lecture 11 - " a better you" - relationships Flashcards
Interdependence and Exchange
- What are some key characteristics of close relationships?
- How does interdependence play out?
3.How are relationships maintained (and ended)?
characteristics of close relationships
interaction
Close relationships involve frequent
interaction over extended periods
Activities eg dates, shopping, moving in together
Close relationships involve many
different activities and events
Influence - profound forms of influence eg changing habits and views
Close relationships involve strong
interpersonal influence - michealangelo effect - the interpersonal process where partners in a close relationship, like romantic partners, help each other “sculpt” their ideal selves. This means they influence each other’s growth and development towards a desired version of themselves, by seeing and acting upon their potential. The effect is based on the idea that partners can bring out qualities that already exist in their loved ones,
Interdependence Theory
“We seek relationships where the benefits outweigh the costs.”
- Rewards
- Anything a person gains: love, money, status, information, goods, services (Foa & Foa, 1974)
- Costs
- Anything a person loses: time, energy, and a loss of rewards.
Rewards: Emotional well-being
Money resources, status
COST: loss of control, time/energy investment, emotional dependence, places to live etc. possible pain/loss of rewards
Interdependence Theory
Outcomes of Outcome of
Person 1 Person 2
—————– = —————-
Contributions Contributions
of Person 1 of Person 2
should be an even ratio
interdependence theory
equity -
- People in
relationships
try to maximize
their outcomes
- Rules and norms
evolve about how
to divide rewards
fairly
- When an inequity
Is perceived, distress
is felt and steps
are taken to
restore equity
Interdependence Theory
Interdependence Theory
Effects of Inequity
- Decreases relationship satisfaction in couples (Sprecher & Schwartz, 1994), especially early in a relationship (Van Yperen & Buunk, 1990)
Effects on relationship satisfaction are stronger for people who have a high concern with fairness in relationships (Sprecher, 1992) - women are higher in caring about equities than men - maybe as often victims of unfairness
Interdependence Theory
Thibaut & Kelley (1959)
- Correspondent Outcomes
- Exist when both partners value the same things
- Social norms
- Arise when partners need to develop rules for trade-offs
- Social roles
- Rules for who does which activities
Factors that help us decide:
Corresponding Outcomes: Do partners have the same general values? Do they want the same things out of life?
Never complete overlap – you want some different desired outcomes – involve negotiation if moving in different direction e.g., recreation (holidays etc. – give examples)
Social Norms: e.g., reciprocity principle = trade-offs and turn taking e.g., alternating holiday
Social Roles: establish general task roles within relationship - could be standards “gender roles” or constructed/negotiated within couple
- Rules for who does which activities
Interdependence Theory
Thibaut & Kelley (1959)
- Comparison Level -social comparisons to other people in your network
- What we deserve and expect
- Comparison Level of Alternatives
- What we could have with someone else - not just comparing to what you deserve but other relationships you could have entirely
More than rewards/costs
What is available? What is what we deserve? What is our worth?
Alternatives: Better worse than other people we could be with? What others have?
Interdependence Theory
Hatfield et al. (1985)
- Relationship inequity creates distress
People attempt to restore equity through their behaviours or their thoughts about the relationship
attribution theory
dissatisfaction may lead to …… attributions
Internal – inside me, a trait
Stable – will persist, existing in past
Global – in a variety of contexts (chose, childcare etc.)
These explanations will be relationship ENHANCING
UNLESS
Just to make up for something bad, felt guilty (or needed something) about a recent fault
NOT internal, stable or global (external, unstable and specific)
e.g., forget anniversary – “something” bad happened at work
External, unstable and specific
“Always like this – my feelings never matter”
Internal, stable, global
Recap positive and negative relationship quality distinctions
Relationship-Enhancing
Attributions
Positive Event
Internal, stable, global
He is a sweet, thoughtful
person.
negative event
External, unstable,
specific
Something must have
happened today..
Distress-Maintaining
Attributions
Positive Event
External, unstable,
specific
He took me out in order
to assuage his guilty
conscience.
Negative
Event
Internal, stable, global
He is always thoughtless.
My feelings never matter
Attribution Theory
Attributions and Satisfaction
- Happy couples make more relationship-enhancing attributions (Holzworth-Munroe & Jacobson, 1985).
- Distress-maintaining attributions may decrease satisfaction over time (Fincham & Bradbury, 1993).
(Holxman) happy couple doe make more ‘relationship enhancing attributions’
(Finahn) longitudinal over a year, distress particularly impacting relationship quality over times
attribution theory
dissatisfaction may lead to ……
reciprocation
reciprocation positive AND negative – respond to negative with negative – once of the worst signs – “relationship death spiral”
more important to avoid negative exchange than have positive exchange
When Problems Arise
Factors that Prevent Lashback
- Perspective-taking and forgiveness (McCullough et al., 1997).
- Commitment (Arriaga & Rusbult, 1998)
Ayduk, O., & Kross, E. (2010). Analyzing negative experiences without ruminating: The role of self-distancing in enabling adaptive self-reflection. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 841-854 - how to emotionally deal with someone doing something negative - do self-distancing/ mindfulness helps them move on
Perspective –taking and empathy leads to FORGIVENESS, = less Lashback
(Ayduk) take a step bad back from reciprocating – literally close eyes and imagine negative experience – imagine taking a step back and witnessing the event – helps provide perceptive
Commitment makes people to hesitate with Lashback
the investment model - rustbult (1980, 1983)
rewards, costs, comparison levels —-> satisfaction ——-> commitment
^
/
/
alternatives and investments
——-> stay or leave
- Rewards and costs explain about 46% of the variance in satisfaction
- Satisfaction, alternatives, investments explain about 61% of the variance in commitment
- Replicated in same-sex relationships.
Rusbult (1980, 1983)
interdependence theory - clark and mills 1979
Not all couples are the same . . .
Communal Relationship -
People provide benefits to
one another on the basis
of needs. No specific
repayments are expected.
Exchange Relationship -
People give benefits with
the expectation of
receiving specific
benefits in return
when problems arise - dissatisfaction may lead to ….
attributions - reciprocation
voice - loyalty - neglect - exit
Carol Rusbult:
Voice – positive e and proactive as conflict is happening – approach – oriented discussion of negotiation and resolution - talk about problems
Loyalty – less approach oriented - passive – wait for situation to improve and stay committed
Neglect – not waiting to get better – just withdrawal – less time spent with partner, refuse to discuss problems - greater distance
Exit – alternatives considered, others good? Time to go. NOT just alternative partners – just alternate social environment – rather be single (for a while anyway)
summary
- Relationships involve interdependence
- Social exchange theory predicts that people monitor the outcomes of their relationships
- People may use different rules to judge the fairness of their relationships, but fairness is less important in communal relationships
How people react to common problems determines whether the relationship persists
