Rusbult's investment model

Question 1

How is the theory an improvement from the social exchange theory?

Answer 1

• It improves it by adding ‘investments’ as a key factor in relationship commitment. The model explains how high investments increase commitment, even if satisfaction is low or if there’s other alternatives
• An investment refers to anything a person would lose if the relationship ended.

Question 2

What does satisfaction mean in this theory?

Answer 2

• It is determined by comparing rewards and costs. A relationship is more satisfiying if rewards are higher than costs. Partners feel satisfied if they receive more than expected due to past experiences, societal norms, etc.

Question 3

What is the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic investments?

Answer 3

• Intrinsic investments > resources directly put into the relationship. They are contributions made within the relationship itself. Can be tangible or intangible (eg: effort, money, possessions, energy)
• Extrinsic investments > resources not originally put into the relationship but are now was the relationship develops (eg: shared possessions, friends, children, memories, cultures)

Question 4

What is the difference between tangible and intangible investments?

Answer 4

• Tangible investments > physical or material things that have been put into the relationship (eg: car, shared house.)
• Intangible investments > non-physical things that hold emotional/psychological value (eg: shared memories, emotional support)

Question 5

How does commitment affect someone in a relationship?

Answer 5

• It is the main psychological factor that causes people to stay because they have made an investment that they do not want to go to waste.

Question 6

What are relationship maintenance mechanisms

Answer 6

• They strengthen commitment, reduce attraction to alternatives and promote relationship stability
• Accommodation, Willingness to sacrifice, Forgiveness, Positive illusion, Ridiculing alternatives

Question 7

Rusbult’s investment model: Can explain abusive relationships

Answer 7

• Rusbult and Martz (1995) studied domestically abused women at a shelter and found that those most likely to return to an abusive partner (i.e. those who presumably were the most committed) reported having made the greatest investment and having the fewest attractive alternatives.
• These women were dissatisfied with their relationships but still committed to them.
• Therefore the model shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships - commitment and investment are also factors.

Question 8

Rusbults investment model: Research support

Answer 8

• Support from a meta-analysis by Benjamin Le and Christopher Agnew (2003).
• Reviewed 52 studies, from the late 1970s to 1999, which together included about 11,000 participants from five countries. They found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment. Relationships in which commitment was greatest were the most stable and lasted longest.
• These outcomes were true for both men and women, across all cultures in the analysis, and for homosexual as well as heterosexual couples.
• This suggests there is validity to Rusbult’s claim that these factors are universally important features of romantic relationships.

Question 9

Rusbults investment model: Issue with correlational studies

Answer 9

• Strong correlations have been found between all the important factors predicted by the investment model. For example most of the studies in Le and Agnew’s meta-analysis were correlational.
• However, correlational studies do not allow us to conclude that the factors identified by the model cause commitment in a relationship. It could be that the more committed you feel towards your partner, the more investment you are willing to make in the relationship, so the direction of causality may be the reverse of that suggested by the model.
• Therefore it is not clear that the model has identified the causes of
  commitment rather than factors that are associated with it.

Question 10

Rusbults investment model: Oversimplifies investment

Answer 10

• One limitation of the model is that it views investment in a simplistic one-dimensional way.
• Goodfriend and Agnew (2008) point out that there is more to investment than just the resources you have already put into a relationship. In the early stages, partners will have made very few actual investments (they may not even live together).
• They extended Rusbult’s original model by including the investment partners make in their future plans. They are motivated to commit to each other because they want to see their cherished plans for the future work out.
• The original model is limited because it fails to recognise the true complexity of investment, especially how planning for the future influences commitment