Theories of romantic relationships: Equity theory Flashcards
(12 cards)
who proposed equity theory?
Walster (1978)
what is equity theory?
It acknowledges the impact of rewards and costs on relationship satisfaction, but criticises social exchange theory for ignoring central role of equity- the perception partners have about whether the distribution of rewards and costs in the relationship is fair.
The role of equity
Equity means fairness. Walster states that what matters most with equity is that both partners’ level of profit is roughly the same. When there’s a lack of equity, then one partner over benefits and the other under benefits from the relationship causing dissatisfaction
Thus satisfaction is about perceived fairness.
how does an under benefitted partner feel?
anger, hostility, resentment
how does an over benefitted partner feel?
guilt, discomfort, shame
Equity and equality
It’s the ratio of rewards and costs to each other that matter not the amount that matters. So if one partner puts a lot into a relationship but at the same time gets a lot out of it, then they are likely to feel satisfied. Satisfying relationships are marked by negotiations to ensure equity. This inevitably involves making trade-offs.
Consequences of inequity
A partner who perceives inequity will become distressed and dissatisfied with the relationship if it continues for long enough. The greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction.
- changes in perceived equity
- dealing with inequity
changes in perceived equity
What makes us most dissatisfied is a change in the level of perceived equity as time goes on.
dealing with inequity
If a partner feels under-benefitted in a relationship, they are motivated to restore equity, especially if they believe the relationship can be saved. The more inequitable the relationship feels, the harder they may work to correct it (behavioural response).
Or, they may cognitively adjust their perception of rewards and costs to feel the relationship is more equitable, even if nothing objectively changes.
Evaluation of equity theory (brief)
strength - evidence, Utne et al
weakness - may not apply to all cultures, Aumer-Ryan
weakness - not all partners concerned about equity
strength of equity theory
there is evidence from studies of real world relationships that confirm equity theory is a more valid explanation than SET. For example, Utne et al carried out a survey of 118 recently married couples, measuring equity with two self-report scales. Participants were aged between 16 and 45 and had been together for more than two years before marrying. The researchers found couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves as over or under benefitting. This study confirms that equity is a major concern of romantic couples and is linked with satisfaction, a central prediction of equity theory.
weaknesses of equity theory
equity theory may not apply to all cultures. Aumer-Ryan et al found that there are cultural differences in the link between equity and satisfaction. Couples from individualist culture (US) considered their relationships to be most satisfying when the relationship was equitable, whereas couples in collectivist culture (Jamaica) were most satisfied when they were over benefitting. This was true of both men and women, so cannot be explained by gender differences. This suggests that the theory is limited because it only applies to some cultures.
not all partners in romantic relationships are concerned about achieving equity. Some people are less concerned about equity than the norm. Some partners are benevolents, who are prepared to contribute more to the relationship than they get out of it. Others are entitleds who believe they deserve to over benefit and accept it without feeling guilty. In both cases such individuals have less concern about equity than the theory predicts. This shows that a desire for equity varies from one individual to another and is not a universal feature of romantic relationships.
