Theories of romantic relationships; Rusbult Flashcards
(13 cards)
what is the investment theory
according to rusbult et al, commitment depends of 3 factors, it is a development of the SET
what are the 3 factors
- satisfaction
- comparison with alternatives
- investment
factor 1; what is meant by satisfaction
satisfying relationship judged by comparing rewards/costs, seen to be profitable if many rewards and few costs
each partner generally satisfied if getting more out of relationship than expecting (based on previous experiences/norms)
factor 2; what is meant by comparison with alternatives
do we believe the relationship, in comparison to alternatives, is rewarding enough
factor 3; what is meant by investment
investment can be understood as anything we would lose if the relationship were to end
what are the 2 major types of investment
- intrinsic = any resources we put directly into relationships, can be both tangible (money) or intangible (energy, self-disclosures)
- extrinsic = resources that did not previously feature in relationship, but now closely associated with it
e.g. tangibles (children, buying a car together), intangibles (shared memories)
combining all factors, how does this link to commitment
if partners in relationships:
- experience high satisfaction levels, due to many rewards, and few costs
- alternatives are less attractive
- sizes of investments increasing
= confidently predict partners will be committed to relationship
what distinction did rusbult make between satisfaction and commitment
commitment = main psychological factor that causes people to stay in relationships
satisfaction = contributory factor
how does rusbult’s distinction help explain why dissatisfied partners may stay in relationships
because they are committed to partner, due to investment made, which they do not want to see go to waste
= work harder to maintain/repair damaged relationship, especially during rough patch
relationship maintenance behaviours (expression of commitment)
- partners do not engage in tit-for-tat, instead they promote relationship
- put partner’s interests first
- forgive for serious transgressions
- unrealistically positive about partner
- negative about tempting alternatives/other people’s relationships (more than less committed partners)
strength of investment model
research support
le and agnew conducted metanalysis of 52 studies, incl 11000 pps in total
= found satisfaction, CLat and investment greatly contributed to commitment
= supports model’s claims about factors contributing to commitment and about commitment being most promising feature in successful LT relationships
= increases reliability of model
weakness of investment model
oversimplifies investment
- goodfriend and agnew argue that it is not just things we bring to relationships that could count as investment, but also a couple’s plans for their future = partners will be committed to staying in relationships because they want to see these plans realised
= shows investment in romantic relationships is a complex phenomenon, consisting of many different factors
= makes the investment model reductionist
further strength of investment model
plausible explanation forabusive relationships
= if partner feels investment they made into relationships will be lost if they leave - more likely to stay in relationship, even when costs are high (e.g., physical or emotional abuse) and rewards few
rusbult and martz study of ‘battered’ women = found women were more likely to return to abusive partner if they felt they had invested in relationship and didn’t have any appealing alternatives
= shows investment model can be applied to wide range of relationships experiences that SET and equity theory fail to explain
= increasing application to everyday relationships
