Rusbult's Investment Model

• what is Rusbult's investment model apart of?

  the theories of romantic relationships
• what is the investment model an extension of?

  social exchange theory
• what did Rusbult (2011) therefore suggest?


  that commitment and investment are both more important than satisfaction in determining the likelihood of a successful relationship
• Rusbult found that when people were deciding whether to end a relationship, what did they weigh up?

  • not only the rewards/costs of the relationship + possible alternatives to them
  • also considered how much they had invested in the relationship
• and, this would essentially measure their what?

  their commitment
• what are the 3 factors that determine the level of commitment shown within a relationship?

  • satisfaction level
  • comparison with alternatives
  • investment size
• what does Rusbult argue that satisfaction occurs when what?

  each partner sees large profits (i.e., rewards - costs), and that there are fewer plausible or profitable alternatives, in which they can invest their resources
• comparison levels play a big part in this - why?

  because of one partner feels that their profits are decreasing, such as through costs increasing throughout the course of the relationship (e.g., discovering that their partner is untidy, abuse or cheating on them), then they shall start looking for alternative relationships or even consider having no relationship at all
• However, there are many couples who have small profits but still remain together - why?

  because they have made large investments in the relationship
• what does this refer to?

  the loss of tangible (intrinsic) or intangible (extrinsic) resources after the end of a relationship
• therefore, what are the two types of investment?

  • intrinsic
  • extrinsic
• what are intrinsic investments?

  resources we directly put into a relationship/ are added to the relationship, both at the beginning and throughout
• what are examples of intrinsic resources?

  • money (tangible)
  • possessions (tangible)
  • energy (intangible)
  • emotions (intangible)
  • time (intangible)
  • opportunities
• what are extrinsic investments?

  resources that previously did not feature in a relationship but are now closely related to it/ describes 'resources' which have come about as a result of the relationship
• what are examples of extrinsic investments?

  • house (tangible)
  • car (tangible)
  • mutual friends (tangible)
  • memories (intangible)
  • shared mortgage
  • children
  • strong expectations from others staying together
• the size of investment dictates what?


  how hard each partner will work to salvage their relationship, and thus demonstrate commitment
• from an economic viewpoint, this commitment is almost what?

  selfish - in that it is carried out purely not to lose the investment
• Rusbult suggested what - related to this?

  that there are mechanisms which facilitate commitment
• what are examples of these mechanisms?

  • ridiculing alternatives
  • positive illusions
  • forgiveness
  • willingness to sacrifice and accommodation
• what are the two variables linked to commitment?

  • equity
  • social support
• what is equity?


  the degree of 'fairness' within a relationship
• what does inequity lead to then?

  • to distress
  • lack of satisfaction
  • less commitment
• how will this distress be relieved?


  by ending the relationship
• what is social support?

  the degree of care/assistances available from others
• when others approve, what happens?

  the positive influence increases commitment
• what is a strength of Rusbult's investment model?

  Rusbult's Investment Model features high ecological validity because it can easily explain abusive relationships
• how is this done?

  by shifting the focus from relationship satisfaction to that of investment and viable alternatives
• as demonstrated by who?

  Rusbult and Martz (1995)
• what did these researchers find?

  they found that the predications based off Rusbult's model can explain why 'battered women' often return to their abusive partners
• and how is it explained?

  in terms of making significant investments and having few alternative partners, rathe than satisfaction (which is obviously not present in an abusive relationship, featuring intimate partner violence, for both partners
• therefore, this focus may be considered what?

  refreshing and a more valid explanation of abusive relationships compared to SET or equity theory
• what is a weakness of Rusbult's investment model?

  it is difficult to measure variables such as satisfaction, the attractiveness of alternatives and intangible investments
• clearly, each of these factors are what?

  entirely subjective to the individual
• this in turn limits what?

  any practical application in terms of relationship counselling
• why?


  as what one person may see as an investment may not be the same for another
• what is the supporting research evidence for this model?

  the meta-analysis by Le and Agnew (2003)
• what did they do?

  reviewed 52 studies from late 1970s-1999, included 11,000 p/s from 5 diff countries
• what did they find?

  • that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives, and investment size all predicted relationship commitment (stable +longest relationships)
  • all of these outcomes were also true for both men and women, across all cultures in the analysis, and for heterosexual and homosexual couples too
• what does this therefore suggest?

  there is some validity to Rusbult's claim that these factors are universally important features of romantic relationships
• what is a weakness of the model?

  oversimplifies investment