Rusbult's investment model

• Rusbult et al. (1983 & 2011)

  Suggests that the maintenance of a relationship is determined by commitment.

  In this context commitment refers to the likelihood that the relationship will persist.

  Just like SET and ET this is an ECONOMIC theory
• The investment model of relationships

  Rusbult suggested that commitment to a relationship depends on three things:

  • Satisfaction level 
  • Comparison with alternatives 
  • Investment size
• Satisfaction level

  Satisfaction is based on the concept of the comparison level. Weighing up the total profit of the relationship by comparing the rewards and costs against previous experiences and social norms.

  Positive vs negative emotions experienced and the extent to which their most important needs are fulfilled by their partner.

  = this determines the level of satisfaction.

  Both partners will feel satisfied if they have more rewards and fewer costs
• -Attractive alternative = may leave the relationship.

  -No alternative exists = may maintain the relationship (increases satisfaction).

  However, sometimes having no relationship is a more attractive alternative than being in an unsatisfactory one.
• Investment size

  Rusbult realised that the CL and CLAlt weren’t enough to explain relationships or our commitment to them in the face of alternatives or rising costs. Hence she came up with the concept of investment

  These investments will create a strong foundation for a lasting future.

  Investment increases dependence, as connections with the partner, that are costly to break, increase.
• Satisfaction vs commitment

  Rusbult argues that is not satisfaction that keeps us in relationships but the commitment. This explains why people stay in unhappy relationships where they are dissatisfied - they are committed.

  Investments!

  We invest things we don’t want to see go to waste, so we work hard to maintain them and repair damage to our relationships by utilising relationship maintenance mechanisms!
• Relationship maintenance mechanisms

  Commitment expresses itself as everyday maintenance behaviours: 

  • Accommodation
  • Willingness to sacrifice
  • Forgiveness
  • Positive illusions
  • Ridiculing alternatives
• Relationship maintenance mechanisms 

  Behavioural

  According to the model, enduring partners do the following:

  Accommodation - prioritising and acting for the health of the relationship over tit-for-tat retaliation.

  Willingness to sacrifice - putting your partner’s interests first.

  Forgiveness - (self explanatory) forgiving them for minor (and major) transgressions.
• Relationship maintenance mechanisms 

  Cognitive

  As well as what they do, committed partners will also think about any alternatives, and each other, in predictable ways:

  Positive illusions - they are unrealistically positive about their partners.

  Ridiculing alternatives - and as a result negative about tempting alternatives and other people’s relationships
• What is the investment model used to explain?

  Relationships involving Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
• Why do victims of partner abuse often remain with their abuser despite low satisfaction?

  Lack of alternatives and high investments
• What did Rusbult and Martz (1995) study in relation to abusive relationships?

  Reasons women stayed with abusive partners
• What did women in refuges report about their commitment to abusive relationships?

  Greatest commitment when alternatives were poor
• How does the investment model compare to the SET and equity theory in explaining relationships?

  It applies to a wider range of relationship experiences
• What are the key components of the investment model in abusive relationships?

  • Low satisfaction in the relationship
  • Lack of viable alternatives
  • High level of investments in the relationship
• AO3 - Wider application of the model

  The main claims of the investment model (commitment is positively associated with satisfaction and investment size and is negatively associated with quality of alternatives)  are true across different populations.

  Research support: 

  • relevance of the model in the USA, Netherlands and Taiwan 
  • relevance of the model in different types of relationship (marital, non-marital, gay, lesbian couples, friendships and abusive relationships)
• AO3 - Meta analysis support

  Le and Agnew (2003)

  Meta-analysis - 11,000 pts in 52 studies

  Discovered:

  • satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment greatly contributed to commitment.
  • commitment was a defining feature of long lasting relationships.