Theories of RR: equity theory

• Equity Theory:

  • Equity theory was developed in response to Social Exchange theory
  • It criticises SET because it fails to take into account the need most people have for equity (fairness) in a relationship
  • Equity means fairness
  • Walster et al. (1978) claimed that what matters the most with equity is that both partners’ level of profit (rewards minus costs) is roughly the same
  • This is not the same as equality where levels of costs and rewards have to be the same for each partner
• Equity theory:

  • When there is a lack of equity, one partner overbenefits and the other underbenefits from the relationship
  • When there is a lack of equity, both partners become dissatisfied with the relationship but the underbenefitting partner has the greater dissatisfaction
  • The underbenefitting partner may feel angry, humiliated and hostile
  • The overbenefitted partner will feel guilt, discomfort and shame
• Equity and Equality

  • Equity theory suggests it’s not the size or amount of the rewards and costs that matters, it is how fair it is
  • So if one partner puts a lot into the relationship and gets a lot out, then that will seem fair
  • Satisfying relationships involve negotiations to ensure equity 
  • This means that rewards are distributed fairly (not necessarily equally) between partners
• Consequences of Inequity

  • Problems arise when one partner puts a great deal into the relationship but gets little from it
  • The partner who suffers from inequity becomes distressed and dissatisfied with the relationship
  • The greater they think the inequity is, the more they are dissatisfied with the relationship
  • This applies to both the overbenefitting and underbenefitting partner
  • At the start of a relationship, partners may be happy to contribute more than they receive 
• Consequences of equity:

  • However, as the relationship progresses, inequity becomes more of a problem leading to dissatisfaction
  • Partners can deal with inequity in two different ways
  • Work hard to make relationship more equitable
  • Change their view of what rewards and costs are so that, even if nothing is changing, the relationship feels more equitable to them because what they used to see as a cost is now accepted as the norm 
• AO3:

  • A strength of equity theory is that there are studies of real-life relationships that confirm equity theory as more valid than SET
  • Utne et al. (1984) studied 118 recently married couples and found that couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves underbenefitting/overbenfitting
  • This research supports the main prediction of equity theory, increasing its validity as an explanation of romantic relationships
• AO3:

  • A limitation of equity theory is that it assumes the need for equity is a universal feature of romantic relationships across all cultures
  • However, Aumer-Ryan et al found that couples in individualist cultures considered their relationship to be most satisfying when the relationship was equitable, whereas partners from collectivist cultures were more satisfied when they were overbenefitting
  • This is a limitation of equity theory because it cannot account for this cultural difference.
• AO3:

  • An argument against equity theory is that not all partners in romantic relationships are concerned about achieving equity
  • Huseman et al. (1987) suggest that some people care less about equity and are willing to contribute more than they get out of a relationship
  • This shows that equity does not necessarily apply to all romantic relationships and is not a universal law of social interaction
• AO3:

  • A limitation of equity theory is that it may not apply to all types of relationships
  • Clark and Mills (2010) suggest that equity plays an important role in casual friendships/relationships but the research does not always support the idea that equity is the most important factor in romantic relationships
  • This suggests that equity theory is not a complete explanation of all relationships as it only appears to apply to some types and not to others.