Investment model of relationships

• Rusbult 1983 proposed the investment model of relationships which suggests that the maintenance of a relationship is determined by commitment.
• Commitment refers to the likelihood that the relationship will persist.
• Commitment is strengthened by relationship satisfaction and investment in the relationship.
• People will have high relationship satisfaction if the rewards outweigh the costs and there is profit.
• Investment refers to the number of resources including money, possessions or memories that people will lose if they leave relationships.
• Intrinsic investments are the things directly put into the relationship such as effort, money and self-disclosure.
• Extrinsic investments are things brought into people’s life through the relationship such as children and friends.
• Commitment is weakened by a presence of alternatives to the relationship.
• Alternatives include not engaging in romantic relationships at all as well as finding a new partner
• Supporting evidence. Le & Agnew 2003 conducted a meta-analysis of Rusbult’s investment model and found across 52 studies, relationship satisfaction, alternatives and investments significantly correlated with commitment to that relationship. This is positive as it exemplifies how commitment was found to be a significant predictor of relationship breakup and increases reliability of the model.
• Explains why people stay in abusive relationships. Rusbult and Martz 1995 found women were more likely to return to an abusive partner if they felt they had invested in the relationship and didn’t have any appealing alternatives. This is positive as the investment model can be applied to a wide variety of relationship experiences, increasing generalisability to relationships.
• Difficult to measure different variables such as satisfaction level. Rusbult et al 1998 developed the investment model scale to overcome this problem, which is seen as a reliable and valid measure, however the scale relies on self-report measures which are often subject to social desirability bias. This is problematic as it is difficult to measure the key concepts of the investment model due to biased results.
• Oversimplified. Goodfriend and Agnew 2008 argue it is not only things we bring to the relationship that count as an investment, but also a couple’s plans for their future. Suggested partners will be committed to staying in relationships because they want to see these plans through. This is problematic as the investment model is reductionist as relationships consist of many different factors.