Investment model

• What is investment model?

  • This was developed to understand why people persist in some relationships but not others.
  • It was developed from the SET, emphasising the importance of commitment in relationships. 
  • Rusbult et al (2011) said that there were 3 factors to commitment: 
  • (comparison with alternatives and satisfaction are similar)
• Satisfaction and alternatives?

  • Satisfaction is based on comparison level.
  • A satisfying relationship is judged by comparing rewards and costs, it is profitable if it has rewards and costs.
  • Each partner will be satisfied if they get more than they expect based on social norms and previous experience. 
  • With SET, it says that a comparison with alternatives results in whether there could be better relationships with other people or not. 
  • CL and CLalt means relationships keep ending if costs outweigh benefits or more attractive alts presented themselves.
• Investment size?

  • A measure of resources attached to a relationship, being lost if it ended, there are two types of investment: 

  1. Intrinsic investments: Resources we put in directly being tangible (money or possessions) or intangible which are things hard to quantify (energy or effort)
  2. Extrinsic investments: Resources that did not feature in the relationship. Tangible resources include a car, intangible can include mutual friends or memories. 
• Commitment?

  Rusbult argued that commitment is more important than satisfaction because it explains why dissatisfied partners stay in a relationship
• Supporting evidence for investment size?

  • There is strong supporting evidence for the theory and commitment. 
  • Le et al (2003) carried out a meta-analysis of 52 studies which included 11,000 p’s looking at factors into relationship maintenance.
  • They found that satisfaction, CLalt and investment were all predictors of relationship commitment.
  • It also applied to both gender, homosexual couples and all cultures.
  • Therefore, this shows that the investment model has validity
• Positive evaluation regarding real life implications?

  • Another strength to this model is that it explains why some remain in an abusive relationship.
  • It seems surprising as these individuals would likely face low satisfaction out of their relationship.
  • However, Rusbult studied abused women and found the most likely to return to an abusive partner reported lots of investments and little alternative choices.
  • Therefore, it recognises that satisfaction is not the only factor in maintenance of a relationship.
• Negative evaluation regarding reductionism?

  • It has been argued that the model oversimplifies the idea of investment.
  • There is more to investment than resources you have put into a relationship .
  • Goodfriend and Agnew (2008) extended the original model by including the investment for future plans.
  • Therefore, the model is a limited explanation of romantic relationships because it does not recognise the complexity of investment, specifically the future planning affecting commitment. 
• Negative evaluation regarding methodological issues?

  • Methodological issues for supporting research
  • It is based on correlational data and cause and effect cannot be inferred.
  • It could be the more committed you feel, the more investment you are willing to make so it can be reversed.
  • It also relies on self report questionnaires as p’s may use social desirability bias.
  • Therefore, it may lack internal validity.