rusbults investment model

• rusbults investment model?

  • commitment is most important reason to maintain romantic relationship
  • this is because they have an investment by being with their significant other & do not want it to go to waste
• 3 factors commitment depends on?

  1. satisfaction level
  2. comparison with alternatives
  3. investment
• satisfaction level?

  • refers to positive vs negative effect experienced in relationship
  • theres greater satisfaction if theres more positive effect experience & they receive more rewards than costs
  • satisfaction is influenced by degree to which partner meets needs of other
• comparison with alternatives?

  • refers to desirability of best & alternative to current relationship
  • based on extent that another person meets their needs better
  • if quality of alternative is high commitment is lower - other people able to meet needs better
• investment?

  • anything that we could lose if relationship breaks down
• 2 types of investment?

  1. intrinsic
  2. extrinsic
• investment size?

  • amount & importance of resources associated to relationship
• intrinsic investment?

  • things we put directly into relationship
  • eg time/love/effort/emotion
• extrinsic investment?

  • resources that previously did not feature in relationship
  • eg children/house/money/pets
• investment model - formation & maintenance?

  • if satisfaction level is high (needs met) we are more committed so relationship is maintained
  • if person believes that their needs are met in current relationship rather than alternative committment is higher so relationship is maintained
  • if investment level is high we are more commited so relationship more likely to be maintained as we have "too much to lose"
• 4 * of rusbults investment model?

  1. evidence from le & agnew 2003
  2. explains real life behaviour of infidelity
  3. explains all relationships
  4. better more complex than social exchange theory
• 2 X of rusbults investment model?

  1. correlational
  2. use of questionnaires
• * evidence from le & agnew 2003?

  • reviewed 52 studies from 1970s-1999 which included 11000 p & 5 countries
  • found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives & investment size correlated with commitment
  • also those rs with most commitment lasted longest
  • was true for both men & women, all cutures, hetero/homosexual rs
  • population
  • shows that commitment is major part of maintaining rs & that its universal in all rs so can be generalised to wider population
• * explains real life behaviour of infidelity?

  • theory allows psychologists to explain why cheating occur in romantic rs as one of factors that affect commitment is comparison with alternatives
  • shows that people cheat as quality of alternative is high & they have less commitment
  • has real life practical application to help us understand infidelity
  • with this knowledge we can try & support couples
  • eg in marriage counselling by identifying why alternative partner may be more desirable & how to ensure levels of commitment are equal in order to maintain rs
• * explains all relationships?

  • allows us to explain maintenance of abusive rs as it explains why people stay together even though they are being abused
  • eg if they have high extrinsic investment - child makes couple more committed to one another & could potentially lose child if their rs breaks down
  • explains maintenance of all rs including ones that appear to be unfair/not profitable by suggesting factors that affect commitment levels are more superior in maintenance of romantic rs
• * better more complex than than SET?

  • model not only considers rewards & costs in rs but it also considers factors that affect commitmnet in rs
  • eg intrinsic & extrinsic investments
  • considers deeper factors which can better explain how couples successfully stay together & maintain their romantic rs
• X use of questionnaires?

  • used to measure levels of commitment
  • people may suffer from social desirability when answering questions on how commited they are in rs & may say theyd never leave/cheat on someone even if they have as theyre committed to rs
  • ? internal
  • findings of research in to this area may be inaccurate reflection of levels of commitment required in maintenance meaning we cannot generalise findings to real life rs
• X correlational?

  • can see relationship between commitment & maintenance but we cannot establish cause & effect relationship between variables
  • we dont know if its commitment causing maintenance of rs/if its maintaining rs that causes them to be more committed
  • ? internal
  • dont know which factor is affecting which & cannot establish cause & effect between commitment & formation & maintenance of romantic rs