Developed in response to criticism from SET, ET accounts for the need for balance rather than profit in a relationship
Walster and colleagues (1978)
Most important with equity is that profit is the same for both partners
Equity not equality
It’s not the size or amount of rewards and costs, it’s the ratio.
If a partner works night shifts then it likely wouldn’t be expected for them to cook the children’s tea. The night shift partner could offer compensation in other areas
Consequences of inequity
The greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction
Both the over and underbenefitted partners may feel this
Changes in perceived equity
Putting in more than you receive at the beginning of a relationship may feel natural but if this progresses dissatisfaction is likely to occur
Dealing with inequity
The underbenefitted partner is motivated to make the relationship more equitable if they feel they can do so. More unfair it feels, the harder they work to restore equity.
However they may instead just change their expectations so feel more equity despite nothing changing
