rusbalt theory:

• STRENGTH:

  • support from a meta-analysis by Agnew et al
  • Reviewed 52 studies, from the late 1970s to 1999, which together included about 11,000 pp from 5 countries
  • They found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment
  • Relationships in which commitment was greatest were the most stable and lasted longest
  • These outcomes were true for both men and women, across all cultures in the analysis, and for homosexual as well as heterosexual

  Validity to Rusbult's claim that these factors are universally important features
• COUNTERPOINT

  • Strong correlations have been found between all the important factors predicted by the investment model
  • IE most of the study in Agnew's et al meta-analysis were correlational
  • However correlational do not allow us to conclude that the factors identified by the model cause commitment
  • It could be that the more committed you feel towards your partner the more investment you are willing to make so the direction of causality may be the reverse of what the model suggested

  Not clear that the model has identified the causes of commitment rather than factors that are associated with it
• STRENGTH:

  • explanation of relationships that involve intimate partner violence
  • Rusbult and Martz studied domestically abused women at a shelter and found that those most likely to return to an abusive partner reported having made the greatest investment and having the fewest attractive alternatives
  • These women were dissatisfied with their relationships but still committed to them

  Therefore the model shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships - commitment and investment are also factors