A03 Equity Theory: Theories Of Romantic Relationships

• Support research evidence

  Studies of real-life research confirm equity theory as a more valid explanation than SET. Utne et al carried out a survey of 118 recently-married couples, measuring equity with the two self-report scales. The husbands and wives were between 16-45 and had been together for 2 years before marriage.
• Utne's results (Support research evidence)

  Found the couples who found their relationship equitable were more satisfied that those who saw themselves as under or over benefitting. Researchers confirm a central prediction of equity theory, increasing its validity as an explanation of romantic relationships.
• Cultural influences

  Equity theory assumes the need to equity is a universal feature accross all cultures as it is fundamental feature of human behaviour. Ryan et al found that there are cultural differences in the link between equity and satisfaction. The researchers compared couples in a collectivist culture with those those in individualist culture.
• Ryan et al's findings (Cultural influences)

  Couples from an individualist culture considered the relationship to be mot satisfying when the were equitable but in collectivist cultures, partners were more satisfied when they were overbenefitting- true for both men and women. This cliams equity theory's universality claim is unwarranted so the theory is limited as it cannot account for cultural influences.
• Individual differences


  Not all partners in a relationship are concerned about achieving equity. Huseman et al suggest that some people are less sensitive to equity than partners.
• Benevolents and entitleds (Individual differences)


  They describe some partners as benevolents, who are prepared to contribute more to a relationship than they get out of it. Others are entitleds, who believe they deserve to be overbenefitted and accept it without feeling distress. Shows equity is not necessarily a global feature of all romantic relationships and is not a universal law of social interaction.
• Types of relationship

  Clark ana Mills attempted to make sense of the evidence that equity is an important feature of relationships. They concluded that we should distinguish between different types of relationships. Research strongly supports how that equity plays a central role in causal friendships, business/work relationships. But evidence about the role of equity in romantic relationships is mixed as equity has been questioned as equity may not always be a priority in romantic relationships.
• Contradictory research evidence


  Some research fails to support predictions made by equity theory. The theory claims that satisfying romantic relationships should become more equitabe over time. But Berg and McQuinn found that equity did not increase in their longitudinal study of dating couples. Equity theory also did not distinguish between those relationships which ended and those that continued , other variables being significantly more important. One is self-disclosure.