Theories of Romantic Relationships

Theories of Romantic Relationships

1. Social Exchange Theory

   • Economic theory
   • based on operant conditioning and economics
   • we form a relationship if it is rewarding
   • Minimax principle
     • we attempt to maximise our rewards and minimise our costs of being in a relationship
     • we stay and commit to a relationship if it is profitable
   • Sampling, Bargaining, Commitment and Institutionalisation
   • Commitment level - how much of a reward you believe you deserve to get.
     • if we judge the potential profit of a new relationship to exceed our CL, the current relationship is profitable, so the person commits.
   • Comparison Level with Alternatives - if one is dissatisfied with their current relationship as it is less rewarding than alternatives so they do not commit to the current relationship
   • Support for CLAlt.
     • Sprecher found that CLAlt negatively correlated with satisfaction so if commitment is high, the alternative options are low
   • Real-world application: IBCT
     • Gottman and Levenson found that in successful marriages, the ratio of positive to negative exchanges was 5:1 but in unsuccessful marriages it was 1:1
     • can help to increase exchanges between couples and reduces number of divorces - beneficial for the economy
   • Limitation: economic metaphor.
     • e.g. Clark and Mills found two types of relationships
       • Exchange relationships - do involve exchanges
       • Communal relationships - between romantic partners marked by receiving and giving of rewards without keeping score
     • not something we do in everyday life

2. Equity Theory

   • Equity is where people strive to achieve fairness in their relationships and places emphasis on the need for each partner to experience a balance between the cost and their benefit
   • Profit in a relationship is maximised and the costs are minimised
   • Distribution - compensations are negotiated to achieve fairness in the relationship
     • If restoring equity is possible, maintenance of the relationship will continue - they will realign their distribution to change their profits
   • The greater the degree of perceived unfairness, the greater the dissatisfaction
   • If one puts in a lot but gets out a lot, then this will seem fair. This is known as the perceived ratio of inputs and outputs
   • Under-benefitted
     • anger
     • not receiving to the same level that you are giving in a relationship
   • Over-benefitted
     • not giving to the same level that you are receiving
     • Guilt
   • Support - Hatfield: Under-benefitted versus Over-benefitted. Found that under were more angry and over were more guilty
   • Cultural Bias - Moghaddam. Economic theories only apply to Western relationships. In non-traditional societies, they are more likely to value security over personal profit.
   • Individual Differences - Huseman. Some are less sensitive to equity. For instance, there are two types of people that are less sensitive to equity.
     • Benevolents - are prepared to contribute more than they receive
     • Entitleds - believe that they deserve to over-benefit and accept it without feeling guilty

3. Investment Model

   • maintenance of a relationship is determined by commitment
   • Commitment is the likelihood that the relationship will persist
   • economic theory
   • Satisfaction is the extent to which the partners feel the rewards of the relationship exceeds the costs
   • Investments are the resources associated with a romantic relationship which would be lost if the relationship ended
     • Intrinsic Investments are what we put in directly, e.g. money, energy and emotions, time etc
     • Extrinsic Investments are jointly point in, e.g. memories
   • Comparison to alternatives is a judgement about whether a relationship with a different partner would reduce costs and increase rewards
   • Valid explanation involving abusive relationships.
     • e.g. Rusbult and Martz asked women why they stayed in an abusive relationship and they said that they had invested a lot
   • Large basis of work supports the model
     • E.g. Le and Agnew found that satisfaction, CLAlt and investment size all predicted commitment
   • Uses correlations so no cause and effect relationships are established. E.g. there a re strong correlations between all of the important factors predicted by the investment model, however, there is no other factual evidence to suggest that this is the case