Maintaining relationships



Maintaining relationships

Social exchange theory proposes that we are most attracted to relationships that provide us with maximum rewards.

Thibaut and Kelley (1959) suggest that we compare our present relationship (which they called the 'reference relationship') to any relationships we have had previously, and to any alternatives that may be currently available. If the present relationship is better than both, it will continue, but if it compares unfavourably with the alternatives, it may end.

Thibaut and Kelley’s four-stage model of long-term relationship

1. Sampling – the couple explore the rewards and costs in a variety of relationships.

2. Bargaining – the couple ‘cost out’ the relationship and identify sources of profit and loss.

3. Commitment – the couple settle into a relationship. The exchange of rewards becomes relatively predictable.

4. Institutionalization – the interactions are established. The couple have ‘settled down’.

Thibaut and Kelley introduced two ‘reference levels:

Comparison level: this is concerned with the past and the present; it is the comparison made between the rewards and costs of the current relationship and what we have been used to. If the current relationship compares favourable, we are motivated to stay in the relationship.

Comparison level for alternatives – this is concerned with possible alternative relationships. Here we compare the current relationship with others which we would be in. If we feel that we could do better in another relationship, we may be motivated to finish the current one.

Equity theory

Walster et al (1978)

There are four principles of equity theory:

• People try to maximize their rewards and minimize negative experiences within any relationship.

• The distribution of rewards is negotiated to ensure fairness. This may be achieved through trade-offs or compensations.

• Unfair relationships produce dissatisfaction. The dissatisfaction is felt most acutely by the ‘loser’ and the greater the degree of perceived unfairness, the greater is the sense of dissatisfaction

• As long as the ‘loser’ feels there is a chance of restoring equity and is motivated to save the relationship, he or she will endeavour to re-establish the equity.

Consider the situation of a married couple with two children. Both work full-time but the man earns more money. The woman drops the children off at school and picks them up from a childminder after work. She also does the shopping, cooking and washing for the family and spends Saturday mornings cleaning the house while her husband takes the children swimming. To an outsider this probably sounds like a raw deal for the woman.

Answer the two questions in a couple of sentences each.

1. Why might the woman not necessarily see this as unfair

2. What could happen in the woman's relationship with her husband that might cause her to start feeling dissatisfied?

Explain in a few sentences what people are most concerned about, according to equity theory, within their relationships.

Rusbult (1983)

Investment model

▪ The level of commitment predicts the likelihood of the relationship being maintained.

▪ Commitment is increased by the level of satisfaction derived from the relationship and weakened by the presence of possible alternatives to the relationship.

▪ Also INVESTMENT increases commitment.

▪ INVESTMENT= anything a person puts into a relationship that will be lost if they leave it

Rusbult (1983) asked college students in heterosexual relationships to complete questionnaires (on satisfaction, alternatives, investment+feeling of commitment) over a 7-month period. Those with higher satisfaction and investment were more committed to the relationship.

Le & Agnew (2003) meta-analysis of 52 studies on over 11000 PPs in 5 countries on BOTH HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL couples. Confirmed Rusbult’s theory. Highest correlation was between SATISFACTION and COMMITMENT. No gender differences, but correlation between investment and commitment was stronger in heterosexual men.

Correlation between alternatives and commitment was stronger for lesbian than heterosexual women.

-meta-analysis relies on only PUBLISHED research (some research with negative outcomes may never be published-RESEARCHER BIAS)

Evaluation of economic exchange theories

• It is not realistic to research relationships in a laboratory.

• There is little actual research and few consistent research findings to support economic theories. For example, there are often gender differences in the expectations that each partner has of a relationship. There may be cultural and other sub-cultural differences in expectations, too.

• Many of the studies associated with exchange theories have contrived methodologies, which have little ecological validity. Argyle (1988) points out that social exchange theory ‘ has led mainly to very artificial experiments … Research on real-life relationships has been hampered by the difficulty of scaling rewards’.

• The majority of methods to study exchange theories were short term and did not examine relationships over the long term.

• There is lack of empirical support. Clark and Mills (1979) identified two different styles of couples: the communal couple and the exchange couple. In the communal couple giving is motivated by concern and positive regard for the other: but in the exchange couple there is a kind of ‘score-keeping’ predicted by exchange theory.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download