Describe and Evaluate Rusbults Investment Model of Relationships PDF

Preview

Summary

ESSAY ON INVESTMENT MODEL OF RELATIONSHIPS...

Description

Describe and Evaluate Rusbult’s Investment Model of Relationships Rusbult said that whether someone stays in a relationship, or not, depends on their investment, their satisfaction and the comparison level of alternatives. Their level of commitment is increased when the first two factors are high, and the last is low. She tested this idea by asking heterosexual college students to complete a questionnaire over 7 months. They noted how satisfactory the relationship was, how it compared with others and how committed they were to it. They also mentioned if it had ended. Her findings showed that all three factors affected whether the relationship would breakdown. A strength of this model is the research support from Le et al. They analysed data from nearly 40000 participants in over 100 studies over a 33 year period. They looked at the data to see which variables showed behavior which indicated a relationship continuing or ending, in non marital relationships. They found that commitment was a strong predictor of whether a relationship would end; satisfaction, alternative and investments were modest predictors. This supports the importance of these factors in relationships, but highlights that commitment is the most influential when determining whether a relationship would end or not. The model is strengthened by its wide application. Its claims have been shown to be true across many cultures, and in different populations, such as gay and lesbian relationships, as well as heterosexual relationships. This implies the model has cross cultural validity, and population validity, as it can be applied universally. Furthermore, this means it has application to abusive relationships; it is able to explain why individuals may continue a relationship with an abusive partner. The model would suggest that victims would have low satisfaction, leading to them leaving the relationship, yet this is not the case; the model does highlight features which may explain this. For example, there may be a lack of alternatives and they may be too invested in that partner, and thus it is highly costly to leave the relationship. Thus, the model can be used to explain a wide range of phenomena in relationships, as well as behavior across many different types of relationships. Despite this, the model is limited by its oversimplification of investment. Goodfriend and Agnew say that the model should be elaborated on to include any plans the partners have made regarding the relationship (investment). This would then mean that ending a relationship would not only result in the loss of current investments, but also future ones. As a result, this would explain why some relationships continue, when it appears that they should not. Furthermore, they provided evidence to show how strongly predictive future commitment is in relationships, suggesting the current model cannot account for all situations of commitment, and is too simple. In addition, the theory is culturally biased. Moghaddam says that theories associated with a profit system are only applicable to western cultures, and short term relationships. People who are more mobile and experience shorter romantic relationships are more likely to be concerned with rewards and costs, whereas long term relationships seem to be based on equity. As well as this, western cultures involve more short term relationships, whereas collectivist cultures are concerned with long term relationships. Thus, they value security more than over-benefitting. This suggests investment model can only apply to western cultures, and lack universality....