maintenance of relationships
- Created by: lucywaite
- Created on: 13-05-16 18:49
View mindmap
- maintenance of relationships.
- - social exchange theory. -equity theory.
- Social exchange theory- Thibaut and Kelly- relationships in terms of maximising the benefits and minimising the costs of the relationship such as, friendship, sex and time given up.
- also described as 'mutual exchange of rewards between partners.'
- idea of multiple rewards is reductionist- claims relationships are maintained due to maximising benefits and minimising costs.
- but ignores cases such as domestic violence- where relationship is maintained but the costs outweigh the benefits.
- There is a level called the comparison level for alternative relationships.where rewards and costs are compared to the reward and costs of a possible alternative relationship.
- Part of the social exchange theory called the stage theory helps you maintain a relationship. The four stages go through a set order of sampling, rewards and costs sampled in another relationship. Bargaining- where a relationship is maintained by predictable reward and then institutionalisation, where the couple settle down.
- the idea of the stage theory is highly business like and ignores freewill of individuals - assumes only maintain relationships for benefits, rather than love.
- Deterministic-not every relationship go through stages/ or in order, e.g. arranged marriages.
- some studies support S.E.T - Rustbult - longitudinal study 7 months- into costs& rewards. Found s.e.t did not explain early 'honey moon period' - but later costs r compared to degree of personal satisfaction- show s.e.t applies to maintenance of relationship.
- Questionnaire- social désirable answers- & is subjective to what actually are rewards and costs cos could be susceptible to perception.
- doesn't take costs and benefits - can't be used in the formation of relationship- making it invalid.
- s.e.t- modified into equity theory- focuses more on balance and stability rather than economic needs.
- idea of the s.e.t can't be generalised into real life- research used to prove s.e.t is done on short term relationships than long term, can't be generalised to long term couples or domestic violence victims.
- according to s.e.t- people keep 'scores' of like 'you got me this, so i'll get you that' and not every relationship will fall into this category- e.g. collectivist cultures- encourage arranged marriages- don't have periods of long engagements or dates to keep 'scores'
- 2nd theory attempts to explain maintenance - Equity Theory
- states- people are motivated to achieve 'fairness' within relationship to get rid of inequality, e.g. breakup- where costs outweighed rewards- isn't case with domestic violence.
- Waister et al- came up with 4 principles. Profit; rewards are maximised, costs minimised. Distribution; trade off to reach negationaltion of fairness. Dissatisfaction; greater the perceived unfairness- greater dissatisfaction. Realignment; being able to restore equity.
- Research that supports- Yum et al- cultural factors had no effect- so equity theory can be generalised to other cultures- making theory valid.
- However-theory may be applied better to female- Maching found women do more work to keep relationship equitable- suggesting gender biased
- Mills and Clark- concluded, difficult to measure equity in relationships- emotions can't be generalised due to individual differences.
- may also be culture biased- reflection of US culture in which prefer equity- european students- prefer equality
- Overall- Equity theory -be used to explain maintenance of relationships- can be criticised aswell. Many reasons found that most work to make a relationship equitable
- Hence- gender biased- as can only be applied to female gender
- Sprecher- close relationships are too complex in order to establish equity- making theory reductionist- as claims we just go through a process- similar to a business.
- Also- due to theory containing emotions it is difficult to measure and quantify- isn't really usable or operationalised.
- Conclude- 2 theories do explain maintenance in a way- can also be criticised due to lack of relationship explanation.
- Firstly- both try to explain relationships terms of business process- ignores emotions and that they can't be treated through idea of profit and loss- and people just going into relationships for rewards.
- Also deterministic- both the s.e.t and equity claim we go 'step by step' through stages- when intact most won't-an e.g. arranged marriages- meaning can't be generalised to all cultures,
- Firstly- both try to explain relationships terms of business process- ignores emotions and that they can't be treated through idea of profit and loss- and people just going into relationships for rewards.
- Conclude- 2 theories do explain maintenance in a way- can also be criticised due to lack of relationship explanation.
- Also- due to theory containing emotions it is difficult to measure and quantify- isn't really usable or operationalised.
- Sprecher- close relationships are too complex in order to establish equity- making theory reductionist- as claims we just go through a process- similar to a business.
- Hence- gender biased- as can only be applied to female gender
- Overall- Equity theory -be used to explain maintenance of relationships- can be criticised aswell. Many reasons found that most work to make a relationship equitable
- may also be culture biased- reflection of US culture in which prefer equity- european students- prefer equality
- Mills and Clark- concluded, difficult to measure equity in relationships- emotions can't be generalised due to individual differences.
- However-theory may be applied better to female- Maching found women do more work to keep relationship equitable- suggesting gender biased
- Research that supports- Yum et al- cultural factors had no effect- so equity theory can be generalised to other cultures- making theory valid.
- Waister et al- came up with 4 principles. Profit; rewards are maximised, costs minimised. Distribution; trade off to reach negationaltion of fairness. Dissatisfaction; greater the perceived unfairness- greater dissatisfaction. Realignment; being able to restore equity.
- Equity in relationships - can differ e.g. taking turns with house hold jobs. every couple go through balance/ imbalance , greater imbalance more effort needed to balance relationship again,
- states- people are motivated to achieve 'fairness' within relationship to get rid of inequality, e.g. breakup- where costs outweighed rewards- isn't case with domestic violence.
- idea of the s.e.t can't be generalised into real life- research used to prove s.e.t is done on short term relationships than long term, can't be generalised to long term couples or domestic violence victims.
- Questionnaire- social désirable answers- & is subjective to what actually are rewards and costs cos could be susceptible to perception.
- some studies support S.E.T - Rustbult - longitudinal study 7 months- into costs& rewards. Found s.e.t did not explain early 'honey moon period' - but later costs r compared to degree of personal satisfaction- show s.e.t applies to maintenance of relationship.
- Deterministic-not every relationship go through stages/ or in order, e.g. arranged marriages.
- the idea of the stage theory is highly business like and ignores freewill of individuals - assumes only maintain relationships for benefits, rather than love.
- Part of the social exchange theory called the stage theory helps you maintain a relationship. The four stages go through a set order of sampling, rewards and costs sampled in another relationship. Bargaining- where a relationship is maintained by predictable reward and then institutionalisation, where the couple settle down.
- There is a level called the comparison level for alternative relationships.where rewards and costs are compared to the reward and costs of a possible alternative relationship.
- but ignores cases such as domestic violence- where relationship is maintained but the costs outweigh the benefits.
- Has to be comparison level where rewards are compared to costs to see how much will be benefited from the relationship.
- also deterministic - predicts we make relationships due to just rewards but this ignores free will- giving up freedom can be chosen and can be seen as a reward- goes against thibaut and kelps theory.
- idea of multiple rewards is reductionist- claims relationships are maintained due to maximising benefits and minimising costs.
- also described as 'mutual exchange of rewards between partners.'
Comments
No comments have yet been made