who is the investment model proposed by and what does it set to do?
Rusbult, it was a development of the SET and aimed to explain what other factors may be keeping couple together despite their costs
1 of 18
name the factors that influence it
commitment, satisfaction level, comparison w alternatives and investment size
2 of 18
what is commitment?
what does it do/act as?
in terms of a romantic rs, it refers to a partners desire to remain in a couple and reflects their intention to have a long term future, acts as a maintenance factor, even if theres difficulties couple doesnt want to waste efforts and will work-
3 of 18
continuing w previous card
why can c be seen as a consequence of increasing dependance?
-through rough patch to repair rs given c thieve made
if a partner is relatively satisfied w their relationship there are no suitable alternatives which are more desirable and has investments in-
4 of 18
contining w previous card
rs they depot want to walk aways from, dependance on that rs may be the result.
5 of 18
what is satisfaction?
comparison level from SET, partners feel higher level of satisfaction if theres more rewards+ less costs, to measure satisfaction partners internally perceive positivity against negativity in rs, satisfaction can increase by equalling tasks such as domest
6 of 18
what is comparison with alternatives?
notion of CwA echoes principle as SET, this is a judgement made by partners in rs concerning wether they would receive greater satisfaction in current rs of rs w an alternative, partners tend to be committed in so usually not many good alternatives
7 of 18
what is investment in romantic rs?
investment maintains c, this refers to the no. of recourse, in/tangible that ppl will lose if they leave the rs. model proposes 2 types of investment; intrinsic- compromises the things partners put directly into the romantic rs such effort, money-
8 of 18
continuing w previous card
what does a bigger investment size mean?
-extrinsic- refers to the things that are brought to ppls life through the rs such as children, shared memories, the bigger the investment, the more likely ppl are to stay in rs, meaning investment size influences c to rs not just level of satisfaction
9 of 18
what is the research examining into the investment model?
.Impett, Beals and Peplau conducted a longitudinal study w age range of 17-79, indicated satisfaction, CwA and investment were all important factors in determine c to marriage (+large sample of 3627)
10 of 18
what is another piece of research?
.Rhahgan+Axsom interviewed a group of fem who were resident in a women's refuge and asked them why they remained in an abusive rs, found satisfaction, CwA and investment featured in PP answers to stay w partner, highest level of c-
11 of 18
continuing w previous card
what is the main piece of research?
-shown by fem who felt investment in rs was high and economic alternative were poor
.Le+Agnew; A- to investigate rusbult I.M of rs
M- a meta-analysis conducted 53 studies comprising 60 independent samples and 11582-
12 of 18
continuing w previous card
-PP in total spanning from the late 1970s until 1990s, data from 5 countries UK, US, Israel, Taiwan and Netherlands, on division of M+F pp was 54% and 46% respectively, explored S, CwA and investment and impact c
13 of 18
continuing w previous card
R- satisfaction in rs, CwA, and investment in rs was hall correlated sig. w C to that union, strongest correlation was reported in the rs between s and c, followed by the association between CwA and investment size and c
C-support I.M
14 of 18
name the eval
-methodological issus, some psych point out most evidence for IM comes from Q/Is which are subjective and unreliable (-but s, c, i.s, etc are all subjective values)
+provides an explanation for y ppl stay in abusive rs-
15 of 18
continuing w previous card
-ie w efforts/c/I dont want to go to waste, Rusbult +Maltz studied 'battered' women found fen were more likely to respond to abusive rs if they feel they have invested in the rs and did not have any appealing alternatives
16 of 18
continuing w previous card
-majority of research is correlational issue as no exp, no evidence that I causes c in rs, limits predictive validity as it fails to predict types of I, how much I needed for long term c for rs to develop, less scientific so cant see as science
17 of 18
continuing w previous card
-no cultural differences, m Le+Agnew study was in the 5 diff counties which have diff cultures, universality as it explains loads of rs/subgroups ie abusive, homo, friendship
18 of 18
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
name the factors that influence it
Back
commitment, satisfaction level, comparison w alternatives and investment size
Card 3
Front
what is commitment?
what does it do/act as?
Back
Card 4
Front
continuing w previous card
why can c be seen as a consequence of increasing dependance?
Comments
No comments have yet been made