Outline and evaluate Rusbult investment model.
Rusbults investment model is another model that seeks to explain romantic relationships further
developing upon the SET, emphasising the importance of commitment, suggesting that commitment
depends on satisfaction level, comparison with alternatives and investment size.
A satisfying relationship is one where the partner is getting more out of a relationship than they
expect given social norms and their previous relationships. Investment refers to anything a individual
puts into a relationship that would be lost if they end the relationship. The two kinds of investments
are intrinsic investments, which refer to resources which are put into a relationships (money, energy,
time). The other is extrinsic investments which refer to extraneous resources which become more
attached to the relationship, such as mutual friends, shared memories and children. If investments
are increasing and satisfaction is high, the relationships is more likely to continue. Moreover if a
person is in a happy relationship but there is more attractive alternative (quality of alternative) than
the person may lean towards ending the relationship. But if there is no alternative, the relationship
shall remain. Commitment, each of these factors are significant but on their own they are weak to
predict whether individuals would remain in a relationship. However, when all factors are together
its provides a strong basis to predict a relationship. If your satisfied in relationship, no attractive
alternatives, invested large amounts in a relationship thus the more likely you are to stay committed
in a relationship.
Another strength of the theory is that provides a useful explanation as to why partners in a violent
relationship decide to remain in the relationship. For example Rusbult and Martz conducted research
on women in shelters who had been victims of physical abuse. They found that most women were
more likely to return to their abusive partners because they felt they had made high investments and
had no other alternatives. Thus this matters because it increases our understanding of how the
investment model explains the decision to stay or leave an abusive relationship and how it may be
useful for those individuals involved in treating abused people as they may be able to change how
the three components of the model are viewed.
A strength of the research is the use of self-report measures. For example questionnaires and
interviews are relied upon for research which is the most appropriate method to use. Factors in the
model such as quality of alternatives and investment size, are not objective constructs. They are
based upon the subjective experience of a particular individual. Therefore this matters because it is
taking into account the individual perceptions of their relationship and so increasing the validity of
the research.
A methodological flaw with the evidence for Rusbult investment model is that it is based on
correlational research. For example research does indicate strong correlations between the factors
outlined by the theory but causation can still not be established. We cannot confirm that the 3
factors satisfaction, investment and comparison to alternatives, is the sole reason why individuals
commit to a relationship. Thus this matters because we cannot be completely certain or imply which
variables cause commitment in a relationship, affecting the validity of the theory.
Rusbults investment model is another model that seeks to explain romantic relationships further
developing upon the SET, emphasising the importance of commitment, suggesting that commitment
depends on satisfaction level, comparison with alternatives and investment size.
A satisfying relationship is one where the partner is getting more out of a relationship than they
expect given social norms and their previous relationships. Investment refers to anything a individual
puts into a relationship that would be lost if they end the relationship. The two kinds of investments
are intrinsic investments, which refer to resources which are put into a relationships (money, energy,
time). The other is extrinsic investments which refer to extraneous resources which become more
attached to the relationship, such as mutual friends, shared memories and children. If investments
are increasing and satisfaction is high, the relationships is more likely to continue. Moreover if a
person is in a happy relationship but there is more attractive alternative (quality of alternative) than
the person may lean towards ending the relationship. But if there is no alternative, the relationship
shall remain. Commitment, each of these factors are significant but on their own they are weak to
predict whether individuals would remain in a relationship. However, when all factors are together
its provides a strong basis to predict a relationship. If your satisfied in relationship, no attractive
alternatives, invested large amounts in a relationship thus the more likely you are to stay committed
in a relationship.
Another strength of the theory is that provides a useful explanation as to why partners in a violent
relationship decide to remain in the relationship. For example Rusbult and Martz conducted research
on women in shelters who had been victims of physical abuse. They found that most women were
more likely to return to their abusive partners because they felt they had made high investments and
had no other alternatives. Thus this matters because it increases our understanding of how the
investment model explains the decision to stay or leave an abusive relationship and how it may be
useful for those individuals involved in treating abused people as they may be able to change how
the three components of the model are viewed.
A strength of the research is the use of self-report measures. For example questionnaires and
interviews are relied upon for research which is the most appropriate method to use. Factors in the
model such as quality of alternatives and investment size, are not objective constructs. They are
based upon the subjective experience of a particular individual. Therefore this matters because it is
taking into account the individual perceptions of their relationship and so increasing the validity of
the research.
A methodological flaw with the evidence for Rusbult investment model is that it is based on
correlational research. For example research does indicate strong correlations between the factors
outlined by the theory but causation can still not be established. We cannot confirm that the 3
factors satisfaction, investment and comparison to alternatives, is the sole reason why individuals
commit to a relationship. Thus this matters because we cannot be completely certain or imply which
variables cause commitment in a relationship, affecting the validity of the theory.
