Lecture 9: Interdependence and Commitment

what is social exchange thoery (SET)?

• an economic model of human behavior

  • People are sensitive to rewards and costs

Outcome = Rewards − Costs

We want best profit possible

what is satifaction determined by?

discrepancies

• you compare what you’re getting to what you think you should be getting.

what are the 3 Major Propositions of SET

1. Partners keep track of costs and rewards

   • immediately and over time

   • may not be conscious

2. We’re attracted to partners who provide the most rewards

3. Norm of reciprocity

   • To receive, we must also give

what are some examples of rewards and costs?

Rewards (slide examples)

• love, laughter, companionship, respect, support

• sexual gratification

• assistance with household tasks

• tangible resources

Costs (slide examples)

• time, loss of opportunities

• conflict, stress, loss of esteem

• disapproval, effort, compromises

• uncertainty, frustration over partner’s imperfections

• tangible resources

✅ Midterm takeaway: Rewards/costs can be emotional, practical, or material.

what are 2 major types of rewards/costs?

1. Instrumental (tangible/task-oriented)

• e.g., picking you up from airport, financial help

2. Emotional

• e.g., feeling loved, knowing someone is there for you

• also includes hurt feelings, uncertainty (emotional costs)

what are the 2 ways that people evluate outcomes in the SET theory?

1. accounting

2. determine profit

explain accounting

• People keep track of rewards vs costs

  • seldom done explicitly or systematically

    • People usually don’t calculate it like math.

    • It’s automatic and becomes conscious mainly when unhappy.

  • value is in the “eye of the beholder”

    • Rewards/costs are subjective: the same behavior can be a reward for one person and a cost for another.

    • Example:

      • Lots of texting: Person A: “They care” (reward)

                                                                      Person B: “Too clingy” (cost)

• Bad is stronger than good

  • in relationships: 5:1 ratio of good to bad

• Not just maximizing rewards

  • people care about whether the exchange feels fair.

explain the Utne et al. (1984) study

• 118 couples

• Assessed balance by comparing own rewards/costs to partner’s

• Looked at marital stability

Three categories:

1. Underbenefitted = I get less than my partner

2. Equitably treated = we’re equal

3. Overbenefitted = I get more than my partner

Graph takeaway

• Highest marital stability = equitable relationships

Lower stability for underbenefitted (and often also lower for overbenefitted vs equitable)

explain determine profit

Interdependence Theory (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959): two comparison standards

Outcomes are judged against:

1. Comparison Level (CL)

2. Comparison Level for Alternatives (CLalt)
   CL (what it is)

• Your standard for what you expect/deserve in a relationship.

✅ Helps predict: Satisfaction

CLalt (what it is)

• Your standard based on other options (other partners, being single, etc.)

✅ Helps predict: Staying/commitment

what is the comparison level (CL)?

Definition (what you expect/deserve)

• CL = what we expect and feel we deserve from our relationships

• Everyone has their own CL, based on prior experience, learning, personality.

explain high vs. low CL

• High CL

  • Expect relationships to be rewarding

  • Low rewards feel unacceptable/disappointing

• Low CL

  • Expect relationships to be troublesome

  • Low rewards feel acceptable/tolerable

what is the Satisfaction equation in CL?

• Satisfaction = Outcome − CL

  • If Outcome > CL → satisfied

  • If Outcome < CL → dissatisfied

explain Comparison Level for Alternatives (CLalt)

Definition (what you realistically think you could get elsewhere)

• CLalt = what we realistically expect we could get in another relationship or situation

• Includes other partners or being single

• It’s the standard used to decide to stay or leave

what is the dependence equation in CLalt?

• Dependence = Outcome − CLalt

  • If Outcome > CLalt → more dependent → more likely to stay

  • If Outcome < CLalt → less dependent → more likely to leave

What determines CLalt?

1. Self-views

   • Low self-esteem → doubt others will want you → lower CLalt

   • High self-esteem → more confident in options → higher CLalt

2. Information about alternatives

   • If you don’t meet new people / don’t see options → lower CLalt

   • If you do meet people / have opportunities → higher CLalt

• Dependence is not based solely on whether or not we are happy!

  • You can be unhappy but still stay if alternatives seem worse.

what the 3 “Major Social Exchange Theory Equations”?

1. Outcomes = Rewards − Costs

2. Satisfaction = Outcomes − CL

3. Dependence = Outcomes − CLalt

what are the 4  outcomes your “SET Equations” diagrams in lecture showing?

A) Happy + Stable

• Outcome above CL (satisfied)

• Outcome above CLalt (staying makes sense)

B) Unhappy + Unstable

• Outcome below CL (dissatisfied)

• Outcome below CLalt (alternatives look better → likely to leave)

C) Happy, but Unstable

• Outcome above CL (satisfied)

• Outcome below CLalt (alternatives look even better → may leave despite being happy)

Example your slide hints at: good job but you get a better offer → you’re happy, but you still leave.

D) Unhappy, but Stable

• Outcome below CL (dissatisfied)

• Outcome above CLalt (alternatives look worse → stay anyway)

How do the standards change over time for the 2 comparison standards?

CL as time goes by 

• Within a relationship, CL can shift due to habituation

  • Expectations adjust based on what you’ve experienced.

  • If you get used to higher rewards, your CL can rise (“this is the new normal”).

  • If you get used to lower rewards, CL can drop (“I guess this is normal”).

CLalt as time goes by (culture slide)

cultural changes that raise/shift CLalt:

• Women’s increased financial independence (South & Lloyd, 1995)

• Mobility (Putnam, 2000)

• Eroding barriers against divorce (Berscheid & Lopes, 1997)

Precise meaning: alternatives become more realistic/available → CLalt can increase, which can reduce dependence and make leaving easier unless outcomes also improve.

what is the Investment Model of Commitment?

The decision to stay vs. leave a relationship is determined by commitment.

what is commitment?

“internal pledge” & the tendency to maintain a relationship and feel psychologically attached to it

what are the 3 things that commitment comes from?

1. Satisfaction

• built from rewards, costs, and CLs (comparison levels)

• basically: how good the relationship feels compared to what you expect/deserve

2. Alternatives (CLalt)

• how good your other options seem (other partners or being single)

3. Investments

• what you would lose if the relationship ended

• can be financial, social, or material

what does the model flow of invest show?

Satisfaction level + Quality of alternatives + Investment size → Commitment → Stay vs. leave decisions

example

• High satisfaction + low alternatives + high investments → high commitment → stay

• Low satisfaction + high alternatives + low investments → low commitment → leave

explain the Derogating Alternatives (Johnson & Rusbult, 1989) study

• 278 students in relationships

• told they were evaluating a campus dating service

• rated their satisfaction and commitment with their partner

• shown an “early applicant” of the opposite sex

  • given moderately favorable personal info

  • applicant attractiveness was manipulated:

    • Highly attractive vs. Moderately attractive vs. Unattractive

• DV: Attraction / liking for the “applicant”

what do the graphs show in the Derogating Alternatives (Johnson & Rusbult, 1989) study?

• Low commitment people showed more attraction to highly attractive alternatives.

• High commitment people showed less attraction overall—they derogated (downplayed) alternatives, especially attractive ones.

why?

• Very high comparison levels (higher standards → alternatives don’t “measure up”)

• Social norms (monogamy expectations)

• Dissonance (if you’re committed, finding others tempting feels inconsistent → you reduce discomfort by rating them less attractive)

explain the Commitment and Fidelity (Drigotas, Safstrom, & Gentilia, 1999) study 1

Study 1

• Participants: 14 men, 60 women, all exclusive daters

• Time 1: measured commitment

• 2 months later (Time 2): completed an infidelity questionnaire

what are the results of the Commitment and Fidelity (Drigotas, Safstrom, & Gentilia, 1999) study 1?

• 72% reported emotional infidelity

• 48% reported physical infidelity (27% > midpoint)

explain the Commitment and Fidelity (Drigotas, Safstrom, & Gentilia, 1999) study 2

Spring Break Study”

• Participants: 12 men, 25 women, all exclusive daters

• Time 1: 2 days before spring break

• Time 2: after 9 days of spring break

what are the results of the Commitment and Fidelity (Drigotas, Safstrom, & Gentilia, 1999) study 2?

• 70% reported emotional infidelity

• 41% reported physical infidelity (17% above midpoint)

how to the 2 studies correlate with the investment model?

• More commitment → less infidelity (negative correlations)

• More satisfaction → less infidelity

• Better alternatives → more infidelity (positive correlations)

• More investment → less infidelity

Most important pattern: “Alternatives” is consistently positive (more tempting options = higher risk), while commitment/satisfaction/investment are negative (they protect against cheating).

what is the conclusion of interdependence & commitment lecture?

• Satisfaction and commitment are complicated constructs

• There’s a lot of ongoing mental calculation

• These factors have reciprocal influence on many pro-relationship behaviours