Rusbult's investment model

Satisfaction

The extent to which romantic partners feel the rewards of a relationship exceed the costs.

Comparison with alternatives

A judgement that partners make concerning whether a relationship with a different partner would bring more rewards and fewer costs.

Investment

The resources associated with a romantic relationship which partners would lose if their relationship were to end

Commitment

A romantic partner’s intention or desire to continue a relationship, reflecting a belief that the relationship has a viable long-term future.

Rusbult

Said that commitment depends on satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment.

Satisfaction as a factor

Based on the comparison level. A satisfying relation ship is judged by comparing rewards and costs and is seen to be profitable if there are many profits and few costs.

Each partner is generally satisfied if they get more out of the relationship than they expect based on previous experiences and social norms.

Comparison with alternatives as a factor

Partners ask themselves if their needs can be met better outside their current relationship.

Can include a relationship with someone else or not having one at all.

Intrinsic investment

Resources we put directly into the relationship.

Can be tangible things like money and possessions.

Can be intangibles like energy, emotion and self-disclosures.

Extrinsic investment

Resources that didn’t exist before the relationship but do now.

Includes possessions bought together like mutual friends or children.

Relationship maintenance mechanisms

Accommodation

Willingness to sacrifice

Forgiveness

Positive illusions

Ridiculing alternatives

Enduring partners do not retaliate after undesirable behaviours

S Le + Agnew

Research support from a meta-analysis.

Reviewed 52 studies from 1970s-1999 with 11,000 participants across 5 countries.

Found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment. Relationships with the most commitment were the most stable and lasted longest.

True for men and women as well as homo- and hetero-sexual couples.

Suggests there is validity to Rusbult’s claim. Some cross-cultural validity.

W Rusbult + Martz

The model is an explanation of abusive relationships

Questioned women who suffered domestic abuse and stayed in a shelter.

Found that those most likely to return reported having made the greatest investment and having the fewest attractive alternatives. Dissatisfied but were still committed.

The model shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships

W Tran

People in different kinds of relationship may perceive investment differently from each other.

Association between investment side and commitment was lower for homosexual couples than for heterosexual couples.

Suggested that the type of investments made may be different in homo- and hetero-sexual couples.

Suggests that there may be additional factors that play a role in homosexual relationships that are not currently accounted for in the model.