RELATIONSHIP

MAINTENANCE
Evaluate Relationship Formation Theories
Describe Social Exchange Theory
Relationship Formation…

◦1. Matching Hypothesis

◦2. Filter Model

◦3. The Reward/Need Satisfaction Model

 Reward/Need Satisfaction Model
◦ Byrne & Clore (1970)

◦ We form relationships b/c we find them rewarding

◦ Partners reward us both by directly meeting our needs (via

Operant Conditioning) and indirectly (via Classical)
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism
Reward/Needs Satisfaction Model
◦  Relationships are often ‘equitable’ and not solely
focused on receiving rewards

◦ Successful and committed relationships tend to focus on

the totality of giving and receiving

◦ Could be seen as an unrealistic approach with focus on

the individual’s needs being met.
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism
 Reward/Need Satisfaction Model
◦  Cultural Differences

◦ Hill (1972) found that Black African-American families did not

value rewards as reinforcement as highly as White couples.
◦ African American couples were more resilient and less dependent
on reinforcement.
◦ Suggests the model may be more suited to Western Culture.
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism
 Reward/Needs Satisfaction Model

◦ Rewards given different for different genders

◦In many cultures, the females are socialised to be more

attentive towards the needs of others (i.e. husbands/kids)
◦Women may not be orientated towards the gratification of
their own needs being met
Essay Question… Due:
Fri 11th

◦Describe and Evaluate two or more theories of

the formation of romantic relationships.

◦(8 & 16 marks)

RELATIONSHIP
MAINTENANCE
Describe Social Exchange Theory
Relationship Maintenance

◦Formation models tell us why we initially choose a

partner

◦Maintenance models explain why we stay in those

relationships, or why we don’t.
Maintenance of Relationships

◦1. Social Exchange Theory (SET)

◦2. Investment Model

◦3. Equity Theory

Social Exchange Theory (SET)
◦ Developed by Thibaut & Kelley (1959)

◦ Relationships based on Economics

◦ Relationships involve Rewards but they

also involve Costs…
Social Exchange Theory (SET)

◦Relationships we choose to create and

maintain are ones that maximise our
rewards and minimise our costs.
 Social Exchange Theory (SET)

◦Assumes we are all selfish and strive for relationships that give
us the most benefit for the least effort
◦These relationships will be the ones we value the most and
are likely to last

◦All relationships are an ‘Exchange’ of rewards and costs

  Marelich et al (2008)
◦ Surveyed 267 students in the US about their attitude to sex

◦ Men more likely to use lies to have sex

◦ Women more likely to use sex to gain partner approval

◦ These findings demonstrate the importance of sex as part of an

exchange process.
◦ Reward = Positive Relationship Outcome
◦ Cost = Deception/Guilt and potentially unwanted sex
Social Exchange Theory (SET)
◦Maintenance of a relationship is determined by
3 factors…

◦1. Cost-Benefit Analysis

◦2. Comparison Level
◦3. Comparison Level of Alternatives
 1. Cost-Benefit Analysis

◦ Process to calculate value of relationship in terms of potential

benefits and costs.

◦ Costs could include:

◦ Time
◦ Finance
◦ Shared Resources
◦ Shared Living Arrangement
◦ Compromise
◦ Risk
 1. Cost-Benefit Analysis
◦ Used at the beginning of a relationship and throughout to
decide if we want to continue in the relationship.

◦ SET predicts that we are likely to leave a relationship if the

ratio of costs and rewards stops being positive

◦ The relationship now runs at a state of Loss as the costs

outweigh the rewards.
 2. Comparison Level (CL)

◦We measure how rewarding our current relationships

are by comparing them to previous relationships,
(comparison level)
 2. Comparison Level
◦If we have experienced more rewarding relationships
in the past, we are more likely to end the current
relationship.

◦If the current relationship compares favourably, we

are motivated to stay
2. Comparison Level
◦In the absence of personal experience,
individuals use relationships of others around
them as a yard stick to measure the value of
their current relationship
3. Comparison Level for Alternatives (CL-
Alt)

◦We compare our current relationship, with the

benefits of other potential relationships we could be
in.

◦i.e. the more positive outcomes offered by an

alternative partner.
3. Comparison Level for Alternatives (CL-
Alt)

◦ If we feel we could do better with someone else, we may

be motivated to finish the current relationship.

◦ If potential alternatives are weak (i.e. no other potential

partners available) we may be inclined to stick the current
relationship out
3. Comparison Level for Alternatives (CL-
Alt)

◦Alternatives could be what might be available to them

from their social network, (not just other romantic
partners)

◦ “I will get to spend more time with my friends”

  Simpson et al (1990)

◦Asked heterosexual female women to rate the

attractiveness of men from photographs

◦The women in a relationship were more likely to rate

the man as being ‘less attractive’ than single women
Abusive Relationships?
◦How can Social Exchange Theory (SET) explain why
women/men who are violently abused (therefore
incurring many costs) and don’t receive many
benefits, stay in their relationship?
  Application to Abusive Relationships

◦Martz (1995)

◦Recurring themes of abusive relationships are when

investments are high and alternatives are low
◦The relationship can still be considered profitable causing
the victim to remain in the relationship
 Social Exchange Theory
◦ We are constantly making these calculations about all of our
relationships

◦ All social behaviour is a series of exchanges attempting to

maximise rewards and minimise costs

◦ We are rational beings who seek the most profitable deal

◦ We are all inherently selfish in our relationships

 Evaluation of SET
◦  Unrealistic
◦ Regards humans as very selfish in their relationships
◦ Assumes we constantly monitor and weigh up costs and benefits
of relationships

◦ Duck (1994) suggests that we only begin to monitor relationships

after we have become dissatisfied with them.
◦ We only begin to consider alternatives towards the end stages of
a relationship breakdown
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism
 Gender Differences
◦In many cultures, women are socialised to expect to
incur costs when in a relationship
◦(maternity leave/changing married name etc.)

◦Women may use a separate calculation of cost-

benefit analysis to men as a result of this imbalance
  Gender Differences
◦ Steil & Weltman (1991)

◦ Questioned married couples about who they believed to have the job
that was ‘most important’
◦ When the man’s salary exceeded the woman’s, both partners were
likely to agree that his was the most important
◦ When the woman’s salary exceeded the man’s, partners were more
likely to agree that neither job was more important.
◦ Suggests that men and women may judge equity of a relationship
differently.
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism
  Cultural Bias
◦ The ‘selfish’ nature of this theory may only apply to Western
culture
◦ Moghaddam (1998) argues that…
◦ Economic Theories only apply to Short-Term, Western
relationships
◦ Applying this to Uni students, who are high in mobility and have
little time to develop long-term commitment…
◦ It makes sense to be more concerned about cost-benefit
analysis
 AO3
Gender
Reductionist
Ethical Guidelines?
Nature vs. Nurture
Animal Studies
Determinsm vs. Free Will
Ethnocentricism