2. Maintenance of Relationships

Key Question –

Why do relationships keep going?

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ZKLCRQC

Starter – read the scenario and decide what factors make their relationship continue

Harry and Jo have been together for 4 years. They share a flat in Leicester. They have separate hobbies but share a lot of social time with friends. In the evening Harry does the cooking and Jo does the cleaning. They have both been in a relationship before but not for a long time. They enjoy each other’s company but do argue at times.

Learning Outcomes

• Outline the key features of two theories of maintenance of relationships

• Describe research which supports these two theories

• Evaluate using strengths and weaknesses these theories and/or the evidence to support it

Big Picture

• Add notes to a handout individually

• Watch video clips to demonstrate the theories

• Choose a piece of research to accompany each theory of maintenance

• Discuss in pairs the most valuable theory

Formation and Maintenance Formation and Maintenance TheoriesTheories

• The similarity theory and The similarity theory and reward/need satisfaction reward/need satisfaction theories explain why two people theories explain why two people would choose each other as would choose each other as partners, other theories go partners, other theories go beyond this and explain how beyond this and explain how relationships are maintained.relationships are maintained.

• The two most influential are The two most influential are Social Exchange Theory and Social Exchange Theory and Equity Theory. These are Equity Theory. These are referred to as ‘Economic’ referred to as ‘Economic’ theories as they assume that theories as they assume that couples calculate ‘costs and couples calculate ‘costs and benefits’ and ‘investment’ benefits’ and ‘investment’ during the relationship.during the relationship.

• Satisfaction (profit) is determined by exchange of rewards (sex, affection, support) and costs (providing support & not always having your own way).

• We develop a comparison level (CL) as a product of our relationships with others and use this to judge the standard of the current relationship we are in

SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY

Model of long term relationships

Thibaut and Kelley’(1959)

“There are four stages that long-term relationships go

through they are…..”

All these ‘stage’ theories can be criticised for being too rigid – individual differences are not considered. Will everyone go

through all the stages?

Why does a Social Exchange Why does a Social Exchange type relationship breakdown?type relationship breakdown?

• Theories referred to in terms of investment, profit, loss, Theories referred to in terms of investment, profit, loss, costs & rewards etc. costs & rewards etc.

• So if relationship is showing a profit then….So if relationship is showing a profit then….• It will continueIt will continue• But if showing a loss (low amounts of positive satisfaction - But if showing a loss (low amounts of positive satisfaction -

few rewards) & High number of attractive alternatives.few rewards) & High number of attractive alternatives.• It will likely fail.It will likely fail.• Thibaut & Kelly stated that people in a relationship Thibaut & Kelly stated that people in a relationship

constantly compare their relationships with previous constantly compare their relationships with previous relationships and possible alternatives.relationships and possible alternatives.

• If the present relationship compares well with others then If the present relationship compares well with others then the motivation is to maintain the current relationship.the motivation is to maintain the current relationship.

Steve and Liz

• Steve and Liz have been dating for 6 months. Steve recently lost his job and has become quite needy. He calls Liz 3 times a day and always wants to spend time with her. This means Liz doesn’t get to spend much time with her friends and she has recently started to miss her weekly attendance to swimming club. When together steve gets quite upset Liz has to spend a lot of energy trying to make him feel better. Steve lives with Liz and is quite messy so Liz often has to clear up after him. Steve tries to make up for this by cooking dinner for Liz when she finishes work. She also thinks he is a really good kisser and is quite good in the bedroom!

Liz and Claire

• Liz broke off the relationship with Steve. She recently realised she is attracted to her gay friend Claire and they have started a romantic relationship. Claire is really independent and doesn’t rely too heavily on Liz for emotional support but they enjoy spending time together. They enjoy a hug and a kiss and sharing a bottle of wine together in the evening. Liz and Claire both go to the swimming club so they always enjoy attending each week together and never miss a session. They both recently moved in together and have found they are both really tidy and clear up after themselves.

Liz’s Comparison Level table

Score Comparison

10 Awful

20 Not that great

30 Ok relationship

40 Good relationship

50 Great relationship

60 Out of this world relationship

This is formed by experiences in other relationships as well as our general view of what we expect from a current relationship. This is also affected by comparison level for alternatives.

comparison level for alternatives.

Rewards from a different partner – costs of breaking up the current relationship = decision

Task

On your handout or in your books write down ONE piece of research to support this theory

• MUST – include details of what the research found

• SHOULD – include some details of the method/sample

• COULD – include evaluation of that piece of research

Balance is achieved more through perceived fairness, as in the Balance is achieved more through perceived fairness, as in the matching hypothesis. Inequity results in striving to restore matching hypothesis. Inequity results in striving to restore balance or in dissolution. This theory is similar to Social balance or in dissolution. This theory is similar to Social exchange but attempts to quantify what makes a relationship exchange but attempts to quantify what makes a relationship fair.fair.

EVIDENCEEVIDENCE• Hatfield et al (1972) interviewed over 500 students about Hatfield et al (1972) interviewed over 500 students about

equity in their relationships. Three months later the inequitable equity in their relationships. Three months later the inequitable relationships were more likely to have ended.relationships were more likely to have ended.

COMMENTARYCOMMENTARY• Equity may be maintained by matching any attractive Equity may be maintained by matching any attractive

characteristics, such as looks, money or status. characteristics, such as looks, money or status. • Individual differences, - Individuals low in exchange orientation Individual differences, - Individuals low in exchange orientation

don’t bother about equity (Buunk & VanYperen, 1991)don’t bother about equity (Buunk & VanYperen, 1991)• Cultural Differences – equity is not a norm for all cultures.Cultural Differences – equity is not a norm for all cultures.• These two theories are called ‘economic theories’ because These two theories are called ‘economic theories’ because

they explain relationships in terms of rewards & costs.they explain relationships in terms of rewards & costs.

Why does an Equity type relationship Why does an Equity type relationship breakdown?breakdown?

• Unfair (inequitable) relationships produce Unfair (inequitable) relationships produce dissatisfaction.dissatisfaction.

• As long as the ‘loser’ feels there is a chance of restoring As long as the ‘loser’ feels there is a chance of restoring the balance (equity) they are motivated to save the the balance (equity) they are motivated to save the relationship.relationship.

• This idea of restoring the balance has also been noticed This idea of restoring the balance has also been noticed by the advertising industry!by the advertising industry!

2.RESRedressing the balance.wmv

Task

On your handout or in your books write down ONE piece of research to support this theory

• MUST – include details of what the research found

• SHOULD – include some details of the method/sample

• COULD – include evaluation of that piece of research

Evaluation of Social Exchange Theory

• Martz (1995) Women in abusive relationships may stay as the high investment (children) and low alternative (nowhere to live) could be considered a reward situation therefore maintaining their relationship. (STRENGTH)

• The theory can not explain why someone might leave a relationship without an alternative (LIMITATION)

• Selfish theory – this theory suggests that people only in relationships for the rewards they get and not for any other reason

SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY & BREAKDOWN& BREAKDOWN

• However if the prospective relationship appears a However if the prospective relationship appears a better alternative than the present relationship – better alternative than the present relationship – then the motivation is to end the current then the motivation is to end the current relationship.relationship.

2.RESLast rolo clip.mpeg

Evaluating Social Exchange & Equity Evaluating Social Exchange & Equity TheoryTheory• Social Exchange theory tends to see relationships as Social Exchange theory tends to see relationships as SNAPSHOTSSNAPSHOTS at at

one point in time – whereas they areone point in time – whereas they are DYNAMIC DYNAMIC constantly changing. constantly changing. • This theory see people as This theory see people as CALCULATINGCALCULATING (Selfish – What’s in it for me? (Selfish – What’s in it for me?

Am I giving more than I am getting?)Am I giving more than I am getting?)• The theory doesn’t take into account the social context of the The theory doesn’t take into account the social context of the

relationship E.g. Arranged marriages, religion, parenting, health relationship E.g. Arranged marriages, religion, parenting, health traditions etc.traditions etc.

• Research evidence is inconsistent (Clark and Mills, 1979 identified two Research evidence is inconsistent (Clark and Mills, 1979 identified two types of couples: types of couples:

• THE COMMUNAL COUPLETHE COMMUNAL COUPLE – giving is motivated by concern and positive – giving is motivated by concern and positive regard for the other ~ they give to meet each others needs – not regard for the other ~ they give to meet each others needs – not expecting anything in return ~ shared responsibility for relationship.expecting anything in return ~ shared responsibility for relationship.

• THE EXCHANGE COUPLETHE EXCHANGE COUPLE – As in social exchange – certain amount of – As in social exchange – certain amount of ‘score keeping’ is evident. Expect a return on their investment ~ cost ‘score keeping’ is evident. Expect a return on their investment ~ cost benefit analysis of relationship ~ give but expect same in return.benefit analysis of relationship ~ give but expect same in return.

• There is also evidence that equity is not the same for everyone There is also evidence that equity is not the same for everyone (Hatfield) Equity may be more important for females than males. (Hatfield) Equity may be more important for females than males. (Gender Issue)(Gender Issue)

• Murstein et al (1977) Equity may only be a problem in troubled Murstein et al (1977) Equity may only be a problem in troubled relationships. (Health of relationship issue) relationships. (Health of relationship issue)

Evaluation: Cultural Bias in Evaluation: Cultural Bias in Economic TheoriesEconomic Theories

THE KEY IDEAS THE KEY IDEAS Moghaddam (1993) concluded that Western Moghaddam (1993) concluded that Western

Relationships were generally:Relationships were generally:IIndividualistic ndividualistic TTemporary & emporary & VVoluntaryoluntaryWhereas Non-Western relationships tended Whereas Non-Western relationships tended

to be:to be:CCollectivist ollectivist OObligatory & bligatory & PPermanentermanent

So rememberSo remember : MOGHADDAM I.T.V. COP : MOGHADDAM I.T.V. COP

This means that many of the research This means that many of the research studies and / or theories we have studied studies and / or theories we have studied can be criticised for being:-can be criticised for being:-

EthnocentricEthnocentric (relevant only to the society (relevant only to the society where the theory and / or study was where the theory and / or study was based) and so lacking cultural relativism.based) and so lacking cultural relativism.

Other evaluative pointsOther evaluative points

Era DependantEra Dependant (as social structures & norms (as social structures & norms generally change over time e.g. single parent generally change over time e.g. single parent families and cohabitation much more common families and cohabitation much more common now than 50 years ago)now than 50 years ago)

Assuming Heterosexuality (hetrosexual bias)Assuming Heterosexuality (hetrosexual bias) (Most research is only completed on heterosexual (Most research is only completed on heterosexual relationships so can we apply them to relationships so can we apply them to homosexual with any confidence?)homosexual with any confidence?)

Some have Some have Ethical ProblemsEthical Problems – what if no one – what if no one wanted to date you!wanted to date you!

Many would be Many would be difficult to make generalisations difficult to make generalisations fromfrom because the task or environment was because the task or environment was artificial (lacked mundane realism) Walster not artificial (lacked mundane realism) Walster not how we normally arrange a date etc.how we normally arrange a date etc.

Plenary

Discuss in pairs – what theory is most valuable for explaining why relationships are maintained and don’t breakdown

Feedback to the rest of the class