Equity theory

SUPPORTING RESEARCH EVIDENCE: UTNE ET AL

Looked at 118 studies from recently married couples between the ages 16 and 45. they used self reports scales to measure perceived equity and satisfaction. they found that those in a more equitable relationship were more satisfied. (however, self report methods can be influenced by social desirability which can skew the results)

SUPPORTING RESEARCH EVIDENCE: STAFFORD AND CANARY

Stafford and Canary studied over 200 married couples who filled out questionnaires on satisfaction and equity, they were also asked questions on what methods they used to maintain their relationship e.g. dividing the chores and having positive communication. found those who had equitable relationships, followed by those who over-benefited were the most satisfied. showing that the happiest and most successful relationships were those who had balanced relationships or were benefiting.

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES

The theory is based on western cultures rather than a combination of that and non-western. Aumer-Ryan et al. show that the concept of equity is more important in Western cultures than non-Western cultures. They found that both men and women from collectivist cultures claimed to be most satisfied with their relationships when they were over-benefitting from it, not when the relationships were fair. These results highlight a culture bias in this area of research and suggest that Equity Theory does not explain the development of romantic relationships in all cultures.

What is equity theory?

The theory that people are most satisfied with a relationship when the ratio between benefits and contributions is similar for both partners. if a person puts a lot into the relationship then they expect to receive a lot as well

consequences of inequity in a relationship

Under-benefitting: feel dissatisfied and believe their relationship to be unfair over-benefitting: feel guilty and shameful for not contributing to the relationship equity both partners are happy with how their relationship is going

changes in dealing with inequality

Dealing with inequity also changes with time. What seemed unfair in the beginning may become a norm as relationships progress, or the partner who gives more may start working even harder on the relationship until the balance is restored.

NON-SUPPORTING RESEARCH EVIDENCE: DEMARIS

Demaris suggested that women are more focussed on their relationships than men were, and they were also more conscious of the injustices in their relationship. shows there are gender differences in men and women in relationships which shows the importance to study them separately. gender bias- could be an example of alpha bias and over-exaggerating the differences between men and women.

SOME PEOPLE ARE MORE EFFECTED BY INEQUITY

Hussman found that there was important individual differences in relationships. benevolent who were simply willing to give more, and entitleds who felt they deserved to over-benefit. shows that the idea that people feel guilty or hard done by if they over/under benefit may be an overstatement.

changes to the view of equity

Ideas of what equity should look like changes over time. it may be perfectly normal to put more into the relationship than you get at the start the relationship but if this continues they will start to feel dissatisfied

DIFFICULTY TO QUANTIFY

A lot the things people count as creating a balanced environment are not physical and cannot be measured with a scale. therefore it becomes far more difficult to say who in the relationship is over-benefiting. therefore the theory cannot be given as an objective party as they cannot know what counts as balanced in each relationship. It may be more effective to use idiographic methods to study relationships rather than trying to establish nomethic laws.