Equity theory
Specification: Theories of romantic relationships: Equity Theory
Equity Theory of Romantic Relationships
Equity Theory suggests that people are concerned about fairness in a relationship and that this is achieved when people feel they get approximately what they deserve from a relationship.
Equity Theory suggests that the winning formula of fairness in relationships is when one partner’s benefits minus their costs, should equal another partner’s benefits minus their costs.
Utne et al. (1984) used self-report scales to measure equity and satisfaction in recently married couples. The 118 participants were aged between 16 and 45 who had been together for 2 years or more before marrying. The study found that partners who rated their relationships as more equitable were also more satisfied with them.
According to Equity Theory, if one partner perceives a relationship as unfair, however, they are going to be dissatisfied with it regardless of whether they are over-benefitting or under-benefitting. According to Equity Theory, a person who gets more benefits out of relationships than they put in will feel guilt and shame, and those who think they put a lot in but get very little back will be angry and resentful. The longer this feeling of unfairness (lack of equity) goes on, the more likely a couple is to break up their relationship.
Equity does not mean equality, though. It is not about the number of rewards and costs, but rather about the balance between them; if a person puts a lot into a relationship and receives a lot, it will feel fair to them.
Perception of equity changes over time. For example, it is perfectly normal for many people to put in more than they receive at the beginning of a relationship, but if it carries on like that for too long, it will lead to dissatisfaction. Additionally, a partner’s way of 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.
Research Examining Equity Theory
Schaffer and Keith (1980) investigated relationship satisfaction over the course of a marriage, focusing on equity and depression. 333 married couples (666 participants in total) of varying ages, to represent a stratified sample of the local population in a Midwestern state of the USA, completed a questionnaire about their feelings of equity in their relationship. The researchers noted that during periods of childrearing, females were more likely to report that they were under-benefitting from their relationships whereas male were more likely to report that they were over-benefitting during these years. Therefore, overall marital satisfaction for wives has peaks and troughs with highs reported during the honeymoon period and once the children had fled the nest and lows during the early child-rearing years.
Hatfield and Rapson (2011) also noted that a couples’ perception of equity changes depending on the stage of the relationship. In the early days of a fledgling relationship, fairness and equity appears to pay a more important role in satisfaction. Once both partners feel committed to one another and the relationship, day-to-day rewards pale into insignificance; long-term married partners cite that they do not keep a record, mental or otherwise, of costs and benefits.
Stafford and Canary (2006)
Aim: To investigate the role of equity in marriage satisfaction.
Method: Over 200 married couples answered questions designed to measure equity in their relationship and overall satisfaction with their relationship. Couples were also asked about the division of household tasks and chores and levels of positivity in their relationship. In addition, questions focusing on maintenance strategies used in the relationship e.g. providing assurances of love and commitment and placing an emphasis on demonstrating affection to the spouse, were also asked.
Results: The researchers discovered that satisfaction was higher in relationships which couples believed were equitable. The next highest cohort who reported satisfaction were those partners who overbenefitted from their spouse. The least satisfied couples were those in which one, or more, of the partners under-benefitted from the relationship. With regard to relationship maintenance strategies, it was noted that males who under-benefitted from their spouse were least likely to demonstrate assurances and affection.
Conclusion: There appears to be a positive relationship between relationship satisfaction and equity, with spouses reporting higher levels of equitability in their couples being the happiest.
Evaluation of Equity Theory
There is research evidence which supports Equity Theory from animal studies. Brosnan and de Waal (2003) observed the behaviour of capuchin monkeys in an attempt to find evidence for the role of equity and fairness in primate relationships. When female monkeys were playing a game in which they received a highly desirable prize of grapes, the researchers noted that females became extremely angry if they were denied this reward. If a different monkey, who had not participated in the game, was given the prize of grapes instead of the female participating in a bid to win them, the monkeys demonstrated aggression towards the experimenters. In a later study, Brosnan et al (2005) discovered that chimps were most upset by an injustice in a casual relationship with another primate than in a more intimate relationship. The results of these studies are important since they suggest that the explanations for romantic relationships, including Equity Theory, have an evolutionary basis.
There is research that contradicts Equity Theory. For example, Berg and McQuinn (1986), conducted a longitudinal study on 38 dating couples. They did not find any increase in equity over time but discovered that a high level of self-disclosure and perceived equity in the beginning of the relationships was a strong predictor that a couple would stay in their relationship. Furthermore, low equity in the beginning was a reliable predictor of a break-up. In other words, it seems that perceived fairness is either present or not in relationships from the start, and does not develop with time, contrary to the prediction of Equity Theory. These findings oppose the central claim of the theory, and contradict the idea that equity increases over time, after the initiation of a romantic relationship.
There may be an issue with determining cause and effect with Equity Theory. Some researchers suggest that dissatisfaction may be the cause, not the consequence, of perceived inequity. However, Van Yperen and Buunk (1990) studied married couples and found that dissatisfaction in inequitable relationships increased with time, not the other way around. Furthermore, there are also some important individual differences in perception of equity. According to Hussman et al. (1987), there are people who are less sensitive to inequity and are prepared to give more in the relationships, termed benevolents whereas other people, entitleds, believe they deserve to over-benefit from relationships and don’t feel too guilty about this. This means that the notions of Equity Theory cannot be reliably applied to all people with the expectation that it will be able to explain their romantic relationships with confidence.
Extension Evaluation: Issues & Debates
There are important gender differences in perception of relationship fairness that Equity Theory ignores. Researchers, such as Sprecher (1992), found that women tend to be more disturbed when under-benefitting from relationships, and feel more guilt when over-benefitting whilst DeMaris et al. (1998) suggest that women are more focused on relationships, and so are more sensitive to injustices. These results indicate clear gender differences between males and females and highlight the importance of conducting research into males and females separately, to avoid gender bias. However, this may then result in an alpha bias and exaggerate differences between males and females that do not actually exist.
There are also important cultural differences not accounted for by the Equity theory. Studies such as Aumer-Ryan et al. (2006) show that the concept of equity is more important in Western cultures than non-Western cultures. They found that both men and women from non-Western (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.
Possible Exam Questions
1. Which of the following statements is NOT an evaluative argument which relates to Equity Theory. (1 mark)
A. There is research evidence which supports Equity Theory, including animal studies.
B. There may be an issue with determining cause and effect with Equity Theory.
C. The findings of Equity Theory can be applied to all cultures globally.
D. There are gender differences in perception of relationship fairness.
Define the term ‘equity’ in relation to romantic relationships. (2 marks)
Briefly outline the Equity Theory of romantic relationships. (4 marks)
A psychologist decided to test whether there is a relation between equity and marriage satisfaction. She published a questionnaire in a newspaper, asking for couples who had been married for more than 5 years to complete it.
a. State a suitable directional hypothesis for this study. (2 marks)
b. Identify the type of sampling that the psychologist used and explain one strength and one weakness of this sampling method. (5 marks)
c. Identify an appropriate statistical test to analyse this data. Explain your choice. (4 marks)
Describe what research has shown about the Equity Theory of romantic relationships. (6 marks)
Kelly and Rahim have been dating for 2 years and moved in together six months ago. While they were dating, Kelly put a lot of effort into maintaining their relationship, but since they started living together, Rahim feels that Kelly puts all responsibility for developing their relationship on him. She expects Rahim to do more than his fair share around the house, and to also make sure their relationship stays positive and fresh. Kelly feels she is entitled to this, without necessarily giving much back. Rahim is starting to feel angry and dissatisfied with their relationship.
Explain Rahim and Kelly's relationship using your knowledge of Equity Theory. (4 marks)
Describe and evaluate Equity Theory as a theory of romantic relationships. (8 marks)
Evaluate Equity Theory as an explanation of romantic relationships. (10 marks)
Outline and evaluate Equity Theory. (16 marks)
Discuss the Social Exchange Theory and the Equity Theory of romantic relationships. (16 marks)