An Investigation of the Rusbult Investment Model of Commitment in Relationships with Pets

A Longitudinal Study of Decision Making in the Process of Acquiring a Dog

“…The correlation with self-efficacy may indicate that people expect more commitment when they feel some control over the situation of having a dog. Thus, the present study also shows that expected commitment seems to be a multifaceted construct referring to rather different aspects of a relationship (Baker, Petit, & Brown, 2016). The questionable internal consistency of the scale that was used (␣ = 0.65), though, may undermine the results.…”

“…In the framework of acquiring a dog, another psychological factor might be relevant: commitment to the dog. In the Investment Model, commitment is related to the satisfaction with a relationship, possible alternatives, and the investments that have been made (Baker, Petit, & Brown, 2016). In the present study on decision making, people could not yet evaluate their relationship with the dog, but they might have expectations about the commitment with their future dog.…”

Owners’ perception of veterinary medical emergencies

“…Human medical research has suggested that people use accident and emergency services for the convenience of seeing medical staff at the time of their choosing (Shipman and others 1997, van Uden 2003). A similar rationale may be occurring within pet owners, especially given the time demands associated with modern living and the emotional investment people have in their pets (Baker and others 2016). The insurance status of pets was not noted in the current study and could also influence client behaviour, as owners may elect to call an out‐of‐hours service for convenience believing additional costs will be covered by insurance.…”

Let it go: Relationship autonomy predicts pro‐relationship responses to partner transgressions

“…Participants completed a 15‐item measure that assessed their tendency to forgive their romantic partner when their partner commits a relationship transgression (Rusbult, ; see also Baker, Petit, & Brown, ). The scale begins with the stem “In incidents when my partner ‘breaks the rules’ I generally…” Participants rated how often they engage in each behavior (e.g., “I keep as much distance between us as possible”) on a 9‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from I never do this to I constantly do this (α = .…”

“…Participants rated how much each statement represents a reason they maintain their relationship on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from does not correspond at all to corresponds exactly (a 5 .73). 2 Tendency to forgive Participants completed a 15-item measure that assessed their tendency to forgive their romantic partner when their partner commits a relationship transgression (Rusbult, 2000(Rusbult, , 2010 see also Baker, Petit, & Brown, 2016). The scale begins with the stem "In incidents when my partner 'breaks the rules' I generally.…”