Broadening the investment model

Abstract

The investment model is one of the most influential theoretical frameworks for understanding commitment in close relationships. Nonetheless, few studies have examined commitment dynamics using within-persons designs. In addition, there have been few attempts to examine potential antecedents of investment dynamics. The current research attempts to integrate the investment model with contemporary perspectives on attachment and perceived partner responsiveness by examining relationship dynamics within and between persons in a yearlong, intensive longitudinal design. We found that across levels of analysis, perceived partner responsiveness shaped investment model variables which, in turn, shaped commitment. We also found that individual differences in attachment moderated some of these dynamics, such that people who were insecurely attached were less likely than others to perceive their partner as responsive. We suggest taking a more integrationist approach to close relationship research and explore romantic relationship dynamics on the within-person level.

Saying “thank you”: Partners’ expressions of gratitude protect relationship satisfaction and commitment from the harmful effects of attachment insecurity.

“…We focused on two primary indicators of relationship well-being, satisfaction and commitment (Hadden, Smith, & Webster, 2014), which have been extensively studied in relation to attachment insecurity. Although most studies examining the benefits of gratitude expression have been focused on affective outcomes such as satisfaction (Algoe et al, 2013;Gordon, Arnette, & Smith, 2011; but see Gordon et al, 2012), we expected positive effects on commitment given our proposed underlying mechanism, increased perceptions of partner's care, which may also be related to insecurely attached individuals' commitment (Segal & Fraley, 2016). Furthermore, relationship commitment is a key indicator of relationship quality, given its strong link with relationship persistence and the enactment of prorelationship behaviors (Le, Dove, Agnew, Korn, & Mutso, 2010;Rusbult & Buunk, 1993).…”

“…In romantic relationships, avoidantly attached individuals do not trust that they can depend upon their partner, thus they deny or suppress their attachment needs in times of distress (Collins & Feeney, 2000;Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005) and even underestimate or undervalue the support they do receive (Collins & Feeney, 2004;Shallcross, Howland, Bemis, Simpson, & Frazier, 2011). Their deep distrust toward their partner also deters them from perceiving their partner's kind acts as voluntary (Beck & Clark, 2010) or that their partner follows communal norms in the relationship (Clark et al, 2010) and in particular, that their partner is responsive to their needs (Beck, Pietromonaco, DeVito, Powers, & Boyle, 2014;Segal & Fraley, 2016). As building a sense of mutual caring and responsiveness to each other's needs constitutes a key element of a satisfying relationship Reis & Gable, 2015), doubts about a partner's care for the self are likely to hinder avoidantly attached individuals from experiencing high relationship satisfaction, and thus from further committing to the relationship (Etcheverry, Le, Wu, & Wei, 2013;Segal & Fraley, 2016).…”

Does Self-Esteem Have an Interpersonal Imprint Beyond Self-Reports? A Meta-Analysis of Self-Esteem and Objective Interpersonal Indicators

“…In illustration, people who possess more positive interpersonal traits garner more acceptance (e.g., Asher & Coie, 1990; Jensen-Campbell et al, 2002), and greater social acceptance may create more opportunities to foster interpersonal traits and skills (see Leary & MacDonald, 2003). Moreover, traits and situated behaviors ultimately influence relationship quality (see Murray et al, 2006), which in turn influences investment into the relationship (see Rusbult & Buunk, 1993) and behavior aimed at restoring the relationship (e.g., Segal & Fraley, 2016). Logically, changes in relationship quality and its consequences for behavior influence relationship stability (e.g., Bui, Peplau, & Hill, 1996), and relationship stability itself can be construed as a form of social acceptance.…”

Bireysel ve İlişkisel Bağlamda Algılanan Partner Duyarlığı: Derleme Çalışması

“…Rusbult'ın yatırım modelindeki üç ana unsurun (ilişki doyumu, ilişkiye yapılan yatırımlar ve seçeneklerin niteliğinin değerlendirilmesi) önemli belirleyicilerinden birinin APD olabileceğini öne süren bir çalışmada ise, APD ve ilişkisel bağlılık arasında bu üç unsurun aracı değişken rolü test edilmiştir. Hem kişi içi hem kişiler arası desenlerde yüksek APD, doyum ve yatırımı olumlu yönde, seçeneklerin niteliğinin değerlendirilmesini ise olumsuz yönde yordamış, bu üç unsur da ilişkisel bağlılıkla ilişkili bulunmuştur (Segal ve Fraley, 2016).…”