Equity theory (AQA A Level Psychology): Revision Note

The key features of equity theory

• Equity theory (Walster et al., 1978) is based on the concept of fairness in a relationship

  • E.g. are both partners receiving the same profit and not incurring unequally weighted costs?

• Equity theory (like Social Exchange Theory and Rusbult’s Investment Model) is an economic theory of relationships, but it attempts to explain aspects of the costs/rewards balance, which SET fails to do

• Equity means that both people in the relationship benefit from the relationship rather than one person overbenefitting, while the other person underbenefits

  • The overbenefitted partner may feel unease, guilt and embarrassment about the inequity in the relationship

  • The underbenefitted partner may feel anger, resentment and dissatisfaction about the inequity in the relationship

• Perception is important, as if one of the partners feels that the relationship is unfair, then this may result in them feeling dissatisfied with it, regardless of whether they overbenefit or underbenefit

• Equity is not the same as equality

  • It is the balance of costs and rewards which is important, not the number of rewards and costs involved

• Insisting on equality in a relationship would involve, for example, all tasks being allocated equally between the couple, but if one person works away from home for several weeks at a time, this is not going to be viable

Perceived inequity

• Perceived inequity occurs when one partner feels that they are putting in more effort and incurring more costs than the other

  • E.g., Frankie does all of the housework and childcare as well as working part-time, whereas their husband Freddie does no housework and only occasionally looks after the children, plus he often plays golf at the weekends

• Equity theory predicts a strong correlation between the size of the perceived inequity and the level of dissatisfaction

  • This applies to both the overbenefitted and underbenefitted partner

• The balance of a relationship can change over time as couples become complacent and perhaps make less effort to please each other

• It is often a change in the level of perceived equity over time that causes the most dissatisfaction

  • E.g., contributing more than you receive may feel natural at the start of a relationship, but if it continues long-term it will no longer feel satisfying

• Perceptions of inequity can change and adjust with the evolution of the relationship

  • E.g., Sara initially thought that it was fine to let Sally have the spare room for her watercolour painting, but now she feels that she would like to have her own space for her crafting hobby, but there is only one spare room, and Sally has claimed it

• The underbenefitted partner will work harder to restore equity than the overbenefitted partner

  • They will do this even when the inequity seems quite obvious and unfair to everyone who knows the couple

• Alternatively, the underbenefitted partner may revise their perceptions of rewards and costs so that the relationship feels more equitable, even if nothing actually changes; what was once seen as a cost (untidiness, thoughtlessness, even abuse) may become accepted as the norm

  • E.g., Sara decides that she doesn’t really like crafting anyway and that Sally is such a good artist that she needs the spare room for her artwork

• Another possible outcome is that the underbenefitted partner reaches a point of ‘no return’ and, feeling extremely disgruntled, will end the relationship

Research which investigates equity theory

• Utne et al. (1984) – a survey of 118 recently-married couples (aged 16–45, together for more than two years before marrying), using two self-report scales, found that couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves as overbenefitting or underbenefitting

• Schaffer & Keith (1980) – equity is not stable throughout a marriage; it has peaks (the ‘honeymoon period’ in the early stages of the relationship) and troughs (for women, this is particularly true during child-rearing years when women mostly underbenefit and men overbenefit)

• Berg & McQuinn (1986) – longitudinal research on dating couples found that equity did not increase over time (as the theory predicts) and did not distinguish between the couples who split up and those who stayed togethe.

  • Other variables, such as self-disclosure, were more important to long-term happiness

Evaluation of equity theory

Strengths

• Research such as Utne et al.’s (1984) demonstrates that  equity theory has good validity, i.e., it reflects a real phenomenon in the dynamics of relationships

• Much of the research on equity theory uses real-life couples so it could be argued that there is a degree of external validity to studies which investigate this topic

Limitations

• Equity theory is not universal: Aumer-Ryan et al. (2007) found that couples in an individualist culture were most satisfied when their relationship was equitable, whereas couples in a collectivist culture were most satisfied when they were overbenefitting (true of both men and women)

  • This suggests that equity is not a universal need in relationships, so the theory cannot account for cultural differences

• Not all partners are concerned about achieving equity: Huseman et al. (1987) suggest that some people are less sensitive to equity than others

  • E.g. 'benevolents' are prepared to contribute more than they get out without distress, while 'entitleds' believe they deserve to overbenefit and accept it without guilt

    • This shows that concern for equity is not a global feature of all romantic relationships, contrary to the claims of the theory

Issues & Debates

• Like other economic theories, equity theory is reductionist, as it reduces relationships to simple cost–benefit calculations

  • It overlooks emotional, personal, and irrational factors like love, commitment, or personal sacrifice, which also play a role in relationship satisfaction

  • This reductionist view may not capture the full complexity of human romantic behaviour