What is Rusbult's Investment Model? A Deep Dive into Commitment and Relationship Longevity

Sunday, September 8, 2024.

When it comes to understanding why people stay in relationships—or leave them—Caryl Rusbult’s Investment Model is one of the most insightful and influential frameworks in social psychology.

Developed in the 1980s, Rusbult's Investment Model offers a comprehensive explanation of commitment in relationships, focusing on three critical factors: satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investment.

John Gottman, one of the most renowned relationship experts, has praised Rusbult's work for its depth and accuracy, often referring to her research when discussing long-term relationship dynamics.

In this post, we'll explore the nuances of Rusbult's Investment Model, explaining each component in detail and demonstrating why it remains a key theory in understanding romantic relationships.

We'll also highlight Gottman’s reflections on Rusbult’s legacy, emphasizing the significant impact of her work in the field of relationship psychology.

The Core Components of Rusbult’s Investment Model

Caryl Rusbult (1952-2010) was an influential social psychologist best known for her work on relationship dynamics, particularly her development of the Investment Model of Commitment.

This model explains why individuals remain committed to romantic relationships, highlighting the importance of satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investment size.

Rusbult’s research has had a profound impact on the field of relationship psychology, helping to deepen our understanding of what sustains long-term partnerships.

Throughout her career, she published extensively on commitment, pro-relationship behaviors, and interdependence in relationships, earning recognition as a major figure in social psychology research.

Rusbult’s Investment Model hinges on three main factors that determine relationship commitment:

• Satisfaction Level
  Satisfaction refers to the degree to which an individual feels positively about their relationship. This includes the fulfillment of emotional, physical, and psychological needs, as well as the extent to which the relationship meets or exceeds the person’s expectations.

  According to Rusbult, satisfaction alone doesn’t explain commitment—while it plays a role, it interacts with other factors to determine whether a person will remain invested in their relationship.

  For instance, even if someone is relatively happy in their relationship, they may not stay if other elements of the Investment Model are weak. Satisfaction, therefore, is crucial but not enough to guarantee long-term commitment.

  Research supporting the model has shown that satisfaction levels can fluctuate but tend to stabilize as couples become more committed to shared goals and emotional investment (Rusbult, 1980).

• Quality of Alternatives
  The second factor, quality of alternatives, is about how appealing the options outside the relationship appear.

  Do other potential partners seem better suited to meet one's needs? Is being single more attractive than staying in the current relationship? If a person perceives that alternatives to their current relationship are more satisfying, they are less likely to remain committed.

  In healthy, committed relationships, folks tend to devalue alternatives, meaning they don’t give much mental space to the idea of other romantic partners.

  This is an essential aspect of relationship longevity, as it reflects a strong commitment to the current partnership. Research shows that couples with a lower perceived quality of alternatives tend to have higher levels of relationship satisfaction and stability (Rusbult et al., 1998).

• Investment Size
  This is where Rusbult's model truly shines—investment is the distinguishing factor that sets her theory apart.

  Investments refer to the resources (both tangible and intangible) that a person has put into the relationship, which would be lost if the relationship were to end. These can include shared finances, mutual friends, time, emotional energy, and even children.

  The larger the investment in the relationship, the more likely a person is to stay, even if they’re not completely satisfied or if there are tempting alternatives.

  Rusbult found that investments deepen commitment, making it harder to leave, even when satisfaction dips. This aspect of her model explains why people might stay in unhappy relationships or work through rough patches—they’ve built something together that is worth holding onto (Rusbult et al., 1986).

Commitment: The Ultimate Outcome of the Investment Model

The combination of these three factors—satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investment size—leads to the overall level of commitment in a relationship.

Commitment is what keeps couples together through thick and thin. Even if satisfaction temporarily drops or a tempting alternative appears, if the investments are large and the alternatives seem weak, a person is likely to stay committed.

Commitment, as defined by Rusbult, isn’t just about staying together; it’s about intentionality in maintaining and improving the relationship. This commitment fosters pro-relationship behaviors, such as forgiveness, sacrifice, and mutual support during challenging times (Rusbult et al., 1998). These behaviors, in turn, increase satisfaction, thereby creating a positive feedback loop that strengthens the relationship over time.

John Gottman’s Reflection on Caryl Rusbult’s Work

John Gottman, whose own research on couples has revolutionized relationship counseling, has often expressed admiration for Rusbult’s Investment Model.

Gottman frequently cites her work in his discussions about why certain couples stay together while others break apart. He particularly appreciates her focus on investment as a key to understanding why people sometimes remain in relationships that aren’t perfect on the surface.

In one of his talks, Gottman commented, “Caryl Rusbult’s work shows us that love isn’t just a feeling. It’s about the decisions we make, the investments we pour into one another, and the deep commitment that keeps us together when life gets hard.” His appreciation of Rusbult’s model underscores how her framework complements his own research on emotional bids, trust, and turning towards one’s partner during difficult times (Gottman, 2015).

Why Rusbult's Investment Model Still Matters Today

Caryl Rusbult’s Investment Model remains highly relevant in today’s world of relationships.

Whether you’re in a long-term partnership or navigating the dating scene, understanding the dynamics of satisfaction, alternatives, and investment can provide valuable insights into the health and future of your relationships.

Her research encourages us to look beyond immediate feelings of happiness and instead consider the bigger picture: the long-term commitment, the shared investments, and the reality of alternatives.

This model is especially useful in explaining why people stay in relationships even when they aren’t always happy—because they’ve built a life together that’s worth fighting for.

Be Well, Stay KInd, and Godspeed.

REFERENCES:

Gottman, J. (2015). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work: A Practical Guide from the Country's Foremost Relationship Expert. Harmony Books.

Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(2), 172-186.

Rusbult, C. E., Johnson, D. J., & Morrow, G. D. (1986). Impact of couple patterns of interdependence on satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 53-70.

Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5(4), 357-391.