Advertisement

Resource Allocation in Intimate Relationships

Trying to Make Sense of a Confusing Literature
  • Margaret S. Clark
  • Kathleen Chrisman
Part of the Critical Issues in Social Justice book series (CISJ)

Abstract

A considerable literature now exists dealing with the rules or norms by which people divide resources in their intimate relationships—that is, in their friendships, family relationships, and romantic relationships. Researchers have often suggested or implied that a single rule is likely to the rule governing the giving and receiving of benefits in intimate relationships. They have examined both adherence to various rules in these relationships and satisfaction in the relationship given the apparent use of one particular rule or another.

Keywords

Resource Allocation Romantic Relationship Intimate Relationship Distributive Justice Relationship Satisfaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Austin, W. (1980). Friendship and fairness: Effects of type of relationship and task performance on choice of distribution rules. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 402–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benton, A. A. (1971). Productivity, distributive justice, and bargaining among children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg, J. (1984). The development of friendship between roommates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 346–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg, J. H., & Clark, M. S. (1986). Differences in social exchange between intimate and other relationships: Gradually evolving or quickly apparent? In V. J. Derlega and B. A. Winstead (Eds.), Friendship and social interaction. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Berg, J. H., & McQuinn, R. D. (1986). Attraction and exchange in continuing and non-continuing dating relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 942–952.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cate, R. M., Lloyd, S. A., & Henton, J. M. (1985). The effect of equity, equality and reward level on the stability of students’ premarital relationships. Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 715–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cate, R. M., Lloyd, S. A., Henton, J. M., & Larson, J. H. (1982). Fairness and reward level as predictors of relationship satisfaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, M. S. (1984). Record keeping in two types of relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 549–557.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, M. S., & Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark, M. S., & Mills, J. (1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, M. S., Mills, J., & Corcoran, D. (1989). Keeping track of needs and inputs of friends and strangers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark, M. S., Mills, J., & Powell, M. C. (1986). Keeping track of needs in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 333–338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, M. S., Ouellette, R., Powell, M. C., & Milberg, S. (1987). Recipient’s mood, relationship type and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 94–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark, M. S., Taraban, C. (1991). Reactions to three emotions in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 324–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Desmarais, S., & Lerner, M. J. (1989). A new look at equity and outcomes as determinants of satisfaction in close personal relationships. Social Justice Besearch, 3, 105–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A socio-psychological perspective. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Foa, E. B., & Foa, U. G. (1980). Resource theory: Interpersonal behavior in exchange. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  19. Greenberg, J. (1983). Equity and equality as clues to the relationship between exchange participants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 195–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hansen, G. L. (1987). Reward level and marital adjustment: The effect of weighing rewards. Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 549–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hatfield, E., Traupmann, J., Sprecher, S., Utne, M., & Hay, J. (1985). Equity and intimate relations: Recent research. In W. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible relationships. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Hatfield, E., Utne, M. K., & Traupmann, J. (1979). Social exchange in developing relationships. In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.), Equity theory and intimate relationships. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hays, R. B. (1985). A longitudinal study of friendship development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 909–924.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holmes, J. G. (1981). The exchange process in close relationships: Microbehavior and macromotives. In M. J. Lerner and S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: Adapting to times of scarcity and change. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  25. Huston, T. L., & Burgess, R. L. (1979). Social exchange in developing relations: An overview. In R. Burgess & T. Huston (Eds.), Social exchange in developing relations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lamm, H., & Schwinger, T. (1980). Norms concerning distributive justice. Are needs taken into consideration in allocation decisions? Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 425–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lamm, H., & Schwinger, T. (1983). Need consideration in allocation decisions: Is it just? Journal of Social Psychology, 119, 205–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lerner, M. (1974). The justice motive: “Equity” and “parity” among children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 539–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lerner, M., Miller, D., & Holmes, J. (1976). Deserving and the emergence of forms of justice. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lloyd, S., Cate, R. M., & Henton, J. (1982). Equity and rewards as predictors of satisfaction in casual and intimate relationships. Journal of Psychology, 110, 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lujansky, H., & Mikula, G. (1983). Can equity explain the quality and stability of romantic relationships? British Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin, M. W. (1985). Satisfaction with intimate exchange: Gender-role differences and impact of equity, equality, and rewards. Sex Roles, 13, 597–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Michaels, J. W., Edwards, J. N., & Acock, A. C. (1984). Satisfaction in intamate relationships as a function of inequality, inequity, and outcomes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 347–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mills, J., & Clark, M. S. (1982). Communal and exchange relationships. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Mills, J., Clark, M. S., & Ford, T. (1992). Development of a measure of strength of communal relationships. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  36. Pataki, S., Shapiro, C., & Clark, M. S. (1992). Acquiring distributive justice norms: Effects of age and relationship type. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 427–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reis, H. T. (1984). The multidimensionaly of justice. In R. Folger (Ed.), The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  38. Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rusbult, C. E., Lowery, D., Hubbard, M. L., Matavankin, O. J., & Neises, M. (1988). Impact of employee mobility and employee performance on the allocation of rewards under conditions of constraint. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 605–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sabatelli, R. M., & Cecil-Pigo, E. F. (1985). Relational interdependence and commitment in marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 931–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schafer, R. B., & Keith, P. M. (1981). Equity in marital roles across the family cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sprecher, S. (1986). The relation between inequity and emotions in close relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sprecher, S. (1988). Investment model, equity and social support determinants of relationship commitment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 318–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Traupmann, J., Hatfield, E., & Sprecher, S. (1981). The importance of “fairness” for marital satisfaction of older women. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  45. Utne, M. K., Hatfield, E., Traupmann, J., & Greenberger, D. (1984). Equity, marital satisfaction, and stability. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 323–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  47. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Traupmann, J. (1978). Equity and premarital sex. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Williamson, G. M., & Clark, M. S. (1989). Providing helping and desired relationship type as determinants of changes in moods and self-evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 722–734.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Williamson, G. M., & Clark, M. S. (1992). Impact of desired relationship type on affective reactions to choosing and being required to help. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret S. Clark
    • 1
  • Kathleen Chrisman
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.School of Dental MedicineUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations