Social Justice in Love Relationships: Recent Developments

被引:0
作者
Elaine Hatfield
Richard L. Rapson
Katherine Aumer-Ryan
机构
[1] University of Hawaii,Department of Psychology
[2] University of Hawaii,Department of History
[3] University of Texas at Austin,Department of Psychology
来源
Social Justice Research | 2008年 / 21卷
关键词
Equity; Social justice; Romantic affairs; Passionate love and sexual desire;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In all societies, people are concerned with justice. “What’s fair is fair!” “She deserves better.” “It’s just not right.” “He can’t get away with that!” “It’s illegal.” “It’s unethical!” “It’s immoral” are fairly common laments. In the 11th century, St. Anselm of Canterbury (Anselem of Canterbury: The major works, 1998) argued that the will possesses two competing inclinations: an affection for what is to a person’s own advantage and an affection for justice; the first inclination is stronger, but the second matters, too. Equity theory, too, posits that in personal relationships, two concerns stand out: firstly, how rewarding are people’s societal, family, and work relationships? Secondly, how fair and equitable are those relationships? According to equity theory, people feel most comfortable when they are getting exactly what they deserve from their relationships—no more and certainly no less. In this article, we will begin by describing the classic equity paradigm and the supporting research. We will then recount the great debate that arose in the wake of the assertion that even in close, loving, intimate relationships, fairness matters. We will end by describing what scientists have learned in the past 35 years about the competing claims of altruism, reward, and fairness in love relationships.
引用
收藏
页码:413 / 431
页数:18
相关论文
共 81 条
[1]  
Amir Y(1987)Are social psychological laws cross-culturally valid? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 18 383-470
[2]  
Sharon I(2004)Sexual economics: Sex as female resource for social exchange in heterosexual interactions Personality and Social Psychology Review 8 339-363
[3]  
Baumeister RF(2006)At a crossroads of disciplines Social Justice Research 19 218-227
[4]  
Vohs KD(2003)Monkeys reject unequal pay Nature 425 297-299
[5]  
Brosnan SF(2005)Tolerance for inequity may increase with social closeness in chimpanzees Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 1560 253-258
[6]  
Brosnan SF(1989)Social comparison, equality, and relationship satisfaction: Gender differences over a ten-year period Social Justice Research 3 157-180
[7]  
de Waal FBM(1985)The effect of equity, equality, and reward level on the stability of students’ premarital relationships The Journal of Social Psychology 125 715-721
[8]  
Brosnan SF(1988)The role of rewards and fairness in developing premarital relationships Journal of Marriage and the Family 50 443-452
[9]  
Schiff HC(1986)Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulations of communal and exchange relationships Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 12 414-425
[10]  
de Waal FBM(1998)Why aren’t indices of relationship costs always negatively related to indices of relationship quality? Personality and Social Psychology Review 2 2-17