Betrayal Analysis

The purpose of the research study Merissa H. Ferrara and Timothy R. Levine performed was to create an explanation and make predictions about the satisfaction and stability of a relationship following incidents betrayal. Ferrara and Levine thought that the investment model and an array of communication strategies would be factors affecting the outcome of relationships after a betrayal. The two researchers used existing scholarship on the importance of relationships to health and well being, the risks a relationship held, and the affect betrayal has on individuals and relationships. Studies relating to the idea that betrayal does not need to ruin a relationship, the lack of communication used to try to repair a relationship, and forgiveness

depending on severity of the betrayal and resulting in more positive relationships were also looked at. Ferrara and Levine focused on the social exchange theory, the idea that people are motivated by the desire to maximize rewards and minimize cost. This idea lead to the theory of exchange based on interdependence, which states that people depend on one another only to the extent that they control the rewards and cost of the other and the other controls the rewards and costs returned. The rewards and costs are considered investments, or the amount and magnitude of resources put into the relationship. These two theories inspired the investment model, the idea that: stability is most directly determined by feelings of commitment; satisfaction is mediated by commitment and determines relationship stability; and that investment is the primary reason people remain in a relationship when they are unhappy.

Ferrara and Levine looked for multiple answers in the study. They wanted to know if is using communication strategies affect relational stability after a betrayal occurred. The study defined betrayal as failing to uphold relational expectations held by a partner. The study also wanted to see how betrayal and comparison level interacted, and the effect the interaction might have o level of satisfaction. Satisfaction was defined as the amount of positive affect associated with the relationship. Researches wanted to look at the relationship between satisfaction and investment size on commitment, and effects comparison level of alternative has on commitment. Commitment referred to the degree to which one feels attachment to and intends to maintain a relationship over time. What affect might satisfaction, investment size, and comparison level of alternative, mediated by commitment, have on relationship

stability? The perceived outcomes people think they would receive if they were not in the relationship are known as the comparison level for the alternative. Researchers hypothesized that commitment had a direct effect on stability, but they also wondered if levels of betrayal severity, relational satisfaction, commitment, and investment were associated with the reported use of apologies, justifications, promises to change, statements of relational value, and taking responsibility. In this study forgiveness was thought to be the forgoing of vengeful behavior.

The sample consisted of 155 university students, 64% of which were female, ranging in age from 18 to 31. Researchers asked participants to recall a situation in a romantic relationship in which their partner betrayed them. Participants were then asked to complete an extensive questionnaire containing a series of 7 point Likert scales on which they were to assess the commitment, investments, comparison level of alternative, and comparison level measurements of their relationship prior to the betrayal, and communication strategies, satisfaction scales evaluated relationship after the betrayal. Relationship stability after the betrayal was measured through a one-item measure. A series of open ended questions asked about the nature of the relationship, betrayal, and other instances of betrayal with the same or different partner. A series of statistical analyses including zero-order correlation, logistic regression, product-term regression analysis, path analysis, and the chi-square goodness -of-fit test were used to analyze the data.

Ferrara and Levine were able to draw multiple conclusions.

The first research question concluded that apology, promise to change, and value the relationship are all significantly correlated with relationship stability. However, justifying the betrayal and accepting responsibility did not have significant effects on relational stability. It is apparent that when it comes to saving a relationship multiple strategies may be effective as long as the communication is relationship based. More serious offenses require greater efforts toward repair. Asking for forgiveness and empathizing with the victim improve the chances of forgiveness. Promising to change significantly related to relational satisfaction which is the most important aspect of a stable relationship.Multiple conclusions were drawn from the hypotheses. The data disproved the idea that betrayal interacts with CL to create a negative effect on level of satisfaction in a relationship . The greater the betrayal, the more unhappy the individual is. Neither the effect of satisfaction nor the level of alternative had a significant effect on commitment. The research did show that investment level was highly predictive of commitment. Commitment itself only marginally predicted relationship stability. Commitment level did not affect the termination of the relationship, both high and low commitment levels left the relationship after betrayal From the second research question, Ferrara and Levine found that commitment and

investment levels were positively associated with almost all methods of communication. Betrayal severity was positively associated with apology, promising change, and accepting responsibly. Only promising change was significantly associated with satisfaction. In conclusion higher standards expressed in class the more dissatisfied the individuals were after the betrayal. Investment was highly related to levels of commitment and more committed and invested betrayal perpetrators are more likely to use each of the communication strategies included in the study

The conclusion of the study Ferrara and Levine performed shows both heuristic value and openness, important criteria needed for a communication science approach. In the introduction it is mentioned that there is a lack of written records on the effects of communication on a relationship after betrayal. This research study generated new ideas about the relationship between relationship stability, satisfaction, and betrayal as well as the idea that the investment model is unsuccessful. Freer and Levine also open dialogue and conversation when they suggest that the next researchers use a larger sample size, the traditional social exchange theory, and communication strategies that involve forgiveness. The authors make similar suggestions in the limitations section of their work.