The Opportunity Cost Of Relationships

The reward/ need satisfaction theory (RNS) was devised by Byron & Clore (1970) to explain the formation of romantic relationships, based on the principles of behavioral psychology. According to the theory, people form relationships with those who are most rewarding/ satisfying to be with which happens through conditioning. The elements of Skinner's operant conditioning proposes that we repeat behaviors with positive outcomes (rewards) and avoid those with negative outcomes (punishments). Relationships positively reinforce by our partner satisfying our needs/rewarding us (through love or attention), but negative reinforcement also plays a part in the likelihood of formation as a relationship avoid us feeling lonely which both result in us

This week there were two main readings: “Relationship Dealbreakers: Traits People Avoid in Potential Mates,” by Jonason, Garcia, Webster, Norman, and Fisher and “Born Gay? The Psychobiology of Human Sexual Orientation,” by Rahman and Wilson. The first article was definitely interesting because it brought up something that I think we all knew, but never really considered. This was that we tend to place more weight on dealbreakers than on dealmakers when it comes to choosing a mate. Also, that women tend to be choosier in short-term relationships. I have seen this pattern in real life more than once. It seems when it comes to my guy friends, all they would need is to see a girls facebook profile picture to know if we wanted to ask her out on

The issue, “Is College the Best Option,” interestingly is actually closely related to my major in a few facets. The idea of opportunity cost is an often overlooked fact that the first author and second author touch upon. This is that the real cost of doing something is equal to the value you’d gain by doing something else. The example the second author, Charles Murray, presents is an anecdote about the young man deciding whether or not he should be an electrician or not. The boy weighs his various options and the cost benefits of each of them in

Opportunity cost can go botho ways, the way of going to college and the way of not going to college. The opportunity cost for not going to college is for example , someone does not go back to school after high school, but works right away. The other example is that someone goes to college and works, but the big difference is that the person going to college stays educated, learns as they go, and moves on while having a job, as for the person just working stays at the same level and even might move down a level for the fact that they are letting time go by . The opportunity cost is a big positive for the person that is going to college and staying

“‘Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all” (Miriam-Webster 253). This quote has been used for centuries as both persuasion in favor of loving and also as comfort in times of heartbreak and loss. However, is this statement completely true, or does it offer false hope to anguishing lovers? In fact, are the rules and costs of loving and being loved so great that in fact it is actually better to never have loved at all? When pondering these questions, one must first consider the rules of loving and being loved to determine the physical, emotional, and psychological costs they entail. In order to do so, one could use Andreas Capellanus’ The Art of Courtly Love as a guideline for the rules of love.

People constantly evaluate the rewards and costs of their relationship as well as the rewards and costs of interaction with another individual. Rewards and costs can be tangible, such as money or gifts, or psychological, such as social support or intellectual stimulation (Unger & Johnson 604). According to Unger and Johnson, “if the reward/cost balance is more favorable than that of other potential relationships, the person will remain in the relationship, if the costs outweigh the rewards and an alternative relationship with more favorable outcomes is available, the person will leave the existing relationship in favor of the alternative” (604). Yet each reward and cost is different to each individual. To better understand reward and costs is to better understand each individual.

If I decided to go to the beach my opportunity cost would be my exam that I would most likely fail because of me choosing to get a tan at the beach instead of studying. Now If I chose to study for my exam instead of the beach I would pass my exam but my opportunity cost would be me getting a tan at the beach and being pale the next day at school.

My opportunity cost for taking this course at ASUB consist of sacrifices that will benefit me in the future. Considering opportunity cost is the way to obtain more of one thing, causing society to forgo the opportunity of getting the next best thing. That meaning sacrifice is the opportunity of the choice. (McConnell, Brue, & FLynn, 2015) By taking this course I am sacrificing spending time with my friends and family so I can further my education.

According to Thibauilt and Kelley (1959), people weigh their costs and benefits of their relationship to determine satisfaction and commitment. Essentially meaning people form relationships in which the incentive is more significant than the action. George Homans summarizes his proposition into three sections: (1) rewards

Levinger’s theory of marital dissolution (1965), proposes that “divorce is a function of inducements to remain in the marriage, specifically the attractions of the marriage and barriers to leaving, and inducements to leave the marriage, specifically the attractiveness of the alternatives to staying. The attractions of the marriage are conceptualized as the ratio of the relationship’s rewards to its costs”. He describes the rewards of marriage as love, respect, trust, sex. He describes costs as abusive behavior, while including barriers for leaving a marriage despite rising costs such as children, pressures from relatives, religious beliefs and social standards. However, the appeal of rewards sometimes triumphs over the costs and further strengthens the barriers to divorce, which means that not all unhappy marriages end in divorce, and sometimes happy marriages can end, if there are more attractive alternatives producing higher rewards (Lewis and Spanier, 1979). For example, couples who have pro-marriage views and life-values are more prone to staying in a relationship only for the sake of the relationship, even after costs such as infidelity, loss of closeness and incompatibility, if they are guaranteed a socioeconomic stability. On the other hand, once happily married couples whose rewards are no longer higher

Emily Esfahani Smith’s 2013 article ‘Relationships Are More Important Than Ambition’ for The Atlantic focuses on several main points. Smith shares with readers early on in the article the real life story of Rod Dreher, a man who left his small town Louisiana home in pursuit of bigger and better things, to help illustrate her main thesis. Smith’s main thesis for the article is that while being ambitious in life may bring greatness such as success, money, and a sense of accomplishment, it is not truly the most important or beneficial aspect of life. She argues this when she writes that “social connections” of many types are what create a happy and satisfied life. This includes family, friends, neighbors, and a plethora of other types of communities

With tuition fee rising and wages declining, the value of a college degree may seem in doubt. However, these aspects alone do not define the benefit of a college degree. Taking in to account the full set of costs and benefits, it is a wise economic decision for an average person to invest in college education.

Parts of opportunity cost are explicit costly (money spent along the project to make it happen, for the task to be done perfectly money and labor need to be involved, e.g. Boss paid workers for their project, students pay tuition to enroll in class and all other amenities involved.) and implicit cost (one’s time value or origin in the next best alternative. The time incorporated in order to run out the next best option).

There is also the trade-off of being with friends or keeping my house clean. I could probably list a few hundred tradeoffs that occur during my day. Another principle of economics is incentive. Incentives are a form of motivation for a person to do something; a simple example of incentives is being paid working wages. The Montessori school children in the study had an incentive for their school to do well; the profit would be funds for a school trip at the end of the year. The better their school store did the more money they had at the end of the year (Broome & Preston-Grimes, 2011). Incentives are one of the principles that show up in my daily life regularly. With four children in one house, the concept of incentives is crucial. There are chores to be done daily, and the incentive of money as a reward is one of the incentives I use.

To explain human relationships further, the social exchange theory can be another definite explanation to help distinguish how we feel to be with other people and how one perceives to be with them, either to rekindle their relationship or to question the decisions that make to be in a relationship (Kelley 1959). The social exchange theory can be defined as a term that allows behaviour to be exchanged to allow a relationship between two people to happen (Huston et al., 2013). An individual social life involves interactions between two people which can be viewed as social exchanges in terms of costs and benefits (Nakagawa et al., 2013). By taking the view of human relationships the social exchange theory argues that individuals engage in a cost benefit analysis which forms their relationship with others (Milkie et al., 2004). When the costs and benefits are equal in a relationship, it is defined as equitable (Siddiqui 2008). Moreover, romantic relationships may be difficult for some people as it involves interpersonal skills in order to make them mutually satisfying therefore requires constant maintenance. Recently, Psychologists have begun to look at the breakdown of relationships and the characteristics which requires them to fail. The breakdown of relationship is a theory which explains the failure of certain human relationships and the factors that may be involved such as lack