SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar / 2026 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2

Loyalty in Close Relationships: A Multidimensional Perspective from Attachment, Social Exchange, and Investment Theories

Yakın İlişkilerde Sadakat: Bağlanma, Sosyal Değişim ve Yatırım Teorileri Bağlamında Çok Boyutlu Bir Değerlendirme

Bahadır Şahin Kamas(NECMETTİN ERBAKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ)0009-0004-4300-8464
Tolga Seki(NECMETTİN ERBAKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ)0000-0001-5594-0786
Pages
760–772
Publication Date
2026-04-04
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The contributions of all three theories to explaining loyalty are comparatively analyzed, revealing the psychological depth of attachment theory, the rational structure of social exchange theory, and the investment model’s emphasis on relational sustainability.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This review study comparatively examines three fundamental theoretical approaches attachment theory, social exchange theory, and the investment model in explaining the phenomenon of loyalty in close relationships.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Loyalty is conceptualized as a multidimensional value encompassing trust, commitment, and continuity, and the psychological and behavioral processes associated with this value are evaluated within the framework of these theories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The contributions of all three theories to explaining loyalty are comparatively analyzed, revealing the psychological depth of attachment theory, the rational structure of social exchange theory, and the investment model’s emphasis on relational sustainability.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bağlanma Teorisi · Sosyal Değişim Teorisi · Yatırım Modeli

Abstract

This review study comparatively examines three fundamental theoretical approaches attachment theory, social exchange theory, and the investment model in explaining the phenomenon of loyalty in close relationships. Loyalty is conceptualized as a multidimensional value encompassing trust, commitment, and continuity, and the psychological and behavioral processes associated with this value are evaluated within the framework of these theories. Attachment theory emphasizes the influence of individuals’ early attachment patterns on adult relationship satisfaction and tendencies toward loyalty. Social exchange theory argues that individuals make rational decisions in relationships based on a reward–costbalance, explaining loyalty through the evaluation of benefits and alternatives. The investment model conceptualizes loyalty as a commitment dynamic shaped by the interaction of relationship satisfaction, the quality of alternatives, and the magnitude of investments made in the relationship. The study also evaluates the effects of digitalization and changing social structures on these theoretical approaches. Findings from recent research indicate the effects of social media use, digital privacy, online jealousy, and dating applications on loyalty. The contributions of all three theories to explaining loyalty are comparatively analyzed, revealing the psychological depth of attachment theory, the rational structure of social exchange theory, and the investment model’s emphasis on relational sustainability. I

Özet

Bu derleme çalışması, yakın ilişkilerde sadakat olgusunu açıklamada üç temel kuramsal yaklaşımı bağlanma teorisi, sosyal değişim teorisi ve yatırım modeli karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektedir. Sadakat; güven, bağlılık ve sürekliliği içeren çok boyutlu bir değer olarak kavramsallaştırılmış ve bu değerle ilişkili psikolojik ve davranışsal süreçler söz konusu teoriler çerçevesinde değerlendirilmiştir. Bağlanma teorisi, bireylerin erken dönem bağlanma örüntülerinin yetişkinlik dönemindeki ilişki doyumu ve sadakat eğilimleri üzerindeki etkisini vurgulamaktadır. Sosyal değişim teorisi, bireylerin ilişkilerde ödül–maliyet dengesine göre rasyonel kararlar aldığını savunmakta ve sadakati fayda ve alternatiflerin değerlendirilmesi üzerinden açıklamaktadır. Yatırım modeli, sadakati; ilişki doyumu, alternatiflerin kalitesi ve ilişkiye yapılan yatırımların büyüklüğünün etkileşimi ile şekillenen bir bağlılık dinamiği olarak kavramsallaştırmaktadır. Çalışmada ayrıca, dijitalleşmenin ve değişen toplumsal yapının bu kuramsal yaklaşımlar üzerindeki etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Son yıllarda yapılan araştırmalardan elde edilen bulgular, sosyal medya kullanımı, dijital mahremiyet, çevrimiçi kıskançlık ve flört uygulamalarının sadakat üzerindeki etkilerine işaret etmektedir. Tüm teorilerin sadakati açıklamadaki katkıları karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilmiş; bağlanma teorisinin psikolojik derinliği, sosyal değişim teorisinin rasyonel yapısı ve yatırım modelinin ilişkisel sürdürülebilirliğe yaptığı vurgu ortaya konmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kamas, B. Ş., Seki, T., *, B. Ş. K. (2026). Loyalty in Close Relationships: A Multidimensional Perspective from Attachment, Social Exchange, and Investment Theories. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2, 760–772. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1718852

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (81)

  1. Adler AP, Adler P (1988) Intense loyalty in organizations: a case study of college. Adm Sci Q, 33:401-417.
  2. Ahn S, Park J, Ye S (2025) How AI enhances employee service innovation in retail: social exchange theory perspectives and the impact of AI adaptability. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 84:104207.
  3. Ainsworth MDS, Blehar MC, Waters E, Wall S (1978) Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
  4. Alaçam S (2020) Evli bireylerde evlilik doyumu, aldatma eğilimi ve kişilik özellikleri arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi (Uzmanlık tezi). İstanbul, Işık Üniversitesi.
  5. Arpaci I, Baloglu M, Ozteke Kozan HI, Kesici S (2017) Individual differences in the relationship between attachment and nomophobia among college students: the mediating role of mindfulness. J Med Internet Res,19:e404.
  6. Ayyıldız E, Elkin N (2016) Üniversite öğrencilerinin bağlanma stilleri ile sürekli öfke ve öfke ifade tarzları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3:51-68.
  7. Bashirpour M, Shafi'abadi A, Doukaneifard F (2020) Factors affecting the tendency to marital infidelity: a grounded theory study. Journal of Qualitative Research in Health Sciences, 8:16-27.
  8. Bauman Z (2007) Liquid Times: Living in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge, Polity Press.
  9. Beauparlant ET, Machia LV, Oh J (2023) Committed to staying single: adapting the investment model of commitment processes to study singlehood. Pers Relatsh, 31:132-155.
  10. Bender A, Ingram R (2018) Connecting attachment style to resilience: contributions of self-care and self-efficacy. Pers Individ Dif, 130:18-20.
  11. Blau PM (2017) Exchange and Power in Social Life. 2nd ed. New York, Routledge.
  12. Bowlby J (1969) Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York, Basic Books.
  13. Bowlby J (1973) Attachment and Loss: Vol. 2. Separation, Anxiety and Anger. New York, Basic Books.
  14. Boyce S, Zeledón P, Tellez E, Barrington C (2016) Gendered jealousy and infidelity norms as sources of sexual health risk and violence among young couples. Am J Public Health, 106:625-632.
  15. Brozowski A, Connor-Kuntz H, Lewis S, Sinha S, Oh J, Weidmann R et al. (2022) A test of the investment model among asexual individuals: the moderating role of attachment orientation. Front Psychol, 13:912978.
  16. Büyükşahin A, Hovardaoğlu S (2007) Yatırım modelinin bazı ilişkisel değişkenler yönünden incelenmesi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 22:69-82.
  17. Cassidy J, Jones JD, Shaver PR (2013) Contributions of attachment theory and research: a framework for future research, translation, and policy. Dev Psychopathol, 25:1415-1434.
  18. Cronin P, Ryan F, Coughlan M (2008) Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. Br J Nurs, 17:38-43.
  19. Cropanzano R, Mitchell MS (2005) Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J Manag, 31:874-900.
  20. Doerfler P, Turk KI, Geeng C, McCoy D, Ackerman J, Dragiewicz M (2024) Privacy or transparency? Negotiated smartphone access as a signifier of trust in romantic relationships. arXiv, 2407.04906.
  21. Eichenberg C, Schneider R, Rumpl H (2024) Social media addiction: associations with attachment style, mental distress, and personality. BMC Psychiatry, 24:278.
  22. Emerson RM (1976) Social exchange theory. Annu Rev Sociol, 2:335-362.
  23. Ergün D (2022) Evli bireylerde romantik ilişkilere yönelik rasyonel olmayan inançların, iletişim çatışması türü ve aldatma eğilimi üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi (Uzmanlık tezi). Çanakkale, Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi.
  24. Finkel EJ, Eastwick PW (2015) Interpersonal attraction: in search of a theoretical Rosetta Stone. In APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 3. Interpersonal Relations. (Eds M Mikulincer, PR Shaver, JA Simpson, JF Dovidio):179-210. Washington D.C., American Psychological Association.
  25. Finkel EJ, Rusbult CE, Kumashiro M, Hannon PA (2002) Dealing with betrayal in close relationships: does commitment promote forgiveness? J Pers Soc Psychol, 82:956-974.
  26. Fox J, Moreland JJ (2015) The dark side of social networking sites: an exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and affordances. Comput Human Behav, 45:168-176.
  27. Fraley RC, Shaver PR (2000) Adult romantic attachment: theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Rev Gen Psychol, 4:132-154.
  28. Gezer F (2022) Evlilik doyumunun yordayıcıları: Aldatma eğilimi ve ilişkilerle ilgili bilişsel çarpıtmalar (Uzmanlık tezi). Gaziantep, Gaziantep Üniversitesi.
  29. Gunther R (2017) How infidelity causes post-traumatic stress disorder. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rediscovering-love/201709/how-infidelity-causes-post-traumatic-stress-disorder (Accessed 06.08.2025).
  30. Hazan C, Shaver P (1987) Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. J Pers Soc Psychol, 52:511-524.
  31. Herman JL (1992) Trauma and Recovery. New York, Basic Books.
  32. Homans GC (1958) Social behavior as exchange. Am J Sociol, 63:597-606.
  33. Homans GC (1961) Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York, Harcourt, Brace & World.
  34. Hsiao A, Ma EJ, Manfreda A, Baker M, Xu J (2023) A social exchange perspective on boosting customer loyalty through culturally competent servers. J Hosp Mark Manag, 32:555-577.
  35. Huang Q, Zhang R, Lee H, Xu H, Pan Y (2024) A study on customer behavior in online dating platforms: analyzing the impact of perceived value on enhancing customer loyalty. Behav Sci, 14:973.
  36. Johnson SM (1996) The Practice of Emotionally Focused Marital Therapy: Creating Connection. New York, Brunner/Mazel.
  37. Kankanhalli A, Tan BCY, Wei KK (2005) Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: an empirical investigation. MIS Q, 29:113-143.
  38. Karabacak KA, Demir M (2017) Özerklik, bağlanma stilleri, bilinçli farkındalık ve duygu düzenleme arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12:271-291.
  39. Korlaelçi MG (1992) Marcel’e göre bağlılık ve sadakat. Felsefe Dünyası, 6:37.
  40. Körner R, Schütz A, Fincham FD (2022) How secure and preoccupied attachment relate to offence-specific forgiveness in couples. J Res Pers, 101:104308.
  41. Labrecque LT, Whisman MA (2020) Extramarital sex and marital dissolution: does identity of the extramarital partner matter? Fam Process, 59:1308-1318.
  42. Le B, Agnew CR (2003) Commitment and its theorized determinants: a meta-analysis of the investment model. Pers Relatsh, 10:37-57.
  43. Levine DT, Stekel DJ (2016) So why have you added me? Adolescent girls’ technology-mediated attachments and relationships. Comput Human Behav, 63:25-34.
  44. Liu C, Ma JL (2019) Adult attachment orientations and social networking site addiction:the mediating effects of online social support and the fear of missing out. Front Psychol, 10:2629.
  45. Mikkelson AC, Ray CD (2024) Commitment, relational uncertainty, and the investment model. Commun Res Rep, 41:105-116.
  46. Mikulincer M, Shaver PR (2016) Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics, and Change. 2nd ed. New York, Guilford Press.
  47. Nickerson C (2022) Social exchange theory and relationships: examples & more. https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-exchange-theory.html (Accessed 06.08.2025).
  48. Nonnenmacher N, Noe D, Ehrenthal JC, Reck C (2016) Postpartum bonding: the impact of maternal depression and adult attachment style. Arch Womens Ment Health, 19:927-935.
  49. Özkur SG (2022) Yetişkinlerde aldatma eğiliminin duygusal özyeterlik ve cinsel tutumla ilişkisi (Uzmanlık tezi). İstanbul, İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi.
  50. Özmeriç D (2024) Commitment in long distance romantic relationships: The role of perceived responses to capitalization attempts and perceived mattering (Uzmanlık tezi). Ankara, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi.
  51. Putra IGBA, Masnita Y, Kurniawati K, Ningsih IY (2025) The influence of banking super apps on enhancing brand loyalty: a review of social exchange theory. Dinasti International Journal of Economics, Finance and Accounting, 6:4134-4147.
  52. Rajâa O, Mekkaoui A (2025) Revealing the impact of social exchange theory on financial performance: a systematic review of the mediating role of human resource performance. Cogent Business & Management, 12:2475983.
  53. Regan PC (2015) Infidelity. In The International Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality. (Eds P Whelehan, A Bolin):583-625. Hoboken, NJ, WileyBlackwell.
  54. Rusbult CE, Buunk BP (1993) Commitment processes in close relationships: an interdependence analysis. J Soc Pers Relat, 10:175-204.
  55. Rusbult CE, Martz JM, Agnew CR (1998) The investment model scale: measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Pers Relatsh, 5:357-391.
  56. Rusbult CE, Van Lange PAM (2003) Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. Annu Rev Psychol, 54:351-375.
  57. Rusbult CE, Zembrodt IM, Gunn LK (1982) Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: responses to dissatisfaction in romantic involvements. J Pers Soc Psychol, 43:1230-1242.
  58. Rusbult CE (1983) A longitudinal test of the investment model: the development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. J Pers Soc Psychol, 45:101-117.
  59. Rusbult CE (1980) Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: a test of the investment model. J Exp Soc Psychol, 16:172-186.
  60. Sagone E, Commodari E, Indiana ML, La Rosa VL (2023) Exploring the association between attachment style, psychological well-being, and relationship status in young adults and adults: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ, 13:525-539.
  61. Sengoz A, Dogru T, Mody M, Isik C (2025) Guiding the path to sustainable tourism development: investigating the role of tour guides within a social exchange theory paradigm. Tour Manag, 110:105162.
  62. Sharabi LL, Timmermans E (2021) Why settle when there are plenty of fish in the sea? Rusbult’s investment model applied to online dating. New Media Soc, 23:2926-2946.
  63. Simmons BL, Gooty J, Nelson DL, Little LM (2009) Secure attachment: implications for hope, trust, burnout, and performance. J Organ Behav, 30:233-247.
  64. Soğancı D (2017) Bağlanma stillerinin romantik ilişki doyumu üzerindeki etkisi (Uzmanlık tezi). İstanbul, Haliç Üniversitesi.
  65. Sprecher S (1998) Social exchange theories and sexuality. J Sex Res, 35:32-43.
  66. Stanley SM, Markman HJ, Whitton SW (2004) Communication, conflict, and commitment: insights on the foundations of relationship success from a national survey. Fam Process, 41:659-675.
  67. Stöven LM, Herzberg PY (2020) Relationship 2.0: a systematic review of associations between the use of social network sites and attachment style. J Soc Pers Relat, 38:1103-1128.
  68. Subaşı NG, Kazan H (2020) Çocukluk dönemi bağlanma stillerinin yetişkin iletişimindeki etkisi. Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication, 10:147-162.
  69. Sullivan KT (2021) Attachment style and jealousy in the digital age: do attitudes about online communication matter? Front Psychol, 12:678542.
  70. Sun J, Miller CH (2023) Smartphone attachment and self-regulation mediate the influence of avoidant attachment style on phubbing. Hum Behav Emerg Technol, 5:8810293.
  71. Swift ML, Virick M (2013) Perceived support, knowledge tacitness, and provider knowledge sharing. Group Organ Manage, 38:717-742.
  72. Taran ED (2023) Yetişkin bireylerin romantik ilişkilerinde bağlanma stilleri ve ilişki doyumlarının anksiyete ile ilişkisinin incelenmesi (Uzmanlık tezi). Lefkoşa, KKTC, Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi.
  73. Terzi S, Işık Ş (2017) Evli bireylerin ilişki bağlanımları: yatırım modeli temelli nitel bir çalışma. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 15:184-199.
  74. Thibaut JW, Kelley HH (1959) The Social Psychology of Groups. New York, Wiley.
  75. Thompson RA (2002) Attachment theory and research. In Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 3rd ed. (Ed M Lewis):164-172. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  76. Tran P, Judge M, Kashima Y (2019) Commitment in relationships: an updated meta-analysis of the investment model. Pers Relatsh, 26:158-180.
  77. Tsui TYD (2022) Social exchange theory and gender differences in online dating applications and self-esteem: the mediation effects of interpersonal relationships satisfaction (Final project papers). Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong.
  78. Türk Dil Kurumu (2025) Sadakat. https://sozluk.gov.tr/ (Erişildi 06.08.2025).
  79. Widom CS, Czaja SJ, Kozakowski SS, Chauhan P (2018) Does adult attachment style mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental and physical health outcomes? Child Abuse Negl, 76:533-545.
  80. Yılmaz HA, Hovardaoğlu S (2015) Relevance of components of investment model and some variables in close relationships with high and low self-monitoring. Journal of Human Sciences, 12:932–949.
  81. Zhang Z, Takahashi Y, Rezwan RB (2025) Knowledge hiding and social exchange theory: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol, 15:1516815.