Emotional Infidelity Research Articles

Sex Differences in Jealousy: Comparing the Influence of Previous Infidelity Among College Students and Adults

Many studies have found that traditionally aged college students differ in their relative distress when asked to imagine a partner’s sexual versus emotional infidelity. This study examined how real partner infidelity experiences among college students and older adults influence these responses, using both forced choice and continuous scales. Consistent with evolutionary theory, and regardless of previous real infidelity experiences, male college students were more likely to be distressed by hypothetical partner sexual infidelity, whereas female college students were more distressed by emotional infidelity. In contrast, infidelity experience moderated adult responses. As hypothesized, sex differences were found only among adults who had not previously experienced real partner infidelity.

Distress in Response to Infidelities Committed by the Partners of Close Others 1It is journal policy that submissions coauthored by a current editor are handled by a guest editor. We thank Rainer Banse, who handled the current manuscript, for his efforts.

To test rival explanations for sex differences in distress over sexual vs. emotional infidelity, evolutionary psychologists have studied people’s reactions to the infidelity suffered by close relatives, claiming that sex-of-target effects would support an evolutionary explanation but refute a sociocultural explanation. This paradigm was extended by comparing genetically related and unrelated targets in two cultures. Students (N = 566) in Greece and Germany reported how much infidelity committed by the partners of siblings versus friends would distress them. Sex-of-target effects were found, though they were limited to Greek participants and to genetically unrelated targets. Across targets, a sex-of-participant effect emerged, with men being more distressed by sexual (vs. emotional) infidelity than women. The results are discussed with respect to evolutionary and sociocultural theorizing.

Sex Differences in Jealousy

Studies have found that more men than women endorse sexual infidelity as more distressing than emotional infidelity, whereas more women than men endorse emotional infidelity as more distressing than sexual infidelity. Some evolutionary psychologists have proposed that this sex difference can be best conceptualized as reflecting evolution-based differences in parental investment that produce a need for paternity certainty among men and a need for male investment in offspring among women. Nonetheless, a conspicuous subset of men report emotional infidelity as more distressing than sexual infidelity. Current theorizing explains between-sex differences but not within-sex differences. We hypothesized that attachment-style differences may help to explain both between- and within-sex differences in jealousy. As hypothesized, dismissing avoidant participants reported more jealousy regarding sexual than emotional infidelity (64.8%), and secure participants, including secure men, reported more jealousy regarding emotional than sexual infidelity (77.3%), χ2(3, N = 411) = 45.03, p < .001. A series of sequential logistic regression analyses indicated significant moderation of the sex-jealousy relationship by attachment style. Implications of an attachment perspective are discussed.

Sex differences in jealousy: The case of Internet infidelity

Studies investigating the events that elicit men’s and women’s jealousy consistently show that men’s jealousy, more than women’s jealousy, is triggered by a mate’s sexual infidelity, and women’s jealousy, more than men’s jealousy, is triggered by a mate’s emotional infidelity. Internet infidelity poses new challenges for modern couples. Therefore, the present study investigated men’s and women’s responses to emotional and sexual infidelity over the Internet. Results from both a student sample (n = 254), and a sample from the general population (n = 483) showed that sex differences in response to Internet infidelity parallels those for offline infidelity. Implications and explanations for this finding, as well as different results between both samples, are discussed.

Impact of Relational Proximity on Distress from Infidelity

Men are generally more distressed by a partner's sexual infidelity whereas women are generally more distressed by a partner's emotional infidelity. The importance of the identity of the interloper, however, has been neglected. We explored the influence of relational proximity (i.e., the degree of genetic relatedness) on distress about infidelity. In Study 1, participants were most distressed when the imagined infidelity occurred between their current mate and close kin. In Study 2, relational proximity mattered more than the type of sexual behavior, the likelihood of contracting a sexually transmitted disease, and the likelihood of the infidelity leading to a damaged reputation. Together, the results indicate that identity matters, especially if the interloper is someone with whom we have familial bonds.

Jealousy and emotion: how partners react to infidelity

This present study explores the differences between women's and men's responses to (hypothetical) infidelity, &nbsp;and how these responses are influenced by the &nbsp;characteristics of the couple's relationship. 372 subjects completed questionnaires (a) itemising their jealous reaction to a partner&acute;s hypothetical infidelity (emotional or sexual); and (b) the state of their relationship. A survey of 250 women and 122 men revealed that the women reported higher intensity of emotional distress than the men. in regard to both emotional and sexual infidelity. There were no significant differences between men and women in their reports of which infidelity troubled them more: both genders are troubled more by emotional infidelity. We also report the influence that the type of relationship has on the emotions provoked by the infidelity.

Jealousy and emotion: how partners react to infidelity

This present study explores the differences between women's and men's responses to (hypothetical) infidelity, &nbsp;and how these responses are influenced by the &nbsp;characteristics of the couple's relationship. 372 subjects completed questionnaires (a) itemising their jealous reaction to a partner&acute;s hypothetical infidelity (emotional or sexual); and (b) the state of their relationship. A survey of 250 women and 122 men revealed that the women reported higher intensity of emotional distress than the men. in regard to both emotional and sexual infidelity. There were no significant differences between men and women in their reports of which infidelity troubled them more: both genders are troubled more by emotional infidelity. We also report the influence that the type of relationship has on the emotions provoked by the infidelity.

Subjective Distress to Violations of Trust in Mexican American Close Relationships Conforms to Evolutionary Principles

Sex differences in subjective distress to violations of trust in a close relationship were observed among Mexican American men and women. Imagining a partner’s emotional infidelity and other female-linked violations (for example, a partner who no longer desires to work) distressed a larger percentage of women than men. In contrast, imagining a partner’s sexual infidelity and other male-linked violations (for example, a partner who no longer makes an effort to look physically attractive) distressed a larger percentage of men than women. The results from two studies provided compelling evidence against a social–cognitive explanation of the sex differences and for an evolutionary psychology explanation based on men and women responding to threats to their sex-linked mating strategies.

Sex differences in the motivation and mitigation of jealousy-induced interrogations

Given the differential costs sexual and emotional infidelity posed for each sex, we hypothesized that humans have sex-differentiated damage assessment strategies to investigate the nature of a partner’s infidelity. Study 1 tested this hypothesis using a forced-choice dilemma in which participants ( N = 172) indicated whether they would be more likely to inquire about the sexual or emotional nature of a partner’s extra-pair relationship. Results confirmed our predictions that (a) men more so than women inquire about the sexual nature of the extra-pair relationship and (b) women more so than men inquire about the emotional nature of the extra-pair relationship. We further hypothesized that humans have sex-differentiated damage control strategies to mitigate the costs of being caught committing infidelity. Study 2 tested this hypothesis using a forced-choice dilemma in which participants ( N = 117) indicated whether they would be more likely to deny the sexual or emotional nature of their involvement with an extra-pair partner. Results confirmed our predictions that if their partner discovered that they were involved with someone else, (a) men more so than women deny any emotional involvement with the extra-pair partner, whereas (b) women more so than men deny any sexual involvement with the extra-pair partner.

Sex differences in response to sexual versus emotional infidelity: The moderating role of individual differences

Numerous studies indicate that men (compared to women) tend to display relatively greater distress in response to sexual infidelity, whereas women (compared to men) tend to display relatively greater distress in response to emotional infidelity. The current research builds upon this literature by examining the role individual differences in chronic jealousy play in moderating these sex differences. Findings demonstrate that sex differences in responses to sexual versus emotional infidelity are substantially greater among individuals high in chronic jealousy – individuals who frequently tend to worry about potential relationship threats – than among individuals low in chronic jealousy. This research highlights the importance of integrating a focus on individual differences with evolutionary theories of social cognition.

Emotional and Sexual Infidelity Offline and in Cyberspace

This study investigated how men and women perceive online and offline sexual and emotional infidelity. Undergraduates from a large university in Northern Ireland participated in the study. It was found that men, when forced to decide, were more upset by sexual infidelity and women by emotional infidelity. It was also found that men were more likely to believe that women have sex when in love and that women believe that men have sex even when they are not in love. It was not, however, found that either men or women believed that having cybersex implied the other was also in love or that being in love online implied they were having cybersex. These results are explained through a social-cognitive lens.

Are Sexual and Emotional Infidelity Equally Upsetting to Men and Women? Making Sense of Forced-Choice Responses

Forced-choice measures that assess reactions to imagined sexual and emotional infidelity are ubiquitous in studies testing the Jealousy as a Specific Innate Module (JSIM) model. One potential problem with such measures is that they fail to identify respondents who find both forms of infidelity equally upsetting. To examine this issue, an experiment was conducted in which two groups of participants imagined a romantic infidelity after which participants in the first group used a traditional forced-choice measure to indicate whether they found sexual or emotional infidelity more upsetting. Participants in the second group instead used a modified forced-choice measure that allowed them also to indicate whether they found both forms of infidelity equally upsetting. Consistent with previous research, those given the traditional forced-choice measure tended to respond in a manner that supported the JSIM model. However, the majority of participants given the modified measure indicated that both forms of infidelity were equally upsetting.

Does the Big-5 relate to jealousy, or infidelity reactions?

Two studies explored whether or not personal experiences of romantic jealousy relate to individual differences in personality by means of the Big Five model of personality. Study 1 examined how scores on the Interpersonal Jealousy Scale relate to the Big 5 dimensions of personality. Seventy-one participants were administered the Interpersonal Adjective Scale Revised: Big Five version (IASR-B5; Trapnell & Wiggins, 1990), the Interpersonal Jealousy Scale (IJS; Mathes & Severa, 1981), and a shortened version of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Strahan & Gerbasi, 1972). Study 2 examined how reactions to emotional and sexual infidelity relate to the Big-5 dimensions of personality. Seventy-seven participants were administered the IASR-B5 and MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale, as well as infidelity scenarios that described either an emotional or sexual infidelity situation (Wiederman & Kendall, 1999). Exploratory hypotheses suggesting that Neuroticism, Extraversion and Openness to experience might be predictors of: jealousy (Study 1), and reactions to a partner’s commission of sexual and emotional infidelity (Study 2) were not confirmed. The Big-5 dimensions of personality were not related to jealousy scores or reactions to infidelity. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Sex Differences in Feelings of Guilt Arising from Infidelity

Although there is extensive literature regarding sex differences in jealousy due to infidelity, guilt resulting from infidelity remains unexplored. We hypothesize that men will feel guiltier from imagined emotional rather than sexual infidelity, as it is most important for their partner's reproductive success. Similarly, we predict that women will feel more guilt from imagined sexual rather than emotional infidelity. The findings indicate a different pattern; men feel guiltier following sexual infidelity, whereas women feel guiltier following emotional infidelity. Results also show that both sexes believe their partners would have a more difficult time forgiving sexual, rather than emotional, infidelity, but women and not men report that sexual infidelity would more likely lead to relationship dissolution. These findings are discussed in view of evolved mating strategies and individual reproductive success.

Online and offline infidelity: impact on life

Background In today's technological development, internet and electronics has fueled the online and offline infidelity. This study has experiences of 700 participant's who shared there life experiences and attitude. Infidelity research analysis was done and sexual, emotional components were studied. Emotional infidelity consists of involving with someone other than partner that may be in the form of feeling, thought or in the form of physical exploration in internet chatting. Sexual infidelity is perceived as an act of betrayal that is as fruitful and satisfactory as in real life.

The crux of cognitive load: constraining deliberate and effortful decision processes in romantic jealousy

DeSteno, Bartlett, Braverman, and Salovey [ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(2002)1103–1116] challenged the evidentiary support for the hypothesis of evolved sex differences in jealousy. They attribute this support emanating from studies forcing men and women to choose between sexual and emotional infidelity as generating more negative emotional responses to a methodological artifact. This attribution is based on the results of their study allegedly demonstrating that sex differences in jealousy emerge in the forced-choice response format only when participants employ deliberate and effortful decision processes but disappear when using automatic or simple decision processes. The present study offers and tests an alternative account of their results. Specifically, the participants were forced to employ a simple decision process by either a substantial time pressure or a jealousy-related word load or jealousy-unrelated digit-string load imposed on the participants while choosing between sexual and emotional infidelity as causing more jealousy. The sex differences predicted by the evolutionary hypothesis were found in the time pressure and word-load condition, and they were attenuated in the digit-string condition. Additionally, only in the digit-load condition was sexual infidelity selected more frequently when it appeared as the first response option, indicating that the empirical basis of DeSteno et al.'s challenge of the evolutionary view of jealousy is in all likelihood attributable to a methodological artifact.

Evidence for conditional sex differences in emotional but not in sexual jealousy at the automatic level of cognitive processing

The two evolutionary psychological hypotheses that men react more jealous than women to sexual infidelity and women react more jealous than men to emotional infidelity are currently controversial because of apparently inconsistent results. We suggest that these inconsistencies can be resolved when the two hypotheses are evaluated separately and when the underlying cognitive processes are considered. We studied jealousy with forced‐choice decisions and emotion ratings in a general population sample of 284 adults aged 20–30 years using six infidelity dilemmas and recordings of reaction times. The sex difference for emotional jealousy existed for decisions under cognitive constraint, was also evident in the decision speed, increased for faster decisions, and was stronger for participants with lower education. No evidence for a sex difference in sexual jealousy was found. Our results support the view of a specific female sensitivity to emotional infidelity that canalizes the development of an adaptive sex difference in emotional jealousy conditional to the sociocultural environment. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

The disengagement of attentive resources from task-irrelevant cues to sexual and emotional infidelity

The present study tests two predictions derived from the evolutionary view of jealousy. (1) For men the disengagement of attentive resources from task-irrelevant cues to sexual infidelity is more difficult than from neutral or emotional infidelity cues. Conversely, for women the disengagement of attentive resources from task-irrelevant cues to emotional infidelity is more difficult than from neutral or sexual infidelity cues. (2) These difficulties are especially pronounced in participants currently involved in a committed romantic relationship. In each trial either an affectively neutral, an emotional infidelity or sexual infidelity distractor was simultaneously presented with a target sentence. The last trial was followed by a recall test for the targets and distractors. The results confirmed both predictions. Implications and limitations of the present study are discussed and suggestions for future research are provided.

Relief over the disconfirmation of the prospect of sexual and emotional infidelity

Two studies tested the predictions that the disconfirmation of the prospect of a mate’s sexual infidelity generates more intense relief in men than in women, whereas the disconfirmation of the prospect of a mate’s emotional infidelity generates more intense relief in women than in men. Additionally, the intensity of relief was predicted to increase with the likelihood of infidelity. The participants indicated their relief over the disconfirmation of the prospect of sexual and emotional infidelity in a forced-choice response format and on separate rating scales. As predicted, more women than men indicated that they would be more relieved about the disconfirmation of the prospect of emotional infidelity. Ratings of the intensity of relief consistently confirmed the prediction that men are more relieved than women about the disconfirmation of the prospect of sexual infidelity. Additionally, women consistently reported more relief about the disconfirmation of emotional than of sexual infidelity. The impact of the likelihood of infidelity on relief was negligible. Limitations and implications of the present study are discussed.

Decision Strategies in Continuous Ratings of Jealousy Feelings Elicited by Sexual and Emotional Infidelity

Two studies (total N = 689) tested the assumption of DeSteno, Bartlett, Braverman, and Salovey (2002) that sex differences in jealousy predicted by the evolutionary view are an artifact of measurement because they are restricted to a forced-choice response format and do not emerge when using continuous jealousy ratings. In Study 1, men and women rated how much a mate's emotional and sexual infidelity contributed to their jealousy feeling. In Study 2, men and women rated the intensity of their jealousy feeling elicited by a mate's emotional and sexual infidelity. In one condition they were asked to make their ratings spontaneously whereas in the other condition they were instructed to make their ratings only after careful consideration. The results of both studies lend no support for the artifact-of-measurement assumption. The implications of the present finding for the assumption of DeSteno et al. (2002) are discussed.