Extradyadic Involvement Research Articles

Dating, marital, and hypothetical extradyadic involvements: How do they compare?

Patterns of extradyadic involvement (EDI) were assessed for 3 samples: an undergraduate dating sample and a community marital sample reporting on an actual experience of EDI, and an undergraduate sample which denied recent EDI and was asked to imagine a hypothetical EDI experience. Good consistency of responses within and between measures was found for the hypothetical EDI sample. Persons reporting on a hypothetical EDI were generally less approving of EDI and imagined that they would experience higher levels of primary relationship satisfaction, overall remorse, and specific types of distress, particularly in comparison to the dating EDI group. Relative to the dating EDI group, the marital EDI group recalled greater dissonance with the EDI behavior, more concern about disapproval from others, and higher levels of intimacy, self‐esteem, and love reasons for the EDI. No differences were found among the groups on the level of emotional closeness with the extradyadic partner.

83: Decision processes associated with discovering a partner’s extradyadic involvement

83: Decision processes associated with discovering a partner’s extradyadic involvement

Your Cheatin' Heart

SUMMARY This work challenges therapists to look at themselves and their beliefs regarding affairs. The work also examines common illogical beliefs in regards to extradyadic involvement. The reader is challenged to examine the underlying dynamic of extradyadic relationships and how their own biases affect how they view clients and work with the dyad.

Adult Attachment and Patterns of Extradyadic Involvement

Relationships between patterns of extradyadic involvement (EDI) and adult attachment were examined separately with undergraduates and community adults reporting prior EDI. Those with fearful or preoccupied styles reported more intimacy motivations for EDI, and undergraduates with these styles also reported more self-esteem motivations. Conversely, those with a dismissive style reported more autonomy motivations for EDI. Those with a fearful attachment style reported ambivalence about intimacy in the EDI. Fearful and preoccupied undergraduates and community males reported a more obsessive extradyadic relationship. However, dismissive individuals did not report more casual EDI. Gender effects also emerged, with females reporting more intimacy motivations than males, and undergraduate males reporting more casual EDI than undergraduate females. In the undergraduate sample, dismissive males had the most extradyadic partners over the prior 2 years relative to all other groups, and preoccupied females reported more partners than secure females. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Extradyadic Involvement during Dating

College student men (n = 299) and women (n = 392) reported their experiences with extradyadic (ED) dating and sexual activity. We also investigated the relationships between ED activity and religiosity, sex–love–marriage association beliefs, narcissism, sexual sensation seeking, a ‘ludic’ or game-playing orientation to romantic relationships, and self-perceived ability to deceive one’s dating partner. Despite normative disapproval for ED activity, a majority of respondents reported having had ED involvement while dating. There was no sex difference in the incidence of ED dating or ED kissing; however, men were more likely than women to experience ED fondling, oral sex, or vaginal intercourse. In general, ED dating and ED sexual activity were related to less adherence to sex–love–marriage association beliefs, increased sexual sensation seeking, a ‘ludic’ love style, and a self-perceived ability to deceive one’s dating partner. Findings are discussed with regard to possible implications and directions for future research.

Extradyadic romantic involvement: Moderating effects of sociosexuality and gender

In two separate experiments, the role of both sociosexuality (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991) and gender in moderating individuals' tendencies to pursue extradyadic relationships was examined. Unmarried subjects, predominantly Anglo and Hispanic, reportedly in “exclusive” dating relationships were presented with opportunities to become involved in a romantic relationship across a variety of situations. Their willingness to disregard both their own involved relationship status as well as their potential partner's current relationship status was assessed. Across experiments, individuals with an unrestricted sociosexual orientation indicated a greater willingness to pursue extradyadic involvement as evidenced by both self-report (Experiments 1 and 2) and behavioral (Experiment 2) measures. Further, on self-report measures, men indicated a greater willingness than did women to pursue extradyadic involvement. Gender differences disappeared on the behavioral measure. Finally, across experiments, subjects were less likely to pursue potential partners who were described as currently involved (versus uninvolved). This latter factor failed to interact with either sociosexuality or gender. Results are discussed from both evolutionary and cultural-contingency perspectives. Implications for practitioners are also presented.

Conditions that Promote Breakups as a Consequence of Extradyadic Involvements

This study examined the conditions under which extradyadic sexual involvements are likely to lead to a breakup or a continuation of the primary relationship. The issue was investigated by comparing a group of 44 men and women who had all been sexually involved outside their marital or cohabiting relationships, and who had since broken up, with a matched control group of 44 people who also had been involved in such relationships, but who were still living with their primary partners. The results indicated that, compared to the control group, the breakup group reported a significantly higher level of relationship dissatisfaction; attributed their own and their partners' extradyadic relationships more to motives of aggression and deprivation; and mentioned a higher level of conflict generated by these relationships. Furthermore, the breakup group indicated greater disapproval of long-term extradyadic relationships. However, the two groups did not differ in the number of extradyadic relationships, the degree of involvement in the most significant of these relationships, and the comparison level for alternatives. In addition, the attributions for breakups given by the respondents in the breakup group showed that men as well as women tended to overlook their own extradyadic sexual involvements as playing a significant role in the breakups. Men did, however, tend much more often than women to blame their breakups on their partners' extradyadic relationships. Furthermore, there was some evidence, according to both men and women, that partners' extradyadic relationships had a stronger influence on the decision to break up.

Toward the Management of Heterosexual Jealousy*

The findings of a recent study of extradyadic involvements and sexual jealousy among college‐age couples are reported. Evidence is brought to bear in support of the principle finding that several aspects of the jealousy experience (eliciting factors, manner of expression) can and do vary widely among individuals. Despite the apparent universality of the jealousy phenomenon, communication in couples is inhibited by the social disapproval associated with its occurrence, and consequently discrepancies such as those evidenced in this study may pass entirely unobserved. As a result, jealousy problems remain unresolved and may serve to trigger further dissension. In light of these findings, developing communication skills is identified as the appropriate treatment mode for sexual jealousy.