Sex Differences In Jealousy Research Articles

A Reproductive Threat-Based Model of Evolved Sex Differences in Jealousy

Although heterosexual women and men consistently demonstrate sex differences in jealousy, these differences disappear among lesbians and gay men as well as among heterosexual women and men contemplating same-sex infidelities (infidelities in which the partner and rival are the same sex). Synthesizing these past findings, the present paper offers a reproductive threat-based model of evolved sex differences in jealousy that predicts that the sexes will differ only when the jealous perceivers' reproductive outcomes are differentially at risk. This model is supported by data from a web-based study in which lesbians, gay men, bisexual women and men, and heterosexual women and men responded to a hypothetical infidelity scenario with the sex of the rival randomly determined. After reading the scenario, participants indicated which type of infidelity (sexual versus emotional) would cause greater distress. Consistent with predictions, heterosexual women and men showed a sex difference when contemplating opposite-sex infidelities but not when contemplating same-sex infidelities, whereas lesbians and gay men showed no sex difference regardless of whether the infidelity was opposite-sex or same-sex.

Did you have sex with him? Do you love her? An in vivo test of sex differences in jealous interrogations

Abundant evidence suggests that between sex differences exist in the degree to which cues to sexual and emotional infidelity trigger jealousy. A criticism of this research is that this commonly found sex difference is a consequence of the hypothetical scenario and forced-choice methodology that is commonly employed. This study used a novel method to explore the nature of jealousy-fueled interrogations (N=75) in the face of actual infidelities captured on video in the syndicated reality program Cheaters. Fifty-one episodes of Cheaters were content analyzed by six coders trained to watch each episode. As predicted, men were more likely than women to inquire about the sexual aspect of their partners’ infidelities, whereas women were more likely than men to inquire about the emotional aspect of their partners’ infidelities. These results suggest that humans have sex-differentiated damage assessment strategies dedicated to investigating the nature of their mates’ extra-pair relationships. Although previous studies have found sex differences in jealousy using prospective and retrospective reports, this is the first study to demonstrate sex differences in romantic jealousy in vivo. These findings refute the criticism that sex differences in jealousy are mere methodological artifacts. Discussion focuses on the benefits and limitations of content-analyzing Cheaters.

Sex drive, attachment style, relationship status and previous infidelity as predictors of sex differences in romantic jealousy

Recent research examining sex differences in jealousy suggests that more men than women tend to be distressed by sexual infidelity, and that more women than men tend to be distressed by emotional infidelity. The primary explanation for these findings is that evolution has shaped men’s and women’s responses to enhance their chances of reproductive success. However, within-sex differences are also found in terms of relative level of distress at sexual or emotional infidelity. This study examined the effect of alternative variables, particularly those associated with attachment and sexual motivations, on both between- and within-sex differences in relative distress at sexual and emotional infidelity. A community sample of 437 adults provided data using a self-report questionnaire. The results showed that sex drive was a significant predictor of distress at jealousy for both men and women, while attachment avoidance and previously being the victim of a sexual infidelity were significant predictors for men only, and relationship status was a significant predictor for women only. Overall, these findings support the evolutionary model of jealousy, and suggest that sex-specific evolved psychological mechanisms underpinning jealousy are influenced by attachment and sexual motivations.

Jealousy Reconsidered: A Reply to

In a recent commentary, DeSteno (2010) critiqued the work of Levy and Kelley (2010) which investigated the relationship of attachment style to the sex difference in jealousy. This commentary addresses the concerns raised by DeSteno; I briefly review some of the literature that was not addressed by DeSteno's commentary and discuss directions that future research may take.

Sex Differences in Jealousy: A Study from Norway

Two infidelity scenarios and the Distress about Mating Rivals Questionnaire were administered to 506 undergraduate students, 202 men and 304 women. The results from the infidelity scenarios strongly suggest that men become more upset by sexual aspects of infidelity compared to women. Women were more upset than men by their partner’s emotional commitment to another woman. Data from the Distress about Mating Rivals Questionnaire showed that men relatively more than women will be more distressed by a rival that has higher status and prestige, better financial prospects and more physical strength compared to themselves. In contrast, women would be relatively more distressed than men by a rival that is more kind and understanding, has a more attractive face and a more attractive body than themselves. The results lend support to evolutionary based explanations for the observed sex differences.

Sex Differences in Jealousy: An Evolutionary Perspective on Online Infidelity

This study examined whether sex differences in jealousy would generalize to online infidelity. Based on the evolutionary psychological explanation for sex differences in jealousy (ancestral men's challenge of paternal uncertainty vs. ancestral women's challenge of ensuring paternal investment), we expected that men and women would perceive online infidelity similarly to conventional infidelity. The experimental design was a 2 (Infidelity Context: online or conventional) × 2 (Participant Sex) × 2 (Infidelity Type: emotional vs. sexual) mixed factorial. Participants were 332 (132 male, 200 female) undergraduates who completed a questionnaire assessing their responses to potential infidelity. As predicted, online and conventional infidelity elicited the same sex difference in jealousy. Implications for social scientists who study online behavior are discussed.

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.

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.

Sex differences in jealousy: Misinterpretation of nonsignificant results as refuting the theory

AbstractStudies examining sex differences in jealousy using continuous measures have produced inconsistent findings. To explain these inconsistencies, this study critically evaluates the criterion used to test the sex difference in jealousy, demonstrating that the Participant Sex × Infidelity Type interaction is the only relevant effect. Then, using a U.S.‐based sample, the sex difference is investigated using 14 continuous‐measure response formats, revealing a highly significant overall sex difference (p &lt; .001, g= .300), despite the sex difference being nonsignificant for 9 of 14 individual formats. Results highlight the danger of falling prey to the belief in the law of small numbers, manifest in this debate as the erroneous interpretation of individual nonsignificant results as refuting the theory.

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.

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.

The basic cognition of jealousy: an evolutionary perspective

Penke and Asendorpf (European Journal Of Personality, vol 21, this issue) argue compellingly that research on jealousy would benefit from more direct investigation of cognitive processes, and report on research providing mixed evidence for sex differences in jealousy. We identify three limitations to the empirical approach utilised by Penke and Asendorpf, and highlight novel conceptual and methodological approaches for directly examining the basic cognitive mechanisms associated with jealousy and intrasexual rivalry. Investigating the basic cognition of intrasexual rivalry will help expand the scope of jealousy‐related research. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

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.

Relations among Individual Differences in Reproductive Strategies, Sexual Attractiveness, Affective and Punitive Intentions, and Imagined Sexual or Emotional Infidelity

We examined relations among Mating Effort, Mate Value, Sex and individuals' self-reported responses to imagined sexual or emotional infidelity. We asked participants to describe the (1) upset or bother (2) aversive emotional reactions (3) punitive impulses, and (4) punitive intentions they experienced in response to imagined sexual or emotional infidelity. The results replicated previously documented sex differences in jealousy. In addition, imagined sexual infidelity upset individuals higher in Mating Effort more than those lower in Mating Effort. Higher Mating Effort also predicted greater temptation, intention, and likelihood to engage in punitive behaviors in response to imagined sexual or emotional infidelity. We discuss these data in light of individual differences in relations between reproductive strategy and romantic jealousy. Additionally, we point to the importance of controlling for co-linearity between reactions to sexual and emotional infidelity, and the need for addressing related methodological problems within jealousy research.

Sex Differences in Response to Sexual and Emotional Infidelity Among Spanish and Chilean Students

This study evaluates sex differences in response to sexual and emotional infidelity in two Spanish-speaking samples. An extension of previous findings with Anglo, European, and Asian students leads to the prediction that men report being more distressed by sexual than by emotional infidelity, and women report the reverse. Five hundred and eleven students from Spain and Chile respond to a questionnaire consisting of forced-choice-scenarios. Significant sex differences in jealousy as a function of type of infidelity emerges and this is consistent with previous research on jealousy.

Sex Differences in Responses to Sexual and Emotional Infidelity: Considerations of Rival Attractiveness and Financial Status

Evolutionary theory based research shows that women and men may differ in their responses to sexual and emotional infidelity. The present research sought to determine how the mate value characteristics of rivals affect the levels of emotional reaction men and women experience with these types of infidelity. Women were expected to report higher levels of upset when their male partners committed infidelity with an attractive rather than an unattractive woman while men were expected to experience the most upset when their female partners committed sexual infidelity with a male rival regardless of the rival's financial status. The results were partially consistent with these hypotheses. Women were most upset by their partner's sexual infidelity regardless of the attractiveness of their female rival and more upset by their partner's emotional infidelity with an attractive woman. Men were most upset with their partner's commission of sexual infidelity regardless of the financial status of their male rival. These findings are discussed in terms of prior research examining sex differences in jealousy and intrasexual competition.

Sex Differences in Jealousy in Response to Actual Infidelity

The present studies address two criticisms of the theory of evolved sex differences in jealousy: (a) that the sex difference in jealousy emerges only in response to hypothetical infidelity scenarios, and (b) that the sex difference emerges only using forced-choice measures. In two separate studies, one a paper-and-pencil survey with a student sample and the other a web-based survey targeting a non-student sample, men and women showed significant sex differences in jealousy in response to actual infidelity experiences; men experienced more jealousy in response to the sexual aspects of an actual infidelity, whereas women experienced more jealousy in response to the emotional aspects of the infidelity. Sex differences emerged using both continuous measures of jealousy as well as the traditional forced-choice measure. Overall, our results demonstrate that sex differences in jealousy are not limited to responses to hypothetical infidelity scenarios; they also emerge in response to actual infidelity experiences.

Constraining accommodative homunculi in evolutionary explorations of jealousy: A reply to Barrett et al. (2006).

This article responds to a critique by H. C. Barrett, D. A. Frederick, M. G. Haselton, and R. Kurzban, wherein it is argued that manipulations of cognitive constraints cannot be used to test general evolutionary hypotheses regarding the architecture of mind. In making this argument, Barrett et al. focus on what they believe to be faulty logic in D. DeSteno, M. Y. Bartlett, J. Braverman, and P. Salovey's use of such techniques to examine proposed sex differences in jealousy. In presenting their argument, however, Barrett et al. appear to disregard central findings presented in DeSteno et al. (2002) and, in so doing, fail to grasp the interrelations among findings that might readily address their concerns. Here, the authors present arguments for why and when manipulations of cognitive resources may prove useful in investigating evolved psychological mechanisms and, in so doing, situate their use within the ongoing debate concerning evolved sex differences in jealousy.

Relationship experience as a predictor of romantic jealousy

We examined between-sex differences and within-sex differences in jealousy in response to a romantic partner’s sexual and emotional infidelity. In addition to replicating established sex differences in jealousy, we investigated a potential trigger for within-sex differences in jealousy. We hypothesized that men will be more distressed by sexual infidelity and women will be more distressed by emotional infidelity and that relationship experience will trigger men and women to respond in evolutionarily predictable ways. We replicated previous research on sex differences in jealousy and demonstrated that relationship experience predicts upset over infidelity, but primarily for men. Relative to men without relationship experience, men with such experience reported greater distress about a partner’s sexual infidelity. Discussion focuses on the relevance of relationship experience to within-sex differences in distress over a partner’s infidelities.