Types Of Infidelity Research Articles

Reconsidering Evolved Sex Differences in Jealousy: Comment on Harris (2003)

In a recent article, Harris (2003) concluded that the data do not support the existence of evolved sex differences in jealousy. Harris' review correctly identifies fatal flaws in three lines of evidence (spousal abuse, homicide, morbid jealousy), but her criticism of two other lines of evidence (self-report responses, psychophysiological measures) is based, in part, on a mischaracterization of the evolutionary psychological theory and a misunderstanding of the empirical implications of the theory. When interpreted according to the correct criterion (i.e., an interaction between sex and infidelity type), self-report studies (both forced-choice and non-forced choice) offer strong support for the existence of sex differences in jealousy. Psychophysiological data also offer some support, although these data are weakened by validity-related concerns. In addition, some refutational evidence cited by Harris (responses to real infidelity, responses under cognitive load) actually does not refute the theory. An integrative model that describes how jealousy might result from the interaction of sociocultural variables and evolved sex differences and suggestions for future research directions are discussed.

The Effect of Vividness of Experience on Sex Differences in Jealousy

Doubt has been raised about the validity of results that appear to demonstrate sex differences in the type of infidelity that elicits jealousy. Two studies explored proposed methodological weaknesses of this research. The first study distinguished participants who had experienced infidelity and those who had only imagined infidelity. The study found the classic sex differences when participants were “forced” to choose which kind of infidelity would be most upsetting, and these differences were more pronounced among participants who were recalling the actual infidelity of a partner. The second study explored the impact of the relatively brief, perhaps cursory response that is commonly evoked by questionnaires versus a slower, more vivid imagining of the infidelity experience. The classic forced choice results were found, and the vivid imagining produced effects that are more powerful. The overall results suggest that participants who had experienced infidelity or vividly imagined infidelity showed greater sex differences, suggesting that the usual format (filling out a questionnaire) may not trigger the evolved mechanism for jealousy.

Gender differences in rival characteristics that evoke jealousy in response to emotional versus sexual infidelity

AbstractPrevious research has shown that in men jealousy is evoked more by a rival's status‐related characteristics than in women, whereas in women jealousy is evoked more by a rival's physical attractiveness than in men. The present study examined whether the occurrence of this gender difference depends upon the type of infidelity one's partner engages in, i.e., emotional or sexual infidelity, and whether these types of jealousy evoke different emotional responses. An experiment was conducted using hypothetical jealousy situations with a 2 (participant gender: male vs. female) × 2 (rival physical attractiveness: high vs. low) × 2 (rival dominance: high vs. low) × 2 (type of infidelity: sexual vs. emotional) mixed‐factor design. Jealousy evoked by emotional infidelity was primarily characterized by feelings of threat, and jealousy after sexual infidelity was primarily characterized by feelings of betrayal and anger. Following emotional infidelity, in men, a rival's dominance, and in women, a rival's physical attractiveness, evoked feelings of threat but not feelings of anger‐betrayal. In contrast, after sexual infidelity, in men, but not in women, a rival's physical attractiveness evoked feelings of betrayal‐anger but not anxiety or suspicion.

Sex differences in the contexts of extreme jealousy

AbstractResearch on sex differences in jealousy using continuous measures sometimes reveals that women report more intense jealousy than men in response to both sexual and emotional infidelity. Two studies tested whether these findings might have stemmed from sex differences in the interpretation of the upper anchor of the jealousy scales (e.g., “extremely jealous”). In Study 1, women and men offered different types of exemplars when describing situations in which they felt extremely jealous. A significantly greater proportion of women than men reported feeling extreme jealousy in the context of romantic relationships. Additional results demonstrated that women and men confuse the terms “jealousy” and “envy,” although this confusion cannot account for the sex differences in the contexts of extreme jealousy. Study 2 demonstrated that the sex difference in the intensity of reported jealousy disappears if the upper anchor of the scale is modified to include specific contextual information (e.g., “as jealous as you could feel in a romantic relationship”).

Former partners and new rivals as threats to a relationship: Infidelity type, gender, and commitment as factors related to distress and forgiveness

AbstractThe overall aim of this study was to examine differences in responses to relationship infidelity when the infidelity involves a former romantic partner as opposed to a new rival. Participants indicated, for either sexual or emotional infidelity, whether they would be more upset if their partner were involved with a former partner or a new person, and whether they would be forgiving. Men and women saw the former partner as a greater threat when the infidelity was sexual. However, for emotional infidelity, only women selected the former partner more frequently. Ratings of the degree of distress and likelihood of forgiveness followed a similar pattern. For women, measures of relationship commitment were related to distress and forgiveness. For men, these measures were related to forgiveness only. The gender differences in distress may be related to differences between men and women in beliefs about the importance of commitment.

Which Infidelity Type Makes You More Jealous? Decision Strategies in a Forced-Choice between Sexual and Emotional Infidelity

This study tested the prediction derived from the evolutionary psychological analysis of jealousy that men and women selecting the adaptively primary infidelity type (i.e., female sexual and male emotional infidelity, respectively) in a forced-choice response format need to engage in less elaborate decision strategies than men and women selecting the adaptively secondary infidelity type (i.e., male sexual and female emotional infidelity, respectively). Unknown to the participants, decision times were registered as an index of the elaborateness of their decision strategies. The results clearly support the prediction. Implications and limitations of the present findings are discussed.

Priming of AIDS and Reactions to Infidelity: Are Sex Differences in Jealousy Context-Dependent?

Abstract: Context effects on men's and women's reactions to infidelity were studied in a laboratory experiment. University students (71 male, 54 female) were randomly assigned to either a neutral-priming control condition or a condition where AIDS was primed unobtrusively. Then they reported whether emotional or sexual infidelity of their partner would distress them more, and rated their degree of distress for each type of infidelity. Men (vs. women) reported greater distress in response to sexual (vs. emotional) infidelity in the neutral-priming condition, whereas no sex differences were observed in the AIDS-priming condition. Most participants were unaware of the priming. The results are discussed in relation to evolutionary and socio-cultural explanations of sex differences in jealousy.

Distress in response to relationship infidelity: The roles of gender and attitudes about relationships

According to the evolutionary model of psychology, biological influences may be a force behind many gender differences in relationship strategies and responses to relationship issues. For example, prior research has shown that males indicated more distress in relation to sexual infidelity, whereas females indicated more distress at the emotional infidelity of their partner. The current study attempted to replicate and extend this previous research by also examining relevant attitudinal factors possibly related to responses to infidelity. Participants (N = 156) were surveyed regarding probable responses to relationship infidelity (sexual vs. emotional infidelity), and measures of participants’ sexual attitudes and romantic beliefs were obtained. Results indicate a clear gender difference: Women were more likely to choose emotional infidelity as most distressing, while more men chose sexual infidelity as most distressing. For the men and women who did choose the same type of infidelity as most distressing, their ratings of the intensity of the distress did not differ. Sexual attitudes were found to be significant in predicting distress caused by either type of infidelity. Romantic beliefs were only significant in predicting distress due to emotional infidelity.

Sex differences in the events that elicit jealousy among homosexuals

AbstractWhen individuals are asked which event would upset them more—a partner's emotional infidelity or a partner's sexual infidelity—among heterosexuals more men than women select a partner's sexual infidelity as the most distressing event, whereas more women than men select a partner's emotional infidelity as the most upsetting event. Because homosexuals’mating psychology is unlike that of heterosexuals, the present study examined which of these two events is more upsetting in a sample of 237 Dutch homosexuals. In support of our hypothesis it was found that, whereas gay men more often than lesbian women chose a mate's emotional infidelity as the most upsetting event, lesbians more often than gay men chose a mate's sexual infidelity as the most upsetting event. In addition, analyses showed that the effect of participant sex on infidelity choice was mediated by beliefs with regard to the co‐occurrence of sexual and emotional infidelity. Apparently, with respect to choosing the most upsetting type of infidelity of their partner, homosexuals resemble heterosexuals of the opposite sex. Several explanations are discussed for this finding.

Emotional reactions to infidelity

We sought to identify emotional reactions to a partner's sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In a preliminary study, 53 participants nominated emotional reactions to a partner's sexual and emotional infidelity. In a second study, 655 participants rated each emotion for how likely it was to occur following sexual and emotional infidelity. Principal components analysis revealed 15 emotion components, including Hostile/Vengeful, Depressed, and Sexually aroused. We conducted repeated measures analyses of variance on the 15 components, with participant sex as the between-subjects factor and infidelity type as the within-subjects factor. A main effect for sex obtained for 9 components. For example, men scored higher on Homicidal/Suicidal, whereas women scored higher on Undesirable/Insecure. A main effect for infidelity type obtained for 12 components. For example, participants endorsed Nauseated/Repulsed as more likely to follow sexual infidelity and Undesirable/Insecure as more likely to follow emotional infidelity. Discussion addresses limitations of this research, and highlights the need for an integrative theory of emotional reactions to infidelity.

Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan

AbstractThe different adaptive problems faced by men and women over evolutionary history led evolutionary psychologists to hypothesize and discover sex differences in jealousy as a function of infidelity type. An alternative hypothesis proposes that beliefs about the conditional probabilities of sexual and emotional infidelity account for these sex differences. Four studies tested these hypotheses. Study 1 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 1,122) by rendering the types of infidelity mutually exclusive. Study 2 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 234) by asking participants to identify which aspect of infidelity was more upsetting when both forms occurred, and by using regression to identify the unique contributions of sex and beliefs. Study 3 replicated Study 2 in a Korean sample (N = 190). Study 4 replicated Study 2 in a Japanese sample (N = 316). Across the studies, the evolutionary hypothesis, but not the belief hypothesis, accounted for sex differences in jealousy when the types of infidelity are rendered mutually exclusive; sex differences in which aspect of infidelity is more upsetting when both occur; significant variance attributable to sex, after controlling for beliefs; sex‐differentiated patterns of beliefs; and the cross‐cultural prevalence of all these sex differences.

Evolutionary Origins of Sex Differences in Jealousy? Questioning the “Fitness” of the Model

Evolutionary psychology has become a popular framework for studying jealousy Much of this popularity can be attributed to work by Buss and his colleagues showing an apparent relation between an individual's sex and jealousy for certain types of infidelity (i e, sexual vs emotional) that is consistent with evolutionary theory (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992) In two studies, we take issue with these findings and argue that the relation between sex and jealousy reported by Buss and his colleagues is more properly explained by considering individuals' beliefs concerning the covariation between sexual and emotional infidelity