Sexual Infidelity Versus Emotional Infidelity

2021 ◽  
pp. 7394-7395
Author(s):  
Carlota Batres
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Emotional Infidelity

scholarly journals The influence of a rival’s (in)fertility on jealousy and the allocation of blame following a mate’s infidelity

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryanne Fisher ◽  
Laura Robertson ◽  
Haley Dillon
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Past Work ◽  
Selective Pressures ◽  
Reproductive Capability ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Do So

Selective pressures throughout evolutionary history have caused the adaptation of sex-specific responses to dilemmas that are relevant for reproductive fitness. Sex differences in imagined jealousy due to infidelity are well documented, but past work does not consider the influence of reproductive capability (i.e., being fertile versus infertile) on responses. Relying on an online survey of 369 adults, we hypothesized that infidelities involving an infertile interloper lead to less jealousy than infidelities involving a fertile interloper. Further, for sexual infidelity, regardless of the interloper’s fertility, we hypothesized men would allocate the most responsibility to their partner and women would do so for the interloper, given women are assumed to behave with more intention. This hypothesis was partially supported; while men did allocate the most responsibility to their mate, so too did women, but women also blamed the interloper more than men. With regards to emotional infidelity, again independent of the interloper’s fertility, we hypothesized men will primarily hold their partner responsible. However, we hypothesized that women will again consider the interloper responsible, but also their partner, due to concerns over fear of losing access to needed resources. This prediction was partially supported, as both sexes primarily hold their partner most responsible, and women held the interloper more accountable than did men. The findings shed light onto how individuals assess relationship threats and allocate responsibility, according to reproductive capability.

Men's Desire for Children Carrying Their Genes and Sexual Jealousy: A Test of Paternity Uncertainty as an Explanation of Male Sexual Jealousy

2005 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 791-798 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene W. Mathes
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Desire For Children ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Sexual Jealousy ◽  
Number Of Children ◽  
Women College Students ◽  
Paternity Uncertainty ◽  
Psychology Courses

In a classic study, Buss, Larson, Westen, and Semmelroth found that men were more distressed by the thought of a partner's sexual infidelity (labeled sexual jealousy) and women were more distressed by the thought of a partner's emotional infidelity (labeled emotional jealousy). Buss and his associates explained the results by suggesting that men are concerned about uncertainty of paternity, that is, the possibility of raising another man's child while believing that the child is their own. To test this explanation, the Desire for Children Scale was created. Its internal consistency and test-retest reliabilities were .86 and .89, respectively. Scores correlate with stated Number of Children Desired (convergent validity) but none of the Big-Five traits (divergent validity). It was hypothesized that for men scores on this scale would correlate positively with scores on sexual jealousy. The Desire for Children Scale and the two Sexual vs Emotional Jealousy items of Buss and his associates were given to 49 men and 55 women college students enrolled in psychology courses. Their average age was 19.9 yr. ( SD = 3.7), and average year in school was 2.0 ( SD= 1.2). Subjects volunteered to participate in the study in exchange for course credit. The hypothesis was confirmed and gives support to the uncertainty of paternity explanation.

scholarly journals Meta-Analyses of Sex Differences in Responses to Sexual Versus Emotional Infidelity: Men and Women are More Similar than Different

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
Romantic Relationships ◽  
Social Cognitive ◽  
Cognitive Theory ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Lesbian And Gay ◽  
The Social ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Continuous Measures

From 54 articles, 172 effect sizes were meta-analyzed to determine whether men and women are differentially distressed by emotional versus sexual infidelity. Predictions were derived and tested from an evolutionary psychology (EP) perspective, a social–cognitive perspective, and the double-shot perspective. The data were not consistent with the EP predictions because men tended to respond in the predicted manner in only the U.S. student samples, whereas the rest of the data were largely consistent with the social–cognitive theory. Specifically, both sexes tended to be more upset by emotional than sexual infidelity when forced to choose which type of infidelity was more distressing. Both sexes indicated that sexual infidelity was more distressing than emotional when asked to rate their level of distress separately for each using continuous measures. The lesbian and gay samples were mostly consistent with the double-shot hypothesis because they tended to respond based on stereotyping grounded in the sex of their partner, paralleling heterosexuals in this regard. Analysis of the scenarios designed to test the double-shot hypothesis found somewhat smaller effects when the possibility of both types of infidelity was ruled out. These findings suggest that professionals seeking to address problems associated with jealousy in romantic relationships would profit from avoiding sex-linked assumptions about which aspect of infidelity is likely to be more upsetting.

scholarly journals Expecting and Competing? Jealous Responses Among Pregnant and Nonpregnant Women

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 147470491983334
Author(s):  
Karlijn Massar ◽  
Abraham P. Buunk
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Pair Bond ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Committed Relationships ◽  
Adaptive Function ◽  
Emotional Infidelity

In the current study, we reasoned that when pregnant, women should be especially motivated to protect their reproductive investments as well as their pair bond and be vigilant about intrasexual competitors. To investigate this, pregnant women ( n = 66) and nonpregnant women ( n = 59; age M = 27.41, SD = 3.36) in committed relationships read a jealousy-evoking scenario that was accompanied by a picture of either an attractive or an unattractive woman, after which they indicated their jealousy about such a situation. Moreover, we asked whether a mate’s emotional infidelity would evoke more jealousy than his sexual infidelity. The results showed that for pregnant women, both rivals evoked similar amounts of jealousy, whereas nonpregnant women’s jealousy was mainly evoked by the attractive rival. Moreover, pregnant women indicated they would be most upset by their partner’s emotional infidelity, and especially if they were previously exposed to the attractive rival. Nonpregnant women considered both types of infidelity equally upsetting. These results emphasize the adaptive function of jealousy and extend the literature on the influence of a rival’s attractiveness on women’s jealousy by focusing on the experiences of pregnant women.

Infidelity and Attachment Styles

2019 ◽  
Vol 118 (11) ◽  
pp. 353-364
Author(s):  
Mr Jirushlan Dorasamy ◽  
J Dorasamy
Keyword(s):  
Attachment Style ◽  
Attachment Styles ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Binary Choice ◽  
Sample Population ◽  
Secure Attachment ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Research Findings

Literature points to differing responses among women and men regarding sexual and emotional infidelity. Inview of limited research regarding gender responses to infidelity within the context of attachment styles, theresearch study investigated whether there were significant difference in the way women and men responded tosexual and emotional infidelity. It also sought to determine whether attachment styles affected genderdifferences.. The sample population consisted of 300staff employed at a university in South Africa, of which 81were male and 219 were female. The voluntary online monkey survey required respondents to provideinformation focusing on demographics, attachment styles and sexual orientation. Following this, sexual andemotional cases were presented for participants to rate each case. Participants then made a binary choice, ofwhich scenario upset them most.The findings showed that men found sexual infidelity most upsetting, whileemotional infidelity was found most upsetting for women. Further, results indicated that men found sexualinfidelity most upsetting within the fearful and secure attachment style, with scores much higher than women inthe categories of fearful and secure attachment style. On the other hand, women found emotional infidelity mostupsetting within the fearful and secure attachment style, with scores much higher than men in the categories offearful and secure attachment style. However, both men and women found sexual infidelity to be most upsettingwith the preoccupied and dismissive attachment style. The research findings showed that there were differencesin the responses of the male and female gender tosexual and emotional infidelity. This supports the theory ofevolutionary sex differences and provides an opportunity to augment further intense and rigorous debate onevolutionary approaches.In view of these findings, the study proposed greater empirical and theoretical studiesin the area of sexual and emotional infidelity within cultural contexts.

Sex Differences in Jealousy in Evolutionary and Cultural Perspective: Tests From the Netherlands, Germany, and the United States

1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 359-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bram P. Buunk ◽  
Alois Angleitner ◽  
Viktor Oubaid ◽  
David M. Buss
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sex Differences ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Evolutionary Psychology ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Cultural Perspective ◽  
Psychological Model ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Sexual Jealousy

As predicted by models derived from evolutionary psychology, men within the United States have been shown to exhibit greater psychological and physiological distress to sexual than to emotional infidelity of their partner, and women have been shown to exhibit more distress to emotional than to sexual infidelity Because cross-cultural tests are critical for evolutionary hypotheses, we examined these sex differences in three parallel studies conducted in the Netherlands (N = 207), Germany (N = 200), and the United States (N = 224) Two key findings emerged First, the sex differences in sexual jealousy are robust across these cultures, providing support for the evolutionary psychological model Second, the magnitude of the sex differences varies somewhat across cultures—large for the United States, medium for Germany and the Netherlands Discussion focuses on the evolutionary psychology of jealousy and on the sensitivity of sex differences in the sexual sphere to cultural input

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

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 147470490700500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Achim Schützwohl
Keyword(s):  
Present Finding ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Choice Response ◽  
Response Format ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Decision Strategies ◽  
Total N ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Evolutionary View

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.

Marital Status as a Candidate Moderator Variable of Male–Female Differences in Sexual Jealousy: The Need for Representative Population Samples

2001 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 553-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Voracek
Keyword(s):  
Marital Status ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Moderator Variable ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Sexual Jealousy ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Eastern Austria

Evolutionary psychological theories predict pronounced and universal male–female differences in sexual jealousy. Recent cross-cultural research, using the forced-choice jealousy items pioneered by Buss, et al., 1992, repeatedly found a large sex differential on these self-report measures: men significantly more often than women choose their mate's imagined sexual infidelity to be more distressing or upsetting to them than an imagined emotional infidelity. However, this body of evidence is solely based on undergraduate samples and does not take into account demographic factors. This study examined male–female differences in sexual jealousy in a community sample ( N = 335, Eastern Austria). Within a logistic regression model, with other variables controlled for, marital status was a stronger predictor for sexual jealousy than respondents' sex. Contrary to previous research, the sex differential's effect size was only modest. These findings stress the pitfalls of prematurely generalizing evidence from undergraduate samples to the general population and the need for representative population samples in this research area.

Relationship between Short-Term Sexual Strategies and Sexual Jealousy

2005 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene W. Mathes
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Infidelity ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Sexual Strategies ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Women Subjects ◽  
Emotional Infidelity ◽  
Sexual Jealousy

In a classic study, Buss, Larson, Westen, and Semmelroth reported that men were more distressed by the thought of a partner's sexual infidelity (sexual jealousy) and women were more distressed by the thought of a partner's emotional infidelity (emotional jealousy). Initially, Buss and his associates explained these results by suggesting that men are concerned about uncertainty of paternity, that is, the possibility of raising another man's child while believing the child is their own. However, later they explained the results in terms of men's preference for short-term sexual strategies. The purpose of this research was to test the explanation of short-term sexual strategies. Men and women subjects were instructed to imagine themselves in a relationship which was either short-term (primarily sexual) or long-term (involving commitment) and then respond to Buss's jealousy items. It was hypothesized that, when both men and women imagined a short-term relationship, they would be more threatened by a partner's sexual infidelity, and, when they imagined a long-term relationship, they would be more threatened by a partner's emotional infidelity. Support was found for this hypothesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document