Emotional and sexual jealousy as a function of sex and sexual orientation in a Brazilian sample

The goal of the present study was to compare the relative distress of homosexual and heterosexual Brazilian men and women on scenarios in which they imagined their partners sexually or emotionally involved with another person, using a forced-choice paradigm and continuous measures. Participants were 68 heterosexual men, 72 heterosexual women, 42 homosexual men, and 35 homosexual women. On the forced-choice questions heterosexual men (39 on one question and 37 on the other) were more upset than their female counterparts (21 on one question and 15 on the other) by scenarios of sexual infidelity than those of emotional infidelity. On questions using continuous measures no significant difference was found between pleasurable sex and attachment scenarios for heterosexual women or heterosexual men. On the highly upsetting scenarios heterosexual men discriminated between flirting and both pleasurable sex and attachment scenarios, being less disturbed by the former. In contrast, heterosexual women were equally distressed by the three scenarios. Scores for the homosexual men and homosexual women fell in between those of the heterosexual men and heterosexual women and did not show a clear cut preference for the sexual infidelity or the emotional alternative on the forced-choice paradigm. However, on the continuous measures of jealousy homosexuals resembled heterosexuals of the opposite sex. There was no evidence that jealousy would be less intense among homosexuals although reproductive outcomes were not at risk.     

Forgiveness or breakup: Sex differences in responses to a partner's infidelity

Infidelities--sexual, emotional, or both--afflict many long-term romantic relationships. When a person discovers a partner's betrayal, a major decision faced is to forgive the partner and remain together or to terminate the relationship. Because men and women have confronted different adaptive problems over evolutionary history associated with different forms of infidelity, we hypothesised the existence of sex differences in which aspects of infidelity would affect the likelihood of forgiveness or breakup. We tested this hypothesis using forced-choice dilemmas in which participants (N = 256) indicated how difficult it would be to forgive the partner and how likely they would be to break up with the partner, depending on the nature of the infidelity. Results support the hypothesis that men, relative to women: (a) find it more difficult to forgive a sexual infidelity than an emotional infidelity; and (b) are more likely to terminate a current relationship following a partner's sexual infidelity than an emotional infidelity. The Discussion provides directions for future work on the determinants of breakup and the psychology of forgiveness.     

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.     

Sexual jealousy: Gender differences in response to partner and rival

Young women (N = 64) and men (N = 52) were asked to imagine discovering that their romantic partner had been sexually unfaithful. Fewer men than women gave positive endorsements to sets of aggressive actions against the unfaithful partner and against the rival. Gender differences did not appear in the motive for taking action against the rival, but more men than women endorsed releasing frustration as the motive for aggressive action against the partner. The genders appeared equally interested in maintaining the relationship with the unfaithful partner, preventing future infidelity, and attracting another partner. More men than women said they were uncertain about their partner's sexual fidelity. The results were interpreted as evidence that women are devalued more than men by an act of sexual infidelity, resulting in men's greater frustration with the partner's transgression but relative behavioral indifference to both the transgressing partner and rival. Men's greater uncertainty about a partner's infidelity may provide the basis for, as suggested by other data, men's greater tendency to ensure that a partner's infidelity and consequent devaluation never occur. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Sexual Jealousy in Heterosexuals,Lesbians, and Gays

The present study tests various hypotheses about effects of gender and sexual orientation on jealousy. One hypothesis is derived from an evolutionary perspective and implies that the stimuli that elicit jealousy are sex-linked and independent of sexual orientation. Several others are based on a sociocultural perspective and imply that the experience of jealousy is linked to social experiences and beliefs that differ for men and women and for homosexuals and heterosexuals. To test these hypotheses, we examined the relative distress reported by heterosexual and homosexual participants while thinking about a partners' sexual vs. emotional infidelity. Participants were predominately Caucasian and included students at a Midwestern state university and attendees at a regional gay and lesbian conference. The results reveal that all groups except heterosexual men experience greater distress when confronted with a partners' emotional infidelity. This pattern contradicts the evolutionary hypothesis that the experience of romantic jealousy is sex-linked. However, our multifaceted attempt to identify social experiences or beliefs that account for the greater sexual jealousy of heterosexual men relative to everyone else was only partly successful.     

Upset in response to a child's partner's infidelities

The weight of existing evidence suggests that men display greater upset in response to a long‐term partner's sexual infidelity, whereas women display greater upset in response to a partner's emotional infidelity. This sex difference was first hypothesized by evolutionary psychologists, who argued that the difference may reflect sex‐differentiated evolved psychological design. Some socialization theorists, in contrast, have argued that the difference may be attributable to sex‐differentiated socialization practices. A. Fenigstein and R. Peltz ( 2002 ) collected data from parents of undergraduates about upset in response to a child's partner's infidelities and found that both sexes report greater upset in response to a son's partner's sexual infidelity and in response to a daughter's partner's emotional infidelity. The key variable therefore is the sex of the child, as predicted from a heuristic application of an evolutionary perspective, and not the sex of the parent, as predicted from a heuristic application of one socialization perspective. We report a replication of these findings using data collected from retirees with an average age of about 70 years who have at least one son and one daughter and most of whom have grandchildren. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Gender Differences,Infidelity, Dyadic Trust,and Jealousy among Married Turkish Individuals

In the present study, relationships among gender, emotional response to partner’s imagined infidelity (emotional and sexual infidelity), and dyadic trust (low and high levels of trust) were investigated as functions of married Turkish individuals’ jealousy types (cognitive, emotional, and behavioral). Five hundred thirty seven (276 women and 261 men) married individuals living in urban areas in Turkey participated in the study. Results of the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) revealed significant main effects for gender, infidelity types, and dyadic trust. Particularly, married Turkish men in this study were found to be more emotionally jealous than women. Participants who responded to sexual infidelity as more upsetting had higher levels of emotional jealousy when compared to the participants who found emotional infidelity more upsetting. Moreover, participants with low dyadic trust for their partners were found to be high in their cognitive jealousy and behavioral jealousy reactions. Results are discussed in details with implications for future research and suggestions for mental health practitioners.     

Right-wing authoritarianism predicts prejudice against “homosexuals” but not “gay men and lesbians”

Can different social category labels for a single group be associated with different levels of prejudice — specifically, sexual prejudice? Some theorizing, and a pilot study in the present research, suggests that the label “homosexuals” carries more deviance-related connotations than does the label “gay men and lesbians.” Given that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) correlates positively with prejudice against groups stereotyped as deviant, it was hypothesized that RWA would predict greater prejudice against “homosexuals” than “gay men and lesbians” among heterosexual participants. Two studies supported this hypothesis and demonstrated that the effect was driven by both perceived threats to heterosexuals' values (i.e., symbolic threat; Study 1) and perceived fundamental differences between “homosexuals” and heterosexuals as social categories (i.e., psychological essentialism; Study 2). Implications for the factors that predict social categorization of and prejudice toward sexual minorities are discussed.     

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

Previous 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.     

Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation?

Men and women were asked to imagine a romantic partner being sexually unfaithful and/or emotionally unfaithful. Three hypotheses regarding gender differences in subjective distress to sexual and emotional infidelity, and in the inferences linking the infidelities were tested. The results indicated that more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person, and more women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person. Asking another group of women and men to imagine a partner committing both infidelities at the same time, and then to indicate which component of the combined infidelity was the most distressing, produced the same sexual asymmetries. The prediction that men will infer from a partner's sexual infidelity the co-occurrence of emotional infidelity and that women will infer from a partner’s emotional infidelity the co-occurrence of sexual infidelity was not supported. An evolutionary perspective, rather than an alternative analysis emphasizing the different inferences men and women draw from sex and love, provided a satisfactory explanation of the sexual asymmetries in the cues to jealousy.     

Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation?

Men and women were asked to imagine a romantic partner being sexually unfaithful and/or emotionally unfaithful. Three hypotheses regarding gender differences in subjective distress to sexual and emotional infidelity, and in the inferences linking the infidelities were tested. The results indicated that more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person, and more women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person. Asking another group of women and men to imagine a partner committing both infidelities at the same time, and then to indicate which component of the combined infidelity was the most distressing, produced the same sexual asymmetries. The prediction that men will infer from a partner's sexual infidelity the co-occurrence of emotional infidelity and that women will infer from a partner’s emotional infidelity the co-occurrence of sexual infidelity was not supported. An evolutionary perspective, rather than an alternative analysis emphasizing the different inferences men and women draw from sex and love, provided a satisfactory explanation of the sexual asymmetries in the cues to jealousy.     

Individual Differences in Males' Reactions to Gay Males and Lesbians1

Males who were tolerant or intolerant of homosexuals participated in an experiment wherein they interacted with a gay male, a lesbian, or a person of unknown sexual orientation. Results showed that although both attitudes toward homosexuality and the partner's sexual orientation affected reactions to that person. there were few effects due to target sex. Although men's reported attitudes toward gay males are more negative than their attitudes toward lesbians. these attitudes d o not necessarily affect reactions to these individuals.     

Same‐sex infidelity in heterosexual romantic relationships: Investigating emotional,relational, and communicative responses

The present study explores emotional, relational, and communicative responses to different‐sex and same‐sex infidelity in heterosexual romantic relationships. Two‐hundred and eighty‐five men and women completed an online survey. Individuals were asked to read a scenario in which an imagined heterosexual partner engages in infidelity with a different‐sex or same‐sex person. Individuals were randomly assigned to one of these two conditions and then asked to complete several measures assessing their imagined emotions, communicative responses, and relational outcomes. Results revealed that both men and women experienced more negative emotional responses to different‐sex infidelity versus same‐sex infidelity. Additionally, men reported more sexual arousal in response to a woman's same‐sex infidelity versus different‐sex infidelity, while women's sexual arousal did not vary across conditions. Lastly, men's communicative responses to jealousy (CRJs) for same‐sex and different‐sex infidelity did not vary, though women reported that they were more likely to respond to same‐sex infidelity than different‐sex infidelity with denial, and more likely to respond to different‐sex than same‐sex infidelity with signs of possession. Several emotional responses to same‐sex infidelity were also found to predict various CRJs. These findings and the implications of the study are discussed.     

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.     

Sex role self schema and psychological adjustment in coupled homosexual and heterosexual men and women

This study examined the relation between dimensions of sex role self schema (assessed by four factor scores of the Bem Sex Role Inventory: Instrumentality, Expressiveness, Autonomy, and Masculinity-Femininity) and psychological adjustment (assessed by the Symptom Checklist-90-R) in 366 homosexuals (230 males and 136 females) and 241 heterosexuals (124 males and 117 females). All subjects were in a cohabitating relationship. Homosexuals and heterosexuals did not differ in psychological adjustment, but men were found to be more distressed by paranoid symptoms than women. Dimensions of sex role self schema varied by an interaction between gender and sexual orientation. Gender differences on Instrumentality, Expressiveness, and Masculinity-Femininity were more pronounced for heterosexuals than for homosexuals. Further, homosexual women were more Instrumental than heterosexual women, while homosexual and heterosexual men were equivalent; homosexual men were more Expressive than heterosexual men, while homosexual and heterosexual women were equivalent; and the discrepancy between homosexual and heterosexual women's Masculinity-Femininity score was greater than that between homosexual and heterosexual men. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that only education and the Autonomy dimension of sex role self scheme were the best nonredundant predictors of psychological adjustment, although the relations were weak. Findings are discussed in terms of current theory and research on sex role self schemas.     

Jealousy in response to online and offline infidelity: the role of sex and sexual orientation

The goal of the present study was to examine the emotional content and intensity of jealousy in response to different types of infidelity (both online and offline unfaithful partner behaviors) among Dutch heterosexuals (n = 191) and homosexuals (n = 121). Based on previous research (Dijkstra, Barelds & Groothof, 2010), participants were presented with ten jealousy‐evoking situations following which the intensity of two different emotional aspects of jealousy was assessed (betrayal/anger and threat). Results showed that scenarios describing a partner having sex with someone else or falling in love with someone else primarily evoked betrayal/anger‐related jealousy, whereas scenarios describing an emotional connection between a partner and someone else primarily evoked threat‐related jealousy. In addition, women experienced more jealousy than men in response to scenarios in which a partner engaged in potentially extra‐dyadic online (but not offline) behaviors. Finally, compared to same‐sex heterosexuals, homosexuals, both male and female, responded with less intense jealousy to scenarios describing a partner having sex with someone else. Implications for the treatment of (internet) infidelity are discussed.     

Sexual and romantic jealousy in heterosexual and homosexual adults

Several theorists have claimed that men are innately more upset by a mate's sexual infidelity and women are more upset by a mate's emotional infidelity because the sexes faced different adaptive problems (for men, cuckoldry; for women, losing a mate's resources). The present work examined this theory of jealousy as a specific innate module in 196 adult men and women of homosexual and heterosexual orientations. As in previous work, heterosexuals' responses to a forced-choice question about hypothetical infidelity yielded a gender difference. However, no gender differences were found when participants recalled personal experiences with a mate's actual infidelity. Men and women, regardless of sexual orientation, on average focused more on a mate's emotional infidelity than on a mate's sexual infidelity. Responses to hypothetical infidelity were uncorrelated with reactions to actual infidelity. This finding casts doubt on the validity of the hypothetical measures used in previous research.     

Exploring perceptions of online infidelity

This study examines the similarities, differences, and potential linkages between perceptions of online infidelity and traditional infidelity using a sample of 123 individuals in committed relationships. Respondents nominated both sexually and emotionally based behaviors as unfaithful and expressed greater distress in response to hypothetical emotional, as compared to sexual, online infidelity. Unlike traditional infidelity, men generally were not more upset by sexual online infidelity than were women. Both men and women believed that emotional and sexual online infidelities were likely to co‐occur. A face‐to‐face meeting was perceived to be more likely following emotional, as compared to sexual, online infidelity and men were viewed as more likely than women to engage in sexual intercourse, given a face‐to‐face meeting with the online contact.     

Gender-typical responses to sexual and emotional infidelity as a function of mortality salience induced self-esteem striving

The authors propose that gender-differentiated patterns of jealousy in response to sexual and emotional infidelity are engendered by the differential impact of each event on self-esteem for men and women. Study 1 demonstrated that men derive relatively more self-esteem from their sex lives, whereas women's self-esteem is more contingent on romantic commitment. Based on terror management theory, it is predicted that if gender-differentiated responses to infidelity are motivated by gender-specific contingencies for self-esteem, they should be intensified following reminders of mortality. In Study 2, mortality salience (MS) increased distress in response to sexual infidelity for men and emotional infidelity for women. Study 3 demonstrated that following MS, men who place high value on sex in romantic relationships exhibited greater distress in response to sexual infidelity, but low-ex-value men's distress was attenuated. The authors discuss the implications for evolutionary and self-esteem-based accounts of jealousy as well as possible integration of these perspectives.     

Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity

Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitions and understanding of different types of infidelity. The current research used a mixed-methodology approach to explore the epistemological nature of sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 1, 379 participants provided open-ended definitions of what they believe constitutes sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 2, responses were then coded by a different group of outside raters to examine overall themes in the definitions provided and how prototypical these definitions were for each type of infidelity. Results identified and examined the definitions with the highest mean ratings in terms of how well they represented emotional infidelity or sexual infidelity. Overall, both men and women had more consistency in their definitions of what constituted sexual infidelity than on what constituted emotional infidelity, suggesting that emotional infidelity is a more vague and complex concept than sexual infidelity. Additionally, when asked to define sexual and emotional infidelity, many participants focused on specific behaviors (including deception), but when asked to consider the types of infidelity as distinct from each other, participants focused on feelings. By exploring how individuals actually define these constructs, these data provide a more accurate and rich depiction of how individuals define acts of infidelity than currently exists in the relationship literature.