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.     

When the sexes need not differ: Emotional responses to the sexual and emotional aspects of infidelity

This study assessed whether previously reported sex differences in jealousy could be accounted for by other related emotions. Participants were presented with hypothetical scenarios involving both a sexual and an emotional infidelity, then were asked how jealous, angry, hurt, and disgusted they would be (using continuous scales). The results replicate the sex difference in response to sexual and emotional infidelity, demonstrate that it is robust when continuous measures are used, and confirm that it is unique to jealousy. Sex differences did not emerge for anger, hurt, or disgust. Instead, sexual infidelity elicited greater anger and disgust, and less hurt, than emotional infidelity, for both women and men. The results also suggest that it is the jealous response to an emotional infidelity that best discriminates women from men, and that both women and those participants in a serious, committed relationship reported significantly greater intensity in their emotional reactions, as compared to men and those not in a committed relationship.     

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.     

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.     

Infidelity, race, and gender: An evolutionary perspective on asymmetries in subjective distress to violations-of-trust

Asymmetries in subjective distress were observed among African American and white (N = 191) men and women who were asked to imagine a partner being emotionally and sexually unfaithful, and a partner committing other paired, gender-linked viola-tions-of-trust. More women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person and more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person. In addition, more men than women were distressed by male-linked violations, such as a partner no longer trying to look attractive, and more women than men were distressed by female-linked violations, such as a partner no longer wanting to work. The results contribute to a growing body of cross-cultural research reporting gender differences in distress to emotional and sexual infidelity. The results also provide cross-cultural validation of the extension of an evolutionary perspective to under-standing gender differences in subjective distress to other biologically relevant viola-tions-of-trust.     

Infidelity, race, and gender: An evolutionary perspective on asymmetries in subjective distress to violations-of-trust

Asymmetries in subjective distress were observed among African American and white (N = 191) men and women who were asked to imagine a partner being emotionally and sexually unfaithful, and a partner committing other paired, gender-linked viola-tions-of-trust. More women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person and more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person. In addition, more men than women were distressed by male-linked violations, such as a partner no longer trying to look attractive, and more women than men were distressed by female-linked violations, such as a partner no longer wanting to work. The results contribute to a growing body of cross-cultural research reporting gender differences in distress to emotional and sexual infidelity. The results also provide cross-cultural validation of the extension of an evolutionary perspective to under-standing gender differences in subjective distress to other biologically relevant viola-tions-of-trust.     

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.     

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.     

Would Mozambican Women Really “Tolerate” Their Husbands’ Extramarital Sexual Relationships as Socially Recommended?

In the Mozambican socio-cultural context, men’s extramarital sexual relationships are generally deemed acceptable, and women are “recommended” to forgive their husbands’ sexual infidelity. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess to what extent Mozambican women would forgive their husbands in case of an extramarital sexual relationship. The material consisted of 24 vignettes—each of which contained the story of a husband who was having an extramarital sexual relationship—a question, and an 11-point response scale. Overall, 225 women indicated their willingness to forgive their husbands in case of sexual infidelity, as a function of three factors: the emotional intensity involved in the extramarital sexual relationship, the regret expressed by the husband, and the commitment involved in the relationship/marriage between the husband and his wife. ANOVA results showed that the willingness to forgive depends on the nature of the extramarital relationship and the attitude of the “cheater”: (a) in the case where the extramarital relationship was of a purely sexual type, without involving deep emotions, and when the husband expressed profound regret, the willingness to forgive was high; (b) in the opposite situation, i.e., when the extramarital relationship involved a high level of emotions, and the husband expressed no regret, the forgiveness was low. Older participants had relatively high rates of forgiveness compared to younger ones. These findings corroborate earlier studies showing that, for females, emotional infidelity was much more distressful than purely sexual infidelity, and corroborate studies showing that Mozambicans tend to forgive offenders when they express regret.     

Relationship between short-term sexual strategies and 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.     

Subjective Distress to Violations of Trust in Mexican American Close Relationships Conforms to Evolutionary Principles

Sex differences in subjective distress to violations of trust in a close relationship were observed among Mexican American men and women. Imagining a partner’s emotional infidelity and other female-linked violations (for example, a partner who no longer desires to work) distressed a larger percentage of women than men. In contrast, imagining a partner’s sexual infidelity and other male-linked violations (for example, a partner who no longer makes an effort to look physically attractive) distressed a larger percentage of men than women. The results from two studies provided compelling evidence against a social–cognitive explanation of the sex differences and for an evolutionary psychology explanation based on men and women responding to threats to their sex-linked mating strategies.     

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.     

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.     

Jealousy,Gender, and Culture of Honor: A Study in Portugal and Brazil

The purpose of this study was to examine whether gender and culture of honor were associated with the type of infidelity (sexual or emotional) that affected our subjects more. Samples of 192 Portuguese university students (119 women and 73 men) and 415 Brazilian university students (214 men and 201 women) participated in this research. Participants responded to six dilemmas reflecting a type of infidelity (sexual or emotional), a gender scale, and a culture of honor scale. The results of both samples are compatible with the cultural theses about jealousy. Both men and women were more affected by emotional infidelity. In addition, it was found that the relationship between the sex of the participants and the type of infidelity that induced stress in them was affected by sociocultural variables, such as culture of honor, masculinity, and femininity. Some differences in the response patterns in the case of an infidelity, in both samples (Portuguese and Brazilian), are shown and discussed.     

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.     

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.     

Gender, socioeconomic status, age, and jealousy: emotional responses to infidelity in a national sample

The authors used a representative national sample (N = 777) to test the evolutionary hypothesis that men would be more bothered by sexual infidelity and women by emotional infidelity, the Jealousy as a Specific Innate Module (JSIM) effect. Our alternative conceptualization of jealousy suggests that there are distinct emotional components of jealousy that did not evolve differently by gender. The authors looked for effects of age, socioeconomic status (SES), and type of measure (continuous or dichotomous) on jealousy. The authors did not find age or SES effects. Forced-choice items provided support for our alternative view; both genders showed more anger and blame over sexual infidelity but more hurt feelings over emotional infidelity. Continuous measures indicated more emotional response to sexual than emotional infidelity among both genders.     

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.     

Sex differences in the events that elicit jealousy among homosexuals

When 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.