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.     

GENDER, JEALOUSY, AND REASON

Abstract— Research has suggested that men are especially bothered by evidence of their partner's sexual infidelity, whereas women are troubled more by evidence of emotional infidelity. One evolutionary account (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992) argues that this is an innate difference, arising from men's need for paternity certainty and women's need for male investment in their offspring. We suggest that the difference may instead be based on reasonable differences between the sexes in how they interpret evidence of infidelity. A man, thinking that women have sex only when in love, has reason to believe that if his mate has sex with another man, she is in love with that other. A woman, thinking that men can have sex without love, should still be bothered by sexual infidelity, but less so because it does not imply that her mate has fallen in love as well. A survey of 137 subjects confirmed that men and women do differ in the predicted direction in how much they think each form of infidelity implies the other, proposing innate emotional differences may, therefore, be gratuitous.     

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.     

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 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 differences in subjective distress to unfaithfulness: testing competing evolutionary and violation of infidelity expectations hypotheses

According to an evolutionary psychology perspective, men's and women's processing of threats to their sex-linked mate selection strategies cause sex differences in infidelity distress. An alternative account assumes that the distress results from men's and women's processing of expectation violations regarding the content of an unfaithful partner's actions with a rival. Logistic regressions supported the conclusion that the participant's sex-but not the processing of expectation violations-was the best predictor of the most distressing infidelity presented in forced-choice, mutually exclusive, and combined formats. Our results also indicated that the sex differences in infidelity distress were neither limited to using data from a forced-choice response format nor caused by the distinct inferences that men and women draw about the relation between love and sex.     

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

The 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.     

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.     

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.     

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 DIFFERENCES IN JEALOUSY IN EVOLUTIONARY AND CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE:

Abstract— 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 Slates ( 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 m the sexual sphere to cultural input.     

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.     

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.     

Dating infidelity: behaviors, reasons and consequences

Older adolescents were surveyed concerning three issues: behaviors which constitute infidelity in a dating relationship, reasons for a dating partner to be unfaithful, and reactions to a dating partner's infidelity. Responses from 247 participants indicated more similarities than differences between dating infidelity and extramarital affairs with regard to behaviors, causes, and consequences. Results are discussed in terms of similarities between dating and marital infidelity, and the rationale for professionals to interact with adolescents concerning the potential long-term consequences of dating infidelity.     

Marital status as a candidate moderator variable of male-female differences in sexual jealousy: the need for representative population samples

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.     

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.     

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.     

Relationship power and betrayal experience as predictors of reactions to infidelity

Explanations for sexual infidelity have been dominated by an evolutionary psychological theory of jealousy that finds its strongest support in research that employs a forced-choice hypothetical infidelity paradigm wherein participants imagine experiencing infidelity and choose whether sexual or emotional infidelity would be more distressing. Robust gender differences that support evolutionary psychological perspectives are consistently found using this paradigm, but recent work suggests that gender differences may be attenuated among actual infidelity victims. However, no research has used the forced-choice paradigm to compare real and hypothetical infidelity. This study uses this paradigm to compare reactions to imagined dating infidelity to those of infidelity victims. No gender differences are observed in response to the forced-choice question among victims of infidelity. Gender differences among participants who imagined infidelity are partially mediated by level of relationship power. Difficulties with the hypothetical forced-choice paradigm and implications for the evolutionary psychological theory of jealousy are discussed.     

Sex Differences in Self-reported Infidelity and its Correlates

We examined sex differences in the prevalence, incidence, reasons for, and consequences of infidelity. Participants (Study 1, 543 undergraduates in the Northwestern US; Study 2, 313 undergraduates and 233 community members in the Mid-Atlantic US), reported on infidelity by questionnaire. Using a broad definition of cheating, women reported being as unfaithful or more unfaithful than men. Men were more suspicious about cheating and more likely to discover the cheating than women. Women were more likely to break up with their partners, to begin new relationships after cheating, and to report reasons for cheating that may indicate a desire to switch long-term mates, such as being unhappy in the current relationship. Results are discussed in the context of evolutionary theory.