Evolutionary and social cognitive explanations of sex differences in romantic jealousy

Abstract

Sex differences in romantic jealousy have been widely reported in the recent psychological literature. According to this literature, men are more likely than women to report being more distressed at sexual than emotional infidelity. There are two explanations for this difference: an evolutionary psychological and a social cognitive explanation. According to the evolutionary psychological account, men and women exhibit differences in jealousy because they faced different reproductive challenges during human evolution. According to the social cognitive account, men and women exhibit these differences because they have been socialised to believe that attachment and sex are weighted differently by each gender. In this study, 268 participants completed a questionnaire designed to compare predictions based on these two theories. The results are generally consistent with the evolutionary account. Men are more distressed by sexual infidelity than by emotional infidelity, and this is not accounted for by beliefs about jealousy that they hold about men, women or themselves.

Effects of Sex, Sexual Orientation, Infidelity Expectations, and Love on Distress related to Emotional and Sexual Infidelity

“…Years later, these results were replicated among another U. S. undergraduate sample (Cramer et al, 2008). Similar results were found among an Australian sample of undergraduate students, with men typically reporting more distress in response to sexual infidelity than women (Ward & Voracek, 2004). In a correlational study, undergraduate males' desire for having genetically-related children was positively related to distress attributed to thoughts of sexual infidelity, thereby lending support to the evolutionary perspective that males are more upset by sexual infidelity due to fear of raising children that are not genetically theirs (Mathes, 2005).…”

“…However, the other ordinal effect, with men reporting significantly more distress to sexual infidelity than women, is typically not found, which leads to the absence of an interaction effect. Moreover, multiple within-sex analyses reveal that men are either equally or more distressed by emotional infidelity than sexual infidelity (Buss et al, 1992;Buss et al, 1999;Buunk et al, 1996;Edlund et al, 2006;Fernandez et al, 2007;Green & Sabini, 2006;Harris, 2002;Harris & Christenfeld, 1996;Penke & Asendorpf, 2008;Sabini & Green, 2004;Schützwohl, 2008;Ward & Voracek, 2004). Therefore, women seem to be responsible for the presence of this sex difference by responding with incredibly high levels of distress to emotional infidelity and less distress to sexual infidelity as compared to their male counterparts.…”

“…This latter variable was essential as past studies have failed to find sex differences in distress related to infidelity among people not currently involved in committed romantic relationships (Dijkstra et al, 2001;Ward & Voracek, 2004). Of these 321 participants, 25 were excluded from data analyses for various reasons: seven failed to respond to ten percent or more of survey questions, fifteen self-reported bisexual identities, two participants did not report their sex, and one individual reported being under 18 years of age.…”

“…Because "research that limits the definition of infidelity to sexual intercourse minimizes the devastating effects that other types of sexual involvement and emotional connections can have on relationships" (Blow & Hartnett, 2005, p. A plethora of researchers agree that both infidelity types must be explored in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of this phenomenon, and many have done so in relation to which infidelity type is more distressing or upsetting: emotional infidelity or sexual infidelity. Across a multitude of studies, a reported sex difference has emerged regarding which infidelity type is viewed as more upsetting, with men seemingly more distressed by sexual infidelity as compared to women, and women experiencing more distress towards emotional infidelity than men (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992;Buss et al, 1999;Buunk, Angleitner, Oubaid, & Buss, 1996;Cramer, Abraham, Johnson, & Manning-Ryan, 2001;Cramer, Lipinski, Meteer, & Houska, 2008;DeSteno & Salovey, 1996;DeSteno, Bartlett, Braverman, & Salovey, 2002;Edlund, Heider, Scherer, Farc, & Sagarin, 2006;Fernandez, Vera-Villarroel, Sierra, & Zubeidat, 2007;Green & Sabini, 2004;Harris, 2003;Harris & Christenfeld, 1996;Penke & Asendorpf, 2008;Sabini & Green, 2004;Sagarin, Becker, Guadagno, Nicastle, & Millevoi, 2003;Schützwohl, 2008;Ward & Voracek, 2004).…”

Electrodermal Responses and Assessments of Jealousy During Preovulatory and Menstrual Phase of Cycle

“…Prvi način provjeravanja ove hipoteze, koji se i danas rabi, osmislili su Buss i suradnici (1992), a uključu-je izbor nevjere koja izaziva veći stupanj ljubomore. Veća osjetljivost muškaraca na seksualnu nevjeru i žena na emocionalnu nevjeru dokumentirana je u istraživanjima koja su uključivala prisilan odabir nevjere koja izaziva veći distres ili ljubomoru (Buss i sur., 1992;Pietrzak, Laird, Stevens i Thompson, 2002;Pavela i Šimić, 2012;Kuhle, Smedley i Schmitt, 2009;Ward i Voracek, 2004). Prisilnim odabirom, spolne su razlike potvrđene i na starijem uzorku (Shackelford i sur., 2004), kao i na uzorcima patološki ljubomornih sudionika obaju spolova (Easton, Schipper i Shackelford, 2007).…”