Sex Differences and the Effect of Rival Characteristics on Adults’ Judgments of Hypothetical Infidelity

Thompson, Ashley E.; Zimmerman, Caileigh; Kulibert, Danica; Moore, Elle A.

doi:10.1007/s40806-016-0076-2

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the previous study show that sexual behaviors (vs. technological, emotional/affectionate, and solitary) are judged to be the most indicative of infidelity given their ostensible and severe character (Thompson and O’Sullivan, 2016b, 2017; Thompson et al, 2017). However, in light of the real experience of infidelity, extradyadic behaviors of a technological nature also have very harmful effects on the person who suffers them (Vossler, 2016), which encourages thinking about the harmful consequences that new technologies can have for romantic relationships.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Although there are many definitions that have been proposed to explain the concept of infidelity, there is still no agreement regarding its meaning (e.g., Thompson and O’Sullivan, 2016b; Thompson et al, 2017). An acceptable definition of infidelity could refer to it as a violation of the commitment of relational exclusivity, which can adopt a sexual, emotional, and/or mixed format of short or long duration (Dillow et al, 2011; Fife et al, 2013), with people other than the main partner (Dillow et al, 2011).…”

Section: Betrayal Of Infidelity: Judgments and Associated Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thompson and O’Sullivan (2016a) classified different extradyadic behaviors that people believe to be constitutive of infidelity, establishing four groups of behaviors: (a) behaviors of a sexual nature (e.g., vaginal and or anal penetration or oral sex); (b) technological (e.g., sending someone sexually explicit and or affectionate text messages or emails); (c) emotional/affectionate (e.g., sharing secrets with a person other than the partner); and (d) solitary (e.g., masturbation). Under this classification, recent research shows that behaviors of a sexual nature are judged to be more indicative of infidelity because they tend to include more explicit behaviors and are not ambiguous (Thompson and O’Sullivan, 2016b, 2017; Thompson et al, 2017). Instead, evaluations based on patterns involving technological, emotional/affectionate, and solitary behaviors are usually considered more ambiguous behaviors and judged as indicative of infidelity depending on the particularities of the situation which occurred (Thompson and O’Sullivan, 2016b, 2017).…”

Section: Betrayal Of Infidelity: Judgments and Associated Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Unforgiveness Motivations in Romantic Relationships Experiencing Infidelity: Negative Affect and Anxious Attachment to the Partner as Predictors

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infidelity is considered an unforgivable betrayal. However, not all behaviors considered unfaithful affect the person who suffers them in the same way. Therefore, to have a better understanding of unforgiveness according to different extradyadic behaviors, two studies were designed. Study 1 ( N = 240) explored which extradyadic behaviors are considered as more indicative of infidelity. The results revealed that sexual behaviors were considered more unfaithful when compared with technological, emotional/affective, and solitary behaviors. Study 2 ( N = 378) examined the influence of experienced extradyadic behaviors on unforgiveness, negative affect, and anxious attachment to the partner. The results showed that (a) sexual and technological behaviors were less frequently forgiven and promoted a more intense negative affect, (b) anxious attachment was predictive of unforgiveness for sexual and technological behaviors, and (c) negative affect mediated the relationship between anxious attachment and unforgiveness for sexual and technological behaviors. These findings and their possible implications for romantic relationships are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Betrayal Of Infidelity: Judgments and Associated Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Betrayal Of Infidelity: Judgments and Associated Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unforgiveness Motivations in Romantic Relationships Experiencing Infidelity: Negative Affect and Anxious Attachment to the Partner as Predictors

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This seems especially likely to be the case for extradyadic romantic relationships which may pose a threat to the existing relationship above and beyond other activities a partner can engage in (e.g., catching a movie with a friend). For example, research has shown that when people imagine (Harris, 2000;Thompson, Zimmerman, Kulibert, & Moore, 2017) or discover (Edlund, Heider, Scherer, Farc, & Sagarin, 2006;Kuhle, 2011) a partner's extradyadic romantic involvement they often engage in behaviors like mate guarding (Buss, 2002;Buss, Shackelford, & McKibbin, 2008), and report negative emotional experiences like jealousy (AlShawaf, Conroy-Beam, Asao, & Buss, 2016;Buss 2000 for a review of research), which may help to prevent the potential loss of a romantic partner.…”

Section: Emotional Ambivalence In Response To Extradyadic Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compersion: When Jealousy-Inducing Situations Don’t (Just) Induce Jealousy

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotional reactions to a partner's extradyadic romantic interests are assumed to be negative and characterized by jealousy, an emotional state that arises over a perceived threat to one's relationship. Yet, reactions may also be positive, and involve compersion, or taking joy in one's partner's pleasure in other sexual and relational encounters. Although some have argued that compersion is the opposite of jealousy, research has shown that compersion and jealousy are not opposing constructs, despite being treated this way in both theoretical and empirical research.Using a convenience sample of polyamorous (N = 3,530) and monogamous (N = 1,358) individuals we draw on theories of jealousy, emotional ambivalence, and emotional forecasting to examine people's anticipated affective responses to hypothetical situations involving a partner's extradyadic relations, and assess whether experience with having a partner engage in extradyadic relations was associated with anticipating less jealousy and more compersion.Results suggest that people in polyamorous relationships report less jealousy and more compersion with their partners, and that personal experience involving a partner's extradyadic romantic interests predicted more compersion and less jealousy, with experience predicting greater increases in compersion among monogamous than polyamorous participants. Finally, while anticipated compersion was associated with greater relationship satisfaction, neither jealousy nor ambivalence were associated with relationship satisfaction. These results further demonstrate that individuals can experience both positive and negative reactions to a partner's extradyadic relations, both based on actual experience and projection of responses to future events, and that real-life experiences are important in anticipating these emotions.

show abstract

“…This seems especially likely to be the case for extradyadic romantic relationships which may pose a threat to the existing relationship above and beyond other activities a partner can engage in (e.g., catching a movie with a friend). For example, research has shown that when people imagine (Harris, 2000;Thompson, Zimmerman, Kulibert, & Moore, 2017) or discover (Edlund, Heider, Scherer, Farc, & Sagarin, 2006;Kuhle, 2011) a partner's extradyadic romantic involvement they often engage in behaviors like mate guarding (Buss, 2002;Buss, Shackelford, & McKibbin, 2008), and report negative emotional experiences like jealousy (AlShawaf, Conroy-Beam, Asao, & Buss, 2016; Buss 2000 for a review of research), which may help to prevent the potential loss of a romantic partner.…”

Section: Emotional Ambivalence In Response To Extradyadic Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compersion: When Jealousy-inducing Situations Don’t (Just) Induce Jealousy

Balzarini¹,

McDonald²,

Kohut³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotional reactions to a partner’s extradyadic romantic interests are assumed to be negative and characterized by jealousy, an emotional state that arises over a perceived threat to one’s relationship. Yet, reactions may also be positive, and involve compersion, or taking joy in one's partner's pleasure in other sexual and relational encounters. Although some have argued that compersion is the opposite of jealousy, research has shown that compersion and jealousy are not opposing constructs, despite being treated this way in both theoretical and empirical research. Using a convenience sample of polyamorous (N = 3,530) and monogamous (N = 1,358) individuals we draw on theories of jealousy, emotional ambivalence, and emotional forecasting to examine people’s anticipated affective responses to hypothetical situations involving a partner’s extradyadic relations, and assess whether experience with having a partner engage in extradyadic relations was associated with anticipating less jealousy and more compersion. Results suggest that people in polyamorous relationships report less jealousy and more compersion with their partners, and that personal experience involving a partner’s extradyadic romantic interests predicted more compersion and less jealousy, with experience predicting greater increases in compersion among monogamous than polyamorous participants. Finally, while anticipated compersion was associated with greater relationship satisfaction, neither jealousy nor ambivalence were associated with relationship satisfaction. These results further demonstrate that individuals can experience both positive and negative reactions to a partner’s extradyadic relations, both based on actual experience and projection of responses to future events, and that real-life experiences are important in anticipating these emotions.

show abstract

Sex Differences and the Effect of Rival Characteristics on Adults’ Judgments of Hypothetical Infidelity

Cited by 11 publications

References 53 publications

Unforgiveness Motivations in Romantic Relationships Experiencing Infidelity: Negative Affect and Anxious Attachment to the Partner as Predictors

Unforgiveness Motivations in Romantic Relationships Experiencing Infidelity: Negative Affect and Anxious Attachment to the Partner as Predictors

Compersion: When Jealousy-Inducing Situations Don’t (Just) Induce Jealousy

Compersion: When Jealousy-inducing Situations Don’t (Just) Induce Jealousy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About