Beyond the Dyad: a Review of the Novel Insights Gained From Studying Consensual Non-monogamy

Exploring Compersion: A Study on Polish Consensually Non-Monogamous Individuals and Adaptation of the COMPERSe Questionnaire

Compersion is a positive emotion experienced in relation to one's partner's relationship(s) with other partner(s). Experiencing it is highly desired in communities practicing consensual non-monogamy (CNM), especially polyamory. This article presents the results of a study on compersion on Polish CNM individuals. The main goal of the study was to adapt to the Polish-speaking population the COMPERSe (Classifying Our Metamour/Partner Emotional Response Scale; Flicker et al., 2021), the first standardized quantitative scale designed to measure compersion. The analyses were performed on data obtained from 211 individuals in CNM relationships and on a comparative group of 169 people in monogamous relationships. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses suggested that the three-factor model of the original COMPERSe version did not fit well, leading to further revisions that resulted in a 7-item, two-factor solution with excellent fit, excellent internal consistency, strong divergent and convergent validity, and excellent test-retest stability. The CNM individuals were found to have higher scores on compersion and cognitive empathy and were also less jealous than the monogamous participants. Furthermore, polyamorous individuals experienced more compersion and less aversion to partner's autonomy than people in open relationships. It was also revealed that compersion indirectly predicted relationship satisfaction by decreasing jealousy and that compersion was, in turn, predicted by cognitive empathy. However, when polyamorous and open relationships were analyzed separately, compersion predicted relationship satisfaction directly, but only in polyamorous relationships; meanwhile, in open relationships, satisfaction was directly predicted by cognitive empathy.

Perceived Impacts of Partners' Other Relationships on Oneself in Consensual Nonmonogamy

Existing research suggests a number of both costs and benefits to oneself that can occur as a result of partners' other relationships in consensual nonmonogamy (CNM), but such costs and benefits have not previously been systematically cataloged. Using reflexive thematic analysis, we present themes derived from semi-structured interviews with 51 individuals (63% white, 55% nonbinary/genderqueer/non-cisgendered, and 77% LGBQ) who have practiced CNM, describing the costs and benefits to themselves that they perceive as a result of their partners' other relationships. Themes describing costs include experiencing difficult feelings (e.g., jealousy), having less with a partner (e.g., less of a partner's time) than one would like, difficulties or conflict within one's own relationship, and difficulties or conflict as a result of interactions between metamours (individuals who share a partner). Themes describing benefits include experiencing positive feelings (e.g., compersion), benefiting from a partner getting needs met in other relationships, strengthening of or pleasurable interactions within one's own relationship, enjoyable or beneficial relationships or interactions between metamours, and personal growth as a result of sharing partners with others. We note that these costs and benefits roughly mirror each other, suggesting that they may reflect the positive and negative sides of some fundamental aspects of CNM. Each of our themes also contains a rich range of elements that suggest avenues for future research. Our results suggest that CNM relationships are complex and multi-faceted, and that further research could fruitfully examine the circumstances that influence whether individuals experience their partners' other relationships positively or negatively.

A Narrative Review of the Dichotomy Between the Social Views of Non-Monogamy and the Experiences of Consensual Non-Monogamous People

Monogamy is deeply rooted in most Western societies, shaping how people construe and behave in romantic relationships. These normative views facilitate the emergence of negative perceptions and evaluations when people choose not to adhere to mononormativity. Even though people in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships are targets of stigmatization, research shows a dichotomy between these negative views and the relational experiences of CNM people. Indeed, people in CNM and monogamous relationships have comparable relationship functioning and quality and struggle with similar relationship problems. One of the differences is that CNM relationships afford people to explore their sexuality and fulfill their needs with multiple partners, without agreed-upon extradyadic behavior being perceived as infidelity or having deleterious consequences to relationship maintenance. These positive experiences notwithstanding, CNM people are continuously pressured by mononormativity and stigmatization, increasing the risk of internalized CNM negativity and worse personal and relational outcomes. One possible way to counteract CNM stigmatization and improve the lives of CNM people is by changing discourses surrounding non-monogamy and improving acceptance, not only in professional settings but also in the general population. Another strategy is to understand how the relationship beliefs and scripts of younger generations can help promote more inclusive and diverse societies.

Examining the Role of Mononormative Beliefs, Stigma, and Internalized Consensual Non-Monogamy Negativity for Dehumanization

Interest in consensually non-monogamous (CNM) relationships has been increasing in the general population in recent years. However, given the cultural dominance of monogamy and the normative expectations often imposed through socialization (i.e., mononormativity), people in CNM relationships may experience negativity, which can become internalized and harm their individual and relationship health. The present study investigated if mononormativity beliefs and CNM relationship stigma were associated with more dehumanization and if internalized CNM negativity was an underlying mechanism for these associations. Results showed that participants who endorsed more mononormative beliefs and CNM relationship stigma also reported more internalized CNM negativity. In turn, participants who experienced more internalized CNM negativity attributed more negative (vs. positive) emotions to themselves and treated their partners as more immature, unrefined, exploitable, and emotionless. These results show that mononormativity and internalized negativity can shape the attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of CNM individuals toward themselves and their partners.

Polygamous Interest in a Mononormative Nation: The Roles of Sex and Sociosexuality in Polygamous Interest in a Heterosexual Sample from the UK

Polygamy is a form of "one-sided" consensually non-monogamous relationship where one person has multiple committed partners, each of whom is only involved with that one person. It was likely a reoccurring feature of ancestral mating that posed adaptive problems for our ancestors. Yet polygamy, and multi-partnering more generally, is understudied in Western cultures, raising questions about the existence of polygamous interest and whether this is calibrated adaptively to personal conditions. In two studies, we examined polygamous interest in two heterosexual online samples from the UK. In Study 1 (N = 393), modest interest was found for polygamous relationships overall. Men were six times more open to polygyny than women, but there was little sex difference in openness to polyandry. Further analysis revealed that all forms of multi-partnering were undesirable relative to singlehood and monogamy; however, consensual multi-partner relationships were less undesirable than non-consensual ones. Sex differences were largest for polygyny and arrangements where men had agreed access to a casual partner alongside a committed one, yet these were two of the most acceptable forms of multi-partnering when men and women's responses were combined. Sociosexuality positively predicted interest in most forms of multi-partnering. Study 2 (N = 735) focused on polygyny and added status-linked traits as predictors. The results of Study 1 were broadly replicated, though the status-linked traits did not predict polygynous interest specifically. Instead, sociosexuality and male intrasexual competitiveness uniquely predicted general interest in multi-partner relationships. Overall, interest in polygamy appears to emerge despite social discouragement and sex differences in interest track the relative costs and benefits associated with it. However, there is no strong evidence that polygamous interest is uniquely calibrated to personal conditions when compared to other forms of multi-partnering.

Stigmatization of Consensual Non-Monogamous Partners: Perceived Endorsement of Conservation or Openness to Change Values Vary According to Personal Attitudes

Studies have shown that romantic partners in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships are targets of stigmatization. However, little is known about the underlying mechanisms and the conditions under which such stigmatization occurs. In two experimental studies (combined N = 772), we asked participants to read the description of two partners in a relationship (monogamous vs. open relationship vs. polyamorous) and make a series of judgments about those partners. Overall results showed that CNM (vs. monogamous) partners were perceived as less trustworthy and as having more sexual health concerns (Studies 1 and 2), and as being less committed and less sexually satisfied (Study 2). Results from a conditional mediation analysis (Study 2) further showed that participants with negative attitudes toward consensual non-monogamy perceived CNM (vs. monogamous) partners as having less conservation and more openness to change values, which was then associated with more stigmatization. In contrast, participants with positive attitudes toward consensual non-monogamy perceived CNM (vs. monogamous) partners as having more openness to change values, which was then associated with less stigmatization. Taken together, these results extended the literature focused on prejudice, discrimination, and stigmatization of minority groups and highlighted key elements that can be used to buffer stigmatization.