Marital Status as a Candidate Moderator Variable of Male–Female Differences in Sexual Jealousy: The Need for Representative Population Samples

Romantic Jealousy: A Test of Social Cognitive and Evolutionary Models in A Population-Representative Sample of Adults

Whereas sexually dimorphic evolutionary models argue for clear sex differences in responses to jealousy-evoking scenarios, social cognitive models emphasize the importance of other factors. This paper explores variables associated with responses to a commonly-used jealousy-evoking scenario in a population-representative sample. Data from 8,386 Australian men and women aged 16-69 were weighted to match the population. The results provided some support for evolutionary models among heterosexual respondents, but findings contrary to evolutionary models were found among non-heterosexual respondents. Support for social cognitive models was provided by the identification of six variables that had significant independent multivariate associations with jealousy: sex, age, education, lifetime number of partners, relationship status, and attitudes toward infidelity. The results suggest that although men and women may tend to respond differently to sexual or emotional infidelity scenarios, the anticipated experience of jealousy in each context is strongly influenced by biographical and cultural factors.

Clark and Hatfield's Evidence of Women's Low Receptivity to Male Strangers' Sexual Offers Revisited

Although frequently cited, there has been no published scientific replication of Clark and Hatfield's (1989) and Clark's (1990) findings concerning women's low receptivity to male strangers' offers of casual sex. Consistently across three identically designed naturalistic experiments (aggregated N = 144), these authors reported a 0% acceptance rate by women. The present research analyzed an informal “real-life” journalistic project ( N = 100) initiated by an Austrian magazine, in which results indicated a 6.1% acceptance rate (95% CI: 2.8–12.6%) for a complete stranger offering women immediate sexual involvement. Various contextual differences, such as setting, subjects' age and attractiveness, and age differences between requestor and receiver, probably contributed to the observed difference in outcome between the journalistic project and the original experiments. The present findings point to the importance of contextual effects in naturalistic investigations of women's receptivity to sexual offers.

Testing the sexual imagination hypothesis for gender differences in response to infidelity

Background

Evolutionary psychologists hypothesized that men are more upset by sexual infidelity than women are, whereas women are more upset by emotional infidelity than men are. On the other hand, the sexual imagination hypothesis states that gender differences in infidelity responses are derived from explicit men’s sexual imagery. Based on the latter hypothesis, we hypothesized that although men would report being more distressed by sexual infidelity than women who were not in a committed relationship (NCR), no gender difference would be reported in a committed relationship (CR).

Findings

These two hypotheses were tested with 598 participants in a CR and 1,643 participants in a NCR. No significant gender difference was found sexual infidelity response in the CR group (d = 0.008, a power of .956), whereas men were more upset than women about sexual infidelity in the NCR group. Moreover, a significant interaction between gender and infidelity type was found in the NCR, whereas no significant interaction between gender and infidelity type was observed in the CR group (partial η² = 0.005, a power of .943).

Conclusions

Our findings supported the sexual imagination hypothesis but were inconsistent with the EJM hypothesis.

A reconsideration of sex differences in response to sexual and emotional infidelity

Previous studies have found that males are more upset over sexual infidelity than females whereas females are more upset over emotional infidelity than males. We hypothesized that such sex differences are explained by explicit sexual imagery by males. The hypothesis was tested in a laboratory using vivid infidelity scenarios and photographs to induce detailed and sexually oriented imagery of a partner's infidelity. In the main experiment, participants included 64 males and 64 females who were currently in committed relationships. The results showed that participants became more upset when they imagined sexual infidelity vividly and realistically than when they did not and there were no significant sex differences in jealousy found when sexual infidelity was imagined in this matter. Overall, our findings suggested that the sex differences in jealousy resulted from males' tendency to imagine sexual infidelity more vividly than females.

Between-Sex Differences in Romantic Jealousy: Substance or Spin? A Qualitative Analysis

An influential evolutionary account of romantic jealousy proposes that natural selection shaped a specific sexually-dimorphic psychological mechanism in response to relationship threat. However, this account has faced considerable theoretical and methodological criticism and it remains unclear whether putative sex differences in romantic jealousy actually exist and, if they do, whether they are consistent with its predictions. Given the multidimensional nature of romantic jealousy, the current study employed a qualitative design to examine these issues. We report the results of sixteen semi-structured interviews that were conducted with heterosexual men and women with the purpose of exploring the emotions, cognitions and behaviors that formed their subjective, lived experience in response to relationship threat. Interpretative phenomenological analysis revealed four super-ordinate themes (“threat appraisal”, “emotional episodes”, “sex-specific threat” and “forgive and forget”) and unequivocal sex differences in romantic jealousy consistent with the evolutionary account. Self-esteem, particularly when conceptualized as an index of mate value, emerged as an important proximal mediator for both sexes. However, specific outcomes were dependent upon domains central to the individual's self concept that were primarily sex-specific. The findings are integrated within the context of existing self-esteem and evolutionary theory and future directions for romantic jealousy research are suggested.

Sex Differences in Jealousy: Comparing the Influence of Previous Infidelity Among College Students and Adults

Many studies have found that traditionally aged college students differ in their relative distress when asked to imagine a partner’s sexual versus emotional infidelity. This study examined how real partner infidelity experiences among college students and older adults influence these responses, using both forced choice and continuous scales. Consistent with evolutionary theory, and regardless of previous real infidelity experiences, male college students were more likely to be distressed by hypothetical partner sexual infidelity, whereas female college students were more distressed by emotional infidelity. In contrast, infidelity experience moderated adult responses. As hypothesized, sex differences were found only among adults who had not previously experienced real partner infidelity.

Sex differences in subjective estimates of non-paternity rates in Austria

The determination of paternity is important due to the possibility of cuckoldry and the subsequent squandering of male reproductive effort. Men may be attuned to prevalence rates of cuckoldry in the local environment to assess risk. However, women may have an enhanced ability to assess paternity and may have superior insight into women's sexual infidelity. Accordingly, this study examined subjective estimates of human non-paternity (HNP), the discrepancy between social/legal versus genetic paternity. The hypothesis was that women would provide higher estimates of HNP than men. A sex difference in the hypothesized direction was observed across four community samples of Austrian adults (totalling 763 men and 795 women), with women overall providing higher HNP estimates than men (14.5% vs. 9.1%). Furthermore, key demographic variables impacted HNP estimates for both sexes: individuals who were unmarried, childless, currently unpartnered, or currently in a romantic relationship of a shorter duration provided higher HNP estimates than their counterparts, thus suggesting that such estimates might be attuned to mating effort and strategies, as well as relationship quality and investment.

Sex Differences in Feelings of Guilt Arising from Infidelity

Although there is extensive literature regarding sex differences in jealousy due to infidelity, guilt resulting from infidelity remains unexplored. We hypothesize that men will feel guiltier from imagined emotional rather than sexual infidelity, as it is most important for their partner's reproductive success. Similarly, we predict that women will feel more guilt from imagined sexual rather than emotional infidelity. The findings indicate a different pattern; men feel guiltier following sexual infidelity, whereas women feel guiltier following emotional infidelity. Results also show that both sexes believe their partners would have a more difficult time forgiving sexual, rather than emotional, infidelity, but women and not men report that sexual infidelity would more likely lead to relationship dissolution. These findings are discussed in view of evolved mating strategies and individual reproductive success.

A review of sex differences in sexual jealousy, including self-report data, psychophysiological responses, interpersonal violence, and morbid jealousy

The specific innate modular theory of jealousy hypothesizes that natural selection shaped sexual jealousy as a mechanism to prevent cuckoldry, and emotional jealousy as a mechanism to prevent resource loss. Therefore, men should be primarily jealous over a mate's sexual infidelity and women over a mate's emotional infidelity. Five lines of evidence have been offered as support: self-report responses, psychophysiological data, domestic violence (including spousal abuse and homicide), and morbid jealousy cases. This article reviews each line of evidence and finds only one hypothetical measure consistent with the hypothesis. This, however, is contradicted by a variety of other measures (including reported reactions to real infidelity). A meta-analysis of jealousy-inspired homicides, taking into account base rates for murder, found no evidence that jealousy disproportionately motivates men to kill. The findings are discussed from a social-cognitive theoretical perspective.