Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Functional Variation in Sensitivity to Cues that a Partner is Cheating with a Rival

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The costs imposed by a romantic partner’s mixed reproductive strategy (MRS) generate selection pressures for anticipatory responses to mitigate or avoid those costs. People will differ in their vulnerability to those costs, based in part on the qualities of their romantic rivals. Thus, we predicted that individuals at high risk of a partner’s MRS—women with many sexually accessible rivals and men with many rivals more physically attractive than themselves—would be more attentive to cues that an MRS was being employed than those at lower risk. Based on similarity judgments derived from a successive-pile-sort method, this prediction was supported in a study involving over 1,300 students and community members. These results complement a growing body of research on selection pressures generated by romantic rivals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For example, the candidate exemplars “I caught my boyfriend kissing another girl” and “My boyfriend made out with someone else at a party” were considered redundant. Conversely, the candidate exemplars “My boyfriend mentioned an ex-girlfriend and that they had a strong connection” and “My boyfriend compares me to his ex” were considered distinct threats and were further evaluated.

  2. The candidate exemplars listed below occupied a similar space in the preliminary CA. The first two exemplars were retained because they were most distant within the cluster; the last four were omitted from subsequent analyses: “You find out from a friend that your partner had dinner with an ex-girlfriend,” “Your partner mentions an ex-girlfriend and that they had a strong connection,” “Your partner compares you to an ex,” “Your partner calls you by her ex-boyfriend’s name,” “Your partner discusses past relationships with unnecessary detail,” “Your partner tells you she considered marrying her last boyfriend.” Other exemplars were retained or omitted in a similar fashion.

References

  • Andersson, M. (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C. (2005). Adaptations to predators and prey. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 200–223). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, O., & Belin, P. (2010). Perceptual scaling of voice identity: Common dimensions for different vowels and speakers. Psychological Research, 74, 110–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, D. V., Sagarin, B. J., Guadagno, R. E., Millevoi, A., & Nicastle, L. D. (2004). When the sexes need not differ: Emotional responses to the sexual and emotional aspects of infidelity. Personal Relationships, 11, 529–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellis, M. A., & Baker, R. R. (1990). Do females promote sperm competition? Data for humans. Animal Behaviour, 40, 997–999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleske-Rechek, A., & Buss, D. M. (2006). Sexual strategies pursued and mate attraction tactics deployed. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1299–1311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boster, J. S. (1986). Can individuals recapitulate the evolutionary development of color lexicons? Ethnology, 25, 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boster, J. (1994). The successive pile sort. Field Methods, 6, 11–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boster, J., Berlin, B., & O’Neill, J. (1986). The correspondence of Jivaroan to scientific ornithology. American Anthropologist, 88, 569–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, D. D. (1995). The social structural basis of the organization of persons in memory. Human Nature, 6, 379–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Haselton, M. (2005). The evolution of jealousy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 506–507.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science, 3, 251–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Choe, J., Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2000). Distress about mating rivals. Personal Relationships, 7, 235–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. P., Angleitner, A., Oubaid, V., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Sex differences in jealousy in evolutionary and cultural perspective: Tests from the Netherlands, Germany, and the United States. Psychological Science, 7, 359–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2004). Gender differences in rival characteristics that evoke jealousy in response to emotional versus sexual infidelity. Personal Relationships, 11, 395–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cann, A., & Baucom, T. R. (2004). Former partners and new rivals as threats to a relationship: Infidelity type, gender, and commitments as factors related to distress and forgiveness. Personal Relationships, 11, 305–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashdan, E. (1996). Women’s mating strategies. Evolutionary Anthropology, 5, 134–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clanton, G., & Smith, L. G. (1977). Jealousy. New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, N., & Young, F. W. (1968). On the relation between unidimensional judgments and multidimensional scaling. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 269–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Vincent, A. C. J. (1991). Sexual selection and potential reproductive rates of males and females. Nature, 351, 58–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M., Wilson, M., & Weghorst, S. J. (1982). Male sexual jealousy. Ethology and Sociobiology, 3, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A. P. C., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Two human natures: How men and women evolved different psychologies. In C. B. Crawford & D. Krebs (Eds.), Foundations of evolutionary psychology: Ideas, issues and applications (pp. 261–280). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A. P. C., Shackelford, T. K., & Hass, R. G. (2007). When a “poach” is not a poach: Re-defining human mate poaching and re-estimating its frequency. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 702–716.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, P., Barelds, D. P. H., & Groothof, H. K. (2010). An inventory and update of jealousy-evoking partner behaviors in modern society. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 17, 329–345.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, P., & Buunk, B. P. (1998). Jealousy as a function of rival characteristics: An evolutionary perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1158–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, P., & Buunk, B. P. (2002). Sex difference in the jealousy-evoking effect of rival characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 829–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2009). Sex difference in jealousy: Misinterpretation of nonsignificant results as refuting the theory. Personal Relationships, 16, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figueredo, A. J., & Jacobs, W. J. (2000). Sexual strategic pluralism through a Brunswikian lens. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 23, 603–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowlkes, E. B., & Mallows, C. L. (1983). A method for comparing two hierarchical clusterings. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 78, 553–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–644.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gaulin, S. J. C., & McBurney, D. H. (2001). Psychology: An evolutionary approach. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geary, D. C., Vigil, J., & Byrd-Craven, J. (2004). Evolution of human mate choice. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 27–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giguère, G. (2006). Collecting and analyzing data in multidimensional scaling experiments: A guide for psychologists using SPSS. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 2, 26–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). Sexual coercion in intimate relationships: A comparative analysis of the effects of women’s infidelity and men’s dominance and control. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 226–234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grafen, A. (1984). Natural selection, kin selection and group selection. In J. Krebs & N. Davies (Eds.), Behavioral ecology: An evolutionary approach (pp. 62–84). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenacre, M. J. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guadagno, R. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2010). Sex differences in jealousy: An evolutionary perspective on online infidelity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, 2636–2655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadfield, J. D., Nutall, A., Osorio, D., & Owens, I. P. F. (2007). Testing the phenotypic gambit: Phenotypic, genotypic and environmental correlations of color. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 20, 549–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson Sobraske, K. N., Boster, J. S., & Gaulin, S. J. C. (2013). Mapping the conceptual space of jealousy. Ethos, 41, 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haselton, M. G., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Conditional expression of women’s desires and men’s mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 49, 509–518.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschfeld, H. O. (1935). A connection between correlation and contingency. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31, 520–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges-Simeon, C. R., Gaulin, S. J. C., & Puts, D. A. (2010). Different vocal parameters predict perceptions of dominance and attractiveness. Human Nature, 21, 406–427.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, L. J., & Schultz, J. (1976). Quadratic assignment as a general data analysis strategy. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 29, 190–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hupka, R. B., Buunk, B., Falus, G., Fulgosi, A., Ortega, E., Swain, R., & Tarabrina, N. V. (1985). Romantic jealousy and romantic envy: A seven nation study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 423–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworska, N., & Chupetlovska-Anastasova, A. (2009). A review of multidimensional scaling (MDS) and its utility in various psychological domains. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 5, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennions, M. D., Møller, A. P., & Petrie, M. (2001). Sexually selected traits and adult survival: A meta-analysis. Quarterly Review of Biology, 76, 3–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, P., & Regier, T. (2003). Resolving the question of color naming universals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 9085–9089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, A., & Luff, D. (2007). Qualitative research analysis. Sheffield, UK: Trent RDSU National Institute for Health Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lima, S. L., & Dill, L. M. (1990). Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 68, 619–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Penton-Voak, I. S., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Partnership status and temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 269, 1095–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., Miller, S. L., Rouby, D. A., & Gailliot, M. T. (2009). Intrasexual vigilance: The implicit cognition of romantic rivalry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 74–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, S. M., Vallacher, R. R., Shackelford, T. K., Bjorklund, D. F., & Yunger, J. L. (2006). Relationship experience as a predictor of romantic jealousy. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 761–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemec, A. F. L., & Brinkhurst, R. O. (1988). The Fowlkes–Mallows statistic and the comparison of two independently determined dendrograms. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 45, 971–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parrot, G. W., & Smith, R. H. (1993). Distinguishing the experiences of envy and jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 906–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, M., & Halliday, T. (1994). Experimental and natural changes in the peacock’s (Pavo cristatus) train can affect mating success. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 35, 213–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, M., & Hunter, F. M. (1993). Intraspecific variation in courtship and copulation frequency: An effect of mismatch in partner attractiveness. Behaviour, 127, 265–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philips, A. (2010). Indignation or insecurity: The influence of mate value on distress to infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 736–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Picard, D., Dacremont, C., Valentin, D., & Giboreau, A. (2003). Perceptual dimensions of tactile textures. Acta Psychologica, 114, 165–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pillsworth, E. G., & Haselton, M. G. (2006). Male sexual attractiveness predicts differential ovulatory shifts in female extra-pair attraction and male mate retention. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A., Dawood, K., & Welling, L. L. M. (2012a). Why women have orgasms: An evolutionary analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1127–1143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L. M., Burriss, R. P., & Dawood, K. (2012b). Men’s masculinity and attractiveness predict their female partners’ reported orgasm frequency and timing. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, S. C., Little, A. C., Gosling, L. M., Perrett, D. I., Carter, V., Jones, B. C., … Petrie, M. (2005). MHC-heterozygosity and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romney, A. K., Moore, C. C., & Rusch, C. D. (1997). Cultural universals: Measuring the semantic structure of emotion terms in English and Japanese. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94, 5489–5494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. A. (1983). Pancultural aspects of the human conceptual organization of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1281–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15, 85–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagarin, B. J., Martin, A. L., Coutinho, S. A., Edlund, J. E., Patel, L., Skowronski, J. J., & Zengel, B. (2012). Sex differences in jealousy: A meta-analytic examination. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 595–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salovey, P., & Rodin, J. (1986). The differentiation of social-comparison jealousy and romantic jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1100–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scelza, B. (2011). Female choice and extra-pair paternity in a traditional human population. Biology Letters, 7, 889–891.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheib, J. E. (2001). Context-specific mate choice criteria: Women’s trade-offs in the contexts of long-term and extra-pair mateships. Personal Relationships, 8, 371–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., Alcalay, L., Allik, J., Angleiter, A., Ault, L., Austers, I., … Zupanèiè, A. (2004). Patterns and universals of mate poaching across 53 nations: The effects of sex, culture, and personality on romantically attracting another person’s partner. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 560–584.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and context effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1185–1204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Human mate poaching: Tactics and temptations for infiltrating existing mateships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 894–917.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schützwohl, A. (2005). Sex differences in jealousy: The processing of cues to infidelity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 288–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schützwohl, A., & Koch, S. (2004). Sex differences in jealousy: The recall of cues to sexual and emotional infidelity in personally more and less context conditions. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 249–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T. K., Voracek, M., Schmitt, D. P., Buss, D. M., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., & Michalski, R. L. (2004). Jealousy in early adulthood and in later life. Human Nature, 15, 283–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpsteen, D. J. (1991). The organization of jealousy knowledge: Romantic jealousy as a blended emotion. In P. Salovey (Ed.), The psychology of jealousy and envy (pp. 31–51). New York: Guilford Press.

  • Singh, D., & Luis, S. (1995). Ethnic and gender consensus fur the effect of waist-to-hip ratio on the judgment of women’s attractiveness. Human Nature, 6, 51–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stillman, T. F., & Maner, J. K. (2009). A sharp eye for her SOI: Perception and misperception of female sociosexuality at zero acquaintance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagler, M. J. (2010). Sex differences in jealousy: Comparing the influence of previous infidelity among college students and adults. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 353–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance. Human Nature, 4, 237–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., Gangestad, S. W., Miller, R., Scheyd, G., McCollough, J. K., & Franklin, M. (2003). Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 668–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, W. S. (1965). Multidimensional scaling of similarity. Psychometrica, 30, 379–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traes, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabitating Americans. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the decent of Man (pp. 136–179). London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voracek, M., Fisher, M., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). Sex differences in subjective estimates of non-paternity rates in Austria. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 652–656.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weller, S. C. (1986). Cross-cultural concepts of illness: Variation and validation. American Anthropologist, 86, 341–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westneat, D. F., Sherman, P. W., & Morton, M. L. (1990). The ecology and evolution of extra-pair copulations in birds. In D. M. Power (Ed.), Current ornithology (pp. 331–369). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, G., & Mullen, P. (1989). Jealousy: Theory, research, and clinical strategies. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, G. D. (1966). Adaption and natural selection: A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection—A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205–214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zarzo, M. (2011). Hedonic judgments of chemical compounds are correlated with molecular size. Sensors, 11, 3667–3686.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, N., Parish, W. L., Huang, Y., & Pan, S. (2012). Sexual infidelity in China: Prevalence and gender-specific correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 861–873.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Editor and reviewers for valuable feedback, the participants for their time and candor, and our many research assistants for their diligent work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, 93106-3210, USA

    Katherine N. Hanson Sobraske & Steven J. C. Gaulin

  2. Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA

    James S. Boster

Authors
  1. Katherine N. Hanson Sobraske
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven J. C. Gaulin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James S. Boster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katherine N. Hanson Sobraske.

Appendix

Appendix

Jealousy-inducing exemplars, men’s version.

  1. A

    You say “I love you” and your partner does not respond

  2. B

    Your partner cancels a date with you to spend time with another man

  3. C

    You find out from a friend that your partner had dinner with an ex-boyfriend

  4. D

    Your partner starts loaning her favorite books and music to another man

  5. E

    Your partner talks about casual flings she has had with men she didn’t know

  6. F

    Your partner remembers ex-boyfriends’ birthdays but always forgets yours

  7. G

    Your partner says she would rather be in a relationship with someone else

  8. H

    Your partner has told you she’s not certain if she will stay with you or find another partner

  9. I

    Your partner helped care for another man when he was ill

  10. J

    Your partner talks about how much she values certain traits in other men; traits she knows that you don’t have

  11. K

    Your partner talks about other men she knows that make her laugh

  12. L

    Your partner flirts with other men when she thinks you aren’t looking

  13. M

    Your partner obviously enjoyed when another man pursued a relationship with her

  14. N

    Your partner does not make physical contact with you when there are other men around

  15. O

    Your partner spends the night at another man’s house

  16. P

    Your partner begins working late nights with a male co-worker

  17. Q

    Your partner gives another man a very expensive gift for no reason

  18. R

    Your partner has a very close relationship with another man but won’t let you spend time with the two of them

  19. S

    Your partner gets drunk at a party, leaves for a while, and refuses to tell you where she was

  20. T

    You catch your partner kissing another man

  21. U

    Your partner tells you she has been having sex with another man

  22. V

    Your partner initiates physical contact with another man while talking with him

  23. W

    Your partner mentions an ex-boyfriend and that they had a strong connection

  24. X

    Your partner dances with another man

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hanson Sobraske, K.N., Gaulin, S.J.C. & Boster, J.S. Functional Variation in Sensitivity to Cues that a Partner is Cheating with a Rival. Arch Sex Behav 43, 1267–1279 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0283-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0283-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation