Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors Influencing the Intended Likelihood of Exposing Sexual Infidelity

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

Abstract

There is a considerable body of literature on infidelity within romantic relationships. However, there is a gap in the scientific literature on factors influencing the likelihood of uninvolved individuals exposing sexual infidelity. Therefore, we devised an exploratory study examining a wide range of potentially relevant factors. Based in part on evolutionary theory, we anticipated nine potential domains or types of influences on the likelihoods of exposing or protecting cheaters, including kinship, strong social alliances, financial support, previous relationship behaviors (including infidelity and abuse), potential relationship transitions, stronger sexual and emotional aspects of the extra-pair relationship, and disease risk. The pattern of results supported these predictions (N = 159 men, 328 women). In addition, there appeared to be a small positive bias for participants to report infidelity when provided with any additional information about the situation. Overall, this study contributes a broad initial description of factors influencing the predicted likelihood of exposing sexual infidelity and encourages further studies in this area.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., Choe, J. C., Lim, H. K., Hasegawa, M., et al. (1999). Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. Personal Relationships, 6, 125–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buunk, B. (1980). Extramarital sex in the Netherlands. Alternative Lifestyles, 3, 11–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano, A., & O’Leary, K. D. (2000). Infidelity and separations precipitate major depressive episodes and symptoms of nonspecific depression and anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 774–781.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M., Wilson, M., & Weghorst, S. (1982). Male sexual jealousy. Ethology & Sociobiology, 3, 311–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Essock-Vitale, S., & McGuire, M. (1985). Women’s lives viewed from an evolutionary perspective: II. Patterns of helping. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenigstein, A., & Peltz, R. (2002). Distress over the infidelity of a child’s spouse: A crucial test of evolutionary and socialization hypotheses. Personal Relationships, 9, 301–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, S. P., & Wright, T. L. (1985). Sex differences in types of extramarital involvement and marital dissatisfaction. Sex Roles, 12, 1101–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. D., Burnette, J. L., & Davis, J. L. (2008). Third-party forgiveness: (Not) forgiving your close other’s betrayer. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 407–418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2006). Relationship dissolution following infidelity: The roles of attributions and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 508–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. (1964). The evolution of altruistic behavior. The American Naturalist, 97, 354–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowiak, W., Nell, M., & Buckmaster, A. (2002). Managing infidelity: A cross-cultural perspective. Ethnology, 41, 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. E. (1970). Extramarital sexual intercourse: A methodological note. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32, 249–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruger, D. J., Fisher, M. L., Edelstein, R. S., Chopik, W. J., Fitzgerald, C., & Strout, S. L. (2013). Was that cheating? Perceptions vary by sex, attachment anxiety, and behavior. Evolutionary Psychology, 11, 159–171.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. (1988). Adultery. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenth, R. V. (2009). Java applets for power and sample size [Computer software] Retrieved December 24, 2013, from http://www.stat.uiowa.edu/~rlenth/Power.

  • Mark, K. P., Janssen, E., & Milhausen, R. R. (2011). Infidelity in heterosexual couples: Demographic, interpersonal, and personality-related predictors of extradyadic sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 971–982.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Michalski, R. L., Shackelford, T. K., & Salmon, C. A. (2007). Upset in response to a sibling’s partner’s infidelities. Human Nature, 18, 74–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monto, M., & Carey, A. (2013). A new standard of sexual behavior? Are claims associated with the “hookup culture” supported by nationally representative data? Presented at the meeting of the American Sociological Association, New York.

  • Sagarin, B. J., Martina, 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 

  • Shackelford, T. K., & Buss, D. M. (1997). Cues to infidelity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1034–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2007). Adaptation to sperm competition in humans. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 47–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T. K., Michalski, R. L., & Schmitt, D. P. (2004). Upset in response to a child’s partner’s infidelities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 489–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shavit, Y., Fischer, C. S., & Koresh, Y. (1994). Kin and nonkin under collective threat: Israeli networks during the gulf war. Social Forces, 72, 1197–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W., Marsden, P., Hout, M., & Kim, J. (2013). General social surveys, 1972-2012. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spanier, G. B., & Margolis, R. L. (1983). Marital separation and extramarital sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 19, 23–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N. W. (1992). The evolutionary psychology of men’s coercive sexuality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 363–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toothaker, L. E. (1993). Multiple comparison procedures. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weis, D. L., & Slosnerick, M. (1981). Attitudes toward sexual and nonsexual extramarital involvements among a sample of college students. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 349–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiederman, M. W. (1997). Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 34, 167–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health Behavior & Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 1420 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

    Daniel J. Kruger

  2. Department of Psychology, St. Mary’s University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Maryanne L. Fisher

  3. Department of Social Sciences, University of South Carolina-Beaufort, Bluffton, SC, USA

    Carey J. Fitzgerald

Authors
  1. Daniel J. Kruger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maryanne L. Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carey J. Fitzgerald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel J. Kruger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kruger, D.J., Fisher, M.L. & Fitzgerald, C.J. Factors Influencing the Intended Likelihood of Exposing Sexual Infidelity. Arch Sex Behav 44, 1697–1704 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0469-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0469-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation