6 Signs Your Spouse Is Having An AffairInfidelity 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. 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. Of the many betrayals that can occur within the context of romantic relationships, infidelity is considered the most severe and threatening to the stability of the relationship Dillow et al. This is typically considered an act of unforgivable betrayal, given the high expectations of loyalty and commitment that people hold for their partners Watkins and Boon, ; Fincham and May, and the time and effort invested in preserving their relationships Dillow et al.
Similarly, several studies showed that the higher the level of commitment, the greater the likelihood that the offended person forgives his or her partner after a transgression e. However, the path by which both variables are related seems to be inconclusive.
Empirical evidence has revealed that the level of commitment may be affected by the degree of shock that people experience after infidelity Marcussen et al.
Accordingly, the overall level of commitment may not be as explanatory of forgiveness as the level of commitment reported after the act of infidelity Heintzelman et al. Future research could shed light on the association between commitment and forgiveness when faced with infidelity, as well as examine the role played by the different extradyadic behaviors in that relationship.
Ultimately, another variable that could influence our findings is accommodation. Moreover, given its close relationship with commitment e. Through accommodation, people restrain their likelihood of engaging in destructive responses after a conflict with their partner. Furthermore, it is likely that people who show higher levels of commitment will accommodate themselves and use more constructive rather than destructive strategies when a conflict arises between both members of the relationship e.
In this sense, the perception of a certain extradyadic behavior as indicative of infidelity could originate a conflict in the relationship—mainly in the offended person.
Thus, people with high levels of commitment would show a greater willingness to adapt and use constructive strategies to face the problem with the transgressive partner and achieve a positive result for their relationship e.
However, could this happen in the case of extradyadic behaviors of a sexual and technological nature? Furthermore, what if the commitment has been affected by such extradyadic behaviors?
Further research is needed to address this complex relational process. In short, the studies described in this paper contribute to an improvement in the knowledge of the infidelity research field, showing that sexual and technological behaviors are considered more indicative of infidelity, and that technological infidelity can be as harmful as sexual infidelity, shedding light on the relevance of social networks and the Internet for the life of relationships.
Likewise, the results provide evidence that unforgiveness—specifically motivation for revenge—can be considered by people with high anxious attachment to their partner to be an effective coping mechanism to counteract the negative affective state resulting from such betrayal.
However, unforgiveness, in turn, is a significant source of stress and anxiety. In this regard, the results could also have implications for intervention because therapeutic practice focused on infidelity takes into consideration the option of forgiving as a means through which the physical and emotional well-being of the couple and of the person who suffers the betrayal can be restored, especially in people with anxious attachment to the partner, who may require more attention given the behavioral characteristics they exhibit in their relationships.
The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author. This research was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Granada.
Participants provided informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. ABM-M carried out the studies.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Abrahamson, I.
Dating infidelity behaviors reasons and consequences
What helps couples rebuild their relationship after infidelity? Issues 33, — Balcells-Junyent, J. Barbaro, N. Insecure romantic attachment dimensions and frequency of mate retention behaviors. Barry, R.
Infidelity in dating relationships: Gender-specific correlates of face-to-face and online . impact of infidelitous behaviors, such as divorce or relationship dissolution . designated relationship dissatisfaction as a significant reason for dating. that the causes of dating infidelity carry over into marriage; however, we found no . tic attachments" and sexual behaviors as "highly unfaithful in dating relationships" .. most common end-results of infidelity by a partner is termination of tbe. Roscoe B, Cavanaugh LE, Kennedy DR. Dating infidelity: behaviors, reasons and consequences. Adolescence. ;23(89) [PubMed: ].
Links among attachment dimensions, affect, the self, and perceived support for broadly generalized attachment styles and specific bonds. Baucom, D. Treating affair couples: clinical considerations and initial findings.
Bernecker, K. Berry, J. III, and Wade, N.
Dating infidelity: behaviors, reasons and consequences.
Forgivingness, vengeful rumination, and affective traits. Besser, A. Dependency, self-criticism and negative affective responses following imaginary rejection and failure threats: meaning-making processes as moderators or mediators. Psychiatry 74, 33— Bowlby, J. Google Scholar. Braithwaite, S. Forgiveness and relationship satisfaction: mediating mechanisms.
Buss, D. Sexual and emotional infidelity: evolved gender differences in jealousy prove robust and replicable.
Carlsmith, K. The paradoxical consequences of revenge. Cavallo, J. When self-protection over reaches: relationship-specific threat activates domain-general avoidance motivation.
CrossRef Full Text. The Mediating role of religiousness in the relationship between the attachment style and marital quality. Clayton, R. The third wheel: the impact of Twitter use on relationship infidelity and divorce.
An experimental examination of the effects of communicative infidelity motives on communication and relational outcomes in romantic relationships. Drouin, M. Facebook or memory: which is the real threat to your relationship? Feldman, S. Fife, S. Facilitating forgiveness in the treatment of infidelity: an interpersonal model. Fincham, F. Forgiveness and conflict resolution in marriage.
viduals who have engaged in dating infidelity. iors, causes, and consequences (Drigotas, Safstrom, & . when thinking about their behavior (i.e., infidelity or. However, not all behaviours considered unfaithful affect the person who in Romantic Relationships Experiencing Infidelity: Negative Affect and Anxious .. However, to date there are no known studies that considered the relationship of. Keywords: Infidelity; marriage; infidelity behavior; reasons for infidelity The results of the study highlighted differences between men and women, with men those in the dating phase and those of different sexual orientations, not with the.
Infidelity in romantic relationships. Transformative processes in marriage: an analysis of emerging trends. Marriage Fam. Finkel, E. Vengefully ever after: destiny beliefs, state attachment anxiety, and forgiveness. Fitness, J. Frijda, N. Sergeant Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum— Gausel, N. Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social-image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict.
Gordon, K. Govier, T. Forgiveness and Revenge. London: Routledge. Guerrero, L. Attachment-style differences in the experience and expression of romantic jealousy. Hayes, A. Hazan, C. Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Heintzelman, A. Recovery from infidelity: differentiation of self, trauma, forgiveness, and posttraumatic growth among couples in continuing relationships.
Couple Family Psychol. Henline, B. Exploring perceptions of online infidelity. Hertlein, K. Internet infidelity: a critical review of the literature. Marital Fam. Cyberpsychology 4, 1—9. Kimmes, J. Forgiveness in romantic relationships: the roles of attachment, attributions, and empathy. Kluwer, E. Unforgiving motivations following infidelity: should we make peace with our past?
Knox, D. Kuder, G. The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika 2, — Lemay, E. Relationship expectations and relationship quality.
Leventhal, A. Sadness, depression, and avoidance behavior. Lishner, D. Are sexual and emotional infidelity equally upsetting to men and women? Making sense of forced-choice responses. Luchies, L. Trust and biased memory of transgressions in romantic relationships.
Mackay, J. Global sex: sexuality and sexual practices around the world. MacKinnon, D. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behav. Manning, W. Marcussen, K. The role of identity salience and commitment in the stress process. Marshall, T. Attachment styles as predictors of facebook-related jealousy and surveillance in romantic relationships. Martell, C. Treating infidelity in same-sex couples. Mattingly, B.
Foggy faithfulness: relationship quality, religiosity, and the perceptions of dating infidelity scale in an adult sample. Issues 31, — McCullough, M. Rumination, emotion, and forgiveness: three longitudinal studies. Cognitive systems for revenge and forgiveness. Brain Sci. Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships.
Theoretical elaboration and measurement. McDaniel, B. Media Cult. Do you have anything to hide?
Infidelity-related behaviors on social media sites and marital satisfaction. Merolla, A. Communicating forgiveness in friendships and dating relationships. Mikulincer, M. Activation of the attachment system in adulthood: threat-related primes increase the accessibility of mental representations of attachment figures. Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics, and Change. Moller, N. Defining infidelity in research and couple counseling: a qualitative study.
Sex Marital Ther. Morey, J.
Morrissette, J. Infidelity and revenge fantasies: an integrative couple therapy approach. Couple Relatsh. Pettijohn, T. II, and Ndoni, A. Imagined infidelity scenario forgiveness and distress: the role of method of discovery and specific cheating behavior.
Rathus, J. Spouse-specific dependency scale: scale development. Violence 12, — Rijavec, M. To forgive or not to forgive? Beliefs about costs and benefits of forgiveness, motivation to forgive and well-being.
Issues 22, 23— Rodrigues, D. Sociosexuality, commitment, sexual infidelity, and perceptions of infidelity: data from the second love web site. Sex Res. Rosenfeld, M. Marriage, choice, and couplehood in the age of the internet. Rusbult, C. A longitudinal test of the investment model: the development and deterioration of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. The investment model scale: measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size.
Accommodation processes in close relationships: theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Russell, V. Attachment insecurity and infidelity in marriage: do studies of dating relationships really inform us about marriage? Sabini, J. Emotional responses to sexual and emotional infidelity: constants and differences across genders, samples, and methods. Psicothema 11, 37— Schmader, T. The approach and avoidance function of guilt and shame emotions: comparing reactions to self-caused and other-caused wrongdoing.
Schneider, J. Is it really cheating? Understanding the emotional reactions and clinical treatment of spouses and partners affected by cybersex infidelity. Compulsivity 19, — Schumann, K. The benefits, costs, and paradox of revenge. Compass 4, — Selterman, D. Moral judgment of close relationship behaviors.
Moral judgment toward relationship betrayal and those who commit them. Sharpe, D. Effect of cheating experience on attitudes toward infidelity. Simpson, J. Slater, D. New York, NY: Penguin. Strelan, P. Strategies for coping with interpersonal hurt: preliminary evidence for the relationship between coping and forgiveness.
Adolescence. Spring;23(89) Dating infidelity: behaviors, reasons and consequences. Roscoe B(1), Cavanaugh LE, Kennedy DR. Dating infidelity has negative impacts on the betrayed partner. (Shackelford intentions a pivotal role as the proximal cause of behavior. (see Ajzen, issues has produced contradictory results with some studies reporting sex differences, Behaviors such as flirting, dating, spending time together, and . men than women, whereas emotional reasons for infidelity (e.g. lack of attention, lack of.
Values 53, 97— Tagler, M. Sex difference in attitudes toward partner infidelity. Thompson, A. Drawing the line: the development of a comprehensive assessment of infidelity judgments. Understanding variations in judgments of infidelity: an application of attribution theory.
Basic Appl. Treas, J. Sexual infidelity among married and cohabitating Americans. Turkle, S. New York, NY: Penguin press. Valenzuela, S. Social network sites, marriage well-being and divorce: survey and state-level evidence from the United States.
Valor-Segura, I. Health Psychol. Vossler, A. Internet infidelity 10 years on: a critical review of the literature. Wade, T. Are there sex differences in reaction to different types of sexual infidelity?
Psychology 3, — Wang, C. Watkins, S. Expectations regarding partner infidelity in dating relationships. Watson, D. Weiser, D. Swiping right: sociosexuality, intentions to engage in infidelity, and infidelity experiences on Tinder. Wenzel, M. Whisman, M. Predicting sexual infidelity in a population-based sample of married individuals. Whitty, M. Emotional and sexual infidelity offline and in cyberspace. Wieselquist, J.
Commitment, pro-relationship behavior, and trust in close relationships. Wilson, K. The gray area: exploring attitudes toward infidelity and the development of the Perceptions of Dating Infidelity Scale. Worthington, E. Forgiveness is an emotion-focused coping strategy that can reduce health risks and promote health resilience: theory, review, and hypotheses. Health 19, — Zhang, Q. The Emotional side of forgiveness: a cross-cultural investigation of the role of anger and compassion and face threat in interpersonal forgiveness and reconciliation.
Of the participants, 21 Emotional involvement: the person attributed the infidelity to extramarital emotional involvement, seeking love and affection in this new relationship, in addition to feeling passionate about this other person. Many of the participants referred to emotional involvement as one of the reasons for the infidelity. Examples of responses are: " I fell in love with someone else, but I'm still in love with my husband", "I fell madly in love with someone else", " I was caught, hooked by another man In this sample, 31 Beliefs and rules: the person who committed infidelity attributed the act to personal beliefs about polygamy or rules that the couple agreed about extramarital relationships.
For example: " I do not believe in monogamy ". A total of 7 2. This axis had The category "physical desire or attraction" was the reason for infidelity most used as justification by women, followed by "emotional involvement". This axis includes contents that refer to aspects of the companion and the marital relationship established.
Revenge, anger, or hostility: the people named anger, hostility, or revenge for infidelity of the partner as reasons for their own infidelity. For example: " Because he betrayed me first", "Because he cannot stay faithful, I get upset and I get back at him", "anger ". In this sample, 8 2.
The presence of violent behavior, rudeness, excesses of jealousy, dissatisfaction with the physical aspects or lack of empathy on the part of the partner are other behaviors that are part of this category, in which infidelity is attributed to the way the companion treats the person who committed infidelity.
In this category, 72 Sexual dissatisfaction: infidelity related to sexual dissatisfaction with the partner. My distinct desires in relation to sexuality, greater than hers ". A total of 24 participants 7. Even though it was the most frequent in both sexes, there were differences in the means of responses of the men and women. Alcohol use: being drunk or under the influence of alcohol when committing the act of infidelity.
For example: " Because I had drunk a lot ". A total of 6 1. Escape from problems: the people committed infidelity as a way of escaping from everyday problems, such as work-related problems: " Escape from problems [mainly financial]accumulation of stress", "Various external problems ".
Two female participants attributed this factor as a reason for their infidelity. The respondents mentioned "Opportunity", "Occasion". For example: " The relationship was just starting, it was still unstable. There was a period of physical distance for professional reasons we lived in different cities for a long time ", "Because he travels a lot for work and I stay home alone", "I travel alone, I went out one night and I had drunk a lot ".
Regarding this reason, 25 8. The reasons related to the context were the least cited by the participants as reasons for the infidelity In fact, the reason "escape from problems" was only mentioned by two women. In this axis, there was no difference between the men and women in any of the categories. The results show that in considering all loving relationships, men and women are unfaithful to the same extent, evidencing certain changes in relation to the phenomenon in the present times.
Regarding sexual, emotional and virtual behaviors linked to the breach of an exclusivity agreement, the results also revealed that there were few differences between men and women, except for sexual infidelity behavior and virtual sexual infidelity. In these cases, men showed more behaviors of exchanging sexual caresses and masturbation over the internet when compared to the women.
However, in the other 21 sexual, emotional and virtual behaviors, there was no difference between the genders. Thus, if in the past there was talk of higher rates of sexual infidelity in men and emotional infidelity in women, these data show another scenario where men and women presented similar infidelity behaviors. A closer look at the results of the women reveals that the most frequent infidelity behaviors among women were more subjective and discrete and may sometimes not even have been perceived as infidelity.
However, for men, the behaviors were more explicit, there being more protagonism of the subjects, that is, they could more clearly be considered infidelities, such as kissing, exchanging sexual caresses and flirting, while the women showed greater discretion in their infidelity behaviors, such as wearing nice clothing and hiding certain messages from the partner.
Regarding sexual behavior, the men and women did not complain about the lack of sex in their relationship and did not seek sex in the extramarital relationship. On the contrary, both men and women revealed that they sought affection, understanding and attention in the extramarital relationship and reported not finding these feelings in their conjugal relationship.
In this way, neither the men and women in this sample had the sexual need or dissatisfaction in their relationship as their main reason for infidelity. Both reported dissatisfaction with the relationship, although the mean of the women for dissatisfaction with the partner or the relationship was higher than that of the men in explaining being unfaithful to the partner.
Considering that the boundaries between infidelity behaviors among men and women are increasingly blurred, the common idea that when men do not find sex at home they seek it elsewhere is out of date. Thus, even if men are satisfied with their sexual life with their partner, they may commit infidelity due to the pursuit of something new, freedom and adventure, and it may even be a way to compensate for affective dissatisfaction in their relationship.
Women, in turn, are also motivated by sexual factors such as desire and attraction for the other. In this sample, both men and women were motivated by factors of dissatisfaction with the relationship and sought affection, understanding and attention, expressing that their partner was not providing satisfactory levels of attention and intimacy. The infidelity began most frequently between the 2 nd and 5 th years of cohabitation and decreased throughout the relationship. In addition, lower levels of marital adjustment were found in those with higher frequencies of infidelity.
These results lead to the association between infidelity and the level of maturity that is expressed in the age and in the length of relationship that can decrease the infidelity behavior. Thus, when couples deepen their level of knowledge, both personal and relational, they may present greater resources to cope with the difficulties of the relationship, which reflects in better levels of marital adjustment. In this way, it can be thought that infidelity can be used by some as a way to address difficulties in the relationship, such as an escape from problems and seeking satisfaction in another relationship, leading to the idea of infidelity as a symptom of low marital adjustment.
It can be seen that the studies of the 's and 's tended towards a dichotomy between sexual and emotional infidelity and different results for men and women. The current results demonstrate that we are dealing with a phenomenon that encompasses a complexity of behaviors: emotional, virtual and sexual.
However, there is a single phenomenon that is difficult to divide into types. Although men and women do not present identical results, and men stand out for seeking the sexual aspect and reasons related to this, in essence both have motivations linked to dissatisfaction with the relationship and seek both emotional and sexual behaviors. In this way, perhaps what differentiates the genders is more related to what infidelity represents for each of them. Although the importance of the theme for the marital relationship is perceived, the data indicate that the maj ority of the people did not talk about the topic with their partner and Since infidelity refers to a breach of agreement, and as each couple establishes this agreement, there is scope for the subjectivity of each loving relationship.
Thus, it is important that couples feel encouraged to communicate their desires and expectations in their relationship, because simply choosing an open relationship does not guarantee higher levels of marital satisfaction, according to the results of this study.
This work aimed to describe infidelity behaviors for a general Brazilian sample. However, the theme is very exciting and it is worth investigating the experience of infidelity in other samples with specific particularities, such as single people, those in the dating phase and those of different sexual orientations, not with the purpose of knowing the differences, but to investigate the hypothesis that the phenomenon of infidelity is not exclusive to a certain type of conjugal configuration.
Barta, W. Motivations for infidelity in heterosexual dating couples: The roles of gender, personality differences, and sociosexual orientation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22 3Beaulieu-Pelletier, G. The role of attachment avoidance in extradyadic sex. Brofenbrenner, U. A ecologia do desenvolvimento humano: Experimentos naturais e planejados. Busby, D. A revision of the dyadic adjustment scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: Construct hierarchyand multidimensional scales.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21 3Drigotas, S. An investment model prediction of dating infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 3Glass, S. Sex differences in type of extramarital involvement and marital dissatisfaction.
Justifications for extramarital relationships- The association between attitudes, behaviors, and gender. The Journal of Sex Research, 29 3Goldenberg, M. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Record. Revista de Estudos Feministas, 18 3Por que homens e mulheres traem? Greeley, A. Marital Infidelity. Society, 31 4Guadagno, R. Sex Differences in Jealousy: An evolutionary perspective on online infidelity.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40 10Haack, K. Infldelid de. Psicologia em Revista, 19 2Hertlein, K. Two roads diverging in a wood: The current state of infidelity research and treatment. Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, 6Hollist, C. Portuguese translation and validation of the Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38 1Kemer, G. Gender differences, infidelity, dyadic trust, and jealousy among married Turkish individuals.
Current Psychology. Lalasz, C. Understanding the relationship between gender and extradyadic relations: The mediating role of sensation seeking on intentions to engage in sexual infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 50 7Lusterman, D. Infidelity: A survival guide. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger. Martins, A. Moller, N. Defining infidelity in research and couple counseling: A qualitative study.
Olabuenaga, J. Palencia, A. Desarrollo del inventario multidimensional de infidelidad IMIN. Pittman, F. Scheeren, P. Thornton, V.Rethinking infidelity ... a talk for anyone who has ever loved - Esther Perel
What is infidelity? Perceptions based on biological sex and personality. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 4Wiederman, M. The Journal of Sex Research, 34 2University students' Perceptions of, and explanations for, infidelity : The development of the infidelity questionnaire IFNQ.
Social Behavior and Personality, 34 6Zhang, N. Sexual infidelity in China: Prevalence and gender-specific correlates.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41 4Zordan, E. E-mail: pscheeren gmail. Services on Demand Journal. Abstract This article aims to investigate the experience of infidelity in married or cohabiting men and women, considering the frequency, types of behaviors and reasons for infidelity. Method Participants Participants of the study were people, women Instruments Sociodemographic and Relationship Data Questionnaire.
Data Collection Procedures To ensure data confidentiality and anonymity, the participants were invited to participate in the online survey through the Qualtrics database www. Data Analysis Procedures Data were analyzed based on descriptive analyzes of frequency, means and standard deviation of the variables collected in the study considering the results for men and women. Results Infidelity: Incidence and Frequency To understand how infidelity was experienced in the couples of this sample, Table 1 presents the values for the variables related to infidelity with calculations of the differences for men and women.
Yes 20 Infidelity: Unfaithful Behaviors With regard to the behaviors of infidelity, the participants indicated, from the list of 23 behaviors measured by the IBQ, those that had occurred in their current relationship.
Exchanging sexual caresses with the person 1 0 0. Being in love with the person 0. Starting to work later to stay longer in the company of a co-worker 0. Stop doing something with your partner to spend more time with the person 0. Using apps or social network sites to find other people 0. In moments of leisure with your partner, being occupied talking on the phone or exchanging messages with the person 0.
Not revealing being in a serious relationship to another person you have met 0. Expressing sexual attraction for the person and not for your partner 0.
Exchanging messages of sexual content with the person over the internet 0. Seeking to do activities to spend more time in the presence of the person 0.