Infidelity

**__ Infidelity __** Infidelity, is defined by Drigotas and Barta (2001) in the context of a dyadic or two person relationship, as a partner’s violation of norms regulating the level of emotional or physical intimacy with people outside of the relationship. (Drigotas &Barta 2001). Infidelity has various motivations in cluding the level of commitment, differing genders, as well as differing ages. Although infidelity is thought of in a purely physical sense, it embodies not only the physical but also the emotional. Infidelity and its residual effects (i.e. lying, feeling of betrayal, lack of trust) is the leading cause of divorce in America. ** Age and Incidence of Infidelity ** Although the estimates vary greatly many studies have been do ne to measure the levels of infidelity across the variables of gender and age. In a 1994 study undertaken by Laumann and Gagnon and referenced by Drigotas and Barta (2001), spanning five age groups, it was found the that 37% of men and 12% of women born between 1933 and 1942 reported having been unfaithful and among people born between 1953 and 1974, the figures were 27.6% for men and 26.2% for women (Drigotas & Barta, 2001). Promiscuity is often thought of and associated with the college age group, so it fits that the infidelity will then permeate college relationships at a higher rate. According to Lewandowski and Ackerman(2006)“Although estimates vary, in a study of college dating relationships, Wiederman and Hurd(1999) found that 68% of women and 75% of men had been involved in some form of extradyadic activity”(Lewandowski & Ackerman, 2006). There is an apparent relationship between age and infidelity with the younger generations participating in infidelity at much higher rates. Factors that may contribute to this phenomenon include the element youth and the attractiveness associated with it, as well as the new ways to participate in infidelity such as cybersex.
 * Sade Ojediran **

** Emotional versus Physical Infidelity ** Physical infidelity is the most acknowledged form of infidelity and can be defined as a partner engaging in sexual relations with a third party outside of the dyadic relationship. Emotional infidelity can be defined as having engaging in an emotional connection with a third party. As stated by Nannini and Meyers (2000), “Emotional infidelity was assumed to be inferred from the partner spending time and exploring common interests with the third party.” (Nannini and Meyers, 2000). Although emotional infidelity may not be sexual in nature the effects can prove to be just as destructive and in some cases even more. Greater distress following emotional infidelity was found for those people who had idealized views about romance and who felt that sexual intercourse was not the sole basis of the relationship or the source of their personal pleasure (Cann, Magnum & Wells, 2001).Women are stereotyped as being emotional, and are biologically motivated to seek a mate who will pro vide for their offspring, rather than a simply an attractive mate to procreate with. Therefore it follows that emotional infidelity will be more distressing to women than to men. In a 1992 study conducted by Buss et. al, and referenced by Nannini and Meyers(2000), measured the differences in reactions between the sexes based on the types of infidelity and found that “Men demonstrated a greater heart rate and electrodermal activity in response to sexual infidelity, and women's electrodermal activity was accelerated in response to emotional infidelity.”(Nannini & Meyers,2000).I n instances of emotional infidelity the individuals whose partner’s are unfaithful, tend to take on more of the responsibility for their partner’s actions. They often blame their own emotionally unavailable actions for their partner seeking fulfillment elsewhere. However on the contrary, individuals are less likely to blame themselves or take responsibility for their partner’s sexual infidelity. According to Nannini and Meyers(2000), “It appears that in violating the sexual exclusivity of the romantic relationship, unfaithful partners force their mates to relinquish any accountability that they might otherwise have felt in the situation” (Nannini & Meyers, 2000). Physical fidelity is a seemingly clear cut rule of most relationships, therefore easier to regulate. However emotional infidelity varies in form and degree which makes it harder to decipher and leads to the violated partner blaming themselves.



** Differences in Infidelity Based on Gende **** r ** Both men and women engage in infidelity, however they vary in both method and frequency. Men have been found to be motivated sexually in their infidelity. Men are more likely to engage in “one night stands” when being unfaithful, which often void of emotional connection. Women on the other hand choose to engage in emotional infidelity to fill the void of absent emotional connection in their relationships. Drigotas and Barta(2001) found that unfaithful women are more likely to be dissatisfied in their current relationship, while unfaithful men are dissatisfied at lower rates. (Drigotas &Barta, 2001). Commitment and loyalty prove to be major factors in the differing reactions of men and women to spousal infidelity. “Sexual infidelity would raise questions about paternity, and would cause the male to question investing resources in support of the offspring. Females, on the other hand, should be more upset by emotional infidelity that might signal a lack of commitment by the male to the long term success of the relationship and any offspring” (Cann et. al, 2001). Although men engage in infidelity at higher rates than women this gap is beginning to narrow (Lewandowski & Ackerman, 2006).

** Infidelity and Divorce ** Infidelity is one of the main causes for divorce across the globe. According to Sweeney and Horwitz (2001), “Indeed sexual exclusivity may be the strongest norm governing marriage, with nearly 99 percent of married persons expecting their spouses to be sexually faithful and the same percentage assuming that their partner expects sexual exclusivity of them” (Sweeny & Horwitz, 2001). With fidelity being such a widely held norm, it seems inevitable for divorce to follow however other factors may influence the decision to divorce. As stated by Drigotas and Barta (2001), “Men were more likely than women to see infidelity as a reason for divorce.” (Drigotas & Barta, 2002) This goes back to the fact that there is men find sexual infidelity to be more distressing. “However, the likelihood of a woman (but not a man) seeking divorce covaried with the discrepancy between partners' reported mate values (i.e., to the extent that a female partner was more attractive than her spouse, she was more likely to end a relationship following her partner's infidelity).” (Drigotas & Barta, 2001). Also based in evolutionary theory, is the fact the women will seek a new partner to care for her and her offspring only if she is attractive enough to get another one. This is evidenced by the fact that older women are less likely to seek divorce even after infidelity because, their level of attractiveness diminishes as they get older. Even after divorce infidelity can prove to cause distress. “While divorce tends to be stressful for all, the highly charged moral climate of adultery suggests that divorces involving the violation of the norm of spousal fidelity will be especially contentious and productive of men's post-divorce standard of living increases distress” (Sweeney and Horwitz, 2001). This happening can cause the violated former spouse to feel even more betrayed.

** References ** Drigotas, S., & Barta W. (2001) //The Cheating Heart: Scientific Explorations of Infidelity//. Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 10, No. 5. Retrieved from: []

Sweeney, M. & Horwitz, A. (2001) // Infidelity, Initiation, and the Emotional Climate of Divorce: Are There Implications for Mental Health? // . Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 42, No. 3. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3090216

Cann, A., Magnum, J., & Wells, M. Jessica L. (2001) //Distress in Response to Relationship Infidelity: The Roles of Gender and Attitudes about Relationships.// The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 38, No. 3. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3813174

Nannini, D., & Meyers, L. (2000) //Jealousy in Sexual and Emotional Infidelity: An Alternative to the Evolutionary Explanation//**.** The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 37, No. 2. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3813596

Lewandowski, G. & Ackerman, R. (2006) //Something’s Missing: Need Fulfillment and Self-Expansion as Predictors of Susceptibility to Infidelity.// The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.146, No. 4