Use 'Print preview' to check the number of pages and printer settings.
Print functionality varies between browsers.
Printable page generated Wednesday, 21 January 2026, 11:52 PM
1. Reflecting on the meanings of affairs
1. Reflecting on the meanings of affairs
The word ‘infidelity’ is a value-laden one. A clue to this lies in the etymology of the word. The Latin origin of ‘infidelity’ is a word that translates as ‘not faithful’: the idea that infidelity involves the immoral abandonment of a faith or a promise. Synonyms include ‘unfaithfulness’ and ‘cheating’ – which have similar connotations – and ‘adultery’ which has a root meaning of ‘corrupted’. The web of meaning around the construct of infidelity is important to note; it can be remarkably difficult when the very terms are so value-laden not to fall into the trap of using language that is far from neutral.
Now try Activity 1.1, to explore this idea further.
Activity 1.1 Metaphors for infidelity
Think of an image or metaphor for infidelity and its impact on relationships.
Discussion
As an example of the value-laden meanings around the term, in our research we have been struck by how hard it is to find words to describe people impacted by infidelity: the temptation is to use words that evoke guilt and crime, such as ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ (Moller and Vossler, 2015; Vossler and Moller, 2014).
The phrases ‘the person who engaged in the act of infidelity’ and ‘the person whose partner engaged in the act of infidelity’ are cumbersome but at least they are more neutral. In any event, as you go through this course, we would ask you to try to use value-free language and approach the material in a spirit of open inquiry while recognising that this may be very difficult for all of us to do.
Continue to Section 1.1 Unpacking personal meanings around infidelity.
1.1 Unpacking personal meanings around infidelity
Infidelity is a value-laden topic in our culture and it can also be very meaningful on a personal level. Because infidelity is common (more on this below) it may well be something you and/or people you care for may have directly experienced. If this is the case, it may be that the topic of infidelity stirs up strong emotions or distressing memories.
If infidelity is a personally meaningful topic for you, please do remember to look after yourself as you study this course. You might also want to consider trying to ‘bracket’ your own responses as you go. ‘Bracketing’ is a term used in a form of qualitative research inquiry called phenomenology, which involves an observer of a phenomenon (here this is you as you think about infidelity) trying to set aside their judgements so as to open themselves up to a fuller experience of the phenomenon.
Activity 1.2 asks you to engage in a bracketing exercise in which you try to identify your views and feelings about infidelity. Noticing your own thoughts and feelings about the topic is potentially useful – it may be particularly difficult to hold onto a spirit of open inquiry when focussed on this topic. In addition, bracketing is a form of personal reflexivity which is encouraged for counsellors and psychotherapists (Donati, 2016)!
Activity 1.2 Personal meanings of infidelity
What do you think or feel about infidelity? Spend at least five minutes writing some notes to capture this. Try to make sure you address the following questions:
- Do you think monogamy is important in couple relationships?
- How do you define infidelity?
- What is your view about what is OK or not OK for a couple in a relationship?
- What do you think has influenced your thinking and feeling about infidelity/importance (or not) of monogamy?
1.2 Prevalence of infidelity
How prevalent (common or frequent) do you think infidelity is? Activity 1.3 explores this question.
Activity 1.3 Estimating infidelity prevalence
In the box below, give your estimate for the percentage of adults that you think have affairs in their lifetime, then click ‘Update’. The graph will show the average value across the cohort of people who have completed this activity.
Discussion
Depending on the way infidelity is defined and the sample, research suggests that lifetime prevalence for infidelity is between 15% and 70% (Hertlein et al., 2005) or 1.2% to 85.5% (Luo et al., 2010). A more conservative estimate, based on nationally representative random sample studies suggests a lifetime prevalence for married partners engaging in extradyadic sexual intercourse of up to 25% (Blow and Hartnett, 2005b).
However, reliable estimates of prevalence of a phenomenon rely on having a good definition and there is considerable debate in the literature about how to define infidelity. There is also debate in the counselling room, as not only may partners in a relationship differ in how they define infidelity (Hertlein et al., 2005) but also couple counsellors have different understandings of infidelity (e.g., Bagarozzi, 2008 vs. Whisman and Wagers, 2005).
The apparent confusion around definitions is important theoretically and empirically but it is also important for therapeutic practice with couples in distress (Blow and Hartnett, 2005a), something which is obviously important for this course. For this reason, it makes sense to look further at definitions next.
Next continue to Session 2 Defining infidelity.