3.6 Predicting infidelity
To date we have been examining both the theories and research that seek to explain why human beings might engage in infidelity – non-sanctioned extra-dyadic sexual and/or emotional relationships versus engaging in consensual non-monogamy or monogamy. Much of the research we have considered is concerned with the function or individual benefits that accrue from different types of mating behaviour – i.e. theoretically why someone might cheat. A different kind of question is to ask empirically what factors might predict infidelity. There is a long-standing body of research which has used survey data to try to do exactly this. Such research is useful in counselling practice as it can help counsellors understand what might be ‘vulnerability factors’ for those in a couple relationship.
The table below is taken from Fincham and May (2017) and provides the authors’ summary of knowledge about infidelity predictors.
Demographics | |
Gender | Males > females; however gender gap is closing |
Minority status | African American > Whites |
Education, age, income | All have been related to infidelity but no consistent pattern of findings |
Individual | |
Personality | Neuroticism, narcissism |
Prior infidelity experience | Infidelity in family of origin; Previously engaged in infidelity |
Number of sex partners | Greater number of sex partners before marriage predicts infidelity |
Alcohol | Problematic drinking, alcohol dependence, illicit drug use |
Attachment | Insecure attachment > secure attachment |
Psychological distress | Greater psychological distress associated with infidelity |
Attitudes | Permissive attitude toward sex; Decoupling of sex and love, closeness; Willingness to have casual sex |
Relationship | |
Relationship dissatisfaction | Dissatisfied > satisfied; Some evidence of bidirectional effects |
Commitment | Lower commitment > higher commitment |
Cohabitation | Prior nonmarital cohabitation > marital cohabitation only; Premarital cohabitation with spouse > no premarital habitation |
Assortative mating | Partners of same religion, levels of education less likely to cheat |
Context | |
Work | Number of days spent traveling for work related to infidelity; Job requiring personal contact with potential sex partners; Larger fraction of opposite sex co-workers in work place related to infidelity for men; Both spouses employed associated with less cheating; One working spouse with other a stay at home spouse related to increased infidelity |
Religion | Less infidelity is associated with: Attendance at religious services; Viewing the Bible as the literal word of God; Prayer focused on partner well-being |
Internet | Given existence of sites that facilitate infidelity, casual sex, it is likely that visiting such sites promotes infidelity |
Activity 3.6 Infidelity vulnerabilities
After you have looked at the table, try and answer the following questions:
3.5 Functions and types of affairs