Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity
Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitio...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) N.J.), 2017-09, Vol.36 (3), p.434-446 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 446 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 434 |
container_title | Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) |
container_volume | 36 |
creator | Guitar, Amanda E. Geher, Glenn Kruger, Daniel J. Garcia, Justin R. Fisher, Maryanne L. Fitzgerald, Carey J. |
description | Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitions and understanding of different
types
of infidelity. The current research used a mixed-methodology approach to explore the epistemological nature of sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 1, 379 participants provided open-ended definitions of what they believe constitutes sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 2, responses were then coded by a different group of outside raters to examine overall themes in the definitions provided and how prototypical these definitions were for each type of infidelity. Results identified and examined the definitions with the highest mean ratings in terms of how well they represented
emotional infidelity
or
sexual infidelity
. Overall, both men and women had more consistency in their definitions of what constituted sexual infidelity than on what constituted emotional infidelity, suggesting that emotional infidelity is a more vague and complex concept than sexual infidelity. Additionally, when asked to define sexual and emotional infidelity, many participants focused on specific behaviors (including deception), but when asked to consider the types of infidelity as distinct from each other, participants focused on feelings. By exploring how individuals actually define these constructs, these data provide a more accurate and rich depiction of how individuals define acts of infidelity than currently exists in the relationship literature. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1931551587</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A501633170</galeid><sourcerecordid>A501633170</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c520t-101260083e84b2c8cdee042a0f2808f8e295f7685ab8201b9d6f3383ff625a753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl9rFDEUxQdRsFY_QN8KguBD6r35M5PBp9rWulAQ2vocsjM3symzmZpkoP32zbpCu7CC5CE3N78TkpNTVUcIJwjQfEnIUUoGWLNWCs7kq-oAW1Ez2QjxutQga4YC4W31LqU7AGzqtj2ovp6T88GH4diG_vjcp1zq2afVpnVDD7Md_-xcrKfsp1BWi-B8T6PPj--rN86OiT78nQ-rX98vbs9-sKufl4uz0yvWKQ6ZISCvAbQgLZe8011PBJJbcFyDdpp4q1xTa2WXmgMu2752QmjhXM2VbZQ4rD5uz72P0--ZUjZ30xzLXZIpT0SlUOnmmRrsSMYHN-Vou7VPnTlVxRchsIFCsT3UQIGiHadQzCjtHf5kD19GT2vf7RV83hEUJtNDHuycklncXP8_--1yl_30gl2RHfMqTeO8-ZW0C-IW7OKUUiRn7qNf2_hoEMwmK2abFVMUZpMVI4uGbzWpsGGg-MLhf4qeAHesulQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1931551587</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity</title><source>SpringerLink</source><creator>Guitar, Amanda E. ; Geher, Glenn ; Kruger, Daniel J. ; Garcia, Justin R. ; Fisher, Maryanne L. ; Fitzgerald, Carey J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Guitar, Amanda E. ; Geher, Glenn ; Kruger, Daniel J. ; Garcia, Justin R. ; Fisher, Maryanne L. ; Fitzgerald, Carey J.</creatorcontrib><description>Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitions and understanding of different
types
of infidelity. The current research used a mixed-methodology approach to explore the epistemological nature of sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 1, 379 participants provided open-ended definitions of what they believe constitutes sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 2, responses were then coded by a different group of outside raters to examine overall themes in the definitions provided and how prototypical these definitions were for each type of infidelity. Results identified and examined the definitions with the highest mean ratings in terms of how well they represented
emotional infidelity
or
sexual infidelity
. Overall, both men and women had more consistency in their definitions of what constituted sexual infidelity than on what constituted emotional infidelity, suggesting that emotional infidelity is a more vague and complex concept than sexual infidelity. Additionally, when asked to define sexual and emotional infidelity, many participants focused on specific behaviors (including deception), but when asked to consider the types of infidelity as distinct from each other, participants focused on feelings. By exploring how individuals actually define these constructs, these data provide a more accurate and rich depiction of how individuals define acts of infidelity than currently exists in the relationship literature.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1046-1310</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1936-4733</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adultery ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Geriatric psychology ; Infidelity ; Interpersonal relations ; Psychological aspects ; Psychology ; Social aspects ; Social Sciences ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2017-09, Vol.36 (3), p.434-446</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 Springer</rights><rights>Current Psychology is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c520t-101260083e84b2c8cdee042a0f2808f8e295f7685ab8201b9d6f3383ff625a753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c520t-101260083e84b2c8cdee042a0f2808f8e295f7685ab8201b9d6f3383ff625a753</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Guitar, Amanda E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geher, Glenn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kruger, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia, Justin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Maryanne L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgerald, Carey J.</creatorcontrib><title>Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity</title><title>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Curr Psychol</addtitle><description>Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitions and understanding of different
types
of infidelity. The current research used a mixed-methodology approach to explore the epistemological nature of sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 1, 379 participants provided open-ended definitions of what they believe constitutes sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 2, responses were then coded by a different group of outside raters to examine overall themes in the definitions provided and how prototypical these definitions were for each type of infidelity. Results identified and examined the definitions with the highest mean ratings in terms of how well they represented
emotional infidelity
or
sexual infidelity
. Overall, both men and women had more consistency in their definitions of what constituted sexual infidelity than on what constituted emotional infidelity, suggesting that emotional infidelity is a more vague and complex concept than sexual infidelity. Additionally, when asked to define sexual and emotional infidelity, many participants focused on specific behaviors (including deception), but when asked to consider the types of infidelity as distinct from each other, participants focused on feelings. By exploring how individuals actually define these constructs, these data provide a more accurate and rich depiction of how individuals define acts of infidelity than currently exists in the relationship literature.</description><subject>Adultery</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Geriatric psychology</subject><subject>Infidelity</subject><subject>Interpersonal relations</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>1046-1310</issn><issn>1936-4733</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl9rFDEUxQdRsFY_QN8KguBD6r35M5PBp9rWulAQ2vocsjM3symzmZpkoP32zbpCu7CC5CE3N78TkpNTVUcIJwjQfEnIUUoGWLNWCs7kq-oAW1Ez2QjxutQga4YC4W31LqU7AGzqtj2ovp6T88GH4diG_vjcp1zq2afVpnVDD7Md_-xcrKfsp1BWi-B8T6PPj--rN86OiT78nQ-rX98vbs9-sKufl4uz0yvWKQ6ZISCvAbQgLZe8011PBJJbcFyDdpp4q1xTa2WXmgMu2752QmjhXM2VbZQ4rD5uz72P0--ZUjZ30xzLXZIpT0SlUOnmmRrsSMYHN-Vou7VPnTlVxRchsIFCsT3UQIGiHadQzCjtHf5kD19GT2vf7RV83hEUJtNDHuycklncXP8_--1yl_30gl2RHfMqTeO8-ZW0C-IW7OKUUiRn7qNf2_hoEMwmK2abFVMUZpMVI4uGbzWpsGGg-MLhf4qeAHesulQ</recordid><startdate>20170901</startdate><enddate>20170901</enddate><creator>Guitar, Amanda E.</creator><creator>Geher, Glenn</creator><creator>Kruger, Daniel J.</creator><creator>Garcia, Justin R.</creator><creator>Fisher, Maryanne L.</creator><creator>Fitzgerald, Carey J.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IBG</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170901</creationdate><title>Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity</title><author>Guitar, Amanda E. ; Geher, Glenn ; Kruger, Daniel J. ; Garcia, Justin R. ; Fisher, Maryanne L. ; Fitzgerald, Carey J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c520t-101260083e84b2c8cdee042a0f2808f8e295f7685ab8201b9d6f3383ff625a753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adultery</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Geriatric psychology</topic><topic>Infidelity</topic><topic>Interpersonal relations</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Guitar, Amanda E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geher, Glenn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kruger, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia, Justin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Maryanne L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgerald, Carey J.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale in Context : Biography</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Guitar, Amanda E.</au><au>Geher, Glenn</au><au>Kruger, Daniel J.</au><au>Garcia, Justin R.</au><au>Fisher, Maryanne L.</au><au>Fitzgerald, Carey J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity</atitle><jtitle>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</jtitle><stitle>Curr Psychol</stitle><date>2017-09-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>434</spage><epage>446</epage><pages>434-446</pages><issn>1046-1310</issn><eissn>1936-4733</eissn><abstract>Researchers studying interpersonal relationships often distinguish between “sexual infidelity” and “emotional infidelity.” Yet, it remains largely unclear whether and how individuals actually conceptualize these constructs in their own lives, and how men and women vary, if at all, in their definitions and understanding of different
types
of infidelity. The current research used a mixed-methodology approach to explore the epistemological nature of sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 1, 379 participants provided open-ended definitions of what they believe constitutes sexual infidelity and emotional infidelity. In Study 2, responses were then coded by a different group of outside raters to examine overall themes in the definitions provided and how prototypical these definitions were for each type of infidelity. Results identified and examined the definitions with the highest mean ratings in terms of how well they represented
emotional infidelity
or
sexual infidelity
. Overall, both men and women had more consistency in their definitions of what constituted sexual infidelity than on what constituted emotional infidelity, suggesting that emotional infidelity is a more vague and complex concept than sexual infidelity. Additionally, when asked to define sexual and emotional infidelity, many participants focused on specific behaviors (including deception), but when asked to consider the types of infidelity as distinct from each other, participants focused on feelings. By exploring how individuals actually define these constructs, these data provide a more accurate and rich depiction of how individuals define acts of infidelity than currently exists in the relationship literature.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1046-1310 |
ispartof | Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2017-09, Vol.36 (3), p.434-446 |
issn | 1046-1310 1936-4733 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1931551587 |
source | SpringerLink |
subjects | Adultery Behavioral Science and Psychology Geriatric psychology Infidelity Interpersonal relations Psychological aspects Psychology Social aspects Social Sciences Studies |
title | Defining and Distinguishing Sexual and Emotional Infidelity |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T08%3A33%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Defining%20and%20Distinguishing%20Sexual%20and%20Emotional%20Infidelity&rft.jtitle=Current%20psychology%20(New%20Brunswick,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Guitar,%20Amanda%20E.&rft.date=2017-09-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=434&rft.epage=446&rft.pages=434-446&rft.issn=1046-1310&rft.eissn=1936-4733&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12144-016-9432-4&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA501633170%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1931551587&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A501633170&rfr_iscdi=true |