ANTICIPATION OF MARITAL DISSOLUTION AS A
CONSEQUENCE OF SPOUSAL INFIDELITY
Todd K.
Shackelford
Florida Atlantic
University
David M. Buss
The University
of Texas at Austin
Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 14, (6) 793-808.
ABSTRACT
This study examined five sources of spousal and
relationship costs that might facilitate heightened anticipations of seeking
divorce as a consequence of spousal infidelity. Three separate data sources
were employed. Fist, 214 participants reported their satisfaction with the
marriage and their anticipations of seeking divorce as a consequence of spousal
infidelity. Second, participants provided information on their spouse's
personality and behaviors their spouse performed that upset them. Third,
couples were interviewed by two interviewers, who subsequently provided
independent ratings of each participant's personality, mate value, and
attractiveness, as well as ratings of the quality of the couple's interaction.
Greater anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse were reported by women
higher in mate value than their husbands; women married to emotionally unstable
men; men reporting lower marital satisfaction; and women in couples displaying
greater conflict during the interview. Discussion locates results within an
evolutionary psychological perspective and addresses methodological issues of
this study.
KEY WORDS
evolutionary psychology
infidelity marital dissolution
We thank the journal's reviewers for their many
helpful suggestions on earlier versions of this paper. Address correspondence
to Todd K. Shackelford, Florida Atlantic University. Department of Psychology,
2912 College Avenue, Davies FL
INTRODUCTION
Infidelity may have no rival in disrupting a
marriage. Cross-culturally, an actual or suspected sexual infidelity by a woman
is the leading cause of wife battering and wife homicide (Daly & Wilson,
1988). Anguish, depression, anger, and humiliation are among the emotional
experiences of the partner of someone who has been unfaithful (Buunk & Van
Driel, 1989; Lawson, 1988). Of the 43 causes of divorce compiled by Betzig
(1989) in her ethnographic study of 160 cultures, a spouse's infidelity was the
single most frequently cited cause.
Studies of divorce in western countries suggest that
between 25 and 50 percent of divorcees cite a spouse's infidelity as the
primary cause of the divorce (Kelly & Conley, 1987). Estimates of marital
infidelity range from 26 to 70 percent for women and from 33 to 75 percent for
men (Buss, 1994). The discrepancy between the ranges of estimates of divorce
due to infidelity and estimates of infidelity suggests that although some
marriages continue following a discovered infidelity, some marriages do not
(Buunk, 1987).
The divorce process often enervates the
psychological, emotional, and physiological health of the parting spouses
(Kitson & Sussman, 1982). Despite the tremendous costs involved, many
couples divorce following detection of infidelity. That so many couples do
divorce following the revelation or discovery of infidelity attests to the
perceived costs that accompany infidelity.
Given the prevalence of and costs associated with
infidelity and with divorce, an important empirical issue is what
differentiates couples who divorce from those who stay together; following infidelity.
Additionally, infidelity and dissolution as a consequence of infidelity are
important issues from several theoretical perspectives. From an evolutionary
psychological perspective (e.g. Buss, 1995), infidelity signals the diversion
of important reproductive resources. From an equity theoretical perspective (
e.g. Messick & Cook, 1983), infidelity may signal serious inequities in a
relationship. From an investment model perspective (e.g. Rusbult, 1980),
infidelity signals lack of commitment to a relationship.
It could be argued from each of these perspectives
that the decision to divorce as a consequence of infidelity occasions a
cost-benefit analysis by the betrayed partner in which the perceived costs and
benefits of remaining married are weighed against those of divorce. The more
costly a marriage is perceived to be, the less incentive the betrayed partner
has to remain married to an adulterous spouse. This study tests this general
proposal using a sample of recently married couples.
To assess the salience of infidelity as a potential
cause of divorce, we developed an instrument in which each spouse estimates the
probability that he or she would seek divorce if his or her partner engaged in
the following activities: flirting with someone else, passionately kissing
some- one else, romantically dating someone else, having a one-night stand, a
brief affair, and a serious affair. Following Buunk (1987), we assume that
these types of infidelity reflect different degrees of spousal cost-infliction.
A one-night stand, but not a passionate kiss, for example, places the betrayed
partner at risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease from the spouse's
lover.
Anticipations of seeking divorce as a consequence of
spousal infidelity are clearly not assessments of actual divorces filed in
response to spousal infidelity. We have no reason to suspect, however, that
estimates of the likelihood of divorcing an unfaithful spouse will consistently
underestimate or overestimate actual divorce in response to spousal infidelity.
Participants making these estimations may strive to appear intolerant of a
spouse's philanderings rather than someone the spouse can 'walk all over' and,
at the same time, strive to appear forgiving, compassionate, and kind, the
hallmarks of a desirable mate (Buss, 1989a). Additionally, several longitudinal
studies of marriage (e.g. Gottman & Levenson, 1992) have documented that
anticipated dissolution reliably predicts actual dissolution.
The use of newlywed rather than longer-married
couples to study anticipated dissolution as a consequence of infidelity has
several advantages. Divorce is most likely to occur in the first few years of
marriage, for a variety of reasons, including infidelity (Betzig, 1989; Buss,
1994). Addition- ally, the early years of marriage are marked by a time of
relational negotiation, wherein each partner seeks to establish what is
acceptable and unacceptable intra-relationship and extra-relationship behavior
(Veroff & Feld, 1970). As spouses successfully negotiate their marital
expectations, conflict generated by the negotiation process diminishes, as does
the likelihood of dissolution as a consequence of such conflict.
This study examines five sources of spousal and
relationship costs that might facilitate increased estimates of seeking divorce
as a consequence of spousal infidelity: discrepancies in the attractiveness and
mate value of the spouses; spousal personality; spousal sources of upset and
irritation; marital dissatisfaction; and independent assessments of the
couple's interaction quality. Here we present specific predictions about the
relationships between these sources of costs and anticipations of divorcing an
unfaithful spouse.
Relative mate value refers to the relative
desirability of the two partners on the 'mating market' (Buss, 1994). In the
present study, two interviewers independently assessed each spouse's mate value
and attractiveness. Where a discrepancy exists, we expect that the partner
higher in relative value will provide higher likelihood estimates of seeking
divorce as a consequence of spousal infidelity. The rationale for this
prediction is that the more valuable partner incurs greater costs than the less
valuable partner by marriage to the current spouse. These greater costs include
opportunity costs associated with foregone mating arrangements with a more
valuable partner (Buss, 1994; Rusbult & Buunk, 1993).
A second source of costs is related to a spouse's
personality characteristics. The five-factor model of personality (Goldberg,
1981) proposes that five major dimensions capture the bulk of significant
individual differences in personality. These dimensions are surgency,
agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness/intellect.
Men and women scoring low on agreeableness,
emotional stability, and openness/intellect are especially likely to inflict a
variety of costs on their spouses (e.g. Buss, 1991). Buss (1991) found that men
and women married to spouses who display low agreeableness, low emotional
stability, and low openness/intellect complain that their spouses are
condescending, jealous, possessive, dependent, neglectful, unreliable,
unfaithful, sexualising of others, abusive of alcohol, emotionally constricted,
and self-centered.
If anticipated dissolution following infidelity
occasions a cost-benefit analysis of remaining married to vs. divorcing an
unfaithful spouse, then men and women married to disagreeable, emotionally
unstable people of low openness/intellect should anticipate greater likelihoods
of divorce. This is expected because spouses displaying these undesirable
personality characteristics are especially likely to inflict a variety of costs
on their partners.
Spousal sources of upset provide relatively direct
assessments of the costs inflicted by a spouse (Buss, 1989b). According to
Buss's (1989b) strategic interference model, the degree of upset felt in
response to a particular spousal behavior tracks the perceived severity of the
costs inflicted by that behavior. We expect, therefore, that spousal sources of
upset will positively co-vary with anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful
spouse.
Marital satisfaction may track the costs and
benefits associated with a particular marriage (e.g. Shackelford & Buss,
1997). It could be argued from several theoretical perspectives (discussed
here) that anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse will involve an
assessment of the costs and benefits of the current marriage, weighed against
the costs and benefits of divorce. Greater perceived costs and fewer perceived
benefits should facilitate increased anticipations of divorcing an adulterous
spouse. We therefore expect that men and women who are less satisfied with
their marriage will anticipate greater likelihoods of divorcing an unfaithful
spouse.
In addition to general marital satisfaction,
assessments of sexual and emotional satisfaction were secured. These two facets
may be crucial, because of the known links between a woman's emotional
dissatisfaction and her likelihood of ending the relationship and a man's
sexual dissatisfaction and his likelihood of ending the relationship (Betzig,
1989). A man may be especially likely to anticipate divorcing an unfaithful
partner if he is sexually dissatisfied with the marriage. A woman, in contrast,
may be especially likely to anticipate divorcing an unfaithful partner if she
is emotionally dissatisfied with the marriage.
Two interviewers provided independent assessments of
the quality of the interaction between spouses. We expect that spouses whose
interactions manifest greater conflict will anticipate greater likelihoods of
divorcing an unfaithful partner. This is expected insofar as the couple's
interaction quality reflects the benefits and costs exchanged within the
marriage ( e.g. Karney & Bradbury, 1995). Spouses displaying greater
conflict may exchange fewer benefits and more costs, relative to spouses
displaying less conflict.
Method
Participants were 214 individuals, 107 men and 107
women, who had been married less than 1 year. Participant details were obtained
from the public records of marriage licenses issued within a large mid-western
county. All couples married within a 6-month period were contacted by letter
and invited to participate in this study. The majority of participants were
Caucasian. The mean age of the wives was 25.52 years (SD = 4.06; range 18-36).
The mean age of husbands was 26.79 (SD = 3.75, range 17-41). This was the first
marriage for 96 percent of the sample. Ninety-six percent of couples had no
children. Couples had been romantically involved for an average of 44 months
(SD = 24.64; range 1 month-S years). Two-thirds of couples had cohabited prior
to marriage for an average of 1.26 years (SD = 1.8 years). Thirty-two percent
of the sample reported that they were Protestant, 22 percent Catholic, about 4
percent Jewish, and 11 percent described their religion a& 'Other'.
Thirty-one percent of respondents reported no religious affiliation. The annual
income of husbands ranged from $0 (unemployed) to $87,000, averaging $21,000
(SD = $12,000). The annual income of wives ranged from $0 (unemployed) to
$68,000, averaging $16,400 (SD = $10,500). Husbands had completed an average of
16.47 years of education (SD = 2.71; range 11-23 years). Wives had completed an
average of 15.99 years of education (SD = 2.94; range 7-25 years).
Participants participated in three separate waves of
assessment. First, they received through the mail a battery of instruments to
be completed at home in their spare time. This battery contained a self-report
personality instrument assessing the five factors of personality (Goldberg,
1983).
Second, participants came to a laboratory testing
session approximately 1 week after receiving the battery of self-report
instruments. During this session, spouses were separated to preserve
independence and to prevent contamination due to discussion ( e.g. providing
higher estimates of marital satisfaction in the partner's presence than might
be provided in the partner's absence ). During this session, participants
completed the instrument in which they provided the probabilities that they
would end their marriage following each of the six forms of spousal infidelity.
Participants also reported on their partner's personality characteristics, and
completed a marital satisfaction instrument and an index of spousal sources of
upset and irritation.
Third, couples were interviewed toward the end of
the testing session by one male and one female interviewer drawn from a
rotating staff of 10 interviewers to secure independent information about each
spouse's mate value, attractive- ness, personality, and the quality of the
couple's interaction. Participants were asked a standard set of questions about
how they met, the nature of their relationship, sources of attraction, sources
of conflict, and their similarities and differences. Immediately following the
interview, the interviewers completed a standard instrument in which they
recorded their perceptions of the couple's interaction quality, and the
personality characteristics, mate value, and attractiveness of each
participant. Confidentiality of all responses was assured. Not even the
participant's spouse could obtain responses without written permission from the
relevant partner.
Participants completed a 40-item personality
instrument during the self- report phase of the study. This instrument
consisted of 40 bipolar adjective scales, eight each for the following major
personality dimensions (sample items in parentheses ): surgency (
dominant-submissive, bold-timid); agreeableness (selfless-selfish, warm-cold),
conscientiousness (reliable-undependable, hard- working-lazy), emotional
stability (secure-insecure, even-tempered-temperamental), and
openness/intellect (curious-uncurious, intelligent-stupid). The instructions
were: 'Please read the following list of characteristics and circle the number
that best describes you generally'. Each bipolar dimension was rated on a
7-point scale, with the high and low anchors positioned at opposite ends of the
scale. Over the midpoint (4) of each scale was positioned the term 'neither'.
The five personality dimensions were scored by summing the eight relevant
rating scales for each dimension. This instrument is based on the factor
loadings reported by Goldberg (1983). Alpha reliabilities for each 8-item
factor were as follows: surgency, alpha = .77; agreeableness, alpha = .62;
conscientiousness, alpha = .72; emotional stability, alpha = .73; and
openness/intellect, alpha = .63. Factor analyses of self-ratings,
spouse-ratings, and interviewer-ratings employing this measure cleanly
replicate the traditional 5-factor solution for all three data sources (see
Botwin et al., 1997).
A parallel version of the Goldberg (1983) instrument
was administered in a separate testing session to the spouses of each
participant. The instructions were: 'Please read the following list of
characteristics and circle the number which best describes your partner
generally'. The five personality dimensions were scored by summing the relevant
eight bipolar rating scales. Alpha reliabilities for each 8-item factor were as
follows: surgency, alpha = .74; agreeableness, alpha = .77; conscientiousness,
alpha = .74; emotional stability, alpha = .77; and openness/intellect, alpha =
.73.
Each couple was interviewed by a pair of trained
interviewers (male and female) drawn from a 10-member team. Each interview
lasted approximately 40 minutes, during which the couple was asked a standard
set of questions, including: 'How did you meet?', 'What are the similarities
and differences between you?', and 'What are the sources of conflict within
your marriage?'.
Immediately following each interview, the two
interviewers independently rated each participant on an observer-based version
of the Goldberg (1983) instrument. As with self-reports and spouse-reports, the
five personality dimensions were scored by summing the relevant eight bipolar
rating scales. The two interviewer-ratings of participants' personality
manifested significant agreement along each of the five dimensions (r = .55 for
surgency; .43 for agreeableness; .56 for conscientiousness; .48 for emotional
stability; and .51 for openness/intellect; all ps < .001, two-tailed), and
were therefore standardised and summed with unit weighting to form five more
reliable scores for each participant. Alpha reliabilities for each 8-item
factor for the composited interviewer-reports were as follows: surgency, alpha
= .90; agreeableness, alpha = .88; conscientiousness, alpha = .88; emotional
stability, alpha = .83; and openness/intellect, alpha = .92.
Self-ratings, spouse-ratings, and aggregate
interviewer-ratings were significantly correlated for each personality
dimension (mean rs: surgency, .52; agreeableness, .24; conscientiousness, .51;
emotional stability. .42; and open- ness/intellect, .31; all ps < .001, two-tailed),
and were therefore standardised and summed with unit-weighting to create a
composite score for each participant along each dimension. According to
classical true score theory ( e.g. Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), these total
composite scores can be expected to be more valid than scores generated from
anyone of the individual data sources, because true score variance will
cumulate, whereas the unique method variance associated with each individual
data source will not cumulate. Alpha reliabilities for each 8-item factor for
the total composites were as follows: surgency, alpha = .90; agreeableness,
alpha = .88; conscientiousness, alpha = .88; emotional stability, alpha = .83;
and openness/intellect, alpha = .92.
The Marital Satisfaction Survey (Shackelford &
Buss, 1997) consisted of 31 questions assessing the respondent's satisfaction
with various aspects of their marriage and their spouse. Three items were
employed in this study. General marital satisfaction was assessed by the item:
'Thinking about things all together, how would you say you feel about your
marriage?'. Sexual satisfaction was assessed by the item: 'How do you feel
about your sexual relationship?'. Emotional satisfaction was assessed by the
item: 'How do you feel about your spouse as a source of encouragement and
reassurance?'. All three items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 =
unsatisfied and 7 = extremely satisfied). A composite marital satisfaction
index was created by summing with unit weighting scores on the general, sexual,
and emotional satisfaction items (alpha = .72).
Two interviewers drawn from a 10-member team
provided independent assessments of the husband's and wife's 'overall
attractiveness as a potential mate (mate value to opposite sex)' on a scale
where 1 = extremely low and 7 = extremely high. A mate value discrepancy
variable was created by subtracting husband's from wife's interviewer-rated
mate value. The two interviewer- assessments of mate value correlated r = .53
(p < .001, two-tailed) and were averaged to create a more reliable measure
of mate value discrepancy. Interviewers also provided assessments of overall
physical attractiveness for each spouse. Overall attractiveness was assessed on
a 7-point scale anchored by 1 = overall unattractive and 7 = overall
attractive. The two interviewer- assessments of overall attractiveness
correlated r = .64 (ps < .001, two-tailed). An overall physical
attractiveness discrepancy variable was created using the same strategy
employed to create the mate value discrepancy variable.
During the laboratory testing session when the
husband and wife were physically separated, participants completed an
instrument entitled 'Sources of Irritation and Upset'. This instrument
contained the following instructions: 'Below is a list of things that spouses
sometimes do that irritate, annoy, anger, or upset each other. Please place an
'X' next to those acts your husband [wife] has performed within the past year
that have irritated, annoyed, angered, or upset you'. Following these instructions
were 147 acts or events, previously nominated by a separate panel (Buss, 1989b
).
Factor analysis (Buss, 1989b) revealed 15 factors
(sample acts in parentheses): condescending ('He treated me like I was stupid
or inferior'), jealous/possessive ('She acted jealous'; 'She was too possessive
of me'), neglecting/rejecting ('He would not spend enough time with me'),
abusive ('He hit me'; 'He verbally abused me'), unfaithful/dishonest ('She had
sex with another man'; 'She lied to me'), inconsiderate ('He did not help to
clean up'), physically self-absorbed ('She fussed too much with her
appearance'), moody ('He acted moody'), sexually withholding ('She refused to
have sex with me'), sexualises others ('He talked about how good-looking
another woman was'), abuses alcohol/emotionally constricted ('She drank too
much alcohol'; 'She hid all her emotions to act tough'), dishevelled ('He did
not take care of his appearance'), insulting of partner's appearance ('She told
me I was ugly'), sexually aggressive ('He tried to force sex acts on me'), and
self-centered ('She was self-centered').
Two interviewers drawn from a 10-member team
independently assessed the quality of the couple's interaction during the
interview. The assessments were recorded immediately following the interview.
Interviewers provided ratings on 7-point Likert scales in response to the
following probes: 'How much conflict is there within the relationship?' (1 =
little conflict, 7 = much conflict); 'How quarrelsome is the couple as a
couple?' (1 = not very quarrelsome, 7 = very quarrelsome); 'How co-operative is
the couple with each other?' (1 = not very co-operative, 7 = very
co-operative); and 'How agreeable is the couple as a couple?' (1 = not very
agreeable, 7 = very agreeable). The two interviewer assessments were
significantly correlated for all four interaction quality variables (conflict,
r = .35; quarrelsomeness, .39; cooperativeness, .27; and agreeableness, .38;
all ps < .001, two-tailed), and were therefore standardised and summed to form
more reliable composite indexes of couple conflict, quarrelsomeness,
cooperativeness, and agreeableness.
During the testing session in which the spouses were
separated from each other, each completed an instrument entitled 'Events with
Others' (Buss & Shackelford, 1997). In addition to providing a series of
other ratings, participants estimated the likelihood that they would end the
marriage as a consequence of each of six types of spousal infidelity: flirting,
passionately kissing, going on a romantic date, having a one-night stand,
having a brief affair, and having a serious affair. Participants provided
estimates on separate 11-point scales for each type of infidelity. The low end
of the scale indicated 0 percent, the high end indicated 100 percent, with the
scale marked off in 10 percent increments.
Results
Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for
the reported probabilities of ending the marriage in response to the six types
of spousal infidelity. The probabilities increased as a function of the
seriousness of the extramarital involvement.
Table 1
To determine whether the sexes differed in their
estimates of anticipated dissolution following the various spousal
infidelities, correlated-means t-tests were conducted for each of the
variables. No significant sex differences were found ( all ps > .05,
two-tailed).
None of the correlations between men's anticipations
of divorcing an unfaithful wife and attractiveness or mate value discrepancy
reached statistical significance (all ps > .05, two-tailed). Women's
anticipations of divorcing an adulterous husband, in contrast, consistently
co-varied with interviewer-rated mate value and attractiveness discrepancy.
Women judged to be higher in relative mate value provided higher likelihood
estimates of seeking divorce if their husband went on a date with another woman
(r = -.21), or had a one- night stand (-.19; both ps<.05, two-tailed). Women
judged to be more attractive than their husband provided higher likelihood
estimates of seeking divorce if he went on a date with another woman (r =
-.26), had a one-night stand ( -.24), or a brief affair ( -.24, p < .01; all
ps two-tailed).
Correlations of anticipated dissolution following
infidelity with spousal personality characteristics are shown in Table 2. The
right panel of Table 2 shows that women married to men scoring low on emotional
stability and openness/ intellect reported higher probabilities that they would
end the marriage if their husband had a one-night stand, brief affair, or
serious affair. Women married to men scoring low on agreeableness and
openness/intellect, respectively, reported higher probabilities that they would
divorce their husband if he had a brief affair or went on a romantic date with
another woman.
Table 2
Husbands' anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful
spouse, in contrast, were only weakly related to spousal personality
characteristics. The left panel of Table 2 shows that men married to women
scoring low on emotional stability and openness/intellect, respectively, anticipated
greater likelihoods of divorcing their partner if she kissed another man or
flirted with another man.
To examine whether anticipated dissolution following
infidelity might be related to own personality characteristics, men's and
women's standings on the five personality factors were correlated with their
own anticipations of seeking divorce as a consequence of spousal infidelity.
Two correlations reached statistical significance for women: women scoring
lower on openness/intellect anticipated greater likelihoods of divorcing their
husband if he had a one-night stand (r = -.25, p < .01) or serious affair (
-.23, p < .05; both ps two-tailed).
Men's anticipations of seeking divorce as a
consequence of spousal infidelity were more strongly linked to their own
personality characteristics. Men scoring lower on emotional stability reported
higher probabilities that they would divorce their wife if she went on a
romantic date with another man, had a one- night stand, brief affair, or
serious affair (respective rs = -.20, -.21, -.23, -.23; all ps < .05,
two-tailed). Men scoring lower on openness/intellect reported higher
probabilities that they would divorce their wife if she flirted with another
man, kissed another man, had a one-night stand or a serious affair (respective
rs = -.32 (p<.01), -.27 (p<.01), -.22 (p<.05), -.19 (p = .05); all ps
two-tailed).
Seven of the 15 spousal sources of upset were
significantly and negatively related to men's or women's anticipations of
divorcing an unfaithful spouse. Table 3 displays these correlations. The left
panel of Table 3 reveals that men's anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful
wife were most consistently related to their complaints that their wife was
unfaithful and dishonest. These correlations were significant for the four more
serious types of infidelity. Men who complained that their wife sexualised
others reported higher probabilities that they would divorce her if she flirted
with another man or had a one-night stand.
The right panel of Table 3 shows that women who
complained that their husband was inconsiderate, abused alcohol, and was
emotionally constricted, reported greater likelihoods that they would seek
divorce if he flirted with another woman, passionately kissed another woman, or
had a one-night stand or a serious affair. Women who complained that their
husband was inconsiderate, and women who complained that their husband abused
alcohol and was emotionally constricted, respectively, reported greater
likelihoods of seeking divorce if he went on a date with another woman or had a
brief affair . Women who complained that their husband was jealous and
possessive, moody, and sexually withholding reported greater likelihoods of
seeking divorce if he flirted with another woman.
None of the correlations between women's general,
sexual, emotional, or composite marital satisfaction and women's estimates that
they would divorce an unfaithful husband achieved statistical significance (
all ps > .05, two-tailed). Paralleling the results for women, no significant
correlations were obtained between men's general and sexual satisfaction and
their anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful wife.
Men's emotional and composite marital satisfaction,
however, displayed consistent relationships to their anticipated dissolution
following spousal infidelity. Men who reported lower emotional and composite
satisfaction reported higher probabilities that they would divorce their wife
if she kissed another man (respective rs = -.20, -.20,p < .05), went on a
romantic date with another man ( -.25, -.25,p < .01), or had a one-night
stand ( -.19, -.20,p < .05; all ps two-tailed).
None of the correlations between men's estimates of
anticipated dissolution following infidelity and interviewer ratings of the
quality of the couple's interaction achieved statistical significance (all ps
> .05, two-tailed). Women's anticipated dissolution following spousal
infidelity, in contrast, was associated with interviewer ratings of the quality
of the couple's interaction.
Women in couples who displayed more conflict during
the interview reported higher probabilities that they would divorce their
husband if he had a one- night stand (r = .21) or brief affair (r = .24; both
ps < .05, two-tailed). Women in couples who displayed less cooperativeness,
more quarrelsomeness, and less agreeableness, respectively, reported higher
probabilities that they would divorce their husband if he had a one-night stand
(r = -.20), brief affair (r = .22), or serious affair (r = -.19; all ps <
.05, two-tailed).
Discussion
Anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse may
entail a cost-benefit analysis by the betrayed person in which the perceived
costs and benefits of the marriage are weighed against the perceived costs and
benefits of divorce. Greater perceived costs and fewer perceived benefits might
facilitate heightened likelihood estimates of divorcing a spouse as a
consequence of his or her infidelity.
This study examined five sources of spousal and
relationship costs that might facilitate increased estimates of dissolution as
a consequence of adultery. This discussion highlights the most important
findings of this study, and locates several of these findings within an
evolutionary psycho- logical perspective.
From an evolutionary psychological perspective,
women of higher mate value and attractiveness than their husband may be
devoting their reproductive capacity to men who provide them with fewer
financial resources or lower quality genes than these women might have received
from alter- native mating arrangements (Buss, 1994). Accordingly, we predicted
that relatively more valuable wives would report higher probabilities of
divorcing an adulterous husband. This prediction was supported for the more
serious types of husband infidelity, including having a one-night stand and a
brief affair .
Men married to relatively less valuable and less
attractive women, in contrast, did not provide consistently higher estimates
that they would divorce their wife if she were unfaithful. The use of
interviewer-assessments of women's mate value and attractiveness may have been
inappropriate. Men married to women rated as relatively less attractive by the
interviewers might perceive their wives to be equally or more attractive than
the men perceive themselves to be. This speculation does not address, however,
why men's, but not women's, perceptions of their spouse's mate value and
attractiveness might deviate from independent parallel assessments.
Men and women displaying disagreeableness, emotional
instability, and low openness/intellect are particularly likely to inflict a
host of costs on their spouses. If anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful
spouse involve considerations of perceived costs already incurred by marriage
to that person, then men and women married to disagreeable, emotionally
unstable, and low openness/intellect people should report higher likelihoods of
divorcing an adulterous partner.
We found support for this prediction for women's
anticipation of seeking divorce in response to their husband's brief affair.
Additionally, husbands' emotional stability and openness/intellect negatively
co-vary with women's anticipations of divorcing their husband if he has a
one-night stand or serious affair. Men's anticipations of divorcing an
unfaithful wife, in contrast, are only weakly related to her emotional
instability and low openness/intellect, and unrelated to her agreeableness.
Men's own standings on agreeableness, emotional stability, and
openness/intellect, however, are strongly predictive of their anticipations of
divorcing an unfaithful wife.
The salience of men's personality for predicting
both men's and women's anticipations of divorcing an adulterous spouse is
consistent with the findings of research on marital stability, more generally
(Karney & Bradbury, 1995). For example, in a longitudinal study of 278
married couples, Kelly & Conley (1987) found that husband's neuroticism and
impulsivity were the two best predictors of a composite measure of marital
satisfaction and stability secured 50 years later .
According to Buss's (1989b) strategic interference
model, spousal sources of upset represent relatively direct assessments of
spousal cost-infliction. Greater upset signals greater cost-infliction. If the
perceived costs of marriage to the current spouse figure into the betrayed
person's considerations of whether to divorce or remain married to an
adulterous spouse, then spousal sources of upset should predict estimates of
the likelihood of divorce as a consequence of spousal infidelity.
Nearly half of the spousal sources of upset reported
by men and women in this sample negatively co-varied, as predicted, with
likelihood estimates of divorcing an unfaithful spouse. The most consistent
predictor of higher likelihood estimates of divorcing an adulterous wife was a
man's complaint that his wife had previously been unfaithful to him. The
predictive importance of men's complaints about a wife's infidelity can be
placed squarely within an evolutionary psychological perspective.
A spouse's unfaithfulness is likely to have imposed
serious reproductive costs on ancestral men and women alike (Buss et al.,
1992). Because of the asymmetry in certainty of genetic parentage, however, a
wife's infidelity is potentially much more costly to her husband than is a
husband's infidelity to his wife. The wife of a philandering man stands to lose
some portion of his investment to another woman. Even if she loses the bulk of
his investment, however, any children she bears are unquestionably her genetic
progeny. The husband of an unfaithful wife stands to lose the entire
reproductive capacity of his spouse, for at least one child-bearing cycle.
Additionally, the unsuspecting cuckold risks investing years, even decades, of
precious tangible and intangible resources in a rival's offspring.
The results suggest that a man married to an
unfaithful wife may have issued an ultimatum to their partner upon discovery of
her extramarital activities: 'If you ever cheat on me again, I will divorce
you'. Given the potentially tremendous costs of a wife's infidelity, an
important question is why some men offer their adulterous partner a second
chance to demonstrate fidelity. These apparently more forgiving men might
receive benefits from their wife, such as more frequent sexual access, that
outweigh the potential costs of a wife's infidelity (Baker & Bellis, 1995).
If anticipations of seeking divorce as a consequence
of a spousal infidelity involve taking stock of the benefits and costs of
remaining married to and divorcing an adulterous partner, and if marital
satisfaction negatively co-varies with spousal cost-infliction, then lower
marital satisfaction should predict higher likelihood estimates of divorcing an
unfaithful spouse. We found support for this prediction for men's, but not
women's, likelihood estimates of divorcing an unfaithful spouse.
Previous research indicates that men are more likely
to end a relationship when they are sexually dissatisfied with the
relationship, whereas women are more likely to end a relationship when they are
emotionally dissatisfied with the relationship. In the present sample, however,
sexual and emotional dissatisfaction are unrelated to women's reports that they
would divorce an unfaithful husband. Further, men's emotional but not sexual
dissatisfaction predicts anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful wife. Failure
to find the predicted sex differences in anticipated dissolution due to sexual
vs emotional dissatisfaction might be due to the use of single item measures of
unknown reliability to assess sexual and emotional dissatisfaction.
An important question for future research is why
men's, but not women's, marital dissatisfaction predicts anticipations of
divorcing an unfaithful spouse. From an evolutionary psychological perspective,
we might have expected results opposite to those obtained. Because a spouse's
infidelity is potentially more reproductively costly for a man than for a
woman, it might have been predicted that men's, relative to women's,
anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse would be less predictable from
feelings of marital dissatisfaction. The reproductive costs of cuckoldry are as
certain and as devastating for the maritally satisfied man as they are for the
maritally dissatisfied man. A man's reproductive resources, in contrast, can be
partitioned between his wife and an extramarital lover. His wife's marital
satisfaction might in part track the portion of his investment that she
continues to receive. A woman's anticipation of divorcing an unfaithful
husband, on this account, might vary with her marital satisfaction. Women
married to unfaithful men might nevertheless express marital satisfaction,
proportionate to the portion of her husband's investment she continues to
receive. In light of the relative clarity of evolutionary psychological predictions
regarding the sex-Inked association between marital satisfaction and
anticipated dissolution following spousal infidelity, future work should
investigate the replicability of the findings of the current study.
Previous research suggests that a couple's
interaction quality reflects the underlying costs and benefits exchanged within
the marriage. Accordingly, we predicted that spouses displaying more conflict
and less cooperativeness during the interview would provide higher likelihood
estimates of divorcing an unfaithful spouse. We found support for this
prediction for women's, but not men's, anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful
spouse.
The results for women are consistent with more
general research on the quality of couple interaction as a predictor of
eventual divorce. Karney & Bradbury (1995) reviewed the results of 14
studies in which the quality of couple interaction during an interview was used
to predict marital stability at a later time. Karney & Bradbury (1995)
concluded that couples displaying greater conflict and less cooperativeness
were more likely to divorce than were couples displaying less conflict and
greater co-operative- ness. Previous research has not identified which spouse
may be more likely to seek divorce, or whether men and women are equally likely
to seek divorce, in couples displaying more negative interactions. Future
research might find that, consistent with results of the present study, women
are more likely than men to seek divorce in couples displaying negative interactions.
A large body of research documents that women are
more attuned to relationship perturbations than are men (reviewed in Hatfield
& Rapson, 1996). The finding that women's, but not men's, anticipations of
divorcing an unfaithful spouse positively co-vary with interviewer judgements
of relationship conflict is consistent with this research.
We assessed expectations of dissolution as a
consequence of spousal infidelity, rather than actual divorces filed as a
consequence of spousal infidelity. Developmental changes across the marital
life span, such as the birth of children, may have important and unanticipated
effects on the betrayed person's deliberations of whether to seek divorce as a
con- sequence of spousal infidelity.
We have no reason to suspect, however, that
likelihood estimates of divorcing an unfaithful spouse will consistently
underestimate 0! over- estimate actual divorce as a consequence of spousal
infidelity. Several results of the present study, such as the linkages between
men's marital dissatisfaction and increased anticipation of dissolution
following infidelity, mirror Buunk's (1987) findings regarding the conditions
that promote actual dissolution as a consequence of admitted infidelity.
We acknowledge that we have greatly simplified the
complexity of events and processes that accompany marital dissolution.
Additionally, we recognise that infidelity is not the only cause of divorce.
Other frequently cited reasons for divorce include infertility, physical abuse,
and failure to provide expected financial resources (Betzig, 1989; Buss, 1994).
This study represents but one step toward gaining a better understanding of the
conditions and contexts under which infidelity might lead to marital
dissolution.
The results of this study are consistent with the
hypothesis that anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse involve a
cost-benefit analysis by the betrayed partner in which the perceived costs and
benefits of remaining married are weighed against those of divorce. An
evolutionary psycho- logical perspective provides a profitable interpretational
framework for the results of this study. Many of these results are consistent
with other perspectives, however, including equity theory and Rusbult's (1980)
investment model of close relationships. Regardless of theoretical orientation,
a critical direction for future research is determining whether the sources of
spousal and relationship costs we have identified as important predictors of
anticipations of divorcing an unfaithful spouse are similarly predictive of
actual divorce filed as a consequence of a discovered infidelity.
REFERENCES
Baker. R.R. & Bellis, M.A. (1995) Human Sperm
Competition. London: Chapman & Hall.
Betzig, L. (1989) 'Causes of Conjugal Dissolution: A
Cross-Cultural Study', Current Anthropology 30: 654- 76.
Botwin, MD., Buss, D.M. & Shackelford, T.K.
(1997) 'Personality and Mate Preferences: Five Factors in Mate Selection and
Marital Satisfaction', Journal of Personality 65: 107-36.
Buss, D.M. (1989a) 'Sex Differences in Human Mate
Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures', Behavioral and
Brain Sciences 12: 1-49.
Buss, D.M. (1989b) 'Conflict between the Sexes:
Strategic Interference and the Evocation of Anger and Upset', Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 56: 735-47.
Buss, D.M. (1991) 'Conflict in Married Couples:
Personality Predictors of Anger and Upset', Journal of Personality 59: 663-88.
Buss, D.M. (1994) The Evolution of Desire:
Strategies of Human Mating. New York: Basic Books.
Buss, D.M. (1995) 'Evolutionary Psychology: A New
Paradigm for Psychological Science', Psychological Inquiry 6: 1-49.
Buss, D.M. & Shackelford, T.K. (1997)
'Susceptibility to Infidelity in the First Year of Marriage', Journal of
Research in Personality 31: 193-221.
Buss, D.M., Larsen, R.J., Westen, D. &
Semmelroth, J. (1992) 'Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and
Psychology', Psychological Science 3: 251-5.
Buunk, B. (1987) 'Conditions that Promote Break-ups
as a Consequence of Extradyadic Involvements', Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology 5: 271-84.
Buunk, B. & Van Driel, B. (1989) Variant
Lifestyles and Relationships. London: Sage.
Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (1988) Homicide.
Hawthorne, NY: Airline de Gruyter.
Goldberg, L. (1981) 'Language and Individual
Differences: The Search for Universals in Personality Lexicons', in L. Wheeler
(ed.) Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 141-65. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Goldberg, L.R. (1983) 'The Magical Number Five, Plus
or Minus Two: Some Considerations on the Dimensionality of Personality
Descriptors', Paper presented at a research seminar of the Gerontological
Research Center (June), NIA/NIH, Baltimore, MD.
Gottman, J.M. & Levenson, R.W. (1992) 'Marital
Processes Predictive of Later Dissolution: Behavior, Physiology, and Health',
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63:
221-33.
Hatfield, E. & Rapson, R.L. (1996) Love and Sex:
Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Karney, B.R. & Bradbury, T.N. (1995) 'The
Longitudinal Course of Marital Quality and Stability: A Review of Theory,
Method, and Research', Psychological Bulletin 118: 3-34.
Kelly, E.L. & Conley, J.J. (1987) 'Personality
and Compatibility: A Prospective Analysis of Marital Stability and Marital
Satisfaction " Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52, 27-40.
Kitson, G.C. & Sussman, M.B. (1982) 'Marital
Complaints, Demographic Characteristics, and Symptoms of Mental Distress in
Divorce', Journal of Marriage and the Family 44: 87-101.
Lawson, A, (1988) Adultery: An Analysis of Love and
Betrayal. New York. Basic Books. Messick, D,M. & Cook, K.S. (eds) (1983)
Equity Theory: Psychological and Sociological Perspectives. New York: Praeger.
Nunnally, J.C. & Bernstein, I.H. (1994)
Psychometric Theory, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw- Hill.
Rusbult, C.E. (1980) 'Commitment and Satisfaction in
Romantic Associations: A Test of the Investment Model’, Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology 16: 172-86.
Rusbult, C.E. & Buunk, B.P. (1993) 'Commitment
Processes in Close Relationships: An Interdependence Analysis', Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships 10: 175-204.
Shackelford, T.K. & Buss, D.M. (1997) 'Marital
Satisfaction in Evolutionary Psychological Perspective', in R.J. Sternberg
& M. Hojat (eds) Satisfaction in Close Relationships, pp. 7-25. New York:
Guildford.
Veroff, J. & Feld, S.L. (1970) Marriage and work
in America. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.