{"title":"I Can But You Can't: Inconsistencies in Judgments of and Experiences With Infidelity","authors":"A. E. Thompson, L. O’Sullivan","doi":"10.1017/jrr.2016.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite strong prohibition against infidelity and endorsement of exclusivity as a norm, many people report engaging in infidelity. The current study examined this paradox by employing a between-subject design using online surveys with 810 adults to assess actor-observer biases in the degree of permissiveness judging own versus partner's hypothetical behaviour, as well as hypocrisy in judgments of infidelity versus self-reported behaviour. Participants judged their own behaviour more permissively than their partner's, but only for emotional/affectionate and technology/online behaviours (not sexual/explicit or solitary behaviours). Many reported having engaged in behaviours that they judged to be infidelity, especially emotional/affectionate and technology/online infidelity behaviours. Sexual attitudes, age, and religion predicted inconsistencies in judgments of infidelity and self-reported behaviour (hypocrisy). This study has implications for educators and practitioners working with couples to improve communication and establish guidelines for appropriate and inappropriate behaviour.","PeriodicalId":37757,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Relationships Research","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/jrr.2016.1","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Relationships Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jrr.2016.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28
Abstract
Despite strong prohibition against infidelity and endorsement of exclusivity as a norm, many people report engaging in infidelity. The current study examined this paradox by employing a between-subject design using online surveys with 810 adults to assess actor-observer biases in the degree of permissiveness judging own versus partner's hypothetical behaviour, as well as hypocrisy in judgments of infidelity versus self-reported behaviour. Participants judged their own behaviour more permissively than their partner's, but only for emotional/affectionate and technology/online behaviours (not sexual/explicit or solitary behaviours). Many reported having engaged in behaviours that they judged to be infidelity, especially emotional/affectionate and technology/online infidelity behaviours. Sexual attitudes, age, and religion predicted inconsistencies in judgments of infidelity and self-reported behaviour (hypocrisy). This study has implications for educators and practitioners working with couples to improve communication and establish guidelines for appropriate and inappropriate behaviour.
期刊介绍:
This innovative journal provides researchers and practitioners with access to quality, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed articles covering the entire range of fields associated with personal, intimate, organizational and family, and social relationships, development, training and analysis of human relationship skills across the life-span. Originally an initiative of the Psychology of Relationships Interest Group of the Australian Psychological Society, the journal became independent within its first year with the intention of publishing papers from the full array of researchers of relationship. The journal features an experienced and eclectic international Editorial Board and is international in its reach. There is a special emphasis on contributions from Asia, including the subcontinent and Pacific regions but the journal welcomes papers from all other parts of the world.