Dados Bibliográficos

AUTOR(ES) D.M. Buss , T.K. Shackelford , T. Hasegawa , LEE A. KIRKPATRICK , JAE C. CHOE , HANG K. LIM , MARIKO HASEGAWA , KEVIN BENNETT , D. Buss , Jürgen Habermas
AFILIAÇÃO(ÕES) The University of Texas at Austin
ANO 1999
TIPO Book
PERIÓDICO Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
ISSN 0265-4075
E-ISSN 1470-8692
DOI 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00215.x
CITAÇÕES 14
ADICIONADO EM 2025-08-14
MD5 e016b7b0bafe0ba963c46ce884a51cfd

Resumo

The different adaptive problems faced by men and women over evolutionary history led evolutionary psychologists to hypothesize and discover sex differences in jealousy as a function of infidelity type. An alternative hypothesis proposes that beliefs about the conditional probabilities of sexual and emotional infidelity account for these sex differences. Four studies tested these hypotheses. Study 1 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 1,122) by rendering the types of infidelity mutually exclusive. Study 2 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 234) by asking participants to identify which aspect of infidelity was more upsetting when both forms occurred, and by using regression to identify the unique contributions of sex and beliefs. Study 3 replicated Study 2 in a Korean sample (N = 190). Study 4 replicated Study 2 in a Japanese sample (N = 316). Across the studies, the evolutionary hypothesis, but not the belief hypothesis, accounted for sex differences in jealousy when the types of infidelity are rendered mutually exclusive; sex differences in which aspect of infidelity is more upsetting when both occur; significant variance attributable to sex, after controlling for beliefs; sex‐differentiated patterns of beliefs; and the cross‐cultural prevalence of all these sex differences.

Ferramentas