Research Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Report SEX DIFFERENCES IN JEALOUSY: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology David M. Buss, Randy J. Larsen, Drew Westen, and Jennifer Semmelrolh University of Michigan Abstract—In species with internal female sources in putative offspring that are ge- mous marriage, a woman risked having fertilization, males risk both lowered pa- netically unrelated. her mate invest in an alternative woman ternity probability and investment in ri- These multiple and severe reproduc- with whom he was having an affair (par- val gametes if their mates have sextial tive costs should have imposed strong tial loss of investment) or risked his de- contact with other males. Females of selection pressure on males to defend parture for an alternative woman (large such species do not risk lowered mater- against cuckoldry. Indeed, the literature or total loss of investment). Second, in nity probability through partner infidel- is replete with examples of evolved an- polygynous marriages, a woman was at ity, but they do risk the diversion of their ticuckoldry mechanisms in lions (Ber- risk of having her mate invest to a larger mates' commitment and resources to ri- tram, 1975), bluebirds (Power, 1975), degree in other wives and their offspring val females. Three studies tested the hy- doves (Erickson & Zenone, 1976), nu- at the expense of his investment in her pothesis that sex differences In jealousy merous insect species (Thornhill & Al- and her offspring. Following Buss (1988) emerged in humans as solutions to the cock, 1983), afid nonhuman primates and Mellon (1981), we hypothesize that respective adaptive problems faced by (Hrdy, 1979). ^Sirice humans arguably cues to the development of a deep emo- each sex. In Study I, men and women show more paternafinvestment than any tional attachment have been reliable selected which event would upset them other of the 200 species of primates (Al- leading indicators to women of potential more—a partner's sexual infidelity or exander & Noonan, 1979), this selection reduction or loss of their mate's invest- emotional infidelity. Study 2 recorded pressure should have ope ratgde specially ment. physiological responses (heart rate, intensely on human male_sASymons ' Jealousy is defined as an emotional electrodermal response, coiTUgator su- (1979); Daly, Wilson, and Weghorst "st^te that is aroused by a perceived percilii contraction) while subjects imag- (1982); and Wilson and Daly (in press) threat to a valued relationship or position ined separately the two types of partner have hypothesized that male sexual jeal- and motivates behavior aimed at coun- infidelity. Study 3 tested the effect of be- ousy evolved as a solution to this adap- tering the threat. Jealousy is 'sexual' if ing in a committed sexual relationship tive problem (but see Hupka, 1991, for the valued relationship is sexual" (Daly on the activation of jealousy. All studies an alternative view). Men who were in- et al., 1982, p. 11; see also, Salovey, showed large sex differences, confirming different to sexual contact between their 1991; White & Mullen. 19^\It is rea- hypothesized sex linkages in jealousy ac- mates and other men presumably ex- sonable to hypothesize that jealousy in- tivation. perienced lower paternity certainty, volves physiological reactions (auto- greater investment in competitors' ga- nomic arousal) to perceived threat and metes, and lower reproductive success motivated action to reduce the threat, al- than did men who were motivated to at- though this hypothesis has not been ex- In species with internal female fertil- tend to cues of infidelity and to act on ization and gestation, features of repro- amined. Following Symons (1979) and those cues to increase paternity proba- Daly et al. (1982), our central hypothesis ductive biology characteristic of all 4,000 bility. species of mammals, including humans, is that the events that activate jealousy males face an adaptive problem not con- Although females do not risk mater- physiologically and psychologically dif- fronted by females—uncertainty in their nity uncertainty, in species with biparen- fer for men and women because of the paternity of offspring. Maternity proba- tal care they do risk the potential loss of different adaptive problems they have bility in mammals rarely or never devi- time, resources, and commitment from a faced over human evolutionary history ates from 100%. Compromises in pater- male if he deserts or channels investment in mating contexts. Both sexes are hy- nity probability come at substantial re- to alternative mates (Buss, 1988; Thorn- pothesized to be distressed over both productive cost to the male—the loss of hUl & Alcock, 1983; Trivers, 19722^The sexual and emotional infidelity, and pre- mating effort expended, including time, redirection of a mate's investment to an- vious findings bear this out (Buss. 1989). energy, risk, nuptial gifts, and mating op- other female and her offspring is repro- However, these two kinds of infidelity portunity costs. A cuckolded male also ductively costly for a female, especially should be weighted differently by men loses the female's parental effort, which in environments where offspring suffer and women. Despite the importance of becomes channeled to a competitor's ga- in survival and reproductive currencies these hypothesized sex differences, no metes. The adaptive problem of pater- without investment from both parents. systematic scientific work has been di- nity uncertainty is exacerbated in spe- rected toward verifying or falsifying their In human evolutionary history, there existence (but for suggestive data, see cies in which males engage in some were likely to have been at least two sit- postzygotic parental investment (Triv- Francis, 1977; Teismann & Mosher, uations in which a woman risked losing a 1978; White & Mullen, 1989). ers, 1972). Males risk investing re- man's investment. First, in a monoga- VOL. 3. NO. 4. JULY 1992 Copyright © 1992 American Psychological Society 251 PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE So\ UinViences in Jealousy STUDY 1: SUBJECTIVE 70 DISTRESS OVER A PARTNER S EXTERNAL INVOLVEMENT 60- This study was designed to test the hypothesis that men and women differ in which form of infidelity—sexual versus 50- emotional—triggers more upset and sub- jective distress, following the adaptive Pcrcentage 40- logic just described. Reporting More Distress to Sexual Infidelity 3Q Method After reporting age and sex, subjects 20- (N = 202 undergraduate students) were presented with the following dilemma: 10 - Please think of a serious committed romantic relationship that you have had in the past, that Sexual Infidelity versus Sexual Infidelity versus you currently have, or that you would like to Deep Emotional Inildellty Love Infidelity have. Imagine that you discover that the per- son with whom you've been seriously in- volved became interested in someone else. What would distress or upset you more (please circle only one): 70 (A) Imagining your partner forming a deep emotional attachment to that person. 60- (B) Imagining your partner enjoying pas- sionate sexual intercourse with that other person. 50- Subjects completed additional ques- tions, and then encountered the next di- Percentage 40- Reporting lemma, with the same instructional set, More Distress to but followed by a different, but parallel, Sexual Infidelity 30 choice: (A) Imagining your partner trying different sexual positions with that other person. (B) Imagining your partner falling in love 10 - with that other person. Results Have Been in Committed Have Not Been In Committed Sexual RdaUonship Sexual Relationship Shown in Figure 1 (upper panel) are the percentages of men and women re- Fig. 1. Reported comparisons of distress in response to imagining a partner's sexual porting more distress in response to sex- or emotional infidelity. The upper panel shows results of Study 1—the percentage of ual infidelity than emotional infidelity. subjects reporting more distress to the sexual infidelity scenario than to the emotional The first empirical probe, contrasting infidelity (left) and the love infidelity (right) scenarios. The lower panel shows the distress over a partner's sexual involve- results of Study 3—the percentage of subjects reporting more distress to the sexual ment with distress over a partner's deep infidelity scenario than to the emotional infidelity scenario, presented separately for emotional attachment, yielded a large those who have experienced a committed sexual relationship (left) and those who have not experienced a committed sexual relationship (right). and highly significant sex difference (x^ = 41.56, df^ 3,/7< .001). Fuily60%of the male sample reported greater distress greater distress over a partner's emo- with 32% more men than women report- over their partner's potential sexual infi- tional attachment to a rival.7 ing greater distress over a partner's sex- delity; in contrast, only 17% of the fe- This pattern was replicated with the ual involvement with someone else, and male sample chose that option, with 83% contrast between sex and love. The mag- the majority of women reporting greater reporting that they would experience nitude of the sex difference was large. distress over a partner's falling in love 252 VOL. 3, NO. 4, JULY 1992 PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE David M. Buss et al. with a rival = 59,20, 4f' = 3, p < Ptilse rate intercourse with this other person. Try to .001). A photoplethysmograph was attached feel the feelings you would have if this to the subject's right thumb to monitor happened to you." the pulse wave. The signal from this The instructions for emotional infidel- STUDY 2: PHYSIOLOGICAL pulse transducer was fed into a Grass ity imagery were identical to the above, RESPONSES TO A PARTNER S Model 7P4 cardiotachometer to detect except the italicized sentence was re- EXTERNAL INVOLVEMENT the rising slope of each pulse wave, with placed with ''Imagine that your partner the internal circuitry ofthe Schmitt trig- is falling in love and forming an emo- Given the strong confirmation of jeal- ger individually adjusted for each subject tional attachment to that person.^'' Phys- ousy sex linkage from Study I, we to output PR in beats per minute.