SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Predicting Infidelity: The Role of Attachment Styles, Lovestyles, and the Investment Model Julie Fricker B. Ed. B. A. Hons (Psych) A thesis submitted in partial fullfilment of the requirements for the award of the Professional Doctorate in Psychology (Counselling Psychology) by Swinburne University of Technology. March 2006 ii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my father Lawrence Fricker (1925 – 2003) always my inspiration, my rock, and my friend. iii DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY I declare that this dissertation is my own account of my research and does not contain any work that has been previously submitted for a degree at any institution, except where due reference is made in the text. To the best of my knowledge this dissertation contains no material published by another person, except where due reference has been made. The ethical principles for research as stipulated by the Australian Psychological Society and Swinburne University of Technology have been adhered to in this research. Several papers have been presented at conferences and published during the process of completing the thesis. A list of the published papers is included for interest in Appendix E. Signed: Julie Fricker 17 March, 2006 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many thanks go to several people. Firstly I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Sue Moore, my primary supervisor, for her efforts and support over the last five years. Her professionalism and enthusiasm has enabled me to maintain perspective and confidence throughout this venture. To my second supervisor, Bruce Findlay, whom I have known since my first year in the undergraduate psychology course (10 years ago!), thanks for his input and support. And heartfelt thanks go to Peter Reggars, who read the thesis and offered valuable feedback and encouragement. I would also like to thank Glen Bates and Roger Cook for their support along the way and the library staff for their friendly assistance, particularly Mez, for often going the extra mile to be of help. As well, I am most grateful to the members of the focus group for graciously giving up their time. Their open and honest participation provided valuable input into this research. To my mother and best friend, Marie, who was always there to lend a hand or an ear. She made an excellent (unpaid!) research assistant, too. Her unswerving encouragement and support helped me to remain steadfast to my goal. Appreciation also goes to special people, both family members and friends, for their interest and extra care when times were tough. Finally, to my study buddy and dear friend, Monica, I'll never be able to thank her enough. The time we have spent together, the laughs, the frustrations, the cups of tea and chocolate, and of course the lunches will be among my fondest memories. We'll head into our professional future, the foundations of which we've laid together, with confidence. v ABSTRACT Infidelity violates a western norm that a range of interpersonal behaviours should remain exclusive in committed romantic relationships. Once exposed, the aftermath can be detrimental to all concerned. However, despite a cultural majority endorsing this belief and apprised of the potential consequences of its violations, infidelity or extradyadic relationships are widespread. Furthermore, individual differences in beliefs about what constitutes infidelity blur the boundaries of acceptable behaviour, making the concept of unfaithfulness difficult to fully describe. This variation in attitudes and behaviour, along with the consistent media attention infidelity attracts affirms the enigmatic nature of the behaviour. In response, an aim of the study was to clarify the construct of infidelity among a contemporary Australian sample. This was achieved in two ways. Firstly, the study examined beliefs and behaviours associated with unfaithfulness using qualitative (focus group) and largely quantitative (survey) data. Secondly, the study involved investigation of the association between infidelity and several individual, relationship and environmental variables. Differences in relationships and environmental conditions can be conceptualised within the theoretical framework of the investment model, while adult attachment theory and a lovestyles typology offer theoretical underpinnings to the study of individual differences. Specifically, the aim of this stage of the study was to examine how adult attachment styles (anxious, avoidant), lovestyles (eros, ludus, storge, mania, pragma, agape), relationship variables (satisfaction, investment, commitment), and an environmental variable (perceived alternatives) predicted infidelity. The sample comprised 243 women and 69 men between the ages of 18 and 60 years (M = 31.3 years, SD = 11.9) who were currently in a romantic relationship of at least one year or who had recently been in such a relationship. Participants completed measures pertaining to attachment, lovestyles and various aspects of relationship quality in addition to several measures of extradyadic behaviour. The study found that infidelity, as defined by respondents, was engaged in by 20% of individuals in their current relationships and by 42% of individuals in their previous relationships. Regarding the nature of infidelity, the current findings indicated that various sexual and emotional behaviours carried out with someone other than one's primary partner were considered unfaithful by the vast majority, while fantasy and flirting behaviours were generally seen as acceptable. It was noteworthy, however, that a substantial minority vi also viewed fantasy as unfaithful, underlining the inherent complexity of the construct. The hypotheses concerning the variables predicting infidelity were partially supported. Results suggested that individuals most likely to engage in extradyadic behaviour were those with an avoidant attachment style or a Ludus lovestyle, more perceived alternatives to their relationship, and most unexpectedly, higher levels of investment in their relationship. Conversely, those least likely to engage in these behaviours were those with an Eros Lovestyle and greater levels of commitment to their relationship. The study confirmed the prevalence of infidelity and emphasised the differential attitudes, behaviours and motivations associated with it. These differences are discussed in relation to the theories presented and an argument is made for research on infidelity to take a broader focus, one that includes the combined aspects of individuals, their relationships and the environment. Implications of these findings for individuals and couples and for the professionals who work with them are discussed, along with suggestions for future research. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE DEDICATION ii DECLARATION iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv ABSTRACT v LIST OF TABLES xi LIST OF FIGURES xii CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1 Prevalence of Infidelity 3 Rationale for the Study 4 The Current Study 6 Aims of the Study 8 CHAPTER TWO - REVIEW OF THE INFIDELITY LITERATURE 10 What Constitutes Infidelity? 10 Types of Infidelity 11 The Role of gender, Age and Relationship Status 14 Attitudes and Behaviours Associated with Infidelity 16 Personality Variables 19 Relationship Variables 20 CHAPTER THREE - THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS 23 The Evolutionary Perspective 23 The Theory of Attachment 26 Adult Attachment 30 Attachment Styles: Enduring or Malleable? 34 Attachment: Part of an Integrated Behavioural system 36 The Lovestyles Typology 39 Lovestyles and Sexuality 42 Lovestyles: Enduring or Malleable 43 viii Gender Differences in Adult Attachment Styles and Lovestyles 43 Relationships Between the Attachment and Lovestyles Perspectives 44 The Investment Model 47 Relationships Between Individual Styles and the Investment Model 50 CHAPTER FOUR - AIMS AND HYPOTHESES 55 Relationships Between Attachment Styles and Lovestyles 55 Relationships Between Individual Styles and Investment Model Variables 57 Relationships Between the Independent Variables and Infidelity 58 Combined Effects of the Individual and Investment Model Variables on Infidelity 60 CHAPTER FIVE - METHOD 62 Design 62 Participants 63 Materials 64 Part A: Focus Group 64 Part B: The Questionnaire 65 Adult Attachment 66 The Lovestyles 67 Infidelity 68 The Infidelity Proneness Scale 68 Extradyadic Behaviours List 69 Unfaithful Beliefs List 70 Relationship Commitment, Satisfaction, Investment and Alternatives 70 Procedure 72 CHAPTER SIX - RESULTS 74 Qualitative Data: The Focus Group 74 Quantitative Data 77 Preliminary Analyses 77 Reliability analyses for Scales 78 Descriptive Data 79 Factor Analysis: Assessing the Dimensions of Infidelity 84 Sex and Infidelity Differences for the Independent Variables 87 ix Relationships Between Attachment, Lovestyles, and the Investment Model Variables 89 Attachment and Lovestyles 89 Investment Model Variables 90 Correlates and Predictors of the Investment Model 91 Correlates of Infidelity Behaviours and Beliefs 94 Predictors of Infidelity Behaviours and Beliefs 95 Infidelity Dimensions 99 Correlates of Infidelity Dimensions 99 Predictors of Infidelity Dimensions 101 Summary - Predictors of Infidelity 103 CHAPTER SEVEN – DISCUSSION 104 The Nature of Infidelity 104 (a) What Constitutes Infidelity? 106 Qualitative Data: The Focus Group 106 Quantitative Data: The Survey 108 (b) The Role of gender, Age, Sexual Frequency, and Relationship Length and Status 110 The Nature of Infidelity: Summary of the Current Findings 112 Predicting Infidelity 113 (c) Relationships Between