Effects of Jealousy Threats on Relationship Perceptions and Emotions

Abstract

The experimental induction of jealousy threat in a specific situation, using an imagery task, affected subjects' perceptions of themselves and of their romantic relationships, and influenced their emotions. Jealousy-provoking situations increased subjects' perceptions of themselves as jealous in their relationships, and their perceptions of themselves as more emotionally involved in the relationship relative to their partners. Jealousy threat decreased levels of perceived security and stability of the relationship and self-perceived feelings of attractiveness and acceptability to partners. These jealousy-provoking scenes also elicited a complexity of emotions: decreased joy and an increased series of negative emotions. When subjects imagined themselves in a high threat condition, where the loss of their partners seemed imminent, they evaluated their relationships as significantly less secure/ stable, and reported greater intensities of surprise, fear and distress in contrast to the low threat scenes. Dispositional measures of self-esteem and jealousy did not significantly predict jealousy-induced relationship perceptions, although these person variables were somewhat correlated with subjects' ratings of characteristics of their relationships in general. It was concluded that situational variables, such as level of jealousy threat, affect both emotions and cognitions related to the self and relationship based upon the salient characteristics of the situation. Some evidence was found for an interactional explanation of romantic jealousy which requires further investigation.

Experiencing and Communicating Romantic Jealousy: Questioning the Investment Model

“…Commitment, the central aspect of Rusbult's investment model, is assumed to be a byproduct of dependence, such that ''dependence produces the psychological experience of commitmentcommitment is the sense of allegiance that is established with regard to the source of one's dependence'' (Drigotas, Rusbult, & Verette, 1999, p. 391). In terms of jealousy experience, emotional dependence on a relationship was positively related to both anticipated (Buunk, 1982) and relationship (Bush, Bush, & Jennings, 1988) jealousy. Further, Murphy, Meyer, and O'Leary (1994) reported a significant positive relationship between dependency and jealousy in violent and nonviolent males.…”

The complex relationship between dependency and domestic violence: Converging psychological factors and social forces.

“…For example, victimization is associated with diminished perfor-mance at work and with increased absenteeism. It may be that only those dependent men who are most prone to become jealous when they believe their partners have become emotionally or physically close with another person are predisposed to domestic violence (see Bush et al, 1988, andOverholser, 1996, for discussions of the dependency-jealousy link). In addition, abusers sometimes threaten the partner's colleagues and/or supervisor and may behave inappropriately at the partner's workplace (e.g., initiating verbal or physical confrontations).…”

Jealousy and commitment: Perceived threat and the effect of relationship alternatives

“…Several theories of jealousy predict that relationship commitment and the attractiveness of relationship alternatives should interact to facilitate the expression of jealousy because to the extent that individuals are more committed to their relationship and perceive that they have unattractive dating alternatives, a jealousy-evoking situation should be perceived as especially threatening to the self, to the relationship, and to the emotional, temporal, and material investments put into the relationship (e.g., Bringle, 1991;Bush, Bush, & Jennings, 1988;Buunk, 1991;Hansen, 1991;Radjecki-Bush, Farrell, & Bush, 1993;White, 1981White, , 1991White & Mullen, 1989). Although men and women react differently to threat, evolutionary theory predicts that cognitive mechanisms are activated when a romantic relationship is threatened (e.g., Buss, 2000).…”