Patterns of paternal investment predict cross-cultural variation in jealous response

Abstract

Long-lasting, romantic partnerships are a universal feature of human societies; but almost as ubiquitous is the risk of instability when one partner strays. Jealous response to the threat of infidelity is well-studied, but most empirical work on the topic has focused on a proposed sex difference in the type of jealousy (sexual or emotional) men and women find most upsetting, rather than on how jealous response varies 1,2. This stems in part from the predominance of studies using student samples from industrialized populations, which represent a relatively homogenous group in terms of age, life history stage, and social norms 3,4. To better understand variation in jealous response, we conducted a two-part study in 11 populations (1,048 individuals). In line with previous work, we find a robust sex difference in the classic forced-choice jealousy task. However, we also show substantial variation in jealous response across populations. Using parental investment theory, we derived several predictions about what might trigger such variation. We find that greater paternal investment and lower frequency of extramarital sex are associated with more severe jealous response. Partner jealousy thus appears to be a facultative response, reflective of the variable risks and costs of men's investment across societies. Main One of the essential features of human mating is the prominence of stable, long-lasting partnerships, which in almost every society are socially enforced through the institution of marriage 5,6. A widespread feature of marriage is the custom of sexual exclusivity. Despite the near ubiquity of this expectation, marriages are at risk of disruption by extramarital partnerships. Adultery is the most commonly cited reason for divorce across cultures 7 , and concurrent partnerships are often common 8,9. In response to threats of infidelity, humans, like other species with stable partnerships, have evolved adaptations to protect against mate poaching and defection. Some of these behaviors, like partner concealment, vigilance and sexual coercion, are shared with other species 10-12 , while others like foot binding and purdah are culturally constructed and unique to humans 13,14. Underlying these behaviors is a suite of psychological mechanisms, of which jealousy is one of the most important. While jealousy itself is thought to be a universal human emotion, traditional evolutionary explanations predict that jealous response to cues of infidelity will differ in men and women, reflecting the unique adaptive problems they face 1,13,14. Men face a risk of paternity uncertainty, which results in the loss of a fitness opportunity, but also in the potential misallocation of investment. Women, on the other hand, risk the diversion of critical resources by their partner

A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review: Infidelity, Romantic Jealousy and Intimate Partner Violence against Women

“…The available evidence documented in the review suggests substantial variation in the frequency with which RJ or infidelity was cited as a reason for IPV. This may be due in part to differing cultural attitudes towards RJ and infidelity [129], and IPV [130]. More research is needed to determine whether the mechanisms and pathways identified in this review are upheld across different regions (e.g., the Middle East and North Africa) and countries, as well as among different populations within countries.…”

An Adaptationist Framework for Personality Science

“…CHEATER; Cosmides, Barrett, & Tooby, 2010) and culturally evolved lexical descriptors for communicating about peoples’ reputations or current behavioural states (e.g. ‘unreliable’; Buss, 2011; Fiddick et al, 2016: Kallens et al, 2018; Scott–Phillips, 2014). Although research based on hypotheses about difference–detecting adaptations is in its infancy, this theoretical lens provides important links between traditional lexically based personality research and the evolutionary psychological approach advocated in this paper.…”

Friendship jealousy: One tool for maintaining friendships in the face of third-party threats?

“…We focus here not on the phylogeny of friendship jealousy, but rather on the features that it might have if, like romantic jealousy, it functioned to help maintain valued but potentially threatened social bonds. maintenance of those relationships-romantic jealousy is likely one adapted tool of partner retention (e.g., Buss, 2000Buss, , 2013Buss & Haselton, 2005;Daly et al, 1992;Scelza et al, 2019;Symons, 1979). 3 Behavior consistent with romantic jealousy may be evidenced in some nonhuman animals; among humans, it exists across cultures, and it possesses features that appear to be well-designed to solve the recurrent problem of retaining mates in the face of third-party threats: (a) romantic jealousy is evoked by cues that a romantic partner stands to be lost to a third party; (b) cues with better predictive validity of impending loss receive prioritization in driving levels of romantic jealousy; and (c) romantic jealousy spurs a suite of behavioral inclinations, known as mate guarding, that are theoretically aimed at countering the threat of partner loss (Buss, 2000(Buss, , 2013Buss & Haselton, 2005;Buss et al, 1992;Buss & Shackelford, 1997;Buunk, 1997; Lewis et al, 2016;Scelza, 2014;Scelza et al, 2019;Schmitt & Pilcher, 2004).…”