ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Social media provides one route to behaviors that may be potentially harmful to romantic relationships, such as communicating with alternative partners, which can sometimes create relationship conflict, breakups, or divorce. Limited empirical evidence exists concerning social media infidelity-related behaviors and marital relationships. This study examined whether married/cohabiting individuals are using social media sites to engage in online infidelity-related behaviors and to what extent this related to relationship satisfaction, ambivalence, and relational attachment characteristics as reported by 338 married/cohabiting individuals from 176 families. Only a small percentage of married/cohabiting couples reported engaging in social media infidelity-related behaviors; however, more engagement in infidelity-related behaviors on social media was significantly related to lower relationship satisfaction, higher relationship ambivalence, and greater attachment avoidance and anxiety in both women and men. Additionally, attachment anxiety and gender interacted with relationship satisfaction in predicting online infidelity-related behaviors when controlling for other variables. Implications are discussed.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 1
CITATION: McDaniel, B. T., Drouin, M., & Cravens, J. (2017). Do you have anything to hide?
Infidelity-related behaviors on social media sites and marital satisfaction.
Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 88-95. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.031
Link to published article:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563216306586
Do You Have Anything to Hide?
Infidelity-Related Behaviors on Social Media Sites and Marital Satisfaction
Brandon T. McDaniel, Ph.D.
Illinois State University
Michelle Drouin, Ph.D.
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne
Jaclyn D. Cravens, Ph.D.
Texas Tech University
*Corresponding Author: Brandon T. McDaniel, Campus Box 5060, Normal, IL 61790. Email:
btmcdaniel.phd@gmail.com. Phone: 309-438-5802.
*The authors declare no conflict of interest.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 2
Abstract
Social media provides one route to behaviors that may be potentially harmful to romantic
relationships, such as communicating with alternative partners, which can sometimes create
relationship conflict, breakups, or divorce. Limited empirical evidence exists concerning social
media infidelity-related behaviors and marital relationships. This study examined whether
married/cohabiting individuals are using social media sites to engage in online infidelity-related
behaviors and to what extent this related to relationship satisfaction, ambivalence, and relational
attachment characteristics as reported by 338 married/cohabiting individuals from 176 families.
Only a small percentage of married/cohabiting couples reported engaging in social media
infidelity-related behaviors; however, more engagement in infidelity-related behaviors on social
media was significantly related to lower relationship satisfaction, higher relationship
ambivalence, and greater attachment avoidance and anxiety in both women and men.
Additionally, attachment anxiety and gender interacted with relationship satisfaction in
predicting online infidelity-related behaviors when controlling for other variables. Implications
are discussed.
Keywords: social media use; social networking; infidelity behaviors; relationship
satisfaction; relationship ambivalence; attachment
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 3
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the families who participated in this research, as well as the research
assistants who made all of this recruitment and data collection possible.
Funding Sources
We would also like to acknowledge the College of Health and Human Development, the
Department of Human Development and Family Studies, as well as the Bennett Pierce
Prevention Research Center at The Pennsylvania State University which awarded research funds
to the first author to complete this research.
This research was also supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA017629) and
the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (F31HD084118). The content is
solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the
university or the National Institutes of Health.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 4
Do You Have Anything to Hide?
Infidelity-Related Behaviors on Social Media Sites and Marital Satisfaction
1. Introduction
According to Pew statistics, 65% of American adults use social media, and this has risen
substantially over the last decade (Perrin, 2015). Alongside this rapid growth, relationship
researchers began investigating how social media is used within relationships, especially
romantic relationships. Much of this research has portrayed social networking as a potential
threat to existing romantic relationships, as it provides a vehicle for communicating with
alternative partners through friend requests, commenting on others’ posts or pictures, covert
communication, or even engaging in cybersex (Cravens & Whiting, 2014; Dibble & Drouin,
2014; Dibble, Drouin, Aune, & Boller, 2015; Drouin, Miller, & Dibble, 2014; Drouin, Miller, &
Dibble, 2015). Accordingly, researchers have shown that social media and/or the conflict and
jealousy that arises from social media use is associated with relationship conflict, breakups, and
even divorce (Clayton, 2014; Clayton, Nagurney, & Smith, 2013; Cravens, Leckie, & Whiting,
2013; Fox, Osborn, & Warber, 2014; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Valenzuela, Halpern, & Katz,
2014).
Although the empirical literature related to social media and relationships has expanded
greatly over the past few years, much of this research has been conducted with young adults;
research on problematic social networking behaviors within married couples is sparse. Although
media sources report that Facebook has been cited in one third of U.S. divorces (Lupkin, 2012),
only a limited number of studies have examined problematic online infidelity-related (IR)
behaviors (e.g., engaging in cybersex, befriending romantic interests or attractive alternative
partners) among couples. The few empirical studies that have examined IR behaviors have
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 5
focused on accounts of those who found their partners cheating (Cravens et al., 2013) or
characteristics of individuals who have sought extra-marital relationships via chat rooms (Dew,
Brubaker, & Hays, 2006). Together, these studies suggest that online environments may provide
a ripe venue for online IR behaviors. There is also some evidence that technology usage
generally can interfere with relationships, potentially causing conflict and lower relationship
satisfaction, even among married couples (McDaniel & Coyne, 2016; Roberts & David, 2016).
Moreover, a recent study involving couples showed that a greater amount of social networking
use (more specifically, Facebook maintenance behaviors) was related to lower levels of partner
love (Northrup & Smith, 2016). In this exploratory study, we extended these inquiries to
examine whether married/cohabiting individuals are using social networking to engage in online
IR behaviors, and to what extent this relates to relationship satisfaction, ambivalence, and
relational attachment characteristics. More specifically, our goals were to conceptualize and
measure social media IR behaviors among primarily married couples, examine these behaviors
as an outcome of relationship satisfaction and ambivalence, and examine whether attachment
anxiety moderates the relationship between relationship satisfaction and ambivalence and
engagement in social media IR behaviors.
1.1. Social Networking Usage and Romantic Relationships
A growing body of research has examined the potential negative effects of social media
usage on romantic relationships. In a seminal study on the topic, Clayton et al. (2013) found that
Facebook usage predicted negative relationship outcomes (e.g., cheating, breakup, and divorce),
but that this association was mediated by Facebook-related conflict and moderated by
relationship length. In other words, Facebook usage predicted negative relationship outcomes
especially when there was conflict surrounding this usage, but only among those who had been
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 6
in their relationships for three years or less. Clayton (2014) found similar results with regard to
Twitter use: Higher usage was related to negative relationship outcomes, and this association was
mediated by Twitter-use conflict. However, in this case, relationship length did not moderate the
indirect effect of social media usage on negative relationship outcomes. Regardless of
relationship length, those who used Twitter more often were more likely to have Twitter-related
conflict, and this predicted negative relationship outcomes. More recently, Ridgway and Clayton
(2016) extended this inquiry to yet another social networking venue and found that posting
selfies on Instagram was related to Instagram-related conflict, which in turn was related to
negative relationship outcomes. This link between social networking usage and negative
relationship outcomes was also supported by a recent, national survey (Valenzuela et al., 2014).
Valenzuela et al. (2014) found that Facebook penetration rate predicted higher rates of divorce
across 43 U.S. states, even after controlling for other potential divorce factors (e.g., income and
unemployment). Moreover, social networking use predicted lower marital quality, marital
dissatisfaction, and marital trouble (Valenzuela et al., 2014).
Another avenue of research has focused more specifically on the potential sources of
online and/or social-networking-related relationship conflict. For example, 920 married couples
in Helsper and Whitty’s (2010) study reported that falling in love, engaging in cybersex, flirting,
and revealing personal details to other parties were the most agreed-upon online infidelity
behaviors. More specific to social networking, Cravens et al. (2013) found the following
Facebook-related infidelity behaviors most consistently reported: friending one’s ex-partner,
private messaging, commenting on attractive user’s pictures, and posting an inaccurate
relationship status. Additionally, other recent studies examined two potential sources of conflict
(i.e., befriending romantic interests and attractive alternatives within Facebook friends lists) and
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 7
their associations with relationship investment characteristics (Drouin et al., 2014; Drouin et al.,
2015). Drouin et al. (2014) found that the frequency of friending attractive alternatives during the
relationship, but not simply the number of attractive alternatives contained in one’s friends list,
related to lower levels of relationship commitment. In a follow-up experiment, Drouin et al.
(2015) found that Facebook friends lists served as memory primers for sexual and committed
relationship alternatives: Those who used Facebook (as opposed to memory) to identify potential
relationship partners identified more alternatives, specifically sexual alternatives.
Combined, these studies present empirical evidence that there are multiple avenues
through which individuals can communicate with others online in ways that are perceived to be
infidelity-related or problematic to relationships. More specifically, the elements of social
network communication that are most consistently labeled as problematic include befriending
past partners (or alternative partners), flirtation, secrecy, and engaging in deep or sexual
conversations with others online. However, although these online behaviors have been identified
as potential threats to fidelity and researchers have begun to link these behaviors to aspects of
relationship investment, no known research has examined whether engagement in online IR
behaviors is related to marital dissatisfaction or ambivalence.
1.2. Infidelity-Related Online Behaviors and Relationship Outcomes
For decades, researchers have been exploring the role of relationship satisfaction in
infidelity. Within cross-sectional studies, the results have been rather consistent: Relationship
dissatisfaction is related to a range of IR behaviors, including both emotional and sexual
extradyadic interactions (e.g., Drigotas, Safstrom, & Gentilia, 1999; Roscoe, Cavanaugh, &
Kennedy, 1998; Shaw, Rhoades, Allen, Stanley, & Markman, 2013; Whisman, Gordon, &
Chatav, 2007). Meanwhile, relationship ambivalence, or the experience of both positive and
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 8
negative sentiment about the same relationship (Luescher & Pilemer, 1998), has been little
explored as a correlate of IR behaviors. Relationship ambivalence may develop in response to
past relationship conflict or transgressions in the relationship, such as disagreements or acts of
betrayal (Birditt, Miller, Fingerman, & Lefkowitz , 2009). These acts of betrayal could include
suspicions or confirmations of a partner’s infidelity, which has been shown to be predictive of
one’s own infidelity behaviors (Whisman et al., 2007). In sum, when individuals feel ambivalent
about their committed partner for any reason, they may be more likely to engage in infidelity
behaviors. Extending these findings to an online environment, we expected that both of these
relationship characteristicsdissatisfaction and ambivalencemay be related to engagement in
online IR behaviors. More specifically, we expected:
H1: Those with lower levels of relationship satisfaction and higher levels of ambivalence
would engage in more social media IR behaviors.
Additionally, we wanted to explore attachment orientation as a predictor of engagement
in social media IR behaviors. Attachment research was originally based on observations of
infants’ attachments to their caregivers (e.g., Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978);
however, a number of researchers in the last few decades have suggested that attachment
characteristics influence adults’ relationship interactions (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991;
Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998; Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003; 2007;
DeWall et al., 2011). According to these researchers, those who display secure attachment
patterns are comfortable depending on others and having others depend on them, and they
typically build close, intimate relationships with romantic partners. Meanwhile, those who
display insecure attachment patterns exhibit high levels of attachment avoidance or attachment
anxiety (Brennan et al., 1998).
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 9
Those with high levels of attachment avoidance often display an air of detachment and
need for independence within their romantic relationships. In accordance with this, researchers
have shown that those who are high in avoidance keep an emotional distance from their partners,
and they are also more likely to engage in casual sex, where physical and emotional intimacy are
not necessarily intertwined (Brennan & Shaver, 1995; Feeney & Noller, 1990; Gentzler & Kerns,
2004; Schmitt, 2005). Additionally, those high in attachment avoidance express less commitment
to their romantic partners (DeWall et al., 2011), and attachment avoidance, in addition to lower
levels of commitment, predicts both emotional and sexual infidelity (DeWall et al., 2011;
Drigotas et al., 1999).
Meanwhile, those with high levels of attachment anxiety have an intense need for
closeness and fear of losing their romantic partner. In order to keep their partners, those high in
anxiety often use hyperactivating strategiesor behavioral attempts to draw their partners closer
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003; 2007). These hyperactivating strategies may include engaging in IR
behaviors to incite jealousy in their romantic partners (e.g., Guerrero, Andersen, Jorgensen,
Spitzberg, & Eloy, 1995). Alternatively, those with high levels of attachment anxiety might seek
intimacy outside of their relationship when they feel that their (high) needs for intimacy are not
being met by a current partner (Drigotas et al., 1999; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2013) or when they
feel that they might lose their partner and try to compensate by establishing a relationship with a
new potential partner (Drouin et al., 2015).
Thus, both attachment avoidance and attachment anxiety have been linked with IR
behaviors in empirical studies, however, much of this research (e.g., DeWall et al., 2011;
Drigotas et al., 1999) has focused on unmarried dating adults, whose relationship dynamics may
differ substantially from those who are in more committed relationships. In a more recent study
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 10
of married individuals, Russel, Baker, and McNulty (2013) found that attachment anxiety, but
not attachment avoidance, predicted infidelity among married couples. Thus, in our study, we
sought to further examine the links between attachment characteristics and IR behaviors among
married/cohabiting couples. In accordance with the findings from Russell et al. (2013), we
expected:
H2: Attachment anxiety would predict social media IR behaviors in this married sample.
Finally, we also examined attachment characteristics and gender as moderators in the
relationships between relationship satisfaction, ambivalence, and engagement in social media IR
behaviors. Several researchers have noted that there are sex differences in the ways in which
attachment characteristics interact with infidelity behaviors. As an example, Allen and Baucom
(2004) found that among women, an anxious attachment style was predictive of engaging in
infidelity behaviors, but among men, an avoidant attachment style was predictive of engaging in
infidelity. Moreover, Drigota et al. (1999) found that women who have an anxious attachment
style may engage in infidelity behaviors if they believe their emotional needs are being
unfulfilled by their committed partner. Thus, both attachment characteristics and sex were
explored as potential moderators in the relationship between satisfaction, ambivalence and
engaging in social media IR behaviors.
1.3. Current Study
In sum, the goals of the current, exploratory study were to: (1) develop a brief measure of
social media IR behaviors, (2) explore the prevalence of social media IR behaviors among
individuals in a married/cohabiting sample, and (3) examine the relationships between engaging
in social media IR behaviors, relationship satisfaction and ambivalence, and attachment anxiety
and avoidance.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 11
2. Method
2.1. Participants & Procedure
The data in this study were collected as part of a larger project on parenting and daily
family life (Daily Family Life Project; McDaniel, 2016). We recruited both parents (mother and
father) from families who had at least one young child via a database of families in a
Northeastern U.S. state, announcements on parenting websites and listservs, and announcements
in the local community. This multi-pronged recruitment strategy was utilized to obtain a sample
of families throughout the U.S. After completing informed consent, participation then consisted
of an initial online survey and subsequent follow-up online surveys at 1, 3, and 6 months.
Participants who completed their survey were entered into a drawing for one of three $100 gift
cards at each time point. At baseline, 183 heterosexual couples (including both partners/spouses)
were recruited into the study, exceeding our original goal of 150 couples based on a priori power
analyses for our planned between-person and within-person analyses. In the present study, our
analytic sample consisted of 338 individuals (173 wives and 165 husbands) from 176 families
(due to missing data on 10 wives and 18 husbands). Couples were currently living together in the
United States and had a child age 5 or younger. Due to a slight modification of the focus of the
study after its inception, measures pertaining to online IR behaviors were added part way
through the study. We therefore utilized data for each family from the first time they received the
items. Thus, 65% (n = 220) of the data came from families at baseline, 14% (n = 46) from month
1, and 21% (n = 72) from month 3.
Our analytic sample resided in these U.S. regions: 55% Northeast, 17% West, 14%
Midwest, and 14% South. The majority of participants were Caucasian (92%) and married
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 12
(96%1), and 73% had a college degree. The mean age of wives was 31.59 years old (SD = 4.44;
Range = 20 to 42), and the mean age of husbands was 33.26 (SD = 5.05; Range = 22 to 52).
Participants self-reported their yearly household income, with the median income being $69,500
(SD = $39,500; Range = $0 to $250,000) with 20% indicating some form of state or federal
assistance (e.g., medical assistance, food stamps). The participants had been in relationships with
their current partners for 10.02 years on average (SD = 4.05; Range = 2 to 23 years). The
participants in our final analytic sample as compared with our baseline recruited sample were
more likely to be Caucasian (χ2 (1) = 23.72, p < .001), married (χ2 (1) = 33.25, p < .001) and to
have received at least some college education (χ2 (1) = 14.12, p < .001).
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Social Media Infidelity-Related Behaviors (SMIRB). IR behaviors on social
networking sites were measured with a series of questions we created specifically for this study
based on a review of the relevant literature (e.g., Cravens et al., 2013; Drouin et al., 2014; Drouin
et al., 2015; Helsper & Whitty, 2010; Hertlein, 2012). In creating this measure, we included the
types of behaviors in which those who are unfaithful might engage (such as feeling
uncomfortable, hiding information/being secretive, forming emotional connections with others
instead of one’s partner, messaging past significant others, and getting defensive). Similar
behaviors have also been measured in other studies of online and offline infidelity (e.g., Cravens
& Whiting, 2014; Dibble & Drouin, 2014; Dibble, Drouin, Aune, & Boller, 2015; Drouin,
Miller, & Dibble, 2014; Drouin, Miller, & Dibble, 2015; Helsper & Whitty, 2010). These
questions form the Social Media Infidelity-Related Behaviors (SMIRB) scale, which contains 7
items (e.g., If my spouse/partner asked me about my chats, comments, and messages to others
1 Although 4% of the couples were not legally married, they were in long-standing, cohabiting partnerships (average
relationship length = 5.88 years), were raising at least one child together, and reported similar levels of relationship
satisfaction and ambivalence to married couples. Thus, for parsimony, we henceforth refer to them as married.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 13
on social networking sites, there are some messages I would like to hide from him/her). [See
Table 1 for all 7 items.] Participants rated their agreement on a 6-point scale (1 = strongly
disagree, 6 = strongly agree). Items were averaged to create an overall IR behavior score with
higher scores representing greater tendency to engage in these behaviors (α = .90 for women, .85
for men). We provide other relevant statistics for this measure in the Results section.
2.2.2. Relationship Satisfaction. Participants completed the Quality of Marriage Index
(QMI; Norton, 1983) to measure their relationship satisfaction. For inclusivity across marital
status, we changed the wording from “spouse” to “partner” and from “marriage” to
“relationship.” The QMI, although having the word “quality” in its name, is generally considered
a global assessment of relationship satisfaction, which includes five satisfaction items (e.g., “My
relationship with my partner makes me happy”) on a 7-point scale (1 = very strongly disagree, 7
= very strongly agree) and one overall happiness item on 10-point scale (1 = unhappy, 10 =
perfectly happy). Additionally, the QMI has been shown to correlate highly with other measures
of relationship satisfaction, such as the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007).
Higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction. The QMI had high internal consistency
(α = .96 for women, .95 for men) and functioned well for both married (α = .95) and cohabiting
individuals (α = .95) in our sample. The QMI has been successfully used in prior relationship
research with mixed marital status samples (e.g., Cowan et al., 2009; Feinberg et al., 2010).
2.2.3. Relationship Ambivalence. To measure relationship ambivalence, 3 items (e.g.,
“How ambivalent or unsure are you about continuing in the relationship with your partner?”)
from Braiker and Kelley's (1979) ambivalence subscale were rated by participants. The
ambivalence subscale uses a 7-point scale (1 = not very much or just a little, 7 = very much or a
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 14
lot), with higher scores indicating greater relationship ambivalence or uncertainty. These items
showed good internal consistency (α = .85 for women, .88 for men).
2.2.4. Attachment in Romantic Relationships. To measure adult romantic attachment,
participants completed the Experiences in Close Relationship Scale-Short Form (ECR-S; Wei,
Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Vogel, 2007). The ECR-S asks participants to rate 12 statements on a
7-point scale (1 = disagree strongly, 7 = agree strongly) concerning how they feel in romantic
relationships. Six statements measured attachment anxiety (e.g., “I worry that romantic partners
won’t care about me as much as I care about them”) and six measured attachment avoidance
(e.g., ‘‘I am nervous when partners get too close’’). As a result of low correlation with the other
5 anxiety items, the item "I do not often worry about being abandoned" was dropped (similar to
Ruppel & Curran, 2012). A higher score indicates greater anxiety or greater avoidance (Anxiety
α = .72 for women and .78 for men; Avoidance α = .83 for women and .78 for men).
2.2.5. Control Variables. We included the following controls: participant age, education
(not college graduate = 1), family income, race/ethnicity (not Caucasian = 1), number of children
(more than one child = 1), relationship length in years, and marital status (not married = 1).
3. Results
3.1. Measure of Social Media IR Behaviors
As explained in the measures section, we created 7 items (see Table 1) from a review of
the relevant literature on unfaithfulness in relationship. We then explored whether these items
loaded together by performing a principal components analysis. This revealed one factor that
accounted for 62% of the variance in the entire sample, 67% of the variance for women, and
58% of the variance for men. Individual factor loadings for the entire sample and factor loadings
and descriptives for women and men are listed in Table 1. All loadings were above .53.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 15
3.2. Prevalence of Online IR Behaviors
Paired samples t-tests showed no significant differences between men’s and women’s
engagement in the various IR behaviors (see Table 1); therefore, we report combined prevalence
statistics (i.e., participants who indicated somewhat agree, agree, or strongly agree) for each
item. Overall, 12% (n = 42) would feel uncomfortable if spouse/partner read their messages, 5%
(n = 17) sometimes wonder whether spouse/partner would be upset if read messages, 6% (n =
20) say there are some messages they want to hide, 7% (n = 24) sometimes share emotional or
intimate information with others instead of spouse/partner, 6% (n = 19) sometimes like to chat or
message old romantic partners, 6% (n = 20) get defensive or angry if disturbed while online, and
5% (n = 16) sometimes hide the things they say to others online.
3.3. Associations Between IR Behaviors and Relationship Satisfaction, Ambivalence, and
Attachment
Greater IR behavior on social networking was significantly related to lower relationship
satisfaction and greater ambivalence as well as greater attachment avoidance and anxiety in both
women and men (see Table 2). To examine our hypotheses further, we used multilevel modeling
(SAS Proc Mixed) to account for the nested nature of our data (spouses/partners within families).
We ran two models predicting online IR behavior: Model 1 with relationship satisfaction as the
predictor, and Model 2 with relationship ambivalence as the predictor (see unstandardized
estimates in Table 3). Both attachment anxiety and avoidance were included as predictors and
moderators. Gender was entered as a moderator (coded 1 = male, 0 = female) to test for
differences in predictions for males and females. Controls (e.g., participant age, household
income, ethnicity, etc.) were also included, and we ultimately removed nonsignificant
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 16
interactions from the final models to increase parsimony and the interpretability of lower order
terms that were significant.
3.3.1. Relationship Satisfaction and Ambivalence. In support of H1 and as shown in
Table 3, lower levels of relationship satisfaction (Model 1; b = -0.03, p < .001; Cohen’s f 2 = .08)
and higher levels of ambivalence (Model 2; b = 0.26, p < .001; Cohen’s f 2 = .15) predicted
greater social media IR behavior.
3.3.2. Attachment avoidance and anxiety. In support of H2 and as shown in Table 3,
greater attachment anxiety predicted greater social media IR behavior (in Model 1 and Model 2;
bs = 0.11 and 0.10, ps < .01; Cohen’s f 2 = .05). Moreover, attachment avoidance did not predict
IR behavior.
3.3.3. Moderation by Attachment Anxiety and Gender. As shown in Table 3, attachment
anxiety and gender significantly interacted with relationship satisfaction in predicting IR
behavior (b = 0.02, p = .02; Cohen’s f 2 = .02). We plotted this interaction in Figure 1. We
explored this three-way interaction using the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013) and obtained
Johnson-Neyman regions of significance. For men with average or lower levels of attachment
anxiety, higher relationship satisfaction related to less IR behavior, and within this group of men
(54% of men) the strength of the relation between relationship satisfaction and IR behavior
became stronger the lower their anxiety. For men with above average levels of attachment
anxiety (46% of men), there was no association between relationship satisfaction and IR
behavior. In contrast, relationship satisfaction was not associated with IR behavior in women
whose anxiety levels were very low (i.e., lower than 1 standard deviation below the average
anxiety level; 16% of women). However, for most women (whose anxiety levels were 1 standard
deviation below average and higher; 84% of women), higher relationship satisfaction predicted
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 17
less IR behavior. Additionally, within these women (and in contrast to men) the strength of the
association between relationship satisfaction and IR behavior becomes stronger as anxiety levels
increase.
4. Discussion
Social networking behaviors have been a subject of recent inquiry as a potential source of
relationship dissatisfaction, conflict, and dissolution (Clayton, 2014; Clayton et al., 2013;
Cravens et al., 2013; Fox et al., 2014; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Valenzuela et al., 2014).
However, the existing research has focused mainly on general social networking use, and few
studies have examined the specific social networking behaviors that may be problematic in
romantic relationships. Therefore, we examined the prevalence of specific types of potentially
problematic IR social networking behaviors among married/cohabiting couples, and whether
engaging in online IR behaviors related to relationship satisfaction, ambivalence, and attachment.
In our sample, only a small percentage of partners reported engaging in social media IR
behaviors. Although 12% indicated that they would be uncomfortable if their partner read their
messages, fewer than 10% of partners stated that they had: shared intimate information with
others online, chatted with ex-relationship partners, engaged in behaviors online that they would
hide from their partner, hidden their chats from their partners, gotten defensive or angry when
their partner interrupted their online behavior, or thought that their partners might be upset if
they read through their online correspondence. These results suggest that few married/cohabiting
individuals engage in online IR behaviors. As research has shown that social media use is
associated with relational conflict and dissolution (Clayton, 2014; Clayton et al., 2013; Cravens
et al., 2013; Fox et al., 2014; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Valenzuela et al., 2014) and lower
levels of love (Northrup & Smith, 2016), these low prevalence statistics were somewhat
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 18
surprising as presumably, IR behaviors are the source of some of this conflict. However, there
are a few potential explanations for these findings.
First, most of these previous studies on social media use and relationship
conflict/dissolution were conducted with single college students, who may have experienced
SNS-related conflict and negative outcomes in a past or current relationship. In contrast, this
study specifically examined primarily married couples who had volunteered to participate in a
longitudinal study of family life. Consequently, negative relationship dynamics (e.g., IR
behaviors) and outcomes (i.e., conflict and dissolution) may be less likely to exist among these
couples, who chose together to participate in this study. Second, their willingness to participate
in this study may be reflective of a greater level of openness and commitment than a couple who
would not choose to participate in such a study, and the study’s duration and intensity may have
lessened the likelihood that people would admit to IR behaviors in self-reports (e.g., social
desirability). Therefore, our prevalence statistics likely represent a conservative estimate of these
types of behaviors within married/cohabiting couples. Finally, our results suggest that there are
components of social media usage that are not infidelity related that might be contributing to
relational conflict among married couples. In fact, some researchers have suggested that social
media and technology conflict may exist among couples simply because one is choosing to
engage with technology over engaging with one’s partner (McDaniel & Coyne, 2016; Roberts &
David, 2016). As such, the relationship between technology and/or social media use and marital
conflict is likely nuanced, comprised of both IR behaviors and general usage patterns that
interfere with couple satisfaction.
More importantly, our analyses showed that married/cohabiting individuals who were
less satisfied and more ambivalent in their relationship were more likely to engage in IR social
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 19
media behaviors. Valenzuela et al. (2014) found that higher overall Facebook usage predicted
lower levels of marital satisfaction and greater incidence of divorce, postulating that social media
may provide social support for those in unhappy marriages, offering opportunities for cheating
behaviors that may cause conflict and erode marital quality. In this study, we examined
relationship satisfaction and ambivalence as predictors of IR behaviors, on the assumption that
engagement in IR behaviors may be the problematic aspect of social media usage, that
relationship satisfaction and ambivalence are more stable traits, and that social media IR
behaviors may be more transient behaviors. With consideration for Valenzuela et al. (2014) we
suggest that this relationship is likely bi-directional; those in less satisfied relationships likely
seek out these types of online interactions with others, and these interactions, in turn, may cause
lower levels of satisfaction. In the future, we intend to fill gaps in the literature with analyses of
relationship directionality.
Finally, although both attachment anxiety and avoidance were positively related to social
media IR behaviors, only attachment anxiety emerged as a unique, significant predictor once
other variables (e.g., relationship satisfaction or ambivalence) were controlled. These findings
align with Russell et al. (2013), who found that among married couples, attachment anxiety but
not attachment avoidance, predicts infidelity. This study offers an extension to prior work,
showing that similar relationship characteristics might influence both offline and online IR
behaviors. However, the results from our study do not elucidate whether those who are anxiously
attached are engaging in IR behaviors as hyperactivating strategies to incite jealousy in their
partners (Guerrero, et al., 1995; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003; 2007) or to line up a potential
partner in case their current relationship fails (Drouin et al., 2015). Thus, future research should
more directly address the motivations behind engagement in these IR behaviors, especially
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 20
among those with insecure attachment patterns. Additionally, attachment anxiety and gender
were moderators in the relationship between relationship satisfaction and social media IR
behaviors. For men with lower attachment anxiety (i.e., more secure attachment styles), higher
levels of satisfaction predicted lower levels of social media IR behaviors. On the contrary, most
of the women in our sample and especially those with higher attachment anxiety demonstrated
this pattern. Perhaps, for men, there is more linear alignment between secure attachment, marital
satisfaction, and fidelity, but for women, the relationship is more complex. It is possible, for
women, that fear of losing one’s partner is greater for those who are highly satisfied in their
relationships, and this fear may keep them from engaging in online IR behavior. Again, this is a
direction for future inquiry.
4.1. Limitations and Conclusion
As mentioned, the participants from this study were volunteers from a longitudinal study
of family life who were fairly well-educated and in stable relationships, and these individuals
may be less likely to have engaged in or reported online IR behaviors. However, there was
enough variance in online IR behaviors that we were able to examine relations between
relationship quality and IR behaviors. In general, our effect sizes were small to medium (as
indicated by the f 2 statistics; Cohen, 1988), which suggests that there are other factors that also
predict online IR behavior that should be explored. Additionally, our measure of social media IR
behaviors was limited to seven items. There are likely other online behaviors that might indicate
or facilitate infidelity, and we look to future studies to help elucidate those behaviors.
Despite these limitations, our study adds to a growing body of literature on social media
and relationships. Overall, few married/cohabiting individuals reported engaging in the social
media infidelity-related (IR) behaviors we measured. However, those who were less satisfied and
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 21
more ambivalent in their relationships engaged in them more often. Moreover, attachment
anxiety interacted in a complex way, with the strength of the association between IR behavior
and relationship satisfaction becoming stronger for men low in anxiety but for women high in
anxiety. In sum, similar characteristics appear to influence both offline and online IR behaviors,
and our study offers an important initial inquiry into the nature of those characteristics and
behaviors among stable married/cohabiting couples.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 22
References
Allen, E. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2004). Adult attachment and patterns of extradyadic
involvements: How do they compare? Journal of Sex Research, 43, 307-317.
Bartholomew, K. & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a
four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226244.
Birditt, K. S., Miller, L. M., Fingerman, K. L., & Lwefkowitz, E. S. (2009). Tensions in the
parent and adult child relationship: Links to solidarity and ambivalence. Psychology and
Aging, 24(2), 287-295.
Braiker, H. B., & Kelley, H. H. (1979). Conflict in the Development of Close
Relationships. Social Exchange in Developing Relationships, 135-168.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L, & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult
attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.),
Attachment Theory and Close Relationships (pp. 4676). New York: Guilford.
Brennan, K. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1995). Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation and
romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Soc Psychology Bulletin, 21, 267283.
Clayton, R. B., Nagurney, A., & Smith, J. R. (2013). Cheating, Breakup, and Divorce: Is
Facebook Use to Blame? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(10),
717-720. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0424
Clayton, R. B. (2014). The Third Wheel: The Impact of Twitter Use on Relationship Infidelity
and Divorce. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(7), 425-430.
Cohen, J. E. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 23
Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., Pruett, M. K., Pruett, K., & Wong, J. J. (2009). Promoting fathers'
engagement with children: Preventive interventions for low-income families. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 71(3), 663-679.
Cravens, J. D., Leckie, K. R., & Whiting, J. B. (2013). Facebook Infidelity: When Poking
Becomes Problematic. Contemporary Family Therapy, 35(1), 74-90.
doi:10.1007/s10591-012-9231-5
Cravens, J. D., & Whiting, J. B. (2014). Clinical Implications of Internet Infidelity: Where
Facebook Fits In. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 42(4), 325-339.
Dew, B., Brubaker, M., & Hays, D. (2006). From the Altar to the Internet: Married Men and
their Online Sexual Behavior. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 13(2-3), 195-207.
Dewall, C. N., Lambert, N. M., Slotter, E. B., Pond, R. S., Deckman, T., Finkel, E. J., . . .
Fincham, F. D. (2011). So far away from one's partner, yet so close to romantic
alternatives: Avoidant attachment, interest in alternatives, and infidelity.Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1302-1316. doi:10.1037/a0025497
Dibble, J. L., & Drouin, M. (2014). Using modern technology to keep in touch with back
burners: An investment model analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 96-100.
Dibble, J. L., Drouin, M., Aune, K. S., & Boller, R. R. (2015). Simmering on the Back Burner:
Communication with and Disclosure of Relationship Alternatives. Communication
Quarterly, 63(3), 329-344. doi:10.1080/01463373.2015.1039719
Drigotas, S. M., Safstrom, C. A., & Gentilia, T. (1999). An investment model prediction of
dating infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 509-524.
Drouin, M., Miller, D. A., & Dibble, J. L. (2014). Ignore your partners’ current Facebook
friends; beware the ones they add! Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 483-488.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 24
Drouin, M., Miller, D. A., & Dibble, J. L. (2015). Facebook or Memory: Which Is the Real
Threat to Your Relationship? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 18(10), 561-566. doi:10.1089/cyber.2015.0259
Feeney, J. A., & Noller, P. (1990). Attachment style as a predictor of adult romantic
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 281291.
Feinberg, M. E., Jones, D. E., Kan, M. L., & Goslin, M. C. (2010). Effects of Family
Foundations on parents and children: 3.5 years after baseline. Journal of Family
Psychology, 24(5), 532.
Fox, J., Osborn, J. L., & Warber, K. M. (2014). Relational dialectics and social networking sites:
The role of Facebook in romantic relationship escalation, maintenance, conflict, and
dissolution. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 527-534. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.031
Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing
precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction
Index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572-583.
Gentzler, A. L., & Kerns, K. A. (2004). Associations between insecure attachment and sexual
experiences. Personal Relationships, 11, 249265.
Guerrero, L. K., Andersen, P. A., Jorgensen, P. F., Spitzberg, B. H., & Eloy, S. V. (1995).
Coping with the green-eyed monster: Conceptualizing and measuring communicative
responses to romantic jealousy. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 270304.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis:
A Regression-Based Approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 25
Helsper, E. J., & Whitty, M. T. (2010). Netiquette within married couples: Agreement about
acceptable online behavior and surveillance between partners. Computers in Human
Behavior, 26(5), 916-926. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.006
Hertlein, K. M. (2012). Digital Dwelling: Technology in Couple and Family Relationships.
Family Relations, 61(3), 374-387. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2012.00702.x
Luescher, K. & Pillemer, K. (1998) Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study
of parent-child relations in later-life. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 413-425.
Lupkin, S. (2012). Can Facebook ruin your marriage? ABC News. Retrieved from
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/facebook-relationship-status/story?id=16406245
Martins, A., Pereira, M., Andrade, R., Dattilio, F. M., Narciso, I., & Canavarro, M. C. (2016).
Infidelity in dating relationships: Gender-specific correlates of face-to-face and online
extradyadic involvement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 193205.
McDaniel, B. T. (2016). Understanding stability and change in daily coparenting: Predictors
and outcomes in families with young children (Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania
State University).
McDaniel, B. T., & Coyne, S. M. (2016). “Technoference”: The interference of technology in
couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-
being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5, 8598. doi:10.1037/ppm0000065
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood:
Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, 53-152. doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(03)01002-5
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and
change. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 26
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2013). The role of attachment security in adolescent and adult
close relationships. In J. A. Simpson, L. Campbell, J. A. Simpson, L. Campbell (Eds.) ,
The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 6689). New York, NY, US: Oxford
University Press.
Northrup, J., & Smith, J. (2016). Effects of Facebook maintenance behaviors on partners’
experience of love. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal, 38, 245
253. doi:10.1007/s10591-016-9379-5
Norton, R. (1983). Measuring Marital Quality: A Critical Look at the Dependent Variable.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45(1), 141. doi:10.2307/351302
Perrin A. (2015). Social Networking Usage: 2005-2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved
fromwww.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/2015/Social-Networking-Usage-2005-201
Ridgway, J. L., & Clayton, R. B. (2016). Instagram unfiltered: Exploring associations of body
image satisfaction, Instagram #selfie posting, and negative romantic relationship outcomes.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 19, 27. doi:10.1089/cyber.2015.0433
Roberts, J. A. & David, M. E. (2016). My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone:
Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Computers in
Human Behavior, 54, 134 141. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.058
Roscoe, B., Cavanaugh, L. E., & Kennedy, D. R. (1988). Dating infidelity: Behaviors, reasons
and consequences. Adolescence, 23, 3543.
Ruppel, E. K., & Curran, M. A. (2012). Relational sacrifices in romantic relationships:
Satisfaction and the moderating role of attachment. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 29(4), 508-529. doi:10.1177/0265407511431190
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 27
Russell, V. M., Baker, L. R., & Mcnulty, J. K. (2013). Attachment insecurity and infidelity in
marriage: Do studies of dating relationships really inform us about marriage? Journal of
Family Psychology, 27(2), 242-251. doi:10.1037/a0032118
Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Is short-term mating the maladaptive result of insecure attachment? A test
of competing evolutionary perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31,
747768.
Shaw, A. M., Rhoades, G. K., Allen, E. S., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2013). Predictors
of extradyadic sexual involvement in unmarried opposite-sex relationships. Journal of
Sex Research, 50, 598610. doi:10.1080/00224499.2012.666816.
Valenzuela, S., Halpern, D., & Katz, J. E. (2014). Social network sites, marriage well-being and
divorce: Survey and state-level evidence from the United States. Computers in Human
Behavior, 36, 94-101. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.034
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The Experiences in Close
Relationship Scale (ECR)-Short Form: Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187-204. doi:10.1080/00223890701268041
Whisman, M. A., Gordon, K. C., & Chatav, Y. (2007). Predicting sexual infidelity in a
population-based sample of married individuals. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 320
324.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 30
Table 3. Multilevel models of social media infidelity-related behaviors predicted by relationship satisfaction,
ambivalence, and attachment avoidance and anxiety
Model 1:
Relationship Satisfaction
as Predictor
Model 2:
Relationship Ambivalence
as Predictor
Fixed effects
b
(SE)
b
(SE)
Intercept
1.55***
(.11)
1.56***
(.11)
Gender
0.003
(.07)
-0.003
(.07)
Control Variables
Age
0.009
(.009)
0.01
(.009)
Family income
0.001
(.001)
0.001
(.001)
Not Caucasian
0.25
(.13)
0.18
(.13)
Not college graduate
-0.09
(.09)
-0.04
(.09)
Multiple children
0.06
(.07)
0.03
(.07)
Marital status
0.31
(.21)
0.20
(.20)
Relationship length
-0.02
(.01)
-0.01
(.01)
Relationship satisfaction or ambivalence, attachment avoidance and anxiety, and interactions with gender
RQ (Satisfaction or ambivalence)
-0.03***
(.008)
0.26***
(.04)
Avoidance
0.08
(.05)
0.07
(.04)
Anxiety
0.11**
(.04)
0.10***
(.03)
RQ X Gender
0.01
(.01)
--
--
Avoidance X Gender
--
--
--
--
Anxiety X Gender
-0.009
(.06)
--
--
RQ X Avoidance
--
--
--
--
RQ X Anxiety
-0.01
(.007)
--
--
RQ X Avoidance X Gender
--
--
--
--
RQ X Anxiety X Gender
0.02*
(.009)
--
--
Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05. RQ = Relationship satisfaction in Model 1 and relationship ambivalence in Model 2. Gender is coded 0 = female
and 1 = male; for interactions, the main effect is for women, and the interaction is the value to add to the main effect in order to get the effect for men.
Non-significant interactions were trimmed and are marked with a "--". Control variables were coded as follows: Gender (1 = male, 0 = female), Not
Caucasian (0 = Caucasian, 1 = other race), Not college graduate (1 = college grad., 0 = less education than college grad.), Multiple children (1 = multiple
children, 0 = only one child in family), and marital status (1 = living together, not married, 0 = married). Except for the above mentioned controls, all other
variables were grand mean centered. Family income was in $1,000 units.
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 31
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
Low Rel. Sat.
High Rel. Sat.
Infidelity-related behavior
Men
Low Anxiety
High Anxiety
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
Low Rel. Sat.
High Rel. Sat.
Women
Low Anxiety
High Anxiety
Figure 1. Predicted values of social media infidelity-related behavior at high and low (1 SD
above and 1 SD below mean) values of relationship satisfaction, moderated by attachment
anxiety and gender. High anxiety is 1 SD above mean (black line) and low anxiety is 1 SD below
mean (gray dashed line).
INFIDELITY ON SOCIAL MEDIA 32
Appendix
Social Media Infidelity-Related Behaviors (SMIRB)
Please rate how much you agree with the following statements.
1. I would feel uncomfortable if my spouse/partner read my chats, comments, and messages
to others on social networking sites.
2. I sometimes wonder whether my spouse/partner would be upset if he/she read my chats,
comments, or messages to others on social networking sites.
3. If my spouse/partner asked me about my chats, comments, and messages to others on
social networking sites, there are some messages I would like to hide from him/her.
4. Sometimes, instead of going to my spouse/partner, I share deep emotional or intimate
information with others online.
5. I sometimes like to chat or message old romantic partners online or on social networking
sites.
6. If my spouse/partner disturbs or interrupts me while I am online, I sometimes get
defensive or angry.
7. I sometimes hide the things I say to others online from my spouse/partner.
Scale:
1 Strongly disagree
2 Disagree
3 Somewhat disagree
4 Somewhat agree
5 Agree
6 Strongly agree
... Because of this, many couples have extramarital internet relationships [7,8] . ...
... It is the same in Arabic. Analyze the same group's construct validity and test-retest reliability [7,17,20] . ...
... We decided to validate an Arabic version of a measurement tool (Social Media Infidelity-Related Behaviors Inventory SMIRB) [7,17] for screen, detect, and research purposes in countries using our Arabic language. The 14-item questionnaire included short 7-item SMIRB inventory. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: There are rising interests in social media research in Arabic countries. Aim of the work: To estimate the reliability, construct validity and factor analysis of the Social Media Infidelity-Related Behaviors Inventory (SMIRB). Methods: The English version of SMIRB was translated into Arabic and verified by 47 bilingual experts. The Arabic version was conducted in electronic format to 247 (females & males, age from 18-60 years old) Egyptian participants who were members at Egyptians social media sites and chat-rooms and were selected randomly. Participants were reassessed 4 weeks after the initial administration of the scale. The Statistical analysis was performed to test-retest reliability, item internal consistency (IIC), interclass correlation (ICC), factor analysis and construct validity. Outcome: Valid and reliable Arabic translated version of SMRIB. Results: Cronbach's a coefficient to assess (IIC) was found to be 0.90 and satisfactory for the 14 items constitute SMIRB. It's14 items met the IIC requirement of correlation ≥ with high ICC (0.965, 95% C.I. (0.954-0.974), p <0.001. The results indicated good repeatability of the SMIRB and construct validity. Factor analysis revealed good construct validity with one-factor solution strong factors emerged with the same construct, accounting for 51.63% of the variance. Each item loaded highly (≥0.45) on the corresponding factor. Clinical implications: we expect that this Arabic translated version of the scale will be widely used in Egypt and Arabic countries Strength and limitations: our research is one of the rare types of research in this field in Egypt. On the other hand, we couldn't assess sexual orientation due to our culture conservation. Conclusion: The Arabic translation of SMIRB is an acceptable, reliable, and valid translated measure to assess the infidelity related behaviors due to social media use.
... Facebook facilitates the creation of close relationships more easily than face-to-face interaction. Unlike face-to-face interaction, in which initial reluctance appears when sharing personal information until the relationship is familiar enough, Facebook offers access to all information on the user's profile, including personal information, referring to interests, opinions, favorite activities, and preferences such as movies, music, or politics [5]. ...
... A growing body of research has suggested that Facebook usage predicts negative relationship outcomes, such as cheating, breakups, and divorce [6]. Thus, social networks provide a way to initiate and perpetuate behaviors that can be potentially harmful to romantic relationships [5]. In other words, social media platforms could be used for infidelity behaviors, and researchers have reported that these online platforms are often used for that [5]. ...
... Thus, social networks provide a way to initiate and perpetuate behaviors that can be potentially harmful to romantic relationships [5]. In other words, social media platforms could be used for infidelity behaviors, and researchers have reported that these online platforms are often used for that [5]. The most common behaviors related to infidelity on Facebook were reported as befriending a former partner, sending private messages to an ex-partner, adding comments to photos of attractive people, and posting an inaccurate relationship status [6]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Little research has been focused on offline or online infidelity in GL dating relationships, especially in a post-communist socio-cultural context. Infidelity–related (IR) behaviors on social media sites might be as hurtful to relationships as offline infidelity, both in gay, lesbian (GL) and heterosexual romantic monogamous relationships. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to examine the associations between dyadic satisfaction, attitudes toward infidelity, and problematic internet usage, with IR behaviors on social media sites among GL and heterosexual unmarried individuals in Romanian sexual minority communities. Results showed that GL respondents did not significantly differ from heterosexual participants regarding IR behaviors. Furthermore, we found the main effect of attitudes toward infidelity and problematic internet use on IR behaviors. Sexual orientation highlights the main effect of IR behaviors when analyzed with dyadic satisfaction. The current study may be a precursor to further research investigating correlations in online IR behavior among lesbian and gay individuals engaging in consensual nonmonogamy. Implications of the findings are discussed in the social context of a post-communist country where GL individuals may face discrimination and stigma because of their sexual orientation.
... Satisfaction is not only correlated with the number of extradyadic partners people admit to having (Wiggins & Lederer, 1984), but also predicts the degree of involvement of the infidelity (e.g., one-night stand versus an ongoing relationship; Glass & Wright, 1985;Tsapelas et al., 2010), and the type of affair (e.g., sexual versus emotional; McDaniel et al., 2017). In fact, relationship satisfaction is a significant predictor of online-only infidelity related behavior, even after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age) and other relationship factors, such as marital status or relationship length (Martins et al., 2016;McDaniel et al., 2017;Whisman et al., 2007). ...
... Satisfaction is not only correlated with the number of extradyadic partners people admit to having (Wiggins & Lederer, 1984), but also predicts the degree of involvement of the infidelity (e.g., one-night stand versus an ongoing relationship; Glass & Wright, 1985;Tsapelas et al., 2010), and the type of affair (e.g., sexual versus emotional; McDaniel et al., 2017). In fact, relationship satisfaction is a significant predictor of online-only infidelity related behavior, even after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age) and other relationship factors, such as marital status or relationship length (Martins et al., 2016;McDaniel et al., 2017;Whisman et al., 2007). ...
Article
Infidelity is often defined as perceived as a violation of relationship exclusivity rules, and many view infidelities as immoral. Thus, one can imagine the importance of understanding why up to a fifth of research samples report cheating in their current relationships. There is considerable literature regarding what factors predict infidelity. Although individual characteristics associated with infidelity do exist, relationship-based variables tend to be the most consistent and robust factors. This chapter will discuss various theories and research findings that suggested different relationship-based factors and frameworks with which to consider and predict why some people engage in infidelity. This chapter reviews some major ideas and research through the lens of the investment model of commitment (i.e., satisfaction, investment, quality of alternatives, commitment), as well as other relationship-based variables (e.g., opportunities and boredom, relationship type and length) that have received empirical support. Finally, the chapter ends with a nod to future directions in this area, and a notion of what researchers should expect from the literature in the future.
... Satisfaction is not only correlated with the number of extradyadic partners people admit to having (Wiggins & Lederer, 1984), but also predicts the degree of involvement of the infidelity (e.g., one-night stand versus an ongoing relationship; Glass & Wright, 1985;Tsapelas et al., 2010), and the type of affair (e.g., sexual versus emotional; McDaniel et al., 2017). In fact, relationship satisfaction is a significant predictor of online-only infidelity related behavior, even after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age) and other relationship factors, such as marital status or relationship length (Martins et al., 2016;McDaniel et al., 2017;Whisman et al., 2007). ...
... Satisfaction is not only correlated with the number of extradyadic partners people admit to having (Wiggins & Lederer, 1984), but also predicts the degree of involvement of the infidelity (e.g., one-night stand versus an ongoing relationship; Glass & Wright, 1985;Tsapelas et al., 2010), and the type of affair (e.g., sexual versus emotional; McDaniel et al., 2017). In fact, relationship satisfaction is a significant predictor of online-only infidelity related behavior, even after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age) and other relationship factors, such as marital status or relationship length (Martins et al., 2016;McDaniel et al., 2017;Whisman et al., 2007). ...
Book
Psychological research has produced a rich body of empirical data documenting humanity’s propensity to commit infidelity in the context of long-term relationships, but comparatively little work has been dedicated to synthesizing these data into an integrated framework that encompasses the full range of its processes, from why it occurs in the first place to how it affects the long-term relationship thereafter. This edited handbook integrates a broad range of topics such as characteristics related to the propensity to commit infidelity, sex differences in reactions to infidelity, our inclination to dissolve relationships after infidelity, and other responses to infidelity. It showcases contributions from experts in social psychology, evolutionary psychology, and others who specialize in research on romantic relationships. The handbook discusses the processes of infidelity alongside sources of variation, such as sexual orientation, developmental life history, individual differences, and culture. This volume captures the interdisciplinary quality of research on the predictors, nature, and consequences of infidelity for the broader social scientific community interested in trust in romantic relationships.
... When values are not shared, partners may be more likely to participate in financial activities the other disapproves of, whether secretly or explicitly, likely leading to increased conflict and lower relationship quality (Baisden et al., 2018). Additionally, marital satisfaction negatively predicted minor instances of infidelity (Shackelford et al., 2008;McDaniel et al., 2017), positive attitudes toward infidelity (Isma and Turnip, 2019), and EMI Shackelford et al., 2008). ...
Article
Full-text available
Introduction Although spouses frequently financially deceive each other (MFD; i.e., marital financial deception), few studies have examined this relationship behavior. The purpose of our study is to examine predictors of separate and joint occurrences of MFD and extramarital affairs (EMI). We chose the predictors we tested using social exchange theory (SET). Methods We used a national sample of married individuals and multinomial logistic regression analyses to examine how different predictors were associated with membership in three different groups (MFD with no EMI, EMI with no MFD, and both MFD and EMI) relative to the group of participants who reported neither behaviors. Results Relationship satisfaction was associated with a lower likelihood of being in the MFD-only group, moral commitment was negatively associated with membership in both EMI groups, and personal dedication commitment was negatively associated with membership in both MFD groups. Flirting with someone other than one’s spouse was positively associated with being in all three groups relative to the reference group. The personal importance of religion was not associated with group membership. Discussion Moral commitment, personal dedication commitment, and flirting with someone other than one’s spouse predicted these two types of marital deception. It is likely that other issues that affect marital outcomes, comparisons, and monitoring alternatives to the relationship may predict MFD and/or EMI.
... Bağlanma. Yetişkin bağlanmasının her iki boyutu (kaygı ve kaçınma) da aldatma ile ilişkilendirilmiştir. Bağlanma kaygısı yüksek olan bireyler, daha çok evlilik dışı ilişki rapor etmekte (Bogaert ve Sadava, 2002;Russell, Baker ve McNulty, 2013), fiziksel ve duygusal aldatma ölçümlerinde daha yüksek puan almakta (Pereira, Taysi, Orcan ve Fincham, 2014) ve internette daha sık aldatma davranışı içinde bulunmaktadır (Ferron, Lussier, Sabourin ve Brassard, 2017;McDaniel, Drouin ve Cravens, 2017). Bağlanma kaçınması da hem fiziksel (Allen ve Baucom, 2004; DeWall ve ark., 2011) hem de çevrimiçi aldatmayı (Ferron ve ark., 2017) yordamaktadır. ...
... La investigación es basta al señalar que las motivaciones para cometer una infidelidad se derivan de múltiples factores y pueden estar relacionadas con causas personales, déficits en la relación de pareja, o socio-sexuales y situacionales (McDaniel, Drouin, y Cravens, 2017;Negash y Morgan, 2016;Selterman, García y Tsapelas, 2017). Con respecto a factores personales, se ha identificado que el comportamiento infiel tiene como facilitador la presencia de diversos rasgos de personalidad como la extroversión, el neuroticismo, bajos niveles de amabilidad y conciencia (van Zyl, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
La infidelidad es un fenómeno multicausal, con consecuencias individuales, familiares y sociales, que afectan la salud física y la emocional. El objetivo de este trabajo es identificar a grupos de jóvenes universitarios con relación de pareja en el último año, a partir de la variable infidelidad y describir sus características desde variables proximales. En la investigación participaron 172 mujeres y 44 hombres de entre 18 y 30 años. Se midieron las variables infidelidad, manejo del conflicto, comunicación, celos y conducta sexual. Como resultado se identificaron tres grupos con particularidades diferentes: “deseo de infidelidad emocional” quienes establecen vínculos románticos; “no infieles” que no cometen adulterio e “infieles sexuales” que son aquellas personas que practican la infidelidad sexual; concluyendo que los “no infieles” son menos celosos, se comunican asertivamente y resuelven conflictos de pareja más efectivamente en contraste con los “infieles sexuales”.
Article
Contemporary communication technology has permeated into the social fabric and has transformed the ways people interact, consume, and exchange information. Currently, virtual socialization is prevalent through social networking sites (SNS). SNS use can also threaten romantic relationships by facilitating infidelity, jealousy, and conflict. Partners may resort to engaging in online surveillance to guard their mate. We surveyed N = 277 adults (68.9% women; Mage = 35.19, SD = 10.65) who are living together in a marital or committed relationship with a partner. In a logistic regression analysis we examined whether relationship commitment, relationship satisfaction, perceived quality of alternatives, social media infidelity-related behaviors (SMIRB), or neuroticism predicted favorable or unfavorable attitudes towards password sharing. After controlling for gender, we found that only SMIRB was negatively associated with attitudes toward password sharing. Those who reported engaging in greater SMIRB behaviors were least likely to endorse password sharing. Implications and limitations are discussed.
Chapter
Building on D. Morgan’s concept of ‘family practices’ as I discussed in Chap. 4, this chapter is primarily concerned with the ‘practices of intimacy’, with the aim of understanding how people experience intimacy and build a sense of closeness. The activities that ‘doing’ family and disclosing intimacy involve when intimate couples are split geographically are contextually varied and, in this regard, three dimensions of practices of family and intimacy are teased out: practices of mobile intimacy, emotion and caring. The narratives emerging from using WeChat indicate how the use of Information and Communication Technologies can both create opportunities for people to enhance existing relational bonds, while decentring love and commitment. While many of the studies on the practices approach emphasise ‘doing’, this research provides insight on how acts of not doing (emotion) can also be articulated as a way of maintaining a sense of intimacy and constructing a family life. I conclude the chapter with an analysis of practices associated with filial piety in the Chinese context. It is argued that by focusing on the practices of intimacy, families can be experienced and constructed differently, while also being informed by cultural discourses and social institutions of family and gender.
Article
Recent research on relationship nostalgia, a sentimental longing for the past of one's romantic relationship, has shown to improve commitment, which should protect against infidelity intentions. However, previous research has shown that more insecurely attached persons do not reap the same benefits from the emotion of nostalgia. The current work introduced the concept of relationship nostalgia preference (i.e., the extent to which people would like displays of nostalgia from their romantic partners [e.g., feeling safe and secure like in earlier parts of the relationship]). In Study 1, nostalgia preference's associations with attachment style and relationship quality (satisfaction, etc.) were tested, revealing negative correlations with attachment avoidance and positive correlations with relationship quality. In Study 2, a conditional process model exhibited how avoidant attachment predicted lower nostalgia preference (replicating Study 1), which was related to reduced commitment. Commitment reduction, in turn, predicted higher attitudes toward infidelity and intentions to commit infidelity. Overall, when people are more avoidantly attached, they like relationship nostalgia less, which has downstream negative consequences for their partnerships.
Article
Full-text available
This study collected data from 75 heterosexual couples. Partners self-reported their own Facebook behaviors as well as their perceptions of their partner’s Facebook behaviors. Partners also completed the Partner Relationship Quality Components inventory. Analyses used a pairwise data set according to the Actor Partner Interdependence Model. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that two factors explained 59 % of the variance regarding Facebook behaviors: Partner Facebook Maintenance (PFM) and Actor Facebook Maintenance (AFM). Two structural equation models were created, one proposing that PFM and AFM would predict Actor Love and Partner Love when controlling for length of relationship, relationship status, and gender, the other proposing that Actor Love and Partner Love would predict PFM and AFM. Overall analysis indicates good model fit for both models. These results suggest that partners who perceive higher levels of love in their relationship actually participate in less Facebook Maintenance behaviors, and couples who engage in more Facebook Maintenance behaviors experience less love in the relationship. Implications for couples and therapists are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Our model outlines the cognitive operations, response strategies, and dynamics of the attachment system in adulthood. It also describes the goals of each attachment strategy and their psychological manifestations and consequences. Whereas the goals of security-based strategies are to form intimate relationships, to build a person's psychological resources, and to broaden his or her perspectives and capacities, the goal of secondary attachment strategies is to manage attachment-system activation and reduce or eliminate the pain caused by frustrated proximity-seeking attempts. Hyperactivating strategies keep the person focused on the search for love and security, and constantly on the alert for threats, separations, and betrayals. Deactivating strategies keep the attachment system in check, with serious consequences for cognitive and emotional openness. This framework serves as our "working model" for understanding the activation and functioning of the attachment system in adulthood. It also provides a framework for reviewing our research findings, which is the mission of the next section.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to examine the predictors and consequences associated with Instagram selfie posting. Thus, this study explored whether body image satisfaction predicts Instagram selfie posting and whether Instagram selfie posting is then associated with Instagram-related conflict and negative romantic relationship outcomes. A total of 420 Instagram users aged 18 to 62 years (M = 29.3, SD = 8.12) completed an online survey questionnaire. Analysis of a serial multiple mediator model using bootstrapping methods indicated that body image satisfaction was sequentially associated with increased Instagram selfie posting and Instagram-related conflict, which related to increased negative romantic relationship outcomes. These findings suggest that when Instagram users promote their body image satisfaction in the form of Instagram selfie posts, risk of Instagram-related conflict and negative romantic relationship outcomes might ensue. Findings from the current study provide a baseline understanding to potential and timely trends regarding Instagram selfie posting.
Article
This article explores the possibility that romantic love is an attachment process--a biosocial process by which affectional bonds are formed between adult lovers, just as affectional bonds are formed earlier in life between human infants and their parents. Key components of attachment theory, developed by Bowlby, Ainsworth, and others to explain the development of affectional bonds in infancy, were translated into terms appropriate to adult romantic love. The translation centered on the three major styles of attachment in infancy--secure, avoidant, and anxious/ambivalent--and on the notion that continuity of relationship style is due in part to mental models (Bowlby's "inner working models") of self and social life. These models, and hence a person's attachment style, are seen as determined in part by childhood relationships with parents. Two questionnaire studies indicated that relative prevalence of the three attachment styles is roughly the same in adulthood as in infancy, the three kinds of adults differ predictably in the way they experience romantic love, and attachment style is related in theoretically meaningful ways to mental models of self and social relationships and to relationship experiences with parents. Implications for theories of romantic love are discussed, as are measurement problems and other issues related to future tests of the attachment perspective.