Antecectents,of sexual jealousyAyala Pines, University of California, Berkeley, andElliot Aronson, University of California, Santa Cruz

Abstract

The paper presents a social-psychological approach to the empirical study ofsexual jealousy, after surveying the philosophical, sociological, anthropological,psychoanalytic, and nonscientific literature on the subject. The social-psychologicalapproach focuses on the environmental and situational factors that cause people toact in a jealous manner.

One hundred and three men and women varying in age, length of relationship,and relationship style responded to a specially designed sexual jealousy inventory.Results indicated that jealousy is a negative physiological, emotional, and mentalstate, experienced at least at some point of their lives by all the subjects in the study.Numerous antecedents, correlates, and consequences of jealousy were investigatedand discussed. Fifty-four percent of the subjects described themselves as "a jealousperson" even when they had good situational reasons to feel less secure in therelationship and to experience jealousy, and even though this dispositional self-attribution has negative consequences for coping.

Sexual jealousy has produced pathology, drama, and tragedy from timeimmemorial. A wide range of hostile, bitter, and painful events has beenattributed to jealousy: Family murder followed by suicide (Goldney, 1977);murder (East, 1949; Holzer, 1974; Hrzebiczeck, Topiarz, & Mikula, 1967;Mercir, 1975; Vauhkonen, 1977); suicide attempts (Biener & Burger, 1976;Mowat, 1966); wife battering (Scott, 1974); marital problems and divorce(Docherty & Ellis, 1976; Gilard, 1896; Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard,1953; Levinger, 1965, 1966); problems of cohabiting couples (Mackhn,1972); destruction of romantic relationships (Constantine & Constantine,1973; Denfield, 1974; Whitehurst, 1977); depression (Cocchin & Tornati,1975); aggression (Ferrari & Del Giudice, 1976; Sinha, 1968); criminalbehavior (Mercuri, 1975); and hatred and violence (Markovitz, 1970; White-hurst, 1971).

Sexual jealousy seems universal; it is experienced whenever a valuedromantic relationship is threatened (Clanton & Smith, 1977; Mace, 1962;

Requests for reprints should be sent, together with a self-addressed, stamped envelope, to:Dr. Ayala Pines, Psychology Department, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720.

Journal of Personality 51:1. March 1983. Copyright 1983 by Duke University Press,

Aspects of sexual jealousy 109Shettel-Neuber, Bryson, & Young, 1978; Vollmer, 1946). As a protectivereaction to such perceived threats, jealousy is different from envy, in whichone desires something one does not have: In jealousy one protects what isone's own. As a reaction that occurs whenever a valued romantic relation-ship is threatened, sexual jealousy differs from reactions when other valuedrelationships are threatened, such as sibling rivalry and graduate-studentmentor relationships.

Poets, playwrights, and novelists have produced rich descriptions of theexperience of sexual jealousy, its causes and consequences. Some of the bestknown descriptions of jealousy appear in Shakespeare's Othello and AWinter's Tale, Tolstoy's The Kreutzer Sonata, De Maupassant's One Eve-ning, Cervante's The Jealous Estremaduran, Burton's Anatomy of Melan-choly, Robbe-Grillet's Jealousy, and Boccaccio's The Decameron.

Various thinkers in the humanities and the social sciences have tried togain a better understanding of sexual jealousy. These include: philosophers(Neu, Note 1; Spinoza, 1979); sociologists (Bernard, 1977; Clanton & Smith,1977; Davis, 1936; Wagner, 1976); psychiatrists and psychoanalysts (Barag,1949; Brunswick, 1929; Chatterji, 1948; Docherty & Ellis, 1976; Fenichel,1953; Freud, 1922; Hoaken 1976; Jones, 1929; Klein, 1957; Klein & Riviere,1964; Lagache, 1950; Mooney 1965; Ping Nie Pao, 1969; Puras 1967;Riviere, 1932; Schechter, 1968; Wulff, 1951); developmental psychologists(Neill, 1960; Odel, Zav, & Zdravlje, 1975; Taviel de Andrade, 1969; Vollmer,1946); humanistic psychologists (Ard, 1967; Blood & Blood, 1977; Constan-tine, 1976, 1977; Constantine & Constantine, 1971, 1973; Denfield, 1974;Ellis, 1977; Hibbard, 1975; Mazur, 1973); personality psychologists (Bringle1981; Bringle & Evenbeck, 1979; Bringle, Roach, Adler, & Evenbeck, Note2; Bringle, Roach, Adler, & Evenbeck, 1979; Bringle & Williams, 1979;Langfeldt, 1961, 1962); anthropologists (Mead, 1931; Elhs, 1977; Frazer,1968; Hupka, Note 3; Hupka 1981); and social psychologists (Aronson &Pines, Note 4; Berscheid & Fei, 1977; Corzine, Note 5; Jaremko & Lindsey,1979; Pines & Aronson, 1981 b; Rausch, Barry, Mertel, & Swain, 1979;Shettel-Neuber, 1978; Walster & Walster, 1977; White, 1980 a, b; White1981 b).

The philosophical, sociological, anthropological, and psychoanalytic lit-eratures provide a rich and interesting collection of speculations, hypotheses,and ideas, but do not provide us with systematic data. Philosophers, forexample, tend to base their conclusions on the theoretical logic of thearguments concerning jealousy rather than on scientific research. Similarly,sociologists tend to remain at the abstract level in their discussion of jealousy,with the group or the organization, rather than the individual, as their unitof analysis. Ethnographic reports, which are the basis of most anthropolog-ical research, are problematic in that the available literature is based forthe most part on the opinions of the ethnographer. Different ethnographers

110 Pines and Aronson

study different societies, and they, themselves, come from different nation-alities and rely mainly on their own impressions. As Hupka (Note 3) noted,they have no absolute or par culture scale or procedure for assessing thefrequency of jealousy-arousing situations in the societies they observe. Mostpsychoanalytic writers base their theories on a single caseor at best, on avery small number of pathological casesand tend to emphasize thedelusional, abnormal, and irrational aspects of jealousy. Developmentalpsychologists, by and large, have generalized from small numbers of childrenand tend to assume that adult jealousy is largely an extension of childhoodjealousy. Thus far, humanistic psychologists have not conducted systematicresearch but have primarily described and speculated about alternativelifestyles and their effect on jealousy.

When we think of a jealousy-producing situation, the obvious concep-tualization is that of an interpersonal event involving at least three people(differing from rivalry, which involves only two). Traditionally, the behav-ioural science that has been best equipped to perform empirical researchon interpersonal dynamics under well-controlled and often dramaticallyintense situations is social psychology. Social psychologists have studied theantecedents and consequences of cooperation and competition, conformity,obedience, group cohesiveness, interpersonal attraction, aggression, and ahost of other phenomena that would seem related to jealousy. And yet, untilthe mid-seventies, social psychologists remained at the periphery of thestudy of jealousy. The only articles on jealousy were speculative pieces bysuch well-known experimentalists as the Walsters (1977) and Berscheid andFei (1977).

The research picture has changed dramatically in recent years. Forexample. White (1980 a, b; 1981 a) began a systematic empirical investi-gation using questionnaires as research tools. White's subjects consisted of150 romantically involved heterosexual couples, predominantly white (84%)college students (91%). His research investigated the correlates of jealousyamong 150 couples. For instance. White (1980 a) found that for both sexes,jealousy is positively related to exclusivity, feelings of inadequacy as apartner, and the degree of dependence of self-esteem upon one's partner'sevaluations. For males, jealousy is also positively related to sex role tradi-tionalism. In an earlier paper. White reported that people who are relativelymore involved in their relationship than their partners are, are more likelyto be jealous (White, Note 6). White also suggested that females' self-perceptions of inadequacy as a partner lead to jealousy, while for males itis jealousy that leads to self-perceptions of inadequacy. Females are alsomore likely to report inducing sexual jealousy than are males (1980 b).

Other correlational studies of jealousy were carried out by Bringle et al.(Note 2, 1979), Corzine (Note 5), Jaremko and Lindsey (1979), and Raushet al. (1979). Again, these studies focus on "dispositional" correlates o(

Aspects of sexual jealousy 111jealousy and indicate that highly jealous people tend to be self-deprecating,unhappy, externally controlled, arousable, anxious, and dogmatic. Corzine(Note 5) found that nonjealous people possess more integrative personalitycharacteristics than do jealous people. Jaremko and Lindsey (1979) foundthat jealousy is positively correlated with anxiety, and negatively correlatedwith social desirability and self-esteem. Tipton, Benedictson, Mahoney, &Hartnett, (1978) factor analyzed responses to a jealousy scale and foundthat "need for loyalty" account for 36% of the variance; "moodiness," "self-confidence," and "envy" account for 9%, 8%, and 7%, respectively.

The closest attempts to study jealousy experimentally were two quasi-experiments by Shettel-Neuber, Bryson, and Young (1978) and Teismanand Mosher (1978). Shettel-Neuber et al. showed subjects videotapes ofjealousy-evoking situations and asked them how likely they were to respondto the situations in certain ways. Results revealed that males were morelikely to report that they would react with anger; females were more likelyto react with depression and attempts to improve the relationship. Teismanand Mosher (1978), using role-playing situations, discovered that in ajealousy condition subjects used significantly more rejecting and coerciveacts and significantly fewer cognitive, resolving, reconciling, and appealingacts than did persons in the nonjealous condition. Persons experiencingjealousy also used significantly more guilt-inducing acts.

After reviewing the scientific writings of philosophers, sociologists, hu-manistic psychologists, psychoanalysts, and anthropologists, we have con-cluded that personality and social psychologists are the only ones attemptingto answer questions about jealousy experimentally and in a systematicmanner. Unfortunately, most often there is a selective sample of subjectsused in the studies: Namely undergraduate college students, primarilyinvolved in short-term dating relationships (Bringle et al.. Note 2, 1979;White, 1980 a, b, 1981 a; Shettel-Neuber et al., 1978; Teisman & Mosher,1978). And there are many problems with the primary research tool ofpersonality and social psychologiststhe questionnaire. For example, it isnot clear how aware people are of their own feelings or how willing theyare to be truthful if a disclosure might put them in what they consider tobe an "undesirable" light.

For the past few years, we have been studying the dynamics of sexualjealousy, using a wide range of methods. We have conducted workshops forpeople having special problems with jealousy; we have collected extensivequestionnaire data; we have observed people living in an alternative lifestylewho claim that they have managed to eliminate jealousy (Pines & Aronson,1981); we have conducted clinical interviews, lectures, and seminars; andwe have read the scientific writings of philosophers, sociologists, humanisticpsychologists, psychoanalysts, and anthropologists. Thus, even though ourmajor research tool in the present study is still the questionnaire, we feel

112 Pines and Aronson

that corroborating evidence from the literature (scientific as well as non-scientific), from discussions with people at workshops and therapy, andfrom many hours of personal in-depth interviews enable us to trust theinformation we gather via our questionnaire more than we otherwise couldor would. On the basis of our research and group work, we came toappreciate the importance of a social-psychological approach to understand-ing jealousy.

A Social Psychological Perspective on Jealousy

People often explain their own and other people's behavior in disposi-tional terms. For example, when they experience certain feelings andphysical symptoms in response to a jealousy-triggering situation, they say"The reason I am experiencing a jealous reaction is because I am a jealousperson." Social psychology introduces a new and exciting perspective to thestudy and understanding of such complex emotions as jealousy by empha-sizing situational attributions. That is to say, it focuses attention on environ-mental factors that may cause people to act in a jealous manner. Forexample, when people experience jealous reactions, they could say "Thereason I am experiencing this jealous reaction is because of the situationthat triggered it." The social-psychological approach does not deny theimportance of individual traits, characteristics, and dispositions; rather, itsuggests that human emotions such as jealousy also have a social basis orcomponent.

The difference between situational and dispositional self-attributions isnot a semantic difference. It has many far-reaching implications for theindividual making the attributions. Individuals who are making dispositionalself-attributions of jealousy are saying, "The reason why we reacted withjealousy is that we are those kinds of people; we simply are jealous people."That explanation puts them in what Philip Zimbardo called "a prison oftheir own mind," a mental prison from which there is no escape. Individualswho make situational self-attributions, on the other hand, are saying, "Thereason why we are reacting with jealousy is because of the person or thesituation that triggered it," which means that "with another person or inanother situation, we might react very differently." Such people are morelikely to try and change, or else get out of, relationships where they feelunhappy or insecure, and actively look for a relationship in which they areless likely to experience jealousy.

Method

SubjectsOne hundred and three subjects participated in the study; 35 were males and 68

were females. Subjects' ages ranged from 21 to 64 (M = 34). The education range

Aspects of sexual jealousy 113was from less than 12 years to graduate degrees (PhD and M.D.). Ninety-fourpercent of the subjects were white, 3% Black, 2% Oriental, and 1% MexicanAmerican. Nineteen percent were single and never married, 41% were married,21% were partnered or cohabitating, 9% were divorced, 4% were separated, 3%were widowed, and 3% were in some other situation. The length of the intimaterelationship discussed ranged from several days to 40 years (M = 72 months).Subjects were recruited individually in the San Francisco Bay Area. A special effortwas made to recruit subjects varying widely in age, relationship duration, andrelationship style. Yet it is important to remember when generalizing from the studythat it is hased on a selective sample. Each suhject was asked to take part in aquestionnaire study investigating sexual jealousy. Total anonymity was assured. Allsubjects approached agreed to participate in the study.Instrument

A specially designed sexual jealousy inventory was used. Items in the questionnairewere based on a thorough review of the literature concerning sexual jealousy as wellas many in-depth interviews. Earlier versions of the questionnaire were pretested toassure the relevance of the items to a wide range of people, to eliminate any languageambiguities, and to provide evidence of psychometric adequacy. The questionnairein its final form included: background information, questions about jealousy preva-lence, attitudes and feelings that are jealousy correlates, elicitors, effects of jealousy,modes of coping with it, and reasons for it. Most questions were responded to on a7-point scale. Background information included: sex, age, siblings, education, occu-pation, race, religion, financial situation, physical and mental condition, maritalstatus, and a series of questions about the intimate relationship that the respondentwas involved in. Questions about the relationship included: length of the relationship;how long one expected it to last; how it could be described; who had the control init; security in it; openness to other relationships; belief in monogamy; openness topartner about other relationships, and expectation of partner's openness; incidentsof unfaithfulness; fantasies of unfaithfulness. Attitudes and feelings that are jealousy-correlates included: self-concept; feelings about one's looks, sexual desirability, andlife in general; feelings about partner; physical and emotional attraction to partner;and partner's jealousy.

Questions about jealousy prevalence included such questions as: Do you consideryourself a jealous person? How jealous are you now? How jealous were you duringchildhood, adolescence, young adulthood, advanced adulthood? Have any Of yourrelationships ended because of jealousy? Do other people consider you jealous? Howmany people will admit to being jealous? Who is more jealousmen or women?Jealousy elicitors included people and situations presented in 2 Guttman scales (asthe data to be presented later indicates that responses were indeed Guttman scaled).Examples of people eliciting jealousy were: Someone you don't know personally andhave a low opinion of; someone you know personally and distrust; your very bestfriend and confidant. Examples of situations eliciting jealousy were: Your mate ishaving an affair, is extremely indiscreet about it and a scandal erupts in the middleof a party; your mate is very discreet, no one else knows about it and s/he doesn'tknow that you know. Other jealousy triggers included such short scenarios as: Yourphone rings and the person on the other end of the line either says, "Sorry, it's the

114 Pines and Aronson

wrong number," or simply hangs up; you are at a party and your mate disappearsfor a long period of time; your mate is being very flirtatious and spends a great dealof time during a party intimately dancing and behaving provocatively with another.Reaction to jealousy included physical (e.g., hot, cold, dizzy, nauseous) and emotional(e.g., inferior, humiliated, angry, anxious) reactions. Coping with jealousy includedsuch items as: rational discussion, sarcasm, denial, crying, physical violence, andhumor. Effects of jealousy included such questions as: Do you consider your jealousya problem? Do you like heing jealous? Would you like to get rid of your jealousy ifyou could? Do you like your partner to be jealous? Do you consider jealousy anappropriate reaction in extreme situations? Do you believe someone who will tellyou s/he is not jealous in such a situation? How desirable is jealousy as a personalcharacteristic? Gan you make yourself stop being jealous? Positive effects includedsuch items as: Jealousy is a sign of love; it brings excitement to a listless relationship;it teaches people not to take each other for granted. Negative effects included suchitems as: Jealousy causes physical distress, may result in violence, and puts a strainon relationships. Reasons for jealousy included such things as: Jealousy is a normalreaction accompanying love; jealousy is a result of personal insecurity; and jealousyis the result of feeling excluded and left out.

In addition to providing information about the antecedents, correlates, andconsequences of jealousy, the study provided further evidence of the psychometricadequacy of the instrument, thus supporting previous research. This evidence willbe presented as the last part of the Results section.

Total anonymity and confidentiality were assured in an effort to maximize honestyof responses. The universality of the experience of jealousy was stressed in order toreduce social undesirahility. It is important to note that in no place in the question-naire were subjects presented with a definition of jealousy. When asked to evaluatetheir own degree of jealousy, the assumption was that they were using their owndefinition of the experience. That is to say, even if two subjects were in actual factvery different in terms of their jealousy, if they reported equal degrees of jealousy,we accepted this report as data and tried to find correlations between this self-reported jealousy and a variety of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Thisseemed simpler and more meaningful than introducing to subjects the very manydifferent definitions of jealoasy found in the literature, or trying to differentiate themany complex facets of the experience. And, indeed, subjects' overwhelmingresponse to the questionnaire was very positive, with the most frequent responsebeing, "It made me get in touch with and explore my feelings of jealousy in ameaningful way."

Psychometric Adequacy of the MeasureAs noted earlier, pretesting of the instrument provided evidence of its psycho-

metric adequacy. In one exploratory study (Aronson & Pines, Note 4) involving 54subjects, 31 of the subjects described themselves as jealous and 22 as not jealous.(One subject did not answer the question.) This response to the criterion question,"Do you consider yourself a jealous person?" differentiated between the subjects onnumerous critical dimensions. Eor example, subjects who described themselves as"jealous people" reported experiencing more jealousy not only at the time of the

Aspects of sexual jealousy 115interview (M = 4.4 vs. 2.2), but also during childhood (M = 4.0 vs. 3.4), adolescence(M = 4.9 vs. 4.4), young adulthood (M = 5.5 vs. 2.8), and advanced adulthood (M= 4.7 vs. 2.3). Their jealousy was more easily triggered, they experienced it moreoften (M = 4.0 vs. 3.0), and for longer periods of time (M = 3.7 vs. 3.0). Theirjealousy was associated with more intense physical and emotional reactions (e.g.,feeling hot M = 2.2 vs. 1.6; nervous and shaky M = 2.3 vs. 1.3; fast heart beat M =2.2 vs. 1.6; frustration M = 2.3 vs. 1.9; vulnerability M = 2.6 vs. 1.9) and theyconsidered it more of a problem (M = 3.5 vs. 2.0). In addition to their ownperception of their jealousy, other peoples' reactions validated the criterion variable:People who described themselves as jealous were considered jealous by more peoplewho knew them well (M = 3.1 vs. 1.4), and hy more people with whom they hadan intimate relationship (M = 4.4 vs. 2.4).

Other evidence supporting the psychometric adequacy of the measure wasprovided hy the intercorrelation of the jealousy self-diagnosis. For example, theintercorrelations of jealousy at various ages indicated that more recent ages correlatedmore highly with current estimates than did earlier ages (jealousy during childhoodcorrelated with current jealousy, r = .17; adolescence, r = .23; young adulthood, r= .50; advanced adulthood, r = .74).

Gorrelations also provided evidence for convergent validity, thus supporting thenotion that we were assessing a single meaningful construct. Eor example: Responsesto the question "How jealous are you at this stage of your life?" were highlycorrelated with the frequency of experiencing jealousy (r = .60); with being viewedas jealous by people in intimate relationships (r = .60) and by most people in one'sacquaintance (r = .51); and with considering jealousy a problem (r = .46; all pvalues less than .001).

One of the interesting findings of this pilot study, which involved 24% men and76% women, was the relative lack of sex differences: There was no differencehetween men and women in terms of their current jealousy (M = 3.6 for men and3.4 for women, F = .11, p = .74), and in terms of their jealousy during earlierperiods of their life. There was no sex difference in either frequency or duration ofthe experience of jealousy, and no sex difference in either emotional or physicalresponses to it. There was no difference between the sexes in terms of the numberof people who considered them jealous (either people who knew them well, orpeople with whom they had an intimate relationship). There was also no sexdifferences in people or situations eliciting jealousywith only one exception.Women reacted with more jealousy to all the scenarios in which the subjects weretold that their mate was having an affair. This sex difference seems related to oneother difference: Women reported believing in monogamy for themselves signifi-cantly more than men did (M = 4.5 for men vs. 5.8 for women, F = 6.1, p = .017).

Additional validation of the instrument was provided during clinical interviewsand experiential workshops in which subjects, after responding to the questionnaire,had a chance to explore their jealousy in depth.

Results

Given the current state of the jealousy area, simple descriptive reportingis likely to prove most valuable to other investigators. Thus we eschewed

116 Pines and Aronson

more complex statistical analyses to present simple means, standard devia-tions, and correlations. It is important to remember, while reading both theresult and the subsequent discussion of their meaning, the well-knownproblems associated with the questionnaire as a research toolsuch asresponse sets, scaling problems, and individual differences in recall.

Table 1 presents means and standard deviations of responses given to thedifferent items of the questionnaire describing the subjects and theirrelationships. From Table 1 it appears that most subjects described them-selves as having a good physical and mental conditionboth better thantheir financial situations, which was described on the average as just betterthan "manage to get by." On the average subjects reported feeling goodabout themselves in general, and being satisfied with their looks, generaldesirability as a sexual partner, life in general, partner's desirability as asexual partner, and the partner in general. The subjects also describedthemselves as being physically and emotionally attracted to their partners.Most subjects were involved in long-term relationships, which was evidentby the fact that the average length of the reported relationships was 6 years.In addition, on the average, subjects expected their relationship to last formany years to come, described it as very good, and felt secure in it. On theaverage subjects were also unlikely to leave their mate for another person,and believed in monogamous relationships. They intended to be open totheir partner about other sexual experiences and expected the partner to beopen as well. When asked whether the partner had ever been unfaithfulsexually, or in any other way, the average response was "probably not."When asked "Have you ever been unfaithful to your partner sexually?",the average response was once or twice only. When asked about beingunfaithful in any other way, the average response was "no." The fewsubjects who did report being unfaithful in another way besides sexualmentioned specifically "flirting." Even though the average subject hadrarely been unfaithful sexually, s/he fantasized sexual involvement withothers rather frequently.

Table 2 presents jealousy related variables. When asked "How jealous isyour partner?" the average response was "moderately jealous." When asked"How jealous are you?" the average response was "somewhat." On theaverage, subjects reported being most jealous during adolescence, less soduring young adulthood, even less during childhood, less during advancedadulthood (those who had reached that age), and least at present. Very fewintimate relationships ended because of jealousy. When asked whether mostpeople who knew them well would consider them jealous, the averageresponse was "no," yet when asked whether people they had been intimatewith considered them jealous, the average response was "moderately so'(M = 2.5 vs. 3.3).

Fifty-four percent of the subjects defined themselves as "jealous people."

Aspects of sexual jealousy 117Table 1. Subject and relationship variables.

StandardMean deviation

Subject variablesFinancial situation (1 = highly insecure; 7 = highly secure) 4.9 1.4Physical condition (1 = very poor; 7 = excellent) 5.7 1.0Mental condition (1 = very poor; 7 = excellent) 5.8 1.0How do you feel about yourself in general? (1 = very dissatisfied;

7 = very satisfied) 5.5 1.0How do you feel about your looks in generai? (1 = very dissat-

isfied; 7 = very satisfied) 5.3 1.0How do you feel about your desirability as a sexual partner (7

= very desirable) 5.7 1.0Hovi/ do you feel about life in general? (7 = very satisfied) 5.8 0.8How do you feel about your partner's desirability as a sexuai

partner? (7 = very desirable) 6.1 1.0How do you feel about your sexual partner in general? (7 = very

satisfied) 5.9 1.0How physically attracted are you to your partner? (7 = very

attracted) 5.7 1.2How emotionally attracted are you to your partner? (7 = very

attracted) 6.2 1.0

Reiationship variablesHow long do you expect the reiationship to last? (1 = very short

time; 7 = forever) 5.3 1.7How would you describe your relationship? (1 = very bad; 7 =

excellent) 5.8 1.2Who has the control in the relationship? (1 = your partner; 7 =

you) 4.1 1.0How secure do you feel about the relationship? (1 = extremely

insecure; 7 = extremely secure) 5.4 1.4If you found another person, would you leave? (1 = definitely

yes; 7 = definitely not) 5.2 1.8Would you be open to your partner about other sexual experi-

ences? (7 = definitely yes) 4.6 2.1Would you expect your partner to be open with you? (7 =

definitely yes) 4.8 1.9Has your partner ever been unfaithful to you sexually? (1 =

definitely not; 7 = definitely yes) 2.8 2.1Has your partner ever been unfaithful in any other way? (7 =

definitely yes) 2.2 1.7Have you ever been unfaithful sexually? (1 = definitely not; 7 =

definitely yes) 2.3 1.8Have you been unfaithful in any other way? (1 = definitely not;

7 = definitely yes) 2.0 1.6Have you fantasized sexual involvement with others? (1 = never;

7 = all the time) 4.4 1.5

118

Table 2. Jealousy variables.

Pines and Aronson

How jealous is your partner? (1 = not at all jealous; 7 =extremely jealous)

How jealous are you now? (1 = not at all jealous; 7 = extremelyjealous)

How jealous were you during childhcxxl?During adolescence?During young adulthood?During advanced adulthood?Average physical reaction (3-point scales: 1 - none at all; 3 =

very intense)Average emotional reaction (3-point scales; 1 = none at all; 3 =

very intense)How often do you experience extreme jealousy? (1 = never; 2

= once; 3 = rarely; 4 = occasionally; 5 = often; 6 = usually)How long did your most extreme jealousy last? (1 = seconds;

2 = minutes; 3 = hours; 4 = days; 6 = months; 7 = years)How long does mild jealousy last (1 = seconds; 2 = minutes; 3

= hours; 4 = days; 5 = weeks; 6 = months; 7 = years)Do you consider your jealousy a problem? (1 = not at all; 7 =

yes, a very serious problem)Do you like being jealous? (7 = dislike it very much)Would you like to get rid of your jealousy? (7 = definitely yes)Do you like your partner to be jealous? (7 = definitely yes)Have any intimate relationships ended because of jealousy? (1

= none; 7 = all)Do most people who know you well consider you a jealous

person? (7 = definitely yes)Do people you have been intimate with consider you jealous?

(7 = definitely yes)What percent of people answering the questionnaire will admit

to being "a jealous person"?What percent are actually jealous?Who are more jealousmen or women? (4 = equal jealousy)Is jealousy a normal response in certain situations? (1 = defi-

nitely not; 7 = definitely yes)Do you consider your jealousy in extreme situations an appro-

priate reaction? (7 = definitely yes)Do you believe someone who will tell you s/he is not jealous in

such extreme situations? (7 = definitely yes)How desirable is jealousy as a personal characteristic? (7 =

very desirable)Can you make yourself stop being jealous? (7 = definitely yes)

When asked what percentage of the people answering the questionnairewould admit to being "a jealous person," the average response was 57%(which is surprisingly close to the 54% who admitted it). When asked what

Mean

3.8

3.33.64.34.13.5

1.6

2.0

3.3

3.7

2.6

2.76.06.82.9

1.4

2.5

3.3

57754.1

4.8

5.1

3.8

3.03.9

Standarddeviation

1.8

1.72.01.81.91.8

0.4

0.4

1.0

1.5

1.1

1.71.31.61.9

0.8

1.6

1.8

25241.0

1.8

1.8

2.0

1.61.6

Aspects of sexual jealousy 119percentage were actually jealous, the average response was 75%. Whenasked who were more jealous, men or women, the average response was"equally jealous" (thus supporting the findings described earlier).

Table 3 presents jealousy elicitors presented in the form of two Guttmanscales. When asked "How much jealousy would you experience if you foundout that your mate/sexual partner had been having a sexual relationshipwith this other person?" the average response to all people eliciting jealousywas 4.4 (more than moderate jealousy). More specifically, the least jealousy-provoking people were, someone one didn't know personally and had a lowopinion of (M = 3.3), and someone one didn't know personally and knewnothing about (M = 3.5). The most jealousy-provoking person was someoneone knew personally and was envious of (M = 5.4). When the trigger wasknown, it made only a little difference whether it was someone one thoughtsimilar to oneself (M = 4.5), someone one distrusted (M = 4.6), or someoneone trusted and considered a friend (M = 4.7).

When asked about jealousy triggered by discovering that one's partnerwas having an affair, the average response to all items was a rather strongjealousy (M = 5.4 on a 1 to 7 scale). The strongest response was triggeredby situations in which other people knew about the betrayal, but one did

Table 3. Jealousy elicitors.

StandardMean deviation

People eliciting jealousy (1 = no jealousy; 7 = extreme jealousy)Someone you don't know and have a low opinion of.Someone you don't know and know nothing about.A family member.Someone you don't know and think very highly about.Someone you know and find similar to you.Someone you know and distrust.Someone you know, trust, and consider a friend.Your best friend and confidant.Someone you know and are envious of.

Love affair of partner as a jealousy elicitor (1 = no jealousy; 7 =extreme jealousy)

Your mate is extremely indiscreet, a scandal erupts, and youhear about it when you are alone; everybody else but you hasknown about it for a long time. 5.7 1.8

Your mate is extremely indiscreet and a scandal erupts in themiddle of a big party and you are there. 5.4 2.0

Your mate is very discreet, no one else knows about it, and s/he doesn't know that you know

. . . and everybody knows about it

. . . and only you and a few dose friends know.Your mate is very discreet, but knows you know.

3.23.54.34.34.54.64.74.95.4

2.02.02.02.02.02.02.02.02.0

5.45.35.15.0

1.82.12.02.1

120 Pines and Aronson

not have the opportunity to respond. For example, "one's mate is extremelyindiscreet about the affair, a scandal erupts, and one is put in the role ofthe betrayed lover, but hears about it when alone (M = 5.7), or else wheneverybody else but oneself has known about it for a long time but no onehas said anything (M = 5.7)." The weakest response (which was still ratherstrong) was triggered when "one's mate is discreet, the three involved arethe only ones who know about it, and the couple knows that one knows"(Af = 5.0). Slightly stronger was the response to the situation when "onlyone and a few close and trusted friends know about it" (M = 5.1).

Looking at other triggers of jealousy, on the average, subjects startedexperiencing jealousy when at a party their mate disappeared for a longperiod of time. Jealousy was usually not triggered when the partner disap-peared for a brief period of time at a party and they didn't know where thepartner was; or else when the person calling on the phone said, "Sorry, it'sthe wrong number" or simply hung up. Most subjects did experiencejealousy when at a party their partner spent a great deal of time talking,dancing, or flirting with a person of the opposite sex.

On the average, subjects also started experiencing jealousy when theirpartner expressed appreciation of, and interest in, someone else, but didnot experience jealousy when the partner expressed appreciation of anattractive stranger passing by or a movie star.

Subjects also reported experiencing jealousy when their partner wasassociating with single people of the opposite sex, or else had a close friendof the opposite sex.

When asked about a love affair their partner might have had, mostsubjects reported experiencing jealousy even when the affair was a casual"one time only" incident that the partner had had recently. On the average,subjects were not very likely to experience jealousy about an affair theirpartner had had many years back, whether before or after being partnered,and whether or not the person involved was now deceased. Yet most subjectswere likely to be jealous knowing that their partner was open to, andfrequently had, casual sexual experiences, even when assured that it wouldin no way affect the relationship.

On the average, subjects tended to react to jealousy-provoking situationsmore emotionally (M = 2.0 on a 3-point scale), especially with anger, fearof loss, and anxiety, than physically (being nervous, shaky, and hot, andhaving fast heart beat). Extreme jealousy for most subjects was experiencedrarely but lasted for many days. The experience of mild jealousy, on theother hand, which was experienced more often, on the average lasted onlyhours.

As for coping with jealousy (see Table 4), the most frequently mentionedmodes of coping were: using the occasion for thinking through one's role inthe situation and processing what one stands/fears to lose (mentioned by80% of the respondents); and rational discussion (79%). The next in terms

Aspects of sexual jealousy 121Table 4. Coping with jealousy (in order of "yes" responses).

How do your cope with jealousy?Use the occasion for thinking and processingRational discussionVerbal assaultSarcasmAcceptanceCryingStony silenceSuffer silently but visiblyAvoidance of issueRetaliationLeave mateSuffer silently and covertlyMake a joke of itDenialPhysical violence

Percentageyes

80796056554442363333292726187

of frequency of useyet much less frequently used than the previous twowere: verbal assault (mentioned by 60% of the respondents); sarcasm (56%);and acceptance (55%). The least frequently mentioned coping strategiesinvolved physical violence (7%), and denial (18%).

When asked (see Table 5) how it felt to be the object of someone else'sjealousy, the most common responses were: "feeling good" (M = 2.1),"feehng pity" (M = 2.0), and "feeling guilty" (M = 1.9). The least frequentresponse was "feeling lucky" (M = 1.2).

Table 6 presents all of the variables in the study that were significantlycorrelated with the response given to the criterion question: "How jealousare you at this stage of your life?" While only the significant correlationsare presented in Table 6, the comparison between those variables that werestatistically significant and those that were not is interesting in and of itself.For example: The more older brothers and the fewer younger brothers onehad, the more likely one was to be jealous. And yet there was no correlationbetween numbers of sistersolder or youngerand jealousy. Unfortunately,the discussion of the results is lengthy enough as is to preclude a detaileddiscussion of those correlations which did not reach statistical significance.From Table 6 it appeared that the older one was, the less one was likely tobe jealous. Also, the older one was, the less likely one was to experiencestrong physical reactions to jealousy (r = .26 p = .001). Poor physical andmental condition were both associated with higher levels of reportedjealousy, yet general feelings about oneself and one's life, and feelings aboutone's looks were not.

It is interesting that the time one had been with one's partner was not at

122

Table 5. An object of jealousy.

How did you feel being the object of some-one's jealousy?

Feeling good