According to new research published in Personal Relationships, heterosexual men experience less distress from infidelity involving female interlopers than from male ones, potentially perceiving these women as additional sexual opportunities, especially when they exhibit feminine traits.
“The topic started out as a discussion with one of my undergrads back in grad school about how sex role presentation may influence reactions to infidelity seen in various papers covering same-sex infidelity,” said study author Mitch Brown, PhD (@ExtravertedFace), an instructor of psychological science at the University of Arkansas.
“My student and I were considering the fact that such reactions could have multiple causes that would manifest in different ways. Namely, does the reduced risk of cuckoldry from a female interloper in a man’s relationship coincide with perceptions of the interloper as an additional sexual opportunity? If so, when does that actually happen? This turned into an exercise in determining whether these predictions were competing or complementary hypotheses.”
Study 1 investigated how the sex role presentation (masculine or feminine) of a female extradyadic partner affects heterosexual men’s reactions to same-sex infidelity. The study was conducted with 156 men from a large public university in the Southeastern U.S. Participants were randomly assigned to read one of three vignettes describing a scenario where they discover their long-term girlfriend in an intimate situation with either another man, a masculine woman, or a feminine woman.
Participants completed measures assessing negative reactions to the infidelity scenario, the perceived sexual opportunity of the extradyadic partner, sexual arousal from the scenario, and the perceived sexual orientation of the extradyadic partner, using a 7-point scale.
Heterosexual men exhibit the most negative reactions to infidelity involving another man, with significantly less distress towards female interlopers, regardless of their masculine or feminine presentation. However, a feminine woman was perceived as offering the greatest sexual opportunity and elicited higher sexual arousal. These findings suggest that factors such as perceived sexual opportunity significantly influence distress levels.
Study 2 aimed to enhance the ecological validity of Study 1’s findings by incorporating visual cues into the experimental design, given that physical attractiveness and secondary sex characteristics can significantly influence perceptions of sexual receptivity and arousal. A total of 138 heterosexual men from a large public university in the Southeastern U.S. were included.
This study replicated the original scenario of discovering infidelity but introduced stock photos of the hypothetical girlfriend and the extradyadic partners to test the impact of visual presentation on men’s reactions. Participants were exposed to images of either another man, a masculine-presenting woman, or a feminine-presenting woman alongside the narrative. Similar to Study 1, participants completed measures for negative reactions, arousal, perceived sexual opportunities, and perceptions of sexual orientation.
Study 2’s results echoed those of Study 1, showing that heterosexual men reacted most negatively to infidelity involving another man, with significantly less distress for a feminine woman, who was perceived as offering the most sexual opportunity.
“The fitness costs imposed by an interloper in one’s relationship are different based on whether the interloper is a man or woman. Men’s threat is that of cuckoldry, which is not imposed by women,” explained Brown.
“We found that men are most distressed by male interlopers in cases of infidelity. However, the possibility exists that a female interloper could minimize contact with the partner, which could be more common among more masculine-presenting lesbian women. This would make feminine-presenting women the least threatening to the relationship, partly because men could perceive her as more likely to report interest in men in her own right (i.e., bisexuality) that may not be inferred from a masculine-presenting woman. Thus, feminine-presenting women elicited the most sexual arousal from men and were viewed as a sexual opportunity more readily.”
No significant difference was found between the masculine-presenting woman and the man in perceptions of sexual opportunity or arousal.
In terms of perceived sexual orientation, participants rated the masculine-presenting women as the least heterosexual (primarily homosexual), the feminine woman as bisexual, and the man as primarily heterosexual, with all differences being statistically significant.
I asked Brown if there are any caveats. The researcher said, “Results for this study are based on two specific main effects that may not address the considerable nuance that is likely in these findings. For example, it could be possible that an unrestricted sociosexuality may be associated with greater tolerance toward extradyadic sex. This could similarly emerge for individuals involved in consensual nonmonogamy.”
What are possible future directions for this line of research? Brown responded, “Perceptions of the sexual interest of the interloper in these studies were based on stereotypes. It could be possible that these inferences could be magnified with stimuli that exhibit a kernel of truth. That is, perceivers have a degree of accuracy in identifying sexual orientation based on physical appearance. Future research would benefit from providing normed stimuli for which information exists of their actual sexual orientation.”
The researcher added, “It is important to recognize that sexual orientation is a complex trait in humans for which multiple selection exists. Some research suggests that women’s homosexuality evolved partly because of the increased benefit of alloparenting, whereas other research suggests that the origin is partially based on men’s relative tolerance that is not afforded to gay men. Heterosexuality emerged under its own unique set of selection pressures. As we investigate topics related to these origins, it remains important to understand this complexity so as not to accuse others of reductionist theorizing.”
The paper, “Heterosexual men’s reactions to infidelity revisited: Comparing the sex role presentation of extradyadic female partners”, was authored by Mitch Brown, Samuel E. Snowden, and Seth M. Bridges.
