Gender difference on the degree of misery caused by Partner's extramarital relations types revisited

• Main Authors: Li Ren, 李任
• Other Authors: Jiun-Yih Huang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2015
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/f4u924

碩士 === 玄奘大學 === 應用心理學系碩士班 === 103 === Through an experiment in 1989, Buss demonstrated from an evolutionary psychology perspective that the level of agony caused by the type of infidelity a partner commits varies in men and women. Men are more agonized when their partner commits sexual infidelity, whereas women are more agonized when their partner commits emotional infidelity. However, in 2000, Harris argued that the method adopted by Buss was flawed. Hence, Harris replaced the level of agony forced-choice method used by Buss with a self-scoring method and consequently reported that Buss’s dissertation lacked sufficient support. In consideration of the lack of domestic research on evolutionary psychology and the extensive prevalence and effects of partner infidelity, this study examines the difference in level of agony felt by male and female undergraduates because of sexual and emotional partner infidelity. The forced-choice method and self-scoring of level of agony method were adopted to examine the arguments of Buss and Harris, while simultaneously giving balance to the order of appearance of the two methods. Data for this study were collected using anonymous self-report questionnaires. The two methods were used separately in the questionnaires for measuring and comparing the level of agony of the participants in the cases of emotional and sexual infidelity. A total of 400 students at a private university in Hsinchu City were asked to complete the questionnaires. A total of 182 valid questionnaires were received from male students and 185 valid questionnaires were completed by female students. The research results showed that male students reported partner emotional infidelity as being more agonizing in the forced-choice section of the questionnaire; however, in the self-scoring of level of agony section, partner sexual infidelity was chosen as being more agonizing. The order of appearance of the two questionnaire sections demonstrated an effect on these choices. For female students, in the forced-choice section, partner emotional infidelity was reported as being more agonizing, and order of appearance exhibited an effect on choices; in the self-scoring of level of agony, those whose questionnaire had the forced-choice section appearing first chose partner emotional infidelity as being more agonizing, whereas those whose questionnaire had self-scoring of level of agony appearing first chose partner sexual infidelity as being more agonizing. Overall, forced-choice or self-scoring of level of agony and their order of appearance affected the choice of male and female students regarding the level of agony caused by partner infidelity type. The current study did not support or contradict Buss’s evolutionary psychology perspective that the level of agony caused by partner infidelity type varies in men and women. This paper concludes by discussing the research results and study limitations.