A review of sex differences in sexual jealousy, including self-report data, psychophysiological responses, interpersonal violence, and morbid jealousy

被引:183
作者
Harris, CR [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Psychol 0109, Ctr Brain & Cognit, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1207/S15327957PSPR0702_102-128
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The specific innate modular theory of jealousy hypothesizes that natural selection shaped sexual jealousy as a mechanism to prevent cuckoldry, and emotional jealousy as a mechanism to prevent resource loss. Therefore, men should be primarily jealous over a mate's sexual infidelity and women over a mate's emotional infidelity. Five lines of evidence have been offered as support: self-report responses, psychophysiological data, domestic violence (including spousal abuse and homicide), and morbid jealousy cases. This article reviews each line of evidence and finds only one hypothetical measure consistent with the hypothesis. This, however is contradicted by a variety of other measures (including reported reactions to real infidelity). A meta-analysis of jealousy-inspired homicides, taking into account base rates for murder found no evidence that jealousy disproportionately motivates men to kill. The findings are discussed from a social-cognitive theoretical perspective.
引用
收藏
页码:102 / 128
页数:27
相关论文
共 130 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1981, BECOMING HUMAN
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1950, MARIA MURDER SUICIDE
  • [3] [Anonymous], JALOUSIE AMOUREUSE P
  • [4] [Anonymous], CRIMINOLOGY
  • [5] Archer J, 2000, PSYCHOL BULL, V126, P651, DOI [10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.651, 10.1037//0033-2909.126.5.651]
  • [6] Archer J, 2000, PSYCHOL BULL, V126, P697, DOI [10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.697, 10.1037//0033-2909.126.5.697]
  • [7] Baron R A., 1997, Social Psychology, V8th
  • [8] Barton RA, 2000, ON THE MOVE: HOW AND WHY ANIMALS TRAVEL IN GROUPS, P204
  • [9] Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence
    Baumeister, RF
    Catanese, KR
    Vohs, KD
    [J]. PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2001, 5 (03) : 242 - 273
  • [10] CAUSES OF CONJUGAL DISSOLUTION - A CROSS-CULTURAL-STUDY
    BETZIG, L
    [J]. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY, 1989, 30 (05) : 654 - 676