The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sex differences in jealousy: Evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement?
Abstract
Two studies are presented that challenge the evidentiary basis for the existence of evolved sex differences in jealousy. In opposition to the evolutionary view, Study I demonstrated that a sex difference in jealousy resulting from sexual versus emotional infidelity is observed only when judgments are recorded using a forced-choice response format. On all other measures, no sex differences were found; both men and women reported greater jealousy in response to sexual infidelity. A second study revealed that the sex difference on the forced-choice measure disappeared under conditions of cognitive constraint. These findings suggest that the sex difference used to support the evolutionary view of jealousy (e.g., D. M. Buss, R. Larsen, D. Westen, & J. Semmelroth, 1992; D. M. Buss et al., 1999) likely represents a measurement artifact resulting from a format-induced effortful decision strategy and not an automatic, sex-specific response shaped by evolution.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Anger was identified as a major component of the response to infidelity [25,26].”
From Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences (2023) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cites
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245
(1976) · Cited by 10,423
Fodor, J. A. (1983) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4737.001.0001 · Cited by 7,734
DeLamater, J., & Ward, A. (2013) · Handbooks of sociology and social research · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6772-0 · Cited by 7,590
Social psychology: handbook of basic principles
Higgins, E., & Kruglanski, A. (2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-3496 · Cited by 5,535
The Adapted mind : evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture
Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992) · Cited by 5,222
Social psychology: handbook of basic principles
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-3595 · Cited by 4,970
Cummins, R., & Fodor, J. A. (1985) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2184717 · Cited by 4,791
Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315807102 · Cited by 4,211
PINKER, S. (1999) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08538.x · Cited by 3,738
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Arbuckle, 1999, Amos
- 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 · DOI · Paper page
- Buss, 1996, The evolutionary psychology of human social strategies., 3
- 10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.1029 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1082 · DOI
- Jarvis, 2000, MediaLab 2000
- 10.1037/h0035472 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate.
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.3.628 · Cited by 804
The Emotional Construction of Morals
PRINZ, J. J. (2009) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571543.001.0001 · Cited by 789
Conceptual Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2015) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470939376.ch1 · Cited by 654
Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2008) · The Innate Mind, Volume 3 · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195332834.003.0019 · Cited by 650
Perspective taking in children and adults: equivalent egocentrism but differential correction
Epley, N., Morewedge, C. K., & Keysar, B. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.002 · Cited by 594
Metadata
- Authors
- DeSteno, D., Bartlett, M. Y., Braverman, J., & Salovey, P.
- Affiliations
- Northeastern University (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1103-1116
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2135727864
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 68
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 13.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
- Keywords
- jealousy, sex differences, evolutionary psychology, sexual infidelity, emotional infidelity, measurement artifacts, response format effects
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Affect, Attitude, Biological Evolution, Extramarital Relations, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Jealousy, Male, Random Allocation, Sexual Behavior, Sex Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
