The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan
Open accessAbstract
The different adaptive problems faced by men and women over evolutionary history led evolutionary psychologists to hypothesize and discover sex differences in jealousy as a function of infidelity type. An alternative hypothesis proposes that beliefs about the conditional probabilities of sexual and emotional infidelity account for these sex differences. Four studies tested these hypotheses. Study 1 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 1,122) by rendering the types of infidelity mutually exclusive. Study 2 tested the hypotheses in an American sample (N = 234) by asking participants to identify which aspect of infidelity was more upsetting when both forms occurred, and by using regression to identify the unique contributions of sex and beliefs. Study 3 replicated Study 2 in a Korean sample (N = 190). Study 4 replicated Study 2 in a Japanese sample (N = 316). Across the studies, the evolutionary hypothesis, but not the belief hypothesis, accounted for sex differences in jealousy when the types of infidelity are rendered mutually exclusive; sex differences in which aspect of infidelity is more upsetting when both occur; significant variance attributable to sex, after controlling for beliefs; sex‐differentiated patterns of beliefs; and the cross‐cultural prevalence of all these sex differences.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.2.204 · Cited by 4,253
Self-citationSex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology
Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00038.x · Cited by 1,263
Self-citationEvolutionary Psychology: A New Paradigm for Psychological Science
Buss, D. M. (1995) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0601_1 · Cited by 1,198
Self-citationCauses of Conjugal Dissolution: A Cross-cultural Study
Betzig, L. (1989) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/203798 · Cited by 518
Cited by
Boyer, P., & Liénard, P. (2006) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x06009332 · Cited by 601
Women's sexual strategies: the hidden dimension of extra-pair mating
Greiling, H., & Buss, D. M. (2000) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00151-8 · Cited by 434
Self-citationHarris, C. R. (2003) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0702_102-128 · Cited by 344
Sex differences in jealousy: Evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement?
DeSteno, D., Bartlett, M. Y., Braverman, J., & Salovey, P. (2002) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1103 · Cited by 286
Emotional reactions to infidelity
Shackelford, T. K., LeBlanc, G. J., & Drass, E. (2000) · Cognition and Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699930050117657 · Cited by 208
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- BUSS, D. M., SHACKELFORD, T. K., KIRKPATRICK, L. A., CHOE, J. C., LIM, H. K., HASEGAWA, M., HASEGAWA, T., & BENNETT, K.
- Venue
- Personal Relationships
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-03
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 125-150
- ISSN
- 1350-4126 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-6811
- OpenAlex
- W2112602190
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 16.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00215.x
- The paper
- BUSS, D. M., SHACKELFORD, T. K., KIRKPATRICK, L. A., CHOE, J. C., LIM, H. K., HASEGAWA, M., HASEGAWA, T., & BENNETT, K. (1999). Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. Personal Relationships. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00215.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.