The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Critical Examination of Popular Assumptions About the Benefits and Outcomes of Monogamous Relationships
Abstract
In this article, we critically examine the social institution of monogamy. First, we discuss the lack of an adequate and consistent definition of the construct of monogamy and consider how common monogamy is. Next, we address perceived benefits of monogamy and whether those ostensible benefits are supported by empirical evidence. We conclude that evidence for the benefits of monogamy relative to other relationship styles is currently lacking, suggesting that, for those who choose it, consensual non-monogamy may be a viable alternative to monogamy. Implications for theories of close relationships are discussed.
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
Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 · Cited by 6,247 · cited 3×
“However, these associations have been studied exclusively within ostensibly monogamous long-term relationships (e.g., Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994), marital relationships (e.g., Butzer & Campbell, 2008; Feeney, 2002; Ross, 1995), and relationships leading up to monogamy (e.g.,…”
BackgroundThe dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(02)00505-6 · Cited by 5,265
Sexual Dysfunction in the United States: Prevalence and Predictors
Laumann, E. O., Paik, A., & Rosen, R. C. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.281.6.537 · Cited by 5,119
Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples.
Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644 · Cited by 3,678
Research on Divorce: Continuing Trends and New Developments
Amato, P. R. (2010) · Journal of Marriage and Family · doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x · Cited by 1,918 · cited 1×
“However, as our discussion has shown, we have ample reason to question the overall advantages of monogamy given persistent infidelity, complaints about lack of attraction for a monogamous partner, and divorce rates within the United States at nearly 50% (Amato, 2010).”
BackgroundRankin, C. H., Abrams, T., Barry, R. J., Bhatnagar, S., Clayton, D. F., Colombo, J., Coppola, G., Geyer, M. A., Glanzman, D. L., Marsland, S., et al. (2009) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2008.09.012 · Cited by 1,665
Adult attachment, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction: A study of married couples
BUTZER, B., & CAMPBELL, L. (2008) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00189.x · Cited by 469
Braunstein, G. D., Sundwall, D. A., Katz, M., Shifren, J. L., Buster, J. E., Simon, J. A., Bachman, G., Aguirre, O. A., Lucas, J. D., Rodenberg, C., et al. (2005) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.165.14.1582 · Cited by 458
Pfeiffer, S. M., & Wong, P. T. P. (1989) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/026540758900600203 · Cited by 389
The DSM diagnostic criteria for hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women
Brotto, L. A. (2010) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9543-1 · Cited by 312 · cited 1×
“Of course, suggesting that monogamy is a cause of sexual desire disorders goes beyond the available data, but being in a monogamous relationship does appear to be a risk factor for the diagnosis of this disorder (Brotto, 2010).”
Background
Cited by
Beyond “oxytocin = good”: neural complexities and the flipside of social bonds
van Anders, S. M., Goodson, J. L., & Kingsbury, M. A. (2013) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0134-9 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Conley, T. D., Ziegler, A., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Valentine, B.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-11-21
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 124-141
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2077082460
- Cited by
- 226
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 39.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A Critical Examination of Popular Assumptions About the Benefits and Outcomes of Monogamous Relationships. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1088868312467087
- The paper
- Conley, T. D., Ziegler, A., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Valentine, B. (2013). A Critical Examination of Popular Assumptions About the Benefits and Outcomes of Monogamous Relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312467087
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.
