IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v4y2020i1d10.1038_s41562-019-0654-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns of paternal investment predict cross-cultural variation in jealous response

Author

Listed:
  • Brooke A. Scelza

    (University of California)

  • Sean P. Prall

    (University of California)

  • Tami Blumenfield

    (Yunnan University)

  • Alyssa N. Crittenden

    (University of Nevada Las Vegas)

  • Michael Gurven

    (University of California)

  • Michelle Kline

    (Simon Fraser University)

  • Jeremy Koster

    (University of Cincinnati)

  • Geoff Kushnick

    (Australian National University)

  • Siobhán M. Mattison

    (University of New Mexico)

  • Elizabeth Pillsworth

    (California State University)

  • Mary K. Shenk

    (Pennsylvania State University)

  • Kathrine Starkweather

    (University of New Mexico)

  • Jonathan Stieglitz

    (Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse)

  • Chun-Yi Sum

    (University of Rochester)

  • Kyoko Yamaguchi

    (Liverpool John Moores University)

  • Richard McElreath

    (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology)

Abstract

Long-lasting, romantic partnerships are a universal feature of human societies, but almost as ubiquitous is the risk of instability when one partner strays. Jealous response to the threat of infidelity is well studied, but most empirical work on the topic has focused on a proposed sex difference in the type of jealousy (sexual or emotional) that men and women find most upsetting, rather than on how jealous response varies1,2. This stems in part from the predominance of studies using student samples from industrialized populations, which represent a relatively homogenous group in terms of age, life history stage and social norms3,4. To better understand variation in jealous response, we conducted a 2-part study in 11 populations (1,048 individuals). In line with previous work, we find a robust sex difference in the classic forced-choice jealousy task. However, we also show substantial variation in jealous response across populations. Using parental investment theory, we derived several predictions about what might trigger such variation. We find that greater paternal investment and lower frequency of extramarital sex are associated with more severe jealous response. Thus, partner jealousy appears to be a facultative response, reflective of the variable risks and costs of men’s investment across societies.

Suggested Citation

  • Brooke A. Scelza & Sean P. Prall & Tami Blumenfield & Alyssa N. Crittenden & Michael Gurven & Michelle Kline & Jeremy Koster & Geoff Kushnick & Siobhán M. Mattison & Elizabeth Pillsworth & Mary K. She, 2020. "Patterns of paternal investment predict cross-cultural variation in jealous response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 20-26, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0654-y
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0654-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0654-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-019-0654-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeffrey Winking & Jeremy Koster, 2021. "Timing, Initiators, and Causes of Divorce in a Mayangna/Miskito Community in Nicaragua," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0654-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.