Betrayal in Mateships, Friendships, and Coalitions

Over evolutionary history, different benefits have been gained and lost from long-term mateships, friendships, and coalitions. Humans have evolved psychological mechanisms that are sensitive to cues to possible diversion of benefits to people outside the relationship. Mateships, friendships, and coalitions are predicted to share some of the same benefits but also to differ in some of the resources conferred. Accordingly, the psychological mechanisms sensitive to betrayal are predicted to operate in the same manner in those domains in which benefits are common across relationships and to operate differently in those domains in which benefits are unique to relationship type. Three interpersonal domains are investigated with regard to perceived betrayal: extra relationship intimate involvement, intrarelationship reciprocity, and relationship commitment. Eight hypotheses are tested across the three relationship domains via perceived betrayal judgments. Results support a model of betrayal entailing some degree of domain specificity but also some generality across domains.

[1]  E K Sadalla,et al.  Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: qualifying the parental investment model. , 1990, Journal of personality.

[2]  D. Buss.  Evolutionary social psychology: Prospects and pitfalls , 1990 .

[3]  D. Buss,et al.  Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. , 1993, Psychological review.

[4]  Donald S. Strassberg,et al.  Self-Disclosure Reciprocity among Preadolescents , 1983 .

[5]  M. Clark,et al.  Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. , 1979 .

[6]  Stephanie L. Brown,et al.  Age preferences and mate choice among homosexuals and heterosexuals: A case for modular psychological mechanisms. , 1995 .

[7]  J. Langlois,et al.  Attractive Faces Are Only Average , 1990 .

[8]  Margo Wilson,et al.  Male sexual jealousy , 1982 .

[9]  S. Gaulin,et al.  Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  Drew Westen,et al.  Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology , 1992 .

[11]  M. Argyle,et al.  The Rules of Friendship , 1984 .

[12]  L. Cosmides.  The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task , 1989, Cognition.

[13]  T. Morton.  Intimacy and reciprocity of exchange: A comparison of spouses and strangers. , 1978 .

[14]  H. Reis,et al.  Interpersonal processes in close relationships. , 1988, Annual review of psychology.

[15]  R. Trivers.  The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[16]  D. Buss,et al.  Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures , 1989, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[17]  J. Kihlstrom.  “I Think It Would Be Fun to Edit a Newspaper.” , 1995 .

[18]  R. Shepard.  Ecological constraints on internal representation: resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. , 1984, Psychological review.

[19]  M. Wiederman,et al.  Gender differences in sexual jealousy: Adaptionist or social learning explanation? , 1993 .

[20]  A. Zahavi.  Mate selection-a selection for a handicap. , 1975, Journal of theoretical biology.

[21]  S. Pinker.  The Language Instinct , 1994 .

[22]  Charles T. Hill,et al.  Gender and Self-Disclosure , 1987 .

[23]  P. Cozby.  Self-disclosure: a literature review. , 1973, Psychological bulletin.

[24]  M. Clark,et al.  Perceptions of Exploitation in Communal and Exchange Relationships , 1985 .