Romantic Jealousy: Causes, Symptoms, Cures (36 page)

2. See Nichols (1984), p. 127.

3. See White C-f Mullen (1989), pp. 14-17.

4. A shorter version of this case was presented in chapter six of Pines (1996).

5. See Guerin et if. (1987), pp. 64-80.

6. See Guerin et al. (1987), p. 77.

7. See Barker (1987), pp. 79-81.

8. I would like to thank my clear friend and colleague Professor Murry Bilmes for his contribution to my understanding of the psychoanalytic perspective and this case.

9. Role-reversal was used as a technique for treating jealousy by others as well. For example, see cleSilva (1987).

10. See lm et al. (1983).

11. Refraining was recommended by other psychologists as well as a technique for treating jealousy. For example, see Im et al. (1985) and Teisman (1979).

12. See Margolin (1985).

13. See Sluzki (1989).

Chapter 5. Men Get Angry, Women Get Depressed

1. Two examples of' feminist psychoanalysts who have written about women's "self in relations" are lean Baker Miller (1987) and Lillian Rubin (1983).

2. Writings describing evolutionary theory and research on sex differences in attraction include Buss (1985, 1989, 1994); Buss & Schmitt (1993); Daly & Wilson (1978); Small (1992); Symons (1979).

3. See Pines £Y Aronson (1983) and Pines & Friedman (1998).

4. In a study done by Gary Hansen (1985) on dating jealousy among college students it was found that there were no sex differences in response to jealousy-provoking situations. On the other hand, sexrole orientation was consistently related to jealousy-with traditional men and women being the more jealous. Other studies that did not find sex differences in jealousy are reported by McIntosh (1989) and White (1981a). Greg White and Paul ;Mullen (1989, pp. 127) report that most studies did not find gender differences in jealousy, and that those studies in which sex differences were found were not consistent in finding one gender to be more jealous than the other.

5. For both men (380A and women (500), the most frequent response was to "talk about it." For women, the second most frequent response (260/6) was "try to ignore the whole thing" "ignoring" was a far less frequent response (18O/6) for men. Men (25%) and women (24u%6) are similar in their likelihood to let their mate know that they are hurt. For most men (81Po) and women (80",o), these three responses (talking, ignoring, and expressing hurt) accounted for the majority of the total responses mentioned. Only a very small percentage of both men and women described themselves as either shouting (8% women and 50/6 men), getting away (5% of the men and 4%/0 of the women), or resorting to violence (only three men and one woman out of 568).

6. See, for example, the works by Henley & Thorn (1977), and Tannen (1990).

7. A study investigating the reasons for dating violence discovered that jealousy caused men to become violent during a (late more often than women (Stets F& Pirog-Good, 1987). Another study of aggression toward partner and rival (Paul & Galloway, 1994) showed that men were more inclined to think about aggressive action against the rival, but women were more emotionally and behaviorally reactive to the rival.

In a study by Bram Buunk (1984), it was found that the attribution of aggression was significantly related to jealousy among males but not among females. In a study of dangerousness associated with jealousy conducted by Gregory Leong and his colleagues (1994), all the dangerous patients (described as suffering from the Othello syndrome") were men.

8. This observation is based on ►ny clinical work, as well as the work of others. See for example Buunk (1982, 1995); Clanton & Smith (1986); Mullen & Martin (1994); Paul & Galloway (1994); and White & Mullen (1989), pp. 126-51.

9. Both my clinical work and studies with Ariella Friedman seem to support this notion. See Pines & Friedman (1998) and Mullen & Martin (1994). Paul Mullen and Judy Martin found in their community study of jealousy that women were more concerned with the effects of infidelity on the quality of the relationship.

10. See Pines (1996); Tavris (1992); and White (1981b).

11. See Darwin (1965/1988, 1970/1981).

12. See Buss et al. (1990, 1992); Cashdan (1993); Daly et al. (1982); Feingold (1992); and Wilson (1978).

13. Sec Goodwin (1942).

14. See Murdock (1949)

15. White & Mullen (1989), pp. 65-64.

16. The power perspective was discussed by White (1977, 1980). See also White & Mullen (1989).

17. See White & Mullen (1989), p. 58.

18. Clanton f& Smith 1986.

Chapter 6. Romantic Jealousy in Different Cultures

1. My friend and colleague Ralph Hupka (1981), a cross-cultural psychologist at California State University, Long Beach, has summarized many of the anthropological reports relating to jealousy, and his articles are probably the best work written on the subject. See also Hupka & Bank (1996) and Buunk & Hupka (1987). Many of the examples quoted in this chapter are from Hupka's two papers. Another source is an article written by the noted anthropologist Margaret Mead (1931/1986). The sociological contribution to the chapter is mainly that of my clear friend Gordon Clanton (see Clanton & Smith (1986)).

2. See Weeks (1914).

3. See Turner (1884).

4. See Clanton (1989).

5. See Gouldsbury & Sheane, (1911).

6. See Ilupka (1981).

7. See Powers (1877) and Wellfish (1967).

8. See Mirski (1937).

9. See Mead (1931/1986).

10. See Fawcett (1886-1889).

11. See Benedict (1934).

12. See Gouldsbury & Sheane (1911).

13. See Aronson £-i Pines (I980); Pines (1987x); Pines & Aronson (1983); Pines & Friedman (1998).

14. See Benedict (1934).

15. See Irons (1979); Kurland (1979); Mead (1931/1986); and Swartz & lorclan (1980).

16. See Mead (1931/1986).

17. See Hupka (1981).

18. See Mirski (1937).

19. See Mead (1931/1986).

20. See Warner (1937).

21. See Karsten (1925).

22. See White E& Mullen (1989).

23. See Taplin (1879).

24. See Langsdorff (1813).

25. See Williams (1820).

26. See Thompson, (1859).

27. See Mishkin (1937).

28. See Davis (1936/1986).

29. See Gouldsbury & Sheave (1911).

30. See Matthews (1877).

31. See Rivers (1906).

32. See Goodwin (1942). See also Hupka (1981) fora comparison between the Todd and the Apache.

33. See Clanton (1989).

34. See Bernard (1986).

35. See Yankelovich (1981).

36. See Prochaska £y, Prochaska (1978).

37. See Crovitz and Steinman (1980).

38. The results of the Harris poll are quoted in Basow (1986).

39. See 13asow (1986), p. 212.

40. See Davis (1936/1986).

41. See Rubin (1990).

42. See Thompson (1983) and Penn et al., (1997).

43. See I3lumstein & Schwartz (1985). See also Pittman (1989) for reported findings about high rates of infidelity combined with a belief in monogamy.

44. See Whitehurst (1986).

45. See Paul et al. (1987).

46. See Buunk & Hupka (1987).

47. See Exodus 19: 3-5 RSV.

48. See Downing (1986).

49. See Clanton (1989).

50. See Harvey & Weary (1984) and Thompson & Snyder (1986).

51. See Ilupka (1981).

Chapter 7. Romantic Jealousy in Open Relationships

1. "Sexual mate exchange" was formerly called "wife swapping." The new term avoids the sexist connotations of the older one. See Gilmartin (1986).

2. Swingers rated themselves as less jealous than did nonswingers in a study by Jenks (1985).

3. See O'Neill & O'Neill (1972).

4. See Smith & Smith (1973).

5. See White & Mullen (1989).

6. See Pines (1987a).

7. See Beecher & Beecher (1971) and White £y' Mullen (1989).

8. See Davis (1936/1986), whose position is elaborated in chapter six of the present book.

9. See Melamed (1991) and Neill (1960).

10. See Pines & Aronson (1981).

11. See Kanter (1972) and White & Mullen (1989), pp. 122-123.

12. See Buunk (1981) and Constantine & Constantine (1974).

13. See Denfeld (1974).

14. See Bartell (1970).

15. See Gilmartin (1986).

16. See DeBuono et. al (1990).

17. See Pines, (1996).

18. See Gilmartin (1986).

19. Similar findings were reported in a special session devoted to the subject of infidelity in the annual convention of the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists, San Francisco, October 1989. See Gilmartin (1986). See also Pestrak ct if. (1985) and Pittman (1989).

Chapter 8. Crimes of Passion

1. Paul Mullen (1996) discusses the relationship between jealousy and violence toward one's partner from both an evolutionary and a social construction perspective. In another paper, (Mullen & Maack, 1985), Mullen reports that an analysis of 178 crimes of passion discovered that 510/o involved an attack on the loved one.

See also Goldney (1977) and Mowat (1966). In Mowat's British study, 850/6 of the seventy-one murders and thirty-nine attempted murders triggered by jealousy that he analyzed involved the loved one.

2. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (I986). In an analysis of 195 murders, conducted almost forty years ago, jealousy was the underlying motive in 22°io of the cases (Gibhens, 1959). Also, in an analysis conducted almost fifty years ago of 200 murders committed in England, it was found that jealousy was the underlying motive in 230/0 of the cases (East, 1949).

3. For example, Gregory Leong and his colleagues (1994) report that people suffering from delusional jealousy ("Othello Syndrome") may present with hostility that ranges from verbal abuse to homicidal acts.

Ola Barnett and colleagues (1995) discovered significantly elevated levels of jealousy' among maritally violent men.

David Riggs (1993) reports the results of a survey of 654 college students in which it was found that students who were aggressive toward their partners and those who were victims of partners' aggression reported more problems in their relationships than did students in nonaggressive relationships. Jealousy was one of the problems mentioned most often by the aggressive students.

For further studies on this topic see also Delgado & Bond (1993); Goodstein & Page (1981); 1-lafner & Boker (1982); Pines (1983); and White & Mullen (1989), chapter eight.

4. The study involving 607 people is described in Pines (1987b) and in Pines & Friedman (1998). The study involving 103 people is described in Pines t;,; Aronson (1983).

5. In two different studies of homicide, West (1968) and Wolfgang (1958), jealousy was found to be the third most common cause

6. For characteristics of violent offenders, see Straus et al. (1980); Straus ti 1lotaling (1980); Taylor (1985); and Gove (1985). To review for characteristics of the violently jealous, see White & Mullen (1989), pp. 227-250.

7. I discuss romantic images extensively in chapter one of the present work, as well as in the second chapter of Pines (1996). The connection between childhood wounds and adult romantic relationship is nicely articulated by Hendrix (1988).

8. This point is also made by White £Y Mullen, (1989), pp. 223-227.

9. Studies of individuals who committed crimes triggered by jealousy show that most often such crimes are committed by males on female victims. For example, see Mowat (1966); see also Mullen & Maack (1985). Regarding other characteristics of violent offenders, see Gove (1985), and for other characteristics of the violently jealous, see White £~ Mullen (1989), pp. 227-230.

10. The study was conducted in a women's prison in California, with the help of specially trained University of California, Berkeley students.

11. The results of the comparison indicated that the women in prison described themselves as more jealous (3.4 vs. 2.7) and as perceived by their intimate partners to be far more jealous (4.9 vs. 2.7) than did the control group. When describing their most intense experiences of jealousy, the women in prison reported feeling more rage (6.9 vs. 4.9), more anxiety (5.1 vs. 4.4), humiliation (5.2 vs. 4.5), frustration (6.2 vs. 5.5), depression (6.0 vs. 4.9), grief (4.2 vs. 5.8), pain (6.5 vs. 5.1), and aggression (6.5 vs. 4.7). They also felt more possessive (6.0 vs. 4.3), selfrighteous (5.7 vs. 3.8), and close to a nervous breakdown (3.1 vs. 2.8). When asked how they usually coped with their jealousy, they were far more likely to say that they used violence (3.4 vs. 1.6). They also reported being more likely to suffer silently but visibly (4.0 vs. 2.8) or to leave their mate (3.3 vs. 2.5). When asked about their childhoods, the women in prison described a more troubled home life (5.7 vs. 4.9), a troubled relationship between the parents (2.9 vs. 4.6) marked by violence of father toward mother (2.8 vs. 1.2), having a jealous mother (4.3 vs. 2.1), and being beaten while growing up (2.8 vs. 1.1). They were also likely to feel less secure in their current intimate relationships (4.7 vs. 5.5).