This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)

Look up infidelity in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Infidelity (colloquially known as cheating) most commonly refers to a breach of the expectation of sexual exclusivity that is expressed or implied in intimate relationships in many cultures.

Infidelity can occur in relation to physical intimacy and/or emotional intimacy. The impact of infidelity is said to be not only about sex outside the relationship, but also about trust, betrayal, lying and disloyalty.^[1] Sexual infidelity by a marriage partner is commonly called philandery, adultery, or an affair.

What constitutes an act of infidelity varies between and within cultures and depends on the type of relationship that exists between people. Even within an open relationship, infidelity may arise if a partner in the relationship acts outside of the understood boundaries of that relationship.

Emotional infidelity is emotional involvement with another person, a process that leads one’s partner to channel emotional resources, such as romantic love, time, and attention, to someone else.^[2] The level of intimate involvement can extend from in-person involvement to online affairs. Emotional infidelity, as compared to physical infidelity, can inflict as much, if not more, hurt, pain and suffering. Most infidelity involves both physical and emotional unfaithfulness.^[3]

Incidence of infidelity[link]

Some researchers say there's a 50–50 chance today that one partner will have an affair during a marriage including non-physical relationships.^[1] It is estimated that roughly 30 to 60% of all married individuals (in the United States) will engage in infidelity at some point during their marriage.^[3] Some authorities (for example, Frank Pittman in 'Grow Up' (Golden Books)) observe infidelity is involved in 90% of first time divorces. A 1997 study with Kristina Gordon found "more than half of the marriages that experience infidelity ended in divorce".

27% of people who reported being happy in marriage admitted to having an affair.^[4]

In a recent survey of 16,000 university students in 53 countries, 20% of long term relationships began when one or both partners were involved with someone else.^[5] Studies suggest around 30–40% of unmarried relationships and 18–20% of marriages are marked by at least one incident of sexual infidelity. Men are more likely than women to have a sexual affair, regardless of whether or not they are in a married or unmarried relationship.^[2]

By contrast, John Gottman with his 35 years of research into marriage,^[6] is reported as saying, "Only 20 percent of divorces are caused by an affair.^[7] Most marriages die with a whimper, as people turn away from one another, slowly growing apart."^[8]

Fifty United Kingdom divorce lawyers were asked to name the most common causes of their cases in 2003. Of those who cited extramarital affairs, 55% said it was a cheating husband that precipitated divorce while 45% it was a wife's cheating.^[9]

Rates among older women tripled from 5% in 1991 to 15% in 2006; rates among men rose from 20–28%. About 20% of younger men and 15% of younger women say they cheated, up from about 15% and 12%, respectively.^[1] Infidelity studies show that extramarital sex occurs in up to 25% of heterosexual marriages in the USA, according to Adrian Blow, a Michigan State University professor who is a marriage and family therapist.^[10] Many experts believe this increase in cheating is due to greater opportunity (time spent away from a spouse) and young people developing the habit of having multiple sexual partners before they get married.^[3]

Children can be witnesses to an affair and outcomes of an affair. Between 2–4% of children are conceived as a result of an affair. A 2005 scientific review of international published studies of paternal discrepancy found a range in incidence from 0.8% to 30% (median 3.7%), suggesting that the widely quoted figure of 10% of non-paternal events is an overestimate.

Infidelity which does not involve sex or conception may be referred to as a romantic friendship or an emotional affair. Some people consider virtual sex, which is an on-line relationship, as infidelity.

Infidelity and gender[link]

Attitudes towards "casual sex" are influenced by gender. Infidelity comes in a variety of forms ranging in complexity that are viewed differently among genders.

According to Michael J. Formica’s "Psychology Today" blog, "There is an intimate relationship between sexuality and emotionality. Men and women, however, tend to approach that relationship from vastly different points of reference and those differences clearly impact reactions to infidelity for each gender, whether that infidelity is emotional or sexual, in very different ways."^[11]

In Annette Lawson’s "Adultery: An Analysis of Love and Betrayal", she speculates, when men have affairs, they want to allow themselves to be vulnerable and dependent and that when women have affairs, they want to be strong and free.^[12] Louise DeSalvo comments, "In affairs, each gender wants to live the possibilities foreclosed to them in ‘normal’ marriages-women seek autonomy; men seek intimacy. Which suggests that if a marriage accommodates these behaviors, there will, perhaps, be less reason to stray."^[13]

Gender differences in infidelity[link]

There is currently debate in the field of evolutionary psychology whether an innate, evolved sex difference exists between men and women in response to an act of infidelity; this is often called a "sex difference".^[14] Those that posit a sex difference exists state that men are more likely to be disturbed by an act of sexual infidelity (having one’s partner engage in sexual relations with another), whereas women are more likely to be disturbed by an act of emotional infidelity (having one’s partner fall in love with another). Those against this model argue that there is no difference between men and women in their response to an act of infidelity.^[15]

One evolutionary hypothesis is based on a theory that aspects of cognition are retained in one’s genes.^[14] These genes are theorized to code for cognitive modules that have been shaped by evolution to perform a specific task. In our case, they would code for a sex specific jealousy response. From an evolutionary perspective, men are theorized to maximize their fitness by investing as little as possible in their offspring and producing as many offspring as possible, due to the risk of males investing in children that are not theirs. Women, who do not face the risk of cuckoldry, are theorized to maximize their fitness by investing as much as possible in their offspring because they invest at least nine months of resources towards their offspring in pregnancy.^[15] Maximizing female fitness is theorized to require males in the relationship to invest all their resources in the offspring. These conflicting strategies are theorized to have resulted in selection of different jealousy mechanisms that are designed to enhance the fitness of the respective gender.^[16]

A common way to test whether an innate jealousy response exists between sexes is to use a forced-choice questionnaire. This style of questionnaire asks participants "Yes or No" and "Response A or Response B" style questions about certain scenarios. For example, a question might ask, "If you found your partner cheating on you would you be more upset by (A) the sexual involvement or (B) the emotional involvement". As the name implies, one is forced to choose between the two options. Many studies using forced choice questionnaires have found statistically significant results supporting an innate sex difference between men and women.^[16] Furthermore, studies have shown that this observation holds across many cultures, although the magnitudes of the sex difference vary within sexes across cultures.^[17]

Although forced-choice questionnaires show a statistically significant sex- difference, these findings are questionable when the entire body of work on sex-differences is considered. When methods other than forced-choice questionnaires are used to identify an innate sex difference, inconsistencies between studies begin to arise.^[18] For example, in a study by Sangrin & Guadango (2005), the authors found that women sometimes report feeling more intense jealousy in response to both sexual and emotional infidelity. The results of these studies also depended on the context in which the participants were made to describe what type of jealousy they felt, as well as the intensity of their jealousy. From this study, it is clear that context plays a role in the responses men and women give researchers and therefore how sex-differences are interpreted.^[19]

In her meta-analysis, Harris (2003)^[18] raises the question of whether forced choice questionnaires actually measure what they purport: jealousy itself and evidence that differences in jealousy arise from innate mechanisms. Her meta-analysis reveals that sex-differences are almost exclusively found in forced-choice studies. According to Harris, a meta-analysis of multiple types of studies should indicate a convergence of evidence and multiple operationalizations. This is not the case, which raises the question as to the validity of forced-choice studies. DeSteno and Bartlett (2002)^[14] further support this argument by providing evidence which indicates that significant results of forced-choice studies may actually be an artifact of measurement; this finding would invalidate many of the claims made by those "in favor" of an "innate" sex difference. Even those "in favor" of sex-differences admit that certain lines of research, such as homicide studies, suggest against the possibility of sex-differences.^[19]

These inconsistent results have lead researchers to propose novel theories that attempt to explain the sex differences observed in certain studies. In Levy & Kelly’s (2010)^[20] study, subsets of men were observed to show more emotional jealousy than sexual jealousy, a contradiction from the evolutionary theorists’ perspective. In an attempt to explain findings such as these, Levy & Kelly propose that differences between sexes, and within sexes, may be a result of the attachment they feel towards their partner. Their findings indicate that men who are more deeply attached to their partner have a greater chance of feeling more emotional jealousy versus sexual jealousy. The authors propose that a social mechanism may be responsible for the observed results. In other words, replicable sex differences in emotion and sexual jealousy could be a function of a social function. Similar studies (Ward & Voracek, 2004) focusing on the masculinization and feminization by society also argue for a social explanation, while discounting an evolutionary explanation.^[21]

The transformation of infidelity[link]

Recently, in North America and Europe specifically, there have been drastic changes in the nature and character of relationships. Fewer people are choosing to get married and instead are assuming relationships similar to marriage, without the title. The divorce rates are rising and types of family development are changing. For example, more couples are choosing to remain childless or have children without being married. These transformations may be attributed to the changing labor markets, along with new and different value sets and lifestyles. In societies where marriage is no longer uncritically perceived as a monogamous life-long relationship, getting married seems a more dubious enterprise.^[22] Marriage, sex, and childbearing, which have been a tightly bound package for much of the 20th century, are no longer so inextricably linked.

Anthropological viewpoint on humans and infidelity[link]

Anthropologists tend to believe humans are neither completely monogamous nor completely polygamous. Anthropologist Bobbi Low, says we are "slightly polygamous"; Deborah Blum, though, believes we are "ambiguously monogamous," and that we are slowly moving away from the polygamous habits of our evolutionary ancestors.^[13]

According to anthropologist Helen Fisher, there are numerous psychological reasons for adultery. Some people may want to supplement a marriage, solve a sex problem, gather more attention, seek revenge, or have more excitement in the marriage. But based on Fisher’s research, there also is a biological side to adultery. "We have two brain systems: One of them is linked to attachment and romantic love, and then there is the other brain system, which is purely sex drive." Sometimes these two brain systems are not well connected, which enables people to become adulterers and satisfy their sex drive without any regards to their attachment side.^[23]

Cultural variation in infidelity[link]

Oftentimes, gender differences in both jealousy and infidelity are attributable to cultural factors. This variation stems from the fact that societies differ in how they view extramarital affairs and jealousy (Hupka et al. 1985). An examination of jealousy across 7 nations revealed that the partner in a relationship serves as the primary and exclusive source of satisfaction and attention in all cultures. Therefore, when an individual feels jealousy towards another, it is usually because they are now sharing the same significant other as the primary source of attention and satisfaction. However, variation can be seen when identifying the behaviors and actions that betray the role of primary attention (satisfaction) giver. For instance, in certain cultures if an individual goes out with another of the opposite gender, emotions of intense jealousy can result; however, in other cultures, this behavior is perfectly acceptable and is not given much thought (Hupka 1985).

It is important to understand where these cultural variations come from and how they root themselves into differing perceptions of infidelity. While many cultures report infidelity as wrong and admonish it, some are more tolerant of such behavior. These views are generally linked to the overall liberal nature of the society. For instance, Danish society is viewed as more liberal than many other cultures, and as such, have correlating liberal views on infidelity and extramarital affairs (Blow and Hartnett 2005). According to Christine Harris and Nicholas Christenfeld (1996), societies that are legally more liberal against extramarital affairs judge less harshly upon sexual infidelity because it is distinct from emotional infidelity. In Danish society, having sex does not necessarily imply a deep emotional attachment. As a result, infidelity does not carry such a severe negative connotation (Harris and Christenfeld). With regards to cultural differences in how the genders view infidelity, it was observed that females found emotional infidelity much more distressful and males found sexual infidelity to be much more distressful than females. A comparison between modern day Chinese and American societies showed that there was greater distress with sexual infidelity in the US than in China. The cultural difference is most likely due to the more restrictive nature of Chinese society, thus, making infidelity a more salient concern. Sexual promiscuity is more prominent in the United States, thus it follows that American society is more preoccupied with infidelity than Chinese society (Geary et al. 1995). Oftentimes a single predominate religion can influence the culture of an entire nation. Even within Christianity in the United States, there are discrepancies as to how extramarital affairs are viewed. For instance, Mormons and Catholics do not view infidelity with equal severity. Catholics and conservative Protestants who follow scripture more directly view aspects of infidelity much more harshly than Mormons. However, simply identifying as Catholic is not enough to warrant a harsh view on infidelity. A measure of attachment to the religion, such as regular church attendance, reflects differences in views within Catholic groups. Catholics with regular church participation consistently viewed infidelity and other social norms more conservatively. Ultimately, it was seen that adults that associated with a religion (any denomination) were found to view infidelity as much more distressing than those who were not affiliated with a religion. Those that participated more heavily in their religions were even more conservative in their views on infidelity (Burdette et al. 2007).

While infidelity is by no means exclusive to certain groups of people, its perception can be influenced by other factors. In fact, individuals that are well educated, live in large metropolitan areas, or have more relaxed views on premarital sex are also more likely to be accepting towards extramarital affairs. Furthermore, within a "homogeneous culture," like that in the United States, factors like community size can be strong predictors of how infidelity is perceived. Larger communities tend to care less about infidelity whereas small towns are much more concerned with such issues (Blow and Hartnett 2005). These patterns are observed in other cultures as well. For example, a cantina in a small, rural Mexican community is often viewed as a place where "decent" or "married" women do not go because of its semi-private nature. Conversely, public spaces like the market or plaza are acceptable areas for heterosexual interaction. A smaller population size presents the threat of being publicly recognized for infidelity. However, within a larger community of the same Mexican society, entering a bar or watering hole would garner a different view. It would be deemed perfectly acceptable for both married and unmarried individuals to drink at a bar in a large city. These observations can be paralleled to rural and urban societies in the United States as well (Hirsch et al. 2007). Ultimately, these variables and societal differences dictate attitudes towards sexual infidelity which can vary across cultures as well as within cultures.

Infidelity and evolution[link]

In her book, "Adultery", Louise DeSalvo comments on infidelity and evolution, "perhaps adultery makes evolutionary sense: Perhaps, it is a pesky way our species guarantees its survival."^[24] In an article titled, "Infidelity: Is Monogamy Just a Myth?" zoologist, David Barash (Co-author of the book "The Myth of Monogamy") and his wife, Dr. Judith Eve Lipton, comment on monogamy and evolution, "When it comes to human beings, there's absolutely no question about monogamy being natural. It's not," Barash and Lipton believe it all goes back to evolution: The male's goal is to make sure his genes live on and therefore he sets out to fertilize as many females as possible. "Sexual opportunity is the name of the game for males," Lipton said. Women, on the other hand, spend nine months pregnant, then have to care for their children. So it's in the interest of the woman to find one man who will stay with her, or at least help her take care of her offspring, and some might argue that man is preferably wealthy or powerful. "Females, by nature, are more choosy and less opportunistic," Lipton said.^[25]

However, other studies have purported that it may have been an evolutionary advantage for women to cheat: they find the most virile man to impregnate them, and a more caring man to help raise the child.^[26]

Freudian model of infidelity[link]

Freudian theory expresses the belief that it is natural and human to have sexual desires. In the book, "The State of Affairs" by Jean Duncombe, Karen Harrison, Graham Allan, and Dennis Marsden Freud’s ideas are examined in the context of adultery. In their words:

"Freud would say adultery is a classic manifestation of antinomic desires splitting the psyche of the adulterer. The split is externalized in three actors:

1. the betrayed spouse is the superego,
2. the lover is the id, and
3. the adulterer is the ego.

Social norms and institutions act as extensions of the superego that serve to regulate behaviors prompted by the id thus implicitly blaming the third party for intruding between the rational sense and the conscience."^[22]

Defense mechanisms to prevent infidelity[link]

Game theory, suggests that cheating is actually the Evolutionary Stable Strategy for an individual to improve his or her own fitness (Roughgarden and Akcay, 2010). This holds true in most mating systems and shows that infidelity is actually advantageous to a cheating male’s fitness. It allows men to copulate with multiple women, maximizing the number of offspring in the next generation (Roughgarden and Akcay, 2010). So why don’t more humans cheat? What defense mechanisms do mates have that prevent infidelity in their partners? Current research in the field provides three suggestions to explain this phenomenon. The original theory proposes that jealousy acts as an innate and adaptive response to prevent infidelity (Buss et al., 1992). Critics of this theory propose an idea that infidelity is prevented through social monitoring of one’s mate and action once there is a violation of expectation (Harris, 2004). The most recent theory suggests that punishing cheaters and damaging their individual reputations are what police infidelity (Hirsch et al., 2007).

The more traditional Evolutionary Psychological viewpoint on how infidelity is prevented is through the adaptively developed emotional response of jealousy. Jealousy is an emotion that can elicit strong responses. Cases have been commonly documented where sexual jealousy was a direct cause of murders and morbid jealousy (Harris, 2003). Buss (2005) states that jealousy has three main functions that can help prevent infidelity.

It can (i) alert an individual to threats with a valued relationship,

(ii) be activated by the presence of interested and more desirable intrasexual rivals,

(iii) function as a motivational mechanism that creates behavioral outputs to deter infidelity and abandonment.

Looking at its physiological mechanism helps support this idea. Jealousy is a form of stress response which has been shown to activate the Sympathetic nervous system by increasing heart rate, blood pressure, and respiration (Harris, 2000). This will activate the "fight or flight" response to ensure action against the attempt at sexual infidelity in their partner (Buss, 1992). Buss and his colleagues (1992) were the first to pioneer a theory that jealousy is an evolved human emotion that has become an innate module, hard-wired to prevent infidelity from occurring. This idea is commonly referred to as Jealousy as a Specific Innate Module (JSIM) and has become widely debated (Harris, 2003). The basis behind this argument is that jealousy was beneficial in our ancestor’s time when cuckoldry was more common (Buss et al., 1992). They suggested that those who were equipped with this emotional response could more effectively stop infidelity and those without the emotional response had a harder time doing so. Because infidelity imposed such a fitness cost, those who had the jealous emotional response, improved their fitness, and could pass down the jealousy module to the next generation (Buss 1996). This provided an ultimate selection mechanism to make this module adaptive and still persist in today’s human population.

David Buss and his colleagues (1992) tested this pioneering hypothesis through self-report, forced-choice studies in college students which was explained in a previous section on the Gender differences in infidelity. Their findings support the JSIM theory since our ancestor’s concerns of paternal uncertainty and parental investment are reflected in modern humans through the subjects’ sex-related responses and anxieties. It suggests that jealousy is adapted to prevent these respective fitness reductions from infidelity in males and females (Buss et al., 1992).

The hypothesis that jealousy evolved into an innate module that is hard wired into human brains is widely accepted but is also met with a lot of controversy. Aside from the experimental flaws and possibility of unreliable data, social-cognitive researchers argue that jealousy can’t be an adaptation to prevent infidelity (Harris, 2004). Christine Harris (2005) states that the fitness advantage of jealousy is not as clear as Buss reports. She speculates that in our ancestor’s times, the act of sex or emotional infidelity is what triggered jealousy. Therefore the signal detection would have happened only after infidelity had occurred, making jealousy an emotional by-product with no selective function. These Social-cognitive researchers believe that a more accurate way to prevent infidelity is by social monitoring and acting upon any violation of expectations. They hypothesize that a person monitors their partner’s actions with a potential rival through primary and secondary appraisals (Harris, 2004). If their expectations are violated at either level of observation they will become distressed and enact an appropriate action to stop the chance of infidelity (Cramer et al., 2008). It allows them to act accordingly before infidelity occurs, thereby having the capability to raise their fitness (Harris, 2004). This can be likened to mate guarding in primates but to a much lesser degree. Harris’ hypothesis was tested by Cramer and his colleagues (2008) using the same survey technique that Buss used, only with both forced-choice and mutually-exclusive surveys. They added an Infidelity Expectations Questionnaire (IEQ) to determine the subject’s current expectations of their relationship prior to the violation of expectations from the Buss survey. After adding this factor and adjusting the original results with the new survey results, social-cognitive researchers would expect no sex differences in responses. However, the results showed a clear sex difference, thereby supporting Buss’ original research results and idea of an innate sex-difference in jealousy and infidelity. More research and evidence need to be provided for the social monitoring theory to be considered in the field.

A recently suggested defense mechanisms of infidelity that is attracting more attention and research is the idea that a particular social group will punish cheaters by damaging their individual reputation (Fisher et al., 2009). The basis for this suggestion stems from the fact that humans have an unmatched ability to monitor social relationships and inflict punishment on cheaters, regardless of the context (Scheuring, 2010). This punishment comes in many forms, one being social gossip of the action. Social Gossip will ostracize that individual from the group by damaging his or her reputation. This damage will impair the future benefits that individual can confer from the group and its individuals (Scheuring, 2010). Punishment actually encourages group cohesion and cooperation. A damaged reputation is especially debilitating when related to sexual and emotional infidelity because it can limit future reproductive mate choices within the group and will cause a net fitness cost that outweighs the fitness benefit gained from the infidelity (Fisher et al., 2010). This will deter an individual from cheating in the first place. A good example of this is given in fieldwork done by Hirsch and his colleagues (2007). They did observational research on the influence of reputation and sexually transmitted disease (STD) risk on sexual practices of the villagers in Degollado, Mexico. What they found was that gossip about extramarital affairs was particularly prevalent and devastating for reputation in this region because of the small community. Adultery can cause an individual to be disowned by the family, hurt the marriage value of his/her family, lose money or a job, and diminish future reproductive potential. Men having extramarital affairs had to be extremely tactful by having these sexual relations in private areas where women don’t go (like bars or brothels) and with women not connected to the community (wandering prostitutes). These are the riskiest areas and the riskiest people to have sexual relations with, making it highly likely to contract and spread HIV/AIDS through these practices. This study shows the power of reputation on an individual because the men of the village value socially safe sex over physically safe sex. In other words, they value their personal reputation over their own well-being since it may confer an increased fitness benefit.

Arguments over these different hypotheses seem to lack progress due to a need for well designed experiments that provide more reliable and conclusive results. Further attention and innovative research towards these major arguments can help elucidate the role of infidelity defense mechanisms in modern human societies.

Purpose of marriage[link]

According to the authors of "The State of Affairs", there exists a common belief that a fundamental purpose of marriage is to control sexual partnering (a point that is specifically stated in Christian weddings). However, the problem lies in the fact that marriage cannot control sexual desires, and the messages our culture provides suggest it can’t satisfy them.^[22] The belief is that it's natural for humans to have sexual desires but they cannot be acted on if humans live together and engage in marriage.

Infidelity and the internet[link]

The rise of the internet and technology in general provide new challenges for modern couples. According to the Global Internet Statistics in 2003, internet population around the world has grown exceptionally fast in less than a decade, rising from 16 million users in 1995 to approximately 680 million in late 2003. Millions of such users are married individuals who use the Internet to meet strangers, flirt, and many times engage in highly sexualized conversations.^[27]

Research on internet infidelity is a relatively new field of interest. It is difficult to classify any type of sexual interaction via the internet as infidelity because it lacks the physical aspect. In their book, "The Philosophy of Sex", Alan Soble and Nicholas Power speculate about the internet, infidelity and culture, "According to the dominant account in our culture, the paradigm case of what counts as sex is heterosexual intercourse, where a man and women engage in a particularly intimate form of physical contact, in which a penis penetrates a vagina. This case is paradigmatic in that it organizes social judgments about which other activities count as sexual, and also connects to dominant views about what sex is normal, natural and good."^[28]

In an attempt to differentiate offline and online infidelity, Cooper, Morahan-Martin, Mathy, and Maheu constructed a "Triple A Engine", which identifies the three aspects of internet infidelity that distinguish it, to some degree, from traditional infidelity:

1. Accessibility: the more access one has to the Internet, the more likely they will engage in infidelity
2. Affordability: the monetary cost of being able to access the internet continues to drop, and for a small price, a user can visit many sites, and meet multiple potential sexual needs
3. Anonymity: the internet allows users to masquerade as someone else, or hide their identity altogether.^[29]

A study done by Hinke A. K. Groothof, Pieternel Dijkstra and Dick P. H. Barelds called "Sex Differences in Jealousy: The Case of Internet Infidelity" explores the differences between consequences of online infidelity versus offline, and the processes that underlie it, for both partners and/or the relationship. It also examines consistency among sex differences and jealousy in relation to the type of infidelity.^[27] The study utilized a sample of 335 Dutch undergraduate students involved in serious intimate relationships. The participants were presented with four dilemmas concerning a partner’s emotional and sexual infidelity over the internet.
They found a significant sex difference as to whether participants chose sexual and emotional infidelity as more upsetting.
More men than women indicated that a partner’s sexual involvement would upset them more than a partner’s emotional bonding with someone else.
Similarly, in the dilemma involving infidelity over the internet, more men indicated their partner’s sexual involvement would upset them more than a partner’s emotional bonding with someone else.^[27]

Chat rooms and infidelity[link]

The new-found popularity of internet chat rooms has contributed largely to infidelity. Never before has it been so easy to engage in the dating scene and meet people while maintaining the stability of marriage. Chat rooms provide a dilemma because some view them as a forum for fantasies and illusions that are simply just communication rather than physical acts. In a sense, they are a place where married individuals can engage in guilt-free excitement. However, everyone feels differently, leading to extreme gray areas.

A study by Beatriz Lia Avila Mileham in 2004 examined the phenomenon of online infidelity in chat rooms, a process whereby individuals involved in a long-term committed relationship seek computer synchronous, interactive contact with opposite-sex members. The following factors were investigated: (a) what elements and dynamics online infidelity involves and how it happens; (b) what leads individuals specifically to the computer to search for a relationship ‘‘on the side’’; (c) whether individuals consider online contacts as infidelity and why or why not; and (e) what dynamics chat room users experience in their marriages.^[30] The results lead to three constructs that symbolize chat room dynamics and serve as a foundation for internet infidelity. They include:

1. Anonymous sexual interactionism
2. Behavioral rationalization
3. Effortless avoidance.

Anonymous sexual interactionism refers to these individuals’ predilection for anonymous interactions of a sexual nature in chat rooms. The allure of anonymity gains extra importance for married individuals, who can enjoy relative safety to express fantasies and desires without being known or exposed.

Behavioral rationalization denotes the reasoning that chat room users present for conceiving their online behaviors’ as innocent and harmless (despite the secrecy and highly sexual nature).

Effortless avoidance involves chat room users’ avoidance of psychological discomfort by exchanging sexual messages with strangers. Happily married individuals also join such rooms.^[30]

Infidelity jurisdictions[link]

In some jurisdictions an extramarital affair may incur unexpected financial costs. In Australia, for example, affairs of two or more years duration can be deemed a de-facto relationship, exposing the married cheater to financial claims in the Family Court on their superannuation savings, income and property. A de-facto relationship may exist even when the partners do not think so. It is the Court that will define when it began and ended, based on the evidence.^[31]

Problems with infidelity research[link]

David Atkins, a research associate professor at the University of Washington in Seattle, outlined the problems researchers face in getting accurate information on the subject. Responses to the survey question "Have you ever had sex with someone other than your spouse while you were married?" aren't clear-cut, he said. "The first thing we have to grapple with is honesty. We know that is a significant issue," he said, explaining that research published last year found that some won't admit infidelity in person but will anonymously. Also, some people interpret sex as intercourse and others don't, he said. The most reliable data, researchers say, comes from that question posed in the nationally representative General Social Survey, a face-to-face interview. Atkins' new study of trends over a 15-year period (1991–2006) in which 19,065 people participated found that infidelity rates were climbing among certain age groups: those 60 and older and those 35 and younger.^[1]

Infidelity at work[link]

An office romance, work romance, or corporate affair is a romance that occurs between two people who work together in the same office, work location, or business.

Adulterous office romances are widely considered to be unhelpful to business and work relationships, but while superior-subordinate relationships are banned in 90% of companies with written policies regarding office romance, companies cannot ban adultery, as, in all but a handful of states, such regulations would run afoul of laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of marital status. Firings nonetheless often occur on the basis of charges of inappropriate office conduct.^[32]

Academics and therapists say cheating is probably more prevalent on the road than close to home. The protection of the road offers a secret life of romance, far from spouses or partners. Affairs range from one-night stands to relationships that last for years. They are usually with a co-worker, a business associate or someone they repeatedly encounter.^[10]

Another reason for the development of office romances is the excessive time co-workers spend together. Spouses today often spend more time with co-workers in the office than with each other. Lisa Miller and Lorraine Ali note in their article from Newsweek, "The New Infidelity" that "nearly 60 percent of American women work outside the home, up from about 40 percent in 1964. Quite simply, women intersect with more people during the day than they used to. They go to more meetings, take more business trips and, presumably, participate more in flirtatious water-cooler chatter."^[33]

According to Dr. Debra Laino in an article for Shave Magazine, some of the reasons women cheat at the workplace are because "women are disproportionately exposed to men in the workplace, and, as a direct consequence, many have more options and chances to cheat."^[34]

Types of infidelity[link]

Each case of infidelity serves a different purpose. Being able to justify the behavior of a spouse and define it will lessen some of the confusion. There are five categories of infidelity:

1. opportunistic infidelity:-example debauchery.
2. obligatory infidelity
3. romantic infidelity
4. conflicted romantic infidelity, and
5. commemorative infidelity

Opportunistic infidelity occurs when a partner is in love and attached to a partner, but surrenders to their sexual desire for someone else. The opportunistic infidelity is driven by irrepressible lust, situational circumstances and/or opportunity, and sometimes, pure risk-taking behavior.

Obligatory infidelity is based on fear that refraining from someone's sexual advances will result in rejection, and being unwilling to handle such rejection, resulting in surrender to them. Some people end up cheating solely on the need for approval from somebody, even though they still hold a strong attraction to their committed partner.

Romantic infidelity occurs when the cheater is in the process of "falling out of love" with his/her partner. The person's self-perceived obligatory commitment to the relationship's tenets and overall life-meaning is likely the only thing still keeping them with their partner in this example.

Conflicted romantic infidelity takes place when a person both falls in love with and has a strong sexual desire for multiple people at one time, even though s/he may already be committed to a partner. In this circumstance the person feels s/he cannot tell his/her committed partner about what has happened, but is in any unable to resist the compulsion; this lack of open discussion is usually what separates conflicted romantic infidelity from things like a well-defined open relationship or polyamory.

Commemorative infidelity occurs when a person has completely fallen out of love with their spouse, but is still in a committed relationship with them.^{[dubious – discuss]}

^[35]

Make up or break up[link]

Divorce is one response to marital infidelity. Another would be to seek couple's therapy or counseling. With time to heal and the mutual goal of rebuilding the relationship, some couples emerge from infidelity with a stronger and more honest relationship than before. Relationship counseling can help put an affair into perspective, explore underlying relationship problems, learn how to rebuild and strengthen a relationship, and avoid divorce – if that is the mutual goal.

Marriage counseling is generally provided by licensed therapists or clinical psychologists known as couple, marriage or family therapists (see family therapy and emotionally focused therapy). These therapists provide the same mental health services as other therapists, but with a specific focus – a couple's relationship.^[36]

Relationship counseling typically brings partners together for joint sessions. The counselor or therapist helps couples pinpoint and understand the sources of their conflicts and try to resolve them. Partners evaluate both the good and bad parts of their relationship. Integrative behavioral couples therapy has shown success in increasing intimacy after an affair.

Intimate betrayal inflicts an attachment wound and this is sometimes irreparable, particularly when both partners are not committed to repair.

In her research, Candyce Russell, a licensed family therapist developed three Emotional Stages that typically follow an incident of infidelity:

Stage one: roller-coaster a time filled with strong emotions, ranging from anger and self-blame to periods of introspection and appreciation for the relationship.

Stage two: moratorium a less emotional period in which the cheated-on spouse tries to make sense of the infidelity, obsesses about details of the affair, retreats physically and emotionally from the relationship, and reaches out to others for help.

Stage three: trust-building for couples who decided they wanted to stay together and make their marriage work. In this stage, "showing commitment to the relationship was most important for injured parties to begin forgiving and building trust," Russell said.^[37]

See also[link]

• Extramarital sex
• Adultery
• Emotional affair
• Open marriage relationship
• Crime of passion
• Polygyny threshold model
• Mistress (lover)
• Relational transgressions
• Promiscuity

References[link]

Notes[link]

Bibliography[link]

• Moultrup, David J. (1990). Husbands, Wives & Lovers. New York: Guilford Press.
• Glass, S. P., & Wright, T. L. (1992). Justifications for extramarital relationships: The association between attitudes, behaviors, and gender. Journal of Sex Research 29, 361–387.
• Pittman, F. (1989). Private Lies . New York: W. W. Norton Co.
• Rubin, A. M., & Adams, J. R. (1986). Outcomes of sexually open marriages. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 311–319.
• Vaughan, P. (1989). The Monogamy Myth. New York: New Market Press.
• Blow, Adrian J.; Hartnett, Kelley (April 2005). "Infidelity in Committed Relationships II: A Substantive Review". Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (Washington, D.C.: American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy) 31 (2). ISSN 0194-472x. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3658/is_200504/ai_n13641677. 
• Blow, Adrian J.; Hartnett, Kelley (April 2005). "Infidelity in Committed Relationships I: A Methodological Review". Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (Washington, D.C.: American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy) 31 (2). ISSN 0194-472x. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3658/is_200504/ai_n13641667. 
• Adult attachment and patterns of extradyadic involvement Family Process, Dec 2004 by Elizabeth S. Allen, Donald H. Baucom
• AN INTEGRATIVE INTERVENTION FOR PROMOTING RECOVERY FROM EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, April 2004 by Gordon, Kristina Coop, Baucom, Donald H, Snyder, Douglas K
• Treating infidelity: Therapeutic dilemmas and effective strategies Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, October 2004 by Ward, David B.
• Managing Infidelity: A Cross-Cultural Perspective by Anne Buckmaster, William Jankowiak, M. Diane Nell; Ethnology, Vol. 41, PART 1, pages 85–100 2002
• Infidelity: The Lessons Children Learn by Jennifer Harley Chalmers, PhD
• Professor Kristina Gordon's research into infidelity and betrayal
• Cybersex and Infidelity Online: Implications for Evaluation and Treatment by Kimberly S. Young, Alvin Cooper, Eric Griffiths-Shelley, James O'Mara, and Jennifer Buchanan Paper Published in Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity, 7(10, 59–74, 2000
• Buss, D. M. (1996, February). Paternity uncertainty and the complex repertoire of human mating strategies . American Psychologist, 51(2), 161–162.
• Buss, D. M., & Haselton, M. (2005, November). The Evolution of Jealousy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(11), 506–507.
• Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Semmelroth, J., & Westen, D. (1992, July). Sex Differences in Jealousy—Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology. Psychological Sciences, 3(4), 251–255.
• Cramer, R. E., Lipinski, R. E., Meeter, J. D., & Houska, J. A. (2008, August). Sex Differences in Subjective Distress to Unfaithfulness: Testing Competing Evolutionary and Violation of Infidelity Expectations Hypotheses. Journal of Social Psychology, 148(4), 389–405.
• DeSteno, D. A., & Salovey, P. (1996, November). Evolutionary origins of sex differences in jealousy? Questioning the fitness of the model. Psychological Science, 7(6), 367–372.
• Fisher, M., Geher, G., Cox, A., Tran, U.S., Hoben, A., Arrabaca, A., Chaize, C., Deitrich, R., & Voracek, M. (2009). Impact of Relational Proximity on Distress from Infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(4), 560–580.
• Harris, C. R. (2000, June). Psychophysiological responses to imagined infidelity: The specific innate modular view of jealousy reconsidered. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(6), 1082–1091.
• Harris, C. R. (2004, January/February). The Evolution of Jealousy. American Scientist, 92(1), 62–71
• Harris, C. R. (2005). Male and female jealousy, still more similar than different: Reply to Sagarin (2005). Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(1), 76–86.
• Hirsch, J. S., Meneses, S., Thompson, B., Negroni, M., Pelcastre, B., & del RIo, C. (2007, June). The inevitability of infidelity: Sexual reputation, social geographies, and marital HIV risk in rural Mexico. The American Journal of Public Health, 97(6), 986–996.
• Roughgarden, J., & Akcay, E. (2010, March). Do We Need a Sexual Selection 2.0? Animal Behavior, 79(3), E1–E4.
• Scheuring, I. (2010, August). Coevolution of honest signaling and cooperative norms by cultural group selection. Buiosystems, 101(2), 79–87.
• Blow, Adrian J., and Kelley Hartnett. "Infidelity in Committed Relationships II: A Substantive Review". Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 31.2 (2005): 217–33. ISI Web of Science. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
• Burdette, Amy M., Christopher G. Ellison, Darren E. Sherkat, and Kurt A. Gore. "Are Their Religious Variations in Material Infidelity". Journal of Family Issues 28.12 (2007): 1553–581. ISI Web of Science. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
• Geary, David C., Michael Rumsey, Christine Bow-Thomas, and Mary K. Hoard. "Sexual Jealousy as a Facultative Trait: Evidence from the Pattern of Sex Differences in Adults from China and the United States". Ethology and Sociobiology 16 (1995): 355–83. Film and Television Literature Index with Full Text. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
• Harris, Christine R., and Nicholas Christenfeld. "Jealousy and Rational Responses to Infidelity Across Gender and Culture". Psychological Science 7.6 (1996): 378–79. ISI Web of Science. Web. 14 Feb 2011.
• Hirsch, Jennifer S., Sergio Meneses, Brenda Thompson, Mirka Negroni, Blanca Pelcastre, and Carlos Del Rio. "The Inevitability of Infidelity: Sexual Reputation, Social Geographies, and Martial HIV Risk in Rural Mexico". American Journal of Public Health 97.6: 986–96. ISI Web of Science. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
• Hupka, Ralph B., Bram Buunk, Gábor Falus, Ante Fulgosi, Elsa Ortega, Ronny Swain, and Nadia Tarabrina. "Romantic Jealousy and Romantic Envy: A Seven-Nation Study". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 16 (1985): 423–46. ISI Web of Science. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
• Sagarin, Brad J. "Reconsidering Evolved Sex Differences in Jealousy: Comment on Harris". Personality and Social Psychology Review 9.1 (2005): 62–75. ISI Web of Science. Web. 14 Feb 2011.
• Vandello, Joseph A., and Dov Cohen. "Male Honor and Female Fidelity: Implicit Cultural Scripts That Perpetuate Domestic Violence". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84.5 (2003): 997–1010. ISI Web of Science. Web. 15 Feb 2011.

Trey Songz
Background information
Birth name	Tremaine Aldon Neverson
Born	(1984-11-28) November 28, 1984 (age 27) Petersburg, Virginia, United States
Genres	R&B, hip hop
Occupations	Singer-songwriter, record producer, actor
Instruments	Vocals, keyboards, sampler
Years active	2004–present
Labels	Atlantic, Songbook
Associated acts	Drake, Troy Taylor, Twista, Juvenile, Bun B, Rick Ross, Plies
Website	www.treysongz.com

Tremaine "Trey" Aldon Neverson (born November 28, 1984), better known by his stage name Trey Songz, is an American singer-songwriter, rapper, record producer and actor. His debut album, I Gotta Make It, was released in 2005, while his second album, Trey Day, was released in 2007. His third album, Ready, was released in 2009 while his fourth studio album, Passion, Pain & Pleasure, was released on September 14, 2010.

Life and career[link]

1984–2004: Early life and career beginnings[link]

Songz was born Tremaine Aldon Neverson on November 28, 1984, in Petersburg, Virginia.^[1] Raised as a military brat, Songz did not have aspirations to have a musical career as a child due to his shyness, saying "Singing wasn't a reality for me, until other people started noticing I sounded good."^[2] He recognized his vocal abilities at the age of 14.^[2] Reluctant to sing, he began performing with encouragement by friends and family in high school. Record producer Troy Taylor discovered Songz during a talent show in 2000, which led him to signing a recording contract with Atlantic Records in 2002.^[2] After graduating from high school in 2002, Songz moved to New Jersey to begin recording his debut album, though recording didn't actually begin until 2003.^[1]

[edit] 2004–2008I Gotta Make It and Trey Day

While recording his debut album in 2004, Songz released multiple mixtapes under the alias Prince of Virginia.^[1] One of the mixtapes featured an "answer track" to R. Kelly's "Trapped in the Closet", entitled "Open the Closet". The song gave Trey some notoriety.^[3] His debut album, I Gotta Make It was released on July 26, 2005.^[4] It debuted at #20 on the Billboard 200, selling 40,000 copies in its first week of sales.^[5] It has sold 300,000 records in the US, but was never certified by the RIAA. Songz's debut single, Gotta Make It, featuring Twista, was released in March 2005 and reached #87 on the Billboard Hot 100 and #21 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs. It garnered success in the R&B/urban community but failed to make a mark in mainstream music. The album's second and final single, Gotta Go, was released in July 2005 and reached #67 on the Hot 100 and #11 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart, becoming even more successful than his debut single in the R&B/urban community and in the mainstream community. After promotion for his debut concluded, he was featured on the lead single from Twista's fifth album, The Day After. The single, "Girl Tonite", reached #14 on the Hot 100 and #3 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart, becoming a huge hit.

Trey Songz performing in 2007.

In mid-2006, Songz began work on a follow-up album to his debut with longtime collaborator Troy Taylor and also employed hitmakers Bryan-Michael Cox, Danja, Stargate (production team) and R. Kelly to help create the album. Trey aimed for the album to be more mainstream-oriented than his debut album. His second studio album, Trey Day, was released on October 2, 2007. The album reached #11 on the Billboard 200,^[6] selling 73,000 copies in its first week. It has since sold 400,000 records in the US, becoming his second album not to be certified by the RIAA. The album was going to be released on May 8, 2007, but was continually delayed in order for a successful single to precede the album, as the lead single failed to impact charts.

His second album was preceded by the lead single, "Wonder Woman", which was released in February 2007. It reached #54 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart, but failed to impact the Hot 100. Because of the single's failure, his second album was delayed from May 2007 to October 2007. The album's second single, "Can't Help but Wait", was released in August 2007 and was released to promote his second album and the film Step Up 2 the Streets soundtrack as a single for it. The single reached #14 on the Hot 100, and #2 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. It became Songz's first Top 20 hit on the Hot 100, and helped to boost his second album's sales. The single was also nominated for Best Male R&B Vocal Performance at the 2008 50th Grammy Awards. The third single from the album, "Last Time", was released in January 2008 and reached #69 on the Hot 100, and #9 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. The fourth and final single from the album, "Missin' You", was released in May 2008, but failed to chart completely. In mid-2008, Songz was nominated for a BET Award for Best Male R&B Artist but did not win the award.^[7]

[edit] 2009–2011: Ready and Passion, Pain & Pleasure

In late 2008, Trey began work on his third studio album with Bryan-Michael Cox, Sean Garrett, Stargate and Troy Taylor and aimed for the record to be more mature than his first two. Before releasing his third album, Songz released a mixtape titled Anticipation in June 2009 through his blog, which featured songs from his third album.^[8] Another mixtape from Trey was released in the summer of 2009, called Genesis. Genesis was a collection of Trey Songz's first recordings when he was fifteen years old and was released to show his fans the dedication that he had to making a record when he was young.^[9] Trey released his third studio album, Ready, on August 31, 2009. The album reached #3 on the Billboard 200, selling 131,000 copies in its first week.^[10] These are his best first week sales to date and the album was his first to reach the Top 10 on the Billboard 200. The album has since sold over 800,000 records in the US, earning a Gold certification from the RIAA in February 2010, becoming his first album to be certified by the RIAA.

Trey Songz performing at Summer Jam on June 5, 2010.

The lead single from the album, "I Need a Girl", was released in April 2009 and reached #5 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop songs chart and #59 on the Hot 100, becoming an R&B/urban hit but not a mainstream hit. A promotional single, "Successful", featuring rapper Drake, was released in June 2009 and reached #17 on the Hot 100, becoming Songz's third Top 20 hit. The single also served as the second and final single from Drake's EP, So Far Gone. The second official single from his third album, "LOL Smiley Face", featuring Soulja Boy Tell 'Em and Gucci Mane, was released in August 2009 and reached #51 on the Hot 100 and #12 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. The third single from the album, "I Invented Sex", featuring Drake, was released in October 2009 and reached #42 on the Hot 100 but #1 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart, becoming his first single to top that chart. Like the first two singles from the album, it achieved success in the R&B/urban community but only some mainstream success. charted within the Billboard Hot 100, and topped the R&B chart. The fourth single from the album, "Say Aah", featuring rapper Fabolous, was released in January 2010 and reached #9 on the Hot 100 and #3 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. The single has become Trey's highest charting single on the Hot 100 and one of his most successful singles on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart.

The fifth and final single from the album, "Neighbors Know My Name", was released in February 2010 and reached #43 on the Hot 100 and #4 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. A sixth single, "Yo Side of the Bed", was going to be released in June 2010, but its release was canceled due to unknown reasons. A music video, featuring singer Keri Hilson, was filmed and released, however. Songz was also the opening act for Jay-Z on his Jay-Z Fall Tour in late 2009. The album was nominated for Best Contemporary R&B Album at the 52nd Grammy Awards in 2010, but lost to Beyoncé's I Am... Sasha Fierce. On April 1, 2010, he recorded an episode of MTV Unplugged, which aired on April 26, 2010.^[11] A documentary-series about Trey, Trey Songz: My Moment, began in June 2010 to positive reviews and high ratings. The 10-part series will end in August 2010 and follows Trey during his time as opening act on Jay-Z's Jay-Z Fall Tour in late 2009.

Songz's fourth studio album, Passion, Pain & Pleasure, was released on September 14, 2010.^[12] Trey began work on the album in early 2010 with Sean Garrett, Troy Taylor and Stargate and has stated that the album will be his most personal to date. The album was completed in July 2010. The album's lead single, "Bottoms Up", featuring female rapper Nicki Minaj, was released on July 27, 2010 and has reached number twenty-four on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart and was shared enough on Facebook to appear as a trending video on ItsTrending. Its video was filmed on July 31, 2010 and is pending release.^[13] Trey also filmed the video for the album's second single, "Can't Be Friends", on August 1, 2010.^[13] "Can't Be Friends" was released as the album's second single in August 2010.^[13] Songz embarked on the Passion, Pain & Pleasure Tour on August 6, 2010 with singer Monica. The tour is his first headlining tour to date and consists of shows in venues that seat 3,000 to 5,000 people. Songz also contributed the song "Already Taken" to the Step Up 3D soundtrack, which was released on July 27, 2010. He filmed a video for the song, which was released in July 2010. The leading lady in the video is former girlfriend and professional dancer Helen Gedlu. Songz appeared at the 2010 MTV Video Music Awards on September 12, 2010.^[14] Songz performed at BET Awards 2011 which broadcasted on June 26, 2011.^[15]

In July 2011, he was cast in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3D as Ryan, the male lead role.^[16]

[edit] 2011–present: Inevitable and Chapter 5

On August 18, 2011, it was announced Songz will be working on his fifth studio titled Chapter 5.^[17] In an interview Trey said the album, which will act as the follow-up to Passion, Pain & Pleasure, is said to be nearing completion. He also carried on to say "It’s my sixth year in the game so I’ve been here for a while now. You can expect the best me you’ve ever heard. I don’t have any release dates in mind right now but I’m just making music and enjoying myself in the studio and having fun. When I get to a place where I feel comfortable saying a date or all of that, people will definitely know. I have a few dream collaborations on that album that I want, but they say if you blow out your candle and make a wish you can’t tell people what you ask for or it won’t come true."^[18]

On November 28, 2011, on his birthday, Songz released his Inevitable EP to prepare for the release of his album. In February 2012, Songz will embark on his Anticipation 2our to promote his mixtape Anticipation 2 and to raise awareness of his new album.

Discography[link]

• I Gotta Make It (2005)
• Trey Day (2007)
• Ready (2009)
• Passion, Pain & Pleasure (2010)
• Chapter V (2012)

Tours[link]

• Passion, Pain & Pleasure Tour (headliner) (2010)
• OMG Tour (opening for Usher) (2010)
• Anticipation 2our (headliner) (2012)

Filmography[link]

Awards and nominations[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Trey Songz

• Official website
• Trey Songz at the Internet Movie Database

Michele Weiner-Davis, MSW, is a marriage and family therapist^[1] and author in the field of family therapy. She is frequently quoted in the media and has been interviewed on television news programs regarding divorce prevention.^[2] Weiner-Davis has often been referred to as The Divorce Buster^[3] after coining the term “divorce busting” at an American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) conference in 1989.^[4][5][6] She currently writes a regular column, Divorce Busting: Musings From an Unabashed Marriage Saver in Psychology Today.^[7][8]

Personal life[link]

Weiner-Davis grew up in New York City^[9] along with two brothers. She has described her young childhood as idyllic, similar to the "Walton Family".^[9][10] During Weiner-Davis' senior year in high school, her parents divorced after twenty-three years of marriage.^[9][11] Her mother had been speaking with a therapist for several years, and she had been advised by the therapist that the differences between her and her husband were irreconcilable.^[10][12] Because of her parent's divorce and because of the widespread ineptitude that passes for "therapy," Weiner-Davis has become a believer in the sanctity of marriage and a champion for saving the relationships of others.^[13][14]

Weiner-Davis has two children, a son and a daughter, and has been married since 1977.^[9][15]

Career[link]

Weiner-Davis received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1973 from Grinnell College.^[16] She then earned a Master's Degree in Social Work (MSW) in 1977 from the University of Kansas.^[17] She began her early career in private practice, counseling young couples with relationship issues. During this time in her career, she believed that a separation was inevitable if one spouse had pre-determined that they wanted a divorce. In those situations, Weiner-Davis would counsel the couples on how to make the divorce easier on the family.^[18][19][20]

During the 1980s, while working with the McHenry County Youth Service Bureau in Woodstock, Illinois,^[21] she became involved with Steve de Shazer ^[22] and Insoo Kim Berg ^[23] and his team at the Brief Family Therapy Center in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. She was part of the group of researchers that made contributions in the field of psychotherapy to help develop what is known as Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT).^{[24][25][26][27][28][29]}

During this period of her career, after her publications in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, she wrote her first book on divorce prevention: Divorce Busting, published in 1992. She opened her first Divorce Busting Center in Woodstock, Illinois. After moving to Boulder, Colorado, she opened her second Divorce Busting Center where she continues to see individuals and couples as a marriage and family therapist.^[30][31] Weiner-Davis says her patients are usually out of therapy in about six visits, while many marriage therapies last months or years.^[32] She advocates an action-based approach and asks each partner in a marriage to "provide what the other needs regardless of whether the giver understands it".^[32] She launched an online marital support website, Divorcebusting.com in June 1998. It attracts thousands of people each day. Her free Open Messageboard web forums^[33] gives the public a place and a way to communicate with Weiner-Davis and has become a place of last resort for many couples before they end up in divorce court.^{[34][35][36][37]}

Weiner-Davis is a clinical member and approved supervisor for the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy^[38] and a member of the International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health. She is recognized by the National Board for Certified Counselors (NBCC) to offer continuing education for certified counselors.^[39][40][41] Therapists from many countries come to the U.S. for her professional training seminars and some of her books and publications based on (SFBT) are used by university professors and professional organizations for classroom and continuing education credits.^[42][43][44] She also works directly over the phone with couples from many countries including Hong Kong, Singapore, India and Japan.^[32]

She is also involved in education and support in supplying advice for several online internet groups including Redbook,^[45] Planet-Therapy.com,^[46] IVillage,^[47] and The National Registry of Marriage Friendly Therapists.^[48]

Weiner-Davis was a State-of-the-Art Faculty presenter in 2005 and in 2009 for the Evolution of Psychotherapy Conference that is held every five years by The Milton H Erickson Foundation.^{[49][50][51][52]}

Books[link]

In 1989 Weiner-Davis co-authored her first book, In Search of Solutions:A New Direction in Psychotherapy with Bill O'Hanlon.^[53] This book was aimed at practicing psychotherapists and based on the principles of Solution focused brief therapy (SFBT),^[6] which is said to have derived in part from the influence and work of Milton H. Erickson^[54][55] and their research from the Brief Family Therapy Center. A revised second edition of the book In Search of Solutions, which contained new material in the advances in the field of (SFBT), was re-released in 2003.^[56][57]

After years of experience in private practice Weiner-Davis came to the conclusion that in many cases divorced couples were merely exchanging one set of problems for another.^[58] She desired to translate the principles of (SFBT) into everyday English and to spread the word of its effective use, believing that most marriages are worth saving and their problems solvable.^[30] To accomplish this goal she wrote the self-help book Divorce Busting: A Step-By-Step Approach to Making Your Marriage Loving Again.^[59] The book challenged mainstream psychotherapeutic techniques at the time^[32] and gave her national recognition as a notable therapist in family therapy. Weiner-Davis believed that far from the traditional fairy-tale notion of "happily ever after," successful marriages involve working through and surviving problems, setbacks, and conflicts to become stronger.^[30] The core of the book's principles is that even if only one spouse desired to save the relationship or make a change, a marriage could be saved.

In 1996 Weiner-Davis released her third book, Change Your Life and Everyone In It: How to.^[60] It was written in order to expand upon the other more personal issues outside of relationships that she believed an effective (SFBT) approach might be able to solve or help with. The book used real life case examples of past experiences she had seen during therapy over the years in helping others to deal with personal problems caused by stress, depression and anxiety. The book was originally released in 1995 with the title Fire Your Shrink! before being renamed.^[61][62] She outlines techniques which break with traditional psychotherapy and focuses on finding solutions rather than root causes of problems.^[62] Weiner Davis said her practice focuses on the future rather than the past and commented that: "Analyzing the past can be enlightening and educational, but can be a complete waste of time....This should not be called psychotherapy. It's a process of change, not introspection".^[62]

In 1999 Weiner-Davis wrote her 4th book Getting Through to the Man You Love:The No-Nonsense, No-Nagging Guide for Women. This book was written for women in an attempt to help women get through to their spouse more effectively.^[63] The book was based on both personal experiences during therapy with women and the trend in divorce rates that show women file for divorce two-thirds of the time.^[64][65][66]

In 2001 Weiner-Davis released a sequel to Divorce Busting, The Divorce Remedy:The Proven 7-Step Program for Saving Your Marriage.^[13] After hearing from thousands of readers over the years who asked particular questions about their own marital circumstances, Weiner-Davis extracted the ideas from her experience and past books and then broke down the ideas into seven specific steps a person could follow. She also discusses some other key relationship issues such as depression, infidelity, Internet obsession, sexual problems & midlife crisis.

In 2003 Weiner-Davis released her book The Sex-Starved Marriage: A Couple's Guide to Boosting Their Marriage Libido.^[32] She found herself writing about this particular subject after she saw a pattern developing in her practice^[34] and determined that a lack of physical intimacy between couples had been leading couples further apart.^[67][68] The book was written in order to take a more proactive stance to help married couples achieve better relationships before their love fades.^[34][69]

Her last book The Sex-Starved Wife: What to Do When He's Lost Desire was released in 2008. The book was undertaken after Weiner-Davis was inundated with telephone calls and letters from many women who said they were having this issue within their marriage and were seeking information to resolve the issue with their husbands.^[70][71] To help determine the extent of the issue Weiner-Davis did a study with the help of Redbook which showed that two-thirds of the women who responded said they desired sex at least as much or more as their husbands did.^[72]

In mass media[link]

Weiner-Davis made her first television appearance on the talk show Donahue, reporting that 85% of the couples using the methods and advice of Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) were leaving from her therapy with their marriages intact.^[3][73]

She also made two other guest appearances on the talk show The Oprah Winfrey Show as well, discussing publicly that these new and innovative but simple approaches using the methods of (SFBT) could save relationships and make marriages stronger, contending that a person did not need a degree in psychology in order to improve their marriage.^[20][74]

The success of Weiner-Davis last two books, The Sex-Starved Marriage and The Sex-Starved Wife, caused Weiner-Davis to appear on several television news programs including Today,^[68][75][76] ABC News 20/20,^[77][78] The CBS Early Show,^[79] The O'Reilly Factor,^[80] and PBS.^[81]

Over the span of her career Weiner-Davis has been interviewed and referenced to in a number of newspaper and magazine articles including The New York Times,^[11][82] Time,^[32][71] Los Angeles Times,^[4] Chicago Tribune,^[34] Newsweek,^[83][84] USA Today,^[85][86] Cosmopolitan,^[87] Daily News,^[88] The Washington Times,^[89][90] U.S. News & World Report.^[36]

Weiner-Davis has also been involved in a reality based show for the BBC about helping couples save their marriages.^[37][91]

Recognition[link]

Weiner-Davis, along with 21 other American therapists, was profiled in the 2003 book Bad Therapy: Master Therapists Share Their Worst Failures by Jeffrey Kottler and Jon Carlson. In it Weiner-Davis describes how she could sometimes tend to focus more on technique as a young therapist and then how she eventually learned from those experiences with couples how to become a better therapist.^[26][92]

Weiner-Davis received an award for Outstanding Contribution to Marriage and Family Therapy in 2001 from The American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT), which represents the professional interests of more than 24,000 marriage and family therapists throughout the United States, Canada and abroad.^[93]

Weiner-Davis received an Impact Award during the 7th Annual Smart Marriages Conference (The Coalition for Marriage, Family, and Couples Education) in 2003. According to their website, "the Impact Awards are presented to those whose research, books, political or grassroots action, leadership and brilliant reconceptualizations have given us new hope about reversing the epidemic of divorce and family breakdown".^[94]

Weiner-Davis received The Washington Times Inaugural Founding Spirit Award in 2007 recognizing her work in community activism.^[89][90]

References[link]

Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber at the NRJ Music Awards in Cannes, France in 2012
Background information
Birth name	Justin Drew Bieber[1]
Born	(1994-03-01) March 1, 1994 (age 18)[2] London, Ontario, Canada
Origin	Stratford, Ontario, Canada
Genres	Pop, R&B, teen pop[3][4][5]
Occupations	Singer-songwriter, musician, actor
Instruments	Vocals, guitar, piano, percussion,[6] trumpet[7]
Years active	2008–present
Labels	Island, RBMG
Associated acts	Usher, Ludacris
Website	justinbiebermusic.com

Justin Drew Bieber ( /ˈbiːbər/ BEE-bər, born March 1, 1994)^[2] is a Canadian Pop/R&B singer-songwriter, musician, and actor.^[3][5] Bieber was discovered in 2008 by Scooter Braun,^[8] who came across Bieber's videos on YouTube and later became his manager. Braun arranged for him to meet with Usher in Atlanta, Georgia, and Bieber was soon signed to Raymond Braun Media Group (RBMG), a joint venture between Braun and Usher,^[9] and then to a recording contract with Island Records offered by L.A. Reid.^[6][10] Bieber's debut single, "One Time", was released in 2009 and peaked in the top twenty in Canada and charted in the top thirty in several international markets. His debut album, the seven-track EP My World, followed in November 2009, and was soon certified platinum in the United States. He became the first artist to have seven songs from a debut album chart on the Billboard Hot 100.^[11]

Bieber's first full-length studio album, My World 2.0, was released in March 2010. It debuted at number one or within the top ten in several countries and was certified platinum in the United States. It was preceded by the worldwide top-ten single, "Baby". The music video of "Baby" is currently ranked as the most viewed and most discussed YouTube video.^[12] Bieber followed up the release of his debut album with his first headlining tour, the My World Tour, the remix albums My Worlds Acoustic and Never Say Never – The Remixes, and the 3D biopic-concert film Justin Bieber: Never Say Never, that nearly matched the record for the biggest opening weekend gross for a concert-film. Bieber released his second studio album, Under the Mistletoe, in November 2011, which debuted at number one on the Billboard 200. Bieber has received numerous awards, including Artist of the Year at the 2010 American Music Awards, and has been nominated for such awards as Best New Artist and Best Pop Vocal Album at the 53rd Grammy Awards. In 2012, Bieber was named Forbes 3rd most powerful celebrity in the world, earning $55 million. As of May 2012, Bieber has sold 15 million albums.^[13]

Early life[link]

Bieber was born on March 1, 1994, in London, Ontario in St Joseph's Hospital,^[14][15] and was raised in Stratford, Ontario.^[16] Bieber's mother, Patricia Lynn "Pattie" Mallette, was 18 years old when she became pregnant. Mallette, originally from Stratford, raised her son with the help of her parents, Bruce and Diane.^[17] Mallette worked a series of low-paying office jobs, raising Bieber as a single mother in low-income housing. Bieber has maintained contact with his father, Jeremy Jack Bieber, who married another woman and had two children.^[18][19][20] Bieber's great-grandfather was from Germany.^[21] Bieber's mother's ancestry is French Canadian.^[22] Bieber attended a French immersion elementary school in Stratford called Jeanne Sauvé Catholic School.^[17]