The current state of affairs in infidelity research: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of romantic infidelity prevalence and its moderators

Summary & key facts

This paper reviewed and combined results from studies about romantic infidelity up to September 2022. The authors included 305 studies with 508,241 respondents from 47 countries. They found that sexual infidelity has been studied most, many papers do not clearly define what counts as infidelity, nonsexual forms are understudied, and some research practices (like anonymous surveys and convenience sampling) tend to give higher reports of sexual infidelity. The authors also flagged common risks of bias across the literature.

Key facts:

• 305 studies met the review's inclusion criteria.
• The combined sample across studies was 508,241 respondents from 47 countries.
• The review searched APA PsycINFO, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and ERIC for peer‑reviewed, English‑language studies published up to September 2022.
• Sexual infidelity received the most research attention; nonsexual forms of infidelity remain underexplored.
• Many studies lacked a clear operational definition of what counts as infidelity.
• Anonymous data collection and convenience sampling were associated with higher reported rates of sexual infidelity, but not higher reported rates of emotional infidelity.
• The authors assessed study‑level risk of bias using the AXIS tool and reported concerns about impression management, self‑selection, and response biases in the field.

Abstract

Abstract In this systematic review and meta‐analysis, researchers' operationalizations of romantic infidelity and the techniques that they employed to measure it were surveyed along with the demographic characteristics of their respondent samples. A meta‐analytic synthesis of infidelity prevalence estimates and their moderators is provided. The APA PsycINFO, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and ERIC databases were searched for peer‐reviewed, English‐language studies reporting infidelity prevalence rates that were published as of September 2022. Weighted aggregate estimates of different forms of infidelity were calculated and the moderating effects of certain methodological variables on these estimates were examined. Study‐level risk of bias was assessed using the Appraisal tool for Cross‐Sectional Studies (AXIS). A total of 305 studies met the inclusion criteria, with an aggregate sample size of 508,241 respondents across 47 countries. Multiple forms of infidelity were identified, with sexual infidelity receiving the most research attention and many studies lacking clear infidelity operationalization. Anonymous data collection and convenience sampling were found to result in greater report of sexual, but not emotional, infidelity. The findings indicate that nonsexual forms of infidelity remain underexplored. Additionally, operational ambiguity and sample demographic homogeneity are widespread in the existing infidelity research literature. Research practices in this field raise concern regarding the effects of impression management, self‐selection, and response biases.

Topics

Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior Marriage and Sexual Relationships Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology

Categories

Experimental and Cognitive Psychology Psychology Social Sciences

Tags

Algorithm Clinical psychology Computer science Internal medicine Medicine Meta-analysis Psychoanalysis Psychology Romance Social psychology State (computer science)