Frontiers in psychology · 2026
Infidelity conduct and desire: the differentiated contribution of broad personality traits.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rodas Jose A, Abad Mayerly, Barandica Arianna, Leon-Rojas Jose E, Valdevila Figueira José Alejandro, Oleas Daniel
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Previous research linking personality to infidelity often conflates actual unfaithful conduct with the psychological desire to cheat. The present study evaluated the incremental predictive value of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits on sexual infidelity conduct and sexual infidelity desire, controlling for demographic characteristics and relationship history.
METHODS: A cross-sectional design was employed with a sample of 200 adults from Ecuador, who completed the Big Five Inventory and the Infidelity Conduct Subscale. Hierarchical multiple linear regression models were used to isolate the variance explained by personality dimensions.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated a clear divergence in the predictors of conduct vs. desire. Specific personality dimensions, notably higher openness to experience and lower agreeableness, significantly predicted the desire for sexual infidelity. In contrast, the predictive power of the FFM traits were not significant for actual infidelity conduct. A personal history of infidelity, alongside older age and male sex, emerged as the strongest predictors of current unfaithful conduct.
DISCUSSION: These findings provide empirical support for the intention-behavior gap within the context of romantic relationships. While personality structure generates the cognitive and emotional precursors for infidelity, actual unfaithful actions are primarily facilitated by relational history and cumulative opportunity.
METHODS: A cross-sectional design was employed with a sample of 200 adults from Ecuador, who completed the Big Five Inventory and the Infidelity Conduct Subscale. Hierarchical multiple linear regression models were used to isolate the variance explained by personality dimensions.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated a clear divergence in the predictors of conduct vs. desire. Specific personality dimensions, notably higher openness to experience and lower agreeableness, significantly predicted the desire for sexual infidelity. In contrast, the predictive power of the FFM traits were not significant for actual infidelity conduct. A personal history of infidelity, alongside older age and male sex, emerged as the strongest predictors of current unfaithful conduct.
DISCUSSION: These findings provide empirical support for the intention-behavior gap within the context of romantic relationships. While personality structure generates the cognitive and emotional precursors for infidelity, actual unfaithful actions are primarily facilitated by relational history and cumulative opportunity.