JSPR
ArticleUnderstanding
extradyadic
sex and its underlying
motives througha dualistic modelof sexual passion

Journal of Social andPersonal Relationships
1–21ª The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0265407519864446
journals.sagepub.com/home/spr

Valerie Guilbault
Nabil Bouizegarene
Frederick L. Philippe
Robert J. Vallerand
University of Quebec at Montreal, Canada

Abstract
Extradyadic sex in monogamous romantic relationships represents a violation of trustthat has been associated with adverse personal and relationship outcomes. Althoughrelational factors related to extradyadic sex have been extensively studied, few individual
sexual factors have been identified, and these factors have remained one-dimensional.
The present research proposes that sexual passion, as defined by the dualistic model ofsexual passion, can help better understand extradyadic sex and its underlying motives by
distinguishing two types of sexual passion. Study 1 (631 students, mean age ¼ 24.92
years) showed that obsessive sexual passion (OSP), but not harmonious sexual passion(HSP), was related to past extradyadic sex, conflict between sexuality and the maintenance of long-term romantic relationships, and ego-invested motives for engaging in
extradyadic sex. Study 2 (84 students, mean age ¼ 28.49 years) used a longitudinal designand showed that OSP, but not HSP, predicted prospective extradyadic sex. In addition,
results revealed that men with an OSP reported engaging in extradyadic sex more often

Corresponding author:
Valerie Guilbault, Department of Psychology, University of Quebec at Montreal, P.O Box 8888, Station
Centre-Ville, Montreal, QC H3C 3P8, Canada.
Email: valerie.guilbault@gmail.ca

2

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)and with more partners than other individuals. These studies underline the importanceof using a two-dimensional approach to understand how sexual passion relates toextradyadic sex.
Keywords
Extradyadic sex, infidelity, romantic relationships, sexuality, sexual passion

Extradyadic sex corresponds to sex that occurs in violation of a partner’s understandingthat the relationship is monogamous. It is estimated to occur in about 20% of adultromantic relationships (Mark, Janssen, & Milhausen, 2011). The discovery or revelationof extradyadic sex has been linked to negative emotional consequences for the betrayedpartner (Allen et al., 2005) such as shame and rage (Olson, Russell, Higgins-Kessler, &Miller, 2002). In addition, extradyadic sex has been identified as one of the most harmful
relationship events (Gordon, Baucom, & Snyder, 2008) and has been associated withrelationship dissolution (Frisco, Wenger, & Kreager, 2017).
Despite these critical consequences, little is known about individual sexual differencesleading a person to engage in extradyadic sex. Research on individual sexual factors has
been limited to using one-dimensional constructs such as a sociosexual orientation or sexualdesire to predict the likelihood of being unfaithful. A broader understanding of sexual factors
could better orient effective prevention and intervention strategies. In the present research,
we propose that the concept of sexual passion as an individual two-dimensional sexual factor(Philippe, Vallerand, Bernard-Desrosiers, Guilbault & Rajotte, 2017) can help gain a deeper
understanding of extradyadic sex and its underlying motives.

Sexual passion
The dualistic model of sexual passion (Philippe et al., 2017) has been developed based on
the dualistic model of passion for activities (Vallerand et al., 2003; Vallerand, 2015). The
literature on passion for activities defines passion through affective, cognitive, andbehavioral criteria. Passion for an activity implies a strong inclination toward an activity
that is loved. Cognitively, the activity is highly valued and is considered personally
important. In addition, the person invests time and energy on a regular basis in thepassionate activity (Vallerand, 2015). It has been argued that the same definition could
be applied to the concept of sexual passion. Individuals with a high sexual passion would
love and value sexuality, identify as a sexual person, and frequently engage in sexual
activities (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). Based on this latter model, sexual passion isdefined as a stable motivational drive that pushes individuals to engage in both partneredand non-partnered sexual activities (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). Within this model,
sexual passion is therefore not conceptualized as a situational emotion felt toward apartner (e.g., Vohs & Baumeister, 2004), but rather as a stable motivational drive toengage in various types of sexual activities.
Furthermore, the dualistic model of sexual passion distinguishes between two types ofpassion: harmonious sexual passion (HSP) and obsessive sexual passion (OSP) (Philippe

Guilbault et al.

3

et al., 2017; Vallerand, 2015). Both types of sexual passion are characterized by thepassion criteria of loving, valuing, and frequently engaging in sexual activities. Also,
both types of passion have been positively associated with solitary and dyadic sexualdesire (Philippe et al., 2019) and with an unrestricted sociosexual orientation (Philippe
et al., 2017), thus suggesting that they both reflect a high inclination toward sexuality.
However, each type of passion is the result of distinct cognitive internalizations ofsexuality in identity and each has therefore distinct consequences.
HSP develops as a result of an autonomous internalization (Vallerand et al., 2006) of
sexuality, which implies that sexuality has been internalized freely and without internalor external pressures. This means that people have learned about sexuality and that they
integrated aspects of sexuality in ways that promoted their free exploration of theirsexual desires and needs and that they felt little pressure to behave in certain sociallyprescribed or stereotypical ways. As a result, they feel free to make their own choices
regarding sexuality and express sexuality in ways that reflect their own values andaccording to what they believe is important and enjoyable (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In otherwords, they feel an internal locus of causality relative to their own sexuality (Hagger &Armitage, 2004). Since choices are authentic, sexuality is more likely to be coherent withother self-aspects and less likely to conflict with them (Mageau, Carpentier, & Vallerand, 2011).
Conversely, when sexuality is internalized in a controlled fashion, following interpersonal and/or intrapersonal pressures, it results in an OSP (Mageau et al., 2011;
Vallerand et al., 2006). Pressures may include societal prescriptions on how to dress inways that are socially perceived as attractive or regarding how to express sexuality
following stereotypical norms (e.g., sexual intercourses should last long). With this formof internalization, norms, values, and beliefs related to sexuality are imposed onto theperson and are less likely to reflect the person’s own values (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Thismeans that people have integrated aspects of sexuality in ways that were not in line with
their sense of self. In other words, people with an OSP feel an external locus of causality
in regard of their sexuality (Hagger & Armitage, 2004). Given this type of internalization, sexuality is not part of an integrated self, is more conflicting, remains associatedwith contingencies, such as feelings of self-esteem or social acceptance, and nourishes
ego-invested structures (Mageau et al., 2011). For instance, people with an OSP may feelthat their self-esteem is tied to the way they express their sexuality (e.g., they may only
feel good about their sexual intercourses when they conform to social norms, such as
being long-lasting and expressing performance).
Drawing from the Dualistic Passion scale for activities (Vallerand, 2015), a scaleassessing both forms of sexual passion has been developed and confirmatory factor
analyses have supported a two-factor model of sexual passion (Philippe et al., 2017).
Moreover, such a dualistic conceptualization of sexual passion has been shown to be
distinct from many other existing potentially related constructs, such as attachment,romantic or relational passion, sexual satisfaction, sexual desire (solo or dyadic), sexualcompulsivity, relationship quality, sociosexuality, personal self-control, and psychological distress (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019).
Each type of passion has also been associated with different consequences. Given thatin HSP, sexuality is autonomously internalized, goals associated with this activity stand4

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)in harmony with other goals (Young, de Jong, & Medic, 2015), including romantic goals.
Accordingly, HSP has been positively associated with higher relationship quality andcouple adjustment (e.g., Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). HSP has also been either negatively
associated or unrelated with impulses that could be harmful to relationship stability suchas attentiveness to romantic alternatives while engaged in a romantic relationship(Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). Thus, HSP should reflect a sexuality that does not conflictwith the establishment and maintenance of long-term romantic relationships.
Conversely, in OSP, sexuality is more likely to conflict with other self-aspects(Philippe et al., 2017, 2019) and ongoing goals (Young et al., 2015). As such, OSP
has been found to be either negatively related or unrelated to relationship quality andcouple adjustment (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). It has also been positively associatedwith attentiveness to alternatives (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019) and found to prospectively
predict relationship dissolution (Philippe et al., 2017). Thus, in OSP, sexuality is felt as
imposing itself on the person and the person feels the need to satisfy his/her sexuality
even at the expense of maintaining a long-term monogamous romantic relationship,
which may generate a feeling of conflict between sexuality and long-term relationships.

Other factors associated with extradyadic sex
Research on extradyadic sex has revealed several factors that can explain in part why
people are sometimes inclined to (and ultimately do) engage in extradyadic sex. First,
research found biological sex differences in extradyadic involvements showing that men
in heterosexual relationships are more likely to engage in extradyadic sex than women(Allen & Baucom, 2004; Frisco et al., 2017). However, this difference tends to be weakerwith younger cohorts (Allen et al., 2005) and some studies report no such difference(e.g., Barta & Kiene, 2005). Still, there seems to be a gap in the number of extradyadic
partners men and women report, with men reporting more partners than women (Allen &Baucom, 2004).
Relationship satisfaction or adjustment and sexual satisfaction have often been
negatively related to extradyadic sex (Mark et al., 2011). Also, attachment avoidance has
been positively associated with extradyadic sex (Allen & Baucom, 2004; BeaulieuPelletier, Philippe, Lecours, & Couture, 2011). Another factor that has received muchattention in relation to extradyadic sex is an unrestricted sociosexual orientation(Simpson & Gangestad, 1992), which has been associated with past extradyadic sexual
involvements (Barta & Kiene, 2005) and a greater willingness to engage in extradyadic
behaviors (Mattingly et al., 2011). Finally, another factor found in the literature is sex
drive or interest toward sexuality, which has been linked to greater involvement in
extradyadic sex (Treas & Giesen, 2000).
In sum, past studies have documented several factors related to extradyadic sex,
mostly relational ones (e.g., Sprecher, 1998), and studies that focused on individual
sexual factors have typically used concepts that are restricted to a one-dimensional
perspective of how the presence or absence of an inclination toward sexuality canlead to extradyadic sex. Moreover, there exist few theoretical sex models explaining
extradyadic sex apart from predisposing factors (Allen et al., 2005). Accordingly,
research has led to the conclusion that a higher inclination toward sexuality is associatedGuilbault et al.

5with a greater likelihood of being unfaithful. This appears over simplistic and risks thestereotyping of people experiencing a high sex drive. The dualistic model of sexualpassion suggests that the picture is more nuanced and that it depends on how sexual
representations have been internalized—in an autonomous or controlled fashion—
thereby leading to different types of sexual passion, each with different consequences on
extradyadic sex. In the present research, we suggest that there are two types of highinclination toward sexuality (HSP and OSP) and that each is differently related to
extradyadic sex occurrence and the motives underlying it.

The present research
The present research sought to test how HSP and OSP are related to the occurrence of
extradyadic sex and how they foster different motives to engage in extradyadic sex. In
the first study, we examined cross-sectionally how HSP and OSP are related to past
extradyadic sex, to conflict between sexuality and the maintenance of long-termromantic relationships, and to potential motives to engage in extradyadic sex. We also
explored whether the results were similar for partnered and single participants. Based on
past studies (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019), we expected to find the same pattern ofassociation between sexual passion and extradyadic sex for single and partnered participants. Study 2 sought to test the direction of the relationship between sexual passion
and extradyadic sex experiences over approximately a year in partnered participants
using a prospective design. As extradyadic sex has been linked to sex, age, attachment,
sexual satisfaction, sexual desire, and couple adjustment (e.g., Allen et al., 2005; Allen &Baucom, 2004), we controlled for these covariates in the studies.
We expected that only OSP would be associated with having had extradyadic sex in
the past. Furthermore, when followed over 1 year, only OSP should prospectively predictextradyadic sex, frequency of extradyadic sex, and number of extradyadic partners.
Finally, both HSP and OSP should be associated with physical motives for having
extradyadic sex, but only OSP should also be associated with ego-invested motives (i.e.,
motives that are not directly associated with sexual pleasure, but compensatory or egothreatening in nature) for having extradyadic sex (e.g., for revenge, to boost self-esteem)
and with difficulty in maintaining long-term relationships because of sex interest.

Study 1
Study 1 examined whether HSP and OSP would be associated with past experiences ofextradyadic sex, in single and romantically involved participants. Because in OSP,
sexual passion conflicts with other life aspects, such as romantic relationships, we
expected that OSP would be positively associated with past extradyadic sex. Conversely,
because in HSP sexuality is integrated with other life aspects, we expected HSP to beunrelated to past extradyadic sex. In addition, given that a controlled internalization ofsexuality leads to interference between sexuality and other life aspects (Young et al.,2015), we expected that OSP would be associated with conflict between sexuality andthe maintenance of long-term romantic relationships, whereas HSP would not.

6

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)We also expected OSP and HSP to be associated with different hypothetical motives
to engage in extradyadic sex. Given that participants were asked to identify motives forwhich they would engage in extradyadic sex if they were ever in a position to engage insuch behaviors and given that both HSP and OSP are indicative of an interest in sexual
activities (Philippe et al., 2019), we expected both to be associated with physicalhypothetical motives for extradyadic sex. However, only OSP reflects a sexuality that is
associated with contingencies such that sexuality can be used to fulfill sexual needs aswell as other needs and desires. On the other hand, HSP reflects a sexuality that has been
autonomously internalized and that should not be associated with contingencies.
Therefore, we hypothesized that OSP would be associated with ego-invested (e.g., toboost self-esteem) or compensatory (e.g., to attenuate feelings of loneliness, for revenge)
motives for having extradyadic sex, whereas HSP would not. None should seek extradyadic sex to find love, because love represents a relational motive to engage inextradyadic sex; in HSP, relational incentives should be obtained through the relationship with the primary partner, whereas in OSP, sexuality is not enmeshed with relational
motives (Philippe et al., 2017). Based on past findings (Philippe et al., 2017), we
expected to find the same pattern of associations for single and coupled participants
regarding extradyadic sex occurrence and its underlying motives. However, as singles
may now be single because of their difficulty balancing their sexuality and romantic life,
they may report experiencing greater conflict between sexuality and the maintenance ofromantic relationships. In all analyses, we controlled for age, sex, attachment, and sexual
satisfaction.

MethodParticipants and procedure
Participants were 631 undergraduate and graduate psychology students recruited in a
Canadian university (439 females and 192 males). Their mean age was 24.92 years(SD ¼ 5.47 years), 436 participants were currently in a romantic relationship, and
195 were single. They were invited to participate in an online study on the topic ofsexuality in exchange of being entered into a draw for one of three prizes of Can $125.

Measures
Sexual passion. The Sexual Passion scale (Philippe et al., 2017) is a 6-item scale based on
the Passion scale (Marsh et al., 2013; Vallerand et al., 2003) that assesses two types ofpassion that characterizes people’s engagement in sexual activities. The scale consists of
two subscales, assessing HSP (3-item subscale; e.g., “Sex is in harmony with the otheractivities in my life”; a ¼ .89) and OSP (3-item subscale; e.g., “I have difficulty tocontrol my need for sex,” a ¼ .83). Participants made their ratings on a 7-point Likerttype scale (1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 7 ¼ Strongly agree).
Passion criteria. Three criteria have been identified to determine whether a person is
passionate for a given activity (Marsh et al., 2013; Vallerand et al., 2003). They wereGuilbault et al.

7adapted to assess participants’ level of sexual passion (a ¼ .79), that is, how much they
like or love sex (“I love sex”), value it (“Sex is important for me”), and invest time andenergy in it (“I spend a significant amount of time engaging in various sexual activities”;
Philippe et al., 2017). Participants responded to these items on a 7-point Likert-type scale(1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 7 ¼ Strongly agree).
Past extradyadic sex. One item was used to assess the frequency of past engagement in
extradyadic sex (“Have you ever had a romantic/sexual relationship with another person
while you were in a relationship with a partner?”). Participants were informed that these
extradyadic relationships had to occur in violation of their partner’s understanding thatthe relationship was monogamous. This item was responded to on a 7-point Likert-type
scale (1 ¼ Never, 7 ¼ Extremely often). A total of 46.2% of the sample reported at least
one instance of past extradyadic sex.
Sex-relationship conflict. A short 3-item scale adapted from Vallerand et al. (2003; Study 1)
was devised for the present study to assess participants’ conflict between sex and their
engagement in a long-term romantic relationship (a ¼ .77; e.g., “My interest in sexuality
is too high to stay with the same partner for a long period of time”). Participants
responded on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 7 ¼ Strongly agree).
Motives for extradyadic sex. A total of 20 items drawn from Glass and Wright (1992) wereused to assess participants’ motives in the hypothetic event that they would engage inextradyadic sex. Participants were asked to complete the following sentence: “I could
have a romantic or sexual relationship outside of my couple . . . ” A factor analysis using
Principal Axis Factoring on the current data with a varimax rotation revealed that items
were organized in five dimensions: physical needs (Eigenvalue ¼ 8.51; 42.53% ofvariance explained; 7 items; e.g., “To experience a strong sexual excitement”; a ¼ .90),
self-esteem (Eigenvalue ¼ 1.86; 9.128% of variance explained; 4 items; e.g., “To
increase my self-esteem”; a ¼ .83), revenge/anger (Eigenvalue ¼ 1.49; 7.43% of variance explained; 4 items; e.g., “To get even with my partner”; a ¼ .80), loneliness(Eigenvalue ¼ 1.21; 6.05% of variance explained; 3 items; e.g., “To not feel alone”; a ¼.85), and love (Eigenvalue ¼ 1.02; 5.12% of variance explained; 2 items; e.g., “To fall inlove with another person”; a ¼ .70). Standardized factor loadings ranged from .49 to .78.
Attachment. The ECR-S (Wei, Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Vogel, 2007) is a short 12-item
version of the Experiences in Close Relationships scale (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver,1998) used to measure two adult romantic attachment dimensions (avoidance andanxiety), each with six items. Evidence of validity and reliability highly similar to theoriginal full scale has been reported for this short scale (Wei et al., 2007). In the present
study, as were .66 and .72 for the avoidance and anxiety subscales, respectively. Items
were responded on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 7 ¼ Strongly
agree).
Sexual satisfaction. One item used in past research (Beaulieu-Pelletier et al., 2011) wasused to assess participants’ current sexual satisfaction (“To what extent are you currently

8

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)sexually satisfied in your life?”). This item was responded to on a 5-point Likert-type
scale (1 ¼ Not satisfied at all, 5 ¼ Totally satisfied). This item was shown to correlate at.79 with the Pinney Sexual Satisfaction Inventory (Pinney, Gerrard, & Denney, 1987),
based on other data of ours (Philippe et al., 2017).

Results and discussion
Preliminary analysis
Means, standard deviations, and correlations among all study variables are shown in
Table 1. We first wanted to replicate the finding that both types of sexual passion are
related to the passion criteria. A hierarchical multiple regression was conducted withsexual passion criteria as the dependent variable to examine these relations. In Step 1,
age, sex, relationship status, attachment, and sexual satisfaction were entered. The two
types of sexual passion were entered in Step 2. The interaction terms between sex or
status and HSP and OSP were entered in Step 3. Results from Step 1 showed that sex
and sexual satisfaction were positively associated with passion criteria and that
attachment avoidance was negatively related to them. As hypothesized, Step 2 revealed
that the two types of sexual passion were positively associated with the sexual passion
criteria over and above the control variables. No interaction terms reached the significance (see Table 2).

Main analyses
A set of multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the associations
between each type of sexual passion and past extradyadic sex, conflict between sex andromantic relationships, and hypothetical motives to engage in extradyadic sex. All
regressions included the same independent variables and interaction terms used in the
preliminary analysis, and each was entered in the same order and number of steps (seeTable 2). A first multiple regression was conducted to examine whether HSP and OSP
would be related to past extradyadic sex. In Step 1, results showed that age andattachment avoidance were positively associated with past extradyadic sex. In Step 2,
only OSP was positively associated with past extradyadic sex, over and above all control
variables. Moreover, these results were not moderated by sex or relationships status.1
Another hierarchical multiple regression was conducted on conflict between sex andlong-term romantic relationships. Results revealed that being a man, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety were positively associated with conflict. As expected, results
revealed that OSP was positively associated with conflict, whereas HSP was not. Also,
there was a significant interaction between OSP and relationship status on conflict. Simple
slopes analysis revealed that among individuals with an OSP, those who were not partnered were more inclined to experience conflict between sex and long-term romantic
relationships (b ¼ .54, p < .001) than those who were partnered (b ¼ .30, p < .001), eventhough the associations remained significant in both cases. It thus appears that amongindividuals with an OSP, even partnered participants experience difficulties in maintaining
their relationship because of their strong interest in sex.

9

4.92
2.17
4.95
1.85
1.62
3.56
2.58
3.34
3.52
2.88
2.07
2.07
2.41

1. HSP
2. OSP
3. Passion criteria
4. Past extradyadic sex
5. Conflict
6. Sexual satisfaction
7. Attachment avoidance
8. Attachment anxiety
9. Physical
10. Lonely
11. Revenge/anger
12. Self-esteem
13. Love

1.09
1.02
1.13
1.23
1.03
1.10
0.90
1.08
1.62
1.71
1.27
1.21
1.34

SD

—
.13**
.62**
.05
.01
.37**
.32*
.03
.02
.01
.05
.02
.04

1
—
.43**
.20**
.49**
.06
24**
.22**
.27**
.12**
.22**
.27**
.05

2

—
.12**
.22**
.21**
.17**
.04
.17**
.03
.10*
.10*
.03

3

—
.42**
.00
.14**
.02
.35**
.14**
.05
.25**
.13**

4

—
.08*
.36**
.12**
.35**
.13**
.17**
.30**
.18**

5

—
.29**
.17**
.17**
.16**
.07
.11**
.12**

6

—
.11**
.24**
.14**
.15**
.23**
.25**

7

Note. M ¼ mean; SD ¼ standard deviation; HSP ¼ harmonious sexual passion; OSP ¼ obsessive sexual passion. n ¼ 631.
*p < .05; **p < .01.

M

Variable

Table 1. Ms, SDs, and correlations among variables (Study 1).

—
.12**
.31**
.25**
.23**
.10*

8

—
.58**
.44**
.66**
.53**

9

.45**
.55**
.54**

10

.51**
.36**

11

.45**

12

10

HSP  Sex
OSP  Sex
HSP  Status
OSP  Status

HSP
OSP

Age
Sex
Relational status
Attachment avoidance
Attachment anxiety
Sexual satisfaction

Variables

b
.02
.20**
.06
.17**.12**.21**
DR2 ¼ .10
.49**
.47**
DR2 ¼ .35
.01
.02
.04
.01
DR2 ¼ .00

b
.16**
.04
.03
.11**
.02
.02
DR2 ¼ .05
.07
.18**
DR2 ¼ .05
.01
.03
.0
.08
DR2 ¼ .01

SexualPast
passion criteria extradyadic sex
PhysicalLonely

b
b
.01
.05
.07
.26**
.12**
.02
.02
.09*
.06
.31**
.20**
.09*
.12**
.11*
.26**
.04
.12**
.08
DR2 ¼ .21 DR2 ¼ .10 DR2 ¼ .12
.05
.10**
.04
.39**
.22**
.11**
DR2 ¼ .12 DR2 ¼ .04 DR2 ¼ .01
.08
.04
.06
.03
.07
.04
.06
.01
.06
.20**
.10
.05
DR2 ¼ .02 DR2 ¼ .01 DR2 ¼ .01

bConflictNote. HSP ¼ harmonious sexual passion; OSP¼ obsessive sexual passion. n ¼ 631.
*p < .05; **p < .01.

Step 3

Step 2

Step 1

Steps
b
.03
.08
.01
.12**
.24**
.01
DR2 ¼ .08.05
.17**
DR2 ¼ .02
.06
.02
.05
.01
DR2 ¼ .01

Revenge/anger

Table 2. Hierarchical regression analyses of type of passion and control variables on study outcomes (Study 1).
Love

b
b
.01
.05
.15**
.01
.02
.02
.18**
.23**
.23**
.05
.04
.04
DR2 ¼ .12 DR2 ¼ .07
.01
.01
.16**
.01
DR2 ¼ .02 DR2 ¼ .01
.03
.02
.07
.03
.03
.01
.09
.11
DR2 ¼ .01 DR2 ¼ .01

EsteemGuilbault et al.

11

Five hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted to examine how HSP and OSP
would relate to the various motives that can underlie a hypothetic engagement in
extradyadic sex. In Step 1, men were more likely to report physical and self-esteem
motives to engage in extradyadic sex. Partnered participants mentioned physical motives
more frequently. Also, both attachment dimensions were positively associated withmotives of physical needs, loneliness, revenge/anger, and self-esteem, and attachment
avoidance was positively associated with love as a motive to engage in extradyadic sex.
Sexual satisfaction was also negatively associated with physical needs as motives toengage in extradyadic sex. As expected, in Step 2, both HSP and OSP were positively
associated with physical needs to engage in extradyadic sex. However, only OSP was
related to ego-involved motives of loneliness, revenge/anger, and self-esteem to engage
in extradyadic sex. Neither HSP nor OSP endorsed love as a motive to engage inextradyadic sex. There were no interactions between each type of passion and sex or
relational status.
Overall, our findings are consistent with our hypotheses. Although both HSP and OSP
correspond to a sexual passion, as assessed by the passion criteria, only OSP was
associated with self-reported past extradyadic and with conflict between sex and longterm romantic relationships. In addition, only OSP was related to ego-invested hypothetical motives to engage in extradyadic sex, such as loneliness, revenge/anger, andself-esteem. This suggests that people with an OSP might be driven to engage inextradyadic sex to cope with negative feelings that are unrelated to sexuality. Also,
results showed that for both HSP and OSP, physical need would be a motive for seeking
extradyadic sex, whereas love would not. It thus seems that in the hypothetical event that
one would engage in extradyadic sex, having a sexual passion is associated withengaging in extradyadic sex for the pleasure derived from sex, not for love. This result is
in line with the past finding, showing that both HSP and OSP are associated withsociosexual orientation (Philippe et al., 2017). As for love, in HSP, individuals shouldseek love through their primary romantic relationship. In OSP, sexual representations aremostly dissociated from relational representations (Philippe et al., 2017), which shouldmake it unlikely that individuals with an OSP seek love through sexuality.

Study 2
Study 2 was designed to test the direction of the effect between sexual passion andextradyadic sex using a prospective design. To do so, we focused on participants alreadyinvolved in a romantic relationship. As we were primarily interested in the sexual aspectof extradyadic sex, we also improved our measure of extradyadic sex by constricting ourdefinition of extradyadic sex only to sexual involvements rather than both romantic andsexual involvements as in Study 1. Indeed, results of Study 1 showed that romantic
motives for having extradyadic sex were unlikely in both HSP and OSP. We expected
OSP, but not HSP, to predict the prospective occurrence of extradyadic sex, the numberof times it occurred, and the number of different partners with which it occurred inapproximately a year. In all analyses, we controlled again for age, sex, attachment,
sexual satisfaction, as well as for sexual desire and couple adjustment as these two latter

12

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)variables have been shown to be sexual and relational factors, respectively, influencing
extradyadic sex.

MethodParticipants and procedure
A total of 84 undergraduate and graduate psychology students (71 females and 13
males) took part in this two-phase prospective study lasting 10 months.2 They wererecruited in a Canadian university and were aged 28.49 years on average (SD ¼ 7.81
years). Among the 84 participants, 52 participants remained with their partner over the
10-month period, 13 separated and were single at Time 2, 10 were single at Time 1 andfound a partner with which they remained at Time 2, and 9 were single at Times 1 and2, but experienced at least one serious romantic relationship between Times 1 and 2.
This sample size is adequate to detect an expected odds ratio of 2.00 with a power of.80 in a logistic regression. At Time 1, participants were asked to complete the scales
presented below. At Time 2, 10 months later, they indicated whether they had engaged
in extradyadic sex over this period and completed other scales that will not be used in
the present study.

Measures
Sexual passion scale. We used the same scale as in Study 1. as were .79 and .74 for HSP
and OSP, respectively.
Extradyadic sex. Participants who were currently engaged in a romantic relationship at
Time 2 were asked to respond to the following item: “From the time you have been withyour current partner and only considering the time elapsed from Time 1 [exact date waspresented], have you ever had a sexual intercourse with someone other than your current
partner?” Participants who were engaged in a romantic relationship at Time 1 but who
had separated between Times 1 and 2 were asked to respond to the following item:“From Time 1 [exact date] up until the time of your separation, have you ever had asexual intercourse with someone other than your primary partner?” Participants werealso informed that these extradyadic relationships had to occur in violation of theirpartner’s understanding that the relationship was monogamous. These items were
responded to on a yes (1) or no (0) basis. A total of 13.1% of the current sample ofparticipants reported having engaged in at least one extradyadic sex episode over the 10month period, which is around the prevalence rate of extradyadic sex found in past
research in young adult population (e.g., Frisco et al., 2017). Participants also indicatedhow many times extradyadic sex occurred and with how many different partners.
Control variables. We used the same scales as in Study 1 for attachment (as were .73 foravoidance and .70 for anxiety) and sexual satisfaction. The short 4-item version(Sabourin, Valois, & Lussier, 2005) of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS; Spanier,1976) was used to assess couple adjustment. It should be noted that this short version ofGuilbault et al.

13

Table 3. Ms, SDs, and correlations among variables (Study 2).
Variable

M

SD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1. HSP
5.21 1.33—
2. OSP
2.26 1.24 .01—
3. Sexual satisfaction 3.55 1.21 .47** .12—
4. Sexual desire
4.64 0.87 .26*
.51** .08—
5. Extradyadic sex
0.13 0.34 .08.43** .03
.38**—
6. Attachment
2.62 1.03 .05
.12
.05
.10
.19
—
avoidance
7. Attachment anxiety 3.38 1.04 .23*.18
.33** .13
.08
.15 —
0.25 0.77 .02.33** .01
.44** .73** .02 .19 —8. Number ofextradyadic
partners
9. Frequency of
0.90 2.84 .02.36** .02
.40** .76** .13 .17 .88**
extradyadic sex
Note. M ¼ mean; SD ¼ standard deviation; HSP ¼ harmonious sexual passion; OSP ¼ obsessive sexual passion.
n ¼ 84.
*p < .05; **p < .01.

the DAS does not include items assessing sexual satisfaction or sexual communication
within the couple. The DAS-4 uses a 6-point Likert-type scale (0 ¼ Always disagree, 5 ¼
Always agree). A sample item is “In general, how often do you think that things between
you and your partner are going well?” a was .89. Sexual desire was measured with 4
items derived from past research representing both cognitive and behavioral aspects ofsexual desire (Rosen et al., 1997; Sills et al., 2005; Spector, Carey, & Steinberg, 1996).
Items were “How frequently do you feel sexual desire?” (1 ¼ Never; 7 ¼ Extremely
often), “How frequently do you have sexual thoughts?” (1 ¼ Never; 7 ¼ Extremely
often), “How long could you go comfortably without having sexual activity of somekind?” (1 ¼ Forever; 7 ¼ Less than 1 day), and “How frequently do you engage in asexual activity (ex. sexual intercourse, masturbation, etc.)?” (1 ¼ Never; 7 ¼ Many times
a day). This short scale has displayed adequate indices of reliability and validity in past
research (Beaulieu-Pelletier et al., 2011). In this study, a was .64, and all 4 items
saturated one factor in an Exploratory Factor Analysis.

Results and discussion
Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables are shown in
Table 3. Point-biserial correlations between passion types and extradyadic sex revealed amoderate positive association between OSP and extradyadic sex (rpb ¼ .44, p ¼ .001),
while HSP was unrelated to it (rpb ¼ .08, p ¼ .423). A logistic regression with attachment
avoidance, attachment anxiety, sexual desire, and the two types of passion was conducted. Results revealed that attachment avoidance (B ¼ .98, SE ¼ .43, Wald ¼ 5.11,
p ¼ .024), sexual desire (B ¼ 1.39, SE ¼ .61, Wald ¼ 5.01, p ¼ .024), and OSP (B ¼ .80,
SE ¼ .39, Wald ¼ 4.15, p ¼ .038) were positively associated with extradyadic sex.
Attachment anxiety was unrelated to extradyadic sex (Wald ¼ 3.03, p ¼ .083) and HSP14Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)as well (Wald ¼ .09, p ¼ .741). For each one-point increase in OSP, the odds of getting
involved in extradyadic sex over the year increased of 2.22 times. Controlling for sex,age, or sexual satisfaction did not affect the present results and there were no interactions
between each type of passion and sex. Sex (Wald ¼ .56, p ¼ .453), age (Wald ¼ .01,
p ¼ .930), and sexual satisfaction (Wald ¼ .31, p ¼ .576) did not significantly predictextradyadic sex. The same logistic regression was conducted again, this time controllingfor couple adjustment (only including participants with this measure available at Time 1,
n ¼ 66). Results remained the same and couple adjustment was unrelated to extradyadicsex (Wald ¼ 1.09, p ¼ .304).3
Multiple regression analyses were conducted with the same independent variables to
examine whether OSP would predict the number of times extradyadic sex occurred andthe number of extradyadic partners. The same variables as in the logistic regression wereentered. Results revealed a significant main effect for sexual desire (bs > .36, ps < .001)
as well as a significant OSP  Sex interaction in both cases (bs > .27, ps < .039). Simple
effects revealed that OSP was predictive of the number of times extradyadic sex occurredand of the number of extradyadic partners for men (ts > 3.32, ps < .001), but not for
women (ts < 1.00, ps ¼ .352).
Overall, these results confirm our hypothesis and further support the expectation that
OSP is associated with extradyadic sex, whereas HSP is not. There are, however, sexdifferences when the number of times and partners of extradyadic sex are considered.

General discussion
The objective of the present research was to investigate the role of sexual passion in
extradyadic sex involvement and the hypothetical motives underlying this engagement.
Replicating past findings (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019), results revealed that both OSP and
HSP were positively associated with sexual passion criteria. However, they also showed
different associations with extradyadic sex. Specifically, only OSP was positively related
to having had past extradyadic sex in Study 1, and only OSP prospectively predicted
extradyadic sex in Study 2. HSP, as expected, was unrelated to past and prospective
extradyadic sex. These results conform to the theory that, in OSP, because sexuality has
been internalized in a controlled fashion, sexuality is not well integrated with other selfaspects and may conflict with other life aspects (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). Conversely,
the null result between HSP and extradyadic sex suggests that having a sexual passion
does not necessarily translate into extradyadic sex. This result is in line with the dualistic
model of sexual passion which posits that because HSP reflects a sexuality that has been
freely and autonomously internalized, it is well integrated and it does not conflict withother self-aspects, such as one’s monogamous romantic relationship (Philippe et al.,2017, 2019). Further supporting the theory, results from Study 1 showed that OSP, but
not HSP, was associated with conflict between the sexuality and the maintenance of along-term romantic relationship, thus replicating past findings (Philippe et al., 2017).
Results of the present studies also held when controlling for relevant confounding
variables such as attachment dimensions and sexual desire.
Other variables were also related to extradyadic sex and motives. Replicating past
research (Allen & Baucom, 2004; Beaulieu-Pelletier et al., 2011), attachment avoidanceGuilbault et al.

15

was positively associated with extradyadic sex in both studies. Also, in Study 1,
attachment avoidance and attachment anxiety were positively related to all motives(except for love that was only related to attachment avoidance), thus showing that
individuals with an insecure attachment endorse various motives for engaging in
extradyadic sex, including ego-invested motives. In Study 2, sexual desire predicted
extradyadic sex and the number of times it occurred, which is in line with past research(Treas & Giesen, 2000).
With regard to motives for extradyadic sex, a fundamental aspect to consider wheninterpreting the results is that our measure assessed hypothetical motives for whichpeople would engage in extradyadic sex, not actual motives that led individuals to do so.
HSP, like OSP, has been associated with an openness to a variety of sexual experiences(Philippe et al., 2019), including having sex without love (sociosexuality, see Philippe
et al., 2017), but as shown by the present studies, not to actual extradyadic sex. However,given this openness to diverse sexual experiences, it remains possible that individuals
with HSP could consider or fantasize about having extradyadic sex, without having
actual intentions of doing it. In fact, fantasizing about it could be an effective mechanism
to allow for some sexual satisfaction while maintaining and protecting one’s relationshipwith a primary partner. We did not assess sexual fantasy, but our hypothetical questions
about motives might have tapped into it. From this hypothetical point of view, if HSP
people were to engage in extradyadic sex, they would do it for physical motives only.
Conversely, OSP would be more likely to engage in it for ego-involved motives, namely,
loneliness, revenge/anger, and self-esteem.

Sexual passion and extradyadic sex
Findings from the present research also contribute to the literature on extradyadic sex byhighlighting how different types of inclination toward sexuality may lead (or not) a
person to engage in extradyadic sex. While past research has suggested that having highsexual desire (Treas & Giesen, 2000) or an unrestricted sociosexuality (Barta & Kiene,
2005) can lead an individual to have extradyadic involvements, the present researchsuggests that the picture is more nuanced. In fact, only OSP was positively related to pastand prospective extradyadic sex. HSP, on the other hand, was not. Thus, even if both
HSP and OSP were positively associated with markers of a strong sex drive, such as thepassion criteria of loving, valuing, and frequently engaging in various sexual activities(Study 1) and sexual desire (Study 2), this strong sex drive was not enough to predictengagement in extradyadic sex. What fundamentally mattered was whether people heldan HSP or an OSP.
The present set of findings also highlight that the motives for which individuals would
engage in extradyadic sex depend on the type of sexual passion. Barta and Kiene (2005)
found that sociosexuality was only related to sex motives for engaging in extradyadic
sex, but not to other motives (i.e., dissatisfaction in the relationship, anger toward apartner, feeling neglected). These other motives were only associated with personality
variables such as neuroticism. Using the concept of sexual passion, the present researchshowed that OSP was related to various motives such as physical interest in sex, loneliness, revenge toward one’s partner, and self-esteem boosting, whereas HSP was only

16

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)related to a physical motive. These findings contribute to better understanding what
could lead certain individuals to engage in extradyadic sex and could inform prevention
and intervention strategies. Specifically, it might prove more fruitful to target individuals
with an OSP to prevent them from engaging in extradyadic sex. Knowing that having an
OSP is associated with ego-invested motives for extradyadic sex, prevention strategies
could help individuals with an OSP meet their needs for connection, respect, and selfesteem through other means than sexuality. Clinicians working with individuals with an
OSP might thus focus on investigating what psychological needs appear unmet or frustrated in a patient’s life.

Sex and relationship status differences in extradyadic sex
Results revealed few sex differences. Men were more likely to endorse physical andself-esteem motives for extradyadic sex than women, which is partly in line with past
research showing that men reported intentions for extradyadic sex because of theirinterest for varied and frequent sexual experiences (Barta & Kiene, 2005). The present
research also suggested that men were more likely to experience conflict between sex
and relationship maintenance than women. This result is in line with past studies
showing that men report more sex partners than women (e.g., Allen & Baucom, 2004),
which could conflict with the establishment of long-term relationships. However, sex
did not predict extradyadic sex in Studies 1 and 2, and almost none of the associations
between sexual passion and extradyadic sex motives and occurrence were moderated
by sex. This result counters stereotypical views of women as having a weaker sex drive
than men (Baumeister, Catanese, & Vohs, 2001) by showing that both women and men
can be characterized by a sexual passion and are equally likely to engage in extradyadic sex and endorse similar motives for extradyadic sex. The only exception foundin Study 2 was that men with an OSP engaged more frequently in extradyadic sex andwith more partners than women. This result is in line with sexual strategies theory,
which posits that men are more likely to engage in extradyadic sex with a greaternumber of partners than women in order to increase their reproductive success (Buss &Schmitt, 1993). It is also consistent with social role theory, which stipulates that sex
differences in sexual behaviors reflect adherence to gender roles that portray men as
more agentic than women (Eagly & Wood, 2012). Taken together, these results
imply that what is crucial in determining who will engage in extradyadic sex (likely for
ego-invested motives) is the type of passion the person holds, regardless of their
biological sex.
It is also noteworthy that Study 1 showed the same patterns of findings between eachtype of passion and extradyadic sex occurrence and motives for partnered and single
participants. The only exception was that singles with OSP reported more conflict
between sex and long-term romantic relationships than partnered individuals. These
results conform to the dualistic model of sexual passion, which conceptualizes sexualpassion as an intrapersonal drive to engage in various sexual activities, alone or withother partners, and which should lead to the same consequences, whether individuals are
single or partnered (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019).

Guilbault et al.

17

Future research
Results from the present research have implications for better understanding the association between each type of sexual passion and romantic relationship dissolution. Past
research has shown that OSP, but not HSP, predicted relationship dissolution (Philippe
et al., 2017) and numerous studies have revealed a positive association between extradyadic sex and relationship dissolution (e.g., Frisco et al., 2017). Findings suggest thatOSP drives people to engage in behaviors that are detrimental to relationship maintenance, including having extradyadic sex, as shown in the present studies, and being more
attentive to attractive alternatives (Philippe et al., 2017, 2019). Over time, these behaviors may contribute to relationship dissolution.
Conversely, HSP has been shown to be unrelated to relationship dissolution (Philippe
et al., 2017). HSP was unrelated to extradyadic sex in the present research and wasunrelated or negatively related to attentiveness to alternatives in past studies (Philippe
et al., 2017, 2019). Literature also suggests that individuals in a committed relationshiptend to devalue attractive alternatives, presumably as a way to shield their current
romantic relationship (for reviews, see Lydon, 2010). It may be that HSP fosters the useof such strategies, thus resulting in the inhibition of behaviors that may interfere withrelationship maintenance, such as attentiveness to alternatives and extradyadic sex.
Relatedly, Philippe et al. (2017) have shown that individuals characterized by high levelsof HSP were better able to inhibit the unconscious activation of attractive targets so thatit did not interfere and conflict with a current goal of completing a sex-unrelated cognitive task. The mechanisms that HSP individuals use to protect their current romantic
relationship from potential alternatives represent a fruitful avenue for future research.

Limitations
Some limitations with regard to the present research must be underscored. First, the datain Study 1 are cross-sectional and therefore do not allow for a test of the direction of theassociation between sexual passion and the outcomes in Study 1, nor do data allow us todraw any causal conclusions between these variables. Yet, the results of Study 2 suggestthat sexual passion does predict future occurrences of extradyadic sex, thus providing
more confidence in the directionality of this association. A second limitation pertains tothe self-reported nature of behaviors. Social desirability may have prevented participantsfrom reporting the full extent of their extradyadic experiences. However, past studies
revealed that participants do report engaging in extradyadic sex even though they may
underreport it (e.g., Allen & Baucom, 2004; Barta & Kiene, 2005; Frisco et al., 2017).
Self-report of actual extradyadic sex is hardly the only way to collect that type of data,
and future research could use indirect behavioral measures of interest in attractive
alternatives (e.g., level of seductive behavior toward an attractive confederate in thelaboratory) as a proxy for intentions of extradyadic sex. A third limitation pertains to thedefinition of extradyadic sex across the two studies. In Study 1, we used a broader
definition, incorporating both romantic and sexual extradyadic involvements, whereas inStudy 2, we focused our measure to assess sexual extradyadic involvements only.
Readers should keep this information in mind when comparing results from both studies,18

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)

as they do not implicate the exact same type of extradyadic involvement. Fourth, thepresent data were collected with university students (undergraduates and graduates), andfuture research will be needed to determine if they generalize to the general population.
Also, the sample size of Study 2 was fairly small, so it would be preferable to replicate its
results within a larger sample size. Data were also collected and analyzed by only
considering the participants’ perspective. Future studies could use dyadic designs toinvestigate actor and partner effects of sexual passion on extradyadic sex. Finally, some
control variables were composed of very few items, and their alphas were consequently
rather modest. Results could therefore be replicated with control measures that rely on
more exhaustive inventories.

Conclusion
In sum, past research on extradyadic sex has identified few individual sexual factors
explaining extradyadic sex and the various motives to engage in it. Moreover, thesefactors were limited to the presence or absence of interest or of a drive toward sexuality(e.g., Barta & Kiene, 2005; Mattingly et al., 2011). The present set of studies show thatsuch a one-dimensional perspective on interest in sexuality may be misleading when
considering extradyadic sex and suggests that two types of sexual passion should be
investigated. Indeed, results suggest that involvement in extradyadic sex stems from
more than just a high sex drive. Instead, what also seems to matter is the type of sexualpassion people hold. Specifically, having an OSP may push people to engage in extradyadic sex.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by a doctoral scholarship from the Fonds
de Recherche sur la Société et la Culture (FRQSC) awarded to Valerie Guilbault (scholarshipnumber: 191621), a doctoral scholarship from the FRQSC awarded to Nabil Bouizegarene (scholarship number: 189692), and a team Grant from the FRQSC awarded to Frederick L. Philippe andRobert J. Vallerand (Grant Number: 2016-SE-187972).

ORCID iD
Valerie Guilbault

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2229-3567

Open research statement
As part of IARR’s encouragement of open research practices, the authors have provided thefollowing information: This research was not pre-registered. The data and materials used in the
research are available. The data and materials can be obtained by emailing: valerie.guilbault@
gmail.com.

Notes
1. Results remained the same when we recoded extradyadic sex as a binary variable (0 ¼ no
instance of extradyadic sex; 1 ¼ at least one such instance).
2. Part of these data has been published elsewhere (Beaulieu-Pelletier et al., 2011). That study had
examined whether attachment avoidance was predictive of extradyadic sex. In the present

Guilbault et al.

19

study, we controlled for attachment in order to show that sexual passion is a distinct factor,
explaining independent and additional variance in extradyadic sex.
3. Dyadic adjustment did not moderate the association between extradyadic sex and HSP or OSP(bs < |.04|, ns).

References
Allen, E. S., Atkins, D. C., Baucom, D. H., Snyder, D. K., Gordon, K. C., & Glass, S. P. (2005).
Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual factors in engaging in and responding to extramarital involvement. Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 12, 101–130. doi:10.1093/clipsy/
bpi014.
Allen, E. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2004). Adult attachment and patterns of extradyadic involvement.
Family Process, 43, 467–488. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.00035.x.
Barta, W. D., & Kiene, S. M. (2005). Motivations for infidelity in heterosexual dating couples: The
roles of gender, personality differences, and sociosexual orientation. Journal of Social andPersonal Relationships, 22, 339–360. doi:10.1177/0265407505052440.
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strengthof sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_5.
Beaulieu-Pelletier, G., Philippe, F. L., Lecours, S., & Couture, S. (2011). The role of attachment
avoidance in extradyadic sex. Attachment & Human Development, 13, 293–313. doi:10.1080/
14616734.2011.562419.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment:
An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close
relationships (pp. 46–76). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective onhuman mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and theself-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. doi:10.1207/
S15327965PLI1104_01.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, &E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 458–476). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446249222.n49.
Frisco, M. L., Wenger, M. R., & Kreager, D. A. (2017). Extradyadic sex and union dissolution
among young adults in opposite-sex married and cohabiting unions. Social Science Research,
62, 291–304. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.08.013.
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. doi:10.1080/
00224499209551654.
Gordon, K. C., Baucom, D. H., & Snyder, D. K. (2008). Optimal strategies in couple therapy:
Treating couples dealing with the trauma of infidelity. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy,
38, 151–160. doi:10.1007/s10879-008-9085 -1.
Hagger, M. S., & Armitage, C. J. (2004). The influence of perceived loci of control and causality
in the theory of planned behavior in a leisure-time exercise context. Journal of Applied
Biobehavioral Research, 9, 45–64. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9861.2004.tb00091.x.

20

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships XX(X)

Lydon, J. E. (2010). How to forego forbidden fruit: The regulation of attractive alternatives as acommitment mechanism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 635–644. doi:10.
1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00283.x.
Mageau, G. A., Carpentier, J., & Vallerand, R. J. (2011). The role of self-esteem contingencies inthe distinction between obsessive and harmonious passion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 720–729. doi:10.1002/ejsp.798.
Mark, K. P., Janssen, E., & Milhausen, R. R. (2011). Infidelity in heterosexual couples: Demographic, interpersonal, and personality-related predictors of extradyadic sex. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 40, 971–982. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9771-z.
Mattingly, B. A., Clark, E. M., Weidler, D. J., Bullock, M., Hackathorn, J., & Blankmeyer, K.
(2011). Sociosexual orientation, commitment, and infidelity: A mediation analysis. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151, 222–226. doi:10.1080/00224540903536162.
Marsh, H. W., Vallerand, R. J., Lafrenière, M. A. K., Parker, P., Morin, A. J., Carbonneau,N., . . . Salah Abduljabbar, A. (2013). Passion: Does one scale fit all? Construct validityof two-factor passion scale and psychometric invariance over different activities andlanguages. Psychological Assessment, 25, 796–809. doi:10.1037/a0032573.
Olson, M. M., Russell, C. S., Higgins-Kessler, M., & Miller, R. B. (2002). Emotional processes
following disclosure of an extramarital affair. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28,
423–434. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2002.tb00367.x.
Philippe, F. L., Vallerand, R. J., Bernard-Desrosiers, L., Guilbault, V., & Rajotte, G. (2017).
Understanding the cognitive and motivational underpinnings of sexual passion from a dualistic
model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 769–785. doi:10.1037/
pspp0000116.
Philippe, F. L., Vallerand, R. J., Beaulieu-Pelletier, G., Maliha, G., Laventure, S., & RicardSt-Aubin, J.-S. (2019). Development of a dualistic model of sexual passion: Examining
determinants and consequences. Manuscript accepted for publication. Archives of Sexual
Behavior.
Pinney, E. M., Gerrard, M., & Denney, N. W. (1987). The Pinney sexual satisfaction inventory.
Journal of Sex Research, 23, 233–251. doi:10.1080/00224498709551359.
Rosen, R. C., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I., Kirkpatrick, J., & Mishra, A. (1997). The
International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessmentof erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49, 822–830. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00238-0.
Sabourin, S., Valois, P., & Lussier, Y. (2005). Development and validation of a brief version of the
dyadic adjustment scale with a nonparametric item analysis model. Psychological Assessment,
17, 15–27. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.15.
Sills, T., Wunderlich, G., Pyke, R., Segraves, R. T., Leiblum, S., Clayton, A., . . . Evans, K.
(2005). The Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory—Female (SIDI—F): Item response analysesof data from women diagnosed with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. The Journal of Sexual
Medicine, 2, 801–818. doi:http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00146.x.
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1992). Sociosexuality and romantic partner choice. Journal of
Personality, 60, 31–51. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00264.x.
Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality ofmarriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28. doi:10.2307/
350547

Guilbault et al.

21

Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development,
factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22, 175–190.
doi:10.1080/00926239608414655.
Sprecher, S. (1998). Social exchange theories and sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 32–43.
doi:10.1080/00224499809551915.
Treas, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 48–60. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00048.x.
Vallerand, R. J. (2015). The psychology of passion: A dualistic model. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C., Léonard, M., . . . Marsolais, J. (2003). Les passions de l’âme: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756–767. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756.
Vallerand, R. J., Rousseau, F. L., Grouzet, F. M., Dumais, A., Grenier, S., & Blanchard, C. M.
(2006). Passion in sport: A look at determinants and affective experiences. Journal of Sport andExercise Psychology, 28, 454–478. doi:10.1123/jsep.28.4.454.
Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Sexual passion, intimacy, and gender. In D. J. Mashek &A. P. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 189–199). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The Experiences in Close
Relationship Scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 88, 187–204. doi:10.1080/00223890701268041.
Young, B. W., de Jong, G. C., & Medic, N. (2015). Examining relationships between passion
types, conflict and negative outcomes in masters athletes. International Journal of Sport andExercise Psychology, 13, 132–149. doi:10.1080/1612197X.2014.932822.