Understanding Infidelity: Why People Cheat and How Therapy Can Help

This is a hot topic in popular culture, filled with myths and misconceptions. Infidelity is broadly defined as engaging in emotional or sexual relations outside the agreed-upon boundaries of a relationship. This includes behaviors such as sexting, flirting, having an emotional connection, or sexual intercourse. According to Glass (2002), the workplace relationship is the most common context for affairs. 

Infidelity is relatively common with most men and women reporting engaging in some form of infidelity at least once during their lifetime. Moreover, close to half of those in relationships have engaged in infidelity. Infidelity is the primary cause of divorce in the U.S. but over 70 percent of marriages survive an affair. An affair can disrupt romantic relationships and damage the trust, connection, and intimacy with devastating consequences to the well-being of both partners in the relationship including children, extended family, and friends. This includes feelings of discontent, depression, blame, and frustration. In a relationship, both individuals often contribute to factors that can lead to infidelity.

Relationship variables tend to be the predictors of infidelity and include relationship satisfaction, relationship length (longer relationship length), desire, sexual satisfaction, romantic love, and some sexual activities (anal, oral, or vaginal sex) within the relationship. In addition, to a lesser degree, individual liberal sexual attitudes (e.g., use of sex toys, anal sex, or masturbation with a partner) are a predictor of infidelity.

Drawing on investment model research (Rusbult 1980, 1983; Drigotas et al., 1999), Doherty (2021) suggests that many participating partners take a “consumer” approach to the relationship where they focus on what they are not receiving from their partner instead of what they themselves are not investing in the relationship. It is not uncommon for betrayed partners to have invested more in the relationship than they have received in return. This dynamic reflects Western socialization, which often conveys a sense of consumer entitlement to exciting relationships and great sex, and fosters behavior that suggests people are disposable or can be easily replaced. Thus, if one is feeling deprived, they are permitted to go elsewhere to meet their needs.    

It is recommended that relationship issues are addressed when they first arise in order to prevent future infidelity. This includes addressing desire discrepancy issues by discussing sexual needs and desires in the relationship where they can be potentially met. An active affair will need to be discontinued in order to repair the relationship. Signs of ongoing infidelity may include a lack of empathy, resistance to displaying warmth and care, and persistent negative attributions projected onto the injured partner. Continued deception deepens the trauma and prolongs the repair process. Injured partners who have recently learned about their partner’s affair may experience a broad range of negative emotional and behavioral effects, including perpetrating intimate partner violence (IPV), depression, suicidal ideation, acute anxiety, and symptoms similar to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; flashbacks, rumination, hypervigilance).

It is not uncommon for couples to experience high rates of severe conflict and verbal or physical aggression in reaction to an affair. Partners who were injured from an affair often feel betrayed and angry. They may vacillate between feelings of rage, powerlessness, victimization, and abandonment. In addition, they also may feel a sense of responsibility due to “missing the signs” or not being available to their loved one and thus experience internalized anger coupled with embarrassment and shame. Moreover, they may experience a loss of identity, a sense of sacredness with their partner, and a sense of purpose that are foundational to emotional security.

The injured partner may begin to incessantly investigate their partner’s activities and verify their partner’s whereabouts. The investigations and continual inquiries along with the participating partner’s justifications for their behavior may establish a hierarchy within the relationship. This dynamic encompasses the participating partner feeling pressure to report their activities to their partner with the injured partner scrutinizing their partner’s actions. This hierarchy can exacerbate the relationship issues and create an imbalance of power within the relationship. Interrogation can trigger defensiveness, which will hinder the process of repairing the relationship. Furthermore, a therapist often needs to help clients understand the boundary between privacy and secrecy.

If the goal is to repair the relationship, then it is imperative that safety is created which is fundamental for honest and vulnerable communication. A lack of safety exacerbates relationship issues that contributed to the infidelity and obstructs repair. The therapist will have to manage anxiety and emotional reactivity in order to maintain safety. Further, they will need to evaluate the following: the duration of the affair, number of participating sexual partners, gender of the third party, level of sexual activity, whether both partners were engaged in an affair, degree of emotional attachment, each individual’s relationship with the third party, extent of deception and secrecy surrounding the affair, awareness or consent of the affair by the other party, and how the affair was perceived by the social circle of the individual or couple. Trust will have to be rebuilt including improving communication with honest and open dialogue along with the creation of a new relationship.       

The participating partner may experience guilt, a loss of self-esteem, as well as depression, suicidality, and acute anxiety, particularly when the disclosure or discovery of infidelity results in separation or threats of divorce. They may also take on a protective role where they attempt to protect their partner from the hurt or the pain of the affair. The guilt coupled with the desire to protect can prevent them from talking about the affair with their partner which may impede processing feelings that are instrumental in repairing the injury caused by the affair. Fear may be experienced by both individuals where the decision to work on their relationship necessitates addressing difficult issues.

Therapists must create and uphold a safe therapeutic environment by fostering trust and safety, demonstrating competence, and preparing the couple for therapy through the provision of a conceptual treatment model. Limiting aggressive exchanges within session in a firm but empathetic manner is instrumental in establishing safety and trust. Building and sustaining a therapeutic alliance with both partners can present specific challenges. For instance, injured partners may find it difficult to accept the therapist's empathic responses to the guilt, hurt, or loneliness experienced by the participating partner. In addition, therapists who hold strong moral beliefs about infidelity will need to examine if their beliefs will impede building an alliance with the participating partner. Even though both individuals in a relationship contribute to the relational context (e.g., emotional unavailability, excessive negativity, prolonged absences, significant emotional or behavioral problems, or desire discrepancies) that can lead to an affair, the participating partner is still responsible for their decision to engage in an affair.

Early on, it is crucial to address questions such as whether to continue living together, how to manage the involvement of the third party in the affair, whom to inform about the affair and what information to disclose, how to handle daily responsibilities like meals and childcare, and how to manage conflicts to prevent emotional or physical harm, all in order to mitigate further damage to the partners or their relationship.

An integrative approach that integrates a three-stage process is optimal in treating infidelity with couples who desire to repair and strengthen their relationship. Stage 1: Dealing with the initial impact - Partners are taught specific skills for managing emotions and decision-making that address relationship crises, and the disruption of individual functioning caused by the affair. During stage 1, the injured partner writes a letter exploring their feelings and reactions to the affair. The therapist can provide initial feedback on the draft of the letter with the injured partner reading the letter to the participating partner during a joint session. The process supports the injured partner exploring their reactions and feelings while maintaining their emotional balance in a manner that is not attacking or abusive, thereby increasing the likelihood of being heard by the participating partner. Once things have de-escalated and stabilized, the therapist helps the injured partner ask the involved partner specific “who,” “what,” and “where” questions. Evaluative comparison questions (e.g., “Why them compared to me?”) are excluded as they are not helpful and “why” questions are generally discouraged early on, as the involved partner may not yet be able to articulate their reasons. The injured partner can bring up “why” questions during stage 2. But the involved partner will need to be honest and transparent and avoid being evasive or minimizing the affair including lying by omission. It’s also important to prepare both partners for the possibility that no amount of understanding will fully explain the affair, and that it may always seem, to some extent, irrational or unfathomable.

Stage 2: Exploring context and finding meaning – Interventions help partners explore factors within the relationship, external to their relationship, and within themselves that heightened their susceptibility to an affair. In stage 2, the main areas of exploration include aspects of the relationship such as communication challenges or time constraints, external stressors like job pressures, financial issues, or conflicts with relatives, the participating partner's beliefs about relationships or their social development history, and issues specific to the injured partner such as their developmental background or relationship skills. Within each domain, the therapist guides the couple to reflect on these factors regarding their potential roles as predisposing or precipitating influences that lead to the affair, factors affecting the maintenance of the affair and its eventual discovery or disclosure, and influences shaping the partners' subsequent responses or recovery. This information should be incorporated into a shared coherent narrative that explains how the affair came about which is instrumental in developing a new set of assumptions about themselves, each other, and the relationship. This can be a task that they would prepare for during a follow-up session, or it can be a written letter where each person describes what they understand to be relevant factors. Afterward, the therapist, together with the couple, discusses aspects of the relationship that may require further attention and how these can be addressed to prevent future betrayals. Through this process, the therapist transitions from focusing on the past to emphasizing the present and future of the relationship.

Stage 3: Moving on - Interventions assist partners in examining their personal beliefs regarding forgiveness and their relevance to recovering from the affair. Moving forward involves each person achieving a more balanced perspective of their partner and the relationship. They commit to not allowing hurt or anger to dictate their thoughts or behavior towards their partner, or to dominate their lives. They willingly relinquish the right to perpetuate continual punishment for their partner's actions or demand additional restitution. Moreover, they choose to remain in the relationship after realistically assessing both its positive and negative aspects. Furthermore, the therapist should assist partners in exploring their personal beliefs regarding forgiveness and how these beliefs influence their efforts to move on from the affair. The therapist may need to confront beliefs held by partners that could hinder their ability to move on in an emotionally healthy manner. It is crucial for the involved partner to express genuine remorse, as this is essential for the forgiveness process. The therapist should discuss aspects of forgiveness with the couple, covering descriptions of forgiveness, common beliefs about forgiveness, consequences of both forgiving and not forgiving, and barriers to forgiveness or moving on. Some individuals struggle with forgiveness due to beliefs that forgiving their partner suggests weakness, condones or excuses the behavior, equates forgiveness with forgetting, or fears vulnerability to future harm. The therapist explores these beliefs and discusses whether they can forgive while still holding their partner appropriately accountable for their behaviors. Other obstacles to forgiveness include anger and resentment that pertain to current dynamics, such as perceived power imbalances resulting from the affair or an inability to restore a sufficient sense of safety within the relationship. Therefore, anger may serve a protective function for the spouse experiencing anger. The anger may also indicate unresolved relational issues or violated assumptions that were not addressed or resolved in earlier stages. Sometimes challenges in transitioning from anger to forgiveness stem from lingering resentments related to the affair rather than current relationship dynamics. In such instances, it is recommended that the therapist assess motivation for change by examining the costs and benefits of maintaining their current position versus actively letting go of anger and moving past the betrayal. Final interventions focus on specific strategies to fortify the relationship and safeguard it against potential threats to fidelity in the future.

Although this is a progressive stage approach, it is not linear as an individual may need to revisit an earlier stage after progressing through that stage (e.g., returning to stage 1 after experiencing a flashback). This process can take anywhere from 6 months to 1-2 years of weekly sessions, depending on the level of pain and injury, motivation, accountability, and commitment to the relationship.

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(2), 101-130.

Amato, P. R., & Previti, D. (2003). People’s reasons for divorcing: Gender, social class, the life course, and adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 24(5), 602-626.

Blow, A.J. and Hartnett, K. (2005), Infidelity in committed relationships II: A substantive review. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31, 217-233.

Doherty, W. J. (2021). The ethical lives of clients: Transcending self-interest in psychotherapy. American Psychological Association.

Drigotas, S. M., Safstrom, C. A., & Gentilia, T. (1999). An investment model prediction of dating infidelity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(3), 509-524.

Glass, S. P. (2002). Couple therapy after the trauma of infidelity. In A. S. Gurman & N. S. Jacobson (Eds.), Clinical handbook of couple therapy (3rd ed., pp. 488–507). The Guilford Press.

Glass, S. (2007). Not "just friends": Rebuilding trust and recovering your sanity after infidelity. Simon and Schuster.

Haseli, A., Shariati, M., Nazari, A. M., Keramat, A., & Emamian, M. H. (2019). Infidelity and its associated factors: A systematic review. The journal of sexual medicine, 16(8), 1155-1169.

Hertlein, K. M., Wetchler, J. L., & Piercy, F. P. (2006). Infidelity: An overview. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 4(2-3), 5-16.

Lefkowitz, E. S., Shearer, C. L., Gillen, M. M., & Espinosa-Hernandez, G. (2014). How gendered attitudes relate to women’s and men’s sexual behaviors and beliefs. Sexuality & culture, 18, 833-846.

Mark, K. P., & Haus, K. R. (2019). Extradyadic relations. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 2102–2105). Springer.

Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of experimental social psychology, 16(2), 172-186.

Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(1), 101-117.

Snyder, D. K., Baucom, D. H., & Gordon, K. C. (2016). Treating infidelity. In S. B. Levine, C. B. Risen, & S. E. Althof (Eds.), Handbook of clinical sexuality for mental health professionals (3rd ed., pp. 209-220). Routledge.

Spring, J. A. (1996). After the affair: Healing the pain and rebuilding the trust when a partner has been unfaithful. Harper Collins.

Thompson, A. E., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2015). Drawing the line: The development of a comprehensive assessment of infidelity judgments. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(8), 910–926.

Vowels, L. M., Vowels, M. J., & Mark, K. P. (2022). Is infidelity predictable? Using explainable machine learning to identify the most important predictors of infidelity. The Journal of Sex Research, 59(2), 224-237.

Weeks, G. R., & Treat, S. R. (2001). Couples in treatment: Techniques and approaches for effective practice (2^nd ed.). Brunner-Routledge.