Tag:

Tiger Woods

Don’t Fall for Infidelity

by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. 9/24/2023

Don't Fall for Infidelity I’m annoyed by infidelity.

What’s gotten me so annoyed to write about it are radio advertisements I hear for a website that encourages people to cheat on their spouse or significant other, acting as though it were a common or even normal experience.

Infidelity — or cheating, as people often refer to it — is neither common nor normal. If you’ve come to the fork in the road where you’ve cheated or are considering cheating on your partner, it’s time to acknowledge another reality — your primary romantic relationship is in trouble. Serious trouble.

You can go down the easy road and cheat — because, after all, somewhere between 10 and 20 percent of people in relationships do. Or you can acknowledge something is going on with your relationship and work to fix it. Cheating is never a sign of a healthy relationship after all.

And if you can’t fix it, you’ll do the honorable thing — leave the relationship first. Before cheating.

9/24/2023 44 comments

Why Tiger Woods Need Not Apologize to Us

by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. 4/9/2023

By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

Why Tiger Woods Need Not Apologize to Us When Tiger Woods held a press conference last Friday to explain where he’s at in his life, I got this feeling that we were looking into someone’s personal and private life in a manner that felt a little silly. After all, what business is it of ours — the public — what this sports celebrity does in his personal life?

Then again, one could apply the same logic to virtually any celebrity and our seemingly-endless obsession with following the private lives and failings of celebrities. Entire print publications and weekly magazines are devoted to the following of celebrities’ lives, as well as popular websites like TMZ.com.

We love to follow other people’s lives — it takes our minds off of our own mundane (and often less-than-ideal) existence. It explains why these publications are so popular and well-read.

But why put yourself out there, voluntarily, while you’re still in the middle of your own recovery? Why hold a “press conference” where nobody is allowed to answer any questions? And where is the one person who should be there — your wife? What does it help or prove?

4/9/2023 15 comments

Addicted to Sex? The Internet? Friendship?

by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. 3/10/2023

By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

Addicted to Sex? The Internet? Friendship? Some would argue that one can become “addicted” to the Internet. I’ve argued for over a decade this is a fairly ridiculous assertion that doesn’t even withstand a simple test of logic. Because if we can become addicted to the pipes that bring us information and friendship, it stands to reason one can become “addicted” to virtually anything in the world — sex, cake, shopping, TV, reading, the Internet, even friendship itself. Where do we draw the line and how? Why single out Internet use as its own disorder, but not someone who can’t be pried from in front of the TV 30 hours a week? Or from reading a book?

I’m certainly not alone noting how the term “Internet addiction” helps sells newspapers more than it helps us understand human behavior. And certainly I write about the latest rounds of research every year that call into question “Internet addiction” for various reasons.

For instance, did you know that despite the fact that dozens of studies have been done on “Internet addiction,” few studies have been done examining the scales used to measure this phenomenon? One that was published last year found that a commonly used scale in early Internet addiction research was basically useless and invalid (invalidating any research that used it). And there has been only one independent study done on the psychometric properties of the “new and improved” 20-item Internet Addiction Test (IAT) used by virtually all other researchers. Five years ago. The researchers who did the study — Widyanto & McMurran (2004) — called for more studies to be done, as its sample size was small, self-selected (not randomized) and therefore their results could hardly be classified as “conclusive:”

[The IAT’s] reliability and validity need to be further tested using a larger sample. Once a valid and reliable measure has been devised, more can then be researchers about the nature of Internet addiction.

Despite the fact that nobody has done that followup research yet (at least for U.S. populations), it hasn’t stopped researchers from using the IAT anyways.

So I was glad to read Vaughan Bell’s entry in Slate yesterday, as he makes sensible points about why it’s bad to medicalize every behavior we engage in a bit too much:

This creeping medicalization of everyday life means that almost any problem of excess can now be portrayed as an individual falling foul of a major mental illness. While drug addiction is a serious concern and a well-researched condition, many of the new behavioral addictions lack even the most basic foundations of scientific reliability. In light of Tiger Woods’ extramarital trysts, “sex addiction” has been widely touted by the global media despite the fact it lacks official recognition and scientific support. Perhaps the most widely publicized of these new diagnoses, Internet addiction, is flawed even on its own terms: A 2009 study published in the journal CyberPsychology and Behavior revealed that it has been classified in numerous, inconsistent ways in published research. Most studies of the “disorder” rely on self-selecting samples of college computer users and are otherwise subject to significant bias.

Despite the scientific implausibility of the same disease — addiction — underlying both damaging heroin use and overenthusiasm for World of Warcraft, the concept has run wild in the popular imagination. Our enthusiasm for labeling new forms of addictions seems to have arisen from a perfect storm of pop medicine, pseudo-neuroscience, and misplaced sympathy for the miserable.

The full article is worth your time if you’re interested in this topic.

Read the full article: Can you really be “addicted” to shopping or using the Internet?.

3/10/2023 27 comments

Perhaps Why Tiger Woods Cheats

by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. 3/3/2023

By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

Perhaps Why Tiger Woods Cheats While more details of the Tiger Woods scandal continuing to emerge, the inevitable question arises — Why would such a successful, attractive man cheat on his wife and family? Why, in general, do men — and women — cheat? And why would Tiger Woods, one of the most successful professional golfers of all time, cheat on his wife, Elin Nordegren?

Psychological research has examined this question and has a few answers.

Infidelity occurs for numerous reasons, ranging from personality factors (Orzeck & Lung, 2005) to evolution-based theories about how extra-partner relationships are natural while monogamy is unnatural (Barash & Lipton, 2001). It’s not surprising to find personality factors may influence cheating behavior, because people who are more similar in personality are less likely to have interpersonal conflict. Among other findings, Orzek & Lung (2005) found that “cheaters see themselves as more social and active compared to their partners and non-cheaters. Additionally, Extroverts may be inclined to cheat to obtain stimulation and prevent boredom. […] Non-cheaters perceived their monogamous partners as significantly higher on Extroversion, compared to the cheaters’ perception of their monogamous partner. It may be important for one partner to be more extroverted in the eyes of each partner and for oneself to be less extroverted in order to prevent cheating.”

“The findings in this study support the idea that cheaters may seek out more stable partners if they perceive their monogamous partners as being less psychologically adjusted than they are […] and suggest that cheaters may perceive themselves as having stronger intellect and stronger creativity compared to that of their partners, leading them to seek out partners that may be a better, that is, similar, match.”

If happiness is found in our similarity to another person (at least through the eyes of personality), then cheating is an effort to seek out increased compatibility in another partner.

Infidelity isn’t purely sexual, either — a person can cheat on another through emotional infidelity as well. Men tend to display relatively greater distress in response to sexual, physical infidelity by their partner, whereas women tend to display relatively greater distress in response to emotional infidelity by their partner.

Other research shows that both men and women lie in relationships about infidelity, even though men reported more infidelity than women do (36% versus 21%, Stebleton & Rothenberger, 1993). And Corey (1989) suggests that sex is not the primary motivator for most affairs; a problematic relationship is. Adulterers cheat rather than face and resolve these problems.

A recent study of sexual dysfunction and infidelity from Italian researchers (Fisher et al., 2009) sheds additional light on characteristics associated with men who cheat. In a study of 2,592 heterosexual men who had sexual dysfunction, they found that infidelity was associated with relationship problems in their long-term relationship or marriage (especially if the man had a stable, secondary relationship with another woman). Men in the study who had extramarital affairs had higher stress at work, a longer primary relationship span, and higher risk of conflicts within the primal couple and within the family. In addition, the researchers found men who cheated were more likely to have a partner who had an illness or very low sexual desire. Men who cheated in this study were also found less likely to have low sexual desire, and had lower feelings of guilt about masturbation.

The precursors to cheat could be summarized as:

Significant, ongoing, unresolved problems in the primary, long-term relationship or marriage
A significant difference in sex drive between the two partners
The older the primary relationship
A greater difference in personality than perhaps the partners realize
And to a far lesser extent, perhaps some theoretical, evolutionary remnants that may have reinforced multiple partners over monogamy (although this is just a hypothetical argument that would be difficult to disprove)

A good, healthy relationship means understanding one another, including one’s sexual needs. In this way, men and women are not so different. Some women prefer romance, but guess what — so do some men. None of these types of generalizations are of any use until you understand the person (not the object) you are in a relationship with. That’s done through simple communication — sit down and talk about your sexual needs with your partner.

An unhealthy relationship that lacks real communication and is on auto-pilot is at risk for a cheating partner. Especially if problems are present in the relationship that are not being realistically addressed in a timely manner (e.g., through couple’s counseling or marriage therapy). Relationships don’t cure themselves — it takes the resolve and commitment of both people in order to make it work.

Why Tiger Woods cheated will likely remain a mystery for some time, until he chooses to share his own personal motivations. But if he’s like most men who cheat, he likely did so because of dissatisfaction with his marriage, a difference in sex drive between him and his spouse, and perhaps greater personality differences between he and his spouse that either of them realize.

References:

Barash, D.P. & Lipton, J.E. (2001). The myth of monogamy: Fidelity and infidelity in animals and people. New York, NY: W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.

Corey, M.A. (1989). Why Men Cheat: Psychological Profiles of the Adulterous Male. Springfield, IL, England: Charles C Thomas.

Fisher, A.D., Corona, G., Bandini, E., Mannucci, E., Lotti, F., Boddi, V., Forti, G., Maggi, M. (2009). Psychobiological correlates of extramarital affairs and differences between stable and occasional infidelity among men with sexual dysfunctions. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 6(3), 866-875.

Orzeck, T. & Lung, E. (2005). Big-Five Personality Differences of Cheaters and Non-Cheaters. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social, 24(4), 274-286.

Stebleton, M.J. & Rothenberger, J.H. (1993). Truth or consequences: Dishonesty in dating and HIV/AIDS-related issues in a college-age population. Journal of American College Health, 42(2), 51-54.

3/3/2023 22 comments