UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Jealousy : an empirical and phenomenological study West, Mariette Bésanger 1983

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1984_A8 W48.pdf [ 10.32MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054203.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054203+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054203.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054203+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054203+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054203+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0054203 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0054203.txt
Citation
1.0054203.ris

Full Text

JEALOUSY: AN EMPIRICAL AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY by MARIETTE BESANGER WEST R.N., ST. PAUL'S HOSPITAL, 1972 B.S.N., UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1981 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF . THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA DECEMBER 1983 © MARIETTE BESANGER WEST, 1S8 3 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d b y t h e h e a d o f my d e p a r t m e n t o r b y h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t b e a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 1956 Main M a l l V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V6T 1Y3 i i ABSTRACT T h i s study examines the concept " j e a l o u s y " using a combination of e m p i r i c a l and phenomenological approaches. In the e m p i r i c a l phase o b j e c t i v e data were analyzed u s i n g d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s . In the phenomenological phase s u b j e c t i v e data were analyzed on the b a s i s of major d e s c r i p t o r s , elements and themes i n the verbatim responses. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n each phase were supported by data and f i n d i n g s from the other phase and by the conc e p t u a l understandings gained from a review of three t h e o r i e s of emotion and a c r i t i q u e of l i t e r a t u r e on j e a l o u s y from s e v e r a l d i s c i p l i n e s . Three hundred a d u l t s from a student f a m i l y housing complex were surveyed using an adapted v e r s i o n of a j e a l o u s y i n v e n t o r y by Aronson and Pines (1982). F o r t y - f i v e female and 28 male respondents d e f i n e d j e a l o u s y i n t h e i r own words; d e s c r i b e d and i n t e r p r e t e d t h e i r most extreme experiences with the emotion and responded (on a one-to-seven s c a l e ) to o b j e c t i v e item s u b t e s t s of j e a l o u s y prevalence; p h y s i c a l and emotional r e a c t i o n s ; general r e a c t i o n s and coping mechanisms. Q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y ses r e s u l t e d i n many p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s . Among them were: apparent t h e r a p e u t i c e f f e c t s of the instrument; sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n each of the o b j e c t i v e s u b t e s t s ; and q u a l i t a t i v e s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s among i n d i v i d u a l s and between the sexes i n p a r t i c i p a n t s ' d e f i n i t i o n s , e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . S e v e r a l hypotheses were generated and many suggestions f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h were d i s c u s s e d . I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e g e n e r a l l y promoted a p p l i c a t i o n of a broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and more p o s i t i v e outcomes f o r j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i L i s t of Tables v i L i s t of F i g u r e s v i i Acknowledgements v i i i D e d i c a t i o n ix Chapter I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1 General Background and Purpose of the Study . 1 D e f i n i n g Jealousy ..... .. 4 Assumptions 5 L i m i t a t i o n s 6 Theo r i e s of Emotion ... 7 II LITERATURE REVIEW . . 25, Jealousy and Envy 25 P e r s p e c t i v e s from Anthropology and S o c i o l o g y 30 P e r s p e c t i v e s from P s y c h i a t r y 45 P e r s p e c t i v e s from Psychology 61 Chapter Summary 113 III EMPIRICAL PHASE 116 Design and Method 116 Subjects 116 Instruments 116 P i l o t Study 117 Data C o l l e c t i o n and Procedures 118 Sample Demography 119 Re s u l t s and D i s c u s s i o n 121 I. J e a l o u s y : T r a i t - B a s e d ? 121 I I . Response Set and/or Re-experience of the Emotion? 123 I I I . Jealousy and S i b l i n g P o s i t i o n 128 IV. Jealousy Prevalence 129 V. General Reactions to Jealousy 129 VI. P h y s i c a l Reactions to Jealousy 132 VI I . Emotional Reactions to Jealousy .... 134 V I I I . Coping with Jealousy 137 Hypotheses and I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future Research 140 Chapter Summary 145 V IV PHENOMENOLOGICAL PHASE 146 P a r t i c i p a n t D e f i n i t i o n s of J e a l o u s y : A D i s c u s s i o n . 1 46 P a r t i c i p a n t s ' Jealousy E x p e r i e n c e s : Major Themes 153 I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future Research 158 Chapter Summary 164 V IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNSELLING PRACTICE 165 General C o n s i d e r a t i o n s 167 C o u n s e l l i n g I n d i v i d u a l s 170 C o u n s e l l i n g Couples 175 C o u n s e l l i n g Groups 180 Chapter Summary 183 THE SI S. SUMMARY 184 REFERENCES . . ..' 186 Appendix A: Jealousy Inventory 194 Appendix B: Request f o r P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Study ...... 201 Appendix C: Cover L e t t e r f o r Inventory 203 Appendix D: Responses to Items 28, 29, 30 206 Appendix E: Responses to Item 120 224 Appendix F: Responses to Item 123 230 v i LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Frequencies of the Demographic V a r i a b l e s ... 120 Table 2: Jealousy Prevalence Questions: Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s 130 Table 3: General Reaction Questions: Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s 131 Table 4: Ranking of P h y s i c a l Reactions on B a s i s of Mean Response 133 Table 5: Ranking of Emotional Reactions on B a s i s of Mean Response " 135 Table 6; Ranking of "Coping With Jea l o u s y " Items on Basis of Mean Response 13.8 LIST OF FIGURES v i i F i g u r e 1: Response to Questions 20 and 122 by Question 19 . 124 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my a d v i s o r , Dr. John Banmen f o r h i s guidance and p a t i e n c e i n h e l p i n g me to complete t h i s r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t and t h e s i s . I thank my committee members, Dr. Marv Westwood and Dr. Robert Armstrong f o r t h e i r support and c o n s u l t a t i o n . I a l s o thank Dr. Adrienne R o e l o f s f o r her f r i e n d s h i p , her time and her c o n s u l t a t i o n ; Bruce M c G i l l i v r a y and Gary Ro e l o f s f o r t h e i r t e a c h i n g and a s s i s t a n c e with computer programming and word p r o c e s s i n g ; G e r i Cymbluck f o r her h e l p with data p r o c e s s i n g ; the s t a f f of U.B.C. H e a l t h Sciences Centre, Department of P s y c h i a t r y , f o r t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p i l o t study; my s u b j e c t s , the r e s i d e n t s of Acadia Park and Acadia Camp for t h e i r time and e n t h u s i a s t i c response; and my f a m i l y , my f r i e n d s and my c o l l e a g u e s f o r 'being t h e r e ' . F i n a l l y and most importantly, I thank my husband, N e v i l l e West for h i s l o v e , h i s p a t i e n c e , h i s support and h i s h e l p with e d i t i n g ; and my daughter Kala West for her love and endless i n v i t a t i o n s to p l a y as w e l l as her h e l p with stamping and d e l i v e r i n g envelopes. ix DEDICATION To N e v i l l e and Kala "Every human pass i o n has i t s u s e f u l purpose." Descartes 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY General Background and Purpose of the Study Jealousy i s an anc i e n t t o p i c and a u n i v e r s a l human experience. However, the body of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge about i t i s in the very e a r l y stages of development. E m p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s and are l a r g e l y a product of t h i s decade. Widely v a r y i n g o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s , methodologies and approaches to data a n a l y s i s have been used yet c l a r i f i c a t i o n of j e a l o u s y as a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t i s not p r e c i s e or comprehensive. Completion of t h i s task awaits a conceptual framework f o r a l l human emotions, which i s f l e x i b l e enough to allow f o r i n t e g r a t i o n of the p l e t h o r a of human phenomena to account f o r our innate human complexity. Jealousy has been examined, analyzed, d i s c u s s e d , dramatized and v i s u a l l y p o r t r a y e d by experts and amateurs i n our c u l t u r e and o t h e r s . T h i s r e s e a r c h r e - e x p l o r e s the t o p i c . The researcher assumes that we as humans have a consensual awareness of the u n i v e r s a l l y experienced j e a l o u s y . T h i s does not mean we experience j e a l o u s y i d e n t i c a l l y . Rather, we,have some h o l i s t i c , u n i v e r s a l l y shared sense of the j e a l o u s y experience as a n a t u r a l 2 phenomenon. T h i s study i s s u b j e c t i v e and o b j e c t i v e , seeking l o g i c a l l i n e a r refinement, ordered i n f o r m a t i o n and e x p e r i e n t i a l meanings. I t i n c o r p o r a t e s both s c i e n t i f i c and phenomenological approaches. O b j e c t i v e data are s c i e n t i c a l l y presented and i n t e r p r e t e d using d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s . L a t e r , the r e s e a r c h e r presents and c r e a t i v e l y i n t e r p r e t s the experiences c o n t r i b u t e d by her s u b j e c t s . She a l s o i n c l u d e s i n s i g h t s gained d u r i n g the r e s e a r c h process i t s e l f , as.a member of the community in which the study takes p l a c e . Using t h i s combined approach she assumes: the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of understanding behaving systems, with more depth than the layman, i n order to h e l p the non-researcher have more i n s i g h t i n understanding himse l f and thus to develop at h i s own pace (Nasru, 1980, p.16). The r e s e a r c h e r , a c o u n s e l l o r , views man as an open system. L i k e the c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s , her approach and outcomes seek f u r t h e r query and v a l i d a t i o n , while promoting i n s i g h t and understanding which s o l i c i t a c t i o n and change. She e x p l o r e s both s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s . Concepts change over time as they serve changing purposes, so the need to remain open and add to the complexity of our understandings i s not j u s t wise but e s s e n t i a l . For purposes of t h i s r e s e a r c h refinement of the j e a l o u s y concept i s t h e r e f o r e secondary to r e - e x p l o r a t i o n . A more convergent conceptual approach and advanced s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s await f u r t h e r refinement of t h e o r i e s 3 and models f o r human emot ions. R o l l o May 's (1969) d i s t i n c t i o n between ' r e a s o n ' f o r and ' pu rpo se ' of our emotions g i ve s f u r t h e r fundamental support to the approach used in t h i s r e s e a r c h which b lends s c i e n t i f i c o b j e c t i v i t y wi th phenomenolog ica l s u b j e c t i v i t y . May (1969) b e l i e v e s emotions are i n t e n t i o n a l and have two a s p e c t s , one that answers to reason and the o ther tha t serves purpose . The f i r s t a spect has to do w i th the past and is" c o r r e l a t e d wi th determin i sm of one ' s past e x p e r i e n c e . He sees i t as the r e g r e s s i v e s i d e of emot ions . The second a s p e c t ' s t a r t s in the present and p o i n t s toward the f u t u r e . It communicates and shares something mean ing fu l from us to the wor l d , and in a r e a l sense i s p a r t i a l l y formed by the f e e l i n g s of o ther persons p r e s e n t . In d e a l i n g w i th the f i r s t a s p e c t , May b e l i e v e s tha t i t i s e n t i r e l y sound to ask the " rea son why", but the second aspect r e q u i r e s a sk ing the "purpose f o r " . Emotion in the second aspect i s a t t r a c t i o n , aroused by v i r t u e of g o a l s , i d e a l s and p o s s i b i l i t i e s in the f u t u r e . He says : The reason i s the c o n s i d e r a t i o n in the past which e x p l a i n s why you are do ing t h i s or t h a t , and purpose , in c o n t r a s t , i s what you want to get out of do ing i t . . . . The second (aspect ) i s c o r r e l a t e d w i th freedom. We p a r t i c i p a t e in forming the f u t u r e by v i r t u e of our c a p a c i t y to conce i ve of and respond to new p o s s i b i l i t i e s , and to b r i n g them out of imag ina t i on and t r y them in a c t u a l i t y (May, 1969, p .91 ) . In summary, t h i s r e s e a r c h renews and adds to the e x p l o r a t i o n of the reasons why and purposes f o r j e a l o u s y . 4 It adds to the G e s t a l t of what i s j e a l o u s y . The researcher i s open and c r e a t i v e i n using her data, i n o b j e c t i v e d e s c r i p t i v e ways and i n more s p e c u l a t i v e , s u b j e c t i v e ways. Her goal i s to f a c i l i t a t e c o u n s e l l o r s and c l i e n t s i n seeking a broader more h e l p f u l p e r s p e c t i v e on j e a l o u s y . The remainder of t h i s chapter w i l l present a new d e f i n i t i o n of j e a l o u s y ; e x p l o r e assumptions upon which t h i s r e s e a r c h i s based, examine the l i m i t a t i o n s and p r o v i d e a broader context f o r j e a l o u s y as w e l l as f u r t h e r s u b s t a n t i a t i o n of approach by p r e s e n t i n g three major c o n c e p t u a l l y d i v e r g e n t t h e o r i e s of human emotion.. F i n a l l y , i t p r o v i d e s a b r i e f o u t l i n e of the chapters to f o l l o w . D e f i n i n g Jealousy Many e a r l y and some contemporary authors d e f i n e j e a l o u s y i n ways that presuppose a j e a l o u s c h a r a c t e r t r a i t or d i s p o s i t i o n (Freud, 1922; L a n g f e l d t , 1962; R i v i e r e , 1932). Others presuppose or imply c a u s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( K l e i n , 1957; S o k o l o f f , 1947; Ziman, 1949) and/or t r e a t j e a l o u s y somewhat c a t e g o r i c a l l y as: e r o t i c ( L a n g f e l d t , 1962); sexual ( B a r r e l l & R i c h a r d s , 1982; Bohm, 1961; Buunk, 1982; Todd & Dewhurst, 1955); h e t e r o s e x u a l ( F r a n c i s , 1977); morbid (Cobb & Marks, 1977; Mowat, 1966; T u r b o t t , 1981); or p a t h o l o g i c a l (Mooney, 1965; Pao, 1977; Seeman, 1979). These e f f o r t s have been e n l i g h t e n i n g to our l o g i c a l understandings of j e a l o u s y . However, they 5 c o n t r i b u t e to a tendency to be p r i m a r i l y d i a g n o s t i c as we s t r i v e to understand our r e a l i t i e s . T h i s tendency i n d i c a t e s a need f o r phenomenolog ica l c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and e x p l o r a t i o n . Nasru (1980) p o i n t s out tha t " concept s are mental c o n s t r u c t s " ( p .7 ) . Phenomeno log i ca l l y then , we need to b u i l d them i n t o images that " e x i s t " and i l l u s t r a t e them in our d e f i n i t i o n s . T h i s r e s e a r c h e r ' s p r e l i m i n a r y d e f i n i t i o n i n c o r p o r a t e s v i s u a l l y - o r i e n t e d d e s c r i p t o r s in a s i m i l a r e f f o r t , , g i v i n g " f o rm" to the human e x p e r i e n c e . The form she uses , a t r i a n g l e , i s not a new one in d i s c u s s i o n s of j e a l o u s y . Rather , i t i s an a n c i e n t and c o n c e p t u a l l y r e l i a b l e one. J e a l o u s y , then , f o r purposes of t h i s r e s e a r c h i s d e f i n e d as a t r i a n g u l a r human exper i ence in which both p e r s o n a l and i n t e r p e r s o n a l co re needs are th rea tened or p e r c e i v e d to be t h r e a t e n e d . The above d e f i n i t i o n a c t s as a concep tua l background. However, in an e f f o r t to remain open to new p o s s i b i l i t i e s the r e s e a r c h e r does not d e f i n e j e a l o u s y f o r her s u b j e c t s . I n s tead , she s o l i c i t s t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n . Assumpt ions 1. J e a l o u s y i s a c o n c e p t u a l l y broader c o n s t r u c t than the c o n s t r u c t s used as f ounda t i on s fo r the c u r r e n t l y 6 a v a i l a b l e measures of j e a l o u s y . 2. J e a l o u s y e x i s t s i n a s o c i a l , i n t e r a c t i o n a l and s i t u a t i o n a l c ontext. Fundamental human needs are at stake and every person has at l e a s t the p o t e n t i a l to experience j e a l o u s y . 3. Humans have a consensual awareness of the j e a l o u s y experience. 4. A combined approach to the study of j e a l o u s y which i n c o r p o r a t e s : c r i t i q u e of p r e v i o u s c o n v e n t i o n a l and res e a r c h l i t e r a t u r e ; a s e l f - r e p o r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e adapted by the re s e a r c h e r ; d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s f o r o b j e c t i v e data; and s u b j e c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s u b j e c t s ' e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts, i s both f e a s i b l e and v a l i d . 5. Inferences about s u b j e c t s ' experiences are s u b s e r v i e n t to t h e i r own s e l f - r e p o r t , but remain v a l i d i n c l u s i o n s on the b a s i s of the r e s e a r c h e r ' s e x p e r t i s e as a c o u n s e l l o r and with the t o p i c area. L i m i t a t ions 1. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e , as a r e s e a r c h t o o l , and the survey approach have the usual w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d problems i n c l u d i n g s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e and other response s e t s , s c a l e problems, s e l e c t i v e r e t u r n s , i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e c a l l , d i f f i c u l t i e s i n sampling non-respondents, e t c . These i s s u e s are reviewed e x t e n s i v e l y by such authors as Krewski, Platek & Rao (1980), Borg & G a l l (1979) and many 7 o t h e r s . 2. A non-random a d u l t p o p u l a t i o n of u n i v e r s i t y students and/or t h e i r p a r t n e r s was sampled. An a d u l t i s d e f i n e d as a male or female between the ages of 20 and 60. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e s t r i c t g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of f i n d i n g s . 3. S e l e c t i o n of the s u b j e c t pool was based on f i n a n c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , convenience and a wish to i n c l u d e s u b j e c t s from v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s , c u l t u r e s , races and r e l i g i o u s / s o c i a l backgrounds. Survey response i s a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r . 4. Residency i n the community sampled i s determined by c r i t e r i a such as: f u l l - t i m e student s t a t u s of at l e a s t one a d u l t ; e s s e n t i a l p a r e n t a l s t a t u s ; number of c h i l d r e n ; income; and p r o x i m i t y of permanent re s i d e n c e to the u n i v e r s i t y . T h e o r i e s of Emotion T h i s s e c t i o n reviews three major t h e o r i e s of emotion, p r o v i d i n g a broader context f o r j e a l o u s y . I t makes apparent the conceptual divergence of these t h e o r i e s , thus p r o v i d i n g f u r t h e r s u b s t a n t i a t i o n f o r the approach used in t h i s r e s e a r c h . P l u t c h i k ' s theory ( P l u t c h i k , 1962; P l u t c h i k , 1980a; P l u t c h i k , 1980b) i s p s y c h o e v o l u t i o n a r y and seeks to i d e n t i f y the ways i n which emotions f u n c t i o n a d a p t i v e l y i n humans and 8 a n i m a l s . H i s s t r u c t u r a l model d e s c r i b e s the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of e i gh t pr imary emotions i n c l u d i n g j oy , a c cep tance , f e a r , s u r p r i s e , sadness , d i s g u s t , anger and a n t i c i p a t i o n . These emotions were a r r i v e d at by f a c t o r a n a l y s i s of many mood terms and are rep re sen ted c o n c e p t u a l l y by h i s "wheel of emot ions" which i s d i v i d e d i n t o e i g h t equa l geometr ic wedges, each r e p r e s e n t i n g a d i f f e r e n t pr imary emot ion. M i x tu re s of ad jacen t pr imary emotions r e s u l t in o ther compounded emot ions. As such, a combinat ion of f ea r and s u r p r i s e y i e l d s awe, wh i le joy mixed wi th acceptance y i e l d s l o v e . P rox im i t y of emotions around the c i r c u m f e r e n c e of the wheel i n d i c a t e s the ex tent of t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y . Emotions tha t are most d i f f e r e n t are d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed. The wheel i s l i k e the c r o s s - s e c t i o n of a r a t h e r e l onga ted g l o b e . I n t e n s i t y i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d by c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l p o s i t i o n and i s weakest at the p o l e s and g r e a t e s t at the equa to r . The i n tense or e q u i t o r i a l v e r s i o n of the pr imary emotion sadness i s then g r i e f wh i le i t s p o l a r v e r s i o n i s p e n s i v e n e s s . He a l s o uses c o l o r s to d i s t i n g u i s h i n t e n s i t y . Ten p o s t u l a t e s encapsu l a te the essence of P l u t c h i k ' s t h e o r y : 1. The concept of emotion i s a p p l i c a b l e to a l l e v o l u t i o n a r y l e v e l s and a p p l i e s to an imal s as w e l l as humans. 2. Emotions have an e v o l u t i o n a r y h i s t o r y and have e v o l v e d v a r i o u s forms of e x p r e s s i o n i n d i f f e r e n t spec i e s . 9 3. Emotions serve an adap t i ve r o l e in h e l p i n g organisms d e a l w i th key s u r v i v a l i s s ue s posed by the env i ronment. 4. De sp i te d i f f e r e n t forms of e x p r e s s i o n of emotions in d i f f e r e n t s p e c i e s , there are c e r t a i n common e lements , or p ro to t ype p a t t e r n s , tha t can be i d e n t i f i e d . 5. There i s a sma l l number of b a s i c , p r imary , or p ro to type emot ions . 6. A l l o ther emotions are mixed or d e r i v a t i v e s t a t e s : that i s , they occur as comb ina t i on s , m i x t u r e s , or as compounds of the pr imary emot ions . 7. Pr imary emotions are h y p o t h e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t s or i d e a l i z e d s t a t e s whose p r o p e r t i e s and • c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s can on ly be i n f e r r e d from v a r i o u s k i n d s ' o f e v i d e n c e . 8. Pr imary emotions can be c o n c e p t u a l i z e d in terms of p a i r s of p o l a r o p p o s i t e s . 9. A l l emotions vary in t h e i r degree of s i m i l a r i t y to one ano ther . 10. Each emotion can e x i s t i n v a r y i n g degrees of i n t e n s i t y or l e v e l s of a r o u s a l ( P l u t c h i k , 1980a, p.8) . P l u t c h i k ' s e i g h t h p o s t u l a t e p l a c e s emotions on a dichotomous cont inuum. He emphasizes t h i s view by say ing "we know that joy i s the oppo s i t e of sadness, tha t hate i s the o p p o s i t e of l o v e " (1980b, p .75 ) . Many author s from v a r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e s who are proponents of the concept of synerg ism ( B a r t e l l , 1977; B e n e d i c t , 1934; C o u l t e r , 1976; Huber, Robinson & Huber, 1978; Maslow, 1971; Maslow & Honigmann, 1970) b e l i e v e r a the r in the e s s e n t i a l u n i t y of seeming paradoxes . P l u t c h i k ' s wheel a l s o does not a l l ow fo r a p o t e n t i a l 10 approx imat ion of o therwi se p o l a r i z e d emot ions . T h i s r e sea r che r i s e x p l o r i n g a more comprehensive concep tua l model. It i n c o r p o r a t e s a mathemat i ca l l y more exact s p h e r i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n segmented i n t o movable t e t r a h e d r a l components to a l low f o r , among other t h i n g s : approx imat ing any emot ion(s ) wi th any o t h e r ( s ) ; and f o r such s u b s t a n t i v e and r e c u r r i n g t r i a d i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s as , f o r example, the one posed by Bower (1981) in h i s • p r e l i m i n a r y e m p i r i c a l e f f o r t to r e l a t e c o g n i t i v e p roces se s to emot ion. Bower (1981) c l a i m s three such se t s i n c l u d i n g a s s o c i a t i v e p r o c e s s e s , i n t e r p r e t i v e p roces ses and s a l i e n c e of mood-congruous m a t e r i a l . It i s noteworthy that the l a t t e r two of these three se t s have three s u b s e t s , aga in i n d i c a t i n g the c o n c e p t u a l f a c i l i t y d e r i v e d by the t r i a d i c v e r t e x e s and p lanes of the t e t r a h e d r o n . The combinat ion of ma themat i ca l l y t rue sphere and component t e t r ahed ron s i s a very u s e f u l c o n c e p t u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . It l ends i t s e l f to both e m p i r i c a l and phenomenolog ica l r e s e a r c h . The use of mathemat ica l t h i n k i n g in c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n i s e x p l a i n e d and suppor ted by Nasru (1980) and F u l l e r (1975). Nasru i n c o r p o r a t e s Taoism and a s p h e r i c a l (as ver ses c i r c u l a r ) Yang-Ying movement i n t o her model f o r a s y n e r g i s t i c view of man and the u n i v e r s e . F u l l e r e x p l a i n s the use of spheres packed w i th t e t r ahedrons (or o ther t r i a n g u l a r geodes ie s ) in model c o n s t r u c t i o n that s t r i v e s f o r under s tand ing the behav iour of whole systems. 11 P l u t c h i k ' s (1980a) theory a l s o d i f f e r s from o t h e r s , such as Izar d ' s (1971) and Sa t r e ' s (1948), in p o s t u l a t i n g that emotion presupposes c o g n i t i o n . Izard's (1971) theory, i n c o n t r a s t , i n c o r p o r a t e s the not i o n of the r e l a t i o n between emotion and c o g n i t i o n , as one of separate but i n t e r a c t i n g subsystems. He c l e a r l y and repeat e d l y emphasizes t h e i r usual harmonious (as versus c o n s e c u t i v e ) i n t e r a c t i v e nature but a l s o c l a i m s that emotion can occur as "a process in cons c i o u s n e s s , completely independent of c o g n i t i o n " ( I z a r d , 1971, p.1850. By suggesting at l e a s t . t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of independent emotional phenomena he give s emotion more s t a t u s than P l u t c h i k who equates emotion with response. The c e n t r a l conceptual divergence of the two t h e o r i e s i s thus emphasized by Izard's c l a i m that emotions " i n t e r a c t " (p.155) r a t h e r than mix l i k e c o l o r s . I z a r d ' s c r i t i q u e of P l u t c h i k ' s p o s t u l a t e s i s ext e n s i v e and r a i s e s many que s t i o n s e s p e c i a l l y regarding i s s u e s of c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n . His own theory views emotions "not only as the p r i n c i p a l m o t i v a t i o n a l system but even more fundamentally as the p e r s o n a l i t y processes which give meaning and s i g n i f i c a n c e to human e x i s t e n c e " (p.183). He cla i m s that emotions have n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l , neuromuscular and phenomenological a s p e c t s . I z a r d (1971) p o s t u l a t e s nine fundamental emotions ( i n t e r e s t , enjoyment, s u r p r i s e , d i s t r e s s , d i s g u s t , anger, 1 2 shame, fea r and contempt) which are subserved by innate mechanisms. He c l a r i f i e s tha t h i s p o s t u l a t e d n ine i s not a f i x e d number and assumes " t h a t some emotions may become v e s t i g i a l and d i sappear and that new ones may e v o l v e " (p .234) . Each emotion has unique phenomenolog ica l and m o t i v a t i o n a l p r o p e r t i e s . One might a c t i v a t e , a t tenua te or amp l i f y ano the r . He q u a l i f i e s the idea of p o s i t i v e and nega t i ve emotions no t i n g r a t h e r tha t "some emotions tend to l ead to p s y c h o l o g i c a l ent ropy w h i l e . o t h e r s tend to f a c i l i t a t e c o n s t r u c t i v e behav iour or the converse of en t ropy " ( I z a r d , 1971, p .182) . I z a rd (1971) suggests tha t p e r s o n a l i t y i s a complex of f i v e subsystems: homeos ta t i c , d r i v e , emot ion, c o g n i t i o n and motor. The l a s t t h r e e , i n c l u d i n g emot ion, are the most important and form the b a s i s f o r un ique l y human behav i ou r . Harmonious i n t e r a c t i o n of these three subsystems leads to e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o u r s . When subsystem i n t e r a c t i o n breaks down or becomes f a u l t y i n e f f e c t i v e behav iour s even tua te . Another of h i s p r i n c i p a l assumptions i s that separa te and d i s c r e t e emotions e x i s t . T h e r e f o r e , compounded emotions such as j e a l o u s y are something more than the summation of more fundamental emot ions . A comprehensive under s tand ing of I z a r d ' s (1971) theory r e q u i r e s a more i n - d e p t h e x p l o r a t i o n of h i s t ex t than i s necessary f o r purposes of t h i s rev iew. However, the c l a r i t y of h i s c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n , h i s ' open - sy s tem ' t h i n k i n g , and 13 r e l a t i v e to others d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n , the g r e a t e r a p p l i c a b i l i t y of h i s theory to humans i s made apparent i n the f o l l o w i n g of h i s c l a i m s : 1. Emotion elements of p e r s o n a l i t y [are r e f e r r e d to] as a system s i n c e , on the b a s i s of both innate and l e a r n e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , emotions are i n t e r r e l a t e d i n dynamic and r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e ways. L a r g e l y because of the nature of the u n d e r l y i n g innate mechanisms, some of the emotions are organized i n a kind of h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p .... A novel sound might e l i c i t the i n t e r e s t of an i n f a n t or c h i l d . If i n i t s f i r s t p r e s e n t a t i o n the strange sound were q u i t e loud i t might e l i c i t f e a r . If the sound were extremely loud and sudden i t might evoke s t a r t l e .... 2. The concept of p o l a r o p p o s i t e s should not be c o n s i d e r e d as d e f i n i n g i n f l e x i b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between emotions, and the apparent o p p o s i t i o n does, not always denote an e i t h e r / o r r e l a t i o n s h i p . Often o p p o s i t e s tend to be a s s o c i a t e d with or e l i c i t e d by each other, as evidenced by the o f t e n observed " t e a r s of j o y " . 3. C e r t a i n emotions other than the p a i r s of p o l a r o p p o s i t e s tend to have f a i r l y r e g u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s , at l e a s t under c e r t a i n circumstances. I n t e r e s t may o s c i l l a t e with fear as the organism explores some unknown o b j e c t or s i t u a t i o n .... 4. Two or more fundamental emotions o c c u r r i n g s i m u l taneously or a l t e r n a t e l y with some r e g u l a r i t y produce a combination of emotions which may take on the q u a l i t y of a t r a i t or p e r s o n a l i t y p a t t e r n . The combination of only some of the components of two or more fundamental emotions produces mixed emotion, which may r e s u l t i n ambiguous, ambivalent, or c o n f l i c t i v e f e e l i n g s . . . . 5. A l l emotions have c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n common. A l l emotions, as c o n t r a s t e d with d r i v e s , are non- c y c l i c a l . One does not become i n t e r e s t e d or d i s g u s t e d or ashamed two or three times a day i n rhythm with i n g e s t i o n , d i g e s t i o n , and metabolic p r o c e s s e s . 6. Emotions have v i r t u a l l y u n l i m i t e d g e n e r a l i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y as m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s . While only food and d r i n k w i l l s a t i s f y the hunger and t h i r s t 14 d r i v e s , a person can l e a r n to be j o y f u l or contemptuous or a f r a i d i n response to a seemingly i n f i n i t e v a r i e t y of t h i n g s . 7. A l l emotions i n f l u e n c e or r e g u l a t e the d r i v e s and other p e r s o n a l i t y subsystems. ' One of the important and frequent f u n c t i o n s of emotion i s to r e g u l a t e , to act as a m p l i f i e r or a t t e n u a t o r i n the m o t i v a t i o n a l system complex. For example, d r i v e s which are not reduced to a l e v e l w i t h i n the t o l e r a n c e l i m i t s of the organism tend to i n s t i g a t e and r e c r u i t emotions, which i n turn a m p l i f y the d r i v e . The emotion of i n t e r e s t - e x c i t e m e n t may b r i n g the sex d r i v e to high p i t c h ; the emotions of d i s g u s t , f e a r , or d i s t r e s s may modulate, mask, reduce, or completely i n h i b i t the sex d r i v e ( I z a r d , 1971, pp.185-187). Solomon (1976) acknowledges Satre as h i s most i n f l u e n t i a l mentor. U n l i k e Satre however, he denies the myth of the passions which c l a i m s that deep down we are a l l the same i n terms of emotions. He r e f u t e s the t r a d i t i o n a l emotional metaphors (eg. being "struck by j e a l o u s y " or "haunted by g u i l t " ) , c l a i m i n g they separate us from our emotions and suggest our emotions are something we should e l i m i n a t e or deal with i n the l e a s t dangerous way. He b e l i e v e s our emotions are something we "do" and says: An emotion i s a (set of) judgement(s) which c o n s t i t u t e our world, our s u r r e a l i t y , and i t s ' i n t e n t i o n a l o b j e c t s ' . An emotion i s a b a s i c judgement about o u r s e l v e s and our p l a c e i n our world, the p r o j e c t i o n of the values and i d e a l s , s t r u c t u r e s and mythologies, a c c o r d i n g to which we l i v e and through which we experience our l i v e s (Solomon, 1976, pp.186-187). Solomon (1976) e x p l a i n s that an i n c i d e n t or p e r c e p t i o n of i t must always i n v o l v e a p e r s o n a l e v a l u a t i o n of s i g n i f i c a n c e i n order that i t be s u f f i c i e n t f o r emotion. Otherwise we would not be able to account f o r the f a c t that 15 d i f f e r e n t people have very d i f f e r e n t emotional r e a c t i o n s to the same i n c i d e n t s . The f e e l i n g theory of emotion i s a negative one acc o r d i n g to Solomon (1976). F e e l i n g s , he p r o f e s s e s , may be s p e c i f i c to the s i t u a t i o n and not the emotion. Hence we can have a l l the f e e l i n g s and not the emotion or we can have the emotion and none of the usual accompanying f e e l i n g s . He d e s c r i b e s the problem with t h i s theory as being a poor choice of paradigm. I t r e s u l t s i n our t y p i c a l use of emergencies or extremes when g i v i n g examples of emotion, and' in our mistaken- b e l i e f s that these f e e l i n g s and se n s a t i o n s are the emotion. He b e l i e v e s f e e l i n g s are much the same i n every i n s t a n c e of d i f f e r e n t emotion. The concept of f e e l i n g , a c c o r d i n g to him, has too many d i f f e r e n t uses to be d e f i n i t i o n a l of s p e c i f i c emotion. He says " f e e l i n g i s the ornamentation of emotion, not i t s essence" (Solomon, 1976, p.159). Solomon suggests we make our emotions, are taught how to make them by our c u l t u r e at a very e a r l y age, and h o l d each other r e s p o n s i b l e f o r them. They are not simply judgements of f a c t i n the usual sense but i n the sense that we make something true by v i r t u e of the judgement i t s e l f . They are a c t i v e , spontaneous but n o n - r e f l e c t i v e judgements. It may seem l i k e our emotions "happen" to us and we do not n e c e s s a r i l y remember making them because they are not always e x p l i c i t , a r t i c u l a t e d , or d e l i b e r a t e d . However, he says 16 "emotions can become r e f l e c t i v e , aware of themselves, t h e i r purposes and t h e i r o b j e c t s " (Solomon, 1976, p.192). An emotion then, a c c o r d i n g to Solomon, i n c l u d e s a whole s e r i e s of judgements about our s e l f and our s e l f - e s t e e m . We must be s e l f - i n v o l v e d to be emotional. When we " f a l l i n lo v e " we make a d e c i s i o n to make someone p a r t i c u l a r l y important to us. When we become angry we have judged and j u r i e d that someone has offended us, that we should take i t p e r s o n a l l y and that they are the g u i l t y p a r t y . In anger we ca s t a set of judgements about the world and we act out the r o l e ( s ) we have c a s t . Our posture re p r e s e n t s the a c c u s a t i o n a l , c o u r t prosecutor r o l e we are p l a y i n g . We make ou r s e l v e s out as s u p e r i o r and s e l f - r i g h t e o u s , hence the jaw set , the tense and forward stand. "The u l t i m a t e o b j e c t ... i s always our own sense of d i g n i t y and s e l f - e s t e e m " (Solomon, 1976, p.190). When emotions are "about" another person he says they c o n s t i t u t e "a r e l a t i o n s h i p of one s o r t or another, perhaps competition or comparison, w i t h i n which one attempts to e l e v a t e h i s s e l f - e s t e e m " (Solomon, 1976, p. 1 90) . Solomon (1976) a l s o speaks of " b i - p o l a r " (p.189) emotions. J e a l o u s y , anger, hate and love are b i - p o l a r because they are not s o l e l y about o n e s e l f , not s o l e l y about the other person and not a c o n j u n c t i o n of the two. They are about the r e l a t i o n s h i p . In Solomon's (1976) view emotions are l o g i c a l , 17 d e s c r i b a b l e and e x p l a i n a b l e , not a n i m a l i s t i c and u n c o n t r o l l a b l e . They are "our most trustworthy and r a t i o n a l instruments of s e l f - e s t e e m " (p.252). They are judgements about our present s i t u a t i o n , our past, other people-and most imp o r t a n t l y , they: i n c l u d e i n t e n t i o n s f o r the f u t u r e , to a c t , to change the world and change our s e l v e s , to revenge o u r s e l v e s in anger, ... to ca r e s s and care f o r another i n l o v e , to d e s t r o y - but at a safe d i s t a n c e - an oppressor i n resentment (Solomon, 1976, p.276). The o r i e s of emotion are many and d i f f e r e n t . . Only a few major contemporary t h e o r i s t s have been presented i n order to provide a broader context f o r j e a l o u s y and to make apparent the divergence i n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s . T h i s means we need to remain open and e x p l o r a t o r y at the l e v e l of examining any p a r t i c u l a r emotion. The remainder of t h i s s e c t i o n w i l l draw together and c r i t i q u e some s p e c i f i c s about j e a l o u s y from the t h e o r i e s d i s c u s s e d above. Nei t h e r P l u t c h i k (1962, 1980a, 1980b) nor Iz a r d (1971) d i s c u s s j e a l o u s y s e p a r a t e l y , but i t i s p o s s i b l e to e x t r a p o l a t e from the main p r i n c i p l e s of t h e i r t h e o r i e s . P l u t c h i k (1962, 1980a, 1980b) i m p l i e s that j e a l o u s y i s a mixed emotion, a d e r i v a t i v e or combined form of (some or p o s s i b l y a l l ) of h i s e i g h t primary emotions. The s t r u c t u r e of h i s conceptual model suggests that j e a l o u s y has a p o l a r o p p o s i t e , another mixed, compounded emotion, but h i s d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s p o l a r i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s a p p l i e d only to h i s e i g h t primary emotions. His second p o s t u l a t e i m p l i e s 18 that j e a l o u s y , even i f not c l e a r l y evident i n f a m i l i a r e x p r e s s i v e forms, i s p o t e n t i a l l y i d e n t i f i a b l e by c e r t a i n common elements or prototype p a t t e r n s i n a l l humans and animals. L i k e a l l other emotions, i t has an e v o l u t i o n a r y h i s t o r y , serves an adaptive r o l e i n h e l p i n g the organism d e a l with key s u r v i v a l i s s u e s and has evolved v a r i o u s forms of e x p r e s s i o n i n d i f f e r e n t s p e c i e s . Jealousy i s , a c c o r d i n g to him, a h y p o t h e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t whose p r o p e r t i e s can only be i n f e r r e d . Observing that some c u l t u r e s do not' l a b e l t h e i r inner mood s t a t e s and that western c u l t u r e s are more l i k e l y than others to include, p s y c h o l o g i c a l components i n t h e i r d e s c r i p t i o n s of emotions, he says "the absence of a word f o r an emotion does not mean that the emotion does not e x i s t i n the s o c i e t y i n q u e s t i o n " ( P l u t c h i k , 1980a, p.5). His theory f u r t h e r i m p l i e s that j e a l o u s y e x i s t s in v a r y i n g degrees of i n t e n s i t y or l e v e l s of a r o u s a l . I z a r d (1971), w i s e l y a w a i t i n g more s u b s t a n t i v e evidence, h e s i t a t e s to extend the p s y c h o e v o l u t i o n a r y sources and dynamics of emotions to a l l s p e c i e s , as does P l u t c h i k . He concludes, that f o r humans at l e a s t , "the fundamental emotions are innate, u n i v e r s a l phenomena" (p.410). He i s not as convinced as P l u t c h i k that emotions (other than h i s fundamental nine) e x i s t i n a l l c u l t u r e s , or at l e a s t not i n the same sense that we attempt to o b j e c t i v e l y d e s c r i b e them in western s o c i e t i e s . He would agree, i t seems, to some 19 common phenomenological aspect of the j e a l o u s y experience i n a l l c u l t u r e s and, on a more o b j e c t i v e l e v e l , to some more or l e s s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d r e c o g n i t i o n and exp r e s s i o n of t h i s s u b j e c t i v e experience depending on the p h y s i c a l and s o c i a l environment. Jealousy, by i n f e r e n c e of Izar d ' s (1971) theory, i s a d i s c r e t e and separate emotion, something more than a combination of fundamental emotions. I t i n f l u e n c e s some or other drives, and has some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n common with a l l other emotions. I t i s part of an organized "emotion" subsystem of p e r s o n a l i t y that i n f l u e n c e s and i s i n f l u e n c e d by four other subsystems and by the system as a whole. I t has n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l , neuromuscular and phenomenological a s p e c t s . Most imp o r t a n t l y , i t has some m o t i v a t i o n a l b a s i s g i v i n g meaning and s i g n i f i c a n c e to the i n d i v i d u a l ' s e x i s t e n c e . Solomon (1976) d e a l s more s p e c i f i c a l l y with j e a l o u s y than e i t h e r P l u t c h i k or I z a r d . He observes that j e a l o u s y i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to anger and ha t r e d . He compares i t with envy, s a y i n g : Jealousy shares envy's 'green-eyed monster' s t a t u s .... There are d i f f e r e n c e s however; j e a l o u s y , u n l i k e envy, sees i t s e l f as the equal of the ot h e r . Where envy glowers q u i e t l y and i n e f f e c t i v e l y - even un n o t i c e a b l y - from a d i s t a n c e , j e a l o u s y i s w i l l i n g and even anxious f o r a c o n f r o n t a t i o n .... U n l i k e envy, j e a l o u s y wants the other to face i t s f a b l e d green eye. Moreover, j e a l o u s y i s u s u a l l y c o n f i n e d to a s i n g l e p o s s e s s i o n or i n c i d e n t ; envy o f t e n i n c l u d e s major aspects or even the e n t i r e l i f e s t y l e of i t s d i s t a n t o b j e c t (Solomon, 1976, p.333). 20 J e a l o u s y , Solomon (1976) c l a i m s , i s a b i - p o l a r emotion i n v o l v i n g c o m p e t i t i o n and s t a t u s . I t s scope or focus i s "a p a r t i c u l a r i n c i d e n t or s e r i e s of i n c i d e n t s " (p.333); i t s o b j e c t i s "another person's c o m p e t i t i v e g a i n " (p.334); i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e l y i t i s " c o n f r o n t a t i o n a l and d e f e n s i v e " (p.334); and the mythology i n v o l v e d i s one of "you've taken what r i g h t f u l l y belongs to me" (p.334). J e a l o u s y : looks to the other as r e s p o n s i b l e f o r one's own d e p r i v a t i o n . But l i k e envy, r i g h t [my emphasis] i s more important than the q u e s t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ; i n j e a l o u s y , one seems himself as having a r i g h t to the coveted o b j e c t - at l e a s t as much r i g h t as the other (Solomon, 1976, p.334). J e a l o u s y ' s d e s i r e i s "to get i t back" (p.334). I t s s t r a t e g y i s one of " p l a c i n g one's stamp on the t h i n g s of the e a r t h " (p.334). Solomon (1976) c l a i m s f u r t h e r that people not uncommonly become j e a l o u s over p o s s e s s i o n s , i n c l u d i n g human pos s e s s i o n s , about which they have l i t t l e or no concern. Solomon a p p l i e s h i s theory of emotions n e g a t i v e l y to j e a l o u s y . He d i s c u s s e s r i g h t s without d i s c u s s i n g freedom, committment, or p r i v i l e g e . T h i s i s convenient, but not p r a c t i c a l or a p p l i c a b l e , e s p e c i a l l y when a c o u n s e l l o r i s faced by the r e l a t i v e l y common case of a woman, s u c k l i n g babe i n arms, who i s threatened by her mate's involvement with another woman. It seems q u i t e a c c e p t a b l e to c o n s i d e r , as does Solomon fo r other emotions, that j e a l o u s y w i l l i n some cases occur as a spontaneous, n o n - r e f l e c t i v e judgement. However, i n 21 d i s c u s s i n g j e a l o u s y as a p a r t i c u l a r emotion Solomon f o r g e t s h i s e a r l i e r c l aims that emotions are i n t e n t i o n s to act and judgements about the past and f u t u r e ( h i s c o n t e x t , i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , i n c l u d e s p r i m a r i l y the p r e s e n t ) . He a l s o seems to fo r g e t h i s fundamental c l a i m that emotions are "our most trustworthy and r a t i o n a l instruments of s e l f - e s t e e m " (Solomon, 1976, p.252). N e g l e c t i n g these p e r s p e c t i v e s ft r e s u l t s i n h i s negative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Solomon sees j e a l o u s y as o c c u r r i n g a f t e r the l o s s as evidenced by h i s statement about j e a l o u s y ' s d e s i r e . . Mb'st other authors (e.g., Cbnstantine, 1976; F o s t e r , 1972; White, 1976, 1980, 1981a) view j e a l o u s y as a fear of l o s s experienced when the t h r e a t i s imminent, apparent or imagined and i t i s thus a s s o c i a t e d with a "yet to happen". C e r t a i n l y the j e a l o u s y judgement w i l l be a moral one and i t w i l l speak to our p e r c e i v e d s t a t u s or pl a c e i n the world as i s suggested by Solomon's general d i s c u s s i o n of emotions. Our j e a l o u s y does say something about the way we see the other person and the r e l a t i o n s h i p , but not n e c e s s a r i l y that we view e i t h e r as o b j e c t s , as he seems to i n d i c a t e when a p p l y i n g h i s general theory to j e a l o u s y . For many reasons, i n c l u d i n g that the fear of l o s s n e c e s s a r i l y occurs before the l o s s , j e a l o u s y may j u s t as l i k e l y be d i r e c t e d toward what the other person p r o v i d e s and r e c e i v e s ( f o r example, those e s s e n t i a l , but a b s t r a c t and 'non-object' q u a l i t i e s such as lov e and intimacy, which we a l l need to give as w e l l 22 as r e c e i v e , keep or p r o t e c t ) . We want to "get them back" only a f t e r we l o s e them and i f our l o s s i n v o l v e s a t h i r d p a r t y ' s gain i t seems more l o g i c a l t h a t , a f t e r the l o s s , we would experience envy d i r e c t e d at the new possessor r a t h e r than j e a l o u s y . The " j e a l o u s woman" in the above example might then fear l o s s , f o r h e r s e l f and her i n f a n t , of a s p e c i a l and unique environment (both p h y s i c a l and•meta-physical). Her l o s s has not yet o c c u r r e d and her fear may transcend Solomon's (1976) p e r s p e c t i v e of her as "wanting to get i t back" or " p l a c i n g a stamp on the t h i n g s of the e a r t h " (p.234). I t may make sense to her that the r e l a t i o n s h i p can be s t o l e n but her moral judgements ( i n t h i s s o c i e t y ) would l i k e l y i n c l u d e that she i s being cheated. A committment that r e s u l t e d i n her p h y s i o l o g i c a l bondage (because of the s u c k l i n g i n f a n t ) i s being broken- Rights a s i d e , she does not have the same p r i v i l e g e s or freedoms as her " d e l i n q u e n t " mate. Solomon (1976) a l s o claims j e a l o u s y ' s d i s t a n c e i s "not i n t i m a t e , not impersonal" '(p.234). T h i s may be so in. the instance of the j e a l o u s person who withdraws or denies but c e r t a i n l y not i n t h e . i n s t a n c e of the person who antagonizes, r e d e f i n e s or r e s o l u t i o n - s e e k s w i t h i n the j e a l o u s y t r i a n g l e or s i t u a t i o n . These four d i f f e r e n t types of j e a l o u s y behaviour, proposed by Constantine (1976, p.388), make c l e a r that j e a l o u s y i s f r e q u e n t l y intimate and always i n v o l v e s 23 fear of l o s s . The l a s t three are a c t i v e e f f o r t s to p r o t e c t the p a i r bond and are s e q u e n t i a l l y more i n t i m a t e . The f i r s t , j e a l o u s withdrawal, i s the only one that f i t s Solomon's c l a i m about j e a l o u s y ' s d i s t a n c e . In summary, t h i s s e c t i o n has presented, d i s c u s s e d and c r i t i q u e d three major t h e o r i e s of emotion g i v i n g j e a l o u s y a place w i t h i n each. I t has made apparent t h e i r conceptual divergence, p o i n t i n g to a need to remain d e s c r i p t i v e and i n search of phenomenological i n s i g h t s . Chapter two i s d i v i d e d i n t o four major s e c t i o n s and a summary. T h e / f i r s t s e c t i o n examins comparisons of j e a l o u s y and envy. The next three s e c t i o n s present and c r i t i q u e s e l e c t e d l i t e r a t u r e from anthropology and s o c i o l o g y , p s y c h i a t r y , and psychology. Chapter three p r e s e n t s the e m p i r i c a l phase of the study. A f t e r p r e s e n t a t i o n of the methodology, d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s are presented f o r the o b j e c t i v e data that were c o l l e c t e d by the survey. P r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d and some hypotheses f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h w i l l be presented. Chapter four w i l l d i s c u s s the s u b j e c t i v e data c o l l e c t e d i n the j e a l o u s y survey. I t w i l l use examples from the appendices which present, completely and verbatim, the i n s i g h t s , d e f i n i t i o n s and e x p e r i e n t i a l d e s c r i p t i o n s of seventy-three people. The researcher w i l l a l s o present a few p e r s o n a l i n s i g h t s gained d u r i n g the re s e a r c h p r o c e s s . Again, suggestions f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h w i l l be made. Chapter f i v e w i l l d i s c u s s i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s study for c o u n s e l l i n g . A few s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s w i l l be suggested. 25 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Th i s chapter i s d i v i d e d i n t o four major s e c t i o n s which were o u t l i n e d on the pr e v i o u s page. The t e x t i s ex t e n s i v e because i n a d d i t i o n to the usual background f o r e m p i r i c a l research, i t prepares the reader f o r the l a t e r phenomenology by o f f e r i n g an in-depth examination of m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y theory and p r a c t i c e . J e a l o u s y and Envy Jea l o u s y and envy are f r e q u e n t l y confused i n s p i t e of t h e i r d i s t i n c t h e r i t a g e s . The lack of c l a r i t y i s o f t e n semantic assuming, as t h i s study does, a consensual awareness of our s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e s . Semantic and conceptual c l a r i t y are important to the c o u n s e l l o r who uses v e r b a l communication to c l a r i f y a m b i g u i t i e s . F o s t e r ' s (1972) "Anatomy of Envy" summarizes s e v e r a l d i s t i n c t i o n s between j e a l o u s y and envy. D i s c u s s i n g t h e i r o r i g i n s he says "although s e m a n t i c a l l y r e l a t e d , they r e f e r to d i s t i n c t aspects of what may be c a l l e d a s o c i a l (and emotional) s t a t e , a r t or emotion" (p.167). The Oxford E n g l i s h D i c t i o n a r y (1933) g i v e s a s i n g l e root f o r the a d j e c t i v e ' j e a l o u s ' and the noun 'jealousy' 26 through the L a t i n z e l o s back to the Greek ^ 7 j X o s . Greek and L a t i n meanings f o r the a d j e c t i v e i n c l u d e ' j e a l o u s y ' , 'emulation' and ' z e a l ' (p.562). Webster (1976) d e f i n e s ' j e a l o u s y ' the noun as " 1 a j e a l o u s d i s p o s i t i o n or s t a t e : a j e a l o u s nature, a t t i t u d e or f e e l i n g : h o s t i l e r i v a l r y : s u s p i c i o n , m i s t r u s t 2 z e a l o u s v i g i l a n c e " (p.1212). The verb "to be j e a l o u s " i s d e f i n e d i n the same source as: 1 i n t o l e r a n t of r i v a l r y or u n f a i t h f u l n e s s ; disposed to suspect r i v a l r y or u n f a i t h f u l n e s s (as i n l o v e ) : apprehensive of the l o s s of another's d e v o t i o n : h o s t i l e toward a r i v a l or one b e l i e v e d to enjoy an advantage (as a posession or a t t a i n m e n t ) : envious, r e s e n t f u l ; 2 z e a l o u s i n guarding (as a p o s e s s i o n ) : v i g i l a n t : s o l i c i t o u s ; 3 d i s t r u s t f u l l y w a t c h f u l ; apprehensive of harm or f r a u d : s u s p i c i o u s (p.1212). Greek' and L a t i n forms f o r "envy" and "envious", on the other hand, are d i s t i n c t . The contemporary E n g l i s h noun "envy" stems from the L a t i n " i n v i d i a " which i s r e l a t e d to a verb form " i n v i d e r e " meaning "to look askance a t , to look m a l i c i o u s l y upon, to c a s t a an e v i l eye upon" ( F o s t e r , 1972, p.167). Webster's T h i r d New I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i c t i o n a r y (1976) d e f i n e s the same verb "to envy" as "to f e e l envy toward or on account o f : be p a i n f u l l y aware or r e s e n t f u l l y aware of the advantage of (another) with a d e s i r e to possess the same advantage" (p.760). F o s t e r (1972), l o o k i n g to Oxford's (1933) o b s o l e t e meanings, "to f e e l a grudge a g a i n s t a person; to regard a 27 person or a c t i o n w i th d e s i r e or d i s a p p r o v a l " (p .562) , observed e n v y ' s a gg re s s i ve p o t e n t i a l . Most s i g n i f i c a n t l y , Fo s te r b e l i e v e s envy i n v o l v e s a d e s i r e to a t t a i n or a c q u i r e and i s t a r g e t e d at the pe r son , not t h e i r p o s s e s s i o n , which i s the t r i g g e r . C o n v e r s e l y , j e a l o u s y i s d i r e c t e d at the va lued po s se s s i on and the s u b j e c t f e a r s i t s l o s s . He conc ludes tha t j e a l o u s y i s " the normal c o u n t e r p a r t of envy, something that i s t r i g g e r e d when the env ied p e r c e i v e s , or becomes consc i ou s of the envy and views i t as a s i g n i f i c a n t t h r e a t " ( F o s t e r , 1972, p .168) . Neu (1980),. in c o n t r a s t , sees d e s i r e as c e n t r a l to both envy and j e a l o u s y . He says : What i s s p e c i a l about the f ea r of l o s s tha t c o n s t i t u t e s j e a l o u s y i s connected with what i s s p e c i a l about p e o p l e : whi le one c o u l d l o s e po s se s s i on of a t h i n g , one c o u l d not l o se i t s a f f e c t i o n — i t has no a f f e c t i o n to g i ve or to be taken away. Th ings do not respond to our f e e l i n g s . People do. And when they do, we may fea r t h e i r l o s s , not j u s t as t h i n g s (as o b j e c t s of d e s i r e and l o v e ) , but as f e e l i n g agents (as sources of d e s i r e and l o v e ) . At the c e n t r e of j e a l o u s y i s i n s e c u r i t y , f ea r of l o s s , s p e c i f i c a l l y f ea r of a l i e n a t i o n of a f f e c t i o n s . . . . the d e s i r e [my emphasis] to be d e s i r e d or the d e s i r e f o r a f f e c t i o n , the need to be l oved (Neu, 1980, p .433) . Neu (1980) d i s t i n g u i s h e s between m a l i c i o u s envy, when the person wants to lower the o ther to h i s own l e v e l and admi r ing envy, when one seeks to r a i s e o n e s e l f to be l i k e the o t h e r . He c l a i m s they have d i f f e r e n t i n s t i n c t u a l sources and deve lopmenta l pa th s . M a l i c i o u s envy, he d e c i d e s , i s u n l i k e e i t h e r j e a l o u s y or admi r ing envy because i t i s o f t e n without a p p r o p r i a t e o b j e c t s . " I t s occur rence 28 may always i n v o l v e pathology" (Neu 1980, p.434). Neu p e r c e i v e s broad contexts f o r j e a l o u s y and envy i n c o n t r a s t to F o s t e r who l o s e s s i g h t of man's complexity, the s i t u a t i o n a l complexity and the complexity of the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o g n i t i o n and emotion. I t i s too s i m p l i s t i c to imagine a poignant j e a l o u s y experience l a c k i n g d e s i r e . K l e i n (1957) i s s i m i l a r to Fo s t e r (1972) i n some of her d i s t i n c t i o n s . She too sees an a g g r e s s i v e , angry aspect of envy and a pa s s i v e aspect of j e a l o u s y . She says " j e a l o u s y i s based on envy" (p.6), but l a t e r p l a c e s them on opposite p o l e s of a continuum. She sees j e a l o u s y as noble when i t i s emulation sharpened by f e a r , but ignoble when i t i s greediness s t i m u l a t e d by f e a r . She does not apply t h i s p o l a r i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c to envy, which she cl a i m s i s "always a base p a s s i o n , drawing the worst pa s s i o n s i n i t s t r a i n " (p.8). According to her, j e a l o u s y i s p o t e n t i a l l y s a t i a b l e but envy i s always i n s a t i a b l e . L i k e R i v i e r e (1932) she b e l i e v e s both emotions have to do with f r u s t r a t i o n of e a r l y o b j e c t - r e l a t i o n s . Competition at i t s most b a s i c l e v e l , as the s t r u g g l e between l i f e and death i n s t i n c t s , u n d e r l i e s K l e i n ' s t h e s i s f o r envy and j e a l o u s y . Scheock (1969) p a r a l l e l s F o s t e r ( l 9 7 2 ) and K l e i n (1957) i n p r o f e s s i n g j e a l o u s y to be l e s s a g g r e s s i v e , more p a s s i v e and l e s s problematic than envy. He b e l i e v e s the envious person knows e x a c t l y what provokes him; that envy i s 29 occa s s i oned by i l l - w i l l and m o r t i f i c a t i o n and i s accompanied by con temp la t i on of s u p e r i o r advantages. Envy " i s a d i r e c t e d emot ion; without a t a r g e t , wi thout a v i c t i m , i t cannot o c c u r " (Schoeck,1969, p . 7 ) . In c o n t r a s t wi th F o s t e r and K l e i n , he b e l i e v e s the j e a l o u s person i s o f t e n in doubt as to the nature of h i s a n t a g o n i s t and i s never a spontaneous pr imary aggressor — h o s t i l e behav io r o c c u r r i n g on ly when a r i v a l appears on the scene. The r e s e a r c h e r assumes, on the b a s i s of her review and c r i t i q u e , . t h a t j e a l o u s y and envy are d i s c r e t e , but r e l a t e d emot ions . They have evo l ved to meet d i f f e r e n t and changing human needs. Each has the p o t e n t i a l to be adap t i ve and/or ma ladapt ive and to have nega t i ve and/or p o s i t i v e consequences depending on a m u l t i t u d e of f a c t o r s , e s p e c i a l l y the s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t s in which they o c c u r . The remainder of t h i s chapter takes a c l o s e r look at the l i t e r a t u r e on j ea l ou sy b e f o r e examining the o b j e c t i v e and e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts of the s u b j e c t s who p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h i s s tudy . The s e c t i o n to f o l l ow samples the l i t e r a t u r e from anthropo logy and s o c i o l o g y , p r e s e n t i n g and c r i t i q u i n g the c o n t r i b u t i o n s of four major t h e o r i s t s . The f i r s t th ree (Dav i s , 1936; Mead, 1931; and B e n e d i c t , 1934) are e a r l y t h e o r i s t s . I t took s e v e r a l decades be fore t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s about j e a l o u s y were n o t i c e d by the d i s c i p l i n e s of p s y c h i a t r y and p sycho logy . The f o u r t h t h e o r i s t ( F i s h e r , 1982) i s very contemporary and adds a new d imens ion to 30 a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l and other p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y . P e r s p e c t i v e s from Anthropology And S o c i o l o g y The importance of i n c l u d i n g i n t h i s review a s o c i o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s i s demonstrated by K i n g s l e y Davis' (1936) "Jealousy and Sexual P r o p e r t y " . He c i t e s Descartes in d e f i n i n g the emotion as "a kind of fear r e l a t e d to a d e s i r e to preserve a p o s s e s s i o n " (p.176). Davis observes that sexual property i s d e f i n e d and r e g u l a t e d by s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and of j e a l o u s y he says "not only i s i t normatively c o n t r o l l e d but i t g i v e s s t r e n g t h to the s o c i a l norms as w e l l " (p.192). To promote an understanding of j e a l o u s y ' s s o c i a l f u n c t i o n he underscores i t s i n e v i t a b l e but h i g h l y v a r i a b l e appearance in d i f f e r e n t s o c i e t i e s . In support of t h i s c l a i m about j e a l o u s y ' s u n i v e r s a l i t y he d i s c u s s e s i t s purpose in r e l a t i o n to the p r e s e r v a t i o n of love r e l a t i o n s h i p s . As such he proposes that the community has an i n t e r e s t i n love "not only because f u t u r e generations depend on i t but a l s o because s o c i a l cohesion r e s t s upon the p e a c e f u l d i s t r i b u t i o n of major v a l u e s " (p.187). Davis (1936) acknowledges an inherent p h y s i o l o g i c a l r e a c t i o n aroused by j e a l o u s y but d e s c r i b e s i t as a f u n c t i o n of the sympathetic nervous system that i s g e n e r a l i z a b l e to many other emotions as w e l l . Other than t h i s j e a l o u s f l a s h , which may or may not be e x t e r n a l l y e v i d e n t , he proposes that 31 t h i s emotion i s expressed d i f f e r e n t l y and experienced i n response to d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s i n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s . He says "each c u l t u r e d i s t r i b u t e s the sexual p r o p e r t y of the s o c i e t y and d e f i n e s the c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s i n i t s own way... t h e r e f o r e the co n c r e t e content cannot be regarded as an i n h e r i t e d stimulus to an i n h e r i t e d response" (p.188). For western s o c i e t y , Davis thus views j e a l o u s y -as b o l s t e r i n g the value on monogamy. In other s o c i e t i e s i t l i k e w i s e supports r a t h e r than causes monogamy, polygamy, polyandry or whatever i n s t i t u t i o n p r e v a i l s . He r e f u t e s the p o l a r or c a u s a l p e r s p e c t i v e with h i s b e l i e f that sexual a f f e c t i o n i s a d i s t r i b u t i v e value and he says: to l e t i t go u n d i s t r i b u t e d would i n t r o d u c e anarchy i n t o the.group and de s t r o y the s o c i a l system... The stimulus to j e a l o u s y , moreover, i s not so much a p h y s i c a l s i t u a t i o n as a meaningful one. The same p h y s i c a l a ct w i l l i n one p l a c e denote ownership, i n another p l a c e robbery.... Jealousy does not respond i n h e r e n t l y to any p a r t i c u l a r p h y s i c a l s i t u a t i o n ; i t responds to a l l those s i t u a t i o n s , no matter how d i v e r s e , which s i g n i f y a v i o l a t i o n of the accustomed sexual r i g h t s (Davis, 1936, pp.189-190). To understand Davis' c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y f o r any given s o c i e t y we must have an an awareness o f : t h e i r d i s t i n c t i o n between economic and sexual p r o p e r t y ; t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r processes of co m p e t i t i o n , r i v a l r y and t r e s p a s s ; the type of a t t i t u d e assumed by the i n d i v i d u a l i n r e l a t i o n to p r o p e r t y that i s owned, possessed or i n custody (e.g., whether the value of the pro p e r t y i s based on need, v a n i t y , p r i d e , love or some combination); t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u a l 32 d e f i n i t i o n of d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s i n terms of the r o l e s and the s t a t u s e s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s ; and f i n a l l y , the means, ends and c o n d i t i o n s which i n f l u e n c e a l l of the above. For i n s t a n c e , d i s c u s s i n g some of these parameters f o r western s o c i e t y i n terms of j e a l o u s y ' s f u n c t i o n in i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , Davis says: As a fear r e a c t i o n i n the i n i t i a l stages of r i v a l r y i t i s simply the obverse s i d e of the d e s i r e to win the o b j e c t . The d e s i r e to win being i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y c u l t i v a t e d , the fear of l o s i n g i s unavoidably s t i m u l a t e d a l s o , though i t s e x p r e s s i o n i s p u b l i c l y frowned upon. But a f t e r ownership has been a t t a i n e d , j e a l o u s y i s a fear and rage r e a c t i o n f i t t e d to p r o t e c t , maintain and prolong the i n i t i m a t e a s s o c i a t i o n of love (Davis,.1936, p.183). In c o n c l u s i o n , Davis' view of j e a l o u s y s t r e s s e s i t s maintenance f u n c t i o n f o r i n d i v i d u a l s , dyads, groups and the i n s t i t u t i o n s of the s o c i e t y i n q u e s t i o n . His p e r s p e c t i v e i s n e u t r a l and he notes that "the hasty readiness to p r a i s e or condemn prevents a c l e a r understanding of the r e l a t i o n of j e a l o u s y to the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e " • ( p . 1 8 7 ) . He sees j e a l o u s y ' s i n t e n t i o n as p r o t e c t i v e while n o t i n g i t s tendency to deny the harmony of intimacy because i t admits to a p e r c e i v e d or threatened breach. He says " i t i s d e s t r u c t i v e of i t [ i n t i m a c y ] only i n so f a r as i t muddles i t s own purpose" (p.183). I t w i l l become apparent i n l a t e r s e c t i o n s of t h i s review that Davis' c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y was very broad f o r the times. Although arguments can be posed both f o r and a g a i n s t h i s v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , he acknowledges 33 a need to a l s o study the emotion from a p e r s o n a l i t y p o i n t of view. T h i s i s i n c o n t r a s t to h i s cohorts i n the other d i s c i p l i n e s who l a r g e l y n e g l e c t e d the s o c i o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s he had made a v a i l a b l e . Margaret Mead's (1931) "Jealousy: P r i m i t i v e and C i v i l i z e d " p o r t r a y s how s i t u a t i o n s that are p r o v o c a t i v e of je a l o u s y i n one c u l t u r e are innocuous i n o t h e r s . L i k e so many others who f o l l o w e d her, Mead conceives of j e a l o u s y as a t h r e a t to the se l f - e s t e e m . Without e n t i r e l y d i s c r e d i t i n g i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s she notes that what i s p e r c e i v e d as t h r e a t e n i n g w i l l be determined by the p a r t i c u l a r s o c i o c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g . She says: However v a r i e d the s o c i a l ( s e t t i n g , i t w i l l be seen to be the threatened ego which r e a c t s j e a l o u s l y . S i t u a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g t h i s s e l f - e s t e e m w i l l , however, take widely d i f f e r e n t forms....There i s h a r d l y any l i m i t of performance or apparent d e p r i v a t i o n to which the i n d i v i d u a l may not be pushed by h i s s o c i e t y ' s standards. Whatever the s o c i a l s e t , however, i t w i l l i n s p i r e him to z e a l f o r h i s s o c i a l l y d e f i n e d p o s i t i o n . And i f he f e e l s h i s s e l f - e s t e e m i s threatened, i f h i s r e p u t a t i o n as a g r a c i o u s wife lender or a s u c c e s s f u l r u l e r of a harem i s i n danger, j e a l o u s y w i l l be the r e s u l t (Mead, 1931, p.119). As w i l l become apparent l a t e r i n t h i s chapter, r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s that attempt to c o r r e l a t e s e l f - e s t e e m with j e a l o u s y remain i n c o n s i s t e n t and models f o r the emotion (White, 1976) have consigned i t to a l e s s c e n t r a l r o l e . A l s o , the l a t e r d i s c u s s i o n of s e l f - e s t e e m w i l l d i s c l o s e i t s p o t e n t i a l l y - spurious nature — i t can be as s i t u a t i o n a l l y dependent as j e a l o u s y . As t h i s a p p l i e s to Mead's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , 34 p o s s i b l y the harem r u l e r ' s r e p u t a t i o n has more of an apparent than an a c t u a l e f f e c t on h i s s e l f - e s t e e m e s p e c i a l l y i f h i s j e a l o u s behaviour i s expected and c o n d i t i o n e d by h i s s o c i e t y and f a m i l y . Mead (1931) draws a f i n e l i n e between z e a l and j e a l o u s y , a d i s t i n c t i o n that i s l a r g e l y n e g l e c t e d elsewhere i n the l i t e r a t u r e . She d e s c r i b e s z e a l as "an a t t e n t i v e i n t e r e s t i n the attainment or p r e s e r v a t i o n of s o c i a l or pe r s o n a l s t a t u s " (p.119) whereas j e a l o u s y i s "a f r i g h t e n e d angry defense of such s t a t u s " (p.119). Mead uses polygamous s o c i e t i e s to exemplify t h i s d i f f e r e n c e , n o t i n g that the zealous man w i l l buy many wives to enhance h i s p r e s t i g e but the impotent man who r i g i d l y p o l i c e s h i s 200 wives i n s t e a d of o v e r l o o k i n g t h e i r l o v e r s i s j e a l o u s . She observes that the two a t t i t u d e s are f u r t h e r confused by the requirement i n romantic love s i t u a t i o n s that a c e r t a i n amount of j e a l o u s y be d i s p l a y e d to a l l a y m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s by the ob j e c t that there i s a lack of z e a l . Adhering g e n e r a l l y to a negative view of j e a l o u s y , Mead (1931) r e l a t e s i t to the e g o c e n t r i c s i d e of love which wants fo r p o s s e s s i o n of the loved o b j e c t . She notes that the su b j e c t need not be wanting f o r e x c l u s i v e p o s s e s s i o n because "many people are zealous of a p r i v i l e g e which they share with others but which they maintain a g a i n s t o u t s i d e r s " (p.116). Je a l o u s y , i n her view, need not be sexual but the sexual v a r i e t y i s the most e g o c e n t r i c and s e l f i s h . 35 Comparing the Banaro t r i b e of New Guinea to the French peasants p r i o r to the r e v o l u t i o n , Mead (1931) shows that the male's e x c l u s i v e , p r o p r i e t a r y a t t i t u d e toward h i s wife i s evident i n both simple and complex s o c i e t i e s . However, she suggests that the Frenchman's j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s and behaviours were e l e m e n t a l l y an outraged d i g n i t y at being r e q u i r e d to lend h i s woman to h i s l o r d f o r d e f l o w e r i n g — because the peasant's lac k of p a r t i c i p a t i o n in- the p l a n n i n g emphasized h i s s o c i a l impotence. In c o n t r a s t , Mead (1931) d e s c r i b e s the Banaro peoples as l i v i n g c o n t e n t e d l y w i t h i n a complex exogamous system in which the new b r i d e i s deflowered by a ceremonial f r i e n d of the bridegroom's f a t h e r and the bridegroom's i n i t i a t i o n to sex was attended to e a r l i e r by the ceremonial f r i e n d ' s w i f e . The s e v e r a l other r e p o r t e d sexual arrangements mean that i n each person's l i f e t i m e he or she w i l l have three mates in a d d i t i o n to t h e i r r e g u l a r spouse. Mead claims t h i s s o c i a l set does not give r i s e to j e a l o u s y . G e n e r a l l y , Mead c o n s i d e r s that sexual j e a l o u s y occurs only in response to i l l i c i t arrangements. However, she seemingly assumes that the Banaro people always respect t h e i r e s t a b l i s h e d boundaries.. Her d i s c u s s i o n does i n d i c a t e that t h e i r e x t r a - r e g u l a r sexual arrangements are planned and r i t u a l i s t i c i n terms of s p e c i f i c persons, o c c a s i o n s , d u r a t i o n and p l a c e . Hence i t would be i n t e r e s t i n g to know t h e i r response to any d e v i a t i o n s from these norms. A l s o , 36 Mead's evidence f o r the i n d i v i d u a l ' s contentment i n Banaro s o c i e t y i s based on whiteman's poor success r a t e s at recruitment f o r la b o r purposes. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , i t i s p o s s i b l e that recruitment was poor because any l o s s of expected sex p a r t n e r s may have provoked int e n s e j e a l o u s i e s . Mead a l s o g i v e s examples of female j e a l o u s i e s o c c u r r i n g in polygamous s o c i e t i e s when the husband has been too long in a c q u i r i n g e x t r a wives to share labor and c h i l d b e a r i n g . In t h i s i n s t a n c e i t i s . d i f f i c u l t to a s c e r t a i n i f Mead was d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between je a l o u s y and envy. G e n e r a l l y , i t i s her view that the widely v a r y i n g s i t u a t i o n s preclude a f e e l i n g d e f i n i t i o n of je a l o u s y because i t "sometimes i n c l i n e s more to f e a r , sorrow and shame, at others to anger, s u s p i c i o n and h u m i l i a t i o n " (p.116). Mead (1931) makes a strong, c l e a r statement to r e j e c t the t r a d i t i o n a l s t e r e o - t y p e of the female as "the je a l o u s sex". Rather, she says: Throughout h i s t o r y , with a few rare exc e p t i o n s , women have been the insecure sex. T h e i r s t a t u s , t h e i r freedom of a c t i o n , t h e i r very economic e x i s t e n c e , t h e i r r i g h t over t h e i r own c h i l d r e n , has been dependent upon t h e i r p r e s e r v a t i o n of t h e i r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s men. Into the f i e l d of pers o n a l r e l a t i o n s have been t h r u s t a l l these other c o n s i d e r a t i o n s not germaine to i t . The wife threatened with the l o s s of her husband's a f f e c t i o n , f i d e l i t y , i n t e r e s t or l o y a l t y , whichever p o i n t her s o c i e t y has d e f i n e d as the p i v o t of w i f e l y tenure, sees the very r o o t s of her s o c i a l e x i s t e n c e being cut from beneath her. She has been i n the p o s i t i o n i n which a man would be i f he had read i n t o h i s wife's a v e r t e d shoulder the d e p r e c i a t i o n of a l l h i s st o c k s , a l o s s of h i s business r e p u t a t i o n , e v i c t i o n from whatever p o s i t i o n he hol d s , both s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l , as w e l l as the l o s s of h i s home and p o s s i b l y a l l c o n t r o l over h i s c h i l d r e n . I f women's s u p e r i o r 37 morbid a n x i e t y concerning t h e i r r e l a t i o n s with the a l l - necessary male purveyors of economic and s o c i a l goods be read i n these terms, i t becomes a t r u i s m that women probably always have been "the j e a l o u s sex" (Mead, 1 931, p.125) . In s p i t e of her r e l a t i v e l y broad view of j e a l o u s y ' s many s i t u a t i o n a l and s o c i a l determinants, Mead (1931) c o n s i d e r s the emtion to be an "unfortunate phenomenon with l i t t l e to be s a i d i n i t s f a v o r " (p.120) and t h i s i s so mainly because i t , " l i k e other forms of extreme egoism, i s r e p e l l e n t " (p.120). She c o n s i d e r s both s o c i a l and pers o n a l f a c t o r s as. c a u s a l of j e a l o u s y , but concludes, that the l a t t e r are r a r e and "the r e s u l t of bad luc k " (p.125). For in s t a n c e , she e x e m p l i f i e s obessive j e a l o u s y i n the case of O t h e l l o a t t r i b u t i n g h i s misfort u n e to an " i n s e c u r i t y born of belonging to a r a c i a l group judged i n f e r i o r by the group from whom he won h i s wif e " (p.124). In her view, the person born with fewer or d i f f e r e n t p h y s i c a l and/or other c u l t u r a l l y - p r i z e d endowments i s unlucky and w i l l be l i k e l y to j e a l o u s l y c l i n g to anything that comes h i s way. Ne v e r t h e l e s s , she deprecates h i s je a l o u s y because i t "adds to r a t h e r than m i t i g a t e s " (p.125) h i s misery. In c o n c l u s i o n , Mead (1931) sees few or no p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s of j e a l o u s y . She i s i n d u c t i v e i n r e f u t i n g use of the word " e x c l u s i v e " i n d e f i n i n g j e a l o u s y ' s p o s s e s s i v e aspect but she goes on to c a t e g o r i z e the emotion i n an e x c l u s i v e l y d e s t r u c t i v e way without p r e s e n t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s . Her lack of confi d e n c e i n the 38 l a t t e r c a t e g o r i z a t i o n i s p o r t r a y e d by her t e n t a t i v e suggestion that c i v i l i z e d s o c i e t i e s should s t r i v e to e l i m i n a t e or d r a s t i c a l l y reduce the emotion's occurrence. . She tempers- t h i s suggestion with a c a u t i o n that the r e s u l t might be s e r e n i t y at the co s t of the passion and i n t e n s i t y which produce great mystics and great a r t i s t s . Her discuss-ion i s thus very u s e f u l i n g i v i n g "reasons" to je a l o u s y but i t i s l e s s u s e f u l and l e s s i n t r i c a t e i n examining j e a l o u s y ' s "purpose" than K i n g s l e y Davis' (1936) s o c i o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s . E x a c t l y the kind and q u a l i t y of passion to which Mead r e f e r r e d i s evident i n Ruth Benedict's (1934) "P a t t e r n s of C u l t u r e " . Benedict was "never a n e u t r a l person" ( H a r r i s , 1970, p.51) and yet she d i d not name the r i g h t or wrong, good or bad s o c i e t y , i n d i v i d u a l , f e e l i n g or behaviour. Likewise, her concern was not with 'normal' or 'abnormal' behaviour but with "the extent to which one c u l t u r e c o u l d f i n d a p l a c e for extremes of behavior i n the mystic, the seer, the a r t i s t — which another c u l t u r e branded as abnormal or worthless" ( c f . p r e f a c e by Mead i n Benedict, 1934,). Of j e a l o u s y she says " i t i s evident from the p r a c t i c e s of many d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s , [that i t ] i s one of the emotions that can be most e f f e c t i v e l y f o s t e r e d by c u l t u r a l arrangements, or i t can be outlawed" (Benedict, 1934, p. 109). But she d i d not p o r t r a y the experience of j e a l o u s y , 39 in i t s e l f , as abnormal, d e s t r u c t i v e or p rob l emat i c and her i s sue w i th emotions and behav iour s in gene ra l was not to d i s t i n g u i s h those that are i n s t i n c t i v e or o r g a n i c a l l y determined from those that are l e a r n e d or engra ined by s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g . She says " the c o n d i t i o n e d response i s as automat ic as the o r g a n i c a l l y determined [ r e spon se ] " (p .17 ) . I n s tead , Bened ic t (1970) examined s o c i e t i e s f o r t h e i r l e v e l s of synergy. In do ing t h i s she i m p l i e d , f o r t h e i r whole systems and f o r t h e i r dyad ic and group subsystems, tha t j e a l o u s y , f e a r , and other emotions t r a d i t i o n a l l y l a b e l l e d as nega t i ve become p rob lemat i c when t h e i r hea l t hy e x p r e s s i o n i s impeded by low l e v e l s of synergy . C o n v e r s e l y , s o c i a l u n i t s that are r ep re sen ted by h i gh l e v e l s of synergy have b u i l t - i n customs and p r a c t i c e s which encourage c o n s t r u c t i v e e x p r e s s i o n of these emot ions . In " P a t t e r n s of C u l t u r e " Bened ic t (1934) compares and c o n t r a s t s th ree very d i s t i n c t c u l t u r e s — the Pueblos of New Mex ico, the n a t i v e s of Dobu in M e l a n e s i a , and the Kwak iu t l Ind ians of ' the American Northwest . She d e s c r i b e s a f r e q u e n t , a g g r e s s i v e and v i o l e n t e x p r e s s i o n of j e a l o u s y i n the Dobu, a t t r i b u t i n g these o b s e r v a t i o n s to the f i e r c e e x c l u s i v i t y and c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s of t h e i r s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s which r e s u l t s in disharmony between i n d i v i d u a l o b j e c t i v e s and s o c i e t a l v a lue s and norms. She e x e m p l i f i e s the; most e x c l u s i v e va lue s of the Dobu in t h e i r b e l i e f s about the 40 ownership of yams ( t h e i r major f o o d s t u f f ) which a re c o n s i d e r e d to have an h e r e d i t a r y l i n e . A l though the m a r i t a l coup le share a common home and p rov ide common food f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n , they j e a l o u s l y guard t h e i r separa te gardens which have been grown from the seed yams of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e h e r e d i t a r y l i n e s . Bened ic t d e s c r i b e s many s i m i l a r l y expressed j e a l o u s i e s a r i s i n g from other m a r i t a l arrangements of the Dobu. Always, the o r i g i n of p rob l emat i c b e h a v i o u r a l e x p r e s s i o n of the emotion r e s i d e s in a s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e that p r e c l u d e s harmony between the i n d i v i d u a l and h i s or her s o c i e t y . For example, the coup le a l t e r n a t e t h e i r h a b i t a t i o n , on a y e a r l y b a s i s , between t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e m a t r i l i n e a l v i l l a g e s . Bened ic t (1934) observes t h a t : The spouse who i s on a l i e n t e r r i t o r y p l a y s a r o l e of h u m i l i a t i o n . A l l the owners of the v i l l a g e may c a l l him [or her ] by h i s name. He may never use the name of one of them....When p e r s o n a l names are used i t s i g n i f i e s tha t important l i b e r t i e s may be taken by the namer . . . .He i s a p e r p e t u a l o u t s i d e r (p .137) . In c o n t r a s t , the Zuni (a Pueblo people) are d e s c r i b e d by Bened ic t (1934) as hav ing a much h i gher l e v e l of synergy. T h e i r s o c i e t y i s a f f i r m a t i v e of l i f e , has a low l e v e l of c o m p e t i t i o n and v i o l e n c e and a h i gh l e v e l of c o o p e r a t i o n . J e a l o u s i e s s t i l l occur but are managed d i f f e r e n t l y . For i n s t a n c e , she d i s c u s s e s m a r i t a l j ea l ou sy s a y i n g : They do not meet a d u l t e r y wi th v i o l e n c e . A u sua l response on the p l a i n s to the w i f e ' s a d u l t e r y was to cut o f f the f l e s h y pa r t of her nose. T h i s was done even in the Southwest by non-Pueblo t r i b e s l i k e the 41 Apache. But in Zuni the unfaithfulness of the wife is no excuse for violence. The husband does not regard i t as a v i o l a t i o n of his ri g h t s . If she i s unfaithful,, i t is normally a f i r s t step in changing husbands, and their i n s t i t u t i o n s make this s u f f i c i e n t l y easy so that i t i s r e a l l y a tolerable procedure. They do not contemplate violence (Benedict, 1934, p.107). Benedict (1934) desribes the same attitude of Zuni wives in the instance of their husbands' adultery. "Controversies, whether they are ceremonial or economic or domestic are carried out with an unparalleled lack of vehemence" (p. 106). She interprets that their expressions, of jealousy, g r i e f , anger and other t r a d i t i o n a l l y negative emotions are moderate because cooperation i s the essence of their l i f e s t y l e . The points made by Benedict are not in exoneration or deprecation of exogamy, monogamy, polygamy or polyandry. Rather, she observes the harmony or lack of i t that results from the s o c i a l structures which vary widely even among societies that have similar marital arrangements. In the f i n a l analysis, this renouned anthropologist can be added to the l i s t of those who believe jealousy to be a cross- c u l t u r a l universal. The insight she adds i s that the emotion w i l l be expressed as a means to a cooperative end or resul t in destruction and violence (or some consequence between these poles) depending on the society's l e v e l of synergy which in turn is based in their p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l structure. Helen Fisher (1982), a contemporary anthropologist, 42 l o o k s a t t h e e v o l u t i o n o f human e m o t i o n s a n d b e h a v i o u r s . She s u g g e s t s a n d p r o v i d e s e v i d e n c e t o i n d i c a t e t h a t , by f o u r m i l l i o n y e a r s ago p r o t o h o m i d m a l e s a n d f e m a l e s we re b o n d i n g , l i v i n g t o g e t h e r , s h a r i n g f o o d and l e a r n i n g t o c o o p e r a t e . She b e l i e v e s t h a t a l o n g w i t h t h e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e s e r e l a t i v e l y c o m p l e x b e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n s , e m o t i o n s s u c h a s j e a l o u s y e v o l v e d " t o t i e i n d i v i d u a l s t o one a n o t h e r [ a n d t o ] . . . . D e f i n e w h o ' s who " ( p . 1 3 2 ) . C o o p e r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t h u s r e q u i r e d t h e e m o t i o n s t h a t came a l o n g w i t h t h e m . C e n t r a l t o F i s h e r ' s ( 1 982 ) t h e s i s i s t h e e v o l u t i o n o f p a i r - b o n d i n g a n d i t s r e q u i r e m e n t f o r s o c i a l f e e l i n g s . She s a y s " c l e a r l y s o c i a l f a c i l i t a t i o n e n c o u r a g e d o u r a n c e s t o r s t o l a u g h a n d c r y t o g e t h e r — a n d t o g e t h e r n e s s was t h e k e y t o l i f e " ( p . 1 1 9 ) . I n t e g r a t i n g c o n c e p t s o f n a t u r a l s e l e c t i o n a n d human f r e e w i l l F i s h e r ( 1 982 ) p r o p o s e s t h a t " n o t a l l human b e h a v i o r i s l e a r n e d . . . . [ y e t ] C o o p e r a t i o n was demanded f o r s u r v i v a l " ( p . 1 1 9 ) . Thu s e a r l y humans s l o w l y d e v e l o p e d n a t u r a l i n c l i n a t i o n s f o r l o v e , f r i e n d s h i p , t r u s t a n d o t h e r e m o t i o n s a n d " e a c h e m o t i o n came t o be e x p r e s s e d so t h a t o t h e r p e o p l e u n d e r s t o o d " ( p . 1 1 9 ) . S e x u a l j e a l o u s y , s he s u g g e s t s , e v o l v e d a l o n g w i t h p a i r - b o n d i n g a n d r e c i p r o c a l a l t r u i s m . She s a y s : B e c a u s e a m a l e was now o b l i g e d t o d e f e n d t h e c h i l d r e n o f h i s m a t e , he w o u l d d e v e l o p a n a t u r a l t e n d e n c y t o make s u r e t h a t t h e y we re h i s c h i l d r e n t o o . Though he m i g h t n o t know i t c o n s c i o u s l y , he d i d n o t w i s h t o e x p e n d h i s t i m e , h i s e n e r g y , a n d p e r h a p s h i s l i f e f o r t h e g e n e s o f a n o t h e r m a l e . Thu s was b o r n s e x u a l 43 j e a l o u s y ( F i s h e r , 1982 pp .113-114) . She e x p l a i n s that a l though the " I ' l l s c r a t c h your back, you s c r a t c h mine" (p.113) agreement was f u n c t i o n a l , as an e a r l y form of r e c i p r o c a l a l t r u i s m , there were always those who wou ldn ' t r e t u r n the h e l p they r e c e i v e d . T h e r e f o r e , even n a t u r a l s e l e c t i o n a l l owed fo r d e c e i t and e a r l y man l e a r n e d f e e l i n g s to n e u t r a l i z e or c o u n t e r a c t i t . Those who were e x p l o i t e d by o ther s would e x p e r i e n c e and express j e a l o u s y , moral i n d i g n a t i o n , outrage and revenge. Meanwhi le, the chea ter f e l t g u i l t , embarassment or s e l f - d e c e p t i o n . Pardon, apology and c o n t r i t i o n r e s u l t e d from a showdown. In summary, F i s h e r ' s (1982) t h e s i s on j e a l o u s y and other emotions i n t e g r a t e s e v o l u t i o n wi th env i ronmenta l i sm. In a n o u v e l l e way she examines the i n f l u e n c e of e a r l y man's s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s , add ing d imens ion to the p e r s p e c t i v e s c r i t i q u e d e a r l i e r in t h i s s e c t i o n . To summarize t h i s s e c t i o n , i t has p re sen ted and c r i t i q u e d one s o c i o l o g i c a l and three a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l views on j e a l o u s y . A l though the p e r s p e c t i v e s of D a v i s , Mead, and Bened ic t were a v a i l a b l e e a r l y in t h i s cen tu ry they seemingly had l i t t l e i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y e f f e c t u n t i l s e v e r a l decades l a t e r . D a v i s ' (1936) view s t r e s s e s j e a l o u s y ' s r o l e in the maintenance of each s o c i e t y ' s i n s t i t u t i o n s and norms. The emotion i s a l s o c o n t r o l l e d by the i n s t i t u t i o n s and norms and he sees i t as d e s t r u c t i v e on ly to the extent tha t i t de fea t s 44 i t s own purpose . Mead's (1931) p e r s p e c t i v e on j e a l o u s y was p r i m a r i l y p e j o r a t i v e and r e a s o n - o r i e n t e d . L i k e Dav i s , she examined s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s but in a more p a r o c h i a l and l e s s pu rpose - o r i e n t e d way. Bened ic t (1934) i n t r o d u c e d a new concept to anthropo logy by sugges t ing that s o c i e t i e s be compared f o r t h e i r v a r y i n g l e v e l s of ' s y n e r g y ' . A c c o r d i n g l y , she p re sen t s a comparat ive a n a l y s i s of s e v e r a l s o c i e t i e s . She i m p l i e s tha t when there i s harmony between i n d i v i d u a l o b j e c t i v e s and s o c i e t a l v a lue s (or h i gh l e v e l s of synergy as in Zuni s o c i e t y ) j ea l ou sy as a means w i l l be l i k e l y to r e s u l t in a c o o p e r a t i v e end. In c o n t r a s t , when l e v e l s , of synergy are low (as in Dobu s o c i e t y ) j e a l o u s y w i l l be l i k e l y to have a d e s t r u c t i v e e f f e c t . As w i l l become apparent l a t e r in t h i s c h a p t e r , the concept of synergy i s r e - a s s o c i a t e d wi th j e a l o u s y theory s e v e r a l decades l a t e r . F i n a l l y , t h i s s e c t i o n examined F i s h e r ' s ( 1 9 8 2 ) t h e s i s which i n t e g r a t e s e v o l u t i o n a r y and env i ronmenta l p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y and other emot ions . The next s e c t i o n c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y exp l o re s and c r i t i q u e s p e r s p e c t i v e s from p s y c h i a t r y beg inn ing wi th Freud and ending w i th the most recent l i t e r a t u r e by Tu rbo t t (1981). 45 P e r s p e c t i v e s from P s y c h i a t r y The most c l a s s i c r e f e r e n c e on j e a l o u s y from both P s y c h i a t r y and Psychology i s Freud's (1922). His account a s c r i b e s to j e a l o u s y four o v e r l a p p i n g emotions — p a i n , g r i e f , enmity and s e l f - d o u b t . He decided the pain and g r i e f are "caused by the thought of l o s i n g the lov e d o b j e c t and [the thought] of the n a r c i s s i s t i c wound" (p.232); the enmity i s "against the s u c c e s s f u l r i v a l " (p.232); and the s e l f - c r i t i c i s m " t r i e s to hold the person himsel f accountable f o r h i s l o s s " (p.232). Freud b e l i e v e d j e a l o u s y to be u n i v e r s a l , rooted i n the uncouscious and r e l a t e d to an unresolved O e d i p a l or b r o t h e r - a n d - s i s t e r complex, or to a d i s g u i s e d e x p r e s s i o n of homosexuality. He d i s t i n g u i s h e d three l a y e r s or stages of je a l o u s y - normal or c o m p e t i t i v e , p r o j e c t e d and d e l u s i o n a l . Normal j e a l o u s y , he s a i d " i s by no means r a t i o n a l , that i s d e r i v e d from the a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n , p r o p o r t i o n a t e to the r e a l circumstances and under the complete c o n t r o l of the conscious ego" (Freud, 1922, p.232). P r o j e c t e d j e a l o u s y and d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y i n both men and women are d e r i v e d from repressed impulses towards u n f a i t h f u l n e s s , a c c o r d i n g to Freud. The former may a l s o r e s u l t from the s u b j e c t ' s own a c t u a l u n f a i t h f u l n e s s . D e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y , on the other hand, i s d i f f e r e n t i n that the obj e c t i s the same sex as the s u b j e c t , and i t "re p r e s e n t s an a c i d u l a t e d homosexuality, and r i g h t l y takes i t s p o s i t i o n among the c l a s s i c forms of 46 p a r a n o i a " (Freud, 1922, p.234). Jones (1929) extended Freud's (1922) t h e s i s and r e i n f o r c e d j e a l o u s y ' s s t a t u s as d i s p o s i t i o n a l and p a t h o l o g i c a l . He suggests ( f o r men i n h i s example) that the p r e d i s p o s i t i o n r e s u l t s from n a r c i s s i s t i c dependency emanating from Oedipal g u i l t l e a d i n g to fear of f a t h e r and i n v e r s i o n . The i n v e r s i o n leads f u r t h e r to fear of women r e s u l t i n g i n p r o j e c t e d f l i g h t and i n f i d e l i t y . R i v i e r e (1932) t r a n s l a t e d many of Freud's works and added her own i n s i g h t s on the b a s i s of a s i n g l e case study. G e n e r a l i z i n g her .conclusions of the p a t h o l o g i c a l to the normal, she viewed j e a l o u s y as a "means of defence a g a i n s t unconscious c o n f l i c t s . . . [and] a symptom of unconscious a c c u s a t i o n s from the super-ego" (p.423). D e c i d i n g her p a t i e n t ' s j e a l o u s y and coquetry c o u l d not be e x p l a i n e d s u f f i c i e n t l y as a p r o j e c t i o n of p e r s o n a l i n f i d e l i t y , R i v i e r e i n s t e a d o f f e r e d the f o l l o w i n g symbolic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n : while e x p e r i e n c i n g j e a l o u s y others were robbing her (the p a t i e n t ) of e v e r y t h i n g ; and i n f l i r t a t i o n she was robbing those around her of e v e r y t h i n g . Both behaviours are an e f f o r t to r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t through a fan t a s y o r i g i n a t i n g i n the o r a l phase of development. R i v i e r e agreed with Freud (1922) and Jones (1929) about the emotion's a s s o c i a t i o n with f e e l i n g s of s e l f - c r i t i c i s m and i n r e l a t i n g even "normal" j e a l o u s y to the n a r c i s s i s t i c wound. However, she e x p l a i n s the wound as "the condemnation 47 by t h e s u p e r - e g o and t h e e x p i a t i o n by t h e ego f o r t h e u n c o n s c i o u s p r e d a t o r y and a g g r e s s i v e i m p u l s e s i n t h e s u b j e c t h i m s e l f " ( R i v i e r e , 1932, p . 4 2 3 ) . S o k o l o f f ' s (1947) t e x t on j e a l o u s y i s a d d r e s s e d t o t h e p h y s i c i a n and t h e p a t i e n t . He n o t e s t h e complex n a t u r e of t h e e m o t i o n and t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h h i s c o l l e a g u e s , i n c l u d i n g F r e u d , n e g l e c t e d o r n e g a t i v e l y m i s i n t e r p r e t e d i t s e v o l u t i o n and r o l e i n a n i m a l s and humans. H i s s t u d y i s much b r o a d e r , s t r e s s i n g t h e u n i t y of p s y c h e and soma. S o k o l o f f c o n c l u d e s t h a t j e a l o u s y i s c o m p r i s e d of two p s y c h o l o g i c a l u n i t s — a p r i m i t i v e r e a c t i o n and a more complex s e n t i m e n t . The r e a c t i o n , he c l a i m s , i s i n s t i n c t u a l , n e g a t i v e and a t a v i s t i c . I t i s s t i l l w i t h us i n a l e s s p r i m i t i v e form, e x p e r i e n c e d by e v e r y o n e b ut i n h i b i t e d by most. In c o n t r a s t , he c l a i m s t h e s e n t i m e n t c a n n o t be c o m p l e t e l y i n h i b i t e d and i f r e p r e s s e d i t may r e s u l t i n c o m p l e x e s . I t s t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n t o a complex (an o b s e s s i v e o r d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y ) depends on p r e d i s p o s i t i o n . He s a y s t h i s e m o t i o n " r e t a i n s a f u n c t i o n i n t h e z o o l o g i c a l economy — t o c o n s e r v e t h e i n d i v i d u a l as a g a i n s t t h e g r o u p . I t i s n a t u r e ' s g r e a t c o r r e c t i v e f o r p u r e l y s o c i a l e m o t i o n " ( S o k o l o f f , 1947, p . 2 2 ) . S o k o l o f f (1947) d i s c u s s e s many and v a r y i n g t y p e s and m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y , s t r e s s i n g i t s autonomous c h a r a c t e r , i t s demand f o r s a t i s f a c t i o n and r e v e n g e and i t s d e s t r u c t i v e p o t e n t i a l f o r s u b j e c t , o b j e c t and s o c i e t y . He 48 c l a i m s i t to be the o l d e s t , the commonest and yet the most concealed and d i s g u i s e d of human emotions. He agrees that i t i s u n i v e r s a l but more or l e s s e f f e c t i v e l y coped with by d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s and c u l t u r e s . S o k o l o f f e x e m p l i f i e s the French, the Somalis and the people of the Sandwich Is l a n d s as the most j e a l o u s of n a t i o n a l i t i e s and the E n g l i s h and Americans as the l e a s t . The a n c i e n t Greeks and Romans were "very l i t t l e j e a l o u s " (p.15). The former r e l a t e d • j e a l o u s y to e x c e s s i v e love and the l a t t e r claimed i t had more to do with envy than l o v e . S o k o l o f f (1947) t r a c e s e x c e s s i v e j e a l o u s y i n a d u l t s to the p e r i o d of c h i l d i n d i v i d u a t i o n and b e l i e v e s i t i s "an e f f o r t to combat f e a r s of aloneness and i s o l a t i o n i n a h o s t i l e world" (p.35). His suggestions fo r treatment are i n s i g h t f u l and comprehensive given the s t a t e of the a r t at that time. He suggests open d i s c u s s i o n to n e u t r a l i z e the t r a d i t i o n a l concealment and r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n surrounding j e a l o u s y . However, he c a u t i o n s that i t s importance or p o t e n t i a l d e s t r u c t i v e nature should not be underestimated. C o l l a b o r a t i v e f a m i l y e f f o r t s and e x t r a love and a t t e n t i o n are h i s treatment f o r c h i l d h o o d j e a l o u s y . He s t r e s s e s e a r l y d e t e c t i o n and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d treatment f o r any problematic j e a l o u s y and i f i t i s s t i l l r a t i o n a l he recommends f r e e d i s c u s s i o n , good-natured t e a s i n g and i n t e l l i g e n t , f r i e n d l y r e f u s a l to submit to e x c e s s i v e demands. R e l a t i v e to others in h i s d i s c i p l i n e , S o k o l o f f i s o p t i m i s t i c i n h i s p r o g n o s i s , 49 c l a i m i n g the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of understanding, p a t i e n c e and i n t e l l i g e n t e f f o r t s i n d e a l i n g with p s y c h o l o g i c a l wounds experienced by the j e a l o u s person and o t h e r s . Ziman (1949) was the f i r s t modern p s y c h i a t r i s t to look comprehensively at j e a l o u s y i n c h i l d r e n and to suggest p r e v e n t i o n and treatment. His t e x t i s a guide f o r parents and i s r e l a t i v e l y h o l i s t i c given i t s e r a . He sees j e a l o u s y as a symptom of worry and p r o c l a i m s "a c h i l d i s j e a l o u s when he wants something someone e l s e has" (p.5). He d e a l s with j e a l o u s y and envy as one and the.same and views them as normal developmental r e a c t i o n s , s t r e s s i n g wise management and understanding of the source r a t h e r than attempts to e l i m i n a t e or supress the emotion. He emphasizes that the " j e a l o u s c h i l d does not n e c e s s a r i l y grow up to be a j e a l o u s a d u l t " (p.5). Ziman a l s o d e a l s with j e a l o u s y i n d i f f e r e n t s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n s and f a m i l y c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , suggesting that a d u l t c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s , a g g r e s s i o n and an u n s a t i a b l e search fo r power emanate only from mismanaged c h i l d h o o d j e a l o u s y . B a s i c a l l y , h i s treatment i n v o l v e s a high q u a l i t y p a r e n t a l nurturance. Schmideberg (1953), another psychoanalyst, focuses on s t i l l more o r a l , a n a l and g e n i t a l c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r s . However, her work i s the f i r s t i n the f i e l d to c l a r i f y and emphasize fear of l o s s as fundamental to the emotion. She agrees with Ziman that c h i l d h o o d j e a l o u s y i s developmental and views p a t h o l o g i c a l adulthood j e a l o u s y as a " s c h i z o i d 50 i n a b i l i t y to l o v e " (p.3). In her view, j e a l o u s y i n c l u d e s elements of sadism, a compulsion to c o n t r o l the loved o b j e c t , h o s t i l i t y , exaggeration, f e a r , g u i l t , strong a n x i e t y , ambivalence of -the love r e l a t i o n s h i p , impotence or doubts about potency, p o s s e s s i v e n e s s , dependency, hurt, l o n e l i n e s s and o b s e s s i o n . Schmideberg (1953) agrees with Freud that p a t h o l o g i c a l a d u l t j e a l o u s y i s a defence a g a i n s t unconscious homosexuality. However, her general t h e s i s i s more complex than h i s . She r e l a t e s j e a l o u s y to many more emotions, intr o d u c e s to p s y c h o a n a l y s i s the p o s s i b i l i t y of j u s t i f i e d or r a t i o n a l j e a l o u s y , and i n c o r p o r a t e s s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l and s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s . For i n s t a n c e , she notes a t r a d i t i o n a l e x p e c t a t i o n i n p a t r i a r c h a l s o c i e t i e s f o r the man to be po s s e s s i v e and j e a l o u s of h i s wife and to regard u n f a i t h f u l n e s s as t h i e v e r y of h i s m a s c u l i n i t y . F i n a l l y , she emphasizes an elemental " f e e l i n g h u r t " f a c t o r and s p e c u l a t e s i t to be a s u r v i v o r of c h i l d i s h h u r t s r e s u l t i n g from having been " b u l l i e d , nagged, teased, h u m i l i a t e d and f r u s t r a t e d " (p.13). A c c o r d i n g to her, t h i s f e e l i n g i s clung to because i t reduces g u i l t over unconscious s a d i s t i c impulses which emanate from Oedipal and c a s t r a t i o n complexes. L a n g f e l d t (1962) was the f i r s t i n P s y c h i a t r y to de- emphasize the r o l e of unconscious psychodynamic processes but he con t i n u e d the t r a d i t i o n a l tendency to l a b e l j e a l o u s y as d i s p o s i t i o n a l . Studying the case h i s t o r i e s of 66 51 p s y c h i a t r i c p a t i e n t s t r o u b l e d by frequent and intense j e a l o u s y , he d e s c r i b e d an " e r o t i c j e a l o u s y syndrome" (p.317), c l a i m i n g that i t can be common among normal people or abnormal and even- c o n g e n i t a l . He b e l i e v e s t h i s syndrome i s p o t e n t i a l l y present i n a l l types of mental d i s o r d e r s but has a s i g n i f i c a n t predominance i n diagnosed c h r o n i c a l c o h o l i s m . He-observes that i n a d d i t i o n to the abuse of a l c o h o l , some b i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s such as the menopause, organic b r a i n syndromes and p s y c h o t i c phases of s e v e r a l mental d i s o r d e r s ( e s p e c i a l l y s c h i z o p h r e n i a and melancholia)' can have a r e l e a s i n g e f f e c t on the je a l o u s y syndrome. F i n a l l y , he suggests that a low l e v e l of i n t e l l i g e n c e r e s u l t s i n poor i n s i g h t i n t o j e a l o u s y ideas, r e n d e r i n g them more or l e s s permanent. Mooney (1965), a B r i t i s h P s y c h i a t r i s t , gave h i s d i s c i p l i n e a s t i l l broader p e r s p e c t i v e on j e a l o u s y , n o t i n g the d i f f i c u l t y that a r i s e s i n attempting to d e f i n e the p a t h o l o g i c a l as a d e v i a t i o n from the norm. Comparing western s o c i e t i e s to the Tobas (a polygamous and polyandrous t r i b e i n southern I n d i a ) , he cl a i m s that when there i s no censure on a d u l t e r y j e a l o u s y must be suppressed but when the i d e a l i s l i f e l o n g f a i t h f u l monogamy i n f i d e l i t y must be suppressed. He e v e n t u a l l y decides that p a t h o l o g i c a l j e a l o u s y i s i r r a t i o n a l and unfounded, emphasizing the p o t e n t i a l f o r frequent e r r o r s by the d i a g n o s t i c i a n who n e g l e c t s a c a r e f u l study of circumstances and s o c i a l 52 c o ntext. Even though Mooney (1965) acknowledged the d i f f i c u l t y with d e f i n i n g the p a t h o l o g i c a l as a d e v i a t i o n from the norm, he goes on ( i n a s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y way) to d i s t i n g u i s h d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y i n which a "mistaken b e l i e f i s h e l d with c e r t a i n t y " (p.1024) from obse s s i v e j e a l o u s y when the p a t i e n t has enough touch with r e a l i t y to a p p r e c i a t e the evidence and r e a l i z e the j e a l o u s y i s symptomatic of emotional problems. A f t e r surveying the P s y c h i a t r i c l i t e r a t u r e , Mooney (1965) o u t l i n e s e i g h t c a t e g o r i e s thought to be a s s o c i a t e d with p a t h o l o g i c a l j e a l o u s y i n c l u d i n g h e r e d i t a r y and f a m i l i a l f a c t o r s , premorbid p e r s o n a l i t y ; drug i n t o x i c a t i o n or a d d i c t i o n ; organic or degenerative c e r e b r a l d i s o r d e r s ; e p i l e p s y ; mental d e f i c i e n c y ; p s y c h i a t r i c syndromes (e.g., paranoid s t a t e , manic-depressive p s y c h o s i s ) ; and other f a c t o r s (e.g., pregnancy and the poat-partum s t a t e ; menopause and i n v o l u t i o n a l changes). Mooney's (1965) prognosis f o r d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y i s worse than for o b s e s s i v e j e a l o u s y . On the b a s i s of h i s a n a l y s i s of 65 case h i s t o r i e s (8 of h i s own and 57 from three other authors) he concludes that "phenothiazine drugs had an i n i t i a l f a v o r a b l e e f f e c t on d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y " (p.1034). His v a r i a n t l e v e l s of s i g n i f i c a n c e are not e x p l a i n e d , but he documents e x t e n s i v e l y and w e l l the other problems with h i s study and the reader i s l e f t to wonder at . j the v a l i d i t y of i n s t i t u t i n g chemotherapy in the f i r s t p l a c e . 53 No other non-chemical treatment a l t e r n a t i v e s are suggested and a p e s s i m i s t i c long-term prognosis i s p r e d i c t e d . The next study of " d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y " was Mowat's (1966) a n a l y s i s of 110 murderers and attempted murderers. He concludes that "12% of male and 3% of female p s y c h o t i c murderers murdered f o r morbid j e a l o u s y [and] ... no other s i n g l e d e l u s i o n i s a s s o c i a t e d with so many deaths from s u i c i d e and murder" (p.115). The murders showed a p a t t e r n i n which the average man was f r e e of j e a l o u s y at the outset of h i s marriage, h i s d e l u s i o n s about h i s wife developing, on the average, s i x years l a t e r . H is deluded s t a t e e s c a l a t e s and he soon m i s i n t e r p r e t s t r i v i a , growing i n c r e a s i n g l y more convinced i n h i s mistaken judgements. Angry scenes and v i o l e n t a t t a c k s eventuate i n the wife l e a v i n g only to r e t u r n l a t e r . The man's d e l u s i o n s then f r e q u e n t l y become h a l l u c i n a t i o n s . S u i c i d e or murder occur on the average about four-and-a-half years a f t e r the onset of the d e l u s i o n a l system. The next p s y c h o a n a l y t i c l i t e r a t u r e on j e a l o u s y i s Seidenberg's (1967) e x p l o r a t i o n of s o c i o - c u l t u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s r e l a t i v e to f i d e l i t y and j e a l o u s y . B a s i c a l l y , he views sexual i n f i d e l i t y as western man's ov e r r a t e d excuse to a v o i d d e a l i n g with other i n f i d e l i t i e s or a c t s of u n f a i t h f u l n e s s . He d i s t i n g u i s h e s between f i d e l i t y as sentiment and f i d e l i t y as l o g i c , c l a i m i n g that i n the former "the p r i n c i p l e i s followed more or l e s s b l i n d l y f o r 54 i t s own sake" (p.29) and i n the l a t t e r i t i s "a p r i n c i p l e i n the s e r v i c e of exigency" (p.29). U n f a i t h f u l n e s s and i n f i d e l i t y , he dec i d e s , "have s u f f e r e d the p e j o r a t i o n of meaning 'sexual' e x c l u s i v e l y " (p.28). In h i s view, e x t r a m a r i t a l a f f a i r s r e f l e c t dependent needs as much as sexual needs. He b e l i e v e s j e a l o u s y i s "an expected a f f e c t of l i v i n g " (p.30) and f r e q u e n t l y "a part of the t i t i l l a t i o n , the f o r e p l a y between p a r t n e r s " (p.31). Seidenberg's (1967) view of je a l o u s y "in marriage i s that i t a r i s e s from the p a t r i a c h a l monogamous system. He cl a i m s that i n the m a t r i a r c h a l polyandrous system n a t u r a l j e a l o u s y h a r d l y e x i s t e d and concludes that the emotion i s "another by-product of male dominance" (p.38). He does not extend t h i s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n to obsessive or d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s i e s . In these i n s t a n c e s he agrees with and extends Freud's (1922) b e l i e f s . H is f i n a l a n a l y s i s i s that f i d e l i t y and j e a l o u s y are " i n e x t r i c a b l y t i e d to man's b a s i c wish f o r the a b s o l u t e , f o r the u n a l t e r a b l e and i n f a l l i b l e " (Seidenberg, 1967, p.51'). Hoaken (1976) d e s c r i b e s j e a l o u s y as a symptom of organic or f u n c t i o n a l p s y c h i a t r i c d i s o r d e r and c l a s s i f i e s i t as provoked or unprovoked. Provoked j e a l o u s y , he c l a i m s may be normal or e x c e s s i v e and n e u r o t i c , whereas unprovoked j e a l o u s y i s i r r a t i o n a l and always e x c e s s i v e . Normal, provoked j e a l o u s y he says: may be completely understandable as a r e a c t i o n to a person's f r u s t r a t e d d e s i r e to preserve a s i g n i f i c a n t 55 emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p . . . [ I t ] runs a n a t u r a l course [and] i s experienced i n r e l a t i o n to a blow to the s e l f - esteem, r a i s i n g doubts that may have had t h e i r o r i g i n in e a r l y experiences (Hoaken, 1976, p.47). E x c e s s i v e or n e u r o t i c j e a l o u s y d i f f e r s only i n degree a c c o r d i n g to him and "most cases occur because of repeated or prolonged p r o v o c a t i o n " (p.48), but are, n e v e r t h e l e s s , r e v e a l i n g of u n d e r l y i n g problems. Unprovoked j e a l o u s y i s morbid and may be one of three kinds — a p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t , an o b s e s s i v e s u s p i c i o n or a f i x e d d e l u s i o n . To d i s t i n g u i s h among the l a t t e r he s t r e s s e s the importance of determining how f i r m l y the subject holds h i s / h e r b e l i e f s . If morbid j e a l o u s y i s a new process f o r the p a t i e n t he suggests the p o s s i b i l i t y of overt or c o v e r t d e p r e s s i v e i l l n e s s and f o r p a t i e n t s with f i x e d d e l u s i o n s he f a v o r s the use of e l e c t r o c o n v u l s i v e therapy. The person with a j e a l o u s p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t should be assessed f o r and helped to c o n t r o l e x c e s s i v e use of a l c o h o l . The t h e r a p i s t i n a l l cases should allow a l i m i t e d and a p p r o p r i a t e discharge of anger, h e l p the person recognize that h i s / h e r need fo r a f f e c t i o n i s exaggerated, and promote emotional independence. Seeman (1979) presents and analyzes f i v e cases of p a t h o l o g i c a l j e a l o u s y i n women, not i n g the s p e c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of time of onset. A l l of her p a t i e n t s at the time of onset were " f e e l i n g u n u s u a l l y insecure and subordinate....[and] l i f e circumstances had c o n s p i r e d to d i m i n i s h [ t h e i r ] s e l f - e s t e e m s " (Seeman, 1979, p.352). The 56 author notes recent l o s s of a parent as a p o s s i b l e p r e c i p i t a t i n g f a c t o r and g e n e r a l l y , that onset occurs at a time when the need to be loved outweighs the need to l o v e . She a l s o notes the frequent presence and yet d e n i a l of pr o v o c a t i o n by the par t n e r of the j e a l o u s s u b j e c t . Although she found l i t t l e i n i t i a l evidence i n her sample of envy d i r e c t e d by the subj e c t at the obj e c t she e v e n t u a l l y c l a i m s that o f t e n they are "engaged i n the game of s i b l i n g - r i v a l r y " (p.354) with both envy and competitiveness q u i t e apparent in t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s . She observed that the sexual f a n t a s i e s of her female p a t i e n t s o f t e n took the form of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the r i v a l and a l l f i v e had "de c r i b e d homoerotic dreams and f a n t a s i e s p r i o r ' t o the development of the [problem a t i c ] j e a l o u s y " (p.355). Seeman (1979) observes that p a t i e n t s with problematic j e a l o u s y f r e q u e n t l y experience i n c r e a s e d l i b i d o . She e x p l a i n s i n an e v o l u t i o n a r y sense as: a response to the t h r e a t of s e p a r a t i o n of the mates and [ i t ] can be seen as nature's attempt to prevent the s e p a r a t i o n and ensure maintenance of the s p e c i e s . One part n e r threatens l o s s of i n t e r e s t ; j e a l o u s y and heightened l i b i d o r e s u l t , l e a d i n g to stronger bonding of the m a r i t a l p a i r (Seeman, 1979, p.358). She a l s o observed in her j e a l o u s (female) s u b j e c t s a c y c l e of ruminations, rage, remorse, and mania and i n t h e i r male p a r t n e r s a c y c l e of s u r r e p t i t i o u s n e s s , f u r t i v e n e s s and u n t r u t h f u l n e s s . In her view both p a r t n e r s keep the jealou s y a l i v e f o r i t s secondary gains and need h e l p to gain i n s i g h t i n order to prevent or r e s o l v e "one p a r t n e r ' s withdrawal 57 from r e a l i t y , the other p a r t n e r ' s bondage, and r e c i p r o c a l u n r e s o l v a b l e h u r t s " (Seeman, 1979, p.359). Seeman (1979) i s the f i r s t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from p s y c h i a t r y to examine c l o s e l y the s o c i a l and i n t e r a c t i o n a l elements of the j e a l o u s y t r i a n g l e i n combination with a temporal and l i f e events p e r s p e c t i v e . Her treatment i n v o l v e s both p a r t n e r s . She i n t e r v e n e s to r e s t o r e s e l f - esteem, a r r e s t p e r c e p t u a l d i s t o r t i o n s , reduce secondary gains and r e - i n t r o d u c e candor i n t o the r e l a t i o n s h i p . She s t r e s s e s the r e a l i t y of the s i t u a t i o n and c o n t r a c t s with both to f o r g e t the past and c o n c e n t r a t e on the p r e s e n t . To prevent e l a b o r a t i o n of d e l u s i o n s she encourages each partner to " v a l i d a t e the other's i n t u i t i o n s and hunches" (Seeman, 1979, p.360). She encourages t r u t h f u l n e s s and • frankness from both regarding t h e i r a c t i o n s and s t r e s s e s that "candor does not i n c l u d e c o n f e s s i o n s of past a c t i o n s " (p.360). The l a t t e r she b e l i e v e s are r e t a l i a t o r y not s u p p o r t i v e . She n e u t r a l i z e s secondary gains through open d i s c u s s i o n which i n c l u d e s the sexual 'turn-on' r o l e of j e a l o u s y . Fantasy i s separated from a c t i o n , s i b l i n g - r i v a l r y and p a r e n t i n g games are exposed and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r c h i l d r e n are d i s c u s s e d . O v e r a l l , Seeman's treatment i s the most comprehensive and humanitarian of any suggested by p s y c h i a t r y to date. Cobb and Marks (1979) c l a i m that "morbid j e a l o u s y can o c c a s i o n a l l y be i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from obsessive-compulsive 58 n e u r o s i s " (p.301). In a p i l o t study they t r e a t e d four j e a l o u s persons on an o u t - p a t i e n t b a s i s . T h e i r treatment "combines operant c o n d i t i o n i n g with response p r e v e n t i o n and can be termed d i f f e r e n t i a l reinforcement" (p.303). P a t i e n t s are taught to " d i s t i n g u i s h c l e a r l y between normal and j e a l o u s thoughts" (p.303) and to d i s r e g a r d the l a t t e r . The partner ( o b j e c t ) of j e a l o u s y i s taught to ignore j e a l o u s q u e s t i o n s and reward normal q u e s t i o n s . The e t h i c s of t h i s approach must be que s t i o n e d . The l a s t example has the t h e r a p i s t e s t a b l i s h i n g d e f i n i t e power l i n e s between the couple — the o b j e c t i s made judge and jury over h i s / h e r partner i n d e c i d i n g the q u a l i t y of the other's q u e s t i o n s . Given the not uncommon p a r e n t a l i z a t i o n and s i b l i n g - r i v a l r y couple dynamics d e s c r i b e d by Seeman (1979), the t h e r a p i s t i n t h i s i n s t a n c e may be promoting ra t h e r than n e u t r a l i z i n g secondary g a i n s . Cobb and Marks (1979) e v a l u a t e t h e i r outcomes on the b a s i s of t a r g e t scores f o r r i t u a l s and ruminations. T h e i r c r i t e r i o n f o r improvement at follow-up was r e d u c t i o n of 4 or more p o i n t s on an 8-point s c a l e f o r much improved, 2 to 3.9 p o i n t s f o r improved, and l e s s than 2 p o i n t s f o r not improved, but they do not i n d i c a t e who d i d the r a t i n g . R i t u a l s were much improved f o r two p a t i e n t s and improved for one, but as i n d i c a t e d by t h e i r t a b l e , the f o u r t h p a t i e n t a c t u a l l y got worse. Follow-up by Cobb and Marks v a r i e d i n d u r a t i o n from two to f i f t e e n months. F i n a l l y , one of t h e i r 59 p a t i e n t s was on an a n t i - d e p r e s s a n t med i ca t i on f o r the d u r a t i o n of t reatment and f o l l o w - u p . They repo r t that "a t tempts to withdraw the drug l e d to an immediate i n c rea se in a n x i e t y and d e t e r i o r a t i o n in mood, but not to any change in j e a l o u s r i t u a l s " (p .303) . S u f f i c e i t to say that the p a t i e n t ' s i n c r e a s e in a n x i e t y and d e t e r i o r a t i o n of mood i n d i c a t e that h i s u n d e r l y i n g problems were s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t — r i t u a l s or no r i t u a l s . We are l e f t w i th no s u b s t a n t i v e ev idence f o r Cobb and Marks ' b e h a v i o r a l p sychotherapy . The f i n a l example from the p s y c h i a t r i c " l i t e r a t u r e i s a case study by Turbo t t (1981). It makes apparent the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i s c i p l i n e ' s e a r l i e r n e g l e c t in terms of f o c u s i n g on ly on the j e a l o u s sub jec t and not on the pa r tner or the r e l a t i o n s h i p . Tu rbo t t r e p o r t s the i n s t a n c e of a mar r i ed coup le in which the husband p re sen ted wi th d e l u s i o n a l j e a l o u s y which r a p i d l y subs ided wi th t rea tment . The wi fe in the i n t e r i m " r a p i d l y deve loped a f l o r i d parano id p s y c h o s i s " (p .167) , r e f u s e d treatment and made attempts to prevent her husband ' s f u r t h e r t rea tment . When h i s j e a l o u s y r e t u r n e d her p s y c h o s i s r e m i t t e d . Tu rbo t t conc ludes " c l e a r r e c i p r o c i t y of p sychopatho logy " (p.166) and c a u t i o n s that "morbid j e a l o u s y may r e s u l t from the unique i n t e r a c t i o n of two p e o p l e " (p .166) . Us ing h i s own and o ther examples he makes c l e a r the importance of a s s e s s i n g both p a r t n e r s and be ing a l e r t to the p o s s i b i l i t y of a c t i v e l y provoked j ea l ou s b e h a v i o u r . 60 T h i s review and c r i t i q u e has o u t l i n e d the h i s t o r i c a l development of j e a l o u s y theory and treatment as documented by the d i s c i p l i n e of p s y c h i a t r y . I t i s apparent that the theory l a r g e l y f o l l o w s the t r a d i t i o n of Freudian p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , f o c u s i n g almost e x c l u s i v e l y on the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of u n d e r l y i n g unconscious p r o c e s s e s . The f i r s t i n t e n s i v e e f f o r t (Seeman's) to i n v o l v e both p a r t n e r s i n therapy and look c l o s e l y at process and r e l a t i o n s h i p dynamics appears only i n 1979. No e f f o r t i s made to r e p o r t the c l i e n t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . Although the focus of treatment i s g r a d u a l l y more dynamic, the focus of theory remains almost e x c l u s i v e l y with the " p a t h o l o g i c a l " . G e n e r a l l y , t h i s tendency seems to r e s u l t i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l and l a y - p e r s o n t r a d i t i o n to view j e a l o u s y p r i m a r i l y as a p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t or c h a r a c t e r i s t i c even though the c o n s t r u c t " p e r s o n a l i t y " has i t s e l f not been v a l i d a t e d . N e v e r t h e l e s s , because any i n d i v i d u a l t h e r a p i s t ' s s u b j e c t i v e i n s i g h t s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s are v a l i d i n c l u s i o n s to the body of knowledge, the l i t e r a t u r e c o n t r i b u t e d by t h i s d i s c i p l i n e continues to be u s e f u l and a p p l i c a b l e . P s y c h i a t r y , i t seems, would be w e l l a dvised to continue i t s very recent trend toward more dynamic, i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y - b a s e d treatment f o r j e a l o u s y ; heed L a n g f e l d t ' s (1962) i n c l i n a t i o n to de-empathsize the r o l e of unconscious psychodynamic pro c e s s e s ; introduce more o b j e c t i v e and v a l i d e m p i r i c a l 61 r e s e a r c h , e s p e c i a l l y r e g a r d i n g t h e i r use of chemotherapy; and introduce the r e p o r t i n g of more s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts by t h e i r c l i e n t s . The next s e c t i o n presents and c r i t i q u e s p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y from the d i s c i p l i n e of psychology. I t begins with A d l e r (1928) and ends with the most recent r e s e a r c h by Aronson and Pines (1983). P e r s p e c t i v e s from Psychology The p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a c h r o n o l o g i c a l development of j e a l o u s y theory and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n w i t h i n the d i s c i p l i n e of psychiatry." As a s p e c i a l i t y w i t h i n medicine, p s y c h i a t r y , f o r the most part separates i t s e l f from the r e s t of psychology, adhering to the a n a l y s i s of unconscious processes and the d i a g n o s i s and treatment of pathology. T h i s s e p a r a t i o n can p a r t l y be t r a c e d to the era of A d l e r and Jung who i n i t i a t e d a departure from Freudian t r a d i t i o n . In psychology t h i s e v e n t u a l l y r e s u l t e d i n the- emergence of s e v e r a l s p e c i a l i t i e s and. a wide v a r i e t y of t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s . G r a d u a l l y t h i s a f f e c t s j e a l o u s y theory and i n t e r v e n t i o n s by i n c r e a s i n g the focus on s o c i o - c u l t u r a l , f a m i l y and i n t e r p e r s o n a l dynamics and by d e c r e a s i n g the focus on i n d i v i d u a l pathology. The r e s e a r c h on j e a l o u s y c o n t r i b u t e d by psychology and p u b l i s h e d p r i o r to the mid-seventies i s p r i m a r i l y t r a i t - based and s u b j e c t s are r e f e r r e d to as " j e a l o u s " or "non- 62 j e a l o u s " persons. T h i s i s i n s p i t e of a l t e r n a t i v e s that were at l e a s t i m p l i e d by Adl e r and Jung i n the twenties and t h i r t i e s . The 1976 appearance of Constantine's i n t e r a c t i o n a l model f o r j e a l o u s y allows f o r a p r e l i m i n a r y i n t e g r a t i o n of i n t e r p e r s o n a l and s t a t e - o r i e n t e d perspect i v e s . To demonstrate the development of j e a l o u s y theory and p r a c t i c e w i t h i n the d i s c i p l i n e of psychology t h i s s e c t i o n reviews and c r i t i q u e s the l i t e r a t u r e beginning with A d l e r (1928) and ending with the most recent r e s e a r c h . I t i s a chronology with the exception that j e a l o u s y instruments, Constantine's (1976) model, B a r t e l l ' s (1977) r e s e a r c h on synergism i n human r e l a t i o n s h i p s and the most recent r e s e a r c h on je a l o u s y by Aronson and Pines (1983) are e x t r a c t e d from the sequence and d i s c u s s e d together near the end of the s e c t i o n to f a c i l i t a t e i n t e g r a t i o n of t h i s and l a t e r c h a p t e r s . A d l e r (1928) t r a c e s j e a l o u s y ' s o r i g i n to the f i r s t few months of l i f e when, a c c o r d i n g to h i s theory, each i n d i v i d u a l i s developing h i s l i f e goal to overcome inherent weaknesses and f e e l i n g s of i n f e r i o r i t y . In h i s view, j e a l o u s y i s a c h a r a c t e r t r a i t that r e s u l t s from f e e l i n g s of being n e g l e c t e d or d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t , and i t s goal i s power. A 1982 t r a n s l a t e d work "Cooperation Between the Sexes" i n d i c a t e s that A d l e r ' s i n s i g h t s i n t o the dynamics of jea l o u s 63 behaviour emphasized i s s u e s of sexual development, but not in a Freudian d e t e r m i n i s t i c sense. A d l e r ' s views were more humanistic, s u b o r d i n a t i n g the sex d r i v e to man's "evaluation of i t f o r h i s own purposes. In h-is view of power, h i s concept of the "masculine p r o t e s t " [which " i s p o s s i b l e only i n a s o c i a l order of male dominance" (Adler, -1982, p. 146)] and h i s frequent r e f e r e n c e s to the a c t u a l , s o c i o - c u l t u r a l o b s t a c l e s to the female's development he i m p l i e s that j e a l o u s y i s more p r e v a l e n t i n women. Woman's r e a l s o c i a l s t a t u s thus a b d i c a t e s her g r e a t e r need to s t r i v e f o r power si n c e "no person can simply t o l e r a t e the f e e l i n g of a r e a l or apparent i n f e r i o r i t y " ( A d l e r , 1982, p.144). Jung (1961) i n c l u d e s j e a l o u s y among h i s "emotional m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of p s y c h o s e x u a l i t y " (p.115), but a l s o notes that i t "does not belong e n t i r e l y to the sexual sphere" (p.154) because i t "has i t s o r i g i n a l s t i r r i n g s i n the d e s i r e for food" (p.154). He c l a i m s that i t i s r e i n f o r c e d r a t h e r than t r i g g e r e d by e a r l y e r o t i c i s m s . Jung (1960) r e l a t e s the j e a l o u s y of paranoid, c h r o n i c a l c o h o l i c s to an "unconscious compensation" (p.209) for t h e i r sublimated love f o r t h e i r p a r t n e r s . T h i s compensation i s a s e l f - e f f o r t to get back on the course of duty. The a l c o h o l i c c o n s c i o u s l y p e r c e i v e s that h i s love i s e n t i r e l y l o s t but i t "can now reappear [from the unconscious] only i n the form of j e a l o u s y " (p.209). Jung (1954) a l s o uses the case study of a seven year 64 o l d boy to exemplify j e a l o u s rage as a compensatory power m a n i f e s t a t i o n . The boy, an only c h i l d , was o r i g i n a l l y diagnosed as being mentally r e t a r d e d but l a t e r i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s showed the o p p o s i t e . A speech impediment ( l a t e r r e s o l v e d by a simple s u r g e r y ) , l a c k of c o o r d i n a t i o n i n walking and a squint i n one eye eventuated i n l e a r n i n g and b e h a v i o u r a l problems. When the boy was expected to compete on u n f a i r grounds he would express rage in the form of temper tantrums, b u l l y i n g and throwing t h i n g s . These problems exacerabated at age f i v e a f t e r the b i r t h of a brother who was soon p r a i s e d f o r doing t h i n g s that were impossible f o r h i s s i b l i n g . Jung d e s c r i b e s , i n the c h i l d , a c y c l e of rage and v i n d i c t i v e n e s s a l t e r n a t i n g with moods of remorse and a f f e c t i o n . T h i s approximates the c y c l e d e s c r i b e d by Seeman (1979) for her a d u l t sample d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s c hapter. Both authors emphasize the u n f a i r e x p e c t a t i o n s and judgements p l a c e d on t h e i r c l i e n t s by the s o c i a l groups in which they p a r t i c i p a t e , thus p o i n t i n g to a need for t h e r a p i s t s to examine the s i t u a t i o n and the r o l e s of i n v o l v e d o t h e r s before d i a g n o s i n g i n d i v i d u a l pathology. F e e l i n g s of impotence and r e s u l t i n g rage may appear more p u r p o s e f u l and a d a p t i v e than p a t h o l o g i c a l when the circumstances i n d i c a t e that the i n d i v i d u a l i s e x p e r i e n c i n g powerlessness. In summary, Jung's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s focus on s i t u a t i o n a l 65 f a c t o r s and are concerned with the c l i e n t ' s goal or purpose. His b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n s , r e l a t i v e t o Freud's, de-emphasize the r o l e of unconscious sexual impulses and are congruent with h i s " o p t i m i s t i c and c r e a t i v e view of humans" (Corey, 1977, p.19). Jung's r e c o g n i t i o n of s o c i e t y ' s r o l e and ex p e c t a t i o n s acknowledge that j e a l o u s behaviour may sometimes be the i n d i v i d u a l ' s best e f f o r t . Reik (1946) contends that j e a l o u s y i s "a si g n that something i s wrong, not n e c e s s a r i l y r o t t e n , i n the organism of l o v e " (p.173). He b e l i e v e s i t i s a symptom not a dis e a s e and on the b a s i s of c l i n i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s he notes some sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of predominant elemental f e e l i n g s , aims and behaviours. J e a l o u s y , i n Reik's (1949) view, i s compounded of envy, depression and a g g r e s s i o n . However, the female's experience c o n s i s t s mainly of envy and the male's of rage. The woman's aim i s to defeat her r i v a l and get back the loved o b j e c t . Her f e a r s i n v o l v e l o s s of emotional involvement, time, a t t e n t i o n , and s e c u r i t y as w e l l as t h r e a t of abandonment, so she becomes p o s s e s s i v e and schemes. The male i s more l i k e l y to experience and act out anger and rage. A c c o r d i n g to Reik, t h i s i s because the male a c c u r a t e l y i n t e r p r e t s that h i s woman's sexual involvement with another i m p l i e s her emotional involvement. H i s aim, i n Reik's view, i s more o f t e n one of r e t a l i a t i o n but h i s rage, emanating from a threatened sexual s e l f - c o n c e p t , renders him inca p a b l e of 66 r a t i o n a l t h i n k i n g or scheming. Reik (1949) proposes that women react by h o l d i n g on to t h e i r p a r t n e r s or by f i g h t i n g , to win them back. Men, i n c o n t r a s t , w i l l focus on images of t h e i r p a r t n e r ' s sexual involvement with the t h i r d p a r t y and react by withdrawing, r e j e c t i n g t h e i r p a r t n e r s or r e t a l i a t i n g . C e n t r a l to Reik's t h e s i s i s a l s o a p e r s p e c t i v e of j e a l o u s y as being a symptom of low s e l f - e s t e e m . T h i s review already i n d i c a t e s some consensus that j e a l o u s y i s a s s o c i a t e d with f e e l i n g s o f i n f e r i o r i t y or a low s e l f - e s t e e m , but' r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s to be reviewed l a t e r (Buunk, 1982; Jaremko & Lindsey, 1979; Teisman & Mosher, 1978; and White, 1976, 1981) are i n c o n s i s t e n t i n t h i s regard. The methodological problems encountered i n v o l v e the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of both j e a l o u s y and s e l f - e s t e e m . A c c o r d i n g l y , Corzine (1974) c i t e s Coopersmith (1967) and Wylie (1961) in an overview of problems inherent to the study of s e l f - e s t e e m and s e l f - c o n c e p t . F i r s t l y , he observes that "the i n d i v i d u a l may or may not be aware that h i s e x p r e s s i o n s are spurious rather than genuine" (Corzine, 1974, p.31). The i n d i v i d u a l with low s e l f - r e g a r d may thus be e f f e c t i v e l y or i n e f f e c t i v e l y c o n c e a l i n g i t from h i m s e l f and/or o t h e r s . Secondly, he observes that p e r s o n a l values a s s o c i a t e d with l a b e l l e d high and low s e l f - e s t e e m "make i t d i f f i c u l t to a r r i v e at commonly accepted norms f o r s c i e n t i f i c e v a l u a t i o n " ' ( p . 3 2 ) . He notes that some 67 i n v e s t i g a t o r s assume a r rogance , v a n i t y , egot i sm, p r i d e and n a r c i s s i s m are a s s o c i a t e d wi th very h i gh s e l f - e s t e e m , wh i l e i n f e r i o r i t y , t i m i d i t y , l ack of p e r s o n a l a ccep tance , s e l f - ha t red and submis s iveness are a s s o c i a t e d w i th low s e l f - esteem. However, these assumptions have not been v a l i d a t e d and in t h i s a u t h o r ' s v iew, i t i s a l s o very important to c o n s i d e r tha t s e l f - e s t e e m may be dynamic and changing r a t h e r than s t a t i c . T h e r e f o r e , e m p i r i c a l measurement and comparison of i t w i th other c o n s t r u c t s such as j e a l o u s y shou ld i n v o l v e , m i n i m a l l y , a t ime s e r i e s approach. In terms of phenomenolog ica l approaches , t h i s author, i s in agreement wi th C o r z i n e who under scores W y l i e ' s c r i t i c i s m s by say ing they n e g l e c t " d r i v e s and unconsc ious m o t i v a t i o n s o u t s i d e the phenomenal f i e l d " ( C o r z i n e , 1974, p .35 ) , thus seemingly assuming that human behav i ou r s , i n c l u d i n g j e a l o u s y behav i ou r s , w i l l be i n f l u e n c e d on ly by s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n s tha t we are aware o f . Wy l ie (1974) re -emphas izes these v iews. Thus, a combined approach may r e s u l t in a more p r e c i s e under s tand ing of j e a l o u s y ' s a f f i l i a t i o n w i th s e l f - e s t e e m . The f i r s t author in the d i s c i p l i n e to suggest s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s i s Ard (1967) who s t r e s s e s the importance of c l e a r communication to a v o i d d e s t r u c t i v e r e a c t i o n s to j e a l o u s y . Emphas iz ing that j e a l o u s behav iour s are dependent on u n d e r l y i n g assumptions he recommends that each pa r tne r d e t a i l h i s / h e r l i m i t s of a c c e p t a b l e behav iour w i th e x t r a d y a d i c , o p p o s i t e - s e x per sons . T h i s exchange shou ld be 68 rev iewed as the r e l a t i o n s h i p p r o g r e s s e s . T r u s t , c l e a r committment and e x p l i c i t communication are the essence of a s u c c e s s f u l r e l a t i o n s h i p in t h i s a u t h o r ' s v iew. Beecher and Beecher (1971), s tudents of A d l e r ' s , wrote "The Mark of C a i n " add re s s i n g the i s sue s of j e a l o u s y and j e a l o u s c o m p e t i t i o n . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , they do not d i s t i n g u i s h between j ea l ou sy and envy, and a l though they make f requent gene ra l r e f e r e n c e s to A d l e r ' s spoken and w r i t t e n p h i l o s o p h i e s , they do not r e f e r to any of h i s s p e c i f i c s about j e a l o u s y . Instead,, they r e l y p redominant l y oh p e r s o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of B i b l i c a l passages. The book i s p r e f a c e d wi th a New Testament c i t a t i o n , " f o r where j e a l o u s y and s e l f i s h ambi t ion e x i s t , the re w i l l be d i s o r d e r and every v i l e p r a c t i c e " (James 3:16, R . S .V . ) . A review of E l l i o t ' s (1967) g l o s s a r y i n d i c a t e s tha t t h i s may w e l l be an a r c h a i c use of the word j e a l o u s y which more l i t e r a l l y connotes envy. J e a l o u s y i s d i s c u s s e d in an e x c l u s i v e l y p e j o r a t i v e way by Beecher and Beecher (1971). In t h e i r view i t i s always symptomatic, p a t h o l o g i c a l or d e s t r u c t i v e . They say "no one in h i s t o r y has spoken w e l l of j e a l o u s y , except perhaps the person who t r i e s to excuse h i m s e l f in order to h ide i t from h i m s e l f " ( p . 5 ) . However, t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n n e g l e c t s the O ld Testament c l a i m "I am a j e a l o u s God" (Exodus 20 :5 , R .S .V . ) . Is the C h r i s t i a n God making nega t i ve s e l f - r e f e r e n c e s or i s he/she s t a t i n g an i n t e n t i o n to z e a l o u s l y p r o t e c t h i s p e r c e i v e d r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s which are the founda t i on s of 69 C h r i s t i a n philosophy and p r a c t i c e ? The Beechers, in s p i t e of t h e i r r e s t r i c t e d views and tendency to confuse j e a l o u s y with envy, address i t s f r e q u e n t l y mentioned a s s o c i a t i o n with power and c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e i r a n a l o g i e s always a s s o c i a t e j e a l o u s behaviours with the seeking of a s u p e r i o r power. T h i s n e g l e c t s the complexity of emotions in g e n e r a l and j e a l o u s y i n p a r t i c u l a r . The authors do not c o n s i d e r any u s e f u l purpose or p o t e n t i a l l y p o s i t i v e i n t e n t i o n or m o t i v a t i o n f o r e i t h e r j e a l o u s y or power. They n e g l e c t i n t e r p e r s o n a l dynamics, s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , and the p e r s p e c t i v e that an i n d i v i d u a l , i n circumstances which indeed render him/her very v u l n e r a b l e , may seek and have a fundamental need f o r 'more' but not n e c e s s a r i l y ' s u p e r i o r ' power. Jea l o u s y , i n these circumstances, may be p r o t e c t i v e , d e f e n s i v e or adaptive r a t h e r than d e s t r u c t i v e and p a t h o l o g i c a l . T h e i r text makes few t h e r a p e u t i c suggestions beyond i n t e r p r e t i n g f o r the i n d i v i d u a l how h i s j e a l o u s comparisons destroy h i s c r e a t i v i t y and i n i t i a t i v e and keep him i n f a n t i l e and dependent. May (1972) d i s c u s s e s j e a l o u s y as a problem of power and love c l a i m i n g that some aspect of i t i s h e a l t h y but more t y p i c a l l y i t "leaves the realms of normal c a r i n g . . . . [ a n d ] c h a r a c t e r i z e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p i n which one seeks more power than l o v e " (p.117). He a l s o says that " i t i s an impotence that a r i s e s in d i r e c t p r o p o r t i o n to the impotence of the 70 i n d i v i d u a l " (p.117). He a s s o c i a t e s j e a l o u s y with l o w - s e l f esteem, powerlessness and r e s u l t i n g s t r u g g l e s f o r r i g h t s , p r i v i l e g e s and freedom. From h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , v i o l e n c e occurs when the person e x p e r i e n c i n g j e a l o u s y a c t u a l l y can do nothing, has no power and experiences h i m s e l f as being l e f t •out i n the c o l d . L i k e Adler and Jung, he t h e r e f o r e i m p l i e s that j e a l o u s y ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p with power i s more than i n t r a p s y c h i c a l l y determined. May (1972) accomplishes a h o l i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e on power by i n c l u d i n g and t r a n s c e n d i n g a continuum of p o s i t i v e s and n e g a t i v e s . However, h i s proposed r e l a t i o n s h i p between j e a l o u s y and power f a l l s short of holism. A c l e a r understanding of May's t h e s i s about power w i l l f a c i l i t a t e a new t h e s i s about j e a l o u s y . May (1972) says "power i s e s s e n t i a l f o r a l l l i v i n g t h i n g s " (p.19) and d i s c u s s e s p o l a r i t i e s i n terms of how power emerges in the i n f a n t and developing human. One pole i s c o m p e t i t i v e and demanding, while the other i s c o o p e r a t i v e . He names f i v e o n t o l o g i c a l l e v e l s of power i n c l u d i n g the power to be, s e l f - a f f i r m a t i o n , s e l f - a s s e r t i o n , a g g r e s s i o n and v i o l e n c e . Each of these l e v e l s e x i s t i n a l l humans as a p o t e n t i a l i t y and " i n the r i g h t s i t u a t i o n can be whipped i n t o a c t i o n " (p.42). Aggression and v i o l e n c e occur only when the other l e v e l s have been blocked or are i n e f f e c t i v e . He says "power i s always i n t e r p e r s o n a l ; i f i t i s p u r e l y p e r s o n a l we c a l l i t s t r e n g t h " (p.35). He 71 emphasizes a modern day tendency, that i s "a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t the d e s t r u c t i v e e f f e c t s of the misuse of. power" (May, 1972, p.20), to view power i n a p e j o r a t i v e way r a t h e r than as a s i g n i f i c a n t , fundamental aspect of the l i f e p r o c e s s . May (1972) d e f i n e s power as "the a b i l i t y to cause or prevent change" (p.99), p o i n t i n g out that i t can be viewed in a c t u a l or p o t e n t i a l terms. He names f i v e types of power — e x p l o i t a t i v e , m a n i p u l a t i v e , c o m p e t i t i v e , n u t r i e n t and i n t e g r a t i v e . Only the l a s t two need some e x p l a n a t i o n . N u t r i e n t power, he says i s " f o r the other" (p.109) and he e x e m p l i f i e s i t along a range from that power a parent e x e r t s in c a r i n g f o r h i s / h e r c h i l d to the power p o t e n t i a l l y expressed through statesmanship at i t s best. I n t e g r a t i v e power, u l t i m a t e l y the most a l t r u i s t i c type, i s "with the other person" (p.109). I t i s "a d i a l e c t i c process of t h e s i s , a n t i t h e s i s and s y n t h e s i s . . . there i s one body, then i t s antibody, and growth proceeds by the r e p u l s i o n or a t t r a c t i o n of these two i n t o a new body" (May, 1972, p.110). He e x e m p l i f i e s i n t e g r a t i v e power i n Ghandi's use of i t through nonviolence and i n i n s t a n c e s when the c r e a t o r of an idea s o l i c i t s a p o l a r response in an i n t e r p e r s o n a l exchange i n order to s t i m u l a t e c r e a t i v i t y . May's concept of power i s h o l i s t i c and s y n e r g i s t i c because i t transcends the continuum by using three conceptual p o i n t s thus i n t e r s e c t i n g a new plane. In t h i s way May supports t h i s author's model f o r 72 emotions as proposed i n chapter one. With these ideas i n mind May's (1972) t h e s i s about power can be a p p l i e d to expand the concept of j e a l o u s y . There i s g e n e r a l agreement i n the l i t e r a t u r e that j e a l o u s y e l e m e n t a l l y i n v o l v e s at l e a s t some aspect of power. However, the trend has been toward to a s s o c i a t e i t with the p e j o r a t i v e , d e s t r u c t i v e s i d e of power. In congruence with t h i s trend May a p p l i e s h i s e x p l o i t a t i v e , c o m p e t i t i v e and manipulative types of power to j e a l o u s y . C o n s i d e r i n g both p e j o r a t i v e and p o s i t i v e labels', w'e can see j e a l o u s y as h i g h l y d e s t r u c t i v e or h i g h l y c o n s t r u c t i v e . I t can be viewed as o c c u r r i n g i n t e r n a l l y and/or expressed e x t e r n a l l y i n a s s o c i a t i o n with each of May's f i v e types of power, i n c l u d i n g the n u t r i e n t and the i n t e g r a t i v e types. Jealousy can then be c o n s t i t u t e d by an e x e r c i s e of and/or need for power e x i s t i n g with the same p o t e n t i a l i t i e s i n r e l a t i o n to each of h i s f i v e o n t o l o g i c a l l e v e l s , from the power "to be" to the powers i n / o f s e l f - a f f i r m a t i o n , s e l f - a s s e r t i o n , a g g r e s s i o n and v i o l e n c e . As May (1972) says of power, p o s s i b l y any of these l e v e l s can a l s o be "whipped i n t o a c t i o n " (p.42) in v a r i o u s experiences of j e a l o u s y . L i k e power, j e a l o u s y (and most other emotions i f we c o n s i d e r the t h e o r i e s of I z a r d and Solomon reviewed e a r l i e r ) motivates and i t s purpose i s to c r e a t e change. "What i t a c h i e v e s " (as i s the c e n t r a l q u e s t i o n asked by May of power) may be something that i s t r u l y c r e a t i v e i n the p o s i t i v e 73 sense, or something that i s very d e s t r u c t i v e , or something that l i e s between or at a t h i r d p o i n t "beyond" these p o l a r i t i e s . E l l i s (1972) c a l l s j e a l o u s y "sex-love t e a r f u l n e s s " (p.118) and d i s t i n g u i s h e s between r a t i o n a l and i r r a t i o n a l j e a l o u s y . R a t i o n a l j e a l o u s y " i s based on the l o g i c o - e m p i r i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s " (p.118). I r r a t i o n a l j e a l o u s y , i n c o n t r a s t , " i s one of the common forms of emotional d i s t u r b a n c e " (p.119). He says i t " i s an i d i o s y n c r a t i c r e a c t i o n to someone b l o c k i n g you" (p.120) and sees along with i t an i l l o g i c a l b e l i e f system that i s "dogmatic, a b s o l u t i s t i c ... and e x a c t l y l i k e those i n which orthodox r e l i g i o n i s t s devoutly b e l i e v e " (p.121). E l l i s ' t e s t f o r the l e v e l of r a t i o n a l i t y the i n d i v i d u a l , can a t t r i b u t e to h i s / h e r j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s i s a rat h e r s i m p l i s t i c check f o r t h e i r l o g i c a l connection with s c i e n t i f i c a l l y observable evidence. Some d i f f i c u l t y i s to be expected i n a p p l y i n g t h i s theory which l a c k s a f f i l i a t i o n with the major t h e o r i e s of emotion. F i r s t l y , "the" l o g i c i s h i s l o g i c ; secondly, h i s theory excludes the p o s s i b i l i t y of the emotion having any phenomenological aspect; t h i r d l y , he im p l i e s that emotion not only has no independent s t a t u s , but serves l i t t l e or no purpose beyond s e r v i n g as a warning s i g n a l f o r th i n g s gone wrong i n the c o g n i t i v e bank; f i n a l l y , i t denies the p o s s i b i l i t y of i n t u i t i o n . C o r z i n e (1974), c i t e d above i n r e f e r e n c e to h i s 74 c r i t i q u e of sel f - e s t e e m methodologies, t e s t s the a s s o c i a t i o n of i n t e g r a t i v e / d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y processes and. j e a l o u s y . He claims and p r o v i d e s support to i n d i c a t e that an i n t e g r a t i v e / d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e schema i s s t r u c t u r e d i n t o the "Bu t l e r - H a i g h Q-Sort" instrument that he uses. T h i s instrument, designed by C a r l Rogers and a s s o c i a t e s "to measure changes e f f e c t e d by t h e r a p e u t i c a t t e n t i o n over a s p e c i f i c p e r i o d o f time" ( C o r z i n e , 1974, p.76), i s u s u a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d i n a pre-therapy/post-therapy f a s h i o n . C o r z i n e uses an adapted v e r s i o n to measure "the no t i o n of s e l f - concept based on s u b j e c t s ' s e l f - d e s c r i p t i o n s " (p.76) to c h a r a c t e r i z e " j e a l o u s " and "non-jealous" persons. He a s s o c i a t e s high s e l f - e s t e e m and the s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g i n d i v i d u a l with i n t e g r a t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y processes and low se l f - e s t e e m or the non s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g i n d i v i d u a l with d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y p r o c e s s e s . D i s - i n t e g r a t i v e means a "movement away from i n t e g r i t y and i n the d i r e c t i o n of c o n f l i c t " (Corzine, 1974, p.176), r a t h e r than a d i v i d i n g or d e s t r u c t i o n of the psyche. C o r z i n e was t h e o r y - t e s t i n g by way of of Q-methodology and F - t e s t procedures. T h i s methodology uses small samples and t e s t s t h e o r i e s "by way of s i n g u l a r p r o p o s i t i o n s that may be d e r i v a t i v e of a p a r t i c u l a r theory" (p.76). His s i n g u l a r p r o p o s i t i o n , i n essence, views p e r c e p t i o n of s e l f as a p o s s i b l e p e r s o n a l i t y dimension i n a l a r g e r theory of j e a l o u s y . He acknowledges that t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n r e f l e c t s 75 only on the i n t e r n a l e xperience. In t h i s author's view, i t i s a l s o important to remember that C o r z i n e ' s c o n c l u s i o n s are d e r i v e d from a uni d i m e n s i o n a l assessment of j e a l o u s y dynamics that a l s o excludes the r o l e ( s ) of i n v o l v e d o t h e r s . An homogenous sample of 38 " j e a l o u s " and 38 "non- j e a l o u s " persons were i d e n t i f i e d s o l e l y on the b a s i s of t h e i r s e l f - r e p o r t that j e a l o u s y e i t h e r was or was not a s i g n i f i c a n t problem f o r them i n terms of t h e i r a t t i t u d e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s . C o r z i n e ' s sampling and procedures thus assume that j e a l o u s y i s d i s p o s i t i o n a l . The c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h assumes j e a l o u s y to be d y n a m i c a l l y rather than s t a t i c a l l y , and i n t e r p e r s o n a l l y as w e l l as i n t r a p e r s o n a l l y experienced. Hence, i t i s r e l e v a n t to conceive of a l t e r n a t e e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r some of C o r z i n e ' s c o n c l u s i o n s and to suggest that had he t e s t e d the p a r t n e r s ( j e a l o u s o b j e c t s ) and i n v o l v e d others ( j e a l o u s agents) as w e l l as h i s j e a l o u s " s u b j e c t s " at v a r i o u s p o i n t s in time, he may have found that a l l p a r t i e s were, o v e r a l l , s i m i l a r l y a f f e c t e d by the j e a l o u s y "process" i n terms of t h e i r s e l f - esteems and s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g l y , Rogers (1972), to whom Cor z i n e a t t r i b u t e s the o r i g i n a l design of the instrument, questioned j e a l o u s y moreso in the context of r e l a t i o n s h i p , s o c i o - c u l t u r a l and g r o u p - i n f l u e n c e d dynamics than as a p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . Even Rogers' suggestion of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y as a p o s s i b l e b i o l o g i c a l aspect of j e a l o u s y suggests i n t e r p e r s o n a l and p o s s i b l y group 76 involvement. A l s o , the l i m i t a t i o n s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r , i n terms of s e l f - e s t e e m as a c o n s t r u c t are inherent to C o r z i n e ' s own d e s i g n . C o r z i n e ' s s u b j e c t s each s o r t e d , i n t o -9 p i l e s , 97 cards c o n t a i n i n g 36 i n t e g r a t i v e items (e.g., "I am a r e s p o n s i b l e person") and 61 d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e items (e.g., "I have a- f e e l i n g of h o p e l e s s n e s s " ) . Beforehand, a l l items had been judged to belong to e i t h e r category on the b a s i s of a two out of three vote by an independent panel of three p s y c h o l o g i s t s . Each subject used a r e c o r d i n g sheet that s t r u c t u r e d the number of cards from each category that would be a l l o t t e d to each of the nine p i l e s . On completion of the s o r t i n g t h i s r e s u l t s i n a normal d i s t r i b u t i o n r e f l e c t i n g a range from "most l i k e me" to " l e a s t l i k e me". Subgroupings of h i s sample were s t r u c t u r e d i n t o h i s s i x hypotheses. T e s t i n g of the f i r s t n u l l hypothesis showed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between j e a l o u s and non-jealous a d u l t s . Corzine concludes that "fewer strategems, both c o n s c i o u s and unconscious, are r e q u i r e d by them [the non-jealous group] in order to cope" (p.151). Viewed d i f f e r e n t l y , i n terms of t r i a n g u l a r group dynamics, t h i s c o n c l u s i o n wants for c o n s i d e r a t i o n of what i t i s about the process that r e q u i r e s more coping on the part of the j e a l o u s s u b j e c t . For example, an a n a l y s i s of power i n the t r i a n g l e suggests that the s u b j e c t , because he/she i s e x p e r i e n c i n g the t h r e a t of l o s s , i s t e m p o r a r i l y i n a lower p o s i t i o n r e l a t i v e to both 77 obje c t and agent. Hence, he/she w i l l indeed r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l coping mechanisms, and more than the others., i f change i s to occur and i f dynamic e q u i l i b r i u m i s to be r e - e s t a b l i s h e d . S e v e r a l other subgroupings by sex and a t o t a l of s i x n u l l hypotheses about i n t e g r a t i v e / d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e processes were used by Corzine (1974) to c h a r a c t e r i z e the " j e a l o u s person" and the "non-jealous person". At i s s u e , given these a p r i o r i c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s , i s h i s c o n f l i c t i n g use of s o c i o - c u l t u r a l l y based and s t a t e - o r i e n t e d r a t h e r than' t r a i t - o r i e n t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . For example, he f i n d s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between j e a l o u s males (JM) and nqn- je a l o u s males (NJM) but s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between j e a l o u s females (JF) and non-jealous females (NJF). His i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n c l u d e s , i n the f i r s t i n s t a n c e , that NJM do not measure d i f f e r e n t l y than JM i n terms of i n t e g r a t i v e / d i s - i n t e g r a t i v e processes because "viewing the l o v e - o b j e c t as h i s p r o p e r t y , he e x t e r n a l i z e s h i s p e r c e p t i o n of the j e a l o u s circumstance" (Corzine, 1974, p.153). His evidence i n d i c a t i n g more i n t e g r a t i o n among JF when compared with NJF i s l i k e w i s e i n t e r p r e t e d s o c i o - c u l t u r a l l y and grounded i n western s o c i e t y ' s s a n c t i o n i n g of woman's v u l n e r a b i l i t i e s v i a t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s so t h a t : J e a l o u s y i s r e a d i l y p e r c e i v e d by the female as an i n t e r n a l problem... [and] she, in c o n t r a s t to the male, senses that her p e r s o n a l inadequacies are f i n a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the circumstances which p r e c i p i t a t e her j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s " ( C o r z i n e , 1974, p.156). 78 Corzine i n c o r p o r a t e s s o c i o - c u l t u r a l and i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y - b a s e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s that would be more adequately supported by comparing " j e a l o u s t r i a n g l e s " with "non-jealous t r i a n g l e s " f o l l o w e d by i n t e r - g r o u p a n a l y s i s of i n d i v i d u a l and r e c i p r o c a l r o l e s . If the s o c i e t a l process a f f e c t s i n d i v i d u a l experiences as much as i s i n d i c a t e d by C o r z i n e ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s then i t l i k e w i s e r e q u i r e s grounding i n the a n a l y s i s of i n t e r p e r s o n a l and group processes. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , i n d i v i d u a l comparisons which exclude o b j e c t and agent r e q u i r e i n c o r p o r a t i o n of both o b j e c t i v e and s u b j e c t i v e - e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts by the s u b j e c t s as w e l l as a r e l i n q u i s h i n g of the tendency to l a b e l the i n d i v i d u a l on the b a s i s of a s i n g l e emotion which probably has only .temporary meaning to t h e i r l i f e p r ocess. However, i t must be remembered that Corzine was r e s e a r c h i n g j e a l o u s y before the 1976 i n t r o d u c t i o n of Constantine's i n t e r a c t i o n a l model which i s d i s c u s s e d toward the end of t h i s s e c t i o n . The expanded p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y provided by h i s model are evidenced i n s e v e r a l of the f o l l o w i n g s t u d i e s . For example, a new approach f o r working with j e a l o u s y i s suggested by Clanton and Smith (1977) who d i r e c t t h e i r t e x t at the " s u b j e c t " of j e a l o u s y , without d i s c o u n t i n g the r o l e s of i n v o l v e d o t h e r s . T h e i r i n t e r v e n t i o n s i n c o r p o r a t e an i n t i a l s t o c k - t a k i n g to determine type of j e a l o u s y , c o n t r i b u t i o n of mood and kind of work to be done on the 79 r e l a t i o n s h i p . They view j e a l o u s y as a c a t a l y s t f o r s e l f - improvement and for s t r e n g t h e n i n g intimacy. The authors suggest an opening of communication channels by t a l k i n g f i r s t about past experiences, then s h a r i n g f a n t a s i e s and d i s c u s s i n g i s s u e s of d i s t r u s t , deception and manipulation and e v e n t u a l l y p r o g r e s s i n g to candid d i s c u s s i o n of important i s s u e s . They acknowledge a p h y s i o l o g i c a l " j e a l o u s f l a s h " , emphasize the " f e a r of l o s s " component of the emotion, and recognize j e a l o u s y as a t r i g g e r f o r c o n s t r u c t i v e communication which "leads to c l a r i f i c a t i o n of"needs, meanings, b e l i e f s and v a l u e s " (p.213). Then F r a n c i s (1977) examines aspects of j e a l o u s y - related-couple-communication. She analyzes them in terms of the experience and e x p r e s s i o n of the emotion, d i s c l o s i n g s e v e r a l b a r r i e r s that p r o v i d e f o r a (negative) enhancement of the j e a l o u s y response. Her i n v e n t i v e methodology i n c o r p o r a t e s a s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w before s u b j e c t s know je a l o u s y i s being i n v e s t i g a t e d . Both p a r t n e r s are simultaneously i n v o l v e d i n a L i k e r t r a t i n g of p o t e n t i a l l y j e a l o u s y - e v o k i n g s i t u a t i o n s . The i n t e r v i e w e r q u e s t i o n s one p a r t n e r while the other observes through a one-way g l a s s , second-guessing h i s / h e r p a r t n e r ' s w r i t t e n , anonymous responses. Four q u e s t i o n n a i r e s are a d m i n i s t e r e d a f t e r the i n t e r v i e w . F r a n c i s (1977) shows evidence f o r wide i n d i v i d u a l , v a r i a t i o n s i n j e a l o u s y experience, e s p e c i a l l y i n terms of 80 e l i c i t i n g f a c t o r s and manner of e x p r e s s i o n but a l s o regarding the a t t r i b u t i o n of i n f i d e l i t y to s e l f and p a r t n e r , the source and s i g n i f i c a n c e of j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s and the means of c o p i n g . S o c i a l u n d e s i r a b l i t y of the j e a l o u s response i n h i b i t s communication and prevents b a s i c r e c o g n i t i o n of these d i s c r e p a n c i e s . Therefore she d i r e c t s i n t e r v e n t i o n at the communcation system and recommends d e a l i n g with j e a l o u s y as a n e u t r a l phenomenon. L i k e Ard (1967), she suggests c l a r i f y i n g u n d e r l y i n g assumptions and working through h y p o t h e t i c a l extradyad'ic s i t u a t i o n s but c a u t i o n s that open communication must, be f o l l o w e d by. n e g o t i a t i o n s toward mutually a c c e p t a b l e r u l e s and boundaries i f j e a l o u s y problems are to be prevented or withstood by the r e l a t i o n s h i p . Shettel-Neuber, Bryson and Young (1978) examine the e f f e c t s of s u b j e c t ' s sex and p h y s i c a l a t t r a c t i v e n e s s of a t h i r d p a r t y i n t e r l o p e r i n terms of the e x p r e s s i o n of j e a l o u s y . They assess " p r o j e c t e d " responses to video-taped, simulated, j e a l o u s y - e v o k i n g s i t u a t i o n s , using 42 male and 41 female undergraduate students. A t t r a c t i v e n e s s i s manipulated fo r the d i f f e r e n t experimental c o n d i t i o n s by a l t e r a t i o n s i n f a s h i o n , c l o t h i n g , h a i r s t y l e , s k i n c o n d i t i o n and p h y s i c a l movements. A n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e r e v e a l e d s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s due to sex, a t t r a c t i v e n e s s , or the i n t e r a c t i o n of both, fo r 12 of t h e i r 36 dependent measures. Regardless of sex, s u b j e c t s were more l i k e l y to f e e l angry 81 or embarassed when the i n t e r l o p e r was u n a t t r a c t i v e . The authors e x p l a i n t h i s as being "due to the s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n and/or the d i f f e r i n g nature of the t h r e a t that an u n a t t r a c t i v e i n t e r l o p e r seems to present" (Shettel-Neuber et a l . , 1978, p.614). Males i n t h e i r study were more l i k e l y to i n i t i a t e angry and/or a g g r e s s i v e behaviours as a response. Examples i n c l u d e d that they would get angry with themselves, get drunk or high and v e r b a l l y t h r e a t e n the other person. Although t h i s f i n d i n g supports e a r l i e r views (cf . Reik, 1949; C o r z i n e , 1974 ) , Shettel-Neuber et a l . do not d i s c u s s p o s s i b l e confounds i n terms of the s p e c i f i c age range and p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l m i l i e u of t h e i r male s u b j e c t s . Males were a l s o more l i k e l y to report f e e l i n g " f l a t t e r e d " by the i n t e r l o p e r ' s a c t i o n s and more "turned on" by t h e i r p a r t n e r s while females r e p o r t e d that they would be more l i k e l y to c r y when alone, make themselves more a t t r a c t i v e to t h e i r p a r t n e r and t r y to make t h e i r p a rtner th i n k they d i d n ' t c a r e . Again these f i n d i n g s support other views about the e f f e c t s of s e x - r o l e t r a d i t i o n a l i s m and r e s u l t i n g d i s t i n c t i o n s i n terms of power d i f f u s i o n ( c f . A d l e r 1928, 1982; May, 1972; C o r z i n e , 1974; and White, 1981) . Males were a l s o more l i k e l y to r e p o r t that they would s t a r t going out with other people and become more s e x u a l l y a g g r e s s i v e with others i f the i n t e r l o p e r was a t t r a c t i v e , but 82 females were more l i k e l y to respond in these ways when the i n t e r l o p e r was u n a t t r a c t i v e . To e x p l a i n these d i f f e r e n c e s , the authors say: If we assume that an a t t r a c t i v e i n t e r l o p e r i s seen as more t h r e a t e n i n g to the r e l a t i o n s h i p , then as the t h r e a t i n c r e a s e s males become more l i k e l y to seek so l a c e or to b o l s t e r t h e i r ego by pursuing a l t e r n a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Females, on the other hand, become l e s s l i k e l y to engage in behaviors that might accent the t h r e a t to the e x i s t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p (Shettel-Neuber et a l . , 1978, p.614). The r e s e a r c h e r s a l s o examine p o s s i b l e p e r s o n a l i t y c o r r e l a t e s ( l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , self-esteem' and body image) of the v a r i o u s j e a l o u s y r e a c t i o n s but f i n d i n g s are not s i g n i f i c a n t . They conclude that "the present r e s u l t s suggest that s i t u a t i o n a l or c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s (e.g., sex- r o l e ) are more important than p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n determining the nature and magnitude of j e a l o u s y r e a c t i o n s " (Shettel-Neuber et a l l , 1978, p.615). T h e i r r e s e a r c h r e v e a l s that "males' and females' p r o j e c t e d responses to a j e a l o u s y - e v o k i n g s i t u a t i o n are q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t " (p.615). However, i t i s again d i f f i c u l t to g e n e r a l i z e the f i n d i n g s because of the p o s s i b i l i t y that a c t u a l l i f e circumstances might e l i c i t d i f f e r e n t r e a c t i o n s than simulated events. A l s o , i t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e that some of h i s s o c i o - c u l t u r a l e x p l a i n a t i o n s can be accounted f o r more by age and s u b - c u l t u r a l m i l i e u than by sex i n the i n s t a n c e of t h i s u n i v e r s i t y undergraduate sample. 83 The l a t e part of the l a s t decade evidenced p r o l i f i c r e s e a r c h on j e a l o u s y aimed at model and. instrument development, attempts at the i s o l a t i o n o.f p o t e n t i a l c o r r e l a t e s and f u r t h e r development of t h e r a p e u t i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s . The re s e a r c h s i n c e then has remained predominantly e m p i r i c a l and the problems continue to be conceptual and me t h o d o l o g i c a l . The tendency to subgroup i n d i v i d u a l s as " j e a l o u s " and "non-jealous" persons i s s t i l l apparent (e.g., Jaremko & Lindsey, 1979) and r e s u l t s i n i n c o n s i s t e n t f i n d i n g s . Model development (White, 1976) encounters the conceptual misplacement of s e l f - e s t e e m . Instrument development encounters many problems, the most poignant being the d i f f i c u l t y with d i s t i n g u i s h i n g j e a l o u s y from other emotions, e s p e c i a l l y envy. On the p o s i t i v e s i d e , there i s an i n c r e a s e d focus on j e a l o u s y r o l e s and r o l e r e c i p r o c i t y i n theory development (Buunk, 1982, Teisman & Mosher, 1978) and i n therapy development (Daher & Cohen, 1979; Teisman, 1979). The themes of power, s e x u a l i t y and sex d i f f e r e n c e s continue and remain p e r t i n e n t . Jealousy i s g r a d u a l l y recognized more as a complex i n t e r a c t i o n a l process than as an i s o l a t e d i n t r a p s y c h i c dynamic and i n 1982 the f i r s t phenomenology by B a r r e l l and Richards appears. The remainder of t h i s s e c t i o n reviews and c r i t i q u e s the s t u d i e s mentioned i n these developments. Then a r e g r e s s i o n i s made i n the chronology to d i s c u s s C o nstantine's i n t e r a c t i o n a l model. T h i s i s followed by a b r i e f 84 i n t r o d u c t i o n to B a r t e l l ' s (1977) r e s e a r c h on synerg ism in human r e l a t i o n s h i p s and an overv iew and c r i t i q u e of j e a l o u s y i n s t rument s . F i n a l l y , the most recent r e s e a r c h by Aronson and P ines (1983) i s d i s c u s s e d . T h i s format i s used to f a c i l i t a t e i n t e g r a t i o n of t h i s and l a t e r c h a p t e r s . Teisman and Mosher (1978) examine sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n c l u d i n g some of those suggested by Re ik . Us ing e i g h t y , p redominant ly Caucas ian (98%), Roman C a t h o l i c (57%), unmarr ied , h e t e r o s e x u a l coup le s they made random ass ignments by sex to (4) j e a l o u s and (4) n o n - j e a l o u s r o l e - p l a y i n g c o n d i t i o n s in which one p a r t n e r assumed a d i s t a n c i n g r o l e wh i le the o ther improv i sed e f f o r t s to overcome the d i s t a n c e and r e - e s t a b l i s h c l o s e n e s s . The authors found t h a t , o v e r a l l , s u b j e c t s in d i s t a n c i n g r o l e s and e x p e r i e n c i n g j e a l o u s y used s i g n i f i c a n t l y more r e j e c t i o n and c o e r c i o n than d i d s u b j e c t s who enacted d i s t a n c i n g f o r n o n - j e a l o u s reasons . However, no sex d i f f e r e n c e s were noted in that r e g a r d . Men tended to s e l e c t sexua l i s sue s of j e a l o u s y wh i le women s e l e c t e d j e a l o u s y i s sue s i n v o l v i n g l o s s of t ime and a t t e n t i o n . However, i t i s noteworthy that the authors a s sess j e a l o u s y in terms of i n i t i a l c o n f r o n t a t i o n and not l ong - te rm p a t t e r n s . They conc lude t h a t : Whi le seeming to c o n t r a d i c t the idea that j e a l o u s c o n f l i c t has an e s c a l a t i n g and r e s o l u t i o n - r e s i s t i n g nature in terms of the q u a n t i t y of v e r b a l a c t s , the re does seem to be some ev idence that the q u a l i t y of v e r b a l behav ior (more r e j e c t i o n and c o e r c i o n ) r e f l e c t s the idea of the r e s o l u t i o n - r e s i s t i n g nature of j e a l o u s c o n f l i c t in comparison to o ther i n t e r p e r s o n a l c o n f l i c t (Teisman & Mosher, 1978, p .1215) . \ 85 Conceived i n terms of threatened l o s s , t h e i r s u b j e c t s ' i n i t i a l r e j e c t i o n and c o e r c i o n might a l s o be e x p l a i n e d as the d e n i a l stage of an a n t i c i p a t o r y g r i e f r e a c t i o n . I t may a l s o be that the t r a d i t i o n a l p e j o r a t i v e l a b e l s attached to j e a l o u s y discouraged i t s open acknowledgement by t h e i r j e a l o u s s u b j e c t s l e a d i n g to more i n d i r e c t e f f o r t s to communicate and p r e c l u d i n g more e f f e c t i v e r e s o l u t i o n - seeking. Although Teisman. and" MO she r found support for. Reik's (1949, 1952) proclaimed sex d i f f e r e n c e s r egarding i s s u e s of the male f o c u s i n g more on h i s p a r t n e r ' s sexual involvement with others and the female on her f e a r s of time l o s s , they found no sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of resource i s s u e s , p o s s i b l y , as they suggest, because the i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h e i r couples were not economically interdependent. A p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g therapy d i r e c t e d at the j e a l o u s system i s suggested by Teisman (1979). "The system i n c l u d e s not only the couple, but a l s o the r i v a l , the t h e r a p i s t and the norms of the s u b c u l t u r e " (p.153). He d e s c r i b e s the concept of the t h e r a p e u t i c t r i a n g l e as w e l l as the use of paradox and symptom t r a n s f e r and s t r e s s e s the importance of i n c o r p o r a t i n g i n t o the couple system an a t t i t u d e of s e r i o u s p l a y f u l n e s s . Teisman's therapy has many fa v o u r b l e p o i n t s , but t h i s author q u e s t i o n s i t s very d i r e c t i v e and b e h a v i o u r a l approach 86 as w e l l as i t s demand f o r a " c o n t i n u a l use of s t r a t e g i e s by the t h e r a p i s t i n order to r e a l i z e , g o a l s " (p.153). Many c o u n s e l l o r s might a l s o f i n d d i f f i c u l t Teisman's suggestions fo r the t h e r a p i s t to assume c o n t r o l of the t h e r a p e u t i c t r i a n g l e by, f o r i n s t a n c e , phoning the r i v a l in f r o n t of the couple and r e q u e s t i n g him/her to p a r t i c i p a t e in therapy. He claims that the r i v a l u s u a l l y r e f u s e s and at t h i s p o i n t the t h e r a p i s t should t e l l him/her to continue the e x t r a m a r i t a l contact to f a c i l i t a t e the t h e r a p i s t i n knowing how to t r e a t the couple. T h i s i s done to " r i t u a l i z e the t h e r a p i s t ' s c o n t r o l and exclude the r i v a l through the r i v a l ' s r e f u s a l " (p.153). The r a t i o n a l e u n d e r l y i n g t h i s i n t e r v e n t i o n i s sound i n viewing the j e a l o u s system as one that i s overpermeable and i n need of temporary boundaries. In q u e s t i o n i s Teisman's "means" which might be a c c e p t a b l e only to the h i g h l y d i r e c t i v e c o u n s e l l o r . Perhaps more widely a c c e p t a b l e i s Teisman's (1979) use of reframing and symptom t r a n s f e r through language a l t e r a t i o n . He notes that " s o c i e t y o r c h e s t r a t e s the l a b e l l i n g and consequently the emotional experience of j e a l o u s y " (p.153). Hence, words such as p a s s i o n a t e , s e x u a l l y - c u r i o u s , l o y a l , zealous, i m a g i n a t i v e and s e n s i t i v e are i n j e c t e d by the t h e r a p i s t to accent the p o s i t i v e p o l a r i t y of j e a l o u s behaviour, to a l t e r p e r s p e c t i v e s , promote a c t i o n and p r o v i d e hope f o r the system. In symptom t r a n s f e r , the t h e r a p i s t a s c r i b e s to the non-jealous person, 87 emotions and r e a c t i o n s s i m i l a r to those of the j e a l o u s person. The purpose i s to r e - d i r e c t the l a t t e r away from h i s / h e r s e l f - f o c u s i n g and more toward t h e i r p a r t n e r ' s s t r u g g l e s . The p r i n c i p l e i s that change w i l l be f a c i l i t a t e d once the couple recognizes that s i m i l a r emotions permeate a l l p a r t s of the system. The dependent member thus has an op p o r t u n i t y to become the h e l p e r . Daher and Cohen (1979) suggest group therapy f o r couples and present the conceptual base and format f o r a workshop, i n v o l v i n g a f i v e - p h a s e p r o c e s s : 1. r e c o g n i t i o n of j e a l o u s y 2. l a b e l l i n g aspects of j e a l o u s y ( l a b e l l i n g and c o g n i t i v e e f f e c t s on j e a l o u s y behaviors) 3. communication about j e a l o u s y with.others 4. acceptance of j e a l o u s y as a l e g i t i m a t e p o s s i b l e aspect of r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and 5. f o c u s i n g on op t i o n s that may induce r e s o l u t i o n (Daher & Cohen, 1979, p.480). They d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a n t s through these phases, using three l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s — " b u i l d i n g a c o g n i t i v e model, s h a r i n g s t r u c t u r e d e x p e r i e n t i a l t a s k s , and a p p l y i n g b e h a v i o r a l options to a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p - d i l e m m a s " (p.481-482). Group' theory i s w e l l managed w i t h i n t h e i r format. Returning to theory development, Jaremko and Lindsey (1979) hypothesized that non-jealous persons would cope with the s t r e s s of d i f f i c u l t s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e b e t t e r than j e a l o u s persons. The purpose of t h e i r study was "to study the j e a l o u s person's response tendency i n coping with s o c i a l s t r e s s " (p.548). They taught 17 " j e a l o u s " and 13 "non- j e a l o u s " s u b j e c t s a c o g n i t i v e , r e v e r s a l - o f - a f f e c t technique 88 as the t e s t c o n d i t i o n . P r i v a t e , tape-recorded, s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e s e s s i o n s served as the s o c i a l s t r e s s o r . Six q u e s t i o n n a i r e items were ranked from most in t i m a t e to l e a s t i n t i m a t e by a l l s u b j e c t s and items ranked 1, 3 and -5 were used f o r the p r e - t e s t while items 2, 4 and 6 were used f o r the p o s t - t e s t . No c o n t r o l group was formed. The authors d i d not f i n d evidence to support t h e i r h y p o t h e s i s . The re p o r t e d key problem with t h e i r experiment i s common — i d e n t i f y i n g j e a l o u s persons from non-jealous persons. They used B r i n g l e ' s (1979) " S e l f - R e p o r t J e a l o u s y S c a l e " and found i t to be s u s c e p t i b l e to s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y . Even though t h e i r sample of 30 for the t e s t c o n d i t i o n c o n s i s t e d of only the very h i g h e s t and the very lowest s c o r e r s from an o r i g i n a l pool of 80, they e v e n t u a l l y imply a t o t a l l a c k of conf i d e n c e i n terms of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g j e a l o u s from non-jealous persons by s e l f - r e p o r t measures. They say " i t may w e l l have been that people [who measured] low i n j e a l o u s y were i n f a c t masked h i g h l y j e a l o u s persons" (p.554). In the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , the age-old assumption that j e a l o u s y i s a p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t u n d e r l i e s the many problems with comparative measurements. They mention s e v e r a l other p o s s i b l e confounds and f i n a l l y conclude that i t may be more u s e f u l to view j e a l o u s y as r e s u l t i n g from " c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s that c o u l d be e l i c i t e d i n most people" (p.553). I t t h e r e f o r e seems evident that t h i s experiment i s an example supports the idea that e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h used alone 89 i s l e s s than e f f i c i e n t i n terms of producing r e s u l t s that l e a d to a g r e a t e r understanding, of the human experience of, j e a l o u s y . Using the same sample for three s t u d i e s , White (1976, 1980, 1981a) d i s c u s s e s a power-and-dependency p e r s p e c t i v e on "romantic" j e a l o u s y . His 1977 study e x p l o r e s model development with t h r e a t to s e l f - e s t e e m c o n c e p t u a l i z e d as. the f i r s t of three stages of "romantic j e a l o u s y " . His f i r s t stage has two components i n c l u d i n g " f e e l i n g s of anger over the a l t e r n a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p and f e e l i n g s of inadequacy as a partner that develop as a .consequence of the a l t e r n a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p " (p.51). White (1976) measures j e a l o u s y • w i t h h i s 17-scale " R e l a t i o n s h i p s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e " developed f o r the study and hypothesizes (among other t h i n g s ) that p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t to s e l f - e s t e e m , due to p a r t n e r ' s involvement with a r i v a l , would p r e d i c t l a t e r f e e l i n g s of inadequacy, p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t to the r e l a t i o n s h i p , anger and f i g h t s . His a n a l y s i s of .data c o l l e c t e d from a survey of 150 couples d i d not generate r e s u l t s to support these p r e d i c t i o n s . He concludes that " i n the absence of evidence, a new model of j e a l o u s y i s r e q u i r e d where s e l f - e s t e e m i s r e l e g a t e d to a more p e r i p h e r a l r o l e " (p.135). In a l a t e r paper, White (1980) r e p o r t s that females are more l i k e l y to induce sexual j e a l o u s y than are males, e s p e c i a l l y i f they are i n a low-power p o s i t i o n r e l a t i v e to 90 t h e i r p a r t n e r . He c o n s i d e r s that being more i n v o l v e d i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p i n d i c a t e s a r e l a t i v e l y l e s s powerful p o s i t i o n . The s u b j e c t s * s e l f - r e p o r t e d motives for i n d u c i n g j e a l o u s y were most f r e q u e n t l y , to t e s t the r e l a t i o n s h i p , f o l l o w e d by a d e s i r e to i n c r e a s e rewards, f o r revenge, to b o l s t e r s e l f - esteem, and l e a s t o f t e n , as a form of punishment. L e v e l of involvement in the r e l a t i o n s h i p was not r e l e v a n t to these v a r i o u s motives. Females more f r e q u e n t l y r e p o r t e d i n d u c i n g j e a l o u s y i n order to gain a s p e c i f i c reward and' so White (1980') e x p l a i n s that "female e x e r c i s e of power i s s t e r e o t y p i c a l l y c o n s t r a i n e d to i n d i r e c t and p e r s o n a l forms of power ... males, on the other hand, are more f r e e to e x e r c i s e d i r e c t and concrete power" (p.226). He suggests, i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , that o r d i n a r y j e a l o u s y i s r e l a t e d to the ways in which the couple share power. U n l i k e many e a r l i e r s u ggestions, White decides t h i s i s r e l a t e d more to the shaping of the r e l a t i o n s h i p than to the i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t i e s . P o s s i b l e c o r r e l a t e s of romantic j e a l o u s y i n c l u d i n g s e l f - e s t e e m , s e l f - e s t e e m dependence, e x c l u s i v i t y , f e e l i n g s of inadequacy as a p a r t n e r , romanticism, sex r o l e t r a d i t i o n a l i s m , dependence on the r e l a t i o n s h i p , p e r c e i v e d dependence of p a r t n e r , b i r t h order and r e l a t i o n s h i p stage are examined i n White's (1981a) study. The l a s t three f a i l e d t o p r e d i c t j e a l o u s y . E x p e c t a t i o n s of sexual 91 e x c l u s i v i t y and f e e l i n g s of inadequacy as a partner were the only v a r i a b l e s that were p r e d i c t i v e of j e a l o u s y f o r both sexes. Self-esteem dependence was p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d with j e a l o u s y f o r males but not f o r females and the t r a d i t i o n a l male was more l i k e l y than other males to r a t e himself as j e a l o u s . White decides that t h i s has to do a b e l i e f , f i x e d i n the t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e , which holds that woman i s more monogamous or f a i t h f u l than man and so any a t t r a c t i o n she has to another man w i l l be over i n t e r p r e t e d by her p a r t n e r . However, sex r o l e t r a d i t i o n a l i s m was not p r e d i c t i v e of j e a l o u s y i n females and he e x p l a i n s that t h i s may,be because t r a d i t i o n a l females no longer endorse the double standard assumptions that male a t t r a c t i o n s to others are not s e r i o u s . High self-eseem males were found to be l e s s j e a l o u s than low s e l f - e s t e e m males. To e x p l a i n why se l f - e s t e e m p r e d i c t s male and not female j e a l o u s y White (1981a) d i s c u s s e s sexual p r e s t i g e , suggesting that i t may be a component of s e l f - e s t e e m that i s captured by f e e l i n g s of inadequacy (as a pa r t n e r ) and t h e r e f o r e r e l a t e d to pe r c e p t i o n of t h r e a t f o r men but not f o r women. Dependence on the r e l a t i o n s h i p was the only v a r i a b l e that White (1981a) found to be independently p r e d i c t i v e of female j e a l o u s y . He e x p l a i n s t h i s as: being rooted i n an economic s t r u c t u r e that c r e a t e s more r e l a t i o n s h i p dependency i n women than i n men. A female's m a t e r i a l and s o c i a l s t a t u s as w e l l as her se l f - e s t e e m may be more r e l a t e d to m a i n t a i n i n g a 92 r e l a t i o n s h i p than i s t rue fo r men. If a r e a l or p o t e n t i a l r i v a l a t t r a c t i o n e x i s t s , the t h r e a t would be consequent ly g r e a t e r than fo r the male. The dependent male may have, or f i n d i t e a s i e r to d e v e l o p , a l t e r n a t i v e sources of esteem and s t a t u s and hence would be l e s s a f f e c t e d by a p e r c e i v e d a t t r a c t i o n (White, 1981a, p .144) . T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n r e c a l l s Mead's (1931) r e j e c t i o n of the " j e a l o u s woman" s t e r e o t y p e p re sen ted e a r l i e r in t h i s c h a p t e r . W h i t e ' s th ree s t u d i e s add to and s y n t h e s i z e s o c i o - c u l t u r a l p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y - r e l a t e d sex d i f f e r e n c e s . H i s e x p l a n a t i o n s are i n s i g h t f u l and supported by e a r l i e r - views and r e s e a r c h in a d d i t i o n to h i s own data . ' However, i t must be kept in mind that h i s sample was very homogeneous, c o n s i s t i n g of p redominant ly white (84%), u n i v e r s i t y s tudents (91%). As he acknowledges, very few coup le s (16%) were engaged or mar r ied and so l e v e l of committment may have s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t e d h i s f i n d i n g s . F i n a l l y , h i s s t a t i c measurement of s e l f - e s t e e m may have been con found ing . Buunk (1982) examines the r e l a t i o n s h i p between a n t i c i p a t e d sexua l j e a l o u s y and s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d i n g s e l f - e s t e e m , emot iona l dependency and r e c i p r o c i t y . He uses th ree male/ female samples d i f f e r i n g in age, soc io -economic s t a t u s and e x t r a - m a r i t a l or e x t r a - r e l a t i o n s h i p sexua l i nvo lvement . The samples a re l a r g e (125 men and 125 women in both f i r s t and second samples and 242 men and 138 women in the t h i r d sample) and heterogeneous i n c l u d i n g wide age ranges and v a r y i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s t r u c t u r e s . Aga in , the 93 s i t u a t i o n s are h y p o t h e t i c a l and hence h i s use of the term " a n t i c i p a t e d " . The author does not e s t a b l i s h s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between a n t i c i p a t e d sexual j e a l o u s y and s e l f - esteem f o r e i t h e r males or females. Again, we are reminded of the i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n j e a l o u s y / s e l f - e s t e e m r e s e a r c h and of White's (1977) suggestion that s e l f - e s t e e m be " r e l e g a t e d to a more p e r i p h e r a l r o l e " (p.135) i n b u i l d i n g models f o r j e a l o u s y . Buunk (1982) f i n d s negative c o r r e l a t i o n s (-.79, -.55 and -.67 at p<.001, r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r the 3 samples ) between intended e x t r a m a r i t a l involvement and a n t i c i p a t e d j e a l o u s y . He concludes that "the higher one's i n t e n t i o n to -become i n v o l v e d i n e x t r a m a r i t a l sexual behavior, the lower one's j e a l o u s y " (p.314). He p r o v i d e s some s u b s t a n t i a t i o n that t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s not e x p l a i n e d by the i n f l u e n c e of a t h i r d f a c t o r such as emotional dependency, the e x t r a m a r i t a l a c t i v i t i e s of the spouse or s e l f - r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l b i a s . Using exchange theory h i s e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t : People w i l l r e a ct l e s s j e a l o u s l y when they themselves f e e l a need to engage i n e x t r a m a r i t a l sexual behavior. In such a case i t may be f e l t u n j u s t i f i e d to manifest j e a l o u s y , even when t h i s emotion i s f e l t . By the same token, someone who r e f r a i n s from e x t r a m a r i t a l sex w i l l r e a c t j e a l o u s l y when the p a r t n e r does engage in e x t r a m a r i t a l a c t i v i t i e s because the norm of r e c i p r o c i t y i s v i o l a t e d (Buunk, 1982, p.311). As the author suggests, t h i s f i n d i n g warrants f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n to determine whether the a s s o c i a t i o n holds when r e a l behaviours are i n c o r p o r a t e d . However, t y p i c a l 94 problems are evident i n h i s d e s i g n . For i n s t a n c e , he d i d not use the word 'j e a l o u s y ' i n h i s measure of the emotion because he wished to c o n t r o l f o r the usual a r t i f a c t c r e a t e d by i t s negative c o n n o t a t i o n s . T h i s he f e l t was e s p e c i a l l y r e l e v a n t to h i s c o r r e l a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y and s e l f - e s t e e m because use of the term might i n c r e a s e the l i k e l i h o o d that people with poor self-images would d e s c r i b e themselves by using i t . However, not using i t and i n s t e a d r e l y i n g on i n d i r e c t terminology, leaves the reader t o t a l l y r e l i a n t on the v a l i d i t y of h i s f i v e s i t u a t i o n a l * e l i c i t o r s i n terms o f . evoking j e a l o u s y and not some other emotion in h i s s u b j e c t s . B a r r e l l and Richards (1982) use a phenomenological approach. They focus t h e i r s u b j e c t s on what i t i s l i k e to be i n the experience of f e e l i n g j e a l o u s and they i d e n t i f y four necessary and s u f f i c i e n t f a c t o r s . The f i r s t i s that "a person focuses on a s i n g l e d e s i r a b l e aspect of another person's experience of r e l a t i o n s h i p with an o b j e c t , event, or person" (p.42). Secondly, i t must be p e r c e i v e d that the other's experience i s d e s i r a b l e to him/her and to o u r s e l v e s . T h i r d l y , he/she "must f e e l i t d i f f i c u l t or impossible to have the d e s i r a b l e experience of the other person" (p.43). F i n a l l y , there must be an "absence of f e e l i n g the person [ o b j e c t ] to be d e s e r v i n g " (p.43). Implementing these four e x p e r i e n t i a l components, B a r r e l l and Richards (1982) recommend that a necessary and s u f f i c i e n t way f o r overcoming j e a l o u s y i s to l e a r n "a sense 95 of r e l a t e d n e s s or connectedness with o t h e r s " so that we b e l i e v e that "other persons are d e s e r v i n g of what comes to them simply because they e x i s t as human beings l i k e o u r s e l v e s " (p.44). They suggest s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n that leads to an understanding of how we c r e a t e our own unique experience of j e a l o u s y and they p r o f e s s that we must l e a r n to i n c l u d e others i n our boundaries as being the same i n terms of being p a r t of a g r e a t e r whole. The authors d i s t i n g u i s h between r e l a t e d n e s s and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . The former recognizes, that "each of us wants to be our own' person" (p.45) but we are a l l broadly r e l a t e d to o t h e r s . The l a t t e r i s " g e n e r a l l y f o r c e d and one-sided" (p.45) and observes the other person as an o b j e c t , r e s u l t i n g i n a sense of togetherness that "does not d e r i v e from a shared and t r u s t e d m u t u a l i t y " (p.45). The authors recommend f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h on j e a l o u s y that i s aimed at encouraging i n d i v i d u a l s to explore t h e i r own j e a l o u s y experiences and share them through d i s c l o s u r e i n a c o n t r o l l e d s e t t i n g . T h e i r a r t i c l e c o n t r i b u t e s something new and d i f f e r e n t to our understanding. However, t h e i r most emphasized i n t e r v e n t i o n recommends a fundamental change in a b e l i e f system that may be u n c o n s c i o u s l y motivated while t h e i r data emanates only from c o n s c i o u s l y p e r c e i v e d "awarenesses", thus not accounting f o r aspects of human experience that are o u t s i d e the phenomenal f i e l d . T h i s problem with phenomenologies i s d i s c u s s e d i n the e a r l i e r 96 c r i t i q u e of s e l f - e s t e e m methodologies. Again, combined approaches may transcend the d e f i c i e n c i e s of using e i t h e r alone. The model d i s c u s s e d below w i l l f a c i l i t a t e t h i s and other p r e l i m i n a r y s t u d i e s which i n c o r p o r a t e a process p e r s p e c t i v e on j e a l o u s y and a combined approach to r e s e a r c h . Constantine (1976) suggests a c o n t e x t u a l s t r u c t u r e of j e a l o u s y and a s e q u e n t i a l , t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l model which g i v e s j e a l o u s behaviour a l e v e l w i t h i n a s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t . His model and theory were developed from i n t e r v i e w s , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and i n s i t u o b s e r v a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y behaviours i n m u l t i l a t e r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . He d e f i n e s j e a l o u s y as "a d e f e n s i v e response to a p a r t i c u l a r kind of s i t u a t i o n which i s p e r c e i v e d as t h r e a t e n i n g to a valued r e l a t i o n s h i p " (p.385). J e a l o u s y , i n Constantine's (1976) view i s a process that i n v o l v e s i n i t i a l p e r c e p t i o n s , then i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s which generate f e e l i n g s that may or may not be expressed b e h a v i o u r a l l y . The context always i n v o l v e s three p o s i t i o n s : an a c t o r (person) who has a r e l a t i o n s h i p with o b j e c t (another person), and an agent (that need not, but may be a person). The a c t o r " p e r c e i v e s an impending l o s s of something valued which [he/she] has i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p with o b j e c t " (p.385). The a c t o r a l s o "experiences primary and p o s s i b l e secondary emotional responses to the l o s s or t h r e a t and behaves i n ' j e a l o u s manner' toward both o b j e c t and agent. 97 Constantine's (1976) model accounts f o r j e a l o u s y that i s e i t h e r automatic and non-sequential or, more commonly, s e q u e n t i a l . The former r e s u l t s i n behaviour that i s a "programmed response t r i g g e r e d by a set of s i t u a t i o n a l cues with l i t t l e , i f any, i n t e r v e n i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a f f e c t u a l experience" (p.387). T h i s b e h a v i o u r a l type i s expected but u n f e l t and emanates from " s o c i e t a l and f a m i l i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g or e x p e c t a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y i n s p e c i f i c circumstances independent of any p e r c e p t i o n of l o s s " (p.387). S e q u e n t i a l j e a l o u s y , on the other hand, i n v o l v e s a process that begins with p e r c e p t i o n and culminates i n behaviour. The a c t o r ' s p e r s o n a l sense of s e c u r i t y or i n s e c u r i t y i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p and h i s a b i l i t y or tendency to p e r c e i v e s i t u a t i o n s s y n e r g i c a l l y , act as p e r c e p t u a l f i l t e r s . Both determine the readiness or ease with which he/she p e r c e i v e s a s i t u a t i o n as p o t e n t i a l l y t h r e a t e n i n g and consequently the l i k e l i h o o d that he/she w i l l express j e a l o u s y . The i n d i v i d u a l whose p e r c e p t i o n i s h i g h l y s y n e r g i c has a way of o r g a n i z i n g h i s / h e r r e a l i t y that allows f o r an " e s s e n t i a l u n i t y and interdependence of dichotomies" (Constantine, 1976, p.387). The s e c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y t h r e s h o l d i s a l s o a f f e c t e d by a multitude of f a c t o r s , but e s p e c i a l l y important are the degree and nature of the a c t o r - o b j e c t committment, the p e r s o n a l m a t u r i t y of both p a r t n e r s and the l o n g e v i t y of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p . , - E v e n t u a l j e a l o u s y behaviours, i f they occur, are of 98 four types i n c l u d i n g i s o l a t i o n a l , a n t a g o n i s t i c , r e d e f i n i t i o n a l and/or r e s o l u t i o n a l . However, Constantine (1976) s t r e s s e s that j e a l o u s behaviour i s "almost a unique pe r s o n a l statement" (p.390). T h i s i s in c o n t r a s t to primary j e a l o u s y a f f e c t which he c l a i m s to be very c o n s i s t e n t across people. By h i s r e p o r t , i n i t i a l f e e l i n g s i n c l u d e "anxiety (or f e a r ) connected with p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t of l o s s , and hurt (or emotional pain) a s s o c i a t e d with p e r c e i v e d a c t u a l l o s s " (p.389). Anxiety and hurt i n j e a l o u s y s i t u a t i o n s are o f t e n q u i c k l y transformed i n t o secondary emotional responses such as g r i e f , d e s p a i r and g u i l t i f the person's s t y l e i s to i n t e r n a l i z e or anger, rage and hate i f the person's s t y l e i s to e x t e r n a l i z e . J e a l o u s behaviours i n t h i s model are seen as p o s i t i v e i n terms of t h e i r i n t e n t i o n to maintain the pair-boundary system and to the extent that they r e s u l t i n e f f e c t i v e r e s o l u t i o n and r e i n t e g r a t i o n . I s o l a t i o n a l behaviour such as w i t h h o l d i n g , s i l e n c e , r e f u s a l to f i g h t or n e g o t i a t e , and s i l e n c e or s e p a r a t i o n are thus l e s s f u n c t i o n a l because the p a i r - c o n t a c t i s not maintained. A n t a g o n i s t i c and r e d e f i n i t i o n a l behaviours are more e f f e c t i v e but the l a t t e r i n v o l v e an i n t e l l e c t u a l i z a t i o n (e.g., the problem i s ' i n f i d e l i t y ' or 'seductive men') that " u n i t e s the p a i r a g a i n s t a common enemy ... [but] p o t e n t i a l l y at the expense of r e a l r e s o l u t i o n " (Constantine, 1976, p.393). T h i s model i n v o l v e s s e v e r a l other t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s 99 between i n i t i a l p e r c e p t i o n and eventual consequences of j e a l o u s behaviours. Each p r o v i d e s f o r a p o t e n t i a l e n try p o i n t f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n s when j e a l o u s y i s p r o b l e m a t i c . B a s i c to these i n t e r v e n t i o n s i s h e l p i n g the couple to recognize the emotion, the purpose i t serves and the p o t e n t i a l i t has to t r i g g e r more e f f e c t i v e communication that w i l l r e s u l t i n a c l a r i f i c a t i o n of v a l u e s , b e l i e f s , committment and i n d i v i d u a l / c o u p l e boundaries. He s t r e s s e s the importance of g e t t i n g to the source of f e a r s and c l a r i f y i n g the type of l o s s that i s p e r c e i v e d , a c t u a l or impending. Constantine (1976), t h e r e f o r e , names s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t types of l o s s i n c l u d i n g : 1. Loss of f ace, s t a t u s , ego-hancement, e t c . 2. Loss of need g r a t i f i c a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g sexual,- i n t e l l e c t u a l , emotional and other needs. 3. Loss of c o n t r o l over Object, of c o n t r o l over A c t o r ' s own l i f e , of power i n r e l a t i o n to Object. 4. Loss of p r e d i c t a b i l i t y , d e p e n d a b i l i t y of behavior of Object i n r e l a t i o n to A c t o r . 5. Loss of p r i v a c y , t e r r i t o r y , e x c l u s i v e access, e t c . 6. Loss of a c t u a l time with Object, c o n t a c t , e t c . (Constantine, 1976, p.395). Co n s t a n t i n e ' s p r e s e n t a t i o n of a t r i a d i c s t r u c t u r e and a s i t u a t i o n a l context f o r j e a l o u s y e l i m i n a t e s the need f o r i t s usual c a t e g o r i z a t i o n as s e x u a l , h e t e r o s e x u a l , time, o p p o r t u n i t y , e t c . More important i s an examination of wants under the wants, source of f e a r s and type of l o s s . His model a l l o w s f o r a v a l u e - f r e e approach to theory development and c l i n i c a l p r a c t i c e . J e a l o u s y , i n h i s view, can be "a h i g h l y u s e f u l i n t e r p e r s o n a l p r o c e s s " (p.391) or i t can "work 100 to the disadvantage of a l l " (p.391). At the most fundamental l e v e l of h i s model i s the i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the s i t u a t i o n and Constantine (1976) hypothesizes that the r e s u l t i n g " j e a l o u s behavior i s c o r r e l a t e d with s y n e r g i c p e r c e p t i o n " (p.397). U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h i s h y p o thesis cannot be t e s t e d e m p i r i c a l l y at t h i s time because a s u i t a b l e instrument i s not a v a i l a b l e . Constantine's C o n t r a s t Scale (1974) was designed to meet t h i s need but i t s i n c l u s i o n i n the p i l o t study f o r the cu r r e n t p r o j e c t r e v e a l e d s e v e r a l problems. Among them, the most p e r t i n e n t were that i t s small number of items (14), r e l a t i v e to number of items i n Aronson and Pines' (1982) je a l o u s y instrument, d i d not allow f o r o b t a i n i n g the necessary spread to demonstrate any c o r r e l a t i o n s t hat may e x i s t . A l s o , h i s items are f o r c e d c h o i c e and were drawn from the "synergy" subscale of Shostrum's (1974) "Personal O r i e n t a t i o n Inventory" which i s scored i p s a t i v e l y . T h i s item-format and type of s c o r i n g depend on the i n d i v i d u a l ' s " p a t t e r n of r e l a t i v e p r e f e r e n c e , and the base l i n e i s the i n d i v i d u a l h i m s e l f " (Thorndike, 1969, p.394). Hence, e x t r a c t i n g one subscale to c r e a t e a separate new instrument does not allow f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g r e l i a b i l i t y or v a l i d i t y by comparison with s t a t i s t i c s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r Shostrum's instrument. F i n a l l y , i n B a r t e l l ' s (1977) view the sy n e r g i c mind i s sane, r a t i o n a l and e t h i c a l and operates i n a mode that cannot be measured s o l e l y by the c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y to 101 t r an scend d i c h o t o m i e s . T h e r e f o r e , c o n s t a n t i n e ' s Con t ra s t S ca le (1971), measures on ly pa r t of the c o n s t r u c t because the items r e q u i r e on ly s i m p l i s t i c c o g n i t i v e d e c i s i o n s and the most s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e response i s q u i t e apparent . A l though s yne rg i c p e r c e p t i o n in the i n d i v i d u a l i s not yet e m p i r i c a l l y measurab le, synerg i sm in human r e l a t i o n s h i p s has been c l o s e l y examined by B a r t e l l (1977). She used grounded theory (a q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h methodology) to study p a i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s tha t were r e p o r t e d (by the i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t i t u t i n g them and' by o ther s ) to be h i g h l y s y n e r g i s t i c . These r e l a t i o n s h i p s were not on ly c o u p l e / l o v e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s but a l s o same-sex and o p p o s i t e - s e x , co-worker and p r o f e s s i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . She found, among many other t h i n g s , tha t s y n e r g i s t i c p a i r s were rep re sen ted by the i n d i v i d u a l and p a i r b l e n d i n g of four se t s of p a r a d o x i c a l q u a l i t i e s i n c l u d i n g the r e a l i s t i c / i m a g i n a t i v e , the i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c / c o l l e c t i v e , the s e r i o u s / p l a y f u l and the m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e . For i n s t a n c e , when the i n d i v i d u a l s in a r e l a t i o n s h i p each c o n t r i b u t e both t r a d i t i o n a l l y f e m i n i n e - p o s i t i v e and t r a d i t i o n a l l y m a s c u l i n e - p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p dynamics w i l l be more s y n e r g i s t i c . B a r t e l l found t h i s to be t rue in terms of the i n t e r a c t i o n s between the two persons and in terms of c o u p l e - i n t e r a c t ion w i th o t h e r s . West ' s (1983) des i gn of a group workshop f o r coup le s e x p e r i e n c i n g p rob lemat i c j e a l o u s y i n c l u d e s s e v e r a l e x e r c i s e s 1 02 aimed at improving couple communication. One of them incorporates B a r t e l l ' s (1977) four categories into a shared assessment of relationship synergism. The process of the exercise i s as important as the actual decisions arrived at by the couple. For instance, in moving through the structured format of the exercise couples become aware of the need to arrive at some harmony in terms of being- at once serious and p l a y f u l . It is expected that the exercise w i l l help the couple-system to be more sy n e r g i s t i c . This intervention holds potential for future research on jealousy. As mentioned e a r l i e r , instrument development emerged late in the l a s t decade and has since been p r o l i f i c . Hence, several jealousy measures are now av a i l a b l e . They include, the "Jealousy Question" later developed into the "Sexual Jealousy Inventory" by Aronson and Pines (1982); the "Self- Report Jealousy" and "Projective Jealousy" scales by Bringle et a l . (1979); the "Interpersonal Jealousy Scale" by Mathes and Severa (1981a, 1981b); the "Chronic Jealousy" and. "Relationship Jealousy" scales by White (1981b, 1981c) and an as yet unnamed scale by Tipton et a l . (1978). There are s t i l l many conceptual and other problems with these scales. Excepting the one by Tipton, a l l were factor analyzed by Mathes, Roter and Joegor (1982) but the expected convergence was not found. Distinguishing jealousy from other emotions remains a central problem and t h i s is readily 1 03 e v i d e n c e d i n t h e i t e m f o r m a t s o f s e v e r a l i n s t r u m e n t s . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e 2 8 - i t e m s c a l e by M a t h e s a n d S e v e r a ( 1 9 8 1 b ) s i m p l y p o s e s a r a t h e r n a r r o w v a r i e t y o f s i t u a t i o n a l e l i c i t o r s a n d r e q u e s t s t h e s u b j e c t t o f i l l i n a b l a n k w i t h t h e name o f h i s / h e r b o y f r i e n d o r g i r l f r i e n d a n d t h e n w e i g h t e a c h on a s c a l e o f one t o n i n e ( e . g . , "I f e e l g o o d when . makes a new f r i e n d " a n d " I f a d m i r e d someone o f t h e o p p o s i t e s e x I w o u l d f e e l i r r i t a t e d " ) . O t h e r f o r m a t s s i m p l y a s k t h e s u b j e c t , i n v a r i o u s w a y s , how j e a l o u s h e / s h e i s , o r how j e a l o u s o r u p s e t t h e p e r s o n i n t h e s t o r y i s . I t e m f o r m a t s f r e q u e n t l y i m p l y an e x c l u s i v e l y s e x u a l d e f i n i t i o n o f j e a l o u s y a n d s u b j e c t s a r e o f t e n r e q u i r e d t o s e l f - d i s c l o s e a t an i n t i m a t e l e v e l w h i c h may r e s u l t i n a s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y r e s p o n s e s e t . A l l s c a l e s e x c e p t t h e one by A r o n s o n a n d P i n e s ( 1 982 ) n e g l e c t a t l e a s t one a n d o f t e n two o f t h e b e h a v i o u r a l , c o g n i t i v e , and a f f e c t i v e d o m a i n s t h a t a r e c r u c i a l t o a p p r o x i m a t i n g a w h o l e p i c t u r e . The p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l a s p e c t o f j e a l o u s y , s u g g e s t e d by I z a r d ' s ( 1 971 ) t h e o r y o f e m o t i o n s , r e m a i n s u n t o u c h e d by a l l i n s t r u m e n t s e x c e p t a g a i n , t h e one by A r o n s o n and P i n e s . T h e i r i n v e n t o r y s o l i c i t s n o t o n l y s u b j e c t s ' own d e f i n i t i o n s o f j e a l o u s y b u t a l s o t h e i r e x p e r i e n t i a l a c c o u n t s w h i c h a r e t h e n u s e d a s t h e c r i t e r i a f o r r a t i n g t h e i r e m o t i o n a l , p h y s i c a l a nd g e n e r a l r e a c t i o n s . T h i s i n s t r u m e n t i s a l s o u n i q u e i n t h a t i t e x a m i n e s j e a l o u s y p r e v a l e n c e a n d c o l l e c t s d a t a a b o u t c u l t u r e , f a m i l y o f 1 04 o r i g i n , and c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p , as w e l l as other demographic i n f o r m a t i o n . One problem i s i t s l e n g t h which r e s u l t s i n some lack of p r a c t i c a l i t y i n terms of survey a p p l i c a t i o n . For these reasons (and others to be d i s c u s s e d in the next chapter) t h i s i n v e n t o r y was s e l e c t e d , but adapted, f o r purposes of t h i s study. Aronson and Pines (1983) use t h e i r "Sexual Jealousy Inventory" to examine p o s s i b l e antecedents, c o r r e l a t e s and consequences of s e l f - r e p o r t e d sexual j e a l o u s y . T h e i r s u b j e c t s were 35 males and 64 females ranging in" age from 21 to 64 (M=34) y e a r s . T h e i r sample i s more heterogeneous than other -studies reviewed i n t h i s s e c t i o n , i n that i t d i d not use undergraduate students, but i t remains a s e l e c t i v e sample of predominantly white (94%) married (41%) couples. Subjects were approached to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a study i n v e s t i g a t i n g sexual j e a l o u s y . The authors s t r e s s the s i g n i f i c a n c e of f o c u s i n g more on s i t u a t i o n a l than on d i s p o s i t i o n a l f a c t o r s i n order that the i n d i v i d u a l w i l l have more d i s t i n c t o p tions f o r change. Sexual j e a l o u s y was not d e f i n e d f o r t h e i r s u b j e c t s so that they would be able to d e f i n e t h e i r own degree of j e a l o u s y on the b a s i s of t h e i r own experience. However, given the authors' i n t e n t to focus on the s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s and promote s u b j e c t s ' s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n , a weakness becomes evident i n the r e p o r t i n g of t h e i r f i n d i n g s — they use the yes/no q u e s t i o n "Do you c o n s i d e r y o u r s e l f a j e a l o u s 105 person?" as a c r i t e r i o n to e s t a b l i s h d i f f e r e n c e s between " j e a l o u s " and "non-jealous" persons. The c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h r e - e x p l o r e s the use of t h i s c r i t e r i o n q u e s t i o n assuming p a r t i c i p a n t s have osmosed, to some extent, the tendency to focus on je a l o u s y as being d i s p o s i t i o n a l . Hence, the examination of s i m i l a r i t i e s not j u s t d i f f e r e n c e s i s very r e l e v a n t and r e q u i r e s a documented rather than an impli e d f o c u s . For i n s t a n c e , Aronson and Pines (1983) r e p o r t : In a d d i t i o n to t h e i r own p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r j e a l o u s y , other peoples' r e a c t i o n s v a l i d a t e d the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e : people who d e s c r i b e d themselves as j e a l o u s were c o n s i d e r e d j e a l o u s by more people who knew them w e l l and by more people with whom they had an i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p (p.115). However, i t must be remembered that only the s u b j e c t s themselves were questioned by the survey, not the people with whom they were in t i m a t e and not others who knew them w e l l . Hence, the above a n a l y s i s i s not v a l i d a t i o n of the c r i t e r i o n q u e s t i o n but rat h e r i t i s v a l i d a t i o n of s u b j e c t s ' tendency to assume that others p e r c e i v e them the same way they p e r c e i v e themselves. Instead of d e l e t i n g t h i s c r i t e r i o n q u e s t i o n from the adapted q u e s t i o n n a i r e , t h i s r esearcher uses i t to examine both s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s , r e p o r t i n g seemingly "negative" and seemingly " p o s i t i v e " f i n d i n g s . She a l s o uses i t to re-examine the i m p l i c a t i o n s of response s e t . The c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h a l s o d i f f e r s from the study by Aronson and Pines (1983) i n that i t re t u r n s to a b a s i c 106 assumption about j ea l ou sy as a d i s c r e t e emot ion, " s e x u a l " or o t h e r w i s e , depending on what the s u b j e c t s themselves d e s c r i b e . T h i s l i t e r a t u r e review has indeed r e v e a l e d a theme i n v o l v i n g sex, s e x u a l i t y , and sexua l s e l f - c o n c e p t . However, to a v o i d i n v a l i d a t i n g o ther themes and to i n c l u d e what I z a r d ' s (1971) theory r e f e r r e d to as the phenomenolog ica l aspect of emotions t h i s s tudy adapts the in s t rument . The focus on sexua l i s sues a n d e l i c i t o r s i s e l i m i n a t e d , the use of s u b j e c t s ' own d e f i n i t i o n s and e x p e r i e n c e s i s ma in ta ined and added' t o by r e q u e s t i n g t h e i r i n s i g h t s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Hence, l a r ge p o r t i o n s of the o r i g i n a l i nven to ry are d e l e t e d and a d d i t i o n a l s u b j e c t i v e q u e s t i o n s ( e . g . , see Appendix A, que s t i on s 29, 30 and 123) are i n c o r p o r a t e d . A few of the many f i n d i n g s from the study by Aronson and P ines (1983) are now p r e s e n t e d i n c o r p o r a t i n g d i s c u s s i o n that i n t e g r a t e s the c u r r e n t study and g i v i n g precedence to t h e i r f i n d i n g s that w i l l be comparab le. Aronson and P ines (1983) say t h a t : [When compared wi th ' n o n - j e a l o u s ' peop le ] s u b j e c t s who d e s c r i b e d themselves as ' j e a l o u s p e o p l e ' r e p o r t e d e x p e r i e n c i n g more j e a l o u s y not only at the time of the i n t e r v i e w (M=4.4 v s . 2.2) but a l s o d u r i n g c h i l d h o o d (M=4.0 v s . 3 .4) , ado le scence (M=4.9 v s . 4 . 4 ) , young adu l thood (M=5.5 v s . 2.8) and advanced adu l thood (M=4.7 v s . 2.3) (p .115) . " J e a l o u s p e o p l e " in t h e i r study a l s o r e p o r t e d the emotion to be more e a s i l y t r i g g e r e d , to occur more f r e q u e n t l y , to l a s t l onger and to be a s s o c i a t e d w i th more i n tense p h y s i c a l and 1 07 e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s . I t i s n o t e w o r t h y t h a t when t h e a u t h o r s r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s t h i s i s a p p l i c a b l e o n l y a t a l e v e l o f h y p o t h e s i s g e n e r a t i o n b e c a u s e t h e y were e x p l o r i n g t h e i r d a t a and had no h y p o t h e s e s . T h e i r f i n d i n g s and t h e f i n d i n g s i n t h e c u r r e n t s t u d y r e q u i r e f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i f e m p i r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e i s t o be e s t a b l i s h e d . The o b j e c t i v e d a t a c o l l e c t e d i n t h e c u r r e n t s t u d y w i l l be u s e d t o s u g g e s t h y p o t h e s e s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . S i g n i f i c a n c e , v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y i n s t e a d become p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l i s s u e s and" t h e r e f o r e s u b j e c t s ' d e f i n i t i o n s of j e a l o u s y , t h e i r e x p e r i e n t i a l a c c o u n t s as w e l l as t h e i r own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a r e p r e s e n t e d c o m p l e t e l y and v e r b a t i m w i t h i n t h e a p p e n d i c e s . Examples a r e d i s c u s s e d by t h e r e s e a r c h e r i n c h a p t e r f o u r i n o r d e r t o p r e s e n t h e r a d d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and i n s i g h t s . U l t i m a t e l y i t i s hoped t h a t t h e r e a d e r w i l l be s t i m u l a t e d t o do t h e same. A r o n s o n and P i n e s (1983) a l s o f o u n d t h a t s u b j e c t s , on t h e a v e r a g e , r e p o r t e d b e i n g "somewhat" j e a l o u s . ( T h e i r i n v e n t o r y u s e s a one t o s e v e n r a t i n g i d e n t i c a l t o t h e one i n A p p e n d i x A f o r most r e s p o n s e s d i s c u s s e d . ) J e a l o u s y was g e n e r a l l y r e p o r t e d as b e i n g most d u r i n g a d o l e s c e n c e , l e s s d u r i n g young a d u l t h o o d , even l e s s d u r i n g c h i l d h o o d , l e s s d u r i n g a d v a n c e d a d u l t h o o d and l e a s t a t p r e s e n t . F i f t y - f o u r p e r c e n t o f t h e i r s u b j e c t s " d e f i n e d t h e m s e l v e s as ' j e a l o u s p e o p l e ' ( p . 1 1 6 ) , but i t i s n o t e w o r t h y t h a t "when a s k e d what p e r c e n t a g e o f p e o p l e a r e a c t u a l l y j e a l o u s , t h e a v e r a g e 108 response was 75%" (p.119). T h e i r s u b j e c t s a l s o b e l i e v e d men and women to be e q u a l l y jealous... The inventory s e c t i o n a s s e s s i n g s t r a t e g i e s f o r coping was changed to-a yes/no format by Aronson and Pines. The o r i g i n a l one to seven s c a l e i s used by t h i s researcher and t h e r e f o r e does not allow f o r d i r e c t comparison. T h e i r s u b j e c t s were, o v e r a l l , most l i k e l y to acknowledge using the j e a l o u s y o c c a s i o n to t h i n k through t h e i r r o l e and to process what they stood/feared to l o s e (e.g., 80% reponded 'yes' to t h i s q u e s t i o n ) . Severtty-nine percent of t h e i r s u b j e c t s acknowledged r a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n ; and much l e s s f r e q u e n t l y they acknowledged v e r b a l a s s a u l t (60%), sarcasm (56%), acceptance (55%), p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e (7%) and d e n i a l (18%). Given a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y , these responses are l i k e w i s e s i g n i f i c a n t i n a reversed order. For i n s t a n c e , i t may be more s i g n i f i c a n t that 7% acknowledged v i o l e n c e as a response (e.g., one thus wonders how many more a c t u a l l y do respond t h i s way) than that 79% acknowledged r a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n (perhaps r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r i n t e n t at the time or the s o c i a l l y a c c e p t a b l e t h i n g to do). The only s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g r e p o r t e d by Aronson and Pines (1983) in terms of f a m i l y c o n s t e l l a t i o n i s that number of o l d e r b r o t h e r s was p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d with j e a l o u s y and number of younger b r o t h e r s was n e g a t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d (e.g., the more o l d e r b r o t h e r s , the more j e a l o u s ; the more younger b r o t h e r s , the l e s s j e a l o u s ) . However, t h i s 109 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n must be c o n s i d e r e d very t e n t a t i v e l y because of the few cases ( f o r the r e l a t i v e l y small sample) that would f a l l i n t o the necessary but p o s s i b l y vast number of . p o s s i b l e subgroupings i f they had c a l c u l a t e d a c t u a l s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n s i n v a r i o u s f a m i l y c o n s t e l l a t i o n s . For in s t a n c e , p o s s i b l y the m a j o r i t y of t h e i r sample were from a p a r t i c u l a r s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n . Aronson and Pines (1983) r e p o r t very few f i n d i n g s i n terms of sex d i f f e r e n c e s . They say: In terms of the experience,, i t s e l f , and i t s general e f f e c t s , however, there were no sex d i f f e r e n c e s ; and when asked d i r e c t l y who were the most j e a l o u s , men or women, the response was 'e q u a l l y j e a l o u s ' .... The few sex d i f f e r e n c e s found i n the study (e.g., women were more l i k e l y than men to f e e l ' c l o s e to a nervous breakdown', ' i n f e r i o r ' and 'hu m i l i a t e d ' and to experience 'fear of l o s s ' , ' g r i e f ' and ' v u l n e r a b i l i t y ' ) c o u l d be ex p l a i n e d by White's c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n as r e s u l t i n g from the women's lack of power i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p or i n s o c i e t y at l a r g e (p.129). However, i t i s noteworthy that the authors change t h e i r p r e v i o u s t r e n d and now rep o r t f i n d i n g s f o r a l l women and a l l men i n t h i s study, as versus those who r a t e d themselves as most j e a l o u s or those who d e f i n e d themselves as je a l o u s people. The cu r r e n t r e s e a r c h re-examine sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of elemental emotions. In summary, t h i s s e c t i o n has reviewed and c r i t i q u e d the l i t e r a t u r e on j e a l o u s y from the d i s c i p l i n e of psychology. A v a r i e t y of t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s emerged as a consequence of the departure from Freudian t r a d i t i o n i n i t i a t e d by Adler and Jung. The r e s u l t i n g d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n of s p e c i a l t i e s i n 110 psychology p a r t l y accounts f o r the many themes about j e a l o u s y that have emerged and f o r the v a r i e t y of r e s e a r c h methodologies that have been used. The p e r s p e c t i v e s from psychology were presented c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y to r e f l e c t the developments i n theory, i n res e a r c h and i n the a p p l i c a t i o n of both to therapy. As i s ongoing i n p s y c h i a t r y , the e a r l y l i t e r a t u r e i n psychology c o n c e n t r a t e d , f o r the most p a r t , on the j e a l o u s d i s p o s i t i o n . In s p i t e of more o p t i m i s t i c A d l e r i a n and Jungian i m p l i c a t i o n s , the emotion was' p r i m a r i l y viewed as i n h e r e n t l y negative or d e s t r u c t i v e and therapy was d i r e c t e d only at the. i n d i v i d u a l . Much of the e a r l y and some of the more recent e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h thus compares the " j e a l o u s person" with the "non-jealous person". G r a d u a l l y , the i n f l u e n c e of f a m i l y , r e l a t i o n s h i p and s o c i o - c u l t u r a l dynamics a l s o emerges. T h i s was i n i t i a l l y evidenced most d i r e c t l y i n the p r a c t i c e s e t t i n g with Ard's (1967) focus on couple- communication . May's (1972) t h e s i s on power was a p p l i e d by t h i s r e s e a r c h e r to j e a l o u s y i n order to expand h i s a s s o c i a t i o n of these two concepts and transcend the b a s i c p o s i t i v e - n e g a t i v e continuum, thus b u i l d i n g a more h o l i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e . S e v e r a l s t u d i e s from the e a r l y and mid-seventies were d i s c u s s e d and c r i t i q u e d . They i n d i c a t e d , among other t h i n g s , the broadening conceptual understanding of j e a l o u s y but a l s o a c o n t i n u i n g r e t i c e n c e i n research to r e l i n q u i s h 111 the tendency to l a b e l the i n d i v i d u a l ' s c h a r a c t e r on the b a s i s of a s i n g l e emotion. F r a n c i s ' (1977) r e s e a r c h showed evidence fo r wide i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n s i n the experience and the e x p r e s s i o n of j e a l o u s y and demonstrated how s o c i a l d i s a p p r o v a l of the emotion serves to i n h i b i t open communication about i t , thus r e i n f o r c i n g i t s negative s t a t u s and p r e v e n t i n g r e c o g n i t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l d i s c r e p a n c i e s . Many d i f f e r e n t elemental emotions of j e a l o u s y were suggested. G e n e r a l l y , i t i s d e s c r i b e d as being compounded of fear (of l o s s ) , anger, rage, power or powerlessness, s e l f - d o u b t , envy, h u r t , p a i n , v u l n e r a b i l i t y , h u m i l i a t i o n , love and/or hate. However, the many proposed combinations f a l l s hort of the "whole" thus s u p p o r t i n g the idea that j e a l o u s y i s a d i s c r e t e emotion (something more than the sum of i t s p a r t s ) that i s uniquely experienced. Sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n the experience and e x p r e s s i o n of j e a l o u s y were a l s o an ongoing theme and there was consensus that males experience and react to the emotion on the b a s i s of t h r e a t s to t h e i r sexual s e l f - e s t e e m and females more on the b a s i s of t h r e a t s to t h e i r emotional involvement and the s e c u r i t y p r o v i d e d by t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s . These d i f f e r e n c e s were t y p i c a l l y e x p l a i n e d by b e l i e f s f i x e d i n t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e s and by i s s u e s of c o o p e r a t i o n or power-sharing between p a r t n e r s (Corzine, 1974; Shettel-Neuber, Bryson & Young, 1978; White, 1980) . White's (1976, 1980, 1981a) s t u d i e s added to and 1 1 2 sy n t h e s i z e d s o c i o - c u l t u r a l p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y - r e l a t e d sex d i f f e r e n c e s . However, these proposed sex d i f f e r e n c e s remain grounded i n h i s and other e m p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s that e i t h e r n e g l e c t the phenomenological aspect of j e a l o u s y or are i n c o n c l u s i v e because of the many methodological problems d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . White's (1976) study a l s o demonstrates the problems encountered i n re s e a r c h that uses s t a t i c measures of s e l f - e s t e e m and/or p l a c e s t h i s nebulously d e f i n e d concept i n a c e n t r a l conceptual r o l e . The f i r s t ' p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l study of j e a l o u s y appeared in 1982 and i n i t B a r r e l l and Richards i d e n t i f i e d four necessary and s u f f i c i e n t f a c t o r s which c o n s t i t u t e the experience. They recommend overcoming j e a l o u s y by l e a r n i n g "a sense of r e l a t e d n e s s with o t h e r s " (p.44). T h e i r study adds a new e x p e r i e n t i a l p e r s p e c t i v e on j e a l o u s y but i t a l s o e x e m p l i f i e s a c e n t r a l problem with phenomenologies i n that i t does not acccount f o r aspects of human experience o u t s i d e the phenomenal f i e l d (e.g., unconscious processes and m o t i v a t i o n ) . For t h i s reason and because of the many problems encountered i n e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s , a combined approach to the study of j e a l o u s y i s supported. A c c o r d i n g l y , j e a l o u s y instruments were c r i t i q u e d and the most r e l e v a n t problems o u t l i n e d , emphasizing t h e i r n e g l e c t of the phenomenological aspect of the emotion as w e l l as t h e i r i n e f f i c i e n c y i n d i s t i n q u i s h i n g j e a l o u s y from other emotions. 113 Toward the end of the s e c t i o n and i n order to f a c i l i t a t e i n t e g r a t i o n of this , and following, chapters,, Constantine's (1976) i n t e r a c t i o n a l model was e x t r a c t e d from the c h r o n o l o g i c a l sequence, presented, and d i s c u s s e d as a p a r t i a l foundation f o r the c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h . T h i s foundation a l s o i n c o r p o r a t e s B a r t e l l ' s (1977) r e s e a r c h on synergism i n human r e l a t i o n s h i p s and the most recent j e a l o u s y r e s e a r c h by Aronson and Pines (1983), e s p e c i a l l y an adapted v e r s i o n of t h e i r j e a l o u s y i n v e n t o r y . T h i s use of model, instrument and p o t e n t i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n f a c i l i t a t e the p r e l i m i n a r y combined phenomenological-empirical approach pursued i n the c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h . Chapter Summary Th i s chapter was d i v i d e d i n t o four major s e c t i o n s . The f i r s t s e c t i o n examined l i t e r a t u r e that compares and c o n t r a s t s j e a l o u s y and envy. The next three s e c t i o n s presented and c r i t i q u e d m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a - r y perspectrves : i'on j e a l o u s y i n order to provide a background f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h . The l i t e r a t u r e examined i n the f i r s t s e c t i o n of t h i s chapter (along with the t h e o r i e s of emotion examined i n chapter one) supports t h i s r e s e a r c h e r ' s assumptions that j e a l o u s y and envy are d i s c r e t e but r e l a t e d emotions; they have evolved to meet d i f f e r e n t and changing human needs; and each has the p o t e n t i a l to be adaptive or maladaptive depending on the the s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l c ontexts i n which 1 1 4 they occur. The second s e c t i o n of t h i s chapter sampled four major p e r s p e c t i v e s on j e a l o u s y from the d i s c i p l i n e s of anthropology and s o c i o l o g y . The c o n t r i b u t i o n s of Davis (1936), Mead (1931), and Benedict (1934) were found to be very s i g n i f i c a n t to a dynamic, i n t e r a c t i o n a l view of the emotion. However, t h e i r views had l i t t l e i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y e f f e c t f o r s e v e r a l decades. For i n s t a n c e , i t was not u n t i l the l a t e s e v e n t i e s that Benedict's concept of synergy was again used i n a s s o c i a t i o n with j e a l o u s y . The t h i r d s e c t i o n of t h i s chapter i s a chronology of p e r s p e c t i v e s from the d i s c i p l i n e of p s y c h i a t r y . The l i t e r a t u r e on j e a l o u s y c o n t r i b u t e d by t h i s d i s c i p l i n e f o l l o w s the t r a d i t i o n of Freudian p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , f o c u s i n g almost e x c l u s i v e l y on the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of u n d e r l y i n g unconscious pro c e s s e s . Jealousy was and conti n u e s to be viewed as a p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t i n p s y c h i a t r i c l i t e r a t u r e and i s d i s c u s s e d as e i t h e r ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' or ' n o n - p a t h o l o g i c a l ' . The l i t e r a t u r e i s not re s e a r c h o r i e n t e d and d i s c u s s e s only c l i n i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s . There were no p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the s u b j e c t s ' own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e i r j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . The f o u r t h s e c t i o n presents and c r i t i q u e s p e r s p e c t i v e s from the d i s c i p l i n e of psychology beginning with Adler (1928) and ending with the most recent r e s e a r c h by Aronson and Pines (1983). May's t h e s i s on power was used to extend the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y . T h i s new 1 15 c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n , B a r t e l l ' s r e s e a r c h on synergism in human r e l a t i o n s h i p s , Constantine's (1976) model f o r j e a l o u s y and the r e s e a r c h by Aronson and Pines (1983), were d i s c u s s e d together to e s t a b l i s h an i n t e g r a t i v e base f o r the chapters to f o l l o w . The next chapter c o n s t i t u t e s the e m p i r i c a l phase of the c u r r e n t study. I t w i l l present and d i s c u s s d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s f o r the o b j e c t i v e data c o l l e c t e d i n the j e a l o u s y survey. More advanced s t a t i s t i c a l analyses are eschewed because t h i s phase of the r e s e a r c h i s aimed" at hypotheses ge n e r a t i o n and because the o b j e c t i v e data are measures by i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t s u s i n g a s u b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i o n — t h e i r own most extreme experience with j e a l o u s y . F i n a l l y , the p r e v i o u s chapter has supported a c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y that does not lend i t s e l f w e l l to a s i n g u l a r l y o b j e c t i v e approach and so t h i s p r e l i m i n a r y combination of phenomenological and e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h r e q u i r e s that each phase r e l i n q i s h something. Thus the phenomenological phase, d e s c r i b e d in chapter four, eschews the usual f a c e - t o - f a c e involvement of re s e a r c h e r and s u b j e c t but i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s , t h e i r e x p e riences, t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and t h e i r i n s i g h t s . 1 16 CHAPTER III EMPIRICAL PHASE Design and Method Subjects T h i s study surveyed a non-random p o p u l a t i o n of f a m i l i e s who r e s i d e i n student f a m i l y housing at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. P a r t i c i p a n t s were r e q u i r e d to be between . the ages of 20 and 60 years. S e l e c t i o n of the subj e c t pool was based on f i n a n c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , convenience and a wish to i n c l u d e s u b j e c t s from v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s , c u l t u r e s , races and r e l i g i o u s / s o c i a l backgrounds. Residency i n the community i s determined by c r i t e r i a that are d e s c r i b e d under " l i m i t a t i o n s " i n chapter one. Instrument The instrument i s i n c l u d e d i n appendix A. I t i s an adapted v e r s i o n of Aronson and Pines' (1982) 14-page "Sexual Jealousy Inventory". Whole s e c t i o n s and s e v e r a l items were d e l e t e d . The r a t i o n a l e f o r use and ad a p t a t i o n of the instrument was d i s c u s s e d i n chapter two. A d d i t i o n s i n c l u d e d items 6, 7, 14, 15, 16, 18, 29, 30, 53-58, 94 and 123. 1 17 Items 8 and 9 were re-worded f o r comprehensiveness. P i l o t Study The p i l o t study used 15 female and 16 male v o l u n t e e r s . They were n u r s i n g , medical and support s t a f f at the Health Sciences Centre H o s p i t a l at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. On the b a s i s of L e r t a p item a n a l y s i s (Nelson, 1974) and bas i c c o r r e l a t i o n s , a d e c i s i o n was made not to i n c l u d e the o r i g i n a l l y intended measure of synergy. L e r t a p r e s u l t s f o r the adapted v e r s i o n of the j e a l o u s y i n v e n t o r y demonstrated, fo r t o t a l t e s t s t a t i s t i c s , a Hoyt's Estimate of R e l i a b i l i t y of 0.97 and a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.72. Subtest s t a t i s t i c s demonstrated Hoyt's of 0.81, 0.94, 0.95 and 0.78 r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r each of the f o l l o w i n g s u b t e s t s : j e a l o u s y prevalence; p h y s i c a l r e a c t i o n s ; emotional r e a c t i o n s ; and general r e a c t i o n s . A d e c i s i o n to i n c l u d e the subtest e n t i t l e d "coping with j e a l o u s y " was made f o l l o w i n g the p i l o t study. On the b a s i s of feedback from the s u b j e c t s minor changes were made i n the o r i g i n a l wording of items numbered 8, 9, and 18. The s t a t i s t i c s presented f o r the p i l o t study are of i n t e r e s t more i n terms of f u t u r e s t u d i e s which i n c o r p o r a t e more advanced s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s than f o r purposes of the e m p i r i c a l phase of t h i s study which uses only d e s c r i p t i v e 118 s t a t i s t i c s . Otherwise, the purpose of the p i l o t study was to assess i n t e r e s t and response and to gain feedback about: the o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r i n g of the adapted i n v e n t o r y ; wording of items ( e s p e c i a l l y s u b j e c t i v e items); and f i n a l l y , to f a c i l i t a t e refinement of procedures and data h a n d l i n g f o r the main study. Data C o l l e c t i o n and Procedures One week p r i o r to the commencement of data c o l l e c t i o n the weekly housing newsletter p u b l i s h e d ' t h e request f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n (see appendix B). During the f o l l o w i n g week 300 unsealed, s e l f - a d d r e s s e d envelopes were d i s t r i b u t e d to the homes i n the housing complex. In a d d i t i o n to the je a l o u s y i n v e n t o r y , the envelopes c o n t a i n e d a cover l e t t e r (see appendix C) s t a t i n g : the purpose of the study; p a r t i c i p a t i o n requirements; p r o c e d u r a l i n f o r m a t i o n ; a r e t u r n d e a d l i n e (set at 21 days a f t e r d e l i v e r y of the envelopes); and the usual e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Follow-up notes to remind p a r t i c i p a n t s of the r e t u r n d e a d l i n e were p u b l i s h e d i n the next two n e w s l e t t e r s . Seventy-seven i n v e n t o r i e s were re t u r n e d to the two c o l l e c t i o n p o i n t s . Four i n v e n t o r i e s were destroyed because i n three cases respondents had not used the p r o v i d e d • s c a l e s and i n one case more than two- t h i r d s of both o b j e c t i v e and s u b j e c t i v e items had been omitted. 119 Sample Demography The f i n a l sample i n c l u d e d 73 respondents. T h e i r demography i s d e s c r i b e d , in p a r t , by Table 1. In a d d i t i o n , they ranged i n age from 22 to 43 years (M=31; S.D.=2.7). S i x t y - f o u r percent of respondents i n d i c a t e d formal education at the l e v e l of a bachelor's degree or beyond. Although 93% of the s u b j e c t s were C a u c a s i a n , many d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s (of b i r t h , r e a r i n g and/or permanent residency) and c u l t u r e s were d e s c r i b e d i n the s u b j e c t i v e responses to item 7. Subjects f r e q u e n t l y named Canada, the U.S.A., England and Germany but Canadians s e p a r a t e l y s p e c i f i e d the Quebecois c u l t u r e i n two i n s t a n c e s , the Haida c u l t u r e i n one i n s t a n c e and the Cree c u l t u r e i n one i n s t a n c e . Otherwise, Japan and New Zealand were each named three times, Iran and I r e l a n d were each named twice and the f o l l o w i n g were named once: B r a z i l , Paraguay, Guyana, Columbia, Italy-, Spain, The*-Middle - East, The West Indies-y N i g e r i a , Kenya, S w i t z e r l a n d , A u s t r a l i a and Y u g o s l a v i a . R e l i g i o n s s p e c i f i e d as "other" (and hence not s e p a r a t e l y i n d i c a t e d on Table 1) i n c l u d e d : Mennonite, T a o i s t , Mormon, Tosan, U n i t a r i a n , E v a n g e l i s t , Buddhist, Latter-Day S a i n t , Agnostic and " u n c l a s s i f i e d " . Seventy-three percent of s u b j e c t s were from f i r s t or second s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n s i n t h e i r f a m i l i e s of o r i g i n . The range f o r number of c h i l d r e n i n f a m i l i e s of o r i g i n was from 1 20 Table 1 Frequencies of the Demographic V a r i a b l e s Var i a b l e s T o t a l Ma l e s Females Subjects S t u d e n t s 2 Race: Caucasian Negroid Or i e n t a l Canadian Indian East Indian Other R e l i g i o n : None P r o t e s t a n t C a t h o l i c Jewish Moslem Hindu Sikh Other Twins 2 73 ( 1 0 0 . 0 ) 45 ( 61.6) 68 ( 93.2) 2 ( 2.7) 1 ( 1 ( 1.4) 1.4) 1 ( 1.4) 23 ( 3T.5) 18 ( 24.7) 12 ( 16.4) 1 ( 1.4) l 9 - ( 26.0) 4 ( 5.5) 28 ( 1 0 0 . 0 ) 16 ( 57. 1 ) 24 ( 87.5) 1 ( 3.6) 1 ( 1 ( 3.6) 3.6) 1 ( 3.6) 13 •(•• 46.4) 4 ( 1 4 . 3 ) 3 ( 10.7) 1 ( 3.6) 7 ( 25.0) 45 ( 1 0 0 . 0 ) 1 29 ( 64.4) 44 ( 97.8) 1 ( 2.2) 10 ( 22.2) 14 ( 31.1) 9 ( 20.0) 12 ( 26.7) •4 ( 8.9) Present M a r i t a l or R e l a t i o n s h i p S t a t u s : S i n g l e 6 ( 8.2) 4 ( 14.3) 2 ( 4.4) D i v o r c e d 1 0 ( 13.7) 2 ( 7.1 ) 8 ( 17.8) Separated 8 ( 11.0) 2 ( 7.1 ) 6 ( 13.3) Widowed Partnered 6 ( 8.2) 4 ( 14.3) 2 ( 4.4) C o h a b i t i n g 6 ( 8.2) 2 ( 7.1) 4-• ( 8.9) Remarried 4 ( 5.5) 1 ( 3.6) 3 ( 6.7) M a r r i e d 33 ( 45.2) 1 3 ( 46.4) 20 ( 44.4) Other Current Family: Two-parent 41 ( 56, .2) 1 6 ( 57. .1 ) 25 ( 55, .6) S i n g l e - p a r e n t 20 ( 27, .4) 3 ( 10. ,7) 1 7 ( 37, .8) Blended 5 ( 6, .8) 2 ( 7. .1) 3 ( 6. .7) Other 7 ( 9, .6) 7 ( 25. .0) Note. 1 . Absolute and ( r e l a t i v e ) f r e q u e n c i e s 2. C a l c u l a t e d on b a s i s of p o s i t i v e response to a Yes/No q u e s t i o n 121 one to e i g h t with three 'only' c h i l d r e n and four 'twins' represented i n the sample. The average c u r r e n t household co n t a i n e d more than 3 people (M=3.4). R e s u l t s and D i s c u s s i o n It i s not f e a s i b l e to present a l l of the o b j e c t i v e r e s u l t s from t h i s survey because even the b a s i c d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s allow f o r m u l t i p l e combinations of data. T h e r e f o r e , the researcher i s s e l e c t i v e i n p r e s e n t i n g only key r e s u l t s v i s a v i s the e a r l i e r c r i t i q u e of t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s and the purpose of the study. I. J e a l o u s y : T r a i t - B a s e d ? Item 19 of the inventor y (Do you c o n s i d e r y o u r s e l f a j e a l o u s person?) was not d e l e t e d when the o r i g i n a l i n v e n t o r y was adapted. I t s i n c l u s i o n assumes that to some extent s u b j e c t s have the same tendencies as r e s e a r c h e r s c r i t i q u e d in the l i t e r a t u r e review to apply ' j e a l o u s ' and 'non- j e a l o u s ' l a b e l s . The l i t e r a t u r e a l s o supports an a p r e d i c t i o n that women w i l l be more l i k e l y than men to acknowledge a ' j e a l o u s ' l a b e l because of t h e i r dependent and i n f e r i o r s t a t u s . With these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n mind, i t was no s u r p r i s e that there were no occ a s i o n s of non-response to the above q u e s t i o n even though t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e was c l e a r l y 122 s t a t e d i n the enclosed i n s t r u c t i o n s . The p a t t e r n of responses to t h i s item (19) does not r e f u t e or support t r a i t - b a s e d t h e o r i e s of j e a l o u s y . However, i t demonstrates the i n a c c u r a c i e s that r e s u l t from a p p l y i n g d i s p o s i t i o n a l l a b e l s on the b a s i s of a s i n g l e emot i o n . F o r t y - e i g h t s u b j e c t s (66%) responded "no" to the qu e s t i o n and 25 (34%) responded "yes". Of the 28 men i n the sample only 25% (7) responded "yes" while 40% (18) of the 45 women d i d the same.- When s u b j e c t s were assigned" t o t a l j e a l o u s y scores on the b a s i s of t h e i r summed responses to emotional, r e a c t i o n s females o v e r a l l i n d i c a t e d a stronger emotional response. When a l l scores were ranked females were a l s o p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more l i k e l y to score above the median than males. However, sex a s i d e , the (18) "yes" and (19) "no" responses above the median very c l o s e l y approximate an i d e n t i c a l l i k e l i h o o d of occurrence. L o g i c a l l y , we would expect that j e a l o u s persons ('yes' respondents) would dominate the above median s c o r e s . When seven i n t e r v a l s were c r e a t e d f o r the above- mentioned t o t a l scores ( i n accordance with the one-to-seven s c a l e from which they were de r i v e d ) 17.8% of a l l men were found i n the top two i n t e r v a l s while only 15.5% of a l l women were i n the same i n t e r v a l s . C o n s i d e r i n g the much l a r g e r p o r p o r t i o n a t e d i f f e r e n c e i n sample s t r u c t u r e [n=73; males=28 (38%); females=45 (62%)] along with the p r e d i c t i o n that 1 23 women as a subgroup are more l i k e l y to be d i s p o s i t i o n a l l y j e a l o u s then men, then they should be found with a gr e a t e r not a l e s s e r frequency than men i n e s p e c i a l l y the top two i n t e r v a l s . Even an i d e n t i c a l occurrence of men and women i n these i n t e r v a l s would be i n c o n s i s t e n t with t r a i t - b a s e d t h e o r i e s , e s p e c i a l l y given the frequent support f o r the idea that women are more l i k e l y to f i n a l l y a s c r i b e to t h e i r b a s i c p e r s o n a l i t i e s the consequences of n e g a t i v e l y p e r c e i v e d c i r c u m s t ances. Random sampling and an adequate number of cases per i n t e r v a l would be necessary to v e r i f y the e m p i r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the above f i n d i n g s . However, even with these experimental p r e c a u t i o n s , i t would be very d i f f i c u l t to c o n t r o l f o r the s o c i a l l y - i n f l u e n c e d or s o c i a l l y - determined and seemingly g r e a t e r tendency of women to c a t e g o r i z e themselves as j e a l o u s . Hence, t r a i t - b a s e d t h e o r i e s and resea r c h on j e a l o u s y are fundamentally i m p r a c t i c a l and the ongoing lac k of evidence supports a recommendation that c o u n s e l l o r s a v o i d i t s a p p l i c a t i o n and l i k e w i s e c a u t i o n t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s and c l i e n t s . I I . Response Set and/or Re-Experience of the Emotion? F i g u r e 1 g r a p h i c a l l y p o r t r a y s ( f o r a l l s u b j e c t s and s e p a r a t e l y f o r males and females) the number of s u b j e c t s who responded at each l e v e l of the response s c a l e f o r items 20 ; ("How j e a l o u s are you at t h i s time i n your l i f e ? " ) and 122 ' 124 F i g u r e 1. Responses t o q u e s t i o n s 20 ( s o l i d l i n e ) and 122 (broken l i n e ) bu, q u e s t i o n 19 (Yes/No) 125 ("Using your own d e f i n i t i o n , how j e a l o u s are you?). The graphs are f u r t h e r d i v i d e d i n t o p a i r s on the b a s i s of "yes" arid "no" responses to item 19 ("Are you a j e a l o u s person?"). There i s a v i s i b l e s h i f t toward the r i g h t when the d o t t e d l i n e i s compared with the s o l i d l i n e . T h i s i n d i c a t e s that by the end of the i n v e n t o r y a l l s u b j e c t s ( r e g a r d l e s s of sex and r e g a r d l e s s of whether or not they had acknowledged being a j e a l o u s person) were r e p o r t i n g more j e a l o u s y . There are many p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s f o r t h i s apparent phendnmenon. The usual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would" a t t r i b u t e the s h i f t to a response set which i n d i c a t e s "the d i f f e r e n c e between the answer given by the respondent and the true answer" (Borg & G a l l , 1979, p.311). Using t h i s d e f i n i t i o n , i t would commonly be suggested that the c o n f l i c t i n g r e p o r t s by s u b j e c t s i n d i c a t e a f a u l t with the measure to the extent that i t i s l e s s than e f f i c i e n t i n s o l i c i t i n g a true measure or simply that s u b j e c t s responded in a p a t t e r n e d way which demonstrates the inaccuracy of s e l f - r e p o r t i n g e n e r a l . However, i n t h i s case i t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e that s u b j e c t s were more aware of, more l i k e l y to acknowledge and perhaps more accu r a t e i n a s s e s s i n g t h e i r j e a l o u s y by the end of the inventory than at the beginning because of a t h e r a p e u t i c e f f e c t of the instrument. Given that no d e f i n i t i o n of j e a l o u s y was presented and much c a u t i o n was taken to a v o i d implying a d e f i n i t i o n , s u b j e c t s were e s s e n t i a l l y responding to the same qu e s t i o n i n 126 items 20 and 122. If they were assuming a r e s e a r c h e r d e f i n i t i o n when responding to item 20 i t would n e c e s s a r i l y be a p r o j e c t i o n and hence s t i l l c l o s e l y comparable to t h e i r own d e f i n i t i o n which was the c r i t e r i o n f o r response to item 122. T h e r e f o r e , the usual negative assumptions about response set i n terms of i t s confounding e f f e c t on r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s can be reversed i n t h i s i n s t a n c e . In other words, i f the d i f f e r e n c e s p o r t r a y e d by the graph demonstrate a response' set i t . i s one that a c t s i n a c o n s t r u c t i v e way because i t demonstrates that responding to the i n v e n t o r y encouraged a s e l f - d e t e r m i n e d accuracy by s u b j e c t s . A f t e r p r e s e n t i n g t h e i r most extreme experience with j e a l o u s y , r e f l e c t i n g on i t s u l t i m a t e p o s i t i v e and negative e f f e c t s (see appendix D), examining t h e i r f e e l i n g s r e l a t i v e to the experience and d e f i n i n g the emotion (see appendix E ) , they were seemingly more prepared to own t h e i r j e a l o u s y and hence give a more " t r u e " or a c c u r a t e s e l f - r e p o r t . T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of o b j e c t i v e data i s a l s o supported by s u b j e c t i v e and phenomenological o b s e r v a t i o n s . The l a r g e o v e r a l l response to the survey both i n terms of the p i l o t study and i n terms of the main study speaks to the keenness of p a r t i c i p a n t s to s e l f - e x p l o r e . The s p e c i f i c content (and even length) of responses to item 123 ( r e q u e s t i n g other i n s i g h t s / t h o u g h t s / e x p e r i e n c e s which s u b j e c t s might wish to c o n t r i b u t e ) a l s o speaks to t h i s keenness and to t h e i r 127 w i l l i n g n e s s to share and make more c o n s t r u c t i v e use of t h e i r f e e l i n g s , thoughts, and experiences with j e a l o u s y (see appendix F, e s p e c i a l l y codes 22, 39 and 43). A l t e r n a t i v e l y , i t can be suggested that the response set i s an o b j e c t i v e demonstration of the phenomenological aspect of the emotion. I n t e r p r e t e d i n r e l a t i o n to the statements about most extreme experiences with j e a l o u s y (which s u b j e c t s c o n t r i b u t e d p r i o r to responding to item 122 but a f t e r items 19 and 20), the demonstrated d i f f e r e n c e s p o s s i b l y i n d i c a t e the. e f f e c t Of an a c t u a l r e - e x p e r i e n c i n g of the emotion d u r i n g completion of the i n v e n t o r y . I f c o g n i t i v e r e c a l l of these events i s i n s u f f i c i e n t i n accounting f o r these d i f f e r e n c e s , responses to the f i n a l item (122) may r e f l e c t the " t r u e " or more accurate f e e l i n g that i s experienced f o l l o w i n g s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n . Again, phenomenological evidence supports the above i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The s u b j e c t i v e responses (e.g., appendix F, code 06) speak on behalf of the suggested r e - e x p e r i e n c i n g of the emotion. A l s o , on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s the researcher was approached by f e l l o w community members. Process notes were accumulated and one non-respondent i s noted as s a y i n g : " I t ' s s i t t i n g there l o o k i n g at me, p a r t of me wants to do i t and p a r t of me doesn't. I guess I'm a f r a i d of what i t might s t i r up f o r me. I'm a s i n g l e parent and I've gone through a l o t g e t t i n g to the p o i n t that I'm now a t . I j u s t want to l e t a l l that go now, yet I know a l o t of i t i s s t i l l there and I guess I'm a f r a i d the j e a l o u s y q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l r e a l l y s t i r i t a l l up a g a i n " . 128 T h i s person's i n d e c i s i o n was seemingly based on an awareness of the phenomena being d i s c u s s e d . She sensed that p a r t i c i p a t i n g would r e s u l t i n r e - e x p e r i e n c i n g past emotions. Furt h e r c o n v e r s a t i o n i n d i c a t e d that she wanted encouragement to p a r t i c i p a t e because of a wish to reach a more complete r e s o l u t i o n . Instead, she was r e f e r r e d f o r c o u n s e l l i n g because of her p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s and because, i n the process of h e l p i n g , the r e s e a r c h e r o f f e r e d her an a l t e r n a t e and l e s s negative view of her j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s that may have i n f l u e n c e d her responses-. In essence, the response set demonstrated by f i g u r e one r e v e a l s something more than can be p o r t r a y e d by i n t e r p r e t a t i n g only the o b j e c t i v e d ata. When both e m p i r i c a l and phenomenological o b s e r v a t i o n s and f i n d i n g s are combined i t becomes evident that s u b j e c t s ' i n s i g h t s and experience cannot be separated from from t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n s without l o s i n g a l a r g e p a r t of the "whole" meaning. I I I . J e a l o u s y and S i b l i n g P o s i t i o n S i b l i n g p o s i t i o n was determined f o r a l l s u b j e c t s by s e p a r a t e l y adding responses to invent o r y items 10 and 11 and then 12 and 13 (see appendix A ) . As p r e v i o u s l y mentioned, 73% of the sample were from f i r s t and second p o s i t i o n s i n t h e i r f a m i l i e s of o r i g i n . Given t h i s sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c along with the wide range of f a m i l y s i z e (and t h e r e f o r e the 1 29 vast p o s s i b i l i t i e s i n terms of f a m i l y c o n s t e l l a t i o n s ) i t i s evident that d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s are not meaningful beyond saying that f i r s t and second s i b l i n g s were seemingly d i s t r i b u t e d i n a random f a s h i o n above and below the median for t o t a l emotional response. IV. J e a l o u s y Prevalence Table 2 presents the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s ( f o r a l l s u b j e c t s and again s e p a r a t e l y f o r males and females) f o r responses to ' j e a l o u s y prevalence' items. I t i s noteworthy that scores are h i g h e s t f o r both males and females d u r i n g adolescence and young adulthood. In c o n t r a s t to the f i n d i n g s by Aronson and Pines (1983) d i s c u s s e d i n chapter two, s u b j e c t s i n t h i s sample, on the average, r e p o r t e d being l e s s j e a l o u s during c h i l d h o o d than d u r i n g adulthood. However, when males and females are c o n s i d e r e d s e p a r a t e l y males r e p o r t more c h i l d h o o d j e a l o u s y than females (M=3.4 vs. 2.7). V. General Reactions to Jealousy Table 3 presents the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r responses to items i n the 'general r e a c t i o n s ' s u b s e c t i o n of the i n v e n t o r y . Subjects on the average r e p o r t e d that extreme experiences with j e a l o u s y are 'rare' and they l a s t f o r more than 'days' but l e s s than 'weeks' and are coped 130 Table 2 Jealousy Prevalence Questions: Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s T o t a l Males Females (n=73) (n=28) (n=45) Question x SD x SD x SD 19. Do you c o n s i d e r y o u r s e l f 1.7 0.5 1.7 0.4 1.6 0.5 a j e a l o u s person? 1=Yes, 2=No 20. How j e a l o u s are you at 2.5 1.5 2.5 1.4 2.4 1.1 t h i s time i n your l i f e ? 1=not at a l l ... 7=extremely 21. During c h i l d h o o d 2.9 1.5 3.4 1.5 2.7 1.5 1 = n o t a t a l l ' - ' . . . 7=extremely 22. During adolescence . 3.9 1.6 4.4 1.6 3.7 1.6 1-not at a l l ... 7=extremely 23. During young adulthood 3.9 1.7 3.7 1.8 4.0 1.6 1=not at a l l ... 7=extremely 24. During adulthood 3.0 1.4 2.8 1.2 3.0 1.4 1=not at a l l ... 7=extremely 25. Have any of your i n t i m a t e 1.6 1.1 1.6 0.9 1.6 1.1 r e l a t i o n s h i p s ended because of your j e a l o u s y ? 1=none ... 7=all of them 26. Do most people who know you 2.1 1.3 2.0 1.0 2.1 1.5 w e l l c o n s i d e r you a j e a l o u s person? 1 = d e f i n i t e l y not ... 7 = d e f i n i t e l y yes •27. Do people you have been 2.8. 1.8 2.5 1.6 2.9 1.9 i n t i m a t e with c o n s i d e r you j e a l o u s ? 1 = d e f i n i t e l y not ... 7 = d e f i n i t e l y yes 131 Table 3 General Reaction Questions: Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s T o t a l Males Females (n=73) (n=28) (n=45) Question x SD x SD x SD 89. R e c a l l i n g your most extreme 4.4 experience of j e a l o u s y , how long d i d the experience l a s t ? 1=seconds ... 4=days ... 7=years 1 .6 4 .3 1 .5 4. 5 1 .6 90. How o f t e n do you 3.0 experience extreme j e a l o u s y ? 1=never ... 7=always 0.9 2 .7 1 .0 3. 2 0 .9 91 . Do you thi n k you coped w e l l 4.2 with the extreme s i t u a t i o n you d e s c r i b e d ? 1=very p o o r l y ... 7=very w e l l 1.7 4 <4 1 .8 4. 1 1 .7 92. Do you c o n s i d e r your 2.2 j e a l o u s y a problem? 1=not at a l l ... 7=a very s e r i o u s 1 .5 one 1 .9 1 .5 2. 5 1 .5 93. Can you make y o u r s e l f stop 4.3 being j e a l o u s y ? 1 = d e f i n i t e l y not ... 7 = d e f i n i t e l y 1 .8 yes 4 .9 1 .7 4. 0 1 .8 94. How o f t e n do you experience 3.8 mild j e a l o u s y ? 1=never . .. 7=always 0.8 3 .7 0 .8 3. 8 0 .7 95. Do you thi n k that j e a l o u s y ,5.7 i s a normal response i n c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s ? 1 = d e f i n i t e l y not ... 7 = d e f i n i t e l y 1 .6 yes 6 .0 1 .2 5. 4 1 .7 96. Do you c o n s i d e r your own 2.1 j e a l o u s y i n extreme s i t u a t i o n s to be an a p p r o p r i a t e r e a c t i o n ? 1 = d e f i n i t e l y not ... 7 = d e f i n i t e l y 1 .3 yes 2 .0 1 .0 2. 1 1 .5 132 with 'averagely w e l l ' . O v e r a l l , s u b j e c t s r e p o r t e d that j e a l o u s y was not a problem but m i l d j e a l o u s y o c c u r r e d " o c c a s i o n a l l y " not " r a r e l y " . The emotion was, on the average, r e p o r t e d to be "a normal response i n c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s " . In c o n t r a s t , j e a l o u s y i n extreme s i t u a t i o n s was not c o n s i d e r e d to be an a p p r o p r i a t e r e a c t i o n thus seemingly supporting i t s ongoing taboo s t a t u s . The most v i s i b l e sex d i f f e r e n c e s are apparent in responses to items 92 and 93 with males on the average c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i r j e a l o u s y to be l e s s of a problem than d i d females. Males were a l s o more c o n f i d e n t i n r e p o r t i n g t h e i r a b i l i t y to stop being j e a l o u s . These d i f f e r e n c e s support f i n d i n g s by White (1976, 1980 1981) and a s i m i l a r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s posed in that they p o s s i b l y r e f l e c t the female's g r e a t e r emotional involvement and dependence on the r e l a t i o n s h i p and hence her l e s s powerful p o s i t i o n . Again, s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of these d i f f e r e n c e s await more advanced a n a l y s i s but the above i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a l s o f i n d s support i n the d i f f e r e n c e s between s u b j e c t i v e responses by males and females to items 28, 29, and 30 (see appendix D, e s p e c i a l l y codes 01, 02, 08, 09, 25, 36, 41, 46, 48, 55 and 56) . VI. P h y s i c a l Reactions to J e a l o u s y Table 4 l i s t s and ranks the ten highest means f o r responses to the 28 ' p h y s i c a l r e a c t i o n ' items, again f o r a l l 1 33 s u b j e c t s and s e p a r a t e l y f o r males and females. I t i s Table 4 Ranking of P h y s i c a l Reactions on B a s i s of Mean Response T o t a l (n=73) Males (n=28) Females (n=45) Mean Response Mean Response Mean Response Fast heartbeat 3. 6 Shakey 3. 4 Fast heartbeat 3. 9 Shakey 3. 5 Fast heartbeat 3. 1 Ene r g i z e d 3. 9 Ene r g i z e d 3. 5 Stomach empty 3. 0 Insomnia 3. 6 Insomnia 3. 2 Blood rushing 2. 9 Shakey 3. 6 Stomach empty 3. 1 . A p p e t i t e l o s s 2. 8 A p p e t i t e l o s s 3. 2 A p p e t i t e l o s s 3. 1 Hot 2. 7 Stomach empty 3. 2 Blood r u s h i n g 3. 0 Energ i z e d 2. 7 Blood rushing 3. 1 Trembling hands 2. 8 Insomnia 2. 6 Breath short 3. 0 Hot 2. 6 Exhausted 2. 6 Trembling hands 3. 0 Breath short 2. 6 Trembling hands 2. 5 Sweaty 2. 6: Note. In the case of t i e d means, the r e a c t i o n with the small e r standard d e v i a t i o n i s l i s t e d f i r s t . A l l items were answered on a 7 p o i n t s c a l e . noteworthy that although the ten r e a c t i o n s f o r the t o t a l sample are a l l moderately weighted and g e n e r a l l y they d e s c r i b e an autonomic nervous system f i g h t - f l i g h t response or seemingly, the 'j e a l o u s f l a s h ' d e s c r i b e d i n the 134 l i t e r a t u r e . However, females ranked "energized" c o n s i d e r a b l y higher than males p o s s i b l y i n d i c a t i n g a g r e a t e r tendency to f i g h t r a t h e r than f l e e . Female responses are a l s o g e n e r a l l y somewhat higher than male responses again supp o r t i n g s e v e r a l e a r l i e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s t hat the f e l t t h r e a t may be g r e a t e r f o r the female than f o r the male because of the former's i n f e r i o r s o c i a l s t a t u s and her gre a t e r dependence on the r e l a t i o n s h i p . A l s o , because these p h y s i c a l r e a c t i o n s d e s c r i b e a autonomic nervous system response, support i s given to Solomon's" (197/6) t h e s i s that f e e l i n g s (as v i s c e r a l s e n s a t i o n s ) may be g e n e r a l i z e d to many d i f f e r e n t emotions. He says " f e e l i n g s are the ornamentation of emotion, not i t s essence" (p.159). V I I . Emotional Reactions to Jealousy Table 5 l i s t s and ranks the ten highest means f o r responses to the 30 'emotional r e a c t i o n ' items f o r a l l s u b j e c t s and s e p a r a t e l y f o r males and females. When-males and females are c o n s i d e r e d s e p a r a t e l y " f e a r of l o s s " , "envy", " p o s s e s s i v e n e s s " and "low s e l f - i m a g e " are ranked among the ten highest means f o r females but not f o r males. Again, female responses o v e r a l l are higher than male responses. "Pain", " s e l f - p i t y " , " v u l n e r a b i l i t y " and "de p r e s s i o n " are among the ten hi g h e s t means f o r males but not f o r females. T h i s f i n d i n g supports the idea that what i s s t e r e o - t y p i c a l l y c o n s i d e r e d to be j e a l o u s y i s seemingly 1 35 Table 5 Ranking of Emotional Reactions on Bas i s of Mean Response T o t a l (n=73) Males (n=28) Females (n=45) Mean Response Mean Response Mean Response Anger 4 .8 Humilation 4 .5 Anger 5 .2 Resentment 4 .6 Depression 4 .3 Rage 5 . 1 Rage 4 .6 Resentment 4 .2 Resentment 4 .8 H u m i l i a t i o n 4 .5 Anger •4 .0 Excluded 4 .8 Anxiety 4 .4 F r u s t r a t i o n 3 .9 Anxiety 4 .7 Excluded 4 .3 S e l f - p i t y 3 .9 Fear of l o s s 4 .6 F r u s t r a t ion 4 .3 Anxiety 3 .8 Low self-image 4 .6 Depression 4 .3 Rage 3 .8 F r u s t r a t i o n 4 .5 Fear of l o s s 4 .2 V u l n e r a b i l i t y 3 .0. H u m i l i a t i o n 4 .5 Low s e l f - 4 .2 Excluded 3 .6 Possess- 4 .4 • image iveness I n f e r i o r i t y 4 . 1 Pain 3 .6 Envy 4 .4 Note. In the case of t i e d means, the r e a c t i o n with the small e r standard d e v i a t i o n i s l i s t e d f i r s t . A l l items were answered on a 7 p o i n t s c a l e . based on emotions that t y p i f y woman's expe r i e n c e . Perhaps i f t r a d i t i o n a l views of j e a l o u s y had been d e r i v e d from more of a focus on i t s elements of p a i n , v u l n e r a b i l i t y , d e p r e s s i o n and s e l f - p i t y then the st e r e o - t y p e would be "the je a l o u s man" ra t h e r than "the j e a l o u s women". It i s a l s o noteworthy that i n the top ten rankings f o r the t o t a l sample "envy" i s not on the l i s t and "low s e l f - image" appears only n i n t h . The absence of envy i n t h i s 136 ranking supports a view of j e a l o u s y as a d i s c r e t e emotion — something more and d i f f e r e n t than envy. The r e l a t i v e l y low ranking of "low s e l f - i m a g e " f o r the t o t a l sample l i s t i n g and f o r the female subsample (as w e l l as i t s absence in the male subsample ranking) supports White's (1976) d e c i s i o n to r e l e g a t e s e l f - e s t e e m to a more p e r i p h e r a l r o l e i n models of j e a l o u s y . U n l i k e ' p h y s i c a l r e a c t i o n ' items where top rankings f o r males and females were very s i m i l a r , t h i s time the very highest rankings f o r males d i f f e r markedly from' those f o r females and those f o r the t o t a l sample. The top two responses f o r males are h u m i l i a t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n while f o r females they are anger and rage. Re-emphasizing that the c r i t e r i o n f o r r a t i n g was the i n d i v i d u a l ' s experience, t h i s f i n d i n g supports a view of j e a l o u s y as an i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y and s o c i a l l y i n f l u e n c e d emotion. R e f l e c t i n g a l s o on Solomon's (1976) view of emotions, the s o c i a l i z a t i o n of the sexes seemingly r e s u l t s i n somewhat d i f f e r i n g emotional judgements of j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . Comparing the separate rankings under males and under females, both f e e l anger, rage, resentment, a n x i e t y , f r u s t r a t i o n and h u m i l i a t i o n but the most poignant elemental emotions f o r the female are anger and rage and f o r the male they are h u m i l i a t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n . Using B a r t e l l ' s (1977) c r i t e r i a to i d e n t i f y h i g h l y s y n e r g i s t i c couples (thus v e r i f y i n g a high l e v e l of s o c i a l 137 and p o s s i b l y economic interdependence) i t c o u l d be hypothesized that f o r these r e l a t i o n s h i p s . , males and females would not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e i r rankings of j e a l o u s y ' s elemental emotions. However, i f f i n d i n g s evenuate i n acceptance of t h i s hypothesis i t w i l l s t i l l be necessary to c o n s i d e r the common purpose served by the emotion r a t h e r than, or i n a d d i t i o n to, s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s between the sexes i n terms of i n t e r n a l exper ience. V I I I . Coping With Jealousy Table 6 l i s t s and ranks the ten highest means f o r the l i s t of 24 'coping with j e a l o u s y ' items. Again the t o t a l sample, males and females are each c o n s i d e r e d s e p a r a t e l y . The same p a t t e r n of o v e r a l l higher female than male responses i s e v i d e n t . The top three items a c r o s s the t a b l e are the s o c i a l l y a c c e p t a b l e " t h i n g s to do". However, " n e g o t i a t i o n " appears c o n s i d e r a b l y lowec on- the' l i s t - , thus- s u p p o r t i n g a suggestion that j e a l o u s y i s not t y p i c a l l y r e cognized as a t r i g g e r f o r interdependent change to the r e l a t i o n s h i p . A l s o apparent i n t h i s ranking i s that the next s e v e r a l items suggest a female tendency to give more weight to a n t a g o n i s t i c or a g g r e s s i v e behaviours and a male tendency to give more weight to behaviours that p o r t r a y a c l o s i n g o f f or a withdrawal. R e f l e c t i n g on Constantine's (1976) typology 138 Table 6 Ranking of "Coping With J e a l o u s y " Items on B a s i s of Mean Response T o t a l (n=73) Males (n=28) Females (n=45) Mean Response Mean Response Mean Response Th i n k i n g through 4 .8 Thin k i n g through 4.5 Th i n k i n g through 5. 0 Acceptance 4 .2 Acceptance 4.4 R a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n 4. 1 R a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n 4 . 1 R a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n 3.9 Acceptance 4. 2 Sarcasm 3 .6 Withdrawal 3.5 Sarcasm 3. 8 Withdrawal 3 .4 Stoney s i l e n c e 3.4 Cr y i n g 3. 7 Arguing 3 .4 I s o l a t i o n ' ' 3.4 Arguing 3. 6 I s o l a t i o n 3 .2 Sarcasm 3.3 N e g o t i a t i o n 3. 4 Stoney s i l e n c e 3 .2 S u f f e r s i l e n t l y + 3.0 v i s i b l y Withdrawal 3. 3 Negot i a t ion 3 . 1 S u f f e r s i l e n t l y + 2.9 c o v e r t l y I s o l a t ion 3. 2 Cr y i n g 2 .9 N e g o t i a t i o n 2.7 Stoney s i l e n c e 3. 0 Note. In the case of t i e d means, the r e a c t i o n with the smaller standard d e v i a t i o n i s l i s t e d f i r s t . A l l items were answered on a 7 po i n t s c a l e . of j e a l o u s behaviours d i s c u s s e d i n chapter two ( i s o l a t i o n a l , a n t a g o n i s t i c , r e d e f i n i t i o n a l and r e s o l u t i o n a l ) i t seems that females are r e p o r t i n g a g r e a t e r tendency than males to behave i n the ways that Constantine maintains w i l l be more l i k e l y to preserve the r e l a t i o n s h i p . T h i s i s a l s o congruent with the many views and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s d i s c u s s e d i n chapter 1 39 two i n that the female's g r e a t e r dependency on the r e l a t i o n s h i p a b d i c a t e s her g r e a t e r need to preserve i t . Again, these d i f f e r e n c e s in coping mechanisms might not be so apparent i f males and females were i d e n t i f i e d f o r study on the b a s i s of t h e i r membership i n s o c i a l l y and economically interdependent r e l a t i o n s h i p s . C o n s i d e r i n g the whole l i s t of 24 items the most apparent d i f f e r e n c e s between means f o r males and females occurred on the items " c r y i n g " , "screaming" and "throwing t h i n g s " . For a l l three items' female means were c o n s i d e r a b l y higher than male means (3.7 vs 1.6; 2.5 vs 1.6; and 2.0 vs 1.2 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) and females were a l s o very s l i g h t l y more l i k e l y to acknowledge p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e than males (1.6 vs 1.5). Although a l l of these means are r e l a t i v e l y low they may be important. A c c o r d i n g l y , nine of the 45 females (or 20%) and 4 out of 28 males (or 14%) acknowledged p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e as a r e a c t i o n to j e a l o u s y that occurs " r a r e l y " or more o f t e n . One male acknowledged i t as h i s " u s u a l " r e a c t i o n and s u b j e c t i v e l y beseeched " t r y to overcome t h i s f e e l i n g , i t i s a k i l l e r " (appendix. F, code 70). A l s o , i t must be remembered that the s o c i a l u n d e s i r a b i l i t y of r e p o r t i n g p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e may be r e s u l t i n g i n lower r a t i n g s on t h i s item. 1 40 Hypotheses and I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future Research As has been f r e q u e n t l y mentioned, the f i n d i n g s of the e m p i r i c a l phase of t h i s study are p r e l i m i n a r y . They are based only on d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s and t h e i r " s i g n i f i c a n c e " awaits more advanced s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s . When c o n s i d e r e d along with f i n d i n g s of the phenomenological phase ( i n c l u d i n g data i n the appendices) they promote a broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the human experience r e f e r r e d to as " j e a l o u s y " , thus a c h i e v i n g the o v e r a l l purpose of the study. It i s hoped that t h i s study w i l l encourage f u t u r e r e s e a r c h on j e a l o u s y that again combines e m p i r i c a l and phenomenological approaches but using methods that are a d d i t i v e i n each phase. Hence, among other t h i n g s , the e m p i r i c a l phase of t h i s study i s used to exemplify the genera t i o n - o f hypotheses from p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s . Although many hypotheses can be e x t r a p o l a t e d from the above d i s c u s s i o n of o b j e c t i v e data-, o n l y a- few- w i l l be7*-presented*. S e v e r a l of the sub s e c t i o n s under "Results and D i s c u s s i o n " are again b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e d i n l i g h t of new hypotheses and i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . S p e c i f i c i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e d e r i v e d from both phases of t h i s r e s e a r c h are presented i n chapter f i v e . S e c t i o n I above i m p l i e s that t r a i t - b a s e d t h e o r i e s of j e a l o u s y r e s u l t i n i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s . Thus hypotheses using " j e a l o u s " and "non-jealous" c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s 141 of i n d i v i d u a l s are not recommended. T h i s i m p l i c a t i o n i s based on the chapter two c r i t i q u e of p r e v i o u s re.s.earch as w e l l as on the o b j e c t i v e f i n d i n g s of t h i s study. Instead, i t i s recommended that f u t u r e research examine the d i f f e r e n t r o l e s i n j e a l o u s y t r i a n g l e s . Couple dynamics and i s s u e s such as b e l i e f s and assumptions about r e l a t i o n s h i p boundaries, dependence on the r e l a t i o n s h i p , power-sharing and c o o p e r a t i o n can be researched i n terms of how they e f f e c t the j e a l o u s y p r o c e s s . Instead of viewing i n d i v i d u a l behaviour in terms of the presence or absence of pathology i t can be examined in terms of i t s r o l e i n the dynamic process of change. Future r e s e a r c h should i n c o r p o r a t e methods that w i l l allow f o r the assessment of r o l e r e c i p r o c i t y and c o n s i d e r the p o s s i b i l i t y of s u b j e c t , object and agent changing r o l e s as dynamics change. As r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n c r e a s i n g l y allow f o r more s o c i a l and economic interdependence, women may be l e s s f r e q u e n t l y found in 'subject' r o l e s than they were in the p a s t . Future r e s e a r c h that implements the p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s of s e c t i o n II (and a l s o s e c t i o n s VI, V I I , and VII) above c o u l d be aimed at the improvement of e x i s t i n g programs and/or the development of new group t h e r a p i e s f o r couples who experience frequent or ongoing problems with j e a l o u s y . A c c o r d i n g l y , Borg and G a l l (1979) s t a t e that the primary goal of r e s e a r c h and development (R&D) methodology i s to take "res e a r c h knowledge and i n c o r p o r a t e i t i n t o a product 1 42 that can be used" (p.623). For i n s t a n c e , s e c t i o n II above i m p l i e s that the intrument used i n t h i s r e s e a r c h had a. t h e r a p e u t i c e f f e c t on s u b j e c t s . Hence, i t may be u s e f u l f o r purposes of formative and summative e v a l u a t i o n of such programs. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , i t might be used to assess or prepare i n d i v i d u a l s f o r the group experience. The "coping with j e a l o u s y " s e c t i o n of the instrument c o u l d be used i n a p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t f a s h i o n to measure i n d i v i d u a l changes i n types of behaviours s e l e c t e d i n response to the same and/or d i f f e r e n t h y p o t h e t i c a l or r e a l j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . Given a program that promotes s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n and teaches n e g o t i a t i o n . s k i l l s and a broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y , the instrument might a l s o be used to demonstrate f o r p a r t i c i p a n t s the s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l and couple experiences with j e a l o u s y and with i t s e x p r e s s i o n . Or, i t might be used to demonstrate how the o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s of human experience cannot be separated from the s u b j e c t i v e experience without l o s i n g a l o t of v a l u a b l e understanding. Hence, the d i f f e r e n c e between the anger and rage d e s c r i b e d by one i n d i v i d u a l and the h u m i l i a t i o n and v u l n e r a b i l i t y d e s c r i b e d by the next ( f o r s i m i l a r experiences with j e a l o u s y ) are determined to a l a r g e extent by t h e i r unique p e r c e p t i o n s , b e l i e f s , values and assumptions. In terms of i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r s e c t i o n III above, i t may be very r e l e v a n t that the sample of people who responded to 143 the j e a l o u s y inventory was c o n s t i t u t e d by 73% f i r s t and second s i b l i n g s . Perhaps i n d i v i d u a l s from these s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n s have a gr e a t e r need to explore the t o p i c . Future res e a r c h that uses very l a r g e samples c o u l d examine the i n t e r a c t i o n of p e r c e p t i o n of j e a l o u s y experiences and v a r i o u s s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n s . Given the chapter two d i s c u s s i o n s of a s s o c i a t i o n s between j e a l o u s y and power or s t a t u s , i t seems that s i b l i n g p o s i t i o n would provide a u s e f u l context w i t h i n which to expl o r e the development of b e l i e f s and assumptions (about s e l f and others) that e i t h e r enhance or impede s e l e c t i o n of e f f e c t i v e coping mechanisms. T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y r e l e v a n t i f we assume that the f a m i l y i s the f i r s t and most important u n i t of s o c i e t y i n terms of l e a r n i n g and p r a c t i c i n g the c o o p e r a t i v e values and interdependence that were suggested (by the ' p e r s p e c t i v e s from anthropology and s o c i o l o g y ' s e c t i o n ) as being i n f l u e n t i a l to the outcomes of je a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . Two hypotheses are s t a t e d i n n u l l terms to exemplify i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r s e c t i o n IV above: 1. There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between male and female ( s e l f - r e p o r t ) o b j e c t i v e measures of f e l t t h r e a t when an h y p o t h e t i c a l j e a l o u s y experience i s i d e n t i c a l l y d e s c r i b e d f o r a l l s u b j e c t s . 2. There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between male and female s u b j e c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of a h y p o t h e t i c a l and p o t e n t i a l l y t h r e a t e n i n g j e a l o u s y experience when the l a t t e r i s i d e n t i c a l l y d e s c r i b e d f o r a l l s u b j e c t s . 144 The f i r s t of the above hypotheses c o u l d be t e s t e d by using o b j e c t i v e items s i m i l a r t o some of those under the 'general r e a c t i o n s ' and 'emotional r e a c t i o n s ' s e c t i o n s of the inve n t o r y used i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . The second hypothesis c o u l d be t e s t e d by using an expert and independent panel of judges ( b l i n d to the sex of s u b j e c t s ) who would be pro v i d e d with a v a r i e t y of t h e o r e t i c a l l y d e r i v e d c a t e g o r i e s f o r placement of whole and/or segmented responses. The r e s u l t s from each h y p o t h e s i s would then be compared. To i n c o r p o r a t e a phenomenological phase the categories' and/or f i n d i n g s c o u l d be v e r i f i e d by the s u b j e c t s , i n d i v i d u a l l y or as a group. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , s u b j e c t s ( i n an open forum) c o u l d be used as the judges f o r c a t e g o r i z i n g the pooled anonymous data. The h y p o t h e s i s a l r e a d y suggested and d i s c u s s e d under s e c t i o n VII above can be s t a t e d i n n u l l terms as: 1. There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between male and female rankings of elemental emotions when an h y p o t h e t i c a l and p o t e n t i a l l y j e a l o u s y - e v o k i n g experience i s i d e n t i c a l l y described- f o r s u b j e c t s who- are ( i n d i v i d u a l l y ) members of couples p r e v i o u s l y a ssessed to be h i g h l y s y n e r g i s t i c . The 'emotional r e a c t i o n s ' s e c t i o n of the inventory c o u l d be used f o r measurement of the above hypothesis and any d i f f e r e n c e s between the sexes i n the rankings would be t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e by using a t w o - t a i l e d K e n d a l l ' s r (Glass & S t a n l e y , 1970, pp. 316-317). Again, s u b j e c t i v e assessment of the purpose that would be served by the 145 emotion f o r each su b j e c t ( r e l a t i v e to the h y p o t h e t i c a l s i t u a t i o n ) would enhance the meaning of r e s u l t s and would c o n s t i t u t e the phenomenological p o r t i o n of the a n a l y s i s . F i n a l l y , v a r i o u s hypotheses can be d e r i v e d from s e c t i o n VIII i n terms of examining sex d i f f e r e n c e s and coping mechanisms. Again R&D methodology would be u s e f u l i n terms of implementation and f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s . I t i s evident that problematic j e a l o u s y p o t e n t i a l l y r e s u l t s i n p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e and hence t h i s methodology i s h i g h l y recommended because of i t s aim to bridge the gap between r e s e a r c h and p r a c t i c e . Chapter Summary Th i s chapter has presented the e m p i r i c a l phase of t h i s study. The design and methodology were presented, i n c l u d i n g a d e s c r i p t i o n of the s u b j e c t p o o l , the instrument, the p i l o t study, data c o l l e c t i o n and procedures, and the sample demography. The p r e s e n t a t i o n of••• r e s u l t s " wa-s-selective-rn> d e a l i n g only with p r e l i m i n a r y , key f i n d i n g s i n accordance with the purpose of the study and the e a r l i e r c r i t i q u e of t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s . F i n a l l y , s e v e r a l hypotheses that were generated from the p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s were presented along with many i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . 1 4 6 CHAPTER IV PHENOMENOLOGICAL PHASE The l a s t chapter presented the e m p i r i c a l phase of t h i s study. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the o b j e c t i v e data made frequent r e f e r e n c e s to the s u b j e c t i v e data thus i n t e g r a t i n g t h i s phase. T h i s chapter d i s c u s s e s the s u b j e c t i v e data which (contained w i t h i n appendices D, E and F) c o n s t i t u t e the body of the phenomenological phase. S u b j e c t s ' verbatim responses are org a n i z e d w i t h i n the appendices i n a way that f a c i l i t a t e s reader i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and inter-comparisons of data. To o f f e r some of her own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , the researcher e x t r a c t s a few major elements or themes from each of two main s e c t i o n s of data: p a r t i c i p a n t d e f i n i t i o n s of j e a l o u s y (see appendix E ) ; and p a r t i c i p a n t d e s c r i p t i o n s of j e a l o u s y experiences (see appendix D). F i n a l l y , i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h and theory development are presented, adding to those- a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d i n chapter t h r e e . P a r t i c i p a n t D e f i n i t i o n s of J e a l o u s y : A D i s c u s s i o n P a r t i c i p a n t s ' d e f i n i t i o n s of j e a l o u s y are presented i n appendix E. Female s u b j e c t s ' responses are separated from male s u b j e c t s ' responses. C o n s i d e r i n g both together, fear and l o s s emerge as the major d e s c r i p t o r s of the emotion. 147 Otherwise, s u b j e c t s name: d e s i r e ; love; c a r e ; h u r t ; p a i n ; b e t r a y a l ; d e c e p t i o n ; envy; t r u s t or lack of i t ; doubt; c o n f u s i o n ; i n d i g n a t i o n ; anger; h o s t i l i t y ; an i n s e c u r i t y with s e l f , about p a r t n e r , or about the r e l a t i o n s h i p ; inadequacy (again i n terms of s e l f , p a r t n e r or the r e l a t i o n s h i p ) ; r i v a l r y ; c o m p e t i t i o n or fear of c o m p e t i t i o n ; p o s s e s s i v e n e s s ; covetousness; and hope or hopelessness. The elemental emotions named broadly f i t a framework of a n t i c i p a t e d g r i e f with a focus that i s more one of p r e v e n t i o n or p r o t e c t i o n than one of r e s i g n a t i o n or acceptance. In s p i t e of t h i s apparent q u a l i t y of p r e s e r v a t i o n , s u b j e c t s a l s o make frequent negative e v a l u a t i o n s of the emotion (codes 09, 10, 20, 59, 60, 64) seemingly c o n f i r m i n g i t s ongoing negative or taboo s t a t u s . O v e r a l l , s u b j e c t ' s d e f i n i t i o n s use more " e f f e c t " , "response" or " r e a c t i o n " d e s c r i p t o r s than "cause", "source" or " s t i m u l u s " d e s c r i p t o r s . The t r a d i t i o n a l view of emotions (as being products of our "being" that we play l i t t l e p a r t in c r e a t i n g ) i s e v i d e n t . Seemingly, t h i s view r e s u l t s i n the hopelessness expressed by s e v e r a l s u b j e c t s who see je a l o u s y as "automatic" (code 02) and "not c o n t r o l l a b l e by l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s " (code 03). I t i s a " s i c k n e s s " (code 60) fo r which "there i s no cure and no way out" (code 06). The t h e o r i e s of emotion by I z a r d (1971) and Solomon (1976) thus have d i r e c t i m p l i c a t i o n f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e i n terms of teaching a l t e r n a t e and more complex ways of viewing, our 1 48 emotions and the r o l e s they p l a y in our l i f e p r o c e s s . Male d e f i n i t i o n s seemingly have more of an i n t e r n a l and c o g n i t i v e locus than female d e f i n i t i o n s which name a wider v a r i e t y of emotional d e s c r i p t o r s and are d i r e c t e d more toward the e x t e r n a l t h r e a t and i n t e r p e r s o n a l l y i n f l u e n c e d q u a l i t i e s of the emotion. In male d e f i n i t i o n s the combination of a more i n t e r n a l locus and an even more negative s t a t u s f o r the emotion may p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n t h e i r more frequent a t t r i b u t i o n of pathology t y p i f i e d by d e s c r i p t o r s such as " s i c k n e s s " , " d i s e a s e " and " i r r a t i o n a l i t y " (codes 55, 59, 60, 64) Throughout both male and female d e f i n i t i o n s there i s an apparent p e r c e p t i o n of d e c e i t , b e t r a y a l or abandonment of the s u b j e c t by the o b j e c t , an a n t i c i p a t e d d i m i n u t i o n of the s u b j e c t ' s s t a t u s in the r e l a t i o n s h i p and/or some t h r e a t to the boundaries of t h e i r l i a s o n . T h i s p e r c e p t i o n confirms that s u b j e c t s have some i n s i g h t i n t o the s o c i a l nature of t h i s emotion but i t i s i n c o n s i s t e n t with m a i n t a i n i n g the negative view d e s c r i b e d above. Thus even though they recognize a fundamental r e c i p r o c i t y i n terms of j e a l o u s y being evoked by both i n t e r n a l and ( s o c i a l ) e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s , they (and e s p e c i a l l y males) tend to "blame" themselves f o r e x p e r i e n c i n g t h i s emotion by making negative a t t r i b u t i o n s to t h e i r " p e r s o n a l i t i e s " . Again, t h i s i s evidence that the essence of more recent t h e o r i e s of emotion has not reached the g e n e r a l p u b l i c . Otherwise, there would be a grea t e r 149 balance in s u b j e c t i v e responses i n terms of p a r t i c i p a n t s r e c o g n i z i n g j e a l o u s y i n a. more, p o s i t i v e way as a motivator f o r c o n s t r u c t i v e a c t i o n i n v o l v i n g on t h e i r primary r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Comparisons of these d e f i n i t i o n s can a l s o be made across male, female, o b j e c t i v e and s u b j e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n s by imagining a t r i a n g l e of the o b j e c t i v e , the s u b j e c t i v e , and the e x p e r i e n t i a l . In the s u b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n we attempt a p e r s p e c t i v e of the experience in r e l a t i o n to the s e l f from 'within' or from an i n t e r n a l focus. Seemingly, t h i s i n t e r n a l focus speaks to the p e r c e i v e d 'reason' or 'source' of our j e a l o u s y . In the o b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n we attempt a p e r s p e c t i v e of the experience i n r e l a t i o n to. the s e l f from 'without' and hence we ( c o n s c i o u s l y or u n c o n s c i o u s l y ) t r y to d e s c r i b e how the object of our j e a l o u s y (or the agent or others) might be viewing us (the s u b j e c t ) . In a p r o j e c t i v e sense t h i s o b j e c t i v e view may then be how we 'want' the o b j e c t of our j e a l o u s y (or the agent or others) to see us i n order that the 'purpose' of our emotion w i l l be served. A c c o r d i n g l y , the combined male and female ' s u b j e c t i v e ' d e f i n i t i o n s speak to j e a l o u s y ' s 'reason' or 'source' as a fear of l o s s ; an imagined, a c t u a l or threatened b e t r a y a l of t r u s t or committment; and/or a p e r c e p t i o n of having been deceived or abandoned. Seemingly in congruence, the h i g h e s t ' o b j e c t i v e ' rankings of j e a l o u s y ' s elemental emotions f o r the t o t a l group were anger, resentment, rage and h u m i l i a t i o n 150 (see t a b l e 5). If j e a l o u s y ' s i n t e n t i s r e a l l y to preserve the r e l a t i o n s h i p the 'purpose' (e.g., l e t t i n g o b j e c t and agent know t h i s ) seems p o o r l y or inadequately served by these emotions and t h i s p o s s i b l y e x p l a i n s the s u b j e c t i v e d e s c r i p t o r s such as ' i r r a t i o n a l ' and ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' . However, i f anger, rage, resentment and h u m i l i a t i o n are seen as normal and i n i t i a l g r i e f r e a c t i o n s to the t h r e a t of l o s s or a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s then they make more sense. T h i s view r e q u i r e s a combination of the o b j e c t i v e and the s u b j e c t i v e -— the 'reason' and the 'purpose'. The o b j e c t i v e l y d e s c r i b e d emotions thus serve the purpose of l e t t i n g the o b j e c t (and agent and others) know that we deny or r e f u t e our a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s — we 'recognize' i f not yet accept a/the t h r e a t . With anger, resentment, rage and h u m i l i a t i o n the s u b j e c t ' o b j e c t i v e l y ' t e s t s the accuracy or v a l i d i t y of h i s / h e r 'source' or ' s u b j e c t i v e ' emotions (the f e a r of l o s s , f e l t b e t r a y a l of t r u s t , e tc.) and does t h i s i n 'reasonable' ways given h i s / h e r stage i n a g r i e f r e a c t i o n to ' a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s ' or the ' t h r e a t of l o s s ' . With t h i s frame of r e f e r e n c e , o b j e c t i v e emotions that d i s p l a y an 'acceptance' would make l e s s sense or be premature because with them the subject r i s k s that the o b j e c t w i l l i n t e r p r e t them an as acceptance of the p o t e n t i a l l o s s r a t h e r than as a r e c o g n i t i o n of the t h r e a t . Thus anger, rage, h u m i l i a t i o n and resentment may not be the most 151 e f f i c i e n t emotions in terms of the u l t i m a t e goal but they serve the purpose d u r i n g the i n i t i a l stage of a n t i c i p a t o r y g r i e f . Examining t a b l e 5 once again, male rankings are h i g h e s t f o r h u m i l i a t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n while female rankings are h i g h e s t f o r anger and rage. A p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r these d i f f e r e n c e s can be found by again combining the o b j e c t i v e and the s u b j e c t i v e . A c c o r d i n g l y , the male s u b j e c t i v e d e f i n i t i o n s more f r e q u e n t l y i n c l u d e d e s c r i p t o r s " such as 'possessiveness' and 'envy' (codes 46, 48, 51 , 54, 55, 56, 59, 61, 70) whereas the female d e s c r i p t o r s are more- f r e q u e n t l y ' d e s i r e ' , ' i n s e c u r i t y ' , 'fear of competion' (as versus competition) and again 'envy' (codes 01, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 14, 18, 22, 23, 26, 29, 32, 34, 3 6 , 4 1 ) . The male in our s o c i e t y with h i s r e l a t i v e l y more powerful s o c i a l and economic p o s i t i o n would ' l o g i c a l l y ' be more l i k e l y to assume h i s r i g h t s , p r i v i l e g e s and ownership r e l a t i v e to the female. In the i n s t a n c e of h i s f e l t j e a l o u s y (as a t h r e a t to the boundaries of the r e l a t i o n s h i p ) he thus o b j e c t i v e l y d i s p l a y s h u m i l i a t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n because the ' s u b j e c t i v e ' source of h i s j e a l o u s y i s moreso one of p o t e n t i a l l o s s of 'possession'. From h i s i n t e r n a l p o i n t of view h i s experience i s l i k e w i s e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' — i t makes l i t t l e sense that someone in a r e l a t i v e l y more powerful p o s i t i o n should suddenly be i n a v i c t i m . r o l e and 152 r e q u i r e d to fear l o s s and/or r e - s t a t e c l a i m s and values on h i s p o s s e s s i o n s . T h i s should 'reasonably' be necessary only i n the process of a c q u i s i t i o n . In c o n t r a s t , the female's p r o t e c t i o n of c l a i m s and her p o r t r a y a l of the value she p l a c e s on the r e l a t i o n s h i p are n e c e s s a r i l y ongoing because of her r e l a t i v e l y dependent and l e s s powerful p o s i t i o n . Hence, her s u b j e c t i v e 'source' of j e a l o u s y i n c l u d e s the type of d e s c r i p t o r s named above (the d e s i r e , i n s e c u r i t y , fear of c o m p e t i t i o n , e t c . ) . She i s o b j e c t i v e l y more l i k e l y to d i s p l a y a ggression as 'anger' and 'rage' because from her p o s i t i o n others l e v e l s of power are p e r c e i v e d to be blocked o f f ( c f . d i s c u s s i o n of May's t h e s i s on l e v e l s of power in chapter two and a l s o the comparison of male and female coping behaviours i n chapter th r e e , s e c t i o n V I I I ) . Females a l s o d e s c r i b e d ( o b j e c t i v e l y ) i n t h e i r coping behaviours a g r e a t e r tendency toward a g g r e s s i o n and antagonism while males were more l i k e l y to withdraw or c l o s e o f f . In t h i s sense, the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f f e r e d e a r l i e r (e.g., using C o n stantine's model these data, were seen as i n d i c a t o r s that females have a gr e a t e r tendency to behave i n ways that w i l l preserve the r e l a t i o n s h i p ) can be seen as one that views the female's purpose as p o s s i b l y more a l t r u i s t i c but a l s o as one that i s more 'r e q u i r e d ' by her s o c i a l s t a t u s . In c o n t r a s t , when the male's p o s i t i o n i s threatened he 1 53 w i l l be more l i k e l y than the female to r e s i g n himself to the l o s s by withdrawing and d i s p l a y i n g h u m i l i a t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n . From h i s p e r s p e c t i v e the circumstance of the r e l a t i v e l y l e s s powerful female managing to evoke i n him t h i s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' emotion, approaches an a p r i o r i c o n f i r m a t i o n that the t h r e a t i s a c t u a l and the l o s s impending or imminent rather than simply 'threatened'. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , an o b j e c t i v e d i s p l a y of acceptance of l o s s r a t h e r than r e c o g n i t i o n of a t h r e a t may be more e f f e c t i v e i n r e v e r s i n g the (dependent, l e s s powerful.)' female's j e a l o u s y evoking behaviour i f her i n t e n t i o n i s not ' f i n a l l y ' one of sabataging the boundaries of the r e l a t i o n s h i p or ending i t ( i n which case her p o s i t i o n becomes one of more power than h i s ) . In t h i s sense, the male's non-action may be as e f f e c t i v e as the female's a c t i o n . In summary, j e a l o u s y f o r both males and females emerges as a d i s p l a y and an experience of a n t i c i p a t o r y g r i e f . T h i s i s evident i n s u b j e c t ' s d e f i n i t i o n s , t h e i r o b j e c t i v e r a t i n g s of elemental emotions and i n t h e i r experimental d e s c r i p t i o n s which are f u r t h e r d i s c u s s e d below. P a r t i c i p a n t s ' J e a l o u s y E x p e r i e n c e s : A D i s c u s s i o n P a r t i c i p a n t s ' most extreme experiences with j e a l o u s y are d e p i c t e d i n appendix D (item 28). These verbatim responses 'speak f o r themselves'. The d i s c u s s i o n to f o l l o w e x t r a p o l a t e s some of the major themes that seem evident to 154 the r e s e a r c h e r . References are a l s o made to responses f o r items 29 and 30 i n the same appendix. Again l o s s and fear are c e n t r a l themes f o r both males and females. Very o f t e n a g e n e r a l i z e d 'fear of l o s s ' i s d e s c r i b e d and many responses name the p a r t i c u l a r l o s s that i s a n t i c i p a t e d . The most d i s t i n c t i s a naming of a ' l o s s of t r u s t ' (codes 08, 11, 30, 34, 40, 44, 60, 66, 71, 73). Sometimes t h i s l o s s of t r u s t i s g e n e r a l i z e d to a l l members of the p a r t n e r ' s sex (codes 34 and 66) or to the s u b j e c t ' s o v e r a l l , a b i l i t y to t r u s t (codes 11, 40", item 3'07. As i n the d e f i n i t i o n s , these responses r e v e a l an apparent or p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t to r e l a t i o n s h i p boundaries and a suggestion that the ob j e c t has betrayed an assumed or e s t a b l i s h e d committment or has been d e c e i t f u l or d i s h o n e s t . Females a l s o d e s c r i b e many other types of a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s i n c l u d i n g : l o s s of conf i d e n c e i n s e l f — g e n e r a l l y or as a woman (code 01, 13, e t c . ) ; l o s s of lo v e , a f f e c t i o n , a t t e n t i o n , intimacy, i n t e r e s t , time or l o s s of the r e l a t i o n s h i p (codes 25, 27, 31, 36, 37, e t c . ) ; l o s s of respec t f o r s e l f or o b j e c t (codes 21, 24); l o s s of c o n t r o l (code 34); l o s s of f r i e n d s h i p with agent (code 26); l o s s of freedom (code 38); and l o s s of a p p r e c i a t i o n (code .42). Few female responses e x p l i c i t l y name the p a r t n e r ' s sexual involvement with another as the primary t h r e a t although many do a l l u d e to r e - d i r e c t e d sexual attention.. A few e x p l i c i t y mention that t h e i r j e a l o u s y emanated more from 1 55 the p o t e n t i a l l o s s of emotional intimacy i m p l i e d by t h e i r p a r t n e r ' s i n f i d e l i t y than from t h e i r knowledge of the a c t i t s e l f . The high l e v e l of s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e and the s p e c i f i c i t y with which women i n t h i s sample have named t h e i r l o s s e s and f e a r s i n d i c a t e s f u r t h e r that indeed they fear more the i m p l i c a t i o n s to t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s than the a c t u a l l o s s of f i d e l i t y . T h i s i s congruent with the many f i n d i n g s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s that were d i s c u s s e d i n chapter two, e s p e c i a l l y those that d i s c u s s e d the female's gr e a t e r dependence on and emotiorial involvement i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p as w e l l as her d i s t i n c t process of s o c i a l i z a t i o n . Males f r e q u e n t l y d e s c r i b e l o s s of l o v e r or sex partner or l o s s of sexual f i d e l i t y (codes 46, 50, 58); l o s s of understanding, understood s t a t u s or hoped f o r s t a t u s (codes 48, 55, 57, 67, 69); l o s s of p a r t n e r ' s l o y a l t y (code 48); l o s s of the r e l a t i o n s h i p or i t s s t a b i l i t y (codes 49, 50, 58, 60, 61, 64, 69); l o s s of p a r t n e r ' s i n t e r e s t , a t t e n t i o n or intimacy (codes 63, 65, 70, 71, 72, 73); and l o s s of f r i e n d s h i p with agent (code 70). As i n t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s of j e a l o u s y , males f r e q u e n t l y name or imply 'envy' or use i t in t e r c h a n g e a b l y with j e a l o u s y . They do not d i s t i n g u i s h between the two emotions as c l e a r l y as do females (codes 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 62, 67, 68). Again, t h e i r responses g e n e r a l l y name fewer elemental emotions and are l e s s d i s c l o s i n g than female responses. They seem more r e s i g n e d to or a c c e p t i n g of the 1 56 t h r e a t of l o s s and more i n c l i n e d to withdraw and/or a v o i d t h e i r f e e l i n g s and the circumstance (codes 56, 58, 61, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70). A few males mention that they e i t h e r don't r e c a l l or have had 'no', 'few' or 'only one' experience with j e a l o u s y . T h i s may be the case or i t may be that they are l e s s l i k e l y than females to rec o g n i z e , acknowledge or remember occurrences of t h i s taboo emotion. Our s o c i e t y does not f a c i l i t a t e the acknowledgement of je a l o u s y by e i t h e r sex and i t may be even more d i f f i c u l t f o r men to c l a i m t h i s emotion because of the ' j e a l o u s woman' st e r e o t y p e . Men may tend to repress the experience and exp r e s s i o n of j e a l o u s y (even more than women) i n order to avo i d i t s negative a s s o c i a t i o n s with emotional dependence, f e m i n i n i t y , envy and p o s s e s s i v e n e s s . T h e i r c l a i m s to r e l a t i v e l y r a r e experiences with t h i s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' emotion are congruously a s c r i b e d to the i n s t i n c t u a l or f o r c e s beyond t h e i r c o g n i t i v e c o n t r o l ( c f . code 72 " j e a l o u s y d i d not manifest i t s e l f to the person i n v o l v e d " and many of the male def i n i t i o n s ) . Males i n t h i s sample who name t h e i r emotions a l s o c o n t r i b u t e more than other males i n responding to items 29 and 30 i n appendix D and item 123, 'other i n s i g h t s ' i n appendix F. For i n s t a n c e , responses to each of these items by code 48 demonstrate the s u b j e c t ' s i n s i g h t i n t o the male s o c i a l i z a t i o n process that was motivated by h i s experiences with j e a l o u s y . In c o n t r a s t , code 56 demonstrates ( i n 157 responses to items 28, 29, 30 and 123) a lack of d i s t i n c t i o n between j e a l o u s y and envy and a strong a f f i l i a t i o n with the norms of the t r a d i t i o n a l male r o l e i n western s o c i e t i e s . O v e r a l l , many s u b j e c t s r e p o r t both p o s i t i v e and negative e f f e c t s i n terms of t h e i r most extreme experiences with j e a l o u s y ( c f . responses to item 29, appendix D). Many times these experiences are named as the s i g n i f i c a n t or f i n a l t r i g g e r f o r ending a r e l a t i o n s h i p . Sometimes t h i s ending i s seen as a c o n s t r u c t i v e step f o r both p a r t i e s but most o f t e n i t s e f f e c t i s viewed i n a much more negative way. J e a l o u s y ' s a f f i l i a t i o n with one of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l o s s i s p o i g n a n t l y d e s c r i b e d i n code 02 by the s u b j e c t ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of how each new j e a l o u s y experience r e - a c t i v a t e s the e a r l i e r e xperience. P o s i t i v e l y , she notes her new i n s i g h t and that she "moved on". The idea that j e a l o u s y i s a p o s i t i v e t r i g g e r f o r communication and a motivator f o r review or r e - e v a l u a t i o n of r e l a t i o n s h i p boundaries i s evident i n many of the responses to item 29. Sometimes s u b j e c t s r e p o r t that t h e i r extreme experiences u l t i m a t e l y r e s u l t e d i n s t r o n g e r , more i n t i m a t e or more c l e a r l y d e f i n e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s (codes 04, 08, 11, 15, 19, 22, 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 42, 61, 65, 73). L i k e w i s e , negative e f f e c t s are many and the most poignant i s (again) the e r o s i o n of t r u s t a s s o c i a t e d with b e t r a y a l of assumed or understood committments. A la c k of c o n s t r u c t i v e or p o s i t i v e r e s o l u t i o n pervades many responses and i s t y p i f i e d i n code 158 06 by the s u b j e c t ' s c l a i m that "I le a r n e d to hate myself f o r f e e l i n g j e a l o u s " . F i n a l l y , responses to item 123 (appendix F) e f f e c t i v e l y demonstrate the broad and v a r i o u s understandings that s u b j e c t s w i l l share i n response to an open-ended q u e s t i o n . In these generous responses j e a l o u s y i s v a r i o u s l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d as normal, h e a l t h y , c o n s t r u c t i v e , p o s i t i v e , abnormal, nega t i v e , d e s t r u c t i v e , p a t h o l o g i c a l and many other c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s . D i f f e r e n t s o c i o - c u l t u r a l i n s i g h t s are c o n t r i b u t e d and many and v a r i o u s causes, e f f e c t s and' elemental emotions are named. S o l u t i o n s and r e s o l u t i o n s abound. A l l responses are unique and together they c o n t r i b u t e to a very broad c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y . I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r Research It i s evident from the g e n e r o s i t y of s u b j e c t s ' responses and from t h e i r l e v e l of s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e that they were not only w i l l i n g but keen to s e l f - e x p l o r e about the-ir j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f f e r e d by the research e r were presented as a m o t i v a t i o n f o r f u r t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e . The broad understandings gained by reviewing the s u b j e c t i v e data i n d i c a t e the need to remain open to the as yet u n r e f i n e d c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y . They support the c o n t i n u i n g use of a d e f i n i t i o n a l "form" and a broad terminology that w i l l allow f o r f l e x i b i l i t y i n terms of 159 i n c o r p o r a t i n g j e a l o u s y i n t o an o v e r a l l framework f o r human emotions. The d e f i n i t i o n presented i n chapter one meets these needs by g i v i n g the concept a form that w i l l allow f o r a s y n e r g i s t i c development of s u b j e c t i v e and o b j e c t i v e i d e a s . I t grounds the emotion i n human needs and experience which are dynamic, and s o c i a l l y as w e l l as i n t r a p e r s o n a l l y determined and i n f l u e n c e d . The t r i a n g u l a r form a l s o allows f o r f u r t h e r development of a c o g n i t i v e - b e h a v i o u r a l - e m o t i o n a l network. I t can be expanded i n t o a t e t r a h e d r a l s t r u c t u r e thus a l l o w i n g f o r the a n a l y s i s of other t r i a n g u l a r networks such as s u b j e c t ^ o b j e c t - a g e n t r o l e s and i n t e r a c t i o n and s u b j e c t i v e - o b j e c t i v e - e x p e r i e n t a l p o s i t i o n s i n terms of the i n d i v i d u a l s of p e r c e p t i o n of j e a l o u s y . A c c o r d i n g l y , a number of d i r e c t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h are i m p l i e d by t h i s phase of the r e s e a r c h . For i n s t a n c e , a more d e t a i l e d q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of j e a l o u s y d e f i n i t i o n s and experiences i s i n d i c a t e d . Having been presented with the t r i a n g u l a r conceptual c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of j e a l o u s y (as d i s c u s s e d above), i n d i v i d u a l s , couples, and/or groups of su b j e c t s c o u l d be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n an open forum generation of data and a q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s l e a d i n g to a more convergent d e f i n i t i o n and/or to a more d e t a i l e d o u t l i n e of major e x p e r i e n t a l themes and elemental emotions. The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n t h i s phase as w e l l as the pr e v i o u s phase of t h i s study i n d i c a t e a c e n t r a l need f o r a 160 q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of j e a l o u s y ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p with d i f f e r e n t types and l e v e l s of power such as those s.ug,ge_sted by May (1972) and d i s c u s s e d at l e n g t h i n chapter two. P r i c e and B a r r e l l (1980) d e s c r i b e a r e s e a r c h paradigm ( i n v o l v i n g an e x p e r i e n t a l approach with q u a n t i t a t i v e methods) that might be u s e f u l i n such r e s e a r c h . Using t h i s methodology, i n v e s t i g a t o r s would "question and p a s s i v e l y a t tend" (p.75) to a v a r i e t y of t h e i r own experiences with j e a l o u s y (e.g., from d i f f e r e n t r o l e p o s i t i o n s — as s u b j e c t , as o b j e c t , and as agent) and d e s c r i b e these experiences i n the context of p l a c i n g themselves i n s i t u a t i o n s or r e l i v i n g past s i t u a t i o n s . The.experiences are then d e s c r i b e d i n terms of how they experience the phenomenon [ i n t h i s i nstance t h e i r power] r a t h e r than i n terms of the t a r g e t of t h e i r a t t e n t i o n or the stimulus c o n d i t i o n s (p.76). A n a l y s i s of these d e s c r i p t i o n s i s then used to generate d e f i n i t i o n a l hypotheses which are "statements about the necessary and s u f f i c i e n t e x p e r i e n t a l elements f o r the occurrence of a given phenomenon" (p.76). These would seemingly be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t i n i n s t a n c e s of j e a l o u s y experiences that v a r i o u s l y r e s u l t i n the s h a r i n g of d i f f e r e n t types of power such as the e x p l o i t a t i v e , m a n i p u l a t i v e , c o m p e t i t i v e , n u t r i e n t and i n t e g r a t i v e types suggested by May (1972). A l s o , the j e a l o u s y process that eventuates i n s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s o l u t i o n may move through a l l or some of these l e v e l s of power sh a r i n g and hence i t may be important to i n c o r p o r a t e s u b j e c t - i n v e s t i g a t o r s who r e p o r t a 161 range of adequate-inadequate r e s o l u t i o n s . P r i c e and B a r r e l l (1980) f u r t h e r suggest that the above q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of e x p e r i e n t i a l d e s c r i p t i o n s can a l s o be used to generate f u n c t i o n a l hypotheses which are "statements about the r e l a t i o n s h i p between e x p e r i e n t a l elements" (p.76). Both types of hypotheses are then t e s t e d i n experiments using s u b j e c t s who are not f a m i l i a r with them and t h i s c o n s t i t u t e s the q u a n t i t a t i v e phase of the r e s e a r c h . The authors suggest using q u e s t i o n n a i r e s to t e s t d e f i n i t i o n a l hypotheses and r a t i o - s c a l i n g techniques to te"st f u n c t i o n a l hypotheses. V a r i a t i o n s of the above-described r e s e a r c h methodology c o u l d a l s o be used to examine the many other r e l a t i o n s h i p s i m p l i e d by t h i s study such as j e a l o u s y and fear of l o s s or fear of com p e t i t i o n as w e l l as j e a l o u s y and synergy. For example, a heterogeneous sample of couples c o u l d be used to generate hypotheses and to q u a n t i t a t i v e l y demonstrate s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of coping mechanisms and outcomes f o r j e a l o u s y experiences given d i f f e r e n t s e l f - assessed l e v e l s of synergy or s e l f - a s s e s s e d types of l o s s and t h e i r meaning. E q u a l l y r e l e v a n t i s the need f o r f u r t h e r study of je a l o u s y and t r u s t . The q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of s u b j e c t i v e data i n t h i s study i n d i c a t e s that extreme j e a l o u s y experiences have e s p e c i a l l y negative or d e s t r u c t i v e outcomes when they i n v o l v e a p e r c e i v e d or a c t u a l b e t r a y a l of t r u s t or 162 committment that i s based i n a value on monogamy. However, some s u b j e c t s report that outcomes of j e a l o u s y experiences i n v o l v i n g sexual i n f i d e l i t y were u l t i m a t e l y p o s i t i v e f o r themselves and/or f o r t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h i s i n d i c a t e s a need f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h to f u r t h e r i n c o r p o r a t e the broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y (as a t r i g g e r f o r change or r e - e v a l u a t i o n of r e l a t i o n s h i p boundaries) i n t o q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of s o c i o - c u l t u r a l and other process f a c t o r s that r e s u l t i n these outcome p o l a r i t i e s . Development of j e a l o u s y theory a l s o needs to co n s i d e r f u r t h e r the r e c i p r o c a l r o l e s i n our c u l t u r e and the p o s s i b i l i t y that j e a l o u s y i s sometimes provoked to t e s t a t r u s t t h at i s u l t i m a t e l y or e x c l u s i v e l y based i n a r i g i d l y h e l d value on monogamy. In t h i s i n s t a n c e , the value i t s e l f may serve a l e s s than u s e f u l purpose and i t may be growth- i n h i b i t i n g . Thus, by provoking j e a l o u s y ( c o n s c i o u s l y or unco n s c i o u s l y ) through a c t i o n s c o n t r a r y to t h i s value and c o n t r a r y to the e x p e c t a t i o n s based on i t , the ob j e c t a c t s ( a l t r u i s t i c a l l y or otherwise) as a change agent. Depending on how the dynamics are managed by a l l concerned, the outcomes can be h i g h l y c r e a t i v e or h i g h l y d e s t r u c t i v e or anywhere i n between. A c r e a t i v e outcome through e f f e c t i v e n e g o t i a t i o n might be ( f o r example) that the subj e c t continues to hold the value but does so l e s s r i g i d l y ; respect i s r e - e s t a b l i s h e d and new or expanded bases f o r t r u s t are formed. 163 In c o n t r a s t , the same s i t u a t i o n , given d i f f e r e n t dynamics, may have equal p o t e n t i a l f o r d e s t r u c t i v e n e s s . An example would be d e n i a l of j e a l o u s f e e l i n g s and t h e i r p r o v o c a t i o n and p e r p e t u a t i o n of d e s t r u c t i v e c y c l e s , l i k e those d e s c r i b e d by Seeman (1979) — r - u n t r u t h f u l n e s s , s u r r e p t i t i o u s n o u s and f u r t i v e n e s s i n one partner and ruminations, rage, mania and remorse in the other. Because c r e a t i v e outcomes are seemingly rare and i n f i d e l i t y approaching the norm in our s o c i e t y , phenomenological and e m p i r i c a l study of t h e i r combination i s recommended. F i n a l l y , the combined a n a l y s i s of both phases of t h i s study i n d i c a t e s that men and women d e f i n e t h e i r j e a l o u s y experiences d i f f e r e n t l y and t h i s was i n t e r p r e t e d i n terms of d i f f e r i n g c u l t u r a l phenomena i n the process of t h e i r s o c i a l i z a t i o n . Seemingly, they have a shared awareness of the phenomenological aspect of the emotion but somewhat d i f f e r i n g 'reasons' for or 'sources' fo r i t s occurrence, yet a common 'purpose' ( p r e s e r v a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p ) that i s expressed in d i f f e r i n g ways. Furth e r c l a r i f i c a t i o n and v a l i d a t i o n of these d i f f e r e n c e s w i l l be most humanely approached by seeking phenomenological evidence that i s grounded i n and l a t e r a p p l i e d to human experience v i a c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e . 1 64 Chapter Summary Thi s chapter has presented the phenomenological phase of t h i s study. The s u b j e c t i v e data c o n t r i b u t e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s were presented ( i n appendices D, E and F) and d i s c u s s e d . Researcher i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were o f f e r e d as mot i v a t i o n f o r f u r t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c o u r c e but i t was emphasized that the essence of t h i s phase i s con t a i n e d w i t h i n p a r t i c i p a n t s ' verbatim resonses and i n t h e i r own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . O b j e c t i v e data and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s from the e m p i r i c a l phase were i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the d i s c u s s i o n . F i n a l l y , i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h and theory development were d i s c u s s e d at l e n g t h , again i n t e g r a t i n g previous c h a p t e r s . 1 65 CHAPTER V IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNSELLING PRACTICE The d e f i n i t i o n of j e a l o u s y presented i n chapter one and the subsequent study have r e s u l t e d i n a broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and many p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s . I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h and theory development were d i s c u s s e d i n chapters three and f o u r . They were d e r i v e d from the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study and from an i n t e g r a t i o n of the body of knowledge reviewed e a r l i e r . The broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y sees i t as a t r i a n g u l a r human experience which i n v o l v e s dynamic i n t e r a c t i o n among c o g n i t i v e , b e h a v i o u r a l and phenomenological components. I t occurs i n a context of a c t u a l or p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t to both p e r s o n a l and i n t e r p e r s o n a l core needs. T h i s t h r e a t i s experienced by the subject mainly as a fear of l o s s and o f t e n i n v o l v e s a p e r c e i v e d or a c t u a l breach of t r u s t or committment by the o b j e c t . Jealousy i s a d i s c r e t e emotion, something more than a sum of i t s elemental emotions. I t i s a s o c i a l , i n t e r a c t i o n a l process which e f f e c t s and i s e f f e c t e d by three people or two people and some other agent such as an a c t i v i t y or m a t e r i a l p o s s e s s i o n . I t i s v a r i o u s l y 166 i n t e r p r e t e d and v a r i o u s l y expressed by i n d i v i d u a l s , couples and the s o c i a l groups to which they belong — depending on many f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f s , assumptions, norms, values and the r u l e s they make about the boundaries f o r t h e i r primary r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h i s chapter d i s c u s s e s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e . They emanate from a c o n s o l i d a t i o n of i n s i g h t s gained from the review of three main t h e o r i e s of emotion; the c r i t i q u e . o f p e r s p e c t i v e s and resea r c h on j e a l o u s y from the d i s c i p l i n e s of anthropology, s o c i o l o g y , p s y c h i a t r y and psychology; the data, f i n d i n g s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of both phases of the study; and from the re s e a r c h e r ' s c l i n i c a l e xperience. F i r s t , general c o n s i d e r a t i o n s are d i s c u s s e d and they are fo l l o w e d by a t h r e e - s e c t i o n p r e s e n t a t i o n of p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , f o r c o u n s e l l i n g couples and f o r c o u n s e l l i n g groups. The author assumes t h a t , i n a l l i n s t a n c e s , a p p l i c a t i o n of her suggestions w i l l be preceded by the i n d i v i d u a l c o u n s e l l o r ' s p r o f e s s i o n a l assessment of t h e i r s u i t a b i l i t y f o r h i s / h e r c l i e n t ( s ) given t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r and unique circumstances. She f u r t h e r assumes that the p o s s i b i l i t y of jea l o u s y as a symptom of organic d y s f u n c t i o n has been r u l e d out. I f there i s strong evidence that the c l i e n t ' s experience with j e a l o u s y i s based on d e l u s i o n a l m a t e r i a l , r e f e r r a l and c o n s u l t a t i o n should be sought promptly. 1 6 7 P h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e , s u i c i d e and homicide should a l s o be r u l e d out i f circumstances suggest that the c l i e n t , may be a danger to hi m / h e r s e l f or o t h e r s . General C o n s i d e r a t i o n s The primary r e l a t i o n s h i p meets many and v a r i o u s needs fo r l o v e , i n t e r e s t , a f f e c t i o n , time, a t t e n t i o n , sexual and other i n t i m a c i e s , as w e l l as economic, s o c i a l and other s e c u r i t i e s . When je a l o u s y occurs the a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s or l o s s e s are complex. Among other t h i n g s , the c o u n s e l l o r ' s r o l e i n v o l v e s h e l p i n g the c l i e n t i d e n t i f y and p r i o r i z e h i s / h e r f e a r s i n r e l a t i o n to these a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s e s . The c o u n s e l l o r a l s o needs to be aware and to help h i s / h e r c l i e n t ( s ) recognize and'express j e a l o u s y ' s many elemental emotions which seem to be r e l a t e d to v a r i o u s stages of an a n t i c i p a t o r y g r i e f r e a c t i o n . Fear and/or fear of l o s s and f e e l i n g s of having been betrayed or abandoned appear to be 5 the'most' s i g n i f i c a n t i n terms- of the' i n d i v i d u a l ' s s u b j e c t i v e experience. O b j e c t i v e l y , he/she may communicate anger, rage, resentment, h u m i l i a t i o n and/or many other emotions. Guidance i n connecting h i s / h e r emotions with the experience i n a meaningful and p o s i t i v e way w i l l f o s t e r movement toward r e c o g n i t i o n of j e a l o u s y as a v a l i d and p o t e n t i a l l y u s e f u l emotion. However, i n l i g h t of j e a l o u s y ' s negative and/or taboo s t a t u s , a l t e r n a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s are f r e q u e n t l y warranted. 168 A c c o r d i n g l y , the c l i e n t ( s ) should be helped to view j e a l o u s y as a motivator or t r i g g e r f o r p o t e n t i a l l y c r e a t i v e a c t i o n that may have p o s i t i v e outcomes f o r a l l involved.. Use of the t r a d i t i o n a l ' j e a l o u s person' l a b e l should be disc o u r a g e d and r e p l a c e d by the dynamic, i n t e r a c t i o n a l p e r s p e c t i v e s that have been d i s c u s s e d at l e n g t h i n t h i s work. P e j o r a t i v e l a b e l s used by c l i e n t s to negate t h e i r emotional experience (or to "blame" themselves or others f o r e x p e r i e n c i n g j e a l o u s y ) should be balanced with more p o s i t i v e l a b e l s such as " l o y a l " , "passionate", "adaptive", or " p r o t e c t i v e " . Jealousy i n v o l v e s i s s u e s of co m p e t i t i o n , power and power-sharing, c o n t r o l , c o o p e r a t i o n , freedom, r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s . These i s s u e s need to be openly d i s c u s s e d w i t h i n the context of ' r e l a t i o n s h i p ' and i n terms of i n d i v i d u a l assumptions, b e l i e f s and e x p e c t a t i o n s . Demonstration and p r a c t i c e of n e g o t i a t i o n s k i l l s w i l l f a c i l i t a t e i n d i v i d u a l s , couples and groups who seek harmony in t h e i r i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Jealousy a l s o fundamentally i n v o l v e s a need f o r maintenance, r e - e v a l u a t i o n and/or change of r e l a t i o n s h i p boundaries. T h i s i m p l i e s a need f o r e a r l y and open d i s c u s s i o n of c o u n s e l l o r and c l i e n t b i a s e s about monogamy or other r e l a t i o n s h i p arrangements. Other bases f o r t r u s t and committment should a l s o be d i s c u s s e d . Emotional and sexual i n t i m a c i e s should be d i s c u s s e d and compared i n terms of t h e i r meaning and value f o r each member and f o r the dyad. 169 The c o u n s e l l o r w i l l a l s o need to be open to the p o s s i b i l i t y of the couple s e p a r a t i n g and should be s k i l l e d i n f a c i l i t a t i n g t h i s process i n a way that minimizes the p o t e n t i a l f o r d e s t r u c t i v e , g r o w t h - i n h i b i t i n g outcomes. The s u b j e c t ' s j e a l o u s y behaviours should g e n e r a l l y be normalized w i t h i n the framework of l o s s , i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and i t s process unless there i s evidence of p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e or other dangerous behaviour. The 'reason' or 'source' f o r the emotion (and i t s elemental emotions) as we l l as the 'purpose' served by i t s various" e x p r e s s i o n s w i l l be a c e n t r a l goal f o r mutual understanding of the s u b j e c t ' s experience. The same means and goal are recommended f o r promoting an understanding of the o b j e c t ' s experience v i s a v i s h i s / h e r emotions, behaviours and involvement i n evoking or m a i n t a i n i n g the j e a l o u s y p r o c e s s . The c o u n s e l l o r should remember that behaviours w i l l be ^ e f f e c t e d by: i n d i v i u a l p e r c e p t i o n of the j e a l o u s y experience; the ongoing process among s u b j e c t , o b j e c t and agent; stages of the a n t i c i p a t o r y g r i e f r e a c t i o n ; c u l t u r a l and s u b c u l t u r a l m i l i e u ; type and p e r c e i v e d potency of t h r e a t ; i n d i v i d u a l , couple and s o c i e t a l l e v e l s of synergy and many other f a c t o r s . A d e c i s i o n to i n c l u d e the agent i n the t h e r a p e u t i c process may be c o n s i d e r e d . In t h i s author's view, any n e g o t i a t i o n i n t h i s regard should c o n s i d e r the p a r t i c u l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e ( s ) ; the wishes of s u b j e c t , o b j e c t and agent; 1 70 and the c o u n s e l l o r ' s p r o f e s s i o n a l judgement. I f a p o s i t i v e d e c i s i o n i s made, the means f o r i n c o r p o r a t i n g the agent w i l l r e q u i r e s e n s i t i v i t y and d i s c r e t i o n . The remainder of t h i s chapter i s d i v i d e d i n t o three s e c t i o n s that w i l l present p r i n c i p l e s and a few s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r i n d i v i d u a l , couple and group c o u n s e l l i n g . Often these p r i n c i p l e s o v e r l a p and with some m o d i f i c a t i o n most statements i n each s e c t i o n are a l s o a p p l i c a b l e to subsequent s e c t i o n s . Choice of s e t t i n g i s assumed to be a c l i e n t - c o u n s e l l o r d e c i s i o n . . C o u n s e l l i n g I n d i v i d u a l s The suggestions below assume that the c l i e n t - c o u n s e l l o r r e l a t i o n s h i p has reached an adequate or b e t t e r l e v e l of shared t r u s t and hence, that the c l i e n t has been guided i n the process of s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n to a po i n t at which a goal of dynamic s e l f - u n d e r s t a n d i n g i s s u i t a b l y pursued ( c f . Egan, 1975, p.36). 1. Help the c l i e n t transcend the tendency to use d i s p o s i t i o n a l l a b e l s . Instead, present a p e r s p e c t i v e of humans as dynamic and changing and a p e r s p e c t i v e of j e a l o u s y as a s o c i a l - i n t e r a c t i o n a l process (e.g., "We don't experience j e a l o u s y i n i s o l a t i o n but i n the context of an important and valued r e l a t i o n s h i p " ) . 2. Give j e a l o u s y a v a l i d context w i t h i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s unique experience. Help him/her to recognize that 171 j e a l o u s y may e x i s t as a sound judgement of a r e a l or p e r c e i v e d t h r e a t to h i s / h e r p h y s i c a l , emotional or p y s c h o l o g i c a l w e l l - b e i n g . Remember that c l i e n t s with d i f f e r i n g s o c i o - c u l t u r a l backgrounds w i l l experience j e a l o u s y i n v a r y i n g s i t u a t i o n a l c ontexts and t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n of i t i s a statement about t h e i r norms, val u e s , b e l i e f s and the assumptions they make about t h e i r i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . 3. Proceed from areas of l e a s t t h r e a t (e.g., c h i l d h o o d experiences with j e a l o u s y ) to areas of; g r e a t e r and most t h r e a t . A c c o r d i n g l y , use past, recent or c u r r e n t . experiences to d e s c r i b e the j e a l o u s y process and r e l a t e i t to a n t i c i p a t o r y l o s s . 4. Promote c l i e n t s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n i n an ongoing way to r e f i n e r e c o g n i t i o n of the elemental emotions i n h i s / h e r j e a l o u s y experience. 5. Help the c l i e n t name s p e c i f i c f e a r s and p r a c t i c e " I - messages" that he/she w i l l be able to use to communicate i n open and d i r e c t ways w i t h i n the context of h i s / h e r i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . 6. E v e n t u a l l y introduce a p e r s p e c t i v e that c h o i c e of d e s t r u c t i v e behaviours over c o n s t r u c t i v e ones does not j u s t i f y "blaming" o u r s e l v e s f o r e x p e r i e n c i n g j e a l o u s y . 7. Guide the c l i e n t i n the process of e x p l o r i n g needs, v a l u e s , assumptions and b e l i e f s i n terms of h i s past and c u r r e n t i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , e s p e c i a l l y with respect 1 72 to boundaries. What are h i s / h e r requirements f o r s e c u r i t y , shared m u t u a l i t y and emotional intimacy? 8. Help the c l i e n t to c l a r i f y h i s / h e r l i m i t s i n terms of what behaviours are c o n s i d e r e d to be a c c e p t a b l e ( f o r s e l f and f o r p a r t n e r ) with opposite-sex persons. 9. Encourage e x p l o r a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y ' s goal w i t h i n the context of the c l i e n t ' s e x p e r i e n c e . Examine the wants and needs that u n e r l i e those that are more s u p e r f i c i a l l y expressed. A c c o r d i n g l y , e x p l o r e the p r i n c i p l e s and p r a c t i c e the s k i l l s of r e s o l u t i o n - s e e k i n g through e f f e c t i v e n e g o t i a t i o n . 10. Promote open d i s c u s s i o n of needs f o r a t t e n t i o n , expressed i n t e r e s t , l o v e , time, e t c . from p a r t n e r and examine them w i t h i n the context of r e a l i s t i c e x p e c t a t i o n s as versus demands. 11. Openly d i s c u s s the i s s u e of s o c i a l d i s a p p r o v a l of j e a l o u s y i n our c u l t u r e and ways f o r overcoming the r e s u l t a n t b a r r i e r s to i t s communication ( c f . previous d i s c u s s i o n s and suggestions throughout the paper). 12. E x p l o r e p o s s i b i l i t i e s i n terms of p a r t n e r ' s p o s s i b l e investment i n m a i n t a i n i n g c l i e n t i n the r o l e of j e a l o u s s u b j e c t — and ways in which c l i e n t and p a r t n e r can assume new r o l e s without ' l o s i n g f a c e ' . T h i s w i l l r e q u i r e t h e i r mutual i n s i g h t i n t o the r e c i p r o c a l nature of t h e i r c u r r e n t experience and r o l e s and hence t h i s author's p r e f e r e n c e f o r couples or group therapy. 1 73 However, there w i l l be i n s t a n c e s i n which one or the other partner r e f u s e s to p a r t i c i p a t e and a c c o r d i n g l y , the c o u n s e l l o r should be cognizant of and s e n s i t i v e to the t h e r a p e u t i c t r i a n g l e that i s , n e v e r t h e l e s s , c r e a t e d . 13. Address the issue of the 'j e a l o u s f l a s h ' and encourage the c l i e n t to name h i s / h e r p a r t i c u l a r p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses during experiences with j e a l o u s y . D i s t i n g u i s h and p a r a l l e l i n s t i n c t u a l behaviour and behaviour that i s c o n d i t i o n e d by our f a m i l i e s and our s o c i e t y , n o t i n g t h e i r tendency to be e q u a l l y 'automatic'. Talk about the f i g h t / f l i g h t response, t e r r i t o r i a l i t y and p h y s i c a l f e e l i n g s as accompanying the emotion r a t h e r than 'being i t ' as per Solomon's (1976) theory. 14. In r e l a t i o n to the above, support the c l i e n t i n t a l k i n g about emotional experiences i n which he/she f e l t a " l o s s of c o n t r o l " and suggest ways i n which these occurrences may be more s a t i s f a c t o r i l y managed. Suggest cues to h e l p c o n t r o l breath, heartbeat and other p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses (e.g., abdominal b r e a t h i n g techniques and/or d r i n k i n g a c o l d g l a s s of water very s l o w l y ) . These and other cues are e s p e c i a l l y important f o r the c l i e n t who expresses a tendency toward p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e . 15. As i n s i g h t s develop, guide the c l i e n t i n an e x p l o r a t i o n of b e h a v i o u r a l o p t i o n s f o r j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . D i s t i n g u i s h each of the four main b e h a v i o u r a l types i n c l u d e d i n Constantine's (1976) model ( i s o l a t i o n a l , 174 a n t a g o n i s t i c , r e d e f i n i t i o n a l and r e s o l u t i o n a l ) . To evaluate progress, compare t h e i r v a r i o u s outcomes i n terms of the c l i e n t ' s own expe r i e n c e . Use r o l e - p l a y i n g or empty-chair techniques to p r a c t i c e c o n s t r u c t i v e v e r b a l exchanges with p a r t n e r . B i b l i o t h e r a p y may be u s e f u l as a s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n for some c l i e n t s . Suggestions might i n c l u d e : a) Andre Maurois' (1965) "Atmosphere of Love" which i s a novel about love and j e a l o u s y . I t i s w r i t t e n from • - the two viewpoints o f a husband and' h i s second wife'. I t e f f e c t i v e l y demonstrates r o l e r e c i p r o c i t y and s h i f t s i n the j e a l o u s y t r i a n g l e as 'subje c t ' becomes 'obj e c t ' in a new r e l a t i o n s h i p . b) A.M. Dahms' "Emotional Intimacy: An Overlooked Requirement f o r S u r v i v a l " which t a l k s about the s k i l l s i mplied i n the t i t l e and pr o v i d e s a p e r s p e c t i v e on intimacy as a committment to c o n s t r u c t i v e human r e l a t i o n s h i p s at a l l l e v e l s of the s o c i a l system. T h i s book i s p r a c t i c a l and not sent imental. c) R o b b e - G r i l l e t ' s (1957) "Jealousy" (or the o r i g i n a l French v e r s i o n "La J a l o u s i e " ) p r o v i d e s a very e x p e r i e n t i a l p e r s p e c t i v e on the emotion. The s t o r y has three c h a r a c t e r s — the husband, the wife and the presumed l o v e r . I t i s n a r r a t e d by the husband and the s t r u c t u r e of the novel has the reader i n an 175 'absent-I" p o s i t i o n . The t e x t i s the mental content of the n a r r a t o r who i s the s u b j e c t of j e a l o u s y . The 'experience' i s compacted i n t o a few days space of time d u r i n g which the n a r r a t o r observes and l i v e s the events of the p l o t i n great d e t a i l . The reader i s p o i g n a n t l y aware of the ever-present 'missing b i t of v i s u a l i n f o r m a t i o n ' because the n a r r a t o r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of scenes i n v o l v i n g h i s wife and her presumed l o v e r i s extremely d e t a i l e d but h i s view i s through s l a t t e d blind's or ' j a l o u s i e s ' thus never a l l o w i n g f o r the complete i n f o r m a t i o n that would be necessary to j u s t i f y h i s s u s p i c i o n s of her i n f i d e l i t y . C o u n s e l l i n g Couples The suggestions- i n t h i s s e c t i o n assume that the couple are s e a r c h i n g f o r ways to mend or improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p . I f , on the other hand, s e p a r a t i o n i s imminent, the c o u n s e l l o r w i l l need to i n c o r p o r a t e d i f f e r e n t p r i n c i p l e s and s t r a t e g i e s . For i n s t a n c e , Lynch (1982) o u t l i n e s a s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w f o r couples at the p o i n t of s e p a r a t i o n . Her premise i s that most couples separate with a hope of r e c o n n e c t i n g in the f u t u r e . Her i n t e r v i e w focuses on h e l p i n g them get a sense that they are making the r i g h t d e c i s i o n ; a plan f o r proceeding; an awareness of the d i f f i c u l t i e s that w i l l be i n v o l v e d ; a f e e l i n g that not a l l 176 i s destroyed; and a sense of the p o t e n t i a l f o r growth. Most of the suggestions under the s e c t i o n s above are a l s o a p p l i c a b l e i n the couples-therapy s e t t i n g , although some m o d i f i c a t i o n s may be necessary. Hence, they are not repeated below. F i n a l l y , none of the suggestions below can be u n i v e r s a l l y a p p l i e d and t h i s s e c t i o n i s not intended as a comprehensive treatment p l a n . 1. Be aware of the t r i a n g l e that i s "set up" by i n i t i a t i o n of therapy. To e f f e c t change in the couple system the t h e r a p i s t w i l l need the balance of c o n t r o l i n terms of the. process and so each t h e r a p i s t needs to make an a p r i o r i d e c i s i o n about how he/she w i l l respond to requests for therapy. One way to prevent c o l l u s i o n i s to agree to the t h e r a p i s t r o l e only a f t e r the request has been i s s u e d by each partner and u n t i l that p o i n t , keep v e r b a l exchanges b r i e f . Do not p a r t i c i p a t e i n telephone d i s c u s s i o n s of problems with one or the other partner unless there are i n d i c a t o r s of p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e , s u i c i d e or homicide i n which case c r i s i s i n t e r v e n t i o n i s necessary. Otherwise, c l a r i f y that l a s t i n g change r e q u i r e s the i n i t i a l and ongoing involvement of both p a r t n e r s . 2. Avoid p o l a r i z i n g the couple by working with a ' j e a l o u s person' and a 'hon-jealous person'. Instead, view the couple as a system and the j e a l o u s y as a process c r e a t e d by and e f f e c t i n g that system and i t s members. 1 77 3. If one or the other member of the couple a s s i g n s pathology to t h e i r p a r t n e r , c o n f r o n t t h i s as an issue, that c o n t r i b u t e s to the d e s t r u c t i v e part of the p r o c e s s . •4. Encourage each member to work on ' s e l f ' w i t h i n the context of the r e l a t i o n s h i p and remember to a f f i r m p o s i t i v e e f f o r t s i n t h i s regard. E s p e c i a l l y i n the e a r l y s e s s i o n s i t w i l l be important to s t r u c t u r e the process and to a v o i d three-way exchanges (e.g., "As part of the process of h e l p i n g both of you to a r r i v e at a common d e s c r i p t i o n of the problem, I am going to speak with each of you f o r 10 minutes. During that time i t i s very .- important f o r the l i s t e n i n g person to be i n v o l v e d but s i l e n t . " ) . A c c o r d i n g l y , demonstrate a t t e n d i n g behaviours and e x p l a i n a c t i v e l i s t e n i n g to f a c i l i t a t e the l i s t e n e r in g a i n i n g a b e t t e r understanding of h i s / h e r p a r t n e r ' s p e r s p e c t i v e . 5. Assess what each member and the couple as a u n i t b r i n g s to therapy i n terms of involvement with other h e l p i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s ; h i s t o r y and s t r u c t u r e of c u r r e n t f a m i l y and f a m i l y of o r i g i n ; p r e v i o u s marriages or r e l a t i o n s h i p s ; c u r r e n t s o c i a l c i r c l e s ; and most im p o r t a n t l y , unresolved l o s s e s . Jealousy as a 'fear of l o s s ' may be an i n d i c a t o r that a pre v i o u s l o s s has not been g r i e v e d f o r by the couple as a u n i t , hence b l o c k i n g intimacy i n t h i s and other areas. 6. A c c o r d i n g l y , the essence of therapy may be i n r e d e f i n i n g 178 the problem as a common need f o r intimacy. Introduce the p e r s p e c t i v e that the o l d problems may be f a i l e d or i n e f f e c t i v e attempts at s o l u t i o n . They d i d n ' t work because the problem was not c l e a r l y d e f i n e d i n the f i r s t p l a c e . 7. As soon as p o s s i b l e , guide the couple i n the process of naming a common goal f o r therapy and i n naming the beh a v i o u r a l changes that w i l l serve as i n d i c a t o r s that t h i s goal has been a t t a i n e d . Often the goal can be encapsulated as a need f o r more and b e t t e r intimacy. 8. Give therapy a beginning and an end by naming the number of s e s s i o n s that w i l l be d e d i c a t e d to working toward the goal that has been named. When t h i s p o i n t i s reached f u r t h e r therapy i s a n e g o t i a b l e i s s u e . 9. Speak to h e a l t h y , p o s i t i v e aspects of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p and a f f i r m s i g n s that they are making connections with t h i s a spect. 10. If present, discourage each p a r t n e r ' s tendency to use good/bad, right/wrong and other black/white p o l a r i t i e s . Provide a p e r s p e c t i v e that each person's r e a l i t y i s h i s / h e r own and i s a v a l i d one f o r him/her. 11. Help them to examine t h e i r j e a l o u s y process i n terms of p a t t e r n s and c y c l e s such as those suggested by Seeman (1979) and d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r . A f l i p c h a r t may be u s e f u l to demonstrate these p a t t e r n s v i s u a l l y and to use f o r fu t u r e r e f e r e n c e when pl a n n i n g or e v a l u a t i n g a c t i o n - 179 o r i e n t e d changes. 12. I n j e c t humor i n t o the couple system by encouraging them to laugh about some of t h e i r i s s u e s . 13. Define ' a f f a i r s ' by t h e i r 'source' which i s o f t e n a 'fear of i n t i m a c y ' . Point out that a f f a i r s can be with another sex p a r t n e r , a f r i e n d , a t h e r a p i s t , a committment to work, c a r e e r , s p o r t s or other a c t i v i t i e s . The j e a l o u s y process may i n v o l v e both p a r t n e r s i n separate a f f a i r s which they should each be encouraged to name. 14. Dialogue openly about v a r i o u s aspects of intimacy such as excitement, shared hopes, dreams, good sex, the a b i l i t y to g r i e v e together, e t c . Draw a 'common purpose' p a r a l l e l between j e a l o u s y and the a f f a i r to show how each serves a s i m i l a r goal and how both are i n d i r e c t attempts to meet mutual needs f o r intimacy. 15. Introduce some r i t u a l s as a grounding f o r intimacy. S o l i c i t s p e c i f i c i t y from each member when he/she s t a t e s wants or needs i n a vague way. 16. D i s t i n g u i s h between wants and needs and h e l p each c l i e n t accept g u i l t f e e l i n g s that may come along with making " I - want" statements. 17. As i n s i g h t s develop and the couple are i n c r e a s i n g l y a b l e to face t h e i r i s s u e s and acknowledge t h e i r mutual r o l e s in m a i n t a i n i n g the j e a l o u s y process, demonstrate higher l e v e l s of s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e (e.g., "I t r y to c o n t r o l you b y . . . . " ) . Explore e f f e c t i v e ways of s h a r i n g power i n i t s 180 p o s i t i v e sense of being "with the other person" (May, 1972, p.109). 18. G e n e r a l l y use and teach a r e s e a r c h approach by f r e q u e n t l y encouraging p e r c e p t i o n checks; promoting shared c u r i o u s i t y ; s h a r i n g e v a l u a t i o n s of what i s working w e l l and what i s not working so w e l l ; and by s h a r i n g a p p r e c i a t i o n s and disappointments with each other and about the process of therapy. The t h e r a p i s t should name what he/she has le a r n e d d u r i n g the process from each person and. from the couple as a u n i t . •.,. 19. For b i b l i o t h e r a p y , . suggest C. S t e i n e r ' s "The Other Side of Power". T h i s book d i s c u s s e s the nature of power and c o o p e r a t i v e ways of s t r i v i n g f o r power p a r i t y i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The suggestions f o r b i b l i o t h e r a p y under p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n are a l s o a p p l i c a b l e here. C o u n s e l l i n g Groups A comprehensive program' design- f o r group c o u n s e l l i n g of couples i s p r o v i d e d elsewhere by t h i s author (West, 1983) and so t h i s s e c t i o n w i l l present only a few major c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The suggestions assume i n c l u s i o n or c o n s i d e r a t i o n of previous s e c t i o n s . 1. Among other t h i n g s , p u b l i c i t y about groups that work with j e a l o u s y should c l e a r l y s t a t e the o b j e c t i v e s ; d e f i n e j e a l o u s y ; emphasize i t s u n i v e r s a l and i n t e r a c t i o n a l nature; exemplify m u t u a l i t y i n the j e a l o u s y process; and 181 s p e c i f y c r i t e r i a f o r the involvement of both p a r t n e r s . 2. P r e - s c r e e n i n g i n t e r v i e w s w i l l be. e s s e n t i a l f o r many reasons i n c l u d i n g needs assessment; s e l e c t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s ; p r e p a r a t i o n f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n ; r e f e r r a l of a p p l i c a n t s not s u i t a b l e f o r the group; and to provide an e a r l y l i a s o n between members and the leader as a way of f a c i l i t a t i n g the. development of t r u s t . 3. A p r e - s e s s i o n meeting of s e l e c t e d p a r t i c i p a n t s should be he l d to enhance the e a r l y stages of group development. For example, the lead'er(s) can introduce themselves, the t o p i c a n d . t h e i r p h i l o s o p h i e s about c o u n s e l l i n g and about a d u l t l e a r n e r s ; members can get acquainted; o b j e c t i v e s can be reviewed and compared with e x p e c t a t i o n s ; some e a r l y statements about i n t e r e s t and goals can be made by p a r t i c i p a n t s ; and i n t r o d u c t o r y concepts can be presented (e.g., a d e f i n i t i o n and b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of je a l o u s y and i t s process and a b r i e f , i n t r o d u c t o r y d i s c u s s i o n about needs, wants, r i g h t s , freedom, p r i v i l e g e and power). 4. The p r e - s e s s i o n i n t e r v i e w s and meeting are e s p e c i a l l y important because the t o p i c i t s e l f i m p l i e s c o n f l i c t to most people. Hence, f e a r s about what w i l l happen i n the group experience need to be d i s c u s s e d . 5. Reading m a t e r i a l s and homework should be c o n s i d e r e d as added p r e p a r a t i o n . T o p i c s might i n c l u d e those mentioned i n #3 above as w e l l as an i n t r o d u c t i o n to the p r i n c i p l e s and s k i l l s of n e g o t i a t i o n as f o r example, T e s s i n a and 182 Smith's (1980) "How to be a Couple and S t i l l be Free". 6. Group numbers w i l l be an important c o n s i d e r a t i o n given the t r i a n g u l a r nature of j e a l o u s y and hence the probable i n c l u s i o n of e x e r c i s e s i n v o l v i n g three people. Twelve members (6 couples) are suggested i n order to meet t h i s need f o r m u l t i p l e s of three and to approximate as c l o s e l y as p o s s i b l e the recommendations of group t h e o r i s t s such as Corey and Corey (1977). 7. Because of the nature of the t o p i c and the "couples" s t r u c t u r i n g of the group, c o - l e a d e r s h i p (e.g., o p t i m a l l y , a man/woman team) w i l l best f a c i l i t a t e process and dynamics. 8. Issues of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y ; how much and when to s e l f - d i s c l o s e ; and other g u i d e l i n e s should be taught i n e a r l y s e s s i o n s and r e i n f o r c e d i n an ongoing way. Again, t h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y important because of the nature of the t o p i c . Group process should a l s o be taught to part i c i p a n t s . 9. E x e r c i s e s and theory w i l l g e n e r a l l y i n v o l v e concepts d i s c u s s e d in t h i s and p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s . For more s p e c i f i c s , please see West (1983). 10. For b i b l i o t h e r a p y i n a c l o s i n g s e s s i o n , subgroups c o u l d reade p o r t i o n s of C o u r t i n ' s (1684) t r e a t i s e on j e a l o u s y and analyze i t i n terms of h i s t o r i c a l versus contemporary sex r o l e s i n western s o c i e t y . F o l l o w i n g subgroup a n a l y s i s , the whole group c o u l d be reassembled f o r a 183 d i s c u s s i o n of what j e a l o u s y meant then versus what i t now means v i s a v i s male and female r o l e s . Chapter Summary T h i s chapter d i s c u s s e d i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e that were d e r i v e d from the broad base of t h i s study on j e a l o u s y and from the r e s e a r c h e r ' s c l i n i c a l e xperience. It was d i v i d e d i n t o four main s e c t i o n s . The f i r s t s e c t i o n d i s c u s s e d some general c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and the next three s e c t i o n s i n c l u d e d p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , couples and groups. 184 THESIS SUMMARY Th i s study was designed to re - e x p l o r e and broaden the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of j e a l o u s y . I t used e m p i r i c a l and phenomenological approaches. In the e m p i r i c a l phase o b j e c t i v e data were analyzed using d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s . In the phenomenological phase s u b j e c t i v e data were analyzed on the b a s i s of major d e s c r i p t o r s , elements and themes i n the verbatim responses of p a r t i c i p a n t s . The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n each phase were supported by data and f i n d i n g s from the other phase and by the conceptual understandings gained from a review of three t h e o r i e s of emotion and a c r i t i q u e of the c o n v e n t i o n a l and re s e a r c h l i t e r a t u r e on j e a l o u s y from the d i s c i p l i n e s of anthropology, s o c i o l o g y , p s y c h i a t r y , and • psychology. Three hundred a d u l t s from a u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t - f a m i l y housing complex were surveyed using an adapted v e r s i o n of a j e a l o u s y instrument by Aronson and Pines (1982). F o r t y - f i v e - female and 28 male respondents d e f i n e d j e a l o u s y i n t h e i r own words; d e s c r i b e d and i n t e r p r e t e d t h e i r most extreme experiences with j e a l o u s y and responded (on a one-to-seven s c a l e ) to o b j e c t i v e item s u b t e s t s measuring j e a l o u s y p r e v a l e n c e ; p h y i c a l and emotional r e a c t i o n s ; g e n e r a l r e a c t i o n s and coping mechanisms. Q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e analyses r e s u l t e d i n many p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s . Among them were: apparent t h e r a p e u t i c 185 e f f e c t s of the instrument; sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n each of the o b j e c t i v e s u b t e s t s ; and q u a l i t a t i v e s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s among i n d i v i d u a l s and between the sexes in p a r t i c i p a n t d e f i n t i o n s , i n t h e i r e x p e r i e n t i a l accounts and in t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . For in s t a n c e , male s u b j e c t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n s named fewer elemental emotions than female s u b j e c t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n s and women named a much l a r g e r .variety of l o s s e s i n t h e i r experiences than d i d men. O b j e c t i v e l y , f o r men, h u m i l i a t i o n and de p r e s s i o n appeared as the h i g h e s t of ranked' mean response's to the 'emotional r e a c t i o n s ' s u b t e s t , while f o r women these rankings were anger and rage. Many of the d i f f e r e n c e s were e x p l a i n e d on the b a s i s of s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l i n f l u e n c e s . The e m p i r i c a l phase was used to generate s e v e r a l hypotheses f o r fu t u r e r e s e a r c h and both phases a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d many general and s p e c i f i c suggestions f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e were presented i n four s e c t i o n s . The f i r s t s e c t i o n d i s c u s s e d general c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and the next three s e c t i o n s presented p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r c o u n s e l l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , f o r c o u n s e l l i n g couples and f o r c o u n s e l l i n g groups. These i m p l i c a t i o n s g e n e r a l l y promote a broader c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and more p o s i t i v e and growthful outcomes fo r j e a l o u s y e xperiences. 186 References A d l e r , A. Understanding human nature. London: George A l l e n and Unwin L t d . , 1928. A d l e r , A. [Cooperation between the sexes] (H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher, Eds. and t r a n s . ) New York: Norton, 1.982. Ard, B.N., J r . A v o i d i n g d e s t r u c t i v e j e a l o u s y . Sexology, 1967, 34, 346-348. Aronson, E., & Pines, A. Sexual j e a l o u s y i n v e n t o r y . Unpublished s c a l e , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Santa Cruz, 1982. Aronson, E., & Pines, A. Antecedents, c o r r e l a t e s , and consequences of sexual j e a l o u s y . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y , March, 1 983, 51.(1), 108-136. B a r r e l l , J . J . , & Richards, A.C. Overcoming sexual j e a l o u s y : An experimental a n a l y s i s of common f a c t o r s . The Personnel and Guidance J o u r n a l , September 1982, 40- 47. B a r t e l l , S.R. Synergism in human r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , A r i z o n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1977). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , J u l y 1978, 39 (1-A), 122-123. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 78-05379) Beecher, M., & Beecher, W. The mark of C a i n : An anatomy of j e a l o u s y . New York: Harper & Row, 1971. Benedict, R. P a t t e r n s of c u l t u r e . Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n , 1934. Benedict, R. Synergy: P a t t e r n s of the good c u l t u r e . American A n t h r o p o l o g i s t , 1 970, 7_2, 320-333. Bohm, E. J e a l o u s y . In A. E l l i s & A. Abarbenel (Eds.), The e n c y c l o p e d i a of sexual behavior ( V o l . 1). New York: Hawthorn, 1961. Borg, W.R., & G a l l , M.D. E d u c a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h (3rd ed.). New York: Longman, 1979. Bower, G.H. Mood and memory. American P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1981, 36(2), 129-148. 187 B r i n g l e , R.G., Roach, S., C r a i g , A., & Evenbeck, S. Measuring the i n t e n s i t y of j e a l o u s r e a c t i o n s . JSAS Catalog of S e l e c t e d Documents in Psychology, 1 979, 9(2), 23. (Ms. No. 1832) Buunk, B. A n t i c i p a t e d sexual j e a l o u s y : I t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to s e l f - e s t e e m , dependency and r e c i p r o c i t y . P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology B u l l e t i n , June 1 982, 8(2), 31 0- 316. Clanton, G., & Smith, L.G. (Eds.). J e a lousy • Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1977. Cobb, J.P., & Marks, I.M. Morbid j e a l o u s y f e a t u r i n g as obsessive-compulsive n e u r o s i s : Treatment by b e h a v i o r a l psychotherapy. B r i t i s h J o u r n a l of . . P s y c h i a t r y , 1979, K34, 301-305. Const a n t i n e , L.L. C o n s t a t i n e ' s Contrast Scale Unpublished s c a l e . Boston: Centre f o r Family Change, 1974 C onstantine, L.L. J e a l o u s y : From theory to i n t e r v e n t i o n . In D.H.L. Olson (Ed.), T r e a t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Lake M i l l s , Iowa: Graphic P u b l i s h e r s , 1976, 383-398. Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of s e l f - e s t e e m . San F r a n c i s c o : W.H. Freeman, 1967. Corey, G. and Corey, M.S. Groups: Process and p r a c t i c e . Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a ! Brooks/Cole, 1977. C o r z i n e , L.W. The phenomenon of j e a l o u s y : A t h e o r e t i c a l and e m p i r i c a l a n a l y s i s ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i t e d S t a t e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y , San Diego, 1974). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1974, 35(2-B), 1016-B. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 74-17,97TT C o u l t e r , N.A., J r . S y n e r g e t i c s : An adventure in human development. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1 976. C o u r t i n , A. [A t r e a t i s e of j e a l o u s i e , or means to preserve peace in marriage] (Los Angeles: W.A. C l a r k Memorial L i b r a r y , S p e c i a l C o l l e c t i o n s No. 12728/NC 0749587). London: W.H. Freeman, 1684. ( P u b l i c a t i o n of o r i g i n a l v e r s i o n i n French, P a r i s : J o s s e t t , 1685.) Daher, D.M. & Cohen, M. Jealousy workshop: A c o n c e p t u a l base and format. Personnel and Guidance J o u r n a l , 1979, 57, 480-483. 188 Dahms, A.M. Emotional intimacy: Overlooked requirement f o r s u r v i v a l . Boulder, Colorado: Pruett P u b l i s h i n g , 1972. Davis, K. Jealousy and sexual p r o p e r t y : An i l l u s t r a t i o n . In Human s o c i e t y . New York: The MacMillan Company, 19497 ( O r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d , 1936) Egan, G.E. The s k i l l e d h e l p e r : A model f o r systematic h e l p i n g . Monterey, C a l i f . : Brooks/Cole, 1975. E l l i o t , M.E. The language of The King James B i b l e : A g l o s s a r y e x p l a i n i n g i t s words and e x p r e s s i o n s . Garden C i t y , N.Y.: Doubleday & Company, 1967. E l l i s , A. The c i v i l i z e d couple's guide to e x t r a m a r i t a l adventure. New York: Wyden, 1972. F i s h e r , H.E. The sex c o n t r a c t : The e v o l u t i o n of human behavior. New York: Q u i l l , 1982. F o s t e r , G.M. The anatomy of envy: A study i n symbolic behavior. Current Anthropology, A p r i l 1972, 13(2), 165-202. F r a n c i s , J.L. Toward the management of h e t e r o s e x u a l j e a l o u s y . J o u r n a l of Marriage and Family C o u n s e l l i n g , 1977, 3, 61-69. Freud, S. [ C e r t a i n n e u r o t i c mechanisms i n j e a l o u s y , paranoia and homosexuality, (1922)] C o l l e c t e d Papers ( V o l . 2). (Joan R i v i e r e , t r a n s . ) London: Hogarth Press, 1956, 232-243. ( O r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d , 1924.) F u l l e r , R.B., & Applewhite, E . J . S y n e rq e t i c s : Ex p i o ratd-on s i n the geometry of t h i n k i n g . New York: Macmillan, 1 982. G l a s s , G.V., & S t a n l e y , J.C. S t a t i s t i c a l methods in education and psychology. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1070. H a r r i s , T.G. About Ruth Benedict and her l o s t manuscript. Psychology Today, 1970, 4, 51-52. Hoaken, P.C.S. Jealousy as a symptom of p s y c h i a t r i c d i s o r d e r . A u s t r a l i a n and New Zealand J o u r n a l of P s y c h i a t r y , 1976, U), 47-51. 189 The Holy B i b l e . (Revised Standard V e r s i o n c o n t a i n i n g the Old and New Testaments) New York, Toronto, Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 19'52'. Huber, R.J., Robinson, S., & Huber, P.P. E v o l u t i o n : S t r u g g l e or synergy? J o u r n a l of i n d i v i d u a l psychology, 1978, 34(2), 210-220. Iz a r d , C E . The face of emotions. New York: Appleton- C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1971. Jaremko, M.E., & Lindsey, R. S t r e s s - c o p i n g a b i l i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l s high and low i n j e a l o u s y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1979, 44, 547-553. Jones, E. Jea l o u s y . In G.E. L e v i t a s (Ed.), The world of psychology ( V o l . 1). New York: B r a z i l l e r , 1963. ( O r i g i n a l l y published' i n 1929) Jung, G.G. [ C o l l e c t e d Works] ( V o l . XVII) (R.F.C, H u l l , t r a n s . ) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954. Jung, C.G. [ C o l l e c t e d Works] ( V o l . I) (R.F.C. H u l l , t r a n s . ) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. Jung, C.G. [ C o l l e c t e d Works] ( V o l . IV) (R.F.C. H u l l , t r a n s . ) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961. K l e i n , M. Envy and g r a t i t u d e : A study of unconscious p r o c e s s e s . London: T a v i s t o c k , 1957. Krewski, D., P l a t e k , R., & Rao, J.N.J. (Eds.) . Current t o p i c s i n survey sampling. New York: Academic Press, 1981. L a n g f e l d t , G. The e r o t i c j e a l o u s y syndrome. J o u r n a l of Neuropsychiatry, 1962, 3, 317-321. Lynch, C. A s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w f o r working with couples at the p o i n t of s e p a r a t i o n . Family Therapy, 1982, 9(1), 21-34. Maslow, A.H. Synergy i n the s o c i e t y and i n the i n d i v i d u a l . In F a r t h e r reaches of human nature. New York: The V i k i n g Press, 1971. Maslow, A.H., & Honigmann, J . J . Synergy: Some notes of Ruth . - B e n e d i c t . American A n t h r o p o l o g i s t , 1970, 72, 320- ! 333. 190 Mathes, E.W., Roter, P.M., & Joerger, S.M. A convergent v a l i d i t y study of s i x j e a l o u s y s c a l e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1982, SO, 1143-1147.' Mathes, E;W., & Severa, N. J e a l o u s y , romantic love and l i k i n g : T h e o r e t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and primary s c a l e development. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1981a, 49, 23- 31 . Mathes, E.W., & Severa, N. I n t e r p e r s o n a l j e a l o u s y s c a l e . Unpublished s c a l e , Western I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1981b. Maurois, A. Atmosphere of l o v e . New York: F r e d e r i c k Ungar, 1965. May, R. Love and w i l l . New York: W.W. Norton, 1969. May, R. Power and innocence: A search f o r the source of v i o l e n c e . New York: W.W. Norton, 1972; Mead, M. J e a l o u s y : P r i m i t i v e and c i v i l i z e d . In G. Clanton & L.G. Smith (Eds.), J e a l o u s y . Englewood C l i f f s , •N.J'.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1977, 115-127. ( O r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d , 1931) Mooney, H.B. P a t h o l o g i c j e a l o u s y and psychochemotherapy. B r i t i s h J o u r n a l of P s y c h i a t r y , 1965, 3, 1023-1042. Mowat, R.R. Morbid j e a l o u s y and murder: A p s y c h i a t r i c study of morbidly j e a l o u s murderers at broadmoor. London: T a v i s t o c k P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1966. Nasru, F.S. A s y n e r g i s t i c view of man and the u n i v e r s e : A p s y c h o s o c i a l model' of man- as an open- system ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , New York State U n i v e r s i t y , 1980). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1981, 41(8-A), 3617-A. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 81 - 0 4 2 2 1 T " Nelson, L.R. Guide to LERTAP use and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Dunedin, New Zealand: U n i v e r s i t y of Otago, 1974. Neu, J . J e a l o u s thoughts. In A. 0. Rorty (Ed.), E x p l a i n i n g emotions. Berkeley and Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1980. The Oxford E n g l i s h D i c t i o n a r y ( V o l . V ) . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. 191 Pao, P. P a t h o l o g i c a l j e a l o u s y . In C.W. S o c a r i d e s (Ed.), The world of emotions. New York: I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t i e s Press, 1977. P l u t c h i k , R. The emotions: F a c t s , t h e o r i e s , and a new model. New York: Random House, 1962. P l u t c h i k , R. A general p s y c h o e v o l u t i o n a r y theory of emotion. In R. P l u t c h i k & H. Kellerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory, r e s e a r c h , and experience. New York: Academic Press, 1980a. P l u t c h i k , R. A language f o r the emotions. Psychology Today, Feb., 1980b, 68-78. P r i c e , D., & B a r r e l l , J . J . An e x p e r i e n t i a l approach with q u a n t i t a t i v e methods: A r e s e a r c h paradigm. Journal, Of HumaniStic Psychology, 1980, 20, 75-95. Reik, T. Psychology of sex r e l a t i o n s . New York: R i n e h a r t , 1946. Reik, T. Of love and l u s t . New York: F a r r a r , Straus and Company, 1949. R i v i e r e , J . Jealousy as a mechanism of defense. I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l a n a l y s i s , 1932, 13, 414-424. R o b b e - G r i l l e t , A. [ J e a l o u s y ] (R. Howard, t r a n s . ) New York: Grove Press, 1959. ( O r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d as "La J a l o u s i e " , P a r i s : Les E d i t i o n s de M i n u i t , 1957.) Rogers, C. On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n , 1961. S a t r e , J.P. The emotions: O u t l i n e of a theory. New York: P h i l o s o p h i c a l L i b r a r y , 1948. Schmideberg, M. Some aspects of j e a l o u s y and f e e l i n g h u r t . P s y c h o a n a l y t i c Review, 1953, £0, 1-16. Schoeck, H. [Envy: A theory of s o c i a l behavior] (M. Glenny and B. Ross, t r a n s . ) New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1969. ( O r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d i n German as "Der Neid", 1966) Seeman, M.V. P a t h o l o g i c a l j e a l o u s y . P s y c h i a t r y , 1979, 42, 351-361. 192 Seidenberg, R. F i d e l i t y and j e a l o u s y : S o c i o - c u l t u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . P s y c h o a n a l y t i c Review, 1967, 54, 583-608. Shettel-Neuber, J . , Bryson, J.B., & Young, L.E. P h y s i c a l a t t r a c t i v e n e s s of the 'other person' and j e a l o u s y . P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology B u l l e t i n , 1978, _4, 612-615. Shostrum, E. Personal o r i e n t a t i o n i n v e n t o r y (2nd ed.). San Diego, C a l i f : E d u c a t i o n a l and I n d u s t r i a l T e s t i n g S e r v i c e , 1974. S o k o l o f f , B. Jealousy, a p s y c h i a t r i c study. New York: Howell Soskin, 1947. Solomon, R.C. The p a s s i o n s . Garden C i t y , New York: Academic Press/Doubleday, 1976". S t e i n e r , C. The other s i d e of power. New York: Grove Press , 1981. Teismann, M.W. J e a l o u s y : S y s t e m a t i c p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g therapy with c o u p l e s . Family Press, 1979, 18(2) , 151-160. Teismann, M.W., & Mosher, D.L. J e a l o u s c o n f l i c t i n d a t i n g c o u p l e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1978, 42, 1211-1216. T e s s i n a , T.B., & Smith, R. How to be a couple and s t i l l be f r e e . North Hollywood, C a l i f o r n i a : Newcastle P u b l i s h i n g , 1980. Thorndike, R.L., & Hagan, E. Measurement and e v a l u a t i o n i n psychology and-education (3rd edv) . New- York: John Wiley & Sons, 1969. T i p t o n , R.M., Benedictson, C.S., Mahoney, J . , & H a r t n e t t , J . J . Development of a s c a l e f o r the assessment of j e a l o u s y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1978, 42, 1217- 1218. Todd, J . & Dewhurst, K. The O t h e l l o syndrome: A study i n the psychopathology of sexual j e a l o u s y . J o u r n a l of Nervous & Mental D i s o r d e r s , 1955, 122, 367-374. Tur b o t t , J . Morbid j e a l o u s y : An unusual p r e s e n t a t i o n with the r e c i p r o c a l appearance of psychopathology i n e i t h e r spouse. A u s t r a l i a n and New Zealand J o u r n a l of P s y c h i a t r y , 1981, J_5, 164-167. 193 Webster's T h i r d New I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i c t i o n a r y of the E n g l i s h Language. S p r i n g f i e l d , Mass.: G. & C. Merriam, 1976. West, M.B. Working with j e a l o u s y : A group workshop f o r c o u p l e s . Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia-, Vancouver, Canada, 1983. White, G.L. The s o c i a l psychology of romantic j e a l o u s y ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles, 1976). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1977, 37(10-B), 5449-5450. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 77-7700) White, G.L. Inducing j e a l o u s y : A power p e r s p e c t i v e . P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology B u l l e t i n , 1980, 6, 222-227. White, G.L. SOme c o r r e l a t e s of romantic j e a l o u s y . . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y , June 1981 a, 49(2), 129-147. White, G.L. Chronic j e a l o u s y s c a l e . Unpublished s c a l e , U n i v e r s i t y of Maryland, C o l l e g e Park, 1981b. White, G.L. R e l a t i o n s h i p j e a l o u s y s c a l e . Unpublished s c a l e , U n i v e r s i t y of Maryland, C o l l e g e Park, 1981c. Wylie, R.C. The s e l f - c o n c e p t . L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press, 1961. Wy1ie, R.C. The s e l f - c o n c e p t : A review of methodological c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and measuring instruments (2nd r e v i s e d ed.). L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press, 1974. Ziman, E.A. Jealousy i n c h i l d r e n : A guide for p a r e n t s . New York: A. A. Wyn , 1949'. APPENDIX A Jealousy Inventory 195 Jealousy Inventory* C i r c l e the number adjacent to the response that a p p l i e s to you. A. Background Information 1. Sex: 1 male 2 female 2. Age: years 3. E d u c a t i o n : Last grade completed i n school 4. Other t r a i n i n g (please s p e c i f y ) 5. Occupation: 6. Are you c u r r e n t l y a student: 1 Yes 2 No 7. Country of b i r t h : . " Country or c o u n t r i e s i n which you were r a i s e d Other c o u n t r i e s or c u l t u r e s i n which you l i v e d or p a r t i c i p a t e d to an extent which has s i g n i f i c a n t l y e f f e c t e d your growth and/or value systems 8. Race: 9. R e l i g i o n : 1. Caucasian 2. Negroid 3. O r i e n t a l 4. Canadian Indian 5. East Indian 6. Other (please* s p e c i f y ) 1. None ( a t h e i s t ) 2. P r o t e s t a n t 3. C a t h o l i c 4. Jewish 6. Moslem 7. Hindu 8. Sikh 9. Other (please s p e c i f y ) S i b l i n g s : 10. Number of o l d e r b r o t h e r s * Adapted from the Sexual Jealousy Inventory by Ayala Pines and E l l i o t Aronson. 196 11. Number of olde r s i s t e r s 12. Number of younger b r o t h e r s 13. Number of younger s i s t e r s 14. I am a twin: 1 Yes 2 No 15. Number of people l i v i n g i n household i n c l u d i n g y o u r s e l f 16. Please s p e c i f y t h e i r ages and sex ( i . e . , 10 year male, 15 year female, etc.) Do not inc l u d e y o u r s e l f . 17. Present m a r i t a l / r e l a t i o n s h i p status; 1. S i n g l e 2. Divor c e d 3. Separated 4. Widowed 5. Partnered 6. Cohabi t ing 7. Remarried 8. Marri e d 9. Other (please 18. My c u r r e n t f a m i l y ( i . e . , not your f a m i l y of o r i g i n ) i s best d e s c r i b e d as: 1. Two-parent f a m i l y 2. S i n g l e parent f a m i l y 3. Blended fam i l y ( c h i l d r e n i n f a m i l y from two or more marriages) 4. Other (please s p e c i f y ) B. Jealousy Prevalence 19. Do you co n s i d e r y o u r s e l f ' a.- j e a l o u s -person-?" 1 Ye;s3i-2 No 20. How j e a l o u s are you at t h i s time i n your l i f e ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 not at a l l extremely j e a l o u s j e a l o u s How j e a l o u s were you i n pre v i o u s p e r i o d s i n your l i f e ? (Please use the above s c a l e f o r a l l four p e r i o d s . ) 21. During c h i l d h o o d : 22. During adolescence: 23. During young adulthood: 1 97 24. During adulthood: ; 25. Have any of your i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s ended because of your j e a l o u s y ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 none s e v e r a l a l l of them 26. Do most people who know you w e l l c o n s i d e r you a j e a l o u s person? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d e f i n i t e l y moderately d e f i n i t e l y not j e a l o u s yes 27. Do people you have been•intimate with c o n s i d e r you j e a l o u s ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d e f i n i t e l y moderately d e f i n i t e l y not' j e a l o u s yes 28. Please d e s c r i b e the s i t u a t i o n that produced your most extreme experience of j e a l o u s y . 29. What p o s i t i v e and/or negative e f f e c t s d i d t h i s experience have on you and on the primary r e l a t i o n s h i p involved? 30. Describe--a s i t u a t i o n that would ( f o r you and-at t h i s time i n your l i f e ) r e s u l t i n a s i m i l a r or more extreme experience of j e a l o u s y . C. Reactions to Jealousy R e c a l l i n g your most extreme experience of j e a l o u s y , to what extent d i d you experience each one of the f o l l o w i n g p h y s i c a l and emotional r e a c t i o n s . Please use the f o l l o w i n g s c a l e to d e s c r i b e a l l items. 1 2 not at a l l 3 4 5 6 7 to a "moderate" very degree i n t e n s e l y 1 98 P h y s i c a l Reactions 31 . hot 44. s e x u a l l y aroused 32. headachy 45. d i z z y 33. shakey 46. a p p e t i t e l o s s 34. stomach empty 47. trembling hands 35. breath short 48. f a s t heartbeat 36. insomnia 49. insomnia 37. e n e r g i z e d 50. blood r u s h i n q 38. c o l d 51 . sweaty 39. f a i n t n e s s 52. exhausted 40. nausea 53. tunnel (or telescoped) 41 . stomach cramps v i sion 42. niqhtmares 54. b l u r r e d v i s i o n 43. about to have a 55. double v i s i o n nervous 56. sounds seem i n t e n s i f i e d breakdown 57. sounds seem d u l l e r 58. sounds are d i s t o r t e d Emotional Reactions 59. rage 74. qr i e f 60. h u m i l i a t i o n 75. h e l p l e s s n e s s 61 . s e l f - p i t y 76. v u l n e r a b i 1 i ty 62. c o n f u s i o n 77. blame 63. pain 78. resentment 64. p o s s e s s i v e n e s s 79. s e l f - r i q h t e o u s 65. i n f e r i o r i t y 80. excluded 66. f r u s t r a t ion 81 . passion 67. fear of l o s s 82. hopelessness 68. envy 83. annoyance 69. anger 84. emotional exhaustion 70. a q q r e s s i o n 85. excitement 71 . a n x i e t y 86. entrapment 72. d e p r e s s i o n 87. low s e l f - i m a q e 73. gui I t 88. self-knowledge General Reactions 89. R e c a l l i n g your most extreme experience of j e a l o u s y , how long d i d the experience l a s t ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 seconds minutes hours days weeks months years 199 90. How o f t e n do you experience extreme j e a l o u s y ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 never once r a r e l y occas. o f t e n u s u a l l y always 91. Do you think you coped w e l l with the extreme s i t u a t i o n you d e s c r i b e d ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 very p o o r l y average very w e l l 92. Do you c o n s i d e r your j e a l o u s y a problem? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 not at a l l moderately a very not so s e r i o u s one 93. Can you make y o u r s e l f stop being j e a l o u s ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d e f i n i t e l y to a c e r t a i n d e f i n i t e l y not degree yes 94. How o f t e n do you experience m i l d j e a l o u s y ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 never once r a r e l y occas. o f t e n u s u a l l y always 95. Do you thin k that j e a l o u s y i s a normal response i n c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d e f i n i t e l y somewhat d e f i n i t e l y not yes 96. Do you c o n s i d e r your own j e a l o u s y i n extreme s i t u a t i o n s to be an a p p r o p r i a t e r e a c t i o n ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d e f i n i t e l y somewhat d e f i n i t e l y not yes 200 Coping with Jealousy How do you cope with j e a l o u s y ? Please use the f o l l o w i n g s c a l e f o r a l l items: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 never once r a r e l y occas. o f t e n u s u a l l y always 97. r a t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n 98. acceptance 99. stony s i l e n c e 100. sarcasm 101. a v o i d i n g the i s s u e 102. s u f f e r s i l e n t l y but v i s i b l y 103. c r y i n g 104. f i n d i n g the funny si d e 105. c l i n g i n g __. 106. beseeching " 107. i s o l a t i o n _____ 108. screaming . 109. throwing t h i n g s 1 TO. d e n i a l 112. r e t a l i a t i n g - making partner j e a l o u s 113. l e a v i n g p a r t n e r 114. s u f f e r s i l e n t l y and c o v e r t l y 115. p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e 116. ' making a joke of i t 117. n e g o t i a t i o n 118. arguing 119. withdrawal 120. using the occasion f o r t h i n k i n g through my r o l e in the s i t u a t i o n and what i t i s I s t a n d / f e a r to l o s e Other (please s p e c i f y ) 121. How would you d e f i n e j e a l o u s y ? 122. Using your own d e f i n i t i o n , how j e a l o u s are you? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 not at a l l moderately extremely 123. Other i n s i g h t s / t h o u g h t s / e x p e r i e n c e s I have had with/about j e a l o u s y and with to share at t h i s time. D i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l , r e l i g i o u s , l i n g u i s t i c or any other c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i l l be g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d . I f , f o r example, you are aware of a few or s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t words f o r j e a l o u s y i n other languages please present them and e x p l a i n t h e i r d i s t i n c t i o n . APPENDIX B Request f o r P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Study 202 P a r t i c i p a t i o n needed in j e a l o u s y study by Masters student i n C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology We a l l have experiences with j e a l o u s y d u r i n g our l i v e s . These experiences can have both p o s i t i v e and negative e f f e c t s f o r o u r s e l v e s and our r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Although none of us are exempt from these experiences, seemingly few people d i s c u s s them openly. The purpose of t h i s study i s to enlarge upon the theory about j e a l o u s y and to provide c o u n s e l l o r s with ways in which they w i l l be a b l e to a s s i s t i n d i v i d u a l s , couples and f a m i l i e s to use t h e i r j e a l o u s y experiences i n meaningful, c o n s t r u c t i v e ways. To p a r t i c i p a t e you must be between the ages of 20-60 yea r s . During the coming week a l a r g e brown unsealed envelope c o n t a i n i n g the j e a l o u s y q u e s t i o n n a i r e and i n s t r u c t i o n sheet w i l l be d i s t r i b u t e d v i a your mail s l o t . I f you choose to complete the q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t w i l l be assumed that your consent to p a r t i c i p a t e i s g i v e n . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l r e q u i r e a maximum of 30 minutes of your time and most people w i l l be able to answer i t much more . q u i c k l y . You are requested to answer the q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n p r i v a c y and without d i s c u s s i o n or c o n s u l t a t i o n . You are, of course, f r e e to withdraw at any time or r e f u s e to answer any q u e s t i o n s without p r e j u d i c e . Should you choose to p a r t i c i p a t e please p l a c e the completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e back i n the envelope, s e a l i t and r e t u r n i t to the MELFA COURT address on the o u t s i d e of the envelope, or i f you l i v e i n the HIGHRISE, ple a s e p l a c e the s e a l e d envelope through the i n s i d e m a i l s l o t on the main f l o o r . People who wish to answer the q u e s t i o n n a i r e but not d e l i v e r i t may c a l l the number below and i t w i l l be p i c k e d up. Return of unanswered q u e s t i o n n a i r e s by the same procedure (except they should remain unsealed) would be g r e a t l y appreciated?. The r e s e a r c h e r w i l l c o l l e c t l a r g e numbers of the envelopes and s h u f f l e them p r i o r to opening. Your i d e n t i t y w i l l remain a b s o l u t e l y anonymous. Please do not p l a c e your name or address anywhere on the envelope or q u e s t i o n n a i r e . A l l i n f o r m a t i o n c o l l e c t e d must remain c o n f i d e n t i a l . Return d e a d l i n e i s J u l y 5, 1983. At the completion of the study a f r e e workshop w i l l be given, with date, time and l o c a t i o n to be announced in the n e w s l e t t e r . The study f i n d i n g s w i l l be shared and q u e s t i o n s w i l l be answered. For f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n , p l e a s e c a l l M a r i e t t e West at 224-7015. 203 APPENDIX C Cover L e t t e r f o r Inventory 204 Dear Occupant, Enclosed please f i n d a q u e s t i o n n a i r e that i s p a r t of a study about j e a l o u s y e x p e r i e n c e s . The study i s f o r my MA t h e s i s i n C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology. The purpose of the study i s to enlarge upon the theory about j e a l o u s y and to p r o v i d e c o u n s e l l o r s with ways i n which they w i l l be able to a s s i s t people to use t h e i r j e a l o u s y experiences i n more c o n s t r u c t i v e ways. We a l l have experiences with j e a l o u s y d u r i n g our l i v e s . These experiences can have both p o s i t i v e and negative e f f e c t s f o r o u r s e l v e s and our r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Although none of us are exempt from these experiences seemingly few people c l a i m . o r d i s c u s s them openly. To p a r t i c i p a t e in t h i s study: 1. You must be between the ages' of" 20 and 60 y e a r s . 2. If you choose to p a r t i c i p a t e , your consent w i l l be assumed by completion and r e t u r n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 3. You are requested to answer the q u e s t i o n n a i r e in p r i v a c y and without c o n s u l t a t i o n or d i s c u s s i o n . • Approximately 30 minutes of your time w i l l be r e q u i r e d , although some w i l l be able to complete i t much more q u i c k l y . 4. Your i d e n t i t y w i l l remain a b s o l u t e l y anonymous and a l l i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l remain c o n f i d e n t i a l . Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be number coded f o r purposes of data h a n d l i n g and a n a l y s i s . Please do not put your' name- or address anywhere on' the envelope or q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 5. The completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e should be p l a c e d back in the envelope, s e a l e d and r e t u r n e d to the Melfa Court address on the o u t s i d e , or to the i n s i d e m a i l s l o t of the f a m i l y housing o f f i c e on the main f l o o r of the h i g h r i s e . Households who wish to r e t u r n unanswered q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , or who would l i k e e x t r a q u e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r other members or who would, p r e f e r pick-up r a t h e r than d e l i v e r y of answered q u e s t i o n n a i r e s may c a l l the number below. 6. You are, of course, f r e e to withdraw at any time or to r e f u s e to answer any q u e s t i o n s without p r e j u d i c e . 206 APPENDIX D Responses to Items 28, 29, 30 207 The f o l l o w i n g are s u b j e c t s ' responses to q u e s t i o n n a i r e items 28, 29, and 30: 28. Please d e s c r i b e the s i t u a t i o n that produced your most extreme experience of j e a l o u s y . 29. What p o s i t i v e and/or negative e f f e c t s d i d t h i s experience have on you and on the primary r e l a t i o n s h i p i n volved? 30. Describe a s i t u a t i o n t h at would ( f o r you and at t h i s time i n your l i f e ) r e s u l t i n a s i m i l a r or more extreme experience of j e a l o u s y . Su b j e c t s ' responses are verbatim statements and hence may c o n t a i n grammar, s p e l l i n g , and punctuation i r r e g u l a r i t i e s . Subject Female Su b j e c t ' s Responses 01 28. F i n d i n g out that my husband loved another woman. 29. I l o s t c onfidence i n myself as a woman f o r a time. I r e a l i z e d that the depth of the r e l a t i o n s h i p on h i s par t had never been what I had hoped i t to be t h e r e f o r e brought past happenings i n t o f o c u s . R e l a t i o n s h i p ended. 30. If I had u n r e a l i s t i c hopes f o r a p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p to develop, then r e a l i z e d I had l o s t , i . e . that i t would never be, because of another woman. 02 28. My husband loved another woman (the couple were c l o s e f r i e n d s of ours) and I f e l t t e r r i b l e . I was married 2 years with a small baby and d e f i n i t e l y f e l t the v i c t i m . 29. I moved on ( p o s i t i v e ) . I am a l s o able to see how each j e a l o u s s i t u a t i o n i s a r e a c t i v a t i o n of t h i s e a r l i e r e x perience. I broke up my marriage ( n e g a t i v e ) . 30. My f i a n c e e wanting to be with another woman besides myself. 03 28. During marriage breakdown, before s e p a r a t i o n , at a p a r t y , I became very j e a l o u s of a woman f l i r t i n g with my ex-husband. 29. P o s i t i v e : I expressed my f e e l i n g s and f e l t a l i t t l e b e t t e r but I r e a l i z e d i t was i n s e c u r i t y 208 about the marriage, (and the man) not the woman, that caused the j e a l o u s y . I t d i s g u s t e d my ex-husband, but did, not a f f e c t the r e l a t i o n s h i p ' s a l r e a d y d i s i n t e g r a t i n g path. 30. I think I am envious now of s o l i d man/woman r e l a t i o n s h i p s , but I can't imagine r e a l l y f e e l i n g j e a l o u s y l i k e I used t o , as I am more secure about myself. 04 28. During c h i l d h o o d , s i s t e r 2 years younger than me r e c e i v e d "more" t h i n g s ( c l o t h e s , p e t s , e t c .) the way I saw i t . I a l s o saw her as c u t e r and more easygoing with more f r i e n d s . I am t o l d that I was " r e s e n t f u l " of her from the moment she was born (I threw numerous tantrums). Up u n t i l adolescence I was extremely j e a l o u s to the p o i n t of f i g h t s and t e a r s because I thought my.parents l a v i s h e d "more" on her. In f a c t , I. tended to ref u s e " t h i n g s " whereas* she accepted e v e r y t h i n g handed to' her - as i f I wanted to be je a l o u s of her. ( s e l f - i n f l i c t e d j e a l o u s y ) 29. During c h i l d h o o d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h i s s i s t e r and I was extremely tense. I t seems we hated each other the whole time. But now I think the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s even stronger than i t would have been otherwise. 30. I f e e l incapable of t h i s kind of j e a l o u s y now. 05 28. The time was when a man I was l i v i n g with confessed he was i n love (and seeing) someone e l s e . I s p l i t up with him and d i d n ' t eat f o r 8 days. 29. We s p l i t up. I cannot accept i n f i d e l i t y , (yet, I am capable of " s t r a y i n g " m y s e l f ) . 30. My b o y f r i e n d f l i r t s with h i s neighbor a l o t . If he- f l i r t e d with h e r at'^'party*,,-- in- front- o-fi- me - then " l e f t " with her - I would be very j e a l o u s . 06 28. Grade 12, h i g h s c h o o l , my b o y f r i e n d s t a r t e d d a t i n g another g i r l . I t was extremely p a i n f u l . I would go to any l e n g t h to t r y to win back h i s a f f e c t i o n s . 29. Pos: i t was a growing experience as I e v e n t u a l l y got over i t . I le a r n e d to d i s l i k e myself f o r f e e l i n g j e a l o u s . Neg: I l o s t a l l sense of p r i d e . I was preoccupied with j e a l o u s y and i t a f f e c t e d my mood. I became q u i t e nasty and h a t e f u l . 30. H o p e f u l l y nothing w i l l ever be as bad as that was. But, i f I deeply loved someone and f e l t h i s a f f e c t i o n s s l i p p i n g away f o r another woman 209 that may r e s u l t i n a s i m i l a r e xperience. 07 28. I had a r e l a t i o n s h i p with a man that was s t r o n g l y attached to another woman. She moved out a few months a f t e r we met but he c o u l d not l e t her go because he was s t i l l so e m o t i o n a l l y attached to her. 29. I loved t h i s man very much and would have l i k e d to marry him but r e a l i z e d he was e i t h e r not i n love with me or s t i l l too at t a c h e d to t h i s woman to even c o n s i d e r another r e l a t i o n s h i p . The p o s i t i v e aspect i s you grow from experience. The negative aspect i s you s u f f e r a l o t of p a i n . 30. I f I saw him again with t h i s lady I would experience j e a l o u s y I'm sure. As w e l l as hurt and resentment. 08 28. A l o v e r who had an int i m a t e a f f a i r with someone e l s e while t r a v e l l i n g . ( I t was a l s o sexual, but i t was the emotional intimacy that was most t h r e a t e n i n g to me.) 29. I f e l t h o r r i b l y i n secure and my t r u s t l e v e l was eroded, but having to de a l with the issue and our f e e l i n g s around i t was I th i n k u l t i m a t e l y growth producing f o r both of us. 30. I can't think of one - a s i m i l a r one would come c l o s e s t , but I thin k I've r e s o l v e d some of the i s s u e s . I have a stronger sense of s e l f now and am more w i l l i n g to experience and acknowledge my v u l n e r a b i l i t y i n s t e a d of fo c u s i n g on the other person, which I think i s what j e a l o u s y i s . 09 28. I saw the man, with whom I had been l i v i n g with for 2 years but who had c a l l e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f f f o r no reason I c o u l d understand, walking i n t o a r e s t a u r a n t with a woman I knew and, suspect but don't know, he had had an a f f a i r with. I was walking down the s t r e e t - y e l l e d a b i t , threw my sweater at him and c r i e d c o n t i n u a l l y f o r about a year. 29. For the man I was j e a l o u s of, the i n c i d e n t was "water o f f a duck's back". For the man I was with i t probably added some understanding as to my f l u c t u a t i n g behaviour towards him. For myself, i t f u r t h e r entrenched me i n the non- e x i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p , I became even more dependent on i t and soon ended the r e l a t i o n s h i p with my new f r i e n d . T h i s happened about 5 years ago, I am s t i l l caught i n t h i s non- e x i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p . I even bore one of h i s 210 c h i l d r e n and am pregnant with a second. 30. If I were to meet a man whom I loved, r e s p e c t e d and committed myself to and had fun with and a great d e a l of intimacy and he l e f t out of the blue or simply cut me o f f - I don't know but I c e r t a i n l y f ear I would go through the same je a l o u s r o u t i n e . 10 28. My most extreme experience of j e a l o u s y that I can r e c a l l probably had to do with the f a c t that I grew up with a twin s i s t e r . She was more "popular" than I and had many more f r i e n d s and i n v i t a t i o n s to p a r t i e s . 29. Negative e f f e c t was probably that of f e e l i n g i n f e r i o r to her. P o s i t i v e e f f e c t was that i t probably helped me to pursue my own i d e n t i t y and i n d i v i d u a l i t y . I s t r i v e d to e x c e l i n d i f f e r e n t areas than her. 30. S i m i l a r perhaps' would be : being' excluded from, a " s o c i a l c i r c l e " . 11 28. B o y f r i e n d - g i r l f r i e n d s i t u a t i o n where b o y f r i e n d appeared i n t e r e s t e d i n other g i r l . T h i s was l a t e teens. D i s c o v e r e d he had s e v e r a l other g i r l f r i e n d s . Subsequent r e l a t i o n s h i p s s u f f e r e d because of a lack i n t r u s t as a r e s u l t of other r e l a t i o n s h i p . 29. (+)opened up more with respect to these f e e l i n g s . Communication between us i n c r e a s e d . (-) an i n c r e a s e i n arguments, decrease in my t r u s t i n him. F r u s t r a t i o n on both s i d e s , s t u d i e s s u f f e r e d . 30. Husband i n t e r e s t e d i n another g i r l but i n a more d e f i n i t e way i . e . not coming home. In other words, now I f e e l more secure i n our r e l a t i o n s h i p . 12 28. Adolescence - I was 16 with a b o y f r i e n d and moved to Japan. While I was l i v i n g there he began d a t i n g another g i r l , dropped me q u i c k l y upon my r e t u r n . 29. Made me somewhat c o l d i n order to e r a d i c a t e the pain caused by j e a l o u s y , I'm much qui c k e r to step out of a r e l a t i o n s h i p i f I f e e l I'm unwanted, don't commit myself as e a s i l y on an emotional l e v e l . 30. My second husband remarrying and g e t t i n g custody of one or more of the c h i l d r e n . (Pain too!) 13 28. In t h e a t r e s c h o o l , I had a great d e a l of respect f o r my a c t i n g teacher. There was a 21 1 woman in the c l a s s with whom I made f r i e n d s on the f i r s t day. T h i s teacher was h i g h l y c r i t i c a l of me and seemed to favour my f r i e n d . T h i s a g i t a t e d me u n t i l I was f u r i o u s with both of them most of the time. A f t e r graduation - t h i s p a r t i c u l a r teacher h i r e d me, in shows she was d i r e c t i n g , i n p r e f e r e n c e to my " f r i e n d " . Now we are " f r i e n d s " again (or at l e a s t on pleasant terms). 29. P o s i t i v e : I was convinced I was a b e t t e r a c t r e s s than the woman being favoured but worked very hard to get the approval of t h i s teacher. Harder than I would have with someone who a l r e a d y thought I was g r e a t . Negative: I was very angry and tense a l o t of the time and found i t hard ( i f not impossible) to deal with e i t h e r of them i n a r a t i o n a l way. I l e t the experience c h i p away at my a l r e a d y shakey s e l f - image. 3 0 . T h i s i s a d i f f i c u l t question.. I think I've mellowed a b i t and I'm more c o n f i d e n t about my work. I'm more j e a l o u s how when my man raves on about another woman. But that doesn't r e a l l y make me hate her - j u s t watch c l o s e l y . I'm in a s i t u a t i o n now where I'm doing a show and one of the a c t r e s s e s i s doing a b r i l l i a n t job - but I'm j u s t e n j o y i n g her. I t ' s smug very s e l f - c o n f i d e n t people that t h r e a t e n me. 14 28. As an adolescent I was very j e a l o u s of one g i r l my b o y f r i e n d was c o n c u r r e n t l y s e e i n g . 29. I t consumed a l o t of energy and the r e l a t i o n s h i p d e t e r i o r a t e d . 3 0 . None. 15 28. A long term general', l o w - l e v e l fear of l o s i n g my husband to another woman, which i n t e n s i f i e d when he had an a f f a i r . 29. I l e a r n e d to l i k e myself. In terms of the r e l a t i o n s h i p over a p e r i o d of years, my husband and I made a conscious choice to be monogomous. 3 0 . I f my husband had an a f f a i r now, p a r t of my r e a c t i o n would be j e a l o u s y but I would d e a l with i t more sanely and i t would be f o r a s h o r t e r time. 16 28. In c h i l d h o o d - the thought that my twin would get something or be a b l e to do something I c o u l d n ' t . We had always done e v e r y t h i n g together, wore the same c l o t h e s (we're both female) e t c . u n t i l we were 16. V a r i o u s grandparents (never our parents) would s i n g l e 212 one out f o r preferment and t h i s would turn one of us i n t o something very nasty. 29. I t has caused a c e r t a i n amount of competition - not as f a r as we o u r s e l v e s are concerned but our spouses i . e . x has got a Ph.D., but y owns 2 houses and 2 c a r s . T h i s i s very s u b l i m i n a l - we never a c t u a l l y express i t i n words. 30. Neither of us can see what the other saw i n t h e i r husband (mine of 11 years, hers of 2). If something happened to one of our spouses, death, d i v o r c e e t c . and another man came on the scene who we both agreed f u l f i l l e d those q u a l i t i e s we admired most i n a man - compassion, e t c . - the other twin would f e e l very j e a l o u s . I t has happened that we found a man l i k e t h i s - f o r t u n a t e l y f o r our r e l a t i o n s h i p - he was a l r e a d y married to a c o u s i n . 17 28. When I found out my husband was married to another woman a l s o . 29. Ended i t that minute. 30. Near repeat of i t I guess. 18 28. I had a l o v e r and our r e l a t i o n s h i p had to be kept dead s e c r e t . An o l d e r woman fondl e d my l o v e r i n my presence ( a g a i n s t h i s wishes) and I • couldn't d e c l a r e that we had something going. (We were both s i n g l e so i t wasn't an " i l l i c i t " a f f a i r ) . 29. No p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s . Heightened f r u s t r a t i o n at not being able to be open about our a f f a i r . 30. I would only be as j e a l o u s as that now i f my husband f l i r t e d with another woman. A c t u a l l y , I'd be astounded r a t h e r than j e a l o u s because he' s- the- l e a s t f 1 i r t a t i o u s - man' P k-nowv W-ith" • any other man, I would probably answer d i f f e r e n t l y to the above q u e s t i o n s . At t h i s time i n my l i f e I f e e l very secure and have no reason to be j e a l o u s . 19 28. Watching the man I was s e x u a l l y i n v o l v e d with t a l k i n g i n t i m a t e l y f o r s e v e r a l hours with another woman. 29. I t made me more i n t e r e s t e d i n the man and w i l l i n g to make more of a committment to the r e l a t i o n s h i p . 30. I f a s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n reoccured I t h i n k my j e a l o u s y would be g r e a t e r now. 20 28. Seeing my s e r i o u s b o y f r i e n d t a l k i n g to an ex- g i r l f r i e n d that I d i d not l i k e . 213 29. E x a s p e r a t i o n on my b o y f r i e n d ' s p a r t . 30. An o l d g i r l f r i e n d of my husband's re-appearing on the scene and my husband being f r i e n d l y with her, even i f he was only being f r i e n d l y . 21 28. When I was 19 I became i n v o l v e d with a boy, who unknown to me, had a g i r l f r i e n d that l i v e d i n another c i t y . He married her a year or so l a t e r . 29. I lear n e d to be c a u t i o u s of people who a v o i d t e l l i n g the t r u t h - not those who l i e , but those who say nothing i n an attempt to p r o t e c t themselves from e x p l a i n i n g . 30. Now that I am married I would become j e a l o u s i f my husband began to see another woman or even i f i t was j u s t a one-night experience that r e s u l t e d from peer p r e s s u r e / d r i n k i n g / p a r t y i n g with the boys. 22 2.8. A f t e r being separated only 2 months my husband " s t a r t e d d a t i n g a good f r i e n d of mine. She had a good job, n i c e f i g u r e , and gorgeous c l o t h e s . I had a l l t h i s b efore I married. 29. The p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s were g r e a t e s t . I had to dea l with him d a t i n g other women. I t helped me to r e a l i z e "I am who I am". The only negative e f f e c t was that I no longer see her i n the same l i g h t as when we were f r i e n d s . 30. Probably i f my c h i l d r e n were always r a n t i n g and ra v i n g about how great daddy's new g i r l f r i e n d i s . I think I might f e e l somewhat threatened. 23 28. S i b l i n g r i v a l r y - younger s i s t e r was a t t r a c t i v e - c l e v e r e t c . 29. S t i l l a l i t t l e j e a l o u s - but d i s t a n c e decreases this--. 30. Seeing other f a m i l i e s enjoying f a m i l y a c t i v i t y without the s t r e s s a t t a c h e d to those i n our own. 24 28. Combination jealousy/anger - a f t e r 4 years of mates' i n f i d e l i t y we separated and continued r e l a t i o n s h i p l i v i n g i n separate d w e l l i n g s . Mate stood me up to go to a g a t h e r i n g at a f r i e n d ' s house so I went alone. He a r r i v e d l a t e r with woman he had been seeing while we l i v e d together and had p r e v i o u s l y s a i d he wasn't seeing her any more. 29. I t ended the r e l a t i o n s h i p . "Last straw" concept. Negative e f f e c t s - f i r s t time I r e a l l y f e l t h a t r e d and I react e d badly - threw g l a s s at him as he l e f t house. F e l t h o r r i b l e 214 for not being able to c o n t r o l myself. 30. To have c u r r e n t companion do a s i m i l a r a c t . Have someone abandon me at a s o c i a l event to f l i r t with o t h e r s . 25 28. Went to b o y f r i e n d ' s house to p i c k him up f o r prearranged date. Encountered him l e a v i n g with a woman with whom he'd had a r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the p a s t . Claimed he forgot the date, l e f t with other woman. 29. Negative e f f e c t s - am now c o n t i n u a l l y s u s p i c i o u s , i n s e c u r e , have very anxious f e e l i n g s whenever I go over to h i s house unexpectedly, always expect the worst. 30. Encountering him with someone e l s e at h i s house, i n an o b v i o u s l y sexual r e l a t i o n s h i p . 26 28. F i r s t husband l e f t me with my o l d e s t , longest f r i e n d (14 y e a r s ) . A f t e r s e v e r a l episodes of i n f i d e l i t y with others and e v e n t u a l l y t h i s f r i e n d . 29. 6 years l a t e r (to present). I cannot speak i n a c i v i l , calm f a s h i o n to e i t h e r of them. 30. For my new partner to commit the same t h i n g . 27 28. While pregnant, a former one night stand was w r i t i n g l e t t e r s and making phone c a l l s t r y i n g to c o n t a c t him. I phoned him while he was i n .... t o l d him about t h i s . Then went to where she was and t o l d her to stay c l e a r . 29. P o s i t i v e - have not had any problems with her s i n c e . I f e l t more secure. When I t o l d him about what I d i d , he supported me by not g e t t i n g mad about i t . Our r e l a t i o n s h i p was rocky at t h i s p o i n t . T h i s seemed to cement my s e c u r i t y that* he was'- with me' and only me;. • 30. I think I would have to f i n d him i n bed with someone other than me. 28 28. My husband was t r a v e l l i n g - i n a s s o c i a t i o n with h i s work and s t a y i n g at a h o t e l - when I c a l l e d to wish him a happy a n n i v e r s a r y I d i s c o v e r e d he was r e g i s t e r e d i n the same room with h i s work a s s o c i a t e - a woman! 29. P o s i t i v e : I took a h o l i d a y and spent four days with a b e a u t i f u l young man. Our marriage r e a d j u s t e d to a f r i e n d s h i p and although we are now d i v o r c e d we are s t i l l f r i e n d s who can t a l k to each other as we c o u l d not do before that i n c i d e n t . 30. I do not b e l i e v e there c o u l d be any i n c i d e n t now that c o u l d provoke the same r e a c t i o n . 215 29 28. - a d e s i r e to want b e t t e r l i v i n g s i t u a t i o n or m a t e r i a l t h i n g s . - a d e s i r e to want more a t t e n t i o n . 29. - i t brought us c l o s e r together, t a l k i n g about i t . 30. If my husband gave a t t e n t i o n to someone with a b e t t e r l i v i n g s i t u a t i o n . 30 28. I was on v a c a t i o n . B o y f r i e n d (I thought) took up with another woman. 29. P o s i t i v e - I have l e a r n e d not to be q u i t e so dependent on someone. Negative - d i s t r u s t of people. S t i l l f i n d i t very d i f f i c u l t to speak to woman i n v o l v e d , or even be i n the same room with her. 30. For a f r i e n d to win a m i l l i o n - d o l l a r l o t t e r y . 31 28. Meet ing past g i r l f r i e n d of my husband's who I. knew he had once been s e r i o u s about. 29. Had a. p o s i t i v e e f f e c t i n that i t taught me that the past had no s i g n i f i c a n c e on the primary r e l a t i o n s h i p . 30. If I f e l t my husband was i n t e r e s t e d and a t t r a c t e d to another woman. 32 28. When my husband dances with another g i r l younger than me and b e t t e r dancer. 29. Very negative - negative d i s c u s s i o n - negative view of myself sadness of my husband who enjoys dancing. 30. Same experience. 33 28. When I was about 20, there was a f e e l i n g of extreme j e a l o u s y towards a co-worker. She was c o n s i d e r a b l y o l d e r than !, but- my - husband admired her, and I f e l t I j u s t c o u l d n ' t compete. The d i f f i c u l t t h i n g was that I a l s o admired her and l i k e d her. I t was hard to understand the f e e l i n g s I had when my husband p r a i s e d her. 29. From t h i s I r e a l i z e d that i t was "O.K." f o r my husband to admire somebody e l s e f o r t h e i r good q u a l i t i e s , as long as there was no i l l r e f l e c t i o n on me. I have l e a r n e d that although some people "outshine" me, I am s t i l l an O.K. person. 30. I f my husband were to admire a c l o s e f r i e n d - and i t seemed to be more than a d m i r a t i o n ! If I f e l t that ;he was p l a c i n g me i n a p o s i t i o n where i t was necessary to compete f o r h i s a f f e c t i o n . 216 34 28. The man I l i v e d with stayed out a l l night with another woman. 29. Negative - d i d n ' t t r u s t the man (men?). P o s i t i v e - made me look c l o s e l y at myself to f i n d out why t h i s happened. E f f e c t - l e d to eventual s p l i t ^ u p . 30. I f I found my husband s l e e p i n g with another woman. 35 28. My husband's i n t e r e s t i n another woman who was younger, a t t r a c t i v e and i n t e l l i g e n t . 29. Mainly negative r e a c t i o n toward myself. Non- comprehension by my husband: i . e . what's a l l the fuss about? 30. My c h i l d r e n ' s p r e f e r e n c e for t h e i r f a t h e r ' s a t t e n t i o n . 36 28. A f r i e n d of mine whom I have been spending a l o t of time with s t a r t e d t a l k i n g about another woman he was making f r i e n d s with - s i n g l e parent, a r t i s t , e t c . I f e l t very insecure and f e l t he was comparing me to her even though we are not having an i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p I d i d n ' t want him to have one with her e i t h e r . 29. I t r e a l l y "gripped" me f o r a while - I became d i s t a n t with my f r i e n d when he t a l k e d of her and made s u b t l e snide remarks. I r e a l l y t r i e d , to work i t out without him - I met her f i n a l l y and f e l t much b e t t e r - I d i d n ' t care f o r her much and f e l t l e s s threatened. 30. I would f e e l badly i f my f r i e n d got i n v o l v e d i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p and c o n s t a n t l y t a l k e d about how wonderful she was and i f I at the same time was not i n v o l v e d i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p . 37 28. I cannot' remember a s p e c i f i c exper-ience-'-which stands out i n a memorable way. 29. In e a r l i e r years i t made me c l i n g y and p o s s e s s i v e . Now i t leads me to detach myself from my f e e l i n g s and thereby g i v e s me g r e a t e r freedom to love both people. 30. The g r e a t e s t j e a l o u s y comes when my c h i l d r e n p r e f e r a f r i e n d ' s company at a time which had been a s p e c i a l i n t i m a t e time f o r us i n the p a s t . 38 28. My l o v e r p l a n n i n g a t r i p out of the country. 29. C o n t r i b u t e d to break-up. 30. A s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n - where p a r t n e r i s " f r e e " to t r a v e l and I am not. 39 28. Sexual j e a l o u s y i n an insecure r e l a t i o n s h i p . 217 29. Helped to end an unstable and harmful r e l a t i o n s h i p . 30. If my husband was a t t r a c t e d to someone e l s e . 40 28. Contact (don't know to what degree of intimacy) between my husband and a former g i r l f r i e n d (to whom he was to be m a r r i e d ) . 29. Taught me that t r u s t of someone c l o s e to you, came from w i t h i n y o u r s e l f . 30. I don't think i t would happen. I b e l i e v e I have p r e t t y w e l l e l i m i n a t e d j e a l o u s y - as an unproductive emotion! 41 28. A younger p h y s i c a l l y more voluptuous woman with d e f i n i t e i n t e n t to make impression on my husband i n my very presence. 29. I f e l t h e l p l e s s and became more keenly aware of my p h y s i c a l shortcomings. I pouted a b i t but . s i n c e husband d i d not d i s p l a y l a s t i n g i n t e r e s t in other woman the episode was soon f o r g o t t e n . 30. I would be much more j e a l o u s i f my husband responded more v i g o r o u s l y to a come-on or i n i t i a t e d one h i m s e l f . For me to become extremely j e a l o u s the woman i n v o l v e d would have to be d e f i n i t e l y much b e t t e r l o o k i n g than myself. I f my husband showed i n t e r e s t i n a woman who was more p l a i n than myself I would p i t y him and would tend not to take him s e r i o u s l y . 42 28. Th i n k i n g that I was not a p p r e c i a t e d or loved by the one I l o v e . 29. Negative - r e s u l t e d i n angry words between 2 of us. P o s i t i v e - got us t a l k i n g and s t r a i g h t e n e d out the problem. 30. F i n d i n g out that my husband was f o o l i n g around: 43 28. A f t e r becoming pregnant by my b o y f r i e n d (now my husband) we separated f o r a year. During that year a c l o s e g i r l f r i e n d became very f r i e n d l y with him. 29. Between my husband and myself the experience i s no longer a negative one. I s t i l l cannot . a s s o c i a t e or even see t h i s former g i r l f r i e n d . 30. I f my husband were to become f r i e n d l y with t h i s p a r t i c u l a r g i r l a g a i n . Even a f r i e n d s h i p would cause j e a l o u s y . 44 28. Husband p r e f e r r e d to spend h i s time more and more with a group of f r i e n d s , s p e c i f i c a l l y with a c e r t a i n g i r l . T o l d me one day that he had f a l l e n in love with her. 218 29. I t destroyed my complete t r u s t I had i n him and made our marriage a f a r c e . The p o s i t i v e : I have s t a r t e d to focus on myself again, I l i v e by myself and f o r myself. 30. None, because I have not been a b l e to t r u s t anyone enough s i n c e , to warrant j e a l o u s y . 45 28. An admired person x o v e r t l y ignored me; d i d n ' t attend my performances although I had rehearsed with him e t c . . . But turned up at another student's performance. 29. P o s i t i v e e f f e c t s : I t r i e d to improve those s k i l l s which the person valued very h i g h l y . Negative e f f e c t s : an undercurrent f e e l i n g that a f f e c t e d our r e l a t i o n s h i p that indeed he was not f a i r and a f e e l i n g that I was not worth as much as I thought I was. 30. Any s i t u a t i o n i n which I would f e e l that I am l o s i n g the a t t e n t i o n of someone I regarded very h i g h l y . Male Su b j e c t s ' Responses 46 28. My g i r l f r i e n d l e f t me, and returned to her ex- l o v e r . 29. Negative - l o n e l i n e s s , s e l f - p i t y , sapped my mot i v a t i o n to work, so I q u i t . P o s i t i v e - a f t e r 3 weeks, found I c o u l d e a s i l y c r e a t e new r e l a t i o n s h i p s , b o l s t e r e d my conf i d e n c e toward d e f e a t i n g j e a l o u s y . 30. Same - g i r l f r i e n d l e aves me f o r another. 47 28. When a g i r l I had taken to a p a r t y l e f t with someone- e l s e without saying a n y t h i n g i 29. A primary r e l a t i o n s h i p was not i n v o l v e d , i t was c a s u a l . 30. I f my wife l e f t a s o c i a l g a t h e r i n g with someone e l s e without f i r s t f i l l i n g me i n on the p o s i t i o n I was l e f t i n . 48 28. In adulthood, an occ a s i o n where my l o v e r t o l d me that she had been intimate with another man she met at a conference. I t was a profound f e e l i n g of h u m i l i a t i o n , d i s l o y a l t y ( a t t r i b u t e d to h e r ) , r i v a l r y . 29. I t was the " l a s t straw" in a f a l t e r i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . We were never i n t i m a t e a f t e r t h a t , although we have met on c o r d i a l , f r i e n d l y terms s i n c e . For myself i t was a "watershed" 219 p e r i o d in which I e v e n t u a l l y matured out of the b o y - g e t s - g i r l syndrome. I decided to a b s t a i n from sexual r e l a t i o n s u n t i l I was capable of great e r emotional intimacy and self-knowledge, with one exc e p t i o n (that echoed the s i t u a t i o n above) I was c e l i b a t e f o r j u s t over a year, entered group therapy, became more s o c i a l and l e s s p o s s e s s i v e . 30. I doubt that any s i t u a t i o n c o u l d evoke a s i m i l a r or more extreme j e a l o u s r e a c t i o n . I n f i d e l i t y on the part of my wi f e , f o r example, would s u r e l y evoke j e a l o u s y , but I b e l i e v e that extreme j e a l o u s y ( i n in t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s or elsewhere) stems from p e r s o n a l i n s e c u r i t y , and I now f e e l more aware of my i n s e c u r i t i e s . 49 28. My wife had an extended (8 months) a f f a i r . 29. Broke us up f o r a year and u n s e t t l e d us f o r four more. 30. The same s i t u a t i o n . 50 28. Wife and best f r i e n d s l e e p i n g t o g e t h e r . 29. Ended marriage and began a c o u r t s h i p . 30. Another man being (becoming) the f a t h e r r o l e of my c h i l d r e n . 51 28. Don't r e c a l l any extreme experience of j e a l o u s y . Only f e e l i n g of j e a l o u s y i s i n a very general sense with regard to people who l i v e a more d e s i r a b l e l i f e s t y l e , b e t t e r sex l i f e , w e l l behaved k i d s , e t c . 29. Not a p p l i c a b l e . 30. (no repsonse) 52 28. (No response) 29. (No response) 30. (No response) 53 28. 1) Appearances 2) Work r e l a t i o n s h i p s 29. 1) Lack of s e l f c o n f i d e n c e and few f r i e n d s 2) Created a tremendous need f o r accomplishment - over a c h i e v e r . 30. Someone who I f e e l i s l e s s capable than I, yet i s more s u c c e s s f u l . 54 28. When my stepmother would o f f e r s p e c i a l food behind my back to my s t e p s i s t e r s e t c . 29. Hate that l a s t s to t h i s day, or should perhaps I c a l l i t very bad moments to remember. 30. Well I c o n s i d e r myself self-made, f i n a n c i a l l y and f a m i l y - w i s e . Perhaps, i f I wouldn't have a f i n a n c i a l l y secure f e e l i n g I would f e e l j e a l o u s 220 towards some of my f r i e n d s or f e l l o w workers. 55 28. Only 1 experience - at age 17 - the g i r l I took to a high school graduation dance deserted me for another guy. 29. We were f r i e n d s before and are s t i l l f r i e n d s now - I was upset at the time, but got over i t . I had n e a r l y f o r g o t t e n the i n c i d e n t u n t i l t h i s survey. 30. (No response) 56 28. As i t happens so i n f r e q u e n t l y , I have no memory of 'the most extreme experience' of j e a l o u s y . One t h i n g I remember: being i n a back seat while a f r i e n d 'made out' with a g i r l I d e s i r e d . 29. I t made me angry and depressed, s u l l e n and d i s t a n t . I wanted to be alone and d i d n ' t f e e l much l i k e p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n group a c t i v i t i e s with the f r i e n d ( s ) I was then with - f o r a day or so. 30. L o s i n g a job to a f r i e n d whom I knew to be l e s s q u a l i f i e d f o r the p o s i t i o n - being r e j e c t e d by a p u b l i s h i n g house that accepted a work of a f r i e n d I thought to be of l e s s e r s i g n i f i c a n c e than mine. A c t u a l l y , t h i s would probably make me angry, r e s e n t f u l - maybe more envious than j e a l o u s . 57 28. When I saw a f r i e n d of mine go a f t e r a g i r l f r i e n d that I had my eye on. 29. I became f r i e n d s with the g i r l and the boy and I became d i s t a n t . 30. I f my wife brought up our c h i l d r e n with her s i d e up of the f a m i l y i n f l u e n c e . T h i s would make^me- angry - t h r n M ng that- my f a m i l y • isn-'t good enough. 58 28. Sexual deception - i n f i d e l i t y . 29. Ended i t . 30. D i f f i c u l t to say - j e a l o u s y tendency now supplanted to d i s s a p p o i n t e d r e c o g n i t i o n and acceptance of r e a l i t y . 59 28. As a young teen (12-13), a neighbour boy was endowed with every m a t e r i a l i s t luxury money c o u l d buy - I was not so endowed and he made sure I remembered t h a t . 29. Even i f the person i n q u e s t i o n ' s l i f e had not become as d i r e c t i o n l e s s as i t d i d , I would have s t i l l l e a r n e d the p o i n t l e s s n e s s of simply a c q u i r i n g " p o s s e s s i o n s . " 221 30. If a person were to e x h i b i t a great deal of s k i l l at a musical instrument without p r a c t i c e , but simply by pure innate t a l e n t (which I do not have much of')' I o f t e n become envious and s e l f - c r i t i c a l . 60 28. My g i r l f r i e n d had a r e l a t i o n s h i p with another male. 29. P o s i t i v e - t o t a l l y c u r t a i l e d any other r e l a t i o n s h i p s I may have had or t h i n k i n g of having. Negative - the f e e l i n g of t r u s t was somewhat ruptured. 30. If I was having a continued i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p and my partner was c a r r y i n g on an a f f a i r with someone e l s e . 61 28. When someone took my g i r l f r i e n d and at the same time got a pa r t I had been promised i n a p l a y . 29. I saw, e v e n t u a l l y , that he was b e t t e r f o r both (the p a r t and the g i r l ) so u l t i m a t e l y they had my b l e s s i n g and I am now q u i t e f r i e n d l y with both (him and her).. 30. If someone was chosen f o r something that I f e l t more q u a l i f i e d to do. 62 28. A woman I know bought a new j a c k - k n i f e f o r her son which was n i c e r than the one I owned. I t o l d him I was j e a l o u s of him having such a ni c e k n i f e . 29. I t made him a p p r e c i a t e the g i f t even more. 30. I cannot imagine j e a l o u s y being an a c t i v e f a c t o r i n my l i f e . 63 28. My f i r s t g i r l f r i e n d l i k e d someone e l s e . 29. (No response) 30. My- spouse- to fa-fee^a-"l/o-veu'-o.s*'leaver 64 28. My f i r s t l o v e r , was an extremely j e a l o u s person and was always checking up on me, she was very s u s p i c i o u s . I r o n i c a l l y she made i t with a trumpet p l a y e r from a very good rock group, I was s i c k with b e t r a y a l , anger and j e a l o u s y . 29. P o s i t i v e l y i t ended the r e l a t i o n s h i p as we knew i t and s h a t t e r e d a l l the inane i l l u s i o n s I had been saddled with from my l e a r n i n g up u n t i l that p o i n t ( i e . love) i n i t s narrowest senses. 30. Perhaps i f someone were to show extreme i n t e r e s t i n my partner and there was some r e c i p r o c a t i o n my i d l e thoughts c o u l d be aroused. 65 28. My g i r l f r i e n d (now my wife) wrote a l e t t e r (I 222 was going to school i n ..., she was going to school i n ...) and t o l d me she had gone on a " c a s u a l " date with another f e l l o w . 29. Neg - I became somewhat i l l and l i s t l e s s f o r s e v e r a l days. Pos - we d i s c u s s e d the matter. My je a l o u s y i n d i c a t e d to her that I was s e r i o u s about her. 30. If I found out that my wife cared more about another male than myself. 66 28. G i r l f r i e n d d i s c o v e r e d d a t i n g another guy. 29. P o s i t i v e - made me aware that I was not as i n d i s p e n s i b l e as I thought. Negative - made me not t r u s t women anymore. 30. F i n d i n g my present g i r l f r i e n d i n t i m a t e with someone e l s e . 67 28. Separated wife going out with an o l d b o y f r i e n d (very.minor j e a l o u s response, but I was aware of i t ) . 29. May have i n t r o d u c e d a very minor b i t of s t r a i n i n t o an otherwise extremely amicable s e p a r a t i o n . . I emphasize the "minor": i t i s hard l y worthy of comment. 30. Cannot v i s u a l i z e any s i t u a t i o n at the moment, sin c e I have no c l o s e c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p with anyone. 68 28. I t r y not to dwell on any p a r t i c u l a r event or i n t e r a c t i o n that makes me f e e l j e a l o u s , however, in g e n e r a l , s i t u a t i o n s where another i n d i v i d u a l i s i n my eyes more s u c c e s s f u l ; be i t in t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with other people or i n what they do w e l l c o u l d cause j e a l o u s y . No event, other than the immediate one causing j e a l o u s y , has been' more1' extreme' 'than the last'. 29. A l l such experiences make me s t r i v e harder to achieve something that others can a t t a i n but I f e e l I can't. 30. (No response) 69 28. An extremely i n t e n s e , prolonged, yet tenuous r e l a t i o n s h i p ; i n which p a r t n e r c a s u a l l y expresses a t t r a c t i o n f o r another male p e r c e i v e d by me to be a more accomplished, dynamic and capable i n d i v i d u a l than myself. 29. Pos: s h a r i n g f e e l i n g s with p a r t n e r . Neg: a f t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p had ended the event c o n t r i b u t e d to the f e e l i n g s t hat the partner had been i n s i n c e r e and ( d i s ) h o n e s t i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p (with h e r s e l f and me). 30. Present p a r t n e r changing and subsequently 223 f i n d i n g . t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p d i d n ' t meet her needs whereas someone e l s e c o u l d . 70 28. F i n d i n g my g i r l f r i e n d i n t i m a t e l y dancing with another person. 29. Negative e f f e c t : break r e l a t i o n s h i p s with f r i e n d s . P o s i t i v e e f f e c t : t r y to be l e s s p o s s e s s i v e . 30. At t h i s time i n l i f e I do not have any f e e l i n g of j e a l o u s y . 71 28. A f t e r seeing my f i r s t and most important person in l i f e , i n an i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p to provoke my senses. 29. As a s i d e e f f e c t helped me to get myself more together. Negative part was the t r u s t which I c o u l d not share 100% with her anymore. 30. Unknown at the moment. 72 28.. P e r c e p t i o n that my h i g h s c h o o l sweetheart was i n t e r e s t e d i n another f e l l o w . 29. L i t t l e e f f e c t as j e a l o u s y d i d not manifest i t s e l f to person i n v o l v e d . J e a l o u s y proved unfounded. 30. S i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n as d e s c r i b e d i n 28 above. 73 28. My wife spending an evening j u s t t a l k i n g with a mutual man f r i e n d who was fond of her. 29. R e a l i z e d that my j e a l o u s y was a r e s u l t of not t r u s t i n g my spouse - l e a r n e d to be more t r u s t i n g and r e s p e c t f u l of her c o n t a c t with other men. 30. My wife becoming i n v o l v e d i n a long-term emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p with another man. 224 APPENDIX E Responses to Item 120 225 The f o l l o w i n g are s u b j e c t s ' verbatim responses to q u e s t i o n n a i r e item 120: 120. How would you d e f i n e j e a l o u s y ? Subject Female S u b j e c t s ' Responses 01 ( j e a l o u s y i s ) fear of not having the r e q u i r e d p r o p o r t i o n of a loved-one's a f f e c t i o n s - i n s e c u r i t y . 02 an automatic response f o l l o w e d by a p a r t i c u l a r st imulus. 03 an emotional response to a s i t u a t i o n which one cannot c o n t r o l by l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s . 04 d e s p e r a t e l y wanting to be l i k e someone e l s e (which i n c l u d e s having " t h i n g s " he/she has or having p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , e t c . ) which i s i n h e r e n t l y a f u t i l e d e s i r e . 05 an" emotion based on paranoia and i n s e c u r i t y . 06 the most h o r r i b l e pre-occupying emotion to expe r i e n c e . There i s no cure or way out. 07 a p h y s i c a l or emotional r e a c t i o n in response to a fe a r of l o s i n g your l o v e r (etc.) to someone e l s e . You can a l s o be envious or ( i . e . ) j e a l o u s of m a t e r i a l t h i n g s someone e l s e has. 08 f e e l i n g insecure or threatened by the l o s s of someone or something, hence p o s s e s s i v e and wanting to hang on, have a l l to-- one's- s e l f . 09 an i r r a t i o n a l , p a i n f u l , c r i p p l i n g emotion which c r e a t e s i n me deep f e e l i n g s of d e s p a i r and powerlessness. I t only e x i s t s i n r e l a t i o n s h i p to a man I have decided to l o v e , surrendered t o , and then been betrayed or abandoned. 10 a negative emotional r e a c t i o n to someone or some s i t u a t i o n i n which you f e e l d e p r i v e d . 11 an emotion that b r i n g s on f r u s t r a t i o n , anger, and r e t a l i a t i o n . The emotion i s caused by b a s i c d i s t r u s t in my case a c t u a t e d by a more s u c c e s s f u l r i v a l . 12 the f e e l i n g aroused when one t h i n k s one i s l o s i n g 226 something dear to one's s e l f and i s h e l p l e s s to do anything to regain i t . 13 i s wanting a f f e c t i o n that i s being given to someone e l s e . 14 the d e s i r e to be something you are not. 15 the r e a c t i o n to l o s s of a f f e c t i o n . 16 -a severe amount of i n d i g n a t i o n a r i s i n g through r i v a l r y with someone c l o s e to myself. (I have never f e l t j e a l o u s of people I don't know.) 17 emotions that are brought to s u r f a c e by innermost thoughts and i d e a l s of what i s r i g h t and/or ac c e p t a b l e to one's s e l f . 18 . i n answering, I have concentrated~on the sexual aspect of j e a l o u s y , not on non-sexual r i v a l r y or c o v e t i n g . T h e r e f o r e , my d e f i n i t i o n of s p e c i f i c j e a l o u s y i s fear of c o m p e t i t i o n f o r someone's a f f e c t i o n , sexual a t t e n t i o n . 19 an emotional response u s u a l l y i n t e n s e and p a i n f u l to an imagined or r e a l s i t u a t i o n i n v o l v i n g your mate/sexual partner and another person. 20 a h o r r i d awful f e e l i n g . 21 doubt/concern/confusion about one's own p o s i t i o n h e l d i n respect to that of another whether i t be concerning m a t e r i a l / m a t e r n a l matters. 22 a f e e l i n g you get when someone e l s e i s what you always" wanted' to- be or were. 23 envious of another's person. 24 a f e e l i n g of being l e f t out of a p l e a s a n t s i t u a t i o n with someone you l o v e . 25 a r e a c t i o n of hurt and b e t r a y a l to an a c t i o n of i n s e n s i t i v i t y on the p a r t of a person I care a great d e a l about. 26 i n s e c u r i t y . 27 f e a r of l o s i n g someone you love to someone e l s e . 28 n a t u r a l r e a c t i o n to being excluded from an i n t i m a t e p a r t of a person's l i f e whom you had t r i e d to share 227 a l l with - a fear of not being " g i v i n g " enough to p r o v i d e that person with enough. 29 a d e s i r e f o r b e t t e r t h i n g s / s i t u a t i o n s e t c . 30 envy of another person's s i t u a t i o n s , r e l a t i o n s , or p o s s e s s i o n s ; but whereas envy i s not u s u a l l y n e g a t i v e , j e a l o u s y d e f i n i t e l y i s n e g a t i v e , and o f t e n can become a problem f o r a l l concerned. 31 an envy of another person's p o s i t i o n or a t t r i b u t e s . 32 a f e e l i n g of inadequacy. 33 a f e e l i n g of resentment towards another person. You f e e l they pose a t h r e a t to you i n some way. 34 c o n d i t i o n e d emotion based on i n s e c u r i t y and low s e l f - e s t e e m . 35 i n a b i l i t y to t r u l y accept c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s / r e l a t i o n s h i p s . 36 a deep i n s e c u r i t y about another person and t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s that don't i n c l u d e you. 37 the f e e l i n g I have.when I see someone e l s e r e c e i v i n g the a t t e n t i o n of a l o v e d one which I thought was the kind of a t t e n t i o n only given to me. 38 anger at i n j u s t i c e of not being loved enough. 39 (no response) 40 being too p r o t e c t i v e of the c o n t a c t s someone you ca-re for- has' w.ith^ others*. 41 f e a r of l o s i n g my husband to a more b e a u t i f u l woman; envy of another g i r l ' s good l o o k s . 42 a f e e l i n g that r e s u l t s when you are c o v e t i n g some s i t u a t i o n or being unable to make someone the way you want them to be. 43 a very intense emotional hurt which can u s u a l l y be helped by d i s c u s s i n g i t with a c l o s e person. 44 the fear of (and r e a c t i o n to) l o s i n g someone or something h i g h l y v a l u e d . 45 a f e e l i n g of having l o s t the a t t e n t i o n of someone h e l d i n high regard or esteem. 228 Male Su b j e c t s ' Responses 46 p o s s e s s i v e n e s s , and a p e r c e p t i o n that.one's possessory i n t e r e s t i s c h a l l e n g e d ; or a d e s i r e to a q u i r e something or someone in the p o s s e s s i o n of another. 47 f e a r i n g complete l o s s of a contact I was f e e l i n g very p o s i t i v e about. 48 r i v a l r y , sense of ( p o s s i b l e ) l o s s , envy, fear of being alone or i n f e r i o r . 49 fear of l o s s (to another person or p u r s u i t ) of loved one ( w i f e ) . 50 s e p a r a t i o n a n x i e t y based on mother's a f f e c t i o n s i n my case. 51 f e e l i n g envious of other persons being i n a s i t u a t i o n I would l i k e to be i n . . 52 (no response) 53 a h o s t i l e emotion toward one who I, at the time, f e e l to have an advantage over me. I. have never experienced j e a l o u s y i n an i n t r a - p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . 54 b u i l t - i n p o s s e s s i v e i n s t i n c t . 55 an i r r a t i o n a l f e e l i n g of p o s s e s s i v e n e s s of another person. 56 r e s e n t f u l and envious f e e l i n g s and/or behavior; a f e a r f u l n e s s of l o s i n g a f f e c t i o n ; covetousness or guarded a t t i t u d e toward someone's at t a i n m e n t s / some person, with p o s s i b l e c o r o l l a r y of p e r c e i v e d r i v a l r y . 57 f e e l i n g that you're not good enough. 58 emotional response to an u n f a i r d e c e p t i o n or i n t e r f e r e n c e - being f o r c e d to p l a y with h a l f a deck. 59 somewhat i r r a t i o n a l - f o r me a r e a l gut f e e l i n g of envy. 60 s i c k n e s s . 229 61 the f e e l i n g you get when someone e l s e i s i n the p o s i t i o n ( s ) you p r i z e . 62 envy with regard to another's a f f e c t i o n . 63 n a t u r a l r e s u l t when one who i s t r u s t e d with one's innermost f e e l i n g s betrays the r e l a t i o n s h i p . 64 emotional d i s e a s e common i n people with narrow emotional experience and f e e l i n g s of i n s e c u r i t y . 65 an emotional r e a c t i o n ( o f t e n manifested p h y s i c a l l y (e.g.) s t r e s s response) to the r e a l or p e r c e i v e d f e a r of l o s s of a f f e c t i o n . 66 a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of one's own s e l f esteem. 67 the f e e l i n g " of i n s e c u r i t y and" pain induced by the thought that someone e l s e has a g r e a t e r a t t r a c t i o n to one's p a r t n e r than o n e s e l f , even when r a t i o n a l l y , that a t t r a c t i o n cannot be j u s t i f i e d . 68 an emotional s t a t e i n i t i a t e d by a f e e l i n g of inadequacy or hopelessness coupled with someone e l s e ' s a b i l i t y to cope e f f e c t i v e l y with the s i t u a t i o n . 69 f e e l i n g of i n s e c u r i t y a r i s i n g from s i t u a t i o n s where an impending l o s s of an i n t i m a t e p a r t n e r i s p e r c e i v e d (be i t r e a l or imaginary) and the a g g r e s s i v e r e a c t i o n s which stem from the f e e l i n g s of i n s e c u r i t y . 70 f e e l i n g of p o s s e s s i v e n e s s . 71 the extreme of love or care f o r somebody or something i s the s t a r t i n g p o i n t of j e a l o u s y . 72 f e a r of d i m i n u t i o n or l o s s of someone or something's r e l a t i o n s h i p r e l a t i v e to me. 73 a lack of t r u s t i n your p a r t n e r . 230 APPENDIX "F Responses to Item 123 231 The f o l l o w i n g are s u b j e c t s ' verbatim responses to q u e s t i o n n a i r e item 123: Other i n s i g h t s / t h o u g h t s / e x p e r i e n c e s I have had with/about j e a l o u s y and wish to share at t h i s time. D i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l , r e l i g i o u s , l i n g u i s t i c or any other c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i l l be g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d . I f , f o r example, you are aware of a few or s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t words for j e a l o u s y i n other languages p l e a s e present them and e x p l a i n t h e i r d i s t i n c t i o n . Subject Female Sub j e c t s ' Responses 02 I d i d the "EST t r a i n i n g " and found i t to be the most i n c r e d i b l e i n s i g h t i n t o my j e a l o u s y ever. I am now f i n e with my j e a l o u s y . 03 I have known more o v e r t l y j e a l o u s / p o s s e s s i v e males, than females. I t seems- s i m i l a r to me to anger or g r i e f or s e n t i m e n t a l i t y -- an emotion not e a s i l y . d i s c i p l i n e d . 04 I f e e l I have "overcome" j e a l o u s y because I have come to s t r o n g l y b e l i e v e that every i n d i v i d u a l i s unique and has h i s own p l a c e i n the scheme of t h i n g s and I c o u l d n ' t p o s s i b l y s t r i v e / w a n t to be l i k e anyone e l s e . 05 Jealousy i s based on an insecure c l i n g i n g a t t i t u d e . It p l a c e s a q u a n t i t a t i v e q u a l i t y on love i . e . " i f you love him then you must t h e r e f o r e love me l e s s " . T h i s i s f a u l t y t h i n k i n g , but common! When I look to my mate for a p p r o v a l , I i n t e r p r e t h i s " a p r o v a l " of another woman ( e s p e c i a l l y one that I am a t t r a c t e d to) as a r e j e c t i o n of me. R e s u l t ? -- rage, i n d i g n a t i o n , f e e l i n g s of i n f e r i o r i t y and h u m i l i a t i o n . I can accept h i s f l i r t a t i o n s i f I f e e l s t rong, a t t r a c t i v e and " n o t i c e d " . I f I f e e l u gly, weak and i n s e c u r e , I cannot t o l e r a t e even m i l d f l i r t a t i o n s on h i s p a r t . 06 To love someone deeply i s the most wonderful human exper i e n c e . Fear of l o s i n g that love to someone e l s e b r i n g s upon j e a l o u s y . N a t u r a l l y the p h y s i c a l and emotional r e a c t i o n s are going to be i n t e n s e , and the f r u s t r a t i n g t h i n g about i t i s that you have no c o n t r o l of your emotions or your s i t u a t i o n . Great q u e s t i o n n a i r e ! I enjoyed p a r t i c i p a t i n g . P.S. Even to f i l l out a q u e s t i o n n a i r e about the most intense experience which occ u r r e d some 13 years ago, I s t i l l can f e e l the pain at the thought of what I went 232 through at the time. 08 When I was a c h i l d , my mother, whose E n g l i s h was not very good, t a l k e d o f j e a l o u s y when she meant envy. I t was years before I c l a r i f i e d the c o n f u s i o n -- i n t e r e s t i n g example of how language can shape concepts and hence f e e l i n g s . 09 I r e a l i z e now that I don't f e e l j e a l o u s because I a v o i d , at great c o s t s , those s i t u a t i o n s which would b r i n g j e a l o u s y (by my d e f i n i t i o n ) about. I have yet • to d e a l e f f e c t i v e l y with the f e e l i n g . T h i s i s , a c t u a l l y , a thought provoking q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 12 My f i r s t husband had a f f a i r s c o n s t a n t l y d u r i n g the 6 years we were l i v i n g t o g e t h e r . I came to expect t h i s as commonplace in our r e l a t i o n s h i p , and j e a l o u s y became a very secondary i s s u e .to me next to honesty (which I f e l t was t o t a l l y l a c k i n g ) . I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to get j e a l o u s when; I f e e l there i s love being manifested between two people — my j e a l o u s y i s u s u a l l y aroused when I p e r c i e v e (wrongly or r i g h t l y ) a l o t of secondary motives — e.g. revenge, wanting to i n f l i c t p a i n , f l i g h t , avoidance, e t c . and I f e e l caught up i n the c e n t r e of i t . 13 I u s u a l l y t r y to a v o i d s i t u a t i o n s where j e a l o u s y c o u l d occur. I t h i n k I u s u a l l y t r y to turn i t around so I don't f e e l j e a l o u s . I t ' s j u s t too f r u s t r a t i n g . 16 B r i t i s h upper middle c l a s s -- j e a l o u s y i s d e f i n i t e l y a no-no. One must not give way to a l l those f e e l i n g s — and so I tended to make up a more acc e p t a b l e emotion to account fo r my behaviour -- l i k e tiredness-. 19 Jealousy o f t e n seems to be " p r o j e c t i o n " . I have a l s o n o t i c e d that the husbands who are promiscuous o f t e n tend to be very j e a l o u s and p o s s e s s i v e of t h e i r wives. 21 My experiences of being j e a l o u s have g e n e r a l l y been very m i l d . Most occasions that I have been j e a l o u s have been those i n which I misunderstood my b o y f r i e n d ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p with a p a r t i c u l a r g i r l -- he f a i l e d to e x p l a i n the s i t u a t i o n thoroughly. 22 I f e e l j e a l o u s y i s a p e r f e c t l y n a t u r a l r e a c t i o n and i f d e a l t with p r o p e r l y , i t can h e l p you understand y o u r s e l f a whole l o t b e t t e r . 233 24 My present companion communicates h i s f e e l i n g s w i t h i n a day or two of t h e i r a r r i v a l . I t helps me to understand h i s i n s e c u r i t i e s and g i v e s me confidence that he w i l l a l s o understand my f e e l i n g s of j e a l o u s y when they s u r f a c e . 26 In my o p i n i o n , j e a l u o s y i s j u s t a symptom of i n s e c u r i t y . At t h i s time in my l i f e , I do not f e e l j e a l o u s y because I am i n a very secure r e l a t i o n s h i p and f e e l very c o n f i d e n t re my own l i f e ( e ducation, s e l f - e s t e e m , e t c . ) . 27 I f e e l i n my younger days that I was extremely j e a l o u s when with someone, but I f e e l t h i s was due to my i n s e c u r i t y . I no longer f e e l t h i s as I f e e l secure with the r e l a t i o n s h i p I have. 31 I t c o u l d be that I'm not very j e a l o u s as I've never been co n f r o n t e d with very many s i t u a t i o n s where j e a l o u s y would a r i s e . 33 J e a l o u s y seems to be a r e s u l t of a f e e l i n g of inadequacy i n one's s e l f . I think people who are s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r own s e l f , tend to be l e s s j e a l o u s . T h i s i n c l u d e s knowing what you a r e , and e i t h e r a c c e p t i n g what you are, or making an e f f o r t to improve y o u r s e l f . There i s no need to be j e a l o u s of o t h e r s , i f the q u a l i t i e s they posses are not what you d e s i r e anyway. 34 Jealousy can be removed by a l l o w i n g one's true love to emerge — love based in t r u t h as opposed to a n t i c i p a t e d rewards -- I have experienced p e r i o d s of no j e a l o u s y . 35 As I g e t - o l d e r , j e a l o u s y af f e c t s me' f a r less-, and the causes are completely d i f f e r e n t . 36 I t h i n k the more d e f i n e d and secure a r e l a t i o n s h i p or f r i e n d s h i p i s , the l e s s need I f e e l to be j e a l o u s . That holds even t r u e r f o r how secure and c o n f i d e n t one i s with o n e s e l f . That i s what I analyse when I f e e l j e a l o u s . 37 I f i n d j e a l o u s y to be the o p p o s i t e of l o v e . When I f e e l one I cannot f e e l the other at the same time. Hate and love can l i v e together though. T h e r e f o r e , i f I am f e e l i n g j e a l o u s , I am not l o v i n g the other person and that i s m_ problem and I can act on t h a t . I t may be that when I f i n d my love f e e l i n g s again I f i n d that I might a l s o need to do something other than what I wanted -- l i k e get busy doing something 234 on my own i n s t e a d of sh a r i n g an experience with that other person. Often I fear l o s i n g the shared experience and indeed the fear i s r e a l and w e l l founded and what I must accept i s l o s i n g an imagined or a n t i c i p a t e d e xperience. 39 When people are j e a l o u s they u s u a l l y have good rea.son to be; such f e e l i n g s p o i n t to d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with one's s e l f , one's r e l a t i o n s h i p s , e t c . , that are hea l t h y to r e a l i z e . 40 In Mombasa (Kenya) both men and women accept the f a c t that during t h e i r l i v e s , they w i l l be a t t r a c t e d ( s e x u a l l y ) to people other than t h e i r permanent p a r t n e r . I f t h i s a t t r a c t i o n r e s u l t s i n sexual intimacy with people, other than the permanent par t n e r (a cause of j e a l o u s y i n Canadians), i t i s u s u a l l y viewed as part o f . l i f e . Because of my con t a c t with people from Mombasa, and from l i v i n g t h e r e , I now f e e l that sexual c o n t a c t i s only one aspect of a r e l a t i o n s h i p . I thi n k that i n Canada, there i s too much emphasis p l a c e d on the sexual p a r t of a r e l a t i o n s h i p -- what about f r i e n d s h i p , co- o p e r a t i o n , mutual g o a l s , to name only a few other important t h i n g s ? By becoming j e a l o u s when your p a r t n e r has sexual c o n t a c t with another, but not being j e a l o u s when there i s a warm f r i e n d s h i p means that your f r i e n d s h i p with your p a r t n e r i s not as important as your sexual r e l a t i o n s h i p . 41 I am convinced that I value p h y s i c a l beauty as much a I do because my mother was c o n s i d e r e d to be very good-looking i n her c u l t u r e (Yugoslavs l i k e sturdy dark women with a l a r g e bosom). She had a n i c e f i g u r e , a p r e t t y face, b e a u t i f u l s t r a i g h t white t e e t h , l o v e l y legs-. Although she got f a t a f t e r I was born, her image as being b e a u t i f u l (self-image and view of people around her) p e r s i s t e d . I was a s i c k l y c h i l d and nothing was done to d i s p e l l my self-image of being a runt who u n f o r t u n a t e l y grew up to be f l a t - c h e s t e d as w e l l , with crooked t e e t h and an u n f l a t t e r i n g nose. Although I have s i n c e come to the c o n c l u s i o n that I'm probably not much worse- l o o k i n g than my mom ( s t i l l s l i m a f t e r two c h i l d r e n , with l e g s l i k e hers, n i c e h a i r , impressive eyes) what has been p l a n t e d i n my c h i l d h o o d s t i l l p ains me when I f e e l threatened by a t r u l y b e a u t i f u l " w e l l - developed" woman. Unless a mother can pass on to her daughter that the p h y s i c a l appearance of her c h i l d i s d e f i n i t e l y a t t r a c t i v e but not r e a l l y that important that c h i l d may have problems i n the je a l o u s y area. U n f o r t u n a t e l y I f i n d t h a t I am 235 a l r e a d y r e p e a t i n g some of my mother's mistakes. My own daughter i s an a t t r a c t i v e c h i l d but I wouldn't c a l l her gorgeous. I c a t c h myself saying " l i t t l e f a t t y " and r e f e r r i n g to the width of her nose. T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e has made me more aware of the f a c t that I have to watch what I'm saying to and about her. I do t e l l her she has b e a u t i f u l h a i r and b e a u t i f u l eyes. E i f e r s u c h t (German f o r jea l o u s y ) d e f i n e d i n the German Brockhaus d i c t i o n a r y as "a pass i o n a t e s t r i v i n g f o r so l e p o s s e s s i o n with a fear of every competitor". Ljubosumnost Slo v e n i a n (Yugoslavian) -- l i t e r a l l y " s u s p i c i o n of l o v e " ( i . e . , a s u s p e c t i n g of your l o v e r ' s love f o r someone e l s e ) . 44 I t i s not good to deny one's own f e e l i n g s and be the martyr of the f a m i l y . They w i l l not a p p r e c i a t e i t b u t . w i l l walk a l l over you. 45 Jealousy i s very c o n t e x t u a l and the qu e s t i o n s do not address the v a r y i n g c o n t e x t s -- (e.g., i n a mentoring c o n t e x t ) . Male Sub j e c t s ' Responses 48 Re #28 -- while the event d e s c r i b e d was a profound i n s t a n c e of j e a l o u s y i n adulthood, there i s another anecdote that comes to mind. When I was i n grade 8 (aged 13) I took a g i r l to the school prom. When another f e l l o w "cut i n " d u r i n g a dance, I walked o u t s i d e with a few f r i e n d s and a f t e r complaining about t h i s " r i v a l " , I p l a c e d a kick a g a i n s t the school w a l l , a s o r t of ritual/mock d i s p l a y of aggre s s i o n and po s s e s s i o n a g a i n s t my r i v a l dancing ' i n s i d e . K i c k i n g , you see, was a l a r g e part of the--- "hard rock" o r i e n t a t i o n ... where I was r a i s e d . And so was the importance of a d v e r t i s i n g your r i g h t s over "your g i r l " a g a i n s t c o m p e t i t o r s . G e n e r a l l y , I do b e l i e v e that j e a l o u s y i s elemental and t h e r e f o r e not u n n a t u r a l . I hope your study taps i n t o the c u l t u r a l e x p e c t a t i o n s of j e a l o u s y as w e l l as ways i n which e x t r a o r d i n a r y j e a l o u s y can be a l t e r e d . F i n a l l y , although I've responded i n terms of sexual j e a l o u s y ( r e a l or imagined) i t i s important to r e a l i z e that j e a l o u s y emerges i n a host of other s i t u a t i o n s ( i n t e l l i g e n c e , d r i v e , n u r t u r i n g a b i l i t i e s , w it, ad i n f i n i t u m ) . 50 To the extent one gi v e s power away i n one's l i f e -- one then becomes obsessed with how that power i s being used. 236 54 German t r a n s l a t i o n : e i f e r s u c h t i g f o r envy or je a l o u s y ? 55 I think: j e a l o u s y i s "bad" but "normal". U n d e s i r a b l e but u s u a l . 56 J e a l o u s y i s something I d e f i n i t e l y know I experience l e s s than most people. I've oten caught p a r t i c u l a r h e l l f o r not f e e l i n g j e a l o u s about other males' advances toward the women i n my l i f e , f o r example. I'm too s e l f - a b s o r b e d and f i e r c e l y independent. Competition i s u s u a l l y with myself. I've thrown away o p p o r t u n i t i e s that would be more m a t e r i a l l y l u c r a t i v e than my obsession with w r i t i n g and, consequently, the c l o s e s t I u s u a l l y get to j e a l o u s y i s envy of m a t e r i a l gain which I then pooh pooh with some thought of fame or other e g o - b l a s t . That's my game. I j u s t don't g i v e a goddamn about most of the th i n g s most people get j e a l o u s about f o r the simple reason that I'm a l r e a d y prepared to l o s e most of them chasing my w i l l - o - t h e - w i s p . Self-imposed martyrdom I suppose you'd have to c a l l i t . I always joke about t h a t . . I'm a s u r v i v o r . I get angry and s e l f - r i g h t e o u s f r e q u e n t l y ; r a r e l y j e a l o u s . I'm too pompous f o r t h a t . 58 I b e l i e v e a v a r i e d l i f e with a moderate number of d i f f e r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s has allowed me to out-grow a y o u t h f u l tendency to j e a l o u s y . 63 Urayamashii -- envy, j e a l o u s y — Japanese. 64 J e a l o u s y seems to be a composite of many d i f f e r e n t (emotions) (responses) anger, p a i n , a l l the p h y s i c a l and emotional r e a c t i o n s l i s t e d . Thru experience one l e a r n s t h e i r way out of such an unheroic emotion. We are given c o n d i t i o n s , d e f i n i t i o n s and p r i n c i p l e s whereby we are expected to l i v e our l i f e and achieve happiness. Thru experience we l e a r n that the in f o r m a t i o n we have been given i s too narrow, i s erroneous, does not apply to us, i s s i l l y and we can begin to form a t r u e r more per s o n a l and more i n t u i t i v e p i c t u r e of the u n i v e r s e . I thin k that j e a l o u s y i s j u s t a symptom of a gr e a t e r problem. I n s e c u r i t y . Which i s j u s t a symptom of humanity's g r e a t e s t enemy -- f e a r . We must come to terms with f e a r and assume that happiness and h e a l t h i s ours. 68 I don't become j e a l o u s i n intimate r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o r romantic reasons, i f the woman I am seeing chooses to be with someone e l s e then I accept that and end 237 the r e l a t i o n s h i p , I do not accept compromise. 70 Try to overcome t h i s f e e l i n g , i t i s a k i l l e r . 71 Jealousy at a very high l e v e l i s almost a must of a man's mind c h a r a c t e r i n the middle east c o u n t r i e s , and i s known and p r a c t i c e d i n the t r a d i t i o n a l c u l t u r e .

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 8 3
France 3 0
Jamaica 1 0
Japan 1 0
Thailand 1 0
Albania 1 0
Canada 1 0
India 1 3
City Views Downloads
Unknown 5 1
Mountain View 4 0
Ashburn 2 0
Kingston 1 0
Tokyo 1 0
Boardman 1 0
Vancouver 1 0
Virginia Beach 1 1
Chandigarh 1 3

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054203/manifest

Comment

Related Items