TYPE Brief Research Report

PUBLISHED 28 September 2023

DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

What’s love got to do with

OPEN ACCESS jealousy?
EDITED BY
Thiago de Almeida,
Independent Researcher, São Paulo, Brazil
Ana Maria Fernandez *†, Maria Teresa Barbato †, Belen Cordero
REVIEWED BY
and Yvone Acevedo
Jaimie Krems,
Laboratorio de Evolución y Relaciones Interpersonales, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago,
University of California, Los Angeles,
Chile
United States
Xiaoxiao Zheng,
Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), China
Romantic love and jealousy seem antagonistic, but the expression of both
*CORRESPONDENCE
emotions have evolutionary functions that can go in the same direction of
Ana Maria Fernandez
[email protected] maintaining a relationship. Considering natural selection designed adaptations to
These authors have contributed equally to this
† solve the problems surrounding reproduction, then love and romantic jealousy
work and share first authorship are emotions aimed at staying cooperative for a period of time, where love
RECEIVED 28 June 2023 solves the adaptive challenges of promoting pair bonding, cooperation, and
ACCEPTED 04 September 2023 protecting offspring; and jealousy is triggered by a threat or the loss of a valuable
PUBLISHED 28 September 2023
cooperative relationship, either on behalf of descendants in need of resources, or
CITATION a close romantic bond. Consequently, understanding love and romantic jealousy
Fernandez AM, Barbato MT, Cordero B and
points in the same adaptive functional domain of protecting a romantic pair bond.
Acevedo Y (2023) What’s love got to do with
jealousy? Specifically, love can be comprehended in two different ways and in regard to
Front. Psychol. 14:1249556. jealousy. First, conceiving love as the attachment to significant others one develops
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556
throughout lifetime, and secondly, it contemplates affective dependence. Results
COPYRIGHT from a sample of single and committed individuals (n = 332) show the predicted
© 2023 Fernandez, Barbato, Cordero and
Acevedo. This is an open-access article
positive correlation between attachment and jealousy as stable traits, consistent
distributed under the terms of the Creative with previous literature. In addition, there is a non-significant and low correlation,
Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The respectively, between attachment and love as a measure of dependence.
use, distribution or reproduction in other
forums is permitted, provided the original
Furthermore, in the single participants group, jealousy was associated with love.
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are The discussion emphasizes the need for expanding a functional account of love
credited and that the original publication in this and jealousy as complementary emotions of our human affective endowment.
journal is cited, in accordance with accepted
academic practice. No use, distribution or
Finally, it would be informative to study attachment as a relational trait and love as
reproduction is permitted which does not a specific affection for a romantic partner that could be manipulated to elucidate
comply with these terms. the functional design of jealousy.

KEYWORDS

affect, pair bonds, evolution, attachment, mating

1. Introduction
The study of love encompasses different perspectives from diverse disciplines, such as
anthropology, genetics, biology, neurobiology, and psychology (De Boer et al., 2012; Carter and
Porges, 2013; Cacioppo and Cacioppo, 2015; Tobore, 2020; Langeslag, 2022). There is general
agreement in describing love as a complex emotion, having multiple expressions (Hatfield and
Sprecher, 1986) and favoring long-term mating (Sorokowski et al., 2017). However, the
experience of love is so broad that several lines of research are needed to understand its origin,
function, and the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon. Love has numerous functions such
as contributing to mate choice, courtship, sex and pair bonding (Bode and Kushnick, 2021),
among others, and one of the most relevant is that it uniquely endows our species with
evolutionary advantages (Frank, 1988; Gonzaga and Haselton, 2008; Durante et al., 2016).

Frontiers in Psychology 01 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

Indeed, love functions as a commitment mechanism that facilitates few main ones. Consequently, commitment and dependence on one
pair bonding (Miller and Todd, 1998; Fletcher et al., 2015; Ein-Dor another is a factor that was first identified in the conception of
and Hirschberger, 2016). investment and exchange of benefits as crucial components of love
Pair bonding is a crucial process associated with love, which has (Kelley and Thibaut, 1978; Joel et al., 2013), as well as the perception
been described as a functional feature present in most mammals, of the loved one as part of the self (Aron et al., 2022). In this
with specific neuroendocrine activation, along with the promotion of context, measures of love have been based on observational
mother-infant attachment (Harlow, 1958; Bales et al., 2021). To better strategies, implicit associations through correlations of scales, and
understand the engagement function of love and pair bonding from self-reports of the different hypothesized components of love
an evolutionary perspective, the neurophysiological maturation of (Graham, 2011), for example. So far, the methods used to assess
the mammalian brain exhibits a phylogenetic link to social love have relied on self-reported measures encompassing various
involvement and attachment behaviors (Porges 1998; Cacioppo et al., definitions, such as lifelong attachment, intimacy, compassion, and
2015). Additionally, there are biochemical mechanisms of social dependence (Fabella, 2023). Nonetheless, when defining love as
engagement regulation, where molecules such as oxytocin and/or attachment, Hudson and Fraley (2017) suggests diverse levels of
vasopressin are directed to facilitate pair bonding (Porges 2011; perceived intimacy and dependence are associated with attachment
Carter and Porges, 2013; Perry-Paldi et al., 2019), which has also been styles, which may hinder functional hypotheses about this emotion.
described as a mechanism underlying human attachment Overall, there is no consensus on the measures employed to
(Feldman, 2016). evaluate love, and how we quantify this emotion relies on the
Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1982; Fraley, 2019; Thompson theoretical framework employed (see Hatfield et al., 2012,
et al., 2022) explains how the pair bond established with a primary for example).
caregiver early in life influences one’s future relationships with the Attachment has a direct influence on the cognitive control of
world, including interactions with others and the quality of dyads in love, enhancing their ability to regulate primary emotions
affective relationships, such as engagements in couples (Hazan and and thoughts (Langeslag and van Steenbergen, 2019). Studies
Shaver, 1987). In general, research on romantic love in adults looking at individual differences in attachment styles when
highlights and captures most of the adaptive characteristics of assessing characteristics like dependence or closeness, have found
mother-infant attachment when adults establish a romantic pair that individuals with anxious attachment tend to require more time
bond (Hazan and Shaver, 1987; Shaver and Hazan, 1988; Fisher, and affection to perceive they are loved by a partner (Hudson and
1998). According to Fletcher et al. (2015), romantic love can Fraley, 2017). Similarly, Barbaro et al. (2021) reported certain
be conceived as an “evolved commitment device” with the ultimate attachment orientations (for example, anxious or avoidant) are
function of motivating the potential reproductive partner to related to mate-retaining behaviors, like controlling the partner
maintain sexual exclusivity long enough to procreate and raise across time. Individuals who develop security in their attachment,
offspring (Hazan and Diamond, 2000). Thus, kindness, empathy, tend to have more satisfying interpersonal relationships and
care and feelings of warmth, which are typical of early pair romantic partners, while “the most emotionally powerful
bonding, are also present in romantic attachment (Fraley, 2019); experiences that people have in their lives derive from the
but romantic bonding also compromises the lust or sexual development, maintenance, and disruption of attachment
attachment system (Shaver and Hazan, 1988; Fisher, 1998). relationships” (Fraley, 2019, p. 419).
Therefore, the study of attachment has become very relevant to Following this same line of assessing the function of love and
understanding the nature, building of, and maintenance of couple attachment, jealousy has been studied as an emotion that motivates
bonds (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). Consequently, the formation the protection of a valued relationship (Mathes, 1986; Buunk, 1997;
of a pair bond may be linked to the origin of love, as it serves as an Neal and Lemay, 2014). Romantic jealousy has been conceived as an
ubiquitous commitment mechanism. affective reaction specifically designed for the protection of close
The empirical evidence suggests that romantic love conveys diverse attachment bonds (Fernández, 2017; Fernández et al., 2022), and as
proximate components and is influenced by individual factors (Perry- far as romantic relationships are concerned, it is an emotion aimed at
Paldi et al., 2019). Elements such as intimacy, passion and commitment the protection of pair bonds (Fletcher et al., 2015).
are universal influences of the love experience (Finkel et al., 2017; However, much of the research on romantic and sexual
Sorokowski et al., 2017; Neto, 2023). On the other hand, individual jealousy has mainly been based on the use of hypothetical scenarios
differences, such as gender, age, and cultural modernization, can impact (Buss, 2018) and retrospective accounts of infidelity (Schützwohl,
the experience of romantic love (Feybesse and Hatfield, 2019; Sorokowski 2008). For example, using scenarios present imaginary situations
et al., 2023). The significance of relationship satisfaction, effective of romantic betrayal (Buss et al., 1999; Sagarin et al., 2012;
communication, and mutual support (Yoo and Joo, 2021), indicates that Bendixen et al., 2015), and methods like movie watching
romantic love is a multifaceted phenomenon involving multiple (Fernández, 2012) and reading stories about infidelity (Sabini and
constituents, social and individual factors (de Munck et al., 2016). Silver, 2005) have been employed. In general, fictional scenarios
In the search for a better comprehension of love, it has been allow participants to mentally recreate extradyadic partner
suggested that this emotion can be described as feelings of affection, involvement, which are then linked to forced-choice questions.
dependence, liking and caring - “a state of intense longing for union These accounts present two fictional cases, such as sexual or
with another” (Hatfield et al., 2012, p. 144), with several theories romantic infidelity, and the subjects are forced to choose which
aiding to understand love, such as attachment theory (Bowlby, situation generates more jealousy (Harris, 2004). Thus, the
1982), the triangular theory of love (Sternberg, 1986), and ecological validity of these experiments depends on variables that
interdependence theory (Baumeister and Vohs, 2007), to name a may not be controlled for in the experimental designs. For instance,

Frontiers in Psychology 02 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

experiencing partner infidelity in real life can significantly about the probability of losing benefits or commitment by the
influence the experience of jealousy (Buunk and Fernandez, 2020), cooperating partner must be paramount for maintaining the valued
and watching movies or reading stories may elicit a specific bond (Buss and Haselton, 2005; Foster et al., 2014). So, understanding
jealousy response when subjects do or do not engage with the love and jealousy is in the same adaptive functional direction of
situation (Strout et al., 2005). protecting human pair bonding.
In general, research on jealousy has focused on identifying sex According to attachment theory, affectionate bonding and
differences between emotional and sexual types of infidelity, while distinctive valuation of significant others emerges throughout the life
contextual differences in terms of partner investment and sample cycle, expanding from the internalization of childhood experiences
type have been looked at more seldom (Scelza et al., 2019). Exploring into friendships and romantic attachment (Bohn et al., 2023). Early
cultural differences in jealousy helps understanding jealousy as an infant bonding facilitates adaptive fitness by motivating caring and
adaptive reaction to changes in resource diversions in a given safety of infants, generating an affectionate engagement prompting
environment. Therefore, current work supports the importance of the child to seek proximity, sensory contact, and comforting from the
considering other variables, such as parental investment and paternity primary caregiver (Bowlby, 1982; Thompson et al., 2021). Indeed,
uncertainty, which are associated with an enhanced jealousy response “the attachment system evolved to protect infants from danger by
(Edlund et al., 2019). keeping them close to the mother” (Hazan and Shaver, 1987, p. 512),
Along these lines, the study of jealousy has been linked to particularly in the ancestral environment (Hrdy, 2009). Attachment
improved measurement of sex differences between sexual and brings enormous psychosocial advantages to humans (Harlow, 1958;
emotional infidelity, using methodological innovations. For example, Hazan and Diamond, 2000), generating an emotional base of felt
using economic games to examine if the allocation/reception of security, love and dependence, and reducing anxiety in times of
resources from a rival evokes this emotion (Barbato et al., 2018), and distress (Fraley, 2019).
the presentation of spatial arrangements between the subject, his or Attachment also plays a crucial role in regulating stress and
her partner and a potential rival to assess jealousy, through certain promoting emotional well-being among individuals. It facilitates
threats (Schützwohl et al., 2011). Therefore, a similar approach to co-regulation within dyads, fostering a sense of security, reducing
study love may aid in the precision of its measurement separation distress, and fulfilling the need for affectionate physical
and assessment. contact (Zeifman, 2019), which has been recently evidenced cross-
From an evolutionary perspective, cognitive biases in the form of culturally (Sorokowski et al., 2023). This emotional system,
adaptive design were shaped by natural selection to solve reproductive connected to social defense theory, has biochemical characteristics
problems (Cosmides and Tooby, 2013), as there are biological and that enable individuals to navigate complex social environments
reproductive costs associated with exclusive resource allocation for and enhance their survival (Ein-Dor and Hirschberger, 2016).
offspring rearing (Buss, 2013; Fernández, 2017). In this regard, the Furthermore, romantic attachment brings about dyadic benefits by
design of love and jealousy may be linked to the creation of a serving as a mechanism for mate choice and fostering courtship
mechanism for encouraging dependence and protection of the attraction. It is an integral part of the adult attachment system,
benefits that commitment and romantic engagements bring about ensuring that parents stay together to raise their offspring effectively
(Conroy-Beam et al., 2015; Fletcher, 2015). In other words, love could (De Boer et al., 2012). In this way, attachment not only promotes
serve as a promoter of altruistic prosocial behaviors associated with individual well-being, but it also contributes to the stability of
the bonding partner, resulting in high benefits to a dyad (Buss, 2007; romantic relationships.
Fletcher et al., 2015), while jealousy enables the retention and It is worth noting the connection between attachment and
monopolization of the bond in potential infidelity scenarios (Buss jealousy has been extensively documented, with attachment anxiety
et al., 1992; Harris, 2003). being a strong predictor of jealousy (Rodriguez et al., 2015; Barbaro
Consequently, the pair bonding present in romantic love aids in et al., 2016; Güçlü et al., 2017). Specifically, individuals with an
the provision of psychological resources advocating care and anxious attachment style are more prone to experiencing anxious
reproductive success (Buss, 2019). Indeed, romantic love is a bond jealousy, while those with an avoidant attachment style are more likely
conveying the provisioning of resources which brings about an to experience reactive jealousy (Buunk and Fernandez, 2020).
implicit assumption of exclusivity, through sexual and emotional Attachment in general, can be conceived as a promoter of
fidelity toward the partner. In this sense, it is posited that for there to commitment, providing emotional security and satisfying affective
be a commitment triggered by romantic love the reproductive success needs in romantic partners (Ein-Dor and Hirschberger, 2016;
of the individual in a potentially procreative bond requires an Feldman, 2016; Buss, 2017). Attachment styles contribute to
interdependence of fitness; where the ability to promote the genes of individual differences in the formation of feelings of security,
one person depends on the other one (Aktipis et al., 2018). The creating a bond of dependence and fear of loss (Attridge, 2013).
maintenance of long-term benefits through the commitment Jealousy, in this sense, plays an important role in understanding the
promoted by romantic love, implies that each partner must push the protection of this affective bond (Buss, 2018; Buunk and Fernandez,
other to obtain benefits from acts of reciprocity for their common 2020). From an evolutionary perspective, jealousy arises in response
reproductive goals, and achieving a reciprocal balance (Cosmides and to the suspicion of losing a partner to a rival, considering the
Tooby, 2013; Conroy-Beam et al., 2015). Hence, there is not only the important benefits of long-term attachment (Schmitt and Buss, 2001;
commitment triggered by the emotion of romantic love, but there may Buss and Haselton, 2005; Foster et al., 2014). Furthermore,
be other emotions such as jealousy, which ensure that the benefits attachment theory provides valuable insights for recognizing
achieved by the initial commitment, are maintained over the long jealousy, particularly in relation to individuals with anxious
term. For this reason, from an evolutionary point of view suspicion attachment who express higher levels of trait jealousy compared to

Frontiers in Psychology 03 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

those with secure attachment (Marshall et al., 2013; Richter et al., Brief Spanish version of the experiences in close relationships, ECR
2022). Hence, attachment and jealousy are directed at the same end (Guzmán et al., 2020), is a widely used measure of anxious and
of facilitating romantic engagement. But, as Fernández (2017) avoidant romantic attachment with an observed reliability of
revised, jealousy is specifically aimed at avoiding the diversion of Mcdonald’s ω = 0.82 and ω = 0.84, respectively.
partner resources that are beneficial in terms of fitness for both Attachment anxiety (Fernández and Dufey, 2015) was measured
members of a romantic dyad. using only the dimension of anxiety of Collins’s (1996) adult
In the present study, attachment was assessed, as well as love attachment scale revised (Mcdonald’s ω = 0.89).
with independent measures of affective dependence. These were Dependance (Attridge et al., 1998), is the degree of psychological
then correlated with subjective indicators of jealousy. Considering and emotional dependence expressed toward the current partner,
the functions of love and jealousy described in the literature, which was conceived as a measure of “love,” reaching an observed
which suggest a common evolutionary purpose of promoting reliability of Mcdonald’s ω = 0.90.
commitment, it was predicted that the function of love and
jealousy go in the same direction of maintaining the benefits of a
romantic relationship. 2.3. Procedure
Accordingly, it was specifically anticipated that:
Participants were recruited through social networks. The samples
- In general, behaviors that trigger higher levels of jealousy are completed the measures online. All participants signed an informed
typically associated with the perceived risk of losing the bond and consent according to the ethical principles of APA, and responded to
potential resources. Therefore, anxious attachment would a sociodemographic questionnaire, measures of jealousy, attachment
be positively correlated with jealousy, as individuals seek to anxiety (Collins’s and ECR, in the singles and committed sample,
protect their romantic bond. In consequence, levels of jealousy respectively), love (dependence). Each study was approved by the
and attachment will exhibit a positive correlation, stemming Institutional Ethics Committee of the author’s University.
from their shared adaptive function.
- On the other hand, measures of love related to dependence would
reflect characteristics of this emotion that may be associated with 2.4. Data analyses
functions other than being a key to resource commitment. As a
result, jealousy should not correlate with these particular Descriptive statistics, correlations and regression analyses between
characteristics. So, it was anticipated that levels of jealousy and the variables were estimated using Jamovi (2021).
the measure of love would not correlate, given they represent
different facets within the domain of love and interpersonal
relationships. Hence, while both variables may share certain 3. Results
commonalities, they also represent distinct aspects of attachment
and interpersonal relationships. Our first prediction was partially supported (see Table 1) with a
significant positive association between attachment and jealousy in
both samples, and a non- significant correlation of love and attachment
found for the single sample. The correlation of love and anxious
2. Materials and methods attachment was low but significant.
Secondly, multiple regression analysis yielded jealousy, as the only
2.1. Participants significant predictor of love (t = 2.13, p = 0.035) in the single sample
(F2,120 = 3.54, p = 0.032, r2 = 0.048). While anxious attachment (t = 2.35,
The complete research involved 332 Chilean people, who were p = 0.020) uniquely predicted love (r2 = 0.050) in the committed
recruited through social networks and took part in two studies. The sample (F2, 206 = 5.45, p = 0.005).
first sample included 123 individuals (M age = 27.9, SD = 9.92, 67%
female), with 47.2% of them indicating that they were not involved
romantically. The second sample comprised 209 committed TABLE 1 Descriptive statistics and correlations by sample.
individuals (M age = 25.9, SD = 5.87, 67% female).
Mean SD 2 3
Sample 1 (n=123)
2.2. Measures 1. Jealousy 2.71 0.95 0.24** 0.22*

2. Attachment anxiety 3.01 1.11 0.14

Jealousy was assessed by a single self-report question asking “how
jealous you are?” (not jealous at all) to 7 (morbidly jealous), which has 3. Love 4.84 0.83

been previously used by Massar and Buunk (2010) and our laboratory Sample 2 (n=209)
in Chile (see Fernández et al., 2022). In an experimental sample of 48 1. Jealousy 3.33 1.53 0.57*** 0.16*
participants (see Barbato et al., 2018), this item had a partial
2. Anxious attachment 3.56 1.53 0.22**
correlation with Buunk’s (1997) 15-item jealousy scale, of r = 0.46,
p < 0.001 for reactive, r = 0.41, for anxious, and r = 0.58 for preventive 3. Love 4.39 0.51
jealousy (ps < 0.001, large effect size). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Frontiers in Psychology 04 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

4. Discussion the individual fitness of both partners. Common resources can

be viewed as benefits resulting from the cooperation with each other
The assessment of the adaptive function of love and jealousy was (Buss, 2003). The basic idea is that the resources of the couple together
studied by examining if specific traits associated with love, such as are greater than the resources of the individuals alone (Kaplan and
attachment were correlated to jealousy. It was predicted that romantic Lancaster, 2003; Conroy-Beam et al., 2015).
love could underlie attachment and jealousy, having the evolved In general, within this framework, jealousy could resolve
function of protecting attachment from situations or rivals that may discrepancies between actual and expected investment in a
pose a threat to a reproductive bond (Buunk, 1997; Buss, 2018). relationship, and love plays a role in motivating individuals to
The first prediction was confirmed as anxious attachment was maintain commitment, invest time and psychological resources on the
associated with jealousy. More specifically, in the single sample, the other, and allocating reproductive resources necessary for adaptive
dimension of anxiety was associated with jealousy, and in the committed fitness in cooperative relationships (Conroy-Beam et al., 2015).
individuals, attachment anxiety and jealousy were positively correlated. One important limitation of the current research is the evaluation
These findings support the idea that attachment and jealousy might of love and jealousy as trait measures, as well as the reliance on a single
operate in conjunction, sharing a similar adaptive function. self-report question about how jealous an individual is. For future
Furthermore, contrary to our second prediction, a positive research it would be ideal to include an actual relationship jealousy
association between jealousy and love emerged in the single and love scales.
participants’ sample. Despite this, no significant correlation was Finally, it would be recommended that further research
found between attachment and love, suggesting the existence of specifically focus on differentiating the potential protective function
unequivocal elements within love, conceived as dependence, which of jealousy in regard to a specific partner and the levels of love or
may be immersed in the experience of love. In general, these interpersonal dependence between them. It would also be expected
outcomes reinforce the notion that love and jealousy operate in that manipulating or varying relationship satisfaction should have an
tandem, reflecting a shared functional logic centered around close effect on jealousy, and possibly on love as well.
relationship protection. Moreover, these results align with traditional
research that links love to indicators of jealousy, alongside
psychological factors such as insecurity and low self-esteem (Mathes Data availability statement
and Severa, 1981; White, 1981; Richter et al., 2022).
However, when looking at the prediction of love from attachment The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will
anxiety and jealousy, we had different results for the single and be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
committed samples. Jealousy was the only variable that predicted love
in the first sample, and attachment was the only predictor of love for
the second sample. This may be indicative, that when people imagine, Ethics statement
but do not have an actual committed romantic bond, they may
attribute more jealousy to feelings of love, independent of their The studies involving humans were approved by Comite de Etica,
anxious attachment. But when committed individuals report on their Universidad de Santiago de Chile. The studies were conducted in
romantic bond to an actual partner, anxious attachment does explain accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements.
love, above and beyond jealousy. The participants provided their written informed consent to
Furthermore, characteristics such as romantic dependence participate in this study.
describe alternative ways of experiencing love which do not appear to
involve jealousy, and may be idealized in people that are not actually
in a committed relationship. Author contributions
Along these lines, it has been reported that the closer the
relationship, such as being single versus being married or in AF and MB contributed to conception and design of the study. AF,
committed relationships, reduces the report of jealousy (Demirtaş MB, and BC organized the database and conducted the statistical analysis.
and Dönmez, 2006). In the case of dependence, research found its BC and YA wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors contributed to
association primarily with reactive jealousy (Rydell and Bringle, manuscript revision, read, and approved the submitted version.
2007). This may be because this type of jealousy depends on specific
contextual factors (Buunk, 1997), rather than being measured solely
by an individual’s perception of their subjective experience. Funding
Our interpretation of love based mainly on interpersonal
dependence can be viewed as romantic love, without triggering the This research was supported by Proyecto DICYT, Código 032356FT,
feelings of real loss or a potential threat commonly experienced in Vicerrectoría de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación, USACH and
jealousy. But, as research since Bowlby’s (1982) seminal work predicts Proyecto Fondecyt Regular #1181114, del Gobierno de Chile.
and supports across time, jealousy is a response strongly related to
attachment (Richter et al., 2022). And it is anxious attachment that
appears to capture the affective traits that most likely mobilize jealousy. Acknowledgments
Drawing on the conceptualization of romantic relationships as a
collaborative effort, it has been proposed that members of a dyad face We thank Constanza Fernandez for her language review, and our
incentives, in evolutionary terms, where resources invested increase degree seminar students: Amanda Berrios, Pedro Canales, Angela

Frontiers in Psychology 05 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

Mejias, Noelia Parada and Bastian Fierro – for their valuable Publisher’s note
contribution to the actualized literature review for this work.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
Conflict of interest and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
be construed as a potential conflict of interest. endorsed by the publisher.

References
Aktipis, A., Cronk, L., Alcock, J., Ayers, J. D., Baciu, C., Balliet, D., et al. (2018). Buunk, B. (1997). Personality, birth order and attachment styles as related to various types
Understanding cooperation through fitness interdependence. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, of jealousy. Personal. Individ. Differ. 23, 997–1006. doi: 10.1016/s0191-8869(97)00136-0
429–431. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0378-4
Buunk, A., and Fernandez, A. M. (2020). Don't cheat like I did: possessive jealousy and
Aron, A., Lewandowski, G., Branand, B., Mashek, D., and Aron, E. (2022). Self- infidelity in close relationships. Interpersona 14, 211–216. doi: 10.5964/ijpr.v14i2.4265
expansion motivation and inclusion of others in self: an updated review. J. Soc. Pers.
Cacioppo, S., and Cacioppo, J. T. (2015). Why may allopregnanolone help alleviate
Relat. 39, 3821–3852. doi: 10.1177/02654075221110630
loneliness? Med. Hypotheses 85, 947–952. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2015.09.004
Attridge, M. (2013). Jealousy and relationship closeness: exploring the good (reactive)
Cacioppo, J. T., Cacioppo, S., Capitanio, J. P., and Cole, S. W. (2015). The
and bad (suspicious) sides of romantic jealousy. SAGE Open 3:215824401347605. doi:
neuroendocrinology of social isolation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66, 733–767. doi: 10.1146/
10.1177/2158244013476054
annurev-psych-010814-015240
Attridge, M., Berscheid, E., and Sprecher, S. (1998). Dependency and insecurity in
Carter, C. S., and Porges, S. W. (2013). The biochemistry of love: an oxytocin
romantic relationships: development and validation of two companion scales. Pers.
hypothesis: Science & Society Series on sex and science. EMBO Rep. 14, 12–16. doi:
Relat. 5, 31–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00158.x
10.1038/embor.2012.191
Bales, K. L., Ardekani, C. S., Baxter, A., Karaskiewicz, C. L., Kuske, J. X., Lau, A. R., Collins, N. L. (1996). Working models of attachment: implications for explanation,
et al. (2021). What is a pair bond? Horm. Behav. 136:105062. doi: 10.1016/j. emotion, and behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 810–832. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.4.810
yhbeh.2021.105062
Conroy-Beam, D., Goetz, C. D., and Buss, D. M. (2015). “Why do humans form long-
Barbaro, N., Pham, M. N., Shackelford, T. K., and Zeigler-Hill, V. (2016). Insecure term mateships? An evolutionary game-theoretic model” in Advances in experimental
romantic attachment dimensions and frequency of mate retention behaviors. Pers. Relat. social psychology. 51, 1–39. doi: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2014.11.001
23, 605–618. doi: 10.1111/pere.12146
Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. (2013). Evolutionary psychology: new perspectives on cognition
Barbaro, N., Weidmann, R., Burriss, R., Wünsche, J., Bühler, J. L., Shackelford, T. K., et al. and motivation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64, 201–229. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131628
(2021). The (bidirectional) associations between romantic attachment orientations and
mate retention behavior in male-female romantic couples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 42, 497–506. De Boer, A., van Buel, E. M., and Ter Horst, G. J. (2012). Love is more than just a kiss:
doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2021.04.005 a neurobiological perspective on love and affection. Neuroscience 201, 114–124. doi:
10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.11.017
Barbato, M. T., Fernandez, A. M., and Rodriguez-Sickert, C. (2018). Jealousy in the
lab: the effect of a third party investment in the romantic partner. Hum. Ethol. Bull. 33, De Munck, V., Korotayev, A., and McGreevey, J. (2016). Romantic love and family
37–48. doi: 10.22330/heb/334/037-048 organization. Evol. Psychol. 14:147470491667421. doi: 10.1177/1474704916674211
Baumeister, R., and Vohs, K. D. (2007). Encyclopedia of social psychology. Demirtaş, H. A., and Dönmez, A. (2006). Jealousy in close relationships: personal,
California: SAGE Publications. relational and situational variables. Turk. J. Psychiatry 17:3.
Bendixen, M., Kennair, L. E. O., and Buss, D. M. (2015). Jealousy: evidence of strong Durante, K. M., Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., Gangestad, S. W., and Simpson, J. A.
sex differences using both forced choice and continuous measure paradigms. Personal. (2016). Pair-bonded relationships and romantic alternatives. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
Individ. Differ. 86, 212–216. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.035 53:74. doi: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.09.001
Bode, A., and Kushnick, G. (2021). Proximate and ultimate perspectives on romantic Edlund, J. E., Buller, D. J., Sagarin, B. J., Heider, J. D., Scherer, C. R., Farc, M. M., et al.
love. Front. Psychol. 12:573123. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.573123 (2019). Male sexual jealousy: lost paternity opportunities? Psychol. Rep. 122:2. doi:
10.1177/0033294118806556
Bohn, J., Holtmann, J., Luhmann, M., Koch, T., and Eid, M. (2023). Consistency and
specificity of attachments to parents, friends, and romantic Partners in Emerging Ein-Dor, T., and Hirschberger, G. (2016). Rethinking attachment theory: from a
Adulthood. Emerg. Adulthood 11, 58–73. doi: 10.1177/21676968221081275 theory of relationships to a theory of individual and group survival. Curr. Dir. Psychol.
Sci. 25, 223–227. doi: 10.1177/0963721416650684
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: retrospect and prospect. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry
52, 664–678. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01456.x Fabella, F. (2023). The love attitude that influences one’s happiness: the relationship
between love attitude scale scores and Oxford happiness scores of selected college
Buss, D. M. (2003). Sexual strategies: a journey into controversy. Psychol. Inq. 14:3. students. Galore Int. J. Appl. Sci. Human. 7, 7–14. doi: 10.52403/gijash.20230202
doi: 10.1207/s15327965pli1403&4_7
Feldman, R. (2016). The neurobiology of mammalian parenting and the biosocial
Buss, D. M. (2007). The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychol. Sin. 39, 502–512. context of human caregiving. Horm. Behav. 77, 3–17. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2015.10.001
Buss, D. M. (2013). Sexual jealousy. Psihologijske Teme 22, 155–182. Fernández, A. M. (2012). “Psicofisiología de los celos románticos: estudio experimental
Buss, D. M. (2017). Sexual conflict in human mating. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 26, de las emociones que surgen ante la infidelidad desde la perspectiva evolucionaria” in Tesis
307–313. doi: 10.1177/0963721417695559 Doctorales en Psicología: Compendio 2011. ed. F. Barrera (Santiago: Editorial LOM), 71–105.

Buss, D. M. (2018). Sexual and emotional infidelity: evolved gender differences in Fernández, A. M. (2017). Sexual jealousy among women. Encyclopedia Evol. Psychol.
jealousy prove robust and replicable. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 13, 155–160. doi: Sci. 1:8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1425-1
10.1177/1745691617698225 Fernández, A. M., Castro, B., Molina, P., Cosmides, L., and Burkett, B. (2022).
Buss, D. M. (2019). “The evolution of love in humans” in The new psychology of Experimental induction of friendship jealousy: comparing the effects of time versus
love. eds. R. J. Sternberg and K. Sternberg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), mental coordination with an interloper. Psykhe. 31, 1–7. doi: 10.7764/psykhe.2021.38635
42–63. Fernández, A. M., and Dufey, M. (2015). Adaptation of Collins' revised adult
attachment dimensional scale to the Chilean context. Psychol. Assess. 28, 242–252. doi:
Buss, D. M., and Haselton, M. (2005). The evolution of jealousy. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9,
10.1590/1678-7153.201528204
506–507. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.09.006
Feybesse, C., and Hatfield, E. (2019). “Passionate love” in The new psychology of love.
Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., and Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in
eds. R. J. Sternberg and K. Sternberg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 183–207.
jealousy: evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychol. Sci. 3, 251–256. doi: 10.1111/
j.1467-9280.1992.tb00038.x Finkel, E. J., Simpson, J. A., and Eastwick, P. W. (2017). The psychology of close
relationships: fourteen core principles. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 68, 383–411. doi: 10.1146/
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., Choe, J. C., Lim, H. K.,
annurev-psych-010416-044038
Hasegawa, M., et al. (1999). Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: tests of
competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. Pers. Fisher, H. E. (1998). Lust, attraction, and attachment in mammalian reproduction.
Relat. 6, 125–150. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00215.x Hum. Nat. 9, 23–52. doi: 10.1007/s12110-998-1010-5

Frontiers in Psychology 06 frontiersin.org

Fernandez et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249556

Fletcher, G. J. (2015). Accuracy and bias of judgments in romantic relationships. Curr. Mathes, E. W., and Severa, N. (1981). Jealousy, romantic love, and liking: theoretical
Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24:4. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190912529.013.17 considerations and preliminary scale development. Psychol. Rep. 49, 23–31. doi: 10.2466/
pr0.1981.49.1.23
Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., Campbell, L., and Overall, N. C. (2015). Pair-
bonding, romantic love, and evolution: the curious case of Homo sapiens. Perspect Mikulincer, M., and Shaver, P. R. (2007). Boosting attachment security to promote
Psychol Sci. 10, 20–36. doi: 10.1177/1745691614561683 mental health, prosocial values, and inter-group tolerance. Psychol. Inq. 18, 139–156.
doi: 10.1080/10478400701512646
Foster, J. D., Jonason, P. K., Shrira, I., Keith Campbell, W., Shiverdecker, L. K., and
Varner, S. C. (2014). What do you get when you make somebody else’s partner your Miller, G. F., and Todd, P. M. (1998). Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2,
own? An analysis of relationships formed via mate poaching. J. Res. Pers. 52, 78–90. doi: 190–198. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01169-3
10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.008
Neal, A. M., and Lemay, E. P. Jr. (2014). How partners’ temptation leads to their
Fraley, R. C. (2019). Attachment in adulthood: recent developments, emerging heightened commitment: the interpersonal regulation of infidelity threats. J. Soc. Pers.
debates, and future directions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 70, 401–422. doi: 10.1146/annurev- Relat. 31, 938–957. doi: 10.1177/0265407513512745
psych-010418-102813gav
Neto, F. (2023). Gender differences in self-estimated types of love for self and others.
Frank, R. H. (1988). Passions within reason: The strategic role of the emotions. UK: Interpersona: an international journal on. Pers. Relat. 17, 130–142. doi: 10.5964/ijpr.9297
Norton.
Perry-Paldi, A., Hirschberger, G., Feldman, R., Zagoory-Sharon, O., Buchris Bazak, S.,
Gonzaga, G. C., and Haselton, M. G. (2008). “The evolution of love and long-term and Ein-Dor, T. (2019). Early environments shape neuropeptide function: the
bonds” in Social relationships: Cognitive, affective, and motivational processes. eds. J. P. case of oxytocin and vasopressin. Front. Psychol. 10:581. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00581
Forgas and J. Fitness (New York: Psychology Press), 39–53.
Porges, S. W. (1998). Love: an emergent property of the mammalian autonomic nervous
Graham, J. M. (2011). Measuring love in romantic relationships: a meta-analysis. J. system. Psychoneuroendocrinology 23, 837–861. doi: 10.1016/s0306-4530(98)00057-2
Soc. Pers. Relat. 28, 748–771. doi: 10.1177/0265407510389126
Porges, S. W. (2011). The polyvagal theory, neurophysiology foundation of emotions,
Güçlü, O., Şenormancı, Ö., Şenormancı, G., and Köktürk, F. (2017). Gender differences attachment, communication, self-regulation. UK: W. W. Norton.
in romantic jealousy and attachment styles. Psychiatry and Clinical psychopharmacology.
27, 359–365. doi: 10.1080/24750573.2017.1367554 Richter, M., Schlegel, K., Thomas, P., and Troche, S. J. (2022). Adult attachment and
personality as predictors of jealousy in romantic relationships. Front. Psychol. 13,
Guzmán, M., Rivera-Ottenberger, D., Brassard, A., Spencer, R., and Lafontaine, M. F. 861481. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.861481
(2020). Measuring adult romantic attachment: psychometric properties of the brief
Spanish version of the experiences in close relationships. Psicologia 33:9. doi: 10.1186/ Rodriguez, L. M., DiBello, A. M., Øverup, C. S., and Neighbors, C. (2015). The Price
s41155-020-00145-w of distrust: trust, anxious attachment, jealousy, and partner abuse. Partn. Abus. 6,
298–319. doi: 10.1891/1946-6560.6.3.298
Harlow, H. F. (1958). The nature of love. Am. Psychol. 13, 673–685. doi: 10.1037/h0047884
Rydell, R. J., and Bringle, R. G. (2007). Differentiating reactive and suspicious jealousy.
Harris, C. R. (2003). Factors associated with jealousy over real and imagined infidelity: Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 35, 1099–1114. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2007.35.8.1099
an examination of the social-cognitive and evolutionary psychology perspectives.
Psychol. Women Q. 27, 319–329. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00112 Sabini, J., and Silver, M. (2005). Gender and jealousy: stories of infidelity. Cognit.
Emot. 19, 713–727. doi: 10.1080/02699930441000490
Harris, C. R. (2004). The evolution of jealousy: did men and women, facing different
selective pressures, evolve different" brands" of jealousy? Recent evidence suggests not, Sagarin, B. J., Martin, A. L., Coutinho, S. A., Edlund, J. E., Patel, L., Skowronski, J. J.,
American Scientist. 92, 62–71. et al. (2012). Sex differences in jealousy: a meta-analytic examination. Evol. Hum. Behav.
33, 595–614. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.02.006
Hatfield, E., Bensman, L., and Rapson, R. L. (2012). A brief history of social scientists’
attempts to measure passionate love. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 29, 143–164. doi: Scelza, B. A., Prall, S. P., Blumenfield, T., Crittenden, A. N., Gurven, M., Kline, M.,
10.1177/0265407511431055 et al. (2019). Patterns of paternal investment predict cross-cultural variation in jealous
response. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 20–26. doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0654-y
Hatfield, E., and Sprecher, S. (1986). Measuring passionate love in intimate
relationships. J. Adolesc. 9, 383–410. doi: 10.1016/s0140-1971(86)80043-4 Schmitt, D. P., and Buss, D. M. (2001). Human mate poaching: tactics and temptations
for infiltrating existing mateships. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80, 894–917. doi:
Hazan, C., and Diamond, L. M. (2000). The place of attachment in human mating. 10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.894
Rev. Gen. Psychol. 4, 186–204. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.186
Schützwohl, A. (2008). The intentional object of romantic jealousy. Evol. Hum. Behav.
Hazan, C., and Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment 29, 92–99. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.10.002
process. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52, 511–524. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511
Schützwohl, A., Morjaria, S., and Alvis, S. (2011). Spatial distance regulates sex-
Hrdy, S. B. (2009). Mothers and others: The evolutionary origins of mutual specific feelings to suspected sexual and emotional infidelity. Evol. Psychol.
understanding. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 9:147470491100900. doi: 10.1177/147470491100900310
Hudson, N. W., and Fraley, R. C. (2017). Adult attachment and perceptions of Shaver, P. R., and Hazan, C. (1988). A biased overview of the study of love. J. Soc. Pers.
closeness. Pers. Relat. 24, 17–26. doi: 10.1111/pere.12166 Relat. 5, 473–501. doi: 10.1177/0265407588054005
Jamovi. (2021). The jamovi project (version 2.2): Computer Software. Available at Sorokowski, P., Kowal, M., Sternberg, R., Aavik, T., Akello, G., Madallh, M., et al.
https://www.jamovi.org (2023). Modernization, collectivism, and gender equality predict love experiences in 45
Joel, S., Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A., MacDonald, G., and Keltner, D. (2013). The countries. Sci. Rep. 13:773. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-26663-4
things you do for me. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 39, 1333–1345. doi: 10.1177/ Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., Butovskaya, M., Karwowski, M., Groyecka, A.,
0146167213497801 Wojciszke, B., et al. (2017). Love influences reproductive success in humans. Frontiers.
Kaplan, H. S., and Lancaster, J. B. (2003). “An evolutionary and ecological analysis of 8:773. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01922
human fertility, mating patterns, and parental investment” in Offspring: Human fertility
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychol. Rev. 93, 119–135. doi:
behavior in biodemographic perspective, eds. K. W. Watcher and R. A. Bulatao
10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.119
(Washington (DC): National Academies Press), 7, 1.
Strout, S. L., Laird, J. D., Shafer, A., and Thompson, N. S. (2005). The effect of vividness of
Kelley, H. H., and Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of
experience on sex differences in jealousy. Evol. Psychol. 3:1. doi: 10.1177/147470490500300118
interdependence. UK: Wiley.
Thompson, R. A., Simpson, J. A., and Berlin, L. J. (2021). Attachment theory in 21st
Langeslag, S. J. (2022). Electrophysiological correlates of romantic love: a review of
century. New York: Guilford.
EEG and ERP studies with beloved-related stimuli. Brain Sci. 12:5. doi: 10.3390/
brainsci12050551 Thompson, R. A., Simpson, J. A., and Berlin, L. J. (2022). Taking perspective on
attachment theory and research: nine fundamental questions. Attach Hum. Dev. 24,
Langeslag, S. J., and van Steenbergen, H. (2019). Cognitive control in romantic love:
543–560. doi: 10.1080/14616734.2022.2030132
the roles of infatuation and attachment in interference and adaptive cognitive control.
Cognit. Emot. 34, 596–603. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2019.1627291 Tobore, T. O. (2020). Towards a comprehensive theory of love: the quadruple theory.
Front. Psychol. 11:862. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00862
Marshall, T. C., Bejanyan, K., Di Castro, G., and Lee, R. A. (2013). Attachment styles
as predictors of Facebook-related jealousy and surveillance in romantic relationships. White, G. (1981). Some correlates of romantic jealousy. J. Pers. 49, 129–145. doi:
Pers. Relat. 20, 1–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2011.01393.x 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1981.tb00733.x
Massar, K., and Buunk, A. P. (2010). Judging a book by its cover: jealousy after Yoo, G., and Joo, S. (2021). Love for a marriage story: the association between love
subliminal priming with attractive and unattractive faces. Personal. Individ. Differ. 49, and marital satisfaction in middle adulthood. J. Child Fam. Stud. 31, 1570–1581. doi:
634–638. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.037 10.1007/s10826-021-02055-6
Mathes, E. W. (1986). Jealousy and romantic love: a longitudinal study. Psychol. Rep. Zeifman, D. M. (2019). Attachment theory grows up: a developmental approach to
58, 885–886. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1986.58.3.885 pair bonds. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 25, 139–143. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.06.001

Frontiers in Psychology 07 frontiersin.org