Psychological Science and Sexual Medicine Perspectives Regarding Infidelity Recovery

The Research for Betrayed Men (RBM) project centers on psychological science and sexual medicine studies that are grounded in biological, empirical, and evidence-based methods and approaches. Data presented in such studies tends to align with experiences that bonded, committed, conscientious betrayed men (fathers) speak about. Regarding sexual infidelity, the RBM project does not pick and choose which psychological science and sexual medicine data it aligns with.

The experiences betrayed men speak about tend not to align with assertions found in popular and clinical infidelity recovery literature. More broadly, betrayed men, counselors, and coaches we have spoken with tend to be unaware of the expansive psychological science and sexual medicine research regarding infidelity. More to the point, many tend to be unaware of significant differences in approach and methodology between psychological science and sexual medicine studies on the one hand, and infidelity recovery literature on the other.

Clear definitions are essential to research projects. Infidelity recovery literature tends to define sexual infidelity broadly. The RBM project defines sexual infidelity as sexual contact with another person.

Popular and clinical infidelity recovery literature tends to convey sexual infidelity as mainly engaged in by men. Clinical literature, for example, oftentimes alleges that 10-15 percent of women engage in sexual infidelity (Allen et al., 2005). However, research has shown that women sexually betray their spouses at the same rates as men (Brand, 2007; Johnson, 2005; Wróblewska-Skrzek, 2021). Furthermore, 30-55 percent of women in long-term, committed relationships (not necessarily marriage) engage in sexual contact with another person during their lifetime (Apostolou & Panayiotou, 2019; Bell et al., 1975; Boekhout et al., 1999). Culture, religiosity, and particularly, social desirability responding, account for such a broad range (30-55 percent) of data (Fincham & May, 2017; Maykovich, 1976; Thompson, 1983). This essay presents a survey of psychological science and sexual medicine studies regarding infidelity recovery, delineated by themes.  

Recovery Statistics

Minimal research has been conducted regarding infidelity recovery statistics. A qualitative study published in 1995 found that fewer than 15 percent of relationships that experienced infidelity can recover and improve (Charny & Parnass, 1995). A broader study published in 2014 referenced the 1995 study as one of the only studies to have addressed recovery statistics (Heintzelman et al., 2014). Psychological science research confirms a low likelihood of forgiveness and reconciliation given the severe nature of the transgression (Bendixen et al., 2018; Ruel et al., 2022; Shackelford et al., 2002). 

Difficulties, Models, and Personality

Some literature has shown that many therapists feel undertrained for and overwhelmed by infidelity recovery work (Heintzelman et al., 2014; Vossler & Moller, 2014; Whisman & Snyder, 2007). Much of the infidelity recovery literature emphasizes the importance of models (O’Rourke et al., 2025). A study published in 2022, however, found that many therapists do not use models (Irvine & Peluso, 2022). Moreover, models tend to employ a systemic approach, which tends to discount individual factors (Smith, 2011). Psychological science approaches infidelity primarily from individual factors, specifically the personality organization of unfaithful spouses (Apostolou & Panayiotou, 2019; Buss & Shackelford, 1997; Lișman & Corneliu, 2023).

Countertransference, Bias, and Prejudice

Infidelity recovery literature addresses therapists’ tendencies to various pitfalls of countertransference (Rokach & Chan, 2023; Silverstein, 1998; Smith, 2011). The literature also addresses bias and prejudice therapists may convey (Haney & Hardie, 2014). Some bias and prejudice seems to be in the direction of betrayed men (O’Rourke et al., 2025). Psychological Science addresses infidelity from sexual psychology differences and sex-differentiated biological factors, including reproductive costs and mate value (Asao et al., 2023; Donner et al., 2023; Jonason & Lavertu, 2017; Miner et al., 2009; Poeppl et al., 2016).

Cognition, High Emotion, and Worth

Infidelity recovery literature tends to emphasize cognitive, high emotion, and self-worth experiences of betrayed spouses, many of which appear to be normed for women (Boekhout et al., 1999; Charny & Parnass, 1995; Silverstein, 1998). This literature also tends to associate such experiences with trauma (Heintzelman et al., 2014; Rokach & Chan, 2023; Vossler & Moller, 2014). Psychological science emphasizes complex, sex-differentiated biological experiences of betrayed spouses and concise definitions of trauma (Asao et al., 2023; Bendixen et al., 2018; Buss & Shackelford, 1997; Miner et al., 2009; Shackelford et al., 2002).

Works Consulted

Allen, E. S., Atkins, D. C., Baucom, D. H., Snyder, D. K., Gordon, K. C., & Glass, S. P. (2005). Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual factors in engaging in and responding to extramarital involvement. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 12, 101–130.

Apostolou, M., & Panayiotou, R. (2019). The reasons that prevent people from cheating on their partners: An evolutionary account of the propensity not to cheat. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 34–40.

Asao, K., Crosby, C., & Buss, D. (2023). Sexual morality: Multidimensionality and sex differences. Evolutionary Behavioural Sciences, 17(4), 420–445.

Bell, R. R., Turner, S., & Rosen, L. (1975). A multivariate analysis of female extramarital coitus. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 37, 375-384.

Bendixen, M., Kennair, L., & Grøntvedt, T. (2018). Forgiving the unforgivable: couples’ forgiveness and expected forgiveness of emotional and sexual infidelity from an error management theory perspective. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12, 322–335.

Boekhout, B., Hendrick, S., & Hendrick, C. (1999). Relationship infidelity: A loss perspective. Journal of Personal & Interpersonal Loss, 4(2), 97-124.

Brand, R., Markey, C., Mills, A., & Hodges, S. (2007). Sex differences in self-reported infidelity and its correlates. Sex Roles, 57(1–2), 101–109.

Buss, D.M., & Shackelford, T.K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 193–221.

Charny, I. W., & Parnass, S. (1995). The impact of extramarital relationships on the continuation of marriages. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 21, 100–115.

Donner, M., Chagas-Bastos, F., Jeremiah, R., & Laham, S. (2023). Pathogens or promiscuity? Testing two accounts of the relation between disgust sensitivity and binding moral values. Emotion, 24(2), 465–478.

Fincham, F., & May, R. (2017). Infidelity in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 70-74.

Haney, J. M., & Hardie, L. (2014). Psychotherapeutic Considerations for Working with Betrayed Spouses: A Four-task Recovery Model. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 35, 401-413.

Heintzelman, A., Murdock, N., Krycak, R., & Seay, L. (2014). Recovery from infidelity: Differentiation of self, trauma, forgiveness, and posttraumatic growth among couples in continuing relationships. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 3, 13-29.

Irvine, T. J., & Peluso, P. R. (2022). An affair to remember: A mixed methods survey examining therapists’ experiences treating infidelity. The Family Journal, 30(3), 324–333.

Johnson, S. (2005). Your cheatin’ heart: Myths and absurdities about extradyadic relationships. Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, 4, 161–172.

Jonason, P. K., & Lavertu, A. N. (2017). The reproductive costs and benefits associated with the Dark Triad traits in women. Personality and Individual Differences, 110, 38–40.

Lișman, C., & Corneliu, H. (2023). Dark, dissatisfied and disengaged: Propensity towards marital infidelity, the dark triad, marital satisfaction and the mediating role of moral disengagement. Psihologija, 56(2), 163-177.

Maykovich, M. K. (1976). Attitudes versus behavior in extramarital sexual relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 693–699.

Miner, E. J., Starratt, V. G., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). It’s not all about her: Men’s mate value and mate retention. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(3), 214–218.

O’Rourke, V., McElvaney, R., & Kirrane, M. (2025). Grappling with Infidelity: The Experiences of Therapists. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 24(1), 24–48.

Poeppl, T., Langguth, B., Rupprecht, R., Safron, A., Bzdok, D., Laird, A., & Eickhoff, S. (2016). The neural basis of sex differences in sexual behavior: A quantitative meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 43, 28-43.

Rokach, A., & Chan, S. H. (2023). Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5).

Ruel, M., De Jesus, A., Cristo, M., Nolan, K., Stewart-Hill, S., DeBonis, A. M., Goldstein, A., Frederick, M., Geher, G., & Alijaj, N. (2022). Why should I help you? A study of betrayal and helping. Current Psychology, 42, 17825–17834.

Shackelford, T. K., Buss, D. M., & Bennett, K. (2002). Forgiveness or breakup: sex differences in responses to a partner’s infidelity. Cognition and Emotion, 16(2), 299–307.

Silverstein, J. L. (1998). Countertransference in marital therapy for infidelity. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 24, 293–301.

Smith, T. (2011). Understanding infidelity: An interview with Gerald Weeks. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 19, 333-339.

Thompson, A. P. (1983). Extramarital sex: A review of the research literature. Journal of Sex Research 19(1), 1–22.

Vossler, A., & Moller, N. P. (2014). “The relationship past can’t be the future”: Couple counsellors’ experiences of working with infidelity. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 29(4), 424–435.

Whisman, M., & Snyder, D. (2007). Sexual infidelity in a national survey of American women: Differences in prevalence and correlates as a function of method of assessment. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 147–154.

Wróblewska-Skrzek, J. (2021). Infidelity in relation to sex and gender: The perspective of sociobiology versus the perspective of sociology of emotions. Sexuality & Culture, 25, 1885-1894.