Jealousy and Romantic Relational Aggression Among Dating College Students

The University of Southern Mississippi The University of Southern Mississippi

The Aquila Digital Community The Aquila Digital Community

Honors Theses Honors College

Spring 5-2017

Jealousy and Romantic Relational Aggression Among Dating Jealousy and Romantic Relational Aggression Among Dating

College Students College Students

Ashlee A. Bryant

University of Southern Mississippi

Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses

Part of the Psychology Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Bryant, Ashlee A., "Jealousy and Romantic Relational Aggression Among Dating College Students" (2017).

Honors Theses

. 524.

https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses/524

This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at The Aquila Digital

Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of The Aquila

Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected].

The University of Southern Mississippi

Jealousy and Romantic Relational Aggression Among Dating College Students

Ashlee Bryant

A Thesis

Submitted to the Honors College of

The University of Southern Mississippi

in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science

in the Department of Psychology

December 2016

iii

Approved by

____________________________________

Eric R. Dahlen, Ph.D., Thesis Adviser

Department of Psychology

____________________________________

D. Joe Olmi, Ph.D.,

Chair

Department of Psychology

____________________________________

Ellen Weinauer, Ph.D., Dean

Honors College

Abstract

Most of the research on relational aggression has been conducted with samples of older

children and early adolescents and has focused primarily on same-sex peer relationships

(Goldstein & Tisak, 2004). The aim of this study was to contribute to the relatively

meager research on relational aggression in the context of college students’ romantic

relationships by exploring the role of interpersonal jealousy. Participants included 377

undergraduate student volunteers (64 men and 313 women) ranging in age from 18 to 58

who were recruited through the Department of Psychology’s subject pool (i.e., Sona).

The data were collected in the form of an online survey hosted through the online

research system used by the Department of Psychology (i.e., Qualtrics). Measures of key

variables included the Multidimensional Jealousy Scale (MJS) and the Romantic

Relational Aggression subscale from the Self-Report of Aggression and Social Behavior

Measure (SRASBM). The scores on all three subscales of the MJS (i.e., cognitive,

emotional, and behavioral) were positively related to scores on the Romantic Relational

Aggression subscale of the SRASBM. Although all three subscales of the MJS predicted

romantic relational aggression, the Cognitive and Behavioral subscales explained the

most unique variance. The implications of these findings and the study’s limitations are

discussed.

Keywords: romantic relational aggression, jealousy, college students

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………....1

Chapter 2: Literature Review……………………………………………………………...2

Relational Aggression……………………………………………………………..2

Jealousy……………………………………………………………………………4

The Present Study…………………………………………………………………6

Chapter 3: Methods……………………………………………………………………….7

Participants………………………………………………………………………..7

Measures………………………………………………………………………......8

Procedure……………………………………………………………………….....9

Chapter 4: Results……………………………………………………………..…………10

Data Screening……………………………………………………………….......10

Preliminary Analyses………………………………………………………….....11

Primary Analyses………………………………………………………………...12

Chapter 5: Discussion……………………………………………………………………13

Limitations……………………………………………………………………….15

Future Directions………………………………………………………………...16

References……………………………………………………………………………….18

Tables……………………………………………………………………………………21

IRB Approval Letter…………………………………………………………………….26

Introduction

Relational aggression is a form of aggressive behavior that involves the

manipulation of social relationships, as in rumor spreading or social ostracism (Goldstein,

Teran, & McFaul, 2008). Others have termed relational aggression as a set of behaviors

intended to damage another’s relationships, reputation, or feelings of belonging or

inclusion, or to exert social control (Werner & Crick, 1999). In the context of intimate

relationships, relational aggression could also involve intentionally making a romantic

partner jealous or threatening to end a relationship (Ellis, Crooks, & Wolfe, 2009).

Most of the research on relational aggression has been conducted with samples of

older children and early adolescents, and has focused primarily on same-sex peer

relationships (Goldstein & Tisak, 2004). While less is known about relational aggression

among older adolescents and emerging adults, this topic is beginning to receive increased

attention. Not only does relational aggression continue to be a significant problem for

older adolescents and early adults, but there is reason to believe that the increased

importance of intimate partnerships during this developmental period may make

relational aggression in dating relationships even more salient (Prather, Dahlen,

Nicholson, & Yowell, 2012). Linder, Crick, and Collins (2002) found that relationally

aggressive behaviors in college students’ dating relationships were associated with a

number of negative relationship qualities. Additionally, victims of romantic relational

aggression generally reported insecure dating relationships, while perpetrators reported

distrust and jealousy in their relationships (Ellis et al., 2009). Moreover, relational

aggression may be an important but often neglected aspect of the broader problem of

intimate partner violence and abuse that is unfortunately common among both teens and

emerging adults (Ellis et al., 2009; Goldstein et al., 2008). Thus, relational aggression

appears to be a relevant concern in both peer and romantic relationships among college

students.

The present study aimed to contribute to the relatively meager research on

relational aggression in the context of college students’ romantic relationships by

exploring the role of interpersonal jealousy. A number of personality and individual

difference factors have been shown to predict relationally aggressive behaviors in college

students’ peer relationships and intimate partnerships; however, the relationship between

romantic jealousy and relational aggression in college students’ dating relationships has

not been adequately investigated. It is hoped that learning more about this potential

relationship can eventually inform efforts to understand, prevent, and treat relational

aggression in this population.

Literature Review

Relational Aggression

Relational aggression refers to a set of behaviors intended to manipulate and/or

damage another’s relationship, reputation, or feelings of belonging or inclusion (Linder et

al., 2002; Prather et al., 2012). Although relational aggression is typically viewed as a

type of indirect aggression, it can be direct or indirect. Examples of indirect relational

aggression include gossip, spreading rumors, and subtle forms of manipulation; whereas,

more direct forms include overt social exclusion or threats to end a relationship if the

victim does not conform to the aggressor’s wishes (Czar, Dahlen, Bullock, & Nicholson,

2011). In the context of romantic relationships, relational aggression is associated with

psychosocial maladjustment, problem behavior, and lower levels of relationships quality

(Goldstein, 2011). Linder et al. (2002) found that both relational aggression and

victimization in romantic relationships were associated with negative relationship

features involving reduced trust and elevated jealousy.

Compared with overt forms of aggression (i.e., verbal and physical aggression),

far less is known about relational aggression. This is especially true among older

adolescents and early adults, as most of the relational aggression literature has focused on

the peer relationships of children and early adolescents (Goldstein & Tisak, 2004).

Goldstein (2011) agreed that relational aggression had been shown to be relatively

common among in youths’ relationship formation and further noted that when it occurred

in same-sex friendships, relational aggression was especially salient for young women,

and that compared to young men, young women were more bothered by relational

aggression and spent more time thinking about it and discussing it.

Among older adolescents and early adults, it is clear that relational aggression in

peer relationships is detrimental. A growing body of research has identified a number of

adverse correlates of relational aggression among college students, such as peer rejection

and insecure attachment, substance use, antisocial behaviors and psychopathic

personality traits, anxiety, and depression (Linder et al., 2002). Although it has received

less attention in the literature than peer relational aggression, romantic relational

aggression (i.e., relationally aggressive behaviors occurring in the context of intimate

partnerships) also appears problematic (Prather et al., 2012). Prather and colleagues

(2012) found that the acceptance of couple violence was positively related to the

perpetration of relational aggression in dating relationships, indicating that individuals

who hold less negative attitudes toward couple violence would be more likely to engage

in relational aggression in their intimate partnerships.

Although a number of variables have been identified that appear useful in

predicting relational aggression in both the peer and romantic relationships of college

students, the potential role of jealousy is unknown. Since some of the relationally

aggressive behaviors that occur in the context of romantic relationships seem to involve

attempts to provoke jealous reactions in one’s partner (e.g., flirting with someone else in

front of one’s partner, withdrawing one’s time and attention from one’s partner and

reallocating them elsewhere), it seems that students who tend to be jealous in their

romantic relationships may be more relationally aggressive.

Jealousy

At the broadest level, romantic jealousy refers to a complex set of emotions,

cognitions, and behaviors (Melamed, 1991; Pfeiffer & Wong, 1989). The emotional

experience of jealousy is varied. For some individuals, the experience may be

characterized primarily by anger. For others, feelings of shame, rejection, or sadness

may dominate the picture (Pfeiffer & Wong, 1989). The cognitive component of

jealousy often involves how one interprets the quality of one’s relationship and various

threats to it (e.g., the perception of real or imagined attraction between one’s partner and

a rival). As Pfeiffer and Wong (1989) noted, interpretations of threats are not necessarily

rational and include worries or suspicions without supporting evidence. The behavioral

component of jealousy refers primarily to how individuals cope when jealous. According

to Pfeiffer and Wong (1989), some of these behaviors are aimed at detecting threats (e.g.,

searching a partner’s belongings for evidence of infidelity) and others seek to protect the

relationship from perceived threat (e.g., showing up unannounced to interrupt a potential

encounter between one’s partner and a suspected rival). Some jealous behaviors (e.g.,

exerting excessive control over one’s partner) are often viewed as forms of emotional or

psychological abuse (Ellis et al., 2009) and may be a precursor to intimate partner

violence (Elphinstion, Feeney, Noller, Connor, and Fitzgerald, 2013). Nemeth, Bonomi,

Lee, and Ludwin, (2012) found that anxiety about sexual fidelity, a common feature of

jealousy, is used as a strategy by perpetrators to control victims. This suggests one way

in which jealousy via infidelity concerns may serve as both a trigger for the acute violent

episode and as a more persistent tactic for sustained abuse over time.

Jealousy is a common phenomenon in romantic relationships and appears to be

relevant in many cases of relationship dissatisfaction. Approximately one third of

couples under the age of 50 seeking counseling identified jealousy as a primary reason

for pursuing professional help (Worley & Sampson, 2014). Elphinstion and colleagues

(2013) found that the most common jealousy-evoking situation between romantic

partners involved one partner’s choice to give time and attention to someone who is not

their partner.

Jealousy has been found to be a factor behind many negative relationship

experiences, such as intimate partner violence, verbal and physical aggression, and

relational dissatisfaction and uncertainty (Elphinstion et al., 2013). Knobloch, Solomon,

and Cruz (2001) also found that the experience and expression of jealousy was associated

with a host of negative intrapersonal and relational outcomes, including relational

dissatisfaction. They also found that cognitive jealousy was closely tied to relational

uncertainty. Communication and jealousy have been found to be related not only to

relational satisfaction, but also to relationship stability and permanence, with

communication associated positively and jealousy associated negatively. Communicative

responses to jealousy are significantly more predictive of relational satisfaction than

jealousy experience alone (Andersen, Elvoy, Guerro, & Spitzberg, 1995).

The Present Study

The present study explored the possible relationship between jealousy and

romantic relational aggression in a college student sample. Research investigating these

issues is important, given the evidence that relational aggression is problematic among

college students and the increased salience of romantic relationships during this

developmental stage (Goldstein & Teran, 2008; Linder et al., 2002). With so little

evidence of a relationship between these constructs, the present study should be viewed

as an exploratory investigation designed to determine whether assessing individual

differences in jealousy is likely to have utility in understanding relational aggression. It

was predicted that jealousy would be positively related to romantic relational aggression.

That is, we expected that college students higher in jealousy would report higher levels of

romantic relational aggression. Although we had no basis for making specific predictions

with regard to the possible role of participant gender, we included this variable to

determine whether there were gender differences on the variables of interest. Finally,

although we were primarily interested in the cognitive dimension of jealousy (i.e., the

degree to which one worries about one’s partner’s romantic interest in others), we

selected a multidimensional measure of jealousy that also permitted is to assess the

emotional and behavioral aspects of jealousy.

Methods

Participants

Participants were 377 undergraduate student volunteers (64 men and 313 women)

ranging in age from 18 to 58 (Mdn age = 20) recruited through the Department of

Psychology’s subject pool. In terms of their racial/ethnic backgrounds, participants

identified themselves as African American (31%), Caucasian (62.9%), Hispanic/Latino

(1.3%), American Indian (.5%), Asian (1.3%), and other (2.9%). With regard to their

sexual orientation, most participants identified themselves as heterosexual or straight.

Freshmen were somewhat overrepresented with the numbers of sophomores, juniors, and

seniors roughly equivalent. Most of the sample did not belong to Greek organizations,

and slightly more than half approximately half lived off campus. Additional information

about the demographic characteristics of participants can be found in Table 1. Eligibility

to participate in the study required participants to be either involved in a current romantic

relationship (73.7% of the sample) or to have been involved in a romantic relationship at

some time during the previous 12 months (26.3% of the sample). Of those currently

involved in a relationship, most involved opposite-sex (i.e., male-female) relationships

(94.6%), followed by same-sex relationships involving two women (4%), and same-sex

relationships involving two men (1.4%). Many of these relationships were long term,

lasting more than 2 years (40.3%), and most were described as dating relationships

(71.9%). Additional information about the current relationships of participants currently

involved in romantic relationships and previous relationship of those not currently

involved in a romantic relationship can be found in Table 2 and Table 3, respectively.

Measures

Demographic Questionnaire. A brief demographic questionnaire was used to

collect information about participants’ gender, age, race, sexual orientation, relationship

status, and living arrangements. Most of this information was used to describe the

sample; however, the questions about age and relationship status were also used to make

sure that participants qualified to participate in the study.

Multidimensional Jealousy Scale (MJS; Pfeiffer & Wong, 1989). The 24-item

MJS was used to assess jealousy across three domains: cognitive, emotional, and

behavioral. All items were rated on a 1 to 7 scale; however, the scale anchors differ for

each of the domains. Items on the cognitive domain and behavioral domains are rated as

to their frequency of occurrence. Specifically, cognitive items are rated from 1 (“all the

time”) to 7 (“never”), and behavioral items are rated from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“all the

time”). Items on the emotional domain are rated by how pleased vs. upset each situation

would make the participant from 1 (“very pleased”) to 7 (“very upset”). Although the

associations of all three domains to romantic relational aggression were of interest, the

primary domain of interest for this study was the cognitive domain, as it provides the

most direct measure of the degree to which one worries about his or her partner’s interest

in a romantic rival as well as interest shown in one’s partner by a rival. Russell and

Harden (2005) reported the reliability coefficients of .82 for the cognitive scale, .90 for

the emotional scale, and .81 for the behavioral scale. The MJS has been used in a number

of studies, and comparisons with other measures of jealousy have supported its validity.

Self-Report of Aggression and Social Behavior Measure (SRASBM; Linder et

al., 2002; Morales & Crick, 1998). Romantic relational aggression was measured using

the 5-item Romantic Relational Aggression subscale from the 56-item SRASBM.

Respondents rated each item on a 7-point scale to indicate how true it is for them from 1

(“not at all true”) to 7 (“very true”). Czar and colleagues (2011) used this scale and

reported reliability coefficients of .72 to .76 range. Evidence of convergent validity has

been provided in the form of correlations with measures of romantic relationship quality

and several indices of psychological adjustment.

Procedure

Potential participants were recruited through the online research system used by

the Department of Psychology (i.e., Sona; https://usm.sona-systems.com/). After reading

a brief description of the study posted through Sona, potential participants who were

interested signed up for the study. After signing up, they received a URL directing them

to an online consent form and all survey measures hosted through Qualtrics. They were

informed about the possible risks and benefits of the study, reminded that participation

was voluntary and could be discontinued at any point during the study without penalty,

and provided with the primary researcher’s contact information. Students who wished to

participate provided electronic consent before being directed to the study questionnaires,

all of which were administered online through Qualtrics. To protect the anonymity of

participants and make sure that it was not possible to link them to their responses,

informed consent was obtained by using a yes/no item where potential participants must

select "yes" in order to see any study questionnaires instead of collecting names or

electronic signatures. The amount of time required to complete the study was

approximately 30 minutes. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board

(IRB) at the University of Southern Mississippi as part of a larger study on relational

aggression.

Results

Data Screening

The electronic data were downloaded from Qualtrics and saved as an SPSS data

file. Although this data file initially appeared to contain data from 472 respondents, 47

cases contained nothing but missing data and were deleted. This is fairly typical for

online survey studies conducted using the Department of Psychology’s subject pool and

probably reflects participants who accessed the survey and then decided not to complete

it at that point in time.

The data file was then examined for cases with excessive missing data on the

variables of interest. Three cases in which respondents omitted the entire Romantic

Relational Aggression subscale of the SRASBM were deleted. This is far less missing

data than is typically encountered in online survey research using this subject pool.

Next, two procedures recommended in the online survey research literature (e.g.,

Huang, Curran, Keeney, Poposki, & DeShon, 2012; Meade & Craig, 2012) were utilized

to identify and remove participants who responded carelessly. First, responses on two

directed response items (e.g., “Please answer ‘agree’ to this question”) that had been

blended into the online questionnaires were examined. Thirty-two participants failed one

or both of the directed response items and were removed from the data file. Second,

survey completion time was examined in order to identify participants who completed the

survey so quickly that it is unlikely that they could have read the instructions on each

questionnaire and attended to item content. This led to the removal of another seven

respondents. These numbers were somewhat lower than what is typical for online survey

research conducted with this subject pool, suggesting that participants in this study were

somewhat more likely to attend to the instructions and item content when answering.

Several analyses were then completed to check for the presence of univariate

outliers (i.e., cases with extreme scores on any variable of interest). Given the size of the

sample, a conservative criterion of z > 4 was used to identify univariate outliers. On this

basis, the data from five additional participants were omitted from, resulting in the final

sample size (N = 377) used in all analyses.

Preliminary Analyses

Alpha coefficients and descriptive statistics for all variables can be found in Table

4. The internal consistencies of the scales were adequate (i.e., αs > .70) to excellent,

suggesting that the scales used to measure each variable were assessing unitary

constructs. Participants obtained higher mean scores on MJS Emotional than on the MJS

Cognitive or Behavioral subscales, indicating that they were likely to report that they

would be upset across a number of situations in which their partner behaved in ways that

might raise concerns about their fidelity. As expected, the distributions of all variables

were skewed, which violates the assumption of normality required for parametric

statistics. The Romantic Relational Aggression subscale of the SRASBM and both the

Cognitive and Behavioral subscales of the MJS were positively skewed (i.e., most

participants obtained low scores on these variables, leading scores to cluster on the left of

the distributions); the Emotional subscale of the MJS was negatively skewed (i.e., most

participants obtained high scores on this variable, leading scores to cluster on the right of

the distribution).

Based on the desire to utilize parametric statistics, the distributions of these

variables were transformed to achieve normality. Specifically, logarithmic

transformations were applied to the Romantic Relational Aggression, MJS Cognitive, and

MJS Behavioral subscales. A reflected square-root transformation was applied to the

MJS Emotional subscale. These transformations normalized the distributions, and

transformed scores were used in subsequent analyses unless otherwise noted.

One-way (gender) Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) were computed to determine

whether women and men differed on any of the variables of interest (see Table 5). In

order for the means and standard deviations by gender to be comparable with those for

the full sample presented in Table 4, non-transformed scores were used in these analyses.

Given the degree of skewness previously noted, ANOVAs were computed using

bootstrapping methods to account for the non-normality of the data. There were a total of

1,000 random samples generated with 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals. There

were no statistically significant gender differences on any variable. Thus, women and

men in the present study did not differ on any of the MJS subscales or the Romantic RA

subscale of the SRASBM.

Primary Analyses

Interrelationships among variables were examined via bivariate correlations for

the full sample (see Table 6). We predicted that interpersonal jealousy, as measured by

the MJS, would be positively related to romantic relational aggression. This hypothesis

was supported, as scores on all three subscales of the MJS (i.e., cognitive, emotional, and

behavioral) were positively related to scores on the Romantic RA subscale of the

SRASBM. Participants who reported having more frequent jealous thoughts about their

romantic partner (MJS Cognitive), being more upset when faced with potential indicators

of their partner’s infidelity (MJS Emotional), and/or engaging in behaviors indicative of

jealousy (MJS Behavioral) reported being more likely to engage in relationally

aggressive behavior in the context of their romantic relationships.

Given that each of the three MJS subscales was related to the Romantic Relational

Aggression subscale of the SRASBM, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed in

which romantic relational aggression was regressed on respondent gender, age, and each

of the three MJS subscales. This type of analysis allows us to determine whether all three

subscales of the MJS were relevant to romantic relational aggression when considered

together and while taking respondent gender and age into account. Respondent gender

and age were entered in Step 1, and each of the three MJS subscales were entered

simultaneously on Step 2.

The full regression model was significant, R = .53, F (5, 376) = 28.82, p = .000.

The addition of the three MJS subscales on Step 2 resulted in a significant change in R

(see Table 7). Each of the three MJS subscales predicted scores on the Romantic

Relational Aggression subscale while taking respondent gender and age into account.

The relative contributions of the MJS Cognitive and Behavioral subscales were

comparable and larger than the contribution of the MJS Emotional subscale.

Discussion

This study was conducted in order to explore whether there was a relationship

between interpersonal jealousy and romantic relational aggression in a college student

sample. Despite the clear theoretical connection between these variables, the possible

role of jealousy among intimate partners had not been previously investigated in the

context of romantic relational aggression. The main findings of the study were that

interpersonal jealousy was positively related to romantic relational aggression and that no

significant gender differences were observed on either jealousy or romantic relational

aggression. While all three forms of jealousy assessed by the Multidimensional Jealousy

Scale (i.e., cognitive, emotional, and behavioral) were positively related to romantic

relational aggression while taking respondent gender into account, the cognitive and

behavioral dimensions explained more of the unique variance in romantic relational

aggression than the emotional dimension.

Our prediction that jealousy would be positively related to romantic relational

aggression in college students’ dating relationships was clearly supported. Although we

were most interested in the relationship of the cognitive component of jealousy to

romantic relational aggression, all three subscales of the MJS (i.e., cognitive, emotional,

and behavioral) were positive predictors of romantic relational aggression while

accounting for respondent gender. Thus, students who reported having more frequent

jealous thoughts about their romantic partner (MJS Cognitive), being more upset when

faced with potential indicators of their partner’s infidelity (MJS Emotional), and/or

engaging in behaviors indicative of jealousy (MJS Behavioral) were more likely to report

engaging in relationally aggressive behavior in their romantic relationships. This finding

is consistent with the work of Linder and colleagues (2002), which showed that

relationally aggressive behaviors in college students’ dating relationships were associated

with a number of negative relationship qualities. In addition, our findings were

consistent with those of Ellis and colleagues (2009), who found that victims of romantic

relational aggression generally reported insecure dating relationships, while perpetrators

reported distrust and jealousy in their relationships.

The present study did not find evidence of gender differences on jealousy or

romantic relational aggression. That is, male and female students in the present sample

did not differ on any of the MJS subscales or in terms of romantic relational aggression.

This is somewhat of a departure from Goldstein’s (2011) finding that relational

aggression in same-sex friendships was more salient for young women than young men;

however, it should be noted that the participants in the present study were older than

those in Goldstein’s study and that the present study focused on romantic rather than peer

relational aggression. The lack of gender differences observed in romantic relational

aggression is consistent with previous studies that found no gender differences in peer or

romantic relational aggression among college students (e.g., Czar et al., 2011; Prather et

al., 2012). Considered in this context, the present findings provide additional evidence

that the widely held belief that relational aggression is far more common among women

may be erroneous when it comes to emerging adults.

Limitations

There were a number of limitations of the present study that should be considered.

First, the use of a college student sample limits the degree to which the results can be

generalized to a non-college population of the same age range as well as to the broader

adult population. Second, women were overrepresented in the present sample (i.e.,

roughly 83% of the participants were women). While there are considerably more

women than men enrolled at the university from which the sample was collected, women

were still overrepresented in the present sample relative to their numbers across the

university. Third, this study relied on self-report measures which were highly face valid,

raising questions about issues of response bias or the possible lack of insight into one’s

own behaviors. Although it is not clear how one could reasonably assess constructs such

as cognitive jealousy without relying heavily on self-report measures, the study of

relational aggression would certainly benefit from supplementing self-report data with

other data collection methods (e.g., comparing self-report data with other-report data).

Finally, it is important to note that the research design utilized here was correlational and

that it does not permit the inference of causal relationships. While the present findings

are consistent with the possibility that jealousy leads to romantic relational aggression,

they are also consistent with the possibility that romantic relational aggression leads to

jealousy or that a third variable leads to both jealousy and romantic relational aggression.

Future Directions

The present findings suggest that the construct of interpersonal jealousy,

especially its cognitive and behavioral dimensions, is likely to be relevant in

understanding relational aggression in college students’ romantic relationships. In

addition to addressing the above limitations through the collection of data from more

diverse samples and the application of innovative methodologies that extend beyond self-

report data, future research should develop and evaluate more sophisticated models of the

relationship between jealousy, romantic relational aggression, and other relevant

variables. There is a growing body of evidence linking a variety of personality traits to

relational aggression among emerging adults. Perhaps jealousy should be considered

alongside some of the personality traits known to be relevant in relational aggression.

For example, might certain aspects of self-esteem (e.g., global self-esteem, contingent

self-esteem) moderate the relationship between jealousy and relational aggression? It

will also be important going forward to examine jealousy as a situational factor rather

than viewing it only as a stable trait. For example, experimental manipulations designed

to provoke jealousy among participants would not only help to assess the direction of the

relationship between jealousy and relational aggression but would also allow researchers

to determine whether jealousy is best conceptualized as a dispositional factor or as a

situational one. Another intriguing possibility involves the study of jealousy and

relational aggression in high-risk populations (e.g., perpetrators of intimate partner

violence). For example, a study of jealousy and romantic relational aggression conducted

with perpetrators of intimate partner violence could provide valuable information about

their role in overt aggression and violence.

In sum, the present study provides future researchers with a useful starting point

by demonstrating that interpersonal jealousy, as assessed with the Multidimensional

Jealousy Scale, is positively related to romantic relational aggression, as assessed with

the Romantic Relational Aggression subscale of the Self-Report of Aggression and Social

Behavior Measure, in a college student sample. It is hoped that this will lead to

additional work aimed at providing a more comprehensive understanding of the role of

jealousy in relational aggression.

References

Andersen, A. P., Elvoy, V. S., Guerro, K. L., & Spitzberg, H. B. (1995). Romantic

jealousy and relational satisfaction: A look at the impact of jealousy experience

and expression. Communication Reports, 8(2), 78-85. Retrieved from:

http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu

Czar, A. K., Dahlen, R. E., Bullock, E. E., & Nicholson, C. B. (2011). Psychopathic

personality traits in relational aggression among young adults. Aggressive

Behavior, 37, 207–214. Retrieved from:

http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu/

Ellis, E. W., Crooks, V. C., & Wolfe, A. D. (2009). Relational aggression in peer and

dating relationships: Links to psychological and behavioral adjustment. Social

Development, 18(2), 254-269. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00468.x

Elphinstion, A. R., Feeney, A.J., Noller, P., Connor, P.J., & Fitzgerald, J. (2013).

Romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction: The costs of rumination.

Western Journal of Communication, 77(3), 293-304. doi:

10.1080/10570314.2013.770161

Goldstein, S. (2011). Relational aggression in young adults’ friendships and romantic

relationships. Personal Relationships, 18, 645–656. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-

6811.2010.01329.x

Goldstein, E. S. & Teran, C. D, & McFaul, A. (2008). Profiles and correlates of

relational aggression in young adults’ romantic relationships. Journal of Youth

and Adolescence, 37: 251-265. doi: 10.1007/s10964-007-9255-6

Goldstein, E. S., & Tisak, S. M. (2004). Adolescents’ outcome expectancies about

relational aggression within acquaintanceships, friendships, and dating

relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 283-303.

doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.11.007

Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012).

Detecting and deterring insufficient effort responding to surveys. Journal of

Business and Psychology, 27(1), 99-114. doi: 10.1007/s10869-011-9231-8

Knobloch, K. L., Solomon, H. D., & Cruz, G. M. (2001). The role of relationships

developments and attachment in the experience of romantic jealousy. Personal

Relationships, 8, 205-224. Retrieved from:

http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu

Linder, R. J., Crick, R. N., & Collins, A. W. (2002). Relational aggression and

victimization in young adults’ romantic relationships: Associations with

perceptions of parent, peer, and romantic relationship quality. Social

Development, 11, 1: 69-83. Retrieved from:

http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu

Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data.

Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437-455. doi: 10.1037/a0028085

Melamed, T. (1991). Individual differences in romantic jealousy: The moderating effect

of relationship characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 455-

461. Retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu

Morales, J. R., & Crick, N. R. (1998). Self-report measure of aggression and

victimization. Unpublished measure.

Nemeth, M. J. Bonomi, E. A. Lee, A. M. & Ludwin, M. J. (2012). Sexual infidelity as

trigger for intimate partner violence. Journal of Women’s Health, 21 (9) 934-949.

doi: 10.1089/jwh.2011.3328

Pfeiffer, S. M., & Wong, T. P. P. (1989). Multidimensional jealousy scale. Journal of

Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 181-196.

Prather, E., Dahlen, R. E., Nicholson, C. B., & Yowell, B. E. (2012). Research on

aggression in dating relationships: Relational aggression in college students’

dating relationships. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 21, 705-

720. doi: 10.1080/10926771.2012.693151

Russell, B. E. & Harton, C. H. (2005). The “other factors”: Using individual and

relationship characteristics to predict sexual and emotional jealousy. Current

Psychology: Developmental • Learning • Personality • Social 24 (4), 242–257.

Retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com.lynx.lib.usm.edu

Werner, N., & Crick, N. (1999). Relational aggression and social-psychological

adjustment in a college sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108(4), 615–

623. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.108.4.615

Worley, T. & Sampson, J. (2014). Exploring the associations between relational

uncertainty, jealousy about partner’s friendships, and jealousy expression in

dating relationships. Communication Studies, 65(4), 370-388. doi:

10.1080/10510974.2013.833529

Table 1

Demographic Characteristics of Participants (N = 377)

Characteristic

Gender

Male

Female

313

Race/Ethnicity

African American/Black

117

Caucasian/White

237

62.9

Hispanic/Latino

1.3

American Indian/Alaskan Native

0.5

Asian

1.3

Other

2.9

Year in College

Freshman

132

35.0

Sophomore

20.2

Junior

22.8

Senior

22.0

Member of Sorority or Fraternity

Yes

24.9

283

75.1

Live On or Off Campus

On Campus

175

46.4

Off Campus

202

53.6

Type of Residence

Dorm

156

41.4

Greek House

4.2

Apartment On Campus

1.3

Apartment Off Campus

113

30.0

With Parent(s)

7.7

House Off Campus

15.4

Sexual Orientation

Heterosexual or Straight

350

92.8

Gay or Lesbian

1.6

Bisexual

5.3

Other

0.3

Table 2

Information About the Relationships of Participants Currently in a Romantic

Relationship (N = 278)

Characteristic

Parties in the Relationship

Woman & Man

263

94.6

Man & Man

1.4

Woman & Woman

4.0

Length of Relationship

< 1 Month

2.2

1-3 Months

7.6

3-6 Months

9.7

6-9 Months

8.6

9-12 Months

7.2

1-2 Years

24.5

More Than 2 Years

112

40.3

Type of Relationship

Dating

200

71.9

Live Together

12.6

Engaged

5.0

Live Together and Engaged

4.0

Married

6.5

Table 3

Information About the Most Recent Relationship of Participants Not Currently in a

Romantic Relationship (N = 99)

Characteristic

Parties in the Relationship

Woman & Man

98.0

Man & Man

2.0

Woman & Woman

Length of Relationship

< 1 Month

6.1

1-3 Months

22.2

3-6 Months

18.2

6-9 Months

9.1

9-12 Months

8.1

1-2 Years

20.2

More Than 2 Years

16.2

Type of Relationship

Dating

93.9

Live Together

4.0

Engaged

1.0

Live Together and Engaged

1.0

Married

Table 4

Alpha Coefficients and Descriptive Statistics (N = 377)

Measure

M (SD)

Skewness

MJS

Cognitive

.95

20.74 (13.05)

1.02

Emotional

.81

43.10 (7.21)

-0.55

Behavioral

.84

17.62 (8.83)

1.15

SRASBM

Romantic RA

.72

10.55 (5.35)

1.23

Note. MJS = Multidimensional Jealously Scale; SRASBM = Self-Report of Aggression

and Social Behavior Measure; RA = relational aggression.

Table 5

Univariate Gender Comparisons (N = 377)

Men (n = 64)

Women (n = 313)

Measure

M (SD)

95% CI

M (SD)

95% CI

F (1,376)

MJS

Cognitive

20.81 (12.86)

17.53-24.28

20.73 (13.10)

19.18-22.33

.00, ns

Emotional

42.47 (6.93)

40.68-44.16

43.22 (7.27)

42.41-44.02

.58, ns

Behavioral

16.53 (9.23)

14.43-18.83

17.84 (8.74)

16.99-18.67

1.17, ns

SRASBM

Romantic RA

10.09 (5.30)

8.87-11.53

10.65 (5.37)

10.02-11.20

.56, ns

Note. MJS = Multidimensional Jealously Scale; SRASBM = Self-Report of Aggression

and Social Behavior Measure; RA = relational aggression; CI = 95% bias-corrected

confidence interval using 1,000 bootstrap resamples of the data.

Table 6

Intercorrelations Among Variables (N = 377)

Measure

1. MJS Cognitive

2. MJS Emotional

.00

3. MJS Behavioral

.41**

.17*

4. SRASBM Romantic RA

.43**

.15*

.44**

Note. MJS = Multidimensional Jealously Scale; SRASBM = Self-Report of Aggression

and Social Behavior Measure; RA = relational aggression.

*p < .01. **p < .001.

Table 7

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Summary for Respondent Gender, Age, and Jealousy

Predicting Romantic Relational Aggression (N = 377)

Variable

SE B

ΔR

Step 1

.00

Gender

.03

.05

Age

.00

.03

Step 2

.28

.28**

MJS Cognitive

.24

.04

.31**

MJS Emotional

.02

.01

.10*

MJS Behavioral

.30

.05

.29**

Note. MJS = Multidimensional Jealously Scale.

*p < .05. **p < .001.

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD

118 College Drive #5147 | Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001

Phone: 601.266.5997 | Fax: 601.266.4377 | www.usm.edu/research/institutional.review.board

NOTICE OF COMMITTEE ACTION

The project has been reviewed by The University of Southern Mississippi Institutional

Review Board in accordance with Federal Drug Administration regulations (21 CFR 26,

111), Department of Health and Human Services (45 CFR Part 46), and university

guidelines to ensure adherence to the following criteria:



 The risks to subjects are minimized.

 The risks to subjects are reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefits.

 The selection of subjects is equitable.

 Informed consent is adequate and appropriately documented.

 Where appropriate, the research plan makes adequate provisions for monitoring

the data collected to ensure the safety of the subjects.

 Where appropriate, there are adequate provisions to protect the privacy of

subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of all data.

 Appropriate additional safeguards have been included to protect vulnerable

subjects.

 Any unanticipated, serious, or continuing problems encountered regarding risks

to subjects must be reported immediately, but not later than 10 days following the

event. This should be reported to the IRB Office via the “Adverse Effect Report

Form”.

 If approved, the maximum period of approval is limited to twelve months.

Projects that exceed this period must submit an application for renewal or

continuation.

PROTOCOL NUMBER: 15021001

PROJECT TITLE: Romantic Relationships in College

PROJECT TYPE: New Project

RESEARCHER(S): Eric Dahlen, Ph.D.

COLLEGE/DIVISION: College of Education and Psychology

DEPARTMENT: Psychology

FUNDING AGENCY/SPONSOR: N/A

IRB COMMITTEE ACTION: Expedited Review Approval

PERIOD OF APPROVAL: 02/11/2015 to 02/10/2016

Lawrence A. Hosman, Ph.D.

Institutional Review Board