Rejection sensitivity - rejecting an unwanted lover safely

Rejecting an unwanted lover unceremoniously can be dangerous. Rejection sensitivity and aggression by the scorned male can have disastrous consequences. Last week a college girl was attacked with a sickle for doing so. The demographic profile of students at our clinic is probably a representation of the Pune student population. Many students feel socially and culturally alienated while having to cope on their own with minimal family support. Some have no one to express their feelings or thoughts to. A smile or other facial expressions from a classmate or a single phrase while watching a game are viewed as tokens of intimacy. Subsequent fantasising invests these facial expressions and interactions with an excessive significance. That the girl does not initiate or acknowledge further interaction is rationalised as shyness and considered a virtue, further embedding the myth of intimacy.

The concept of gender equality may be alien in the culture of the student. It comes as a great shock to the lover, when he gathers up his courage to proclaim his love only to find it discarded unceremoniously. His reaction will depend on his attachment style - the behavioural response to separation developed in childhood. Mostly he will withdraw further into his shell, but in some cases, especially when he is high on the personality characteristic of rejection sensitivity and has a fearful attachment style, he will harbour and act out thoughts of revenge.These vengeful thoughts smoulder unrecognised until they burst forth in as dramatic and unexpected action as the initial profession of love.

Rejecting an unwanted lover

Rejection sensitivity is always a concern when rejecting an unwanted lover. The independent modern woman needs to learn how to handle this situation without involving family or other third parties. Rejecting an unwanted lover can be considered as a form of breaking bad news. For this there is no better technique than the SPIKES 6-step protocol which is used to break bad news in medicine.

Setting

Make sure there is privacy. No matter how startled you are by his profession of love, do not blurt out a summary dismissal in front of everyone. Stay in a public place, but take him to one side.

Perception

Ask him to clarify what he has just said, and what lead him to say that. This  will help you to place him, if you haven't already done so.

Invitation

Ask whether you can tell him your point of view on the subject

giving Knowledge

Warning before giving the bad news helps the person process the information imparted without  getting angry or feeling isolated. Start by saying "I am sorry to say that I don't feel that way". Don't be rude or excessively blunt  Responses such as "who do you think you are?",  "why should I have feelings for you?" or laughing contemptuously are bound to turn love into the other end of the stick - hate, especially if he is high on rejection sensitivity. Check his reactions and modify  what you are saying so he can understand.

Empathise

Identify his emotion - sadness, anger, hurt. Closely monitor his facial expressions. Acknowledge it. "I can see that you are feeling hurt. Anyone in your position might feel like that".

Strategy

Discussing what comes next. Start from his Perception of the relationship to help vent his emotions. Deal with these Empathically, again the facial expressions are important. The goal should be to politely but firmly communicate "I don't feel that way" so "we cant take this any further, don't take this personally".

The aim is to stay polite while rejecting an unwanted lover without humiliating him. It should not take more than 5-10 minutes of time spent reading facial expressions and showing concern while firmly putting forward your own lack of 'spark' in the relationship.

Reference

1. Baile WF, Buckman R, Lenzi R, Glober G, Beale EA, Kudelka AP. SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer. Oncologist. 2000;5(4):302-11.

Sexual Dysfunction and Relationships

The Erectile Dysfunction-Relationship Cycle

Erectile and sexual dysfunction in an ongoing relationship usually reflects difficulties between the partners. Relationship problems interfere with sexual feelings and cause or worsen erectile dysfunction.  Any experience that hinders the ability to be intimate, that leads to a feeling of inadequacy or distrust, or that develops a sense of being unloving or unlovable may result in erectile dysfunction.  Successive episodes of impotence are reinforcing. The man becomes increasingly anxious about his next sexual encounter. Erectile dysfunction is worsened by anticipatory anxiety about achieving and maintaining an erection interferes.  Sexual dysfunction interferes with pleasure in sexual contact and reduces ability to respond to sexual stimulation.

Erectile Dysfunction in the relationship cycle

In the early years of the relationship

• Lack of knowledge - there is a refractory period after sex before you can get the next orgasm. This refractory period increases gradually from a few minutes in teenagers to many days  in the elderly. Misguided enthusiasm after a period of separation causes a one-off problem with erection. This  is transient erectile problem is further reinforced by succeeding anxiety.
• Lack of privacy - the young couple moves into the parental home and has minimal access to privacy. Sex is a hurried activity with the focus on orgasm. Intimacy is not fostered. Subsequently there is dissatisfaction and a further build-up of anxiety.
• Stressors - careers with long working hours, night shift work and work from home leaves little time for the emotional intimacy that is requisite for sexual intimacy.

Middle phase

• Lifestyle changes - a sedentary  life style coupled with an indiscriminate diet result in obesity, a leading risk factor for erectile dysfunction. Excessive alcohol intake, and smoking have a direct impact on sexual functioning.
• Infidelity - is a major cause of anxiety and erectile dysfunction in the middle phase of the relationship. This  is especially so when the infidelity arises from insecurity - the man or woman attempting to prove continued youthfulness and desirability outside the relationship.

Later years

• Medical issues - chronic illnesses such as diabetes, and heart disease are commonly associated with erectile dysfunction.

What to do

• Don't panic - anxiety worsens erectile dysfunction. An occasional problem with  erection is not a reflection on your masculinity, and does not necessarily indicate a long term erectile dysfunction. Don't immediately try  to 'prove' yourself. Give it a days break to be safely out of the refractory period. There  will be  no trouble in the  next sexual encounter.
• Communicate - reassure your  partner of your continuing sexual interest in her. Communicate openly about  your condition. Involving your  partner improves the outcome of treatments for erectile dysfunction.
• Quit smoking
• Lose weight, exercise regularly
• Get treatment for alcohol or drug problems
• Work through relationship issues. Consider counseling if unable to work through  problems on your own.
• Depression, anxiety and stress related mental health issues should be addressed. Don't ignore them.

Whom to see for sexual dysfunction

• Consult a qualified psychiatrist. He or she  is the only person with the knowledge, training, and experience to deal with the psychological and medical issues that result in sexual dysfunction. The psychiatrist will also address issues in the relationship that are perpetuating the erectile dysfunction.
• Avoid self-styled sex therapists and sexologists

References:

1. Kubin M, Wagner G, Fugl-Meyer AR. Epidemiology of erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res. 2003 Feb;15(1):63-71.
2. McCabe M, Althof SE, Assalian P, Chevret-Measson M, Leiblum SR, Simonelli C, Wylie K. Psychological and interpersonal dimensions of sexual function and dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2010 Jan;7(1 Pt 2):327-36.
3. Metz ME, Epstein N. Assessing the role of relationship conflict in sexual dysfunction. J Sex Marital Ther. 2002 Mar-Apr;28(2):139-64.
4. Nina Bingham. Research Findings on Sexual Dysfunction, Intimacy and Conflict in Heterosexual Couples. Accessed 30-Jun-2012

Rejection and aggression - the fury of the scorned male

Rejection experienced in an intimate relationship can trigger unexpected aggression with sometimes fatal consequences. A working woman in Pune was stabbed to death in her home when she spurned the marriage proposal of a good friend. Another 17 year-old girl from Hadapsar was stabbed in the stomach for rebuffing the overtures of a relative. Why would a man assault a woman after professing his love to her? Many instances of aggression arise from events where an individual perceives he is not sufficiently loved or valued in the context of an intimate relationship.

People differ in their readiness to perceive and react to rejection. The desire to belong is a basic human need. Some maintain equanimity while others over-react in ways that harm their relationships and their well-being. Hostility and aggression are among the most destructive reactions to rejection. Low self-esteem, depression, jealousy, self-neglect and a breakdown of daily routine are other painful outcomes of being rejected. Social rejection is the strongest predictor of violence in adolescents (Surgeon General 2001). This association between rejection and aggression is also repeatedly shown in social experiments.

Rejection triggers behaviours internalised during interactions with parents during infancy and early childhood. Based on these interactions children form certain expectations regarding the satisfaction or rejection of their needs. When childhood needs are met sensitively and consistently the child forms secure expectations. When childhood needs are met with rejection the child forms a pattern of insecure expectations involving doubts and anxieties. These repeated early interactions determine the individuals attachment style - the communication pattern exhibited in close relationships.

Aggression is first learned during infancy as a response to separation from the mother. The purpose is to reunite with the mother and discourage future separation. Adults who are socially immature respond to separation from a loved one with shouting, crying, and throwing or smashing objects. Again the purpose is to protect the relationship. Men with a fearful or preoccupied attachment style are more likely to be jealous, violent and abusive in intimate relationships. This tendency to violence increases when the relationship is threatened. Males with a fearful attachment style are anxious about gaining their partners approval and at the same time are fearful of being rejected by them. These males are more likely to attribute negative intent to their partners. This combination of internal conflict and external blame makes men with a fearful attachment style respond to rejection with aggression (Leary 2006).

Jealousy is the precursor of aggression in many close relationships. Jealousy occurs when people believe that another person does not sufficiently value their relationship because of the presence or intrusion of a third party. Men who are abusive have higher interpersonal jealousy. Abused women and the men who abuse them report jealousy as the most common precursor to violence. Among both men and women, intimate violence is often provoked by real or imagined infidelity (Leary 2006). We have already discussed jealousy in the context of the family.

Rejection-sensitivity is a personality characteristic associated with aggression elicited by rejection in love and romance. People high in rejection sensitivity (Downey 1996)

1. Anxiously expect rejection by significant people in their lives.
2. Readily perceive intentional rejection in the ambiguous or insensitive behaviour of their new partner.
3. Over-react to rejection

Gender differences (Downey 1996) dictate that men with high rejection sensitivity manifest jealousy in the face of perceived rejection. Their consequent attempts to control their love object’s interactions with other males leads to further dissatisfaction in the relationship. When they are not successful in this they respond with rage - the common fallout of jealousy. Females react to perceived rejection with hostility and withdrawal of support. Both gender reactions lead to dissatisfaction with the partner and subsequent breakup of the relationship. If taken to an extreme, the jealousy in the rejection sensitive male can lead to fatal consequences for object of his affections.

Despite these negative experiences rejection sensitive people are repeatedly drawn to intimate relationships. The new relationship is viewed as an opportunity for acceptance. Initially they work hard to ingratiate themselves with their partner. However, the inevitable transient negativity, insensitivity, or preoccupation triggers the deeply ingrained anxieties and expectations of rejection. The person over-reacts to minor and ambiguous signals from the love object and starts the cycle of dissatisfaction in the relationship.

Rejection sensitivity is deeply ingrained in the personality. An intimate partner or a therapist can alter the expectancies and anxieties about rejection. It is possible for the rejection sensitive person to develop better conflict resolution skills. But only when there is a high degree of motivation in the rejection-sensitive person and a skilled, and nurturing partner.

References

1. Özlem Ayduk, Anett Gyurak, and Anna Luerssen. Individual differences in the rejection-aggression link in the hot sauce paradigm: The case of Rejection Sensitivity. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2008 May 1; 44(3): 775–782. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.07.004
2. Downey G, Feldman SI. Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996 Jun;70(6):1327-43.
3. Leary MR, Twenge JM, Quinlivan E. Interpersonal rejection as a determinant of anger and aggression. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006;10(2):111-32.
4. Office of the Surgeon General. (2001). Youth violence: A report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

Relationship conflict and strain in youth

Some relationships are characterised by conflict and strain and this can be detrimental to mental health in youth. Romantic relationships are important for mental health during the transition from adolescence to adulthood. Satisfaction in the relationship is strongly related to regard and empathy with the partner (Cramer 2003). Intimacy increases positive feelings in the relationship. The perceived quality of a relationship depends more on the presence of intimacy than on absence of conflict (Laurenceau 2005).

We have already noted the various the reactions to breakup of relationships. We now take a look at some psychological aspects of conflict and strain in ongoing relationships of young persons.

Gender aspects of ongoing relationships

For a young woman an ongoing and current relationship is associated with feelings of psychological well-being. For her just being in a romantic relationship provides a social identity and increases feelings of self- worth. This need to be in a relationship increases especially when there is gender inequality in the family. After a recent breakup; the altered social identity and reduction of self-worth make her prone to clinical depression.

For young men the quality of the ongoing relationship is more important. Men’s identity and feelings of self-worth are greatly affected by the support or strain they experience from their partner. This is because their romantic partner is their primary source of intimacy. In contrast young women have intimate relationships with family and friends. (Simon & Barrett, 2010). Men benefit more than women from support gained through a relationship; they are also more disturbed than women by strain in an ongoing relationship. When in a strained relationship men are likely to develop substance abuse problems.

Conflict in relationships

The quality of conflict negotiation between the partners in a relationship evolves over time. Initially the romantic bond overshadows the ability to acknowledge and deal with differences. The partners downplay their disagreements and fail to negotiate their differences. Later on, in stable relationships there is an increasing capability to recognize and face disagreements and to negotiate them in a better manner (Shulman 2008).

Personal characteristics and attachment style also play a role. Self-directed and autonomous people are generally less defensive and more understanding in their response to conflict (Knee 2005). Insecure, anxious individuals experience more conflict with their dating partners. Their conflicts tend to escalate in severity. These individuals require daily support to experience satisfaction with the relationship. As perceptions of satisfaction and intimacy change, commitment to the relationship is eroded over time (Campbell 2005). Family background of the partner is also important. The individual's style of handling conflict is learned through interactions with the mother and with siblings. This persists into the romantic relationship (Reese-Weber 2005).

Predictors of break-up

• Breakup of the romance is imminent when the pattern of interaction between partners is characterised by criticism, unrealistic expectations, or withdrawal.
• The best single predictor of impending breakup is contempt. This is especially so when the female partner displays contempt (Gottman 1994).
• Substance abuse problems in any of the partners increases conflict and hostility in the relationship (Floorsheim 2008).
• Adolescents with personality disorders are more likely to have conflict in their relationships (Chen 2004).

References

1. Campbell L, Simpson JA, Boldry J, Kashy DA. Perceptions of conflict and support in romantic relationships: the role of attachment anxiety. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Mar;88(3):510-31.
2. Chen H, Cohen P, Johnson JG, Kasen S, Sneed JR, Crawford TN. Adolescent personality disorders and conflict with romantic partners during the transition to adulthood. J Pers Disord. 2004 Dec;18(6):507-25.
3. Cramer D. Facilitativeness, conflict, demand for approval, self-esteem, and satisfaction with romantic relationships. J Psychol. 2003 Jan;137(1):85-98.
4. Florsheim P, Moore DR. Observing differences between healthy and unhealthy adolescent romantic relationships: substance abuse and interpersonal process. J Adolesc. 2008 Dec;31(6):795-814. Epub 2007 Nov 26.
5. Gottman JM: What Predicts Divorce? The Relationship Between Marital Processes and Marital Outcomes. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1994.
6. Knee CR, Lonsbary C, Canevello A, Patrick H. Self-determination and conflict in romantic relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Dec;89(6):997-1009.
7. Laurenceau JP, Troy AB, Carver CS. Two distinct emotional experiences in romantic relationships: effects of perceptions regarding approach of intimacy and avoidance of conflict. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2005 Aug;31(8):1123-33.
8. Reese-Weber M, Kahn JH. Familial predictors of sibling and romantic-partner conflict resolution: comparing late adolescents from intact and divorced families. J Adolesc. 2005 Aug;28(4):479-93.
9. Shulman S, Mayes LC, Cohen TH, Swain JE, Leckman JF. Romantic attraction and conflict negotiation among late adolescent and early adult romantic couples. J Adolesc. 2008 Dec;31(6):729-45. Epub 2008 Oct 4.
10. Robin W. Simon and Anne E. Barrett. Nonmarital Romantic Relationships and Mental Health in Early Adulthood: Does the Association Differ for Women and Men? Journal of Health and Social Behavior 2010:51(2) 168–182 DOI: 10.1177/0022146510372343

Breakup of romantic relationships in youth

Breakups in non-marital relationships are a source of stress in youth. Breakups are a major reason for self-referral at the Clinic. Stress arises from conflict in daily interaction between the couple and peaks at the time of breakup. The individual’s reaction to breakup of the relationship depends on his or her attachment style.

Reactions to breakup depend on individual attachment style

There are four attachment styles displayed in relationships. These attachment styles are delineated based on the individuals capacity for intimacy (interest in and comfort with closeness and interdependence) and independence (less dependence on partner’s approval, and reduced anxiety about abandonment) (Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991).

How do individuals react during a breakup?

Intense reactions occur in those individuals whose partners terminated the relationship, those who were more emotionally involved in the relationship, and those high in attachment anxiety.

Emotionally secure individuals react to romantic breakup with open, empathic communication with their partner. They try social coping strategies and use friends and family as sources of comfort. They are better able to understand their partner’s point of view regarding the breakup, and are less likely to respond in a histrionic or angry fashion. Secure individuals come in for therapy when they are disturbed by their partner’s reaction to the breakup.

Avoidance prone and dismissing individuals rarely display distress or acting out behaviours. They try to avoid all contact with and reminders of the partner. They also successfully use self-reliant coping strategies. Dismissing individuals use self-medication to suppress attachment-related thoughts and feelings, and this is often the reason for which they come seek help at the Clinic.

Anxious insecure individuals coming to us display three primary dysfunctional reactions (Davis and colleagues, 2003).

• Extreme distress and preoccupation with the lost partner. They neglect work and themselves, waiting all day at the computer desperately hoping to chat with the partner who is trying to terminate the relationship.
• Acting out - strenuous and exaggerated attempts to reestablish the relationship. This is often combined with angry, hostile, vengeful or violent behavior. These reactions include stalking and defaming the former lover by passing on contact numbers and photographs.
• Dysfunctional coping and lack of resolution of the loss including self-destructive strategies such as use of drugs or alcohol. .

What happens after the breakup?

Resolution. Breakup leads to changes in the individual’s perception of himself or herself – the self-concept (Sloter and colleagues, 2010). Relationship anxiety is strongly associated with a lost self-concept without the former partner. The partners renegotiate their sense of self outside the boundaries of relationship. Reduced clarity in the self-concept is associated with post-breakup emotional distress. With time most breakups end in resolution of the associated distress. The individual’s idea of the self and the lost attachment figure are reorganised to allow a changed emotional bond and adjustment to changed circumstances.

Integration. Anxious and avoidant persons may to some extent integrate the ex-partner into their lives in an altered form of attachment, such as friendship or working relationships.

Chronic mourning. Those who are higher in anxiety (more emotionally involved) and those who are more attached to the lost partner (did not initiate the breakup) have greater desire for the lost partner.

Replacement. Insecure individuals high in attachment anxiety are more likely to search immediately for a replacement partner. They feel uncomfortable when not in a romantic relationship. Re-bound relationships formed under these desperate conditions are unusually troubled later on.

High attachment anxiety increases the breakup rate

References

1. Bartholomew K, Horowitz L M. Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1991: 61, 226-244.
2. Davis D, Shaver PR, Vernon ML. Physical, emotional, and behavioral reactions to breaking up: the roles of gender, age, emotional involvement, and attachment style. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003 Jul;29(7):871-84.
3. Slotter EB, Gardner WL, Finkel EJ. Who am I without you? The influence of romantic breakup on the self-concept. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2010 Feb;36(2):147-60. Epub 2009 Dec 15.

Jealousy, rage and murder

In a jealous rage a Pune immigrant murdered his family - wife and two daughters - with an axe. He then attempted suicide. He suspected his wife of infidelity.

Evolution of jealousy

As with socio-sexuality, jealousy has an evolutionary basis that arises out of natural selection (Harris, 2003). Sexual jealousy drives males to guard against cuckoldry thereby ensuring that a rivals genes are not passed on through their mate. Emotional jealousy drives females to ensure her mates continued investment in her own offspring.

Psychodynamics of jealousy, rage and murder

• Freud showed morbid jealousy to be the deepest form of paranoia. His analysis indicated use of the defense mechansims of denial and projection to protect against threatening homosexual impulses - I do not love him—she (a wife, lover) loves him. Othello struggled with jealousy until he murdered Desdemona and then committed suicide.
• Murder or homicide can be understood as rage directed externally while suicide is rage directed inwards. Suicide is thus an inverted homicide (Menninger 1938). This argument is supported by the similarity in characteristics of perpetrators of murder-suicide and those of persons who commit only suicide (Palermo 1997).

Family murder-suicide by males

The jealous male resorts to spouse abuse. The resulting screams are usually ignored by society. If the woman has some independence repeated incidents may result in splitting from her partner. Here again her children may be used as hostages to keep her compliant. It is rare for the morbidly jealous male to be brought for psychiatric evaluation without some external coercion. The tragedy of a family murder-suicide is that its indicators are ignored by the family's society.

• Wife murders are commonly based on jealousy and suspicion of infidelity. Dr O Somasundaram (1970) showed that 30% of ‘The men who kill their wives’ were cases of sexual jealousy and 10% had delusional jealousy.  
• When the children are suspected to be those of the paramour, paternity testing through DNA samples is sought at Hyderabad. Or the children could also be put to death along with their mother. 
• Family murder followed by suicide of the assailant is significantly associated with morbid jealousy in upto a quarter of cases (Goldney 1977, Adinkrah 2008).

How does morbid jealousy manifest in women?

• The newly wed woman who turns jealous is tormented by her suspicions. At this stage the delusion is not yet fixed. The process of paranoia is not entrenched. The woman is aghast at her own attraction towards other males. She struggles to conceal her thoughts and impulses. Freud’s analysis of the process of morbid jealousy is rendered explicit. When she musters the courage to confront him the caring spouse will seek psychiatric consultation if it is available.
• The slightly less caring husband will seek psychiatric consultation for his delusional spouse when it affects his work. She has tried private investigators and other sources to identify the paramour and to check his mobile phone records. At this stage she may also consult with a psychiatrist to recruit his help against her husband. Her husband is alarmed only when his boss or a female colleague is entreated to join cause in the search for his paramour.
• The least caring spouse will try to beat the suspicions out of her. However, by their very nature the delusions are strengthened with each blow. She may then herself seek psychiatric help for her emotional problems or may be referred for the same after treatment for physical abuse. The morbidly jealous woman may also beat her partner.(Stuart, Moore et al., 2006).

Underlying mental illness is apparent before the family murder-suicide

References

1. Adinkrah M. Husbands who kill their wives: an analysis of uxoricides in contemporary Ghana. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2008 Jun;52(3):296-310. Epub 2007 Oct 8.
2. Freud S. Psychoanalytic notes upon an autobiographical account of a case of paranoia (dementia paranoides). In Standard Edition of the Complete Work of Sigmund Freud, vol 12. Hogarth Press, London, 1966.
3. Goldney RD. Family murder followed by suicide. Forensic Sci. 1977 May-Jun;9(3):219-28.
4. Harris CR. A review of sex differences in sexual jealousy, including self-report data, psychophysiological responses, interpersonal violence, and morbid jealousy. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2003;7(2):102-28. Erratum in: Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2003;7(4):400. Comment in:Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2005;9(1):62-75; discussion 76-86.
5. Menninger K. 1938. Man Against Himself. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
6. Palermo GB, Smith MB, Jenzten JM, Henry TE, Konicek PJ, Peterson GF, Singh RP, Witeck MJ. Murder-suicide of the jealous paranoia type: a multicenter statistical pilot study. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 1997 Dec;18(4):374-83.
7. Somasundaram O. The men who kill their wives. Indian J Psychiatry 1970;12:125.
8. Stuart GL, Moore TM, Gordon KC, Hellmuth JC, Ramsey SE, Kahler CW. Reasons for intimate partner violence perpetration among arrested women. Violence Against Women. 2006 Jul;12(7):609-21.

Social Networking - Psychological Effects on Teenagers

Parents worry that social networks like Facebook could have harmful psychological effects on their children. They seek consultation for social network related behaviour of their teenagers when academic grades fall due to excessive time spent on Facebook, when the teenager is subjected to cyberstalking, or when they themselves are disturbed by the online self-profile of their child. What do we know about some of these social networking behaviours that bring parents and their children to the Clinic?

Friends, self-presentation and self-esteem

Posting a profile assists the teenager in gaining self-awareness. Becoming self-aware by viewing one's own Facebook profile enhances self-esteem (Gonzales and Hanock, 2010).

A larger number of Facebook friends and  an exaggerated positive self-presentation does enhance the teenager’s well-being. However this is not necessarily associated with a sense of belonging to a supportive group. A more honest self-presentation does increase happiness and is also grounded in social support provided by Facebook friends (Kim and Lee, 2010). However, adolescents having more than 300 FB friends have increased levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, that makes them prone to depression in later life (Morin-Major et al, 2016)

Children whose self-worth is based on public contingencies (others' approval, physical appearance, outdoing others in competition) indulge in more photo sharing. People whose self-worth is contingent on appearance have a higher intensity of online photo sharing. Those with private-based contingencies (academic competence, family love and support, being a virtuous or moral person, and God's love) spend less time online (Stefanone et al 2010).

Facebook vs face-face

Impressions formed from face-to-face interaction and from personal web pages generally correspond. So, people liked in face-to-face interaction are also liked on the basis of their Facebook pages. Whether online or offline, people who are socially expressive are liked. People who express themselves non-verbally though gestures and body language in face-to-face interaction are also expressive online. The same goes with self-disclosure - when there is more disclosure offline there is more disclosure on line (Weisbuch et al, 2009).

Facebook and WhatsApp mostly act as an extension of face-to-face interaction. However, some users do rely on Facebook and WhatsApp for interpersonal communication more than face-to-face interaction (Kujath 2010).

Predictors of excessive use

• Extroverted and unconscientious individuals spend more time on social networking sites and their usage tends to be addictive (Wilson K et al, 2010).
• Shy people  also like Facebook and spend more time on it. However, they have few Facebook "Friends” (Orr et al, 2009).
• Narcissistic personalities also have high levels of online social activity. They are recognised online  by the quantity of their social interactions, their main photo self-promotion, and attractiveness of their main photo (Buffardi LE 2008, Mehdizadeh 2010).

Needs satisfied by Facebook

The four primary needs for participating in groups within Facebook are socialising, entertainment, self-status seeking, and information (Park et al 2009). The majority of students use friend-networking sites for just that - making new friends and locating and keeping in touch with old ones (Raacke and  Bonds-Raacke 2008).

Negative outcomes

Broad claims of unwanted sexual solicitation or harassment, associated with social networking sites may be unjustified. The risk of victimisation for a teenage is more likely through instant messaging (IM) and chat (Ybarra and Mitchell 2008).

Parental supervision is a key protective factor against adolescent risk-taking behavior

Unmonitored internet use may expose adolescents to risks such as cyberbullying, unwanted exposure to pornography, and revealing personal information to sexual predators  (Pujazon-Zazik and Park 2010).

References

1. Buffardi LE, Campbell WK. Narcissism and social networking Web sites.Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008 Oct;34(10):1303-14. Epub 2008 Jul 3. PubMed
2. Gonzales AL, Hancock JT. Mirror, Mirror on my Facebook Wall: Effects of Exposure to Facebook on Self-Esteem. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Jun 24. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed
3. Kim J, Lee JE. The Facebook Paths to Happiness: Effects of the Number of Facebook Friends and Self-Presentation on Subjective Well-Being. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Nov 30. [Epub ahead of print]. PubMed
4. Kujath CL. Facebook and MySpace: Complement or Substitute for Face-to-Face Interaction?
5. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Jun 24. [Epub ahead of print]. PubMed
6. Mehdizadeh S. Self-presentation 2.0: narcissism and self-esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Aug;13(4):357-64. PubMed
7. Julie Katia Morin-Major, Marie-France Marin, Nadia Durand, Nathalie Wan, Robert-Paul Juster, Sonia J. Lupien. Facebook behaviors associated with diurnal cortisol in adolescents: Is befriending stressful? Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016. 63: 238–246. 
8. Orr ES, Sisic M, Ross C, Simmering MG, Arseneault JM, Orr RR. The influence of shyness on the use of Facebook in an undergraduate sample. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2009 Jun;12(3):337-40. PubMed
9. Park N, Kee KF, Valenzuela S. Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2009 Dec;12(6):729-33. PubMed
10. Pujazon-Zazik M, Park MJ. To tweet, or not to tweet: gender differences and potential positive and negative health outcomes of adolescents' social internet use.Am J Mens Health. 2010 Mar;4(1):77-85..PubMed
11. Raacke J, Bonds-Raacke J. MySpace and Facebook: applying the uses and gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2008 Apr;11(2):169-74. PubMed
12. Stefanone MA, Lackaff D, Rosen D. Contingencies of Self-Worth and Social-Networking-Site
13. Behavior. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Jun 24. [Epub ahead of print]. PubMed
14. Weisbuch M, Ivcevic Z, Ambady N. On Being Liked on the Web and in the "Real World": Consistency in First Impressions across Personal Webpages and Spontaneous Behavior. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009 May;45(3):573-576. PubMed
15. Wilson K, Fornasier S, White KM. Psychological predictors of young adults' use of social networking sites. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2010 Apr;13(2):173-7. PubMed
16. Ybarra ML, Mitchell KJ. How risky are social networking sites? A comparison of places online where youth sexual solicitation and harassment occurs. Pediatrics. 2008 Feb;121(2):e350-7. Epub 2008 Jan 28. PubMed

How do I know if my partner is cheating on me - evolution, sexuality and relationships

Last week I gave a talk on Personality and Sexuality. One question that cropped up was - "How do I know if my partner is cheating on me?" By chance the next morning there was a newspaper article attributing uncommitted sex, one-night stands, and acts of infidelity to genetics.

Individuals who have frequent sex with multiple partners are psychologically different from those who have frequent sex with single partner (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). This sociosexual difference places individuals in two groups

1. Unrestricted sociosexual types, have a higher number of sexual partners, and one night stands. They have a permissive attitude to casual and uncommitted sex.
2. Restricted sociosexual types, require greater closeness and commitment before sex with their romantic partner.

 Genetics plays an important role in sociosexuality

Genes evolve to enhance survival of the species. From an evolutionary viewpoint females reproduce with a mate who will invest in their offspring and produce offspring with an advantaged genetic makeup. Female socio-sexual orientation exists because males vary in the quality of their genes.

• Unrestricted type females benefit from passing the genes of men with greater reproductive success to their own offspring. To induce males to invest in their offspring they frequently engage in pretense and deceit, traits that are strongly associated with unrestricted sociosexuality.
• Restricted type females benefit from caring males who limit reproductive efforts to the females own offspring.
• Male sociosexuality evolved through competition. Males who do not succeed with an unrestricted socio-sexual orientation become Restricted.

How do you know your partner's sociosexuality?

Lynda Boothroyd showed that observers were able to identify restricted vs. unrestricted individuals from cues in thier faces. My audience successfully differentiated the Restricted and Unrestricted pairs from the same picture. Test yourself.

What does this mean for a relationship?

• Restricted socio-sexual personalities are more willing to remain in an unsatisfactory marriage. They are less likely to be drawn out of such a relationship by attractive alternate partners.
• For Unrestricted individuals long term stability in the relationship depends on the extent to which the partner is highly attractive and possesses high social visibility. Decisions to continue or terminate a relationship depend more on changes in the partners physical attractiveness and social status.

However, personality is not all in the genes. Genes contribute to the biological aspect of personality - temperament. Personality also has an acquired aspect - character. When fully developed, character defines the mature personality.

How do I know if my partner is cheating on me?

To return to the question. Asking the question indicates there are already boundaries being overstepped. It indicates an erosion of trust - a core component in any long-term relationship. That is what needs to be addressed.

Jeffry A Simpson, Steven W Gangestad. Personality and sexuality: empirical relations and an integrative theoretical model. In: Sexuality in close relationships. Kathleen McKinney, Susan Sprecher Editors. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. New Jersey. 1991:71-92.