One hundred twenty-five men and 125 women, all Dutch and mostly liberal middle-class, responded to a series

of scales measuring present, past, and anticipated jealousy as well as a variety of variables thought to be correlated with jealousy. All respondents were or had been in a sexually open marriage in which one or both partners had had an extramarital involvement. Women were more jealous than men. A variety of negative and positive consequences of spouse's extramarital involvement are presented. Individual and marital variables such as self-esteem, age, emotional dependency, and marital satisfaction were only weakly related to jealousy ff at all. Only two of four major perceived causes for the reduction of jealousy in the relationship were related to jealousy anticipated in future jealousy-provoking situations. The findings are discussed in connection with sex roles, the threats that trigger jealousy, and a theoretical model of jealousy presented elsewhere.

JEALOUSY IN SEXUALLY OPEN MARRIAGES

BRAM BUUNK
Catholic University-Nijmegen, the Netherlands

Several surveys have begun to document the prevalence of jealousy in romantic relationships and its relationship to a real or potential sexual involvement between one's romantic partner and a third person. Buunk (1978b) found in a Dutch sample that 90% of the women and 83% of the men reported they would feel jealous if their partners were involved in a long-term sexual relationship with another person, while an incidental sexual involvement was rated as jealousy-provoking by 83% of the women and 73% of the men. These findings are particularly interesting since about half of the Dutch population does not
Author's Note: The author t h a n k s Gregory L. W h i t e f o r editorial assistance on this article.

ALTERNATIVELIFESTYLES, Vol. 4 No. 3, August 1981 357-372 (~ 1981 SagePublications,Inc. 357

358

ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES

categorically reject extramarital sex (Middendorp, 1974). Bryson (1977) found that 96% of the American college students interviewed reported having felt jealous, and Warum (1978) found that 83% of a German sample reported likewise. Most of the Germans indicated that their partner's actual involvements with others had triggered jealousy, but for some involvement was only suspected and for others jealousy resulted from a lack of attention by the partner. These results, and a cross-cultural survey of jealousy (Hupka, 1977) suggest that jealousy in sexually open marriages is likely to be a problem, since the triggering event of actual involvement of one's partner with a third person is a consequence of this marriage lifestyle. However, there is relatively little data about jealousy in sexually open marriages. Kinsey et al. (1953) reported that only 40% of husbands of extramaritally involved wives knew of the involvement, and in 42% of these cases there had been some serious difficulties. Knapp (1976) reported that jealousy was often a problem in her sample of 17 sexually open marriages, but provides no figures on frequency or severity of the problems. Ramey (1975) reported in his sample of partners in "intimate friendships" that only 15% reported reacting negatively to their partner's sexual involvement with another, while 60% responded positively. Most respondents felt their jealousy had not changed or decreased in their relationship, and 20% reported never feeling jealous over their partner's sexual relations with intimate friends. Studies of "swinging" and group marriage provide some information which may be relevant to jealousy in sexually open marriages. Constantine and Constantine (1971, 1973) found 80% of partners in group marriages reported problems with jealousy, though these problems seemed to diminish over time. Smith and Smith (1970) felt that most people practicing "'comarital" sex feel some degree of jealousy initially, but that jealousy becomes modified and limited when the spouse's involvement occurs with the person's knowledge and consent. Jacobsen et al. (1971) reported that 75% of partners practicing mate exchange rarely experienced jealousy, a figure which may be due in part to his Dutch sample and in part to the stringent norms that swingers develop to reduce jealousy (Denfeld and Gordon, 1970; Gitmartin, 1972). Nevertheless, Denfeld's (1974) survey of California marriage counselors revealed that jealousy was the major reason people dropped out of swinging.

Buunk / JEALOUSY IN OPEN M A R R I A G E

359

This study assessed the frequency of jealousy in response to a partner's involvement with another, and aspects of the situation and person which affected the development of jealousy. In addition, partners were surveyed as to how they expressed their jealousy and attempted to reduce it. The study is mainly descriptive, I have elsewhere presented a theoretical model of jealousy (Buunk, 1980b) which leans partly on the models developed by Clanton and Smith (1977), Constantine (1976), and White (1977), and on attribution and exchange theory.

METHOD SUBJECTS

One hundred twenW-five men and 125 women who were cohabitating (14%} or married responded to advertisements in periodicals (76%), lectures (18%), or word of mouth (6%). All had been in relationships with a partner who in the previous two years had been (or was currently) involved in an extramarital relationship. Of the 250 respondents, 170 were in couples (85 pairs), and 206 were currently in relationships. A subsample of 50 men and 50 women were selected for more extensive questioning. Analysis of their results is also reported here. All respondents were Dutch. 51% had the equivalent of four or more years of college, and 79% of the males were on the two highest levels of occupational groups, compared to 15% of the males in the population. Of the women, 42% had jobs, and half of the respondents were unaffiliated with any religious denomination. Most of the couples (68%) had one or more children. Of the total, 78% were between 27 and 46 years old, 15% were oidet" and 7% were younger. Compared to the total population, the attitudes of the respondents concerning sex were extremely liberal. The respondents in the sample actively sought a relatively high level of psychosexual stimulation. Furthermore, outspokenness regarding gender/role equality was more pronounced than it is in the Dutch population as a whole. On the other hand, they had neither relatively high nor relatively low levels of marriage satisfaction, self-esteem, or neuroticism.

360

ALTERNATIVELIFESTYLES

Extramarital sex was more than an incidental phenomenon for most of the respondents, with 88% having had at least one longterm extramarital relationship, and 86% one or more short-term involvements. Of the sample, 62% had been involved in three or more short-term extramarital contacts, and 26% had had at least three long-term relationships. Though 55% had participated at least once in partner exchange, this practice was not a predominant pattern. Only 17% had participated in partner exchange three or more times.

MEASURES
The following scales were used to measure variables of interest related to jealousy:

Jealousy
The subject was asked to indicate how frequently various perceptions and feelings had occurred in the relationship on a 5point scale including never, seldom, now and again, fairly often, and very often. Of these 20 items, 15 are presented in Table 1. Additional items were: "'1 was jealous," '3 felt bad," "1 found my jealousy unpleasant," "1 was angry with the other," and "3 was angry with my partner." Coefficient alpha for this scale was .93.

Past Jealousy
The subjects responded to the same 20 items in the Jealousy scale, but responded specifically to feelings and perceptions at the time of the "most significant extramarital relationship" of the spouse in the past. A 5-point scale ranging from "'did not apply" to "very much applied" was used.

Anticipated Jealousy
Subjects were asked how they would feel if their partner were to engage in five different behaviors: flirting, sexual contact, making love a little, having a long-established sexual relationship, and being in love with another. Responses were recorded on a 9point scale ranging from "extremely pleasant" to "extremely unpleasant." Coefficient alpha was .91.

Buunk / JEALOUSY IN OPEN MARRIAGE Self-Esteem

361

A 9-item scale reached a coefficient alpha of .76. Subjects rated extent of agreement with items like "'1 like myself" and "1 am inclined to think I am no good at all."

Neuroticism

Subjects rated extent of agreement to 7 items including "'1 don't get depressed easily" and "1 see myself as a nervous person." Coefficient alpha was .82.

Marital Satisfaction

Subjects rated how often 8 items applied to their relationship on a 5-point response scale ranging from "never" to "very often." Items included "1 feel happy when I am with my partner," " M y partner irritates me," and "Things are going well between us.'" Coefficient alpha was .88

Emotional Dependency

Subjects rated extent of agreement with 9 items assessing emotional dependency on one's partner. Items included "1 can't imagine what my life would be like without my partner," "Even without my partner I could be happy," and "It would be difficult for me to live without my partner." Coefficient alpha was .81.

Ground Rules for Open Marriage

Buunk (I 980b) reported a factor analysis of 16 various rules or norms used by couples in open marriages to deal with extramarital relationships. These items were given to the current sample and factor scores computed following Buunk's (1980b) analysis. Factors and sample items were Marriage Primacy ("You devote enough time and attention to your spouse"), Restricted Intensity ("There are only brief contacts"), Visibility ("Your spouse knows your outside partner"), Mate Exchange ("It is a mate exchange"), and Invisibility ("Your spouse is not too aware of it").

362

ALTERNATIVELIFESTYLES

Perceived Causes f o r Jealousy R e d u c t i o n

On a 5-point response scale ranging from "applies very m u c h " to "does not apply," 13 potential causes for the reduction of jealousy were assessed according to the respondent's perceptions of the causes for reduction of their own jealousy. These items and their factor analysis are presented in Table 2.

RESULTS SEX DIFFERENCES IN JEALOUSY

Females scored significantly higher on the Jealousy Scale (Ms = 51.6, 42.2, t (248) = 3.30, p < .01, two-tailed), the Past Jealousy Scale (Ms = 54.1, 46-3, t (248) = 3.00, p < .01), and the Anticipated Jealousy Scale (Ms = 28.2, 24.5, t (248) = 3.69, p < .001). Separate analysis of the 20 items of the Jealousy Scale showed females scoring significantly higher on 9 of the items. Of these, 8 are indicated in Table 1, Females also rated themselves as more often jealous than men (Ms = 3.1, 2.3, t (248) = 2.94, p < .01).
FREQUENCY OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS IN JEALOUSY

Table 1 presents 15 of the items from the Jealousy Scale. These items may be classified as positive or negative perceptions. The percentage of respondents in the intensively interviewed sample of 100 respondents who reported having the perception at least now and again, and the items showing sex differences, are indicated. There results can be summarized as follows. Most respondents, especially males, viewed the extramarital behavior of their spouse in one or more aspects as positive. Nearly all men and women were at least occasionally pleased that their partner had had intercourse with someone they liked, or had had an enjoyable experience. Many felt good about their partner not directing his or her attention solely to them. The perception that a partner's extramarital behavior afforded the respondent an extra measure of freedom was favorable for most subjects. There are also a number of negative perceptions associated with extramarital relationships of the spouse. The five most

TABLE 1

Negative and Positive Perceptions in Jealousy

% o f Respondents Reporting the Perception

Means Male Female

Male

Female

t = Measurement o f sex differences

Negative Perceptions
44 60 2.30 2,62 1.40

1.

I could hardly stand my partner's paying me less attention than formerly,

2. 30 54 2,22 2.78

I f o u n d it unpleasant that my partner enjoyed certain things more with the o t h e r person than with me,

2.42*

3, 36 14 22 36 20 38 64 24 16 1.64 1.60 2.24 1.82 29 2.06

I couldn't bear my partner having sexual inter* course with another person when I have never done so,

2.00 1.70 1,84 2.90 2.44

.23 .36 1.18 3.04** 3.14"*

4.

I was afraid that my partner w o u l d leave me,

5.

I f o u n d it unpleasant f o r the very reason that o u r relationship was strained.

6.

I c o u l d n ' t bear it that m y partner experienced things I was excluded f r o m .

7.

I felt threatened because in certain respects I regarded the other person as better than myself.

8, 40 30

t~ o'~ w

I f o u n d it unpleasant that my partner had a relationship with another person whereas I had no one,

34 44

2.18
1.86

2.09
2.50

.40 2.35*

9.

I couldn't bear the uncertainty.

(Continued)

4=
T A B L E 1 (Continued)

% of Respondents Reporting the Perception Means Male Female Male Female

t = Measurement of sex differences

Negative Perceptions (Continued)

20 22 32 1.68 2.08 46 1.78 2.50 3.41 * * 2.13*

10,

I didn't like the idea that I was no longer the only one f o r my partner.

11.

I could hardly bear it that m y partner had sexual intercourse w i t h that very person.

Positive Perceptions
90 78 68 1 O0 78 54 56 3.24 2.94 4.20 78 3.74 3.42 2.68 2.54 3.56 1 A1 2.33" 1,64 3.16"*

1.

I was pleased that my partner had sexual intercourse with someone I liked.

2.

I was pleased because it gave me more freedom, too.

3.

1 was glad that m y partner did n o t direct his/her attention solely to me.

4.

I was pleased f o r my partner that he/she had an enjoyable experience,

NOTE: The percentage of those for w h o m the perception occurred " n o w and again," " f a i r l y o f t e n , " or " v e r y o f t e n . " Mean difference not given here. N = 50 males and 50 females. *p <~ .05. * * p ~.01.

Buunk / JEALOUSY IN OPEN MARRIAGE

365

frequently mentionedmby a percentage ranging from about 30% to nearly 50%--were: the idea of getting less attention than before; the perception that the partner enjoyed certain things more with the other person; the idea of being excluded; envy, the sense that the partner did have a relationship while the respondent did not; and uncertainty. The first four of these perceptions seem to be typical for what Clanton and Smith (1977) have distinguished as feeling excluded, the minor form of jealousy. Indeed, as Clanton and Smith have suggested, this feeling seems to be responsible for most flashes of jealousy. Fear of loss, the other, more serious, type of jealousy proposed by the same authors, is explicitly mentioned only by a small minority of the respondents. However, some other perceptions are possibly indicative of this fear, for example, finding a partner's behavior unpleasant for the reason that the relationship was strained, or feeling threatened because the rival was regarded as better in certain respects. About a third of the respondents said they did not like the idea that they were no longer the only one for their partner, a perception that is probably similar to what Constantine (1977) has described as the loss of privacy, territory, or exclusive access. About a quarter reported being upset by the fact that their partner had had sexual intercourse with a particular person. This last fact accords with balance theory (Heider, 1958) which would predict that jealousy is especially strong when the rival is perceived as unattractive. Other research seems to confirm this prediction (Bryson, 1977; Buunk, 1978b). Of the 11 negative perceptions, 6 are on the average more often mentioned by women. However, a similar analysis of the Past Jealousy scale shows only 3 of these 6 perceptions to be more frequent for women: not being able to bear the uncertainty; not liking the idea of being no longer the only one for the partner; and feeling threatened because the other person is in certain respects better than they are (see Buunk, 1980a). Because the sexes are found to differ on these 3 perceptions of different measures, they can probably be regarded as more typical of female jealousy. It is interesting to note that in this sample, the fear of loss is not, as has sometimes been supposed (see Mead, 1970), more common among women than among men.

366

ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES

CORRELATES OF JEALOUSY Each of the potential correlates of jealousy was correlated with the Jealousy Scale. Few of the personal, relational, or normative variables were related to jealousy. The results are briefly reviewed below.
Ground Rules

Buunk (1980b) had identified five major patterns of ground rules used by couples in open marriages to reduce the conflict over a spouse's extramarital involvements. None of the five factor scores used as indicants of these patterns were significantly correlated with jealousy. These results call into question the usefulness of these norms to actually reduce jealousy in open marriages. Perhaps Buunk's sample of couples were responding in an ideal way to questions about reducing conflict, or perhaps the patterns are effective in dealing with the consequences of becoming jealous, but not in preventing it.

Self-Esteem

Self-esteem was uncorrelated with jealousy. This finding contradicts a number of theoretical positions (see Mead, 1970) that suppose jealousy is more likely or more intense among those with low self-esteem. White (1977) has also found jealousy to be uncorrelated with a similar global measure of self-esteem.
Neuroticism

Neuroticism was moderately correlated with jealousy (r = .42, < .01.). This variable can be seen as reflecting general anxiety. The correlation suggests that people who respond with anxiety in a variety of situations are also more inclined to react jealously when their spouse is involved in relationships with others. This finding is in line with other data from this project (Buunk, 1980a) and the results of Bringle, Roach et al. (1977), who found their jealousy scale to be correlated with anxiousness.

Buunk / JEALOUSY IN OPEN MARRIAGE Age

367

Age, which was found to correlate negatively w i t h jealousy in a recent German study (Warum, 1978), was uncorrelated with the Jealousy Scale.
Marital Variables

The marital variables seem to have only minor relationships w i t h jealousy. Length of the relationship, number of children, and being married versus cohabiting are not correlated significantly with jealousy. This contrasts w i t h Buunk's (1980a) finding that sexual jealousy was stronger among cohabiting than among married women, while this difference was absent among men. Marital satisfaction is weakly related to jealousy (r = -.27, p = <~ .01). A further analysis showed that only among men is the correlation significant (r = -.26, p < .05); among women it was quite low (r = - .16, ns). Buunk (1 980a) also found jealousy and marital dissatisfaction to be more correlated for men than for women. Bringle, Evenbeck, and Schmedel (1977) found marital dissatisfaction of husbands mainly correlated with their wives' jealousy, particularly when it was different from their own level. Emotional dependency was not correlated with jealousy in this sample. Bringle et al. (1977) found, however, that the more dependent partner was more jealous.
PERCEIVED CAUSES FOR REDUCTION OF JEALOUSY

The respondents w h o were still married or cohabiting at the time of interview (N = 206) were asked if they were less jealous in the relationship now than in the past. 56% indicated they were. This Reduced Jealousy group did not differ from the Stable Jealousy group on the Past Jealousy Scale (Ms = 47.4, 49.2, respectively), t (204) = .75, ns). Consistent w i t h their self-report, the Reduced Jealousy group scored lower on the Anticipated Jealousy Scale than those in the Stable Jealousy group (Ms = 24.8, 27.6, t (204) = 2.78, p < .01). The 116 people who said they were less jealous now were presented with sixteen items concerning the perceived causes for

368

ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES

TABLE 2

Attributed Causes for Reduced Jealousy: Frequencies and Results of Factor Analysis (N = 1:!6)
Attributed Cause Factor 1 : Independence
I'm less dependent of my partner I accept that m y partner has the right life on his/her own I have more self-confidence t find other m e n / w o m e n tess threatening I have more i m p o r t a n t things besides my relationsh ip I understand now you cannot expect everything in life f r o m y o u r partner { feel more secure about m y qualities 65 69 71 58 46 53 52 .71 .55 ,63 .56 .65 .69 .62 % of Respondents

Factor Loading

Factor 2: Accepting Jealousy

I've learned t o express m y feelings o f jealousy I accept m y feelings of jealousy better n o w 53 51 .79 .71

Factor 3: Trust
I feel more secure about our relationship n o w I trust m y partner more n o w 49 47 .70 .72

Factor 4" C o m m u n i c a t i o n
I had good talks about it w i t h m y partner My partner had much understanding f o r m y feelings 85 66 .75 .60

N O T E : The percentage o f those w h o indicated that the cause "very m u c h " or "fairly w e l l " lecl t o a reduction in jealousy.

their reduced jealousy. The respondents were asked to indicate (on a five-point scale ranging from "'applies very much" to "does not apply") the degree to which each cause had contributed to their decreased jealousy. A principal component factor analysis w i t h varimax rotation was carried out on these sixteen items. Three causes did not load on any resulting factor. The results of this analysis and the frequency with which the various causes were mentioned are shown in Table 2. The four factors accounted for 60% of variance.

Buunk / JEALOUSY IN OPEN M A R R I A G E

369

The first factor is called Independence because the defining items indicate self-esteem that is relatively independent of the relationship. More than half of the respondents believed that this factor had been of great importance for reducing their jealousy. Increased self-confidence and security about one's own qualities seem to be connected with not viewing other men or women as threatening too quickly. Although the items had been formulated before the work of Clanton and Smith (1977: 223) appeared, the content of this factor seems to be in line with their idea that "the best antidote against recurrent jealousy is growth toward autonomy." The second factor of Accepting Jealousy was indicated by about half of the respondents. This attributed cause is related to learning to accept and express jealousy toward one's spouse. The importance of improving the marital relationship to reducing jealousy seems also clearly reflected in the third factor which is called Trust. The two items loading high on this factor are indicative of a growth in security and trust in the marital relationship and are mentioned by nearly half of the sample as reasons for their reduced jealousy. The fourth factor, Communication, reflects an emphasis on the importance of good communication and understanding in the relationship with a partner in reducing jealousy. Further analysis revealed a sex difference on only one factor. Women were more likely than men to indicate that they became less jealous because of good communication with their partner (t (114) = 2.22, p < .05). In order to determine if the perceived causes for the reduction of jealousy were related to jealousy anticipated in reaction to jealousy-provoking situations, factor scores were computed by simple summation of defining items. These four factor scores were then correlated with the Anticipated Jealousy Scale. Responses to the Past Jealousy Scale were partialed out so that the partial correlations with the Anticipated Jealousy Scale represent the person's expectations of the future controlled for past influences. (Anticipated Jealousy and Past Jealousy were correlated .65.) Two of the four factors were negatively related to anticipated jealousy. The partial correlation between independence and anticipated jealousy was significant for both men (r = -.29, p < .05) and women (r = -.21, p < .05), while communication was significantly related to anticipated jealousy for females (r = -.24, p = .05) and nearly significantly for males (r = -.20, p < .10). Accepting

370

ALTERNATIVELIFESTYLES

jealousy was unrelated to anticipated jealousy, as was trust (partial r's = -.16, -.05). All these correlations were low. These data indicate that the perceived causes for reduction of one's jealousy are only weakly related, if at all, to the person's expectation of how jealous they may become in future jealousyprovoking situations.

CONCLUSIONS Jealousy is by no means absent in sexually open marriages; about 80% have felt jealous--a percentage that is in agreement with other comparable studies. About one-fifth of the people practicing a sexually nonexclusive type of marriage seem to be free from jealousy. Although this percentage is about the same for both sexes, women, on the average, felt jealousy more often. This can perhaps be explained by the greater anxiety women appear to feel in general (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1979) and by traditional socialization that has emphasized the importance of marriage for the self-esteem of women. Data presented elsewhere (Buunk, 1980a), showing cohabiting women to be more jealous than married women, are probably in line with this last explanation. The perceptions that have been found in this study to be characteristic of jealousy seem to indicate that it is mainly the experience of feeling excluded from important activities of the spouse (see Clanton and Smith, 1977), although for women other perceptions also play an important role, especially uncertainty and feelings of inferiority compared to the "rival." However, it must be pointed out here that the fear of loss does not seem to be a very important perception connected with jealousy among either sex. Nevertheless, in this sample where spouses give each other the freedom of engaging in affairs with others, there can still be pain because of the mere fact that the partner is involved in relationships oneself is excluded from. This jealousy seems more related to neuroticism (as an indication of general anxiety) than to self-esteem as had been previously supposed. A striking point is the close link between the experience and expression of jealousy. Although several authors (e.g., Constantine, 1976; Clanton and Smith, 1977) have emphasized the importance of finding constructive ways for handling jealousy, the data presented here suggest that this is very difficult. People who

Buunk / J E A L O U S Y tN O P E N M A R R I A G E

371

f e e l j e a l o u s a r e very likely to express t h e i r j e a l o u s y in d e s t r u c t i v e , aggressive ways. N e v e r t h e l e s s , most p e o p l e w h o s e j e a l o u s y s h o w e d a d e c l i n e f r o m t h e past m e n t i o n c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e s p o u s e as an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r c o n t r i b u t i n g to t h i s r e d u c t i o n . Also, a m o r e i n d e p e n d e n t a t t i t u d e t o w a r d t h e s p o u s e s e e m s t o be an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r in r e d u c i n g j e a l o u s y (Knapp and W h i t e h u r s t , 1977).

REFERENCES

BRINGLE, R. G., S. EVENBECK,and K. SCHMEDEL(1977) "The role of jealousy in marriage." Presented at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco. BRtNGLE, R. G., S. ROACH, C. AUDLER, and S. EVENBECK(1977)"'Correlates of jealousy.'" Presented at the annual meetings of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago. BRYSON, J. B. (1976) "'The natures of sexual jealousy: an exploratory study.'" Presented at the annual meetings of the American PsychologicalAssociation, Washington, D.C. (1977) "Situational determinants of the expression of jealousy.- Presented at the annual meetings of the American PsychologicalAssociation, San Francisco, BUUNK, B. (1978a) "'Jaloezie 1/Een ingewikkelde belevenis." intermediair 14, 11 : 1-7. - - - - - - (1978b) "Jaloezie 2/Ervaringen van 250 Nederlanders." Intermediair 14, 12: 43-51. - - - - - - (1980a) Intieme Relaties met Derden: een Social Psychologische Studies. Alphen aan den Rijn/Brussel: Samsom. - (1980b) "Sexually open marriages: groundrutes for countering potential threats to marriage." Alternative Lifestyles 3:312-328. - - - - - - (1980c) "Jealousy: coping with extramarital relationships of the spouse," in D. Magnusson (chair) Stress and coping processes--psychodynamic and psychological approaches. Presented at the Twenty Second International Congress of Psychology, Leipzig. CLANTON, G. and L. G. SMITH [eds.] (1977)Jealousy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. CONSTANTINE, L. J. and J. M. CONSTANTINE(1971) "Sexual aspects of multilateral relations." J. of Sex Research 7: 204-226. ---(1973) Group Marriage: A Study of Contemporary Multilateral Marriage. New York: Macmillan. CONSTANTINE, L. L. (1976) "Jealousy: from theory to treatment," in D.H.E. Olson (ed.) Treating Relationships. Lakeview, IL: Graphic. - - - - - - (1977) "Jealousy: techniques for intervention," in G. Clanton and L. Smith (eds.) Jealousy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Halt. DENFELD, D. (1974) "'Dropouts from swinging: the marriage counselor as informant," in J. R. Smith and L. S. Smith (eds.) Beyond Monogamy: Recent Studies of Sexual Alternatives in Marriage. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.

372

ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES

~-and M. GORDON (1970) "The sociology of mate swapping: or the family that swings together clings together." J. of Sex Research 6: 85-100. GILMARTIN, B. G, (1977) "'Jealousy among the swingers," in G. Clanton and L. G. Smith (eds.) Jealousy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. HEIDER, F. (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: John

Wiley. HUPKA, R. B. (I977) "Societal and individual roles in the expression of jealousy."
Presented at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco. JACOBSEN, R. (1971) Wie Doen er aan PaKnerruil en Waarom? Amsterdam: Psychologisch Laboratorium. KtNSEY, A. C., W. B. POMEROY, and P. GEBHARD (1953) Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders. KNAPP, J. (1976) "An exploratory study of seventeen sexually open marriages." J. of Sex Research 12: 206-219. KNAPP, J, and R. N. WHITEHURST (1977) "Sexually open marriage and relationships: issues and prospects," in R. W. Libby, and R. N. Whitehurst (eds.) Marriage and Alternatives: Exploring Intimate Relationships. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. LOBSENZ, N. M. (1977) "Taming the greeneyed monster," in G. Clanton and L. G. Smith (eds.) Jealousy, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. MACCOBY, E. E. and C. N. JACKLIN (1979) The Psychology of Sex Differences. PaIo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press. MEAD, M. (1970) "Jealousy: primitive and civilized," in F. Lindenfeld (ed.) "Radical Perspectives on Social Problems: Readings in Critical Sociology. New York: Macmillan. MIDDENDORP, C. P. (1974) "Culturele veranderingen in Nederland, 1965-1970." Intermediair 10, 11: 1-10. RAMEY, J. W. (t975) "Intimate groups and networks: frequent consequences of sexually open marriage." Family Coordinator 24: 515-530. SMITH, J. R. and L. G. SMITH (1970) "Co-marital sex and the sexual freedom movement." J. of Sex Research 6: 131-143. WARUM (1978)"Eifersucht." Sonderteil nr. 31. WHITE, G. L. (1977) "Inequality of emotional involvement: power and jealousy in romantic couples." Presented at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.

Brain Buunk completed his studies in social psychology at the State University of Groningen, the Netherlands, in 1971. He has published a number of papers and two books on topics such as jealousy, premaritat sex~ and marital choice, and he is currently finishing a book on sexually open marriage. He edited a special issue of this j o u r n a l on "Alternative Lifestyles in the Netherlands" (August 1980) He is a staff member of the Social Psychology Department at the Catholic University in Nijmegen, the Netherlands.