1. Introduction

Infidelity is a common issue observed in couples, even when the rules of society are opposed to it. Infidelity can represent the violation of the fundamental assumption of exclusivity in aspects of emotional and / or sexual intimacy. The majority of people who have committed relationships, whether it is a relationship of marriage, coexistence or courtship, have the expectation that their emotional and sexual needs will be met exclusively by their partner [3] [4] [20].

However, in Western societies more than 50% of married people have been involved in infidelity [7]. In Mexico, attitudes toward infidelity also have their variants. Couples with more time of married, people with low schooling and people of province have more favorable attitudes to infidelity; and as the main cause are unfulfilled expectations, personality traits as a second cause and cultural values that vary from one place to another [5].

Regarding its prevalence, it has been estimated that from 26% to 70% of married women, and that from 33% to 75% of married men have been involved in an infidelity. Additionally, extramarital sexual relations are the most commonly cited cause of marital dissolution, and it has been proposed as a common area of conflict in relationships [12].

Although history has called adultery the act of entering into sexual intimacy with a person other than the spouse and that this is in many ways similar to what is known as infidelity, there is an important difference between the two concepts: infidelity implies a violation of a covenant made only between the members of the couple [11] and adultery refers to legal terms of the marriage contract [2]. However, given the similarities between these two terms, they have been mixed to be considered as synonyms; however, nowadays its meaning is no longer exactly the same.

Infidelity can also be defined as a betrayal and / or violation of trust, promise or vote in the agreed rules or limits of a relationship, regardless of whether or not there was a formal agreement before the law, and does not necessarily have to be sexual or otherwise [21]; The fact is that the deception is there and that does not minimize or classify the damage that infidelity can cause.

In general, the literature presents two characteristic types of infidelity:

Ÿ Sexual infidelity (coitus) refers to sexual activity with someone else, in addition to the stable partner [16].

Ÿ Emotional infidelity (falling in love) occurs when one of the partners focuses their sources of romantic love, such as time and attention, on someone else [16].

Most of the works reported by the literature on the subject of infidelity have focused on unfaithful behavior and its consequences. And the others have covered the reasons for this phenomenon and have found that infidelity in women is more related to satisfaction in their primary relationship, whereas in men infidelity is more related to sexual satisfaction and cultural aspects [17].

Due to the high probability of appearance, infidelity has become a relevant aspect in the study of relationships, mainly because it has been determined as the leading cause of divorce worldwide [11], also as a trigger for physical consequences and psychological, such as neurosis, which is a psychological disorder characterized by intense internal conflict, which causes different types of anxiety, such as expropriation anxiety, like for example when people who were betrayed feel that something was taken away from them; execution anxiety is to believe that the deceit was given by a physiological matter and that the other is better in intimacy, frequent in men; and assessment anxiety damages the woman's self-esteem because she imagines that infidelity was due to the fact that the other is worth more than her [1].

Therefore, the objective of the present study was to compare the differences in the infidelity of men and women of the Autonomous University of Campeche with a relationship from 2 to 5 years of courtship, through the application of the Multidimensional Infidelity Inventory, analyzing the dimensions of unfaithful behavior, infidelity reasons, infidelity concept and consequences of infidelity.

2. Method

2.1. Study Aim

2.1.1. Overall Objective

To compare the differences of infidelity of university men and women from 2 to 5 years of courtship.

2.1.2. Specific Objectives

Ÿ To analyze the unfaithful behavior of university men and women.

Ÿ To analyze the reasons for infidelity of university men and women.

Ÿ To analyze the concepts of infidelity of university men and women.

Ÿ To analyze the consequences of the infidelity of university men and women.

Ÿ To compare the different dimensions of infidelity in each sex.

3. Scenario

This study was carried out at the Autonomous University of Campeche.

4. Participants

A non-probabilistic sample was taken for convenience of 100 undergraduate students, 50 men and 50 women, between 18 and 26 years old, with an average age of 20 years old, who are in a couple relationship between 2 to 5 years of engagement. The selected degrees were 6, with the intention of having at least one degree for each area of knowledge or faculty, which were the following: Nursing, Accounting and Administration, Law, Humanities-Psychology, Engineering and Chemical-Biological Sciences.

5. Instruments

1. Sociodemographic sheet with information about: Gender, age, faculty, semester, dating time, gender of the couple, age of the couple and their occupation,

2. Multidimensional Inventory of Infidelity, whose authors are Romero Palencia, Rivera and Díaz Loving [15]. This inventory is made up of four dimensions or subscales which were framed in statements with a Likert type response of 5 points. A factorial analysis of main components was performed, with orthogonal rotation (varimax) to obtain the validity of each subscale:

a) The Infidel Conduct subscale consisted of 48 statements, ranging from "never" to "always". It determines the prevailing unfaithful behavior that the subject has made. The Alpha coefficient of Cronbach was obtained in order to know the internal consistency of this subscale, resulting in a total alpha of .984 in the original study and in this study was .871

Cronbach's Alpha coefficients are shown below by factor on the original study and in this study:

Sexual Infidelity .974 /.942

Desire for emotional infidelity. 958 /.935

Desire for sexual infidelity .957 /.912

Emotional infidelity .865 / .878

b) The subscale of Infidelity Motives consisted of 70 items, ranging from "totally disagree" to "totally agree." In this subscale importance is attributed to the factor that motivates infidelity. The Alpha coefficient of Cronbach was obtained in order to know the internal consistency of this subscale as a whole, resulting in a total alpha of .982 in the original study and in this study was .897

Cronbach's Alpha coefficients by factor are shown below on the original study and in this study:

Dissatisfaction in the primary relationship .966 /.856

Sexuality .957 / .921

Emotional and social instability .908 / .893

Ideology and norms .901 / .894

Impulsivity. 895 / .902

Apathy .918 / .876

Aggression .849 / .826

c) The subscale of Concept or Beliefs of Infidelity: It was constituted by 44 items, ranging from "very much" to "nothing". It refers to what subjects consider or believe what infidelity is. The Alpha coefficient of Cronbach of this subscale was an alpha of .967 in the original study and in this study was .920

Cronbach's Alpha coefficients by factor are shown below on the original study and in this study:

Transgression to the relationship .955 /.905

Feeling of loss .911 / .867

Dissatisfaction .938 / .901

Passion .892 / .831

Insecurity .879 / .824

Love towards another .901 / .873

d) The subscale of Consequences of Infidelity: Formed by 13 items, ranging from "Strongly disagree" to "totally agree". In it, the subjects refer to infidelity as a positive or negative consequence. The Alpha coefficient of Cronbach of this subscale was an alpha of .772 in the original study and in this study was .714

Cronbach's Alpha coefficients by factor are shown below on the original study and in this study:

Negative consequences of infidelity .909 / .857

Positive consequences of infidelity .758 / .704

The Multidimensional Inventory of Infidelity is valid and reliable for the Mexican population, in it the author added not only the aspects contemplated in the literature but also integrated contributions already described in the dimensions.

6. Procedure

Permits were requested in the different faculties to apply the questionnaires. Participants signed an agreement of confidentiality and informed consent. Application schedules were established and finally, the obtained data was emptied to achieve the following results. The SPSS software was used to perform the statistical analysis. A student’s “t” test and a one way anova were used to analyze data.

7. Results

After the application of the Multidimensional Inventory of Infidelity, we proceeded to the statistical analysis, considering the comparison of the results of men and women. In the first instance, the averages of the factors of unfaithful behavior presented in Figure 1 were obtained.

Figure 1. Means and results of the "t" test of the factors of the Infidel conduct dimension in men and women

Figure 1 shows the comparison between the means obtained in both men and women about the infidel behavior that prevails in each one. Only statistically significant differences were obtained in the Emotional Infidelity factor, where women scored higher than men.

Regarding the Infidelity Motives dimension, the bilateral significance obtained in these factors (Dissatisfaction in the primary relationship .365, Emotional and social instability .705, Ideology and norms .338, Impulsivity .158, Apathy .282 and Aggression. 360) are greater than Alpha 0.05, so the results are not statistically significant.

The means obtained in both men and women are close to each other, as in the case of the emotional and social instability factor where the average of men is 2.0943 and for women 2.0200.

The bilateral significance obtained in the factors of the Beliefs of infidelity dimension (Transgression to the relationship .213, Sentiment of loss .222, Dissatisfaction .614, Passion .499, Insecurity .284, Love towards another .577) are greater than Alpha 0.05, so we understand that there are no statistically significant differences between the means obtained in men and women. The above can be seen as an example in the means of the dissatisfaction factor where men have an average of 2.6060 and women of 2.7340, as well as in the Passion factor where men have an average of 3.0280 and women of 2.8560.

Finally, the bilateral significance obtained in the factors of the Consequences of infidelity dimension in men and women (Negative consequences of infidelity .847 and Positive consequences of infidelity .431) are greater than alpha 0.05. The means obtained in the first factor is 4.1650 in men and 4.1825 in women, while in the second factor it is 1.7760 in men and 1.6160 in women, so we can conclude that the means are statistically equal or in other words they are not have found statistically significant differences between the samples in relation to their mean.

Figure 2 shows the multiple comparisons in relation to the dissatisfaction in the primary relationship factor of the Infidelity Reasons dimension between the different faculties included in the sample using Tukey HSD analysis. Significant differences were found between the Faculty of Law and the Faculty of Accounting and Administration (P≤.05).

Figure 2. Average scores per faculty for dissatisfaction in the primary relationship and its level of significance

Another analysis was the Pearson correlation between the factors corresponding to the Multidimensional Infidelity Inventory. The results obtained can be seen in the following table:

Table 1. Results of the correlation between the factors, age of the person, age of the couple and time of courtship

Table 1 shows the results of the correlations that were obtained between the factors of one dimension with another, as well as between the factors of the same dimension, since this represents the internal consistency of the results that can be obtained in the multidimensional inventory of infidelity.

8. Discussion and Conclusions

Regarding the initial hypothesis of the research, in which it was stated that there are significant differences in all the dimensions of infidelity in men and women, it was found that the only statistically significant difference was obtained in the dimension of Infidel conduct, where women obtained a greater average in the factor of Emotional infidelity, which refers to the behavior that denotes the maintenance of a romantic emotional bond with another person besides the couple. However, in the desire of sexual infidelity factor, which is the desire for a romantic bond with another person besides the partner without necessarily carrying it out, a difference was obtained, although not significant, in which men obtained a greater mean than women. Regarding the factors of sexual infidelity and desire for emotional infidelity, there were no differences in both genders. In this regard, women are unfaithful mainly for emotional reasons (20%), while men are unfaithful mainly for sexual reasons, (75-80%) [8]. Some aspects that could explain the tendency of women to be emotionally unfaithful can be the women's liberation movement, a higher level of education in women and the incorporation of women into the forces of production. Making a specific analysis by area of conflict and infidelity, we find that sexual and emotional infidelity in both men and women, the conflicts that are most related to it (in descending order by value of the correlation), are jealousy, activities own, personality and sexual relations [13].

In the dimension of Reasons for infidelity no significant differences were obtained, however, men scored higher than women in each of the factors, with the exception of the factor of emotional and social instability (infidelity is attributed to personal problems, mainly of emotional nature), where both genders obtained the same average. Men more often attribute that infidelity originates due to problems of communication, attention and interest existing within the primary relationship; search of satisfaction of needs mainly of sexual and playful nature; to the structure of values and ideology derived from their education and environment; as a consequence of the errors or impulses of the individual lacking control over himself; for lack of love and apathy within the primary relationship; and to feelings of anger, anger and revenge towards the primary couple. Women are unfaithful - in the following order of importance - due to communication problems with the couple, sexual dissatisfaction, lack of love, personal characteristics of other men, money and retaliation against a previous infidelity of their partner [10]. While men resort to this practice attracted by the physicality of other women, poor communication, sexual dissatisfaction, lack of love, poor hygiene of their partner, financial problems and revenge.

Also, in the Beliefs of infidelity dimension, no significant differences were found in both genders. both considered infidelity as a label of an adventure full of passion, desire and novelty; and considered infidelity as a lack of the exclusive bond established within the primary relationship; an act derived from individual negative feelings; a lack of security and congruence on the part of the individuals who carry it out; a fact derived from insecurity, confusion, cowardice and selfishness on the part of the individuals who carry it out; and as the encounter with love, love and understanding lost within the primary bond. In general, authors define infidelity as the lack of sexual and / or emotional commitment agreed between the members of the marital or dating partner, which can be seen as a response to the conflict, but also as a cause of it [6].

Finally, in the Consequences of infidelity dimension, both genders consider that the act of infidelity can cause harm to the primary relationship, even encouraging the dissolution of the bond. As a consequence of infidelity, pain appears acutely and dramatically, since it represents a powerful and devastating attack on self-esteem, on the very feeling of identity as an individual and as a couple [15]. Only a small percentage of men considered that the act of infidelity can bring benefits to the primary relationship, favoring the approach and resolution of the problem within the bond. Regarding the above, it was found that the majority of males (52%) and females (73%) understood that having sexual relations with another person did not affect their formal relationship [18]. Similarly, men (63%) and females (71%) understood that having sex with other people did not affect their feelings towards the current couple.

Infidelity is one of the situations identified by mental health professionals that can have an adverse impact on the emotional health of the individual, couple and family. The discovery of an infidelity in the couple has been related to homicidal and / or suicidal crises, feelings of anger, anger, frustration, among others [18].

In relation to the field of study of the sample (fig. 2), the only significant difference found was for the factor of dissatisfaction in the primary relationship for the infidelity motives scale, between the group that studies law (lowest score) and the admission and accounting group (highest score). Sexual dissatisfaction was a strong correlate and an important predictor of dyadic adjustment of the couples, which could eventually motivate infidelity [9]. However, the fact that students in a career are different in this factor needs to be studied in more detail considering the aspects of the personality profiles of each career.

In this way, future research considers the possibility of studying some other possible causes that lead men and women to infidelity that go beyond the scope of this study, such as the search for personal image, hierarchy, gender roles of the Campeche culture, of competitiveness, by a specific hunger, by feeling loved, desired, self-esteem, social classes, economic power, addiction to sex and addiction to drugs, or by a simple impulse of purely instinctive or biological origin. Similarly, the possibility of replicating the study with a larger sample, with a better representation by gender, different ages and participants who report being faithful and unfaithful.

We emphasize that the results cannot be generalized to other universities or other populations, for this it is necessary to continue expanding the sample in other populations.

Research should continue to be carried out in this area, in order to obtain data on the behavior of the person in affective relationships; so that models of intervention and treatment with cultural sensitivity can be established.