Infidelity Decision‐Making by Emerging Adult Women: A Grounded Theory

ABSTRACT

Though infidelity's causes and consequences are widely discussed, the decision‐making processes, especially among women, has been largely neglected in the academic literature. This study aims to address this gap by examining the infidelity decision‐making process of emerging adult women. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we analyzed in‐depth, semi‐structured interviews with 22 women who had engaged in infidelity while in committed heterosexual relationships. In contrast with more linear decision‐making models, the findings reveal that women's infidelity decision‐making is a non‐linear process involving a dynamic interaction of three interconnected factors—unfulfilling relationship, motivation, and rationalizing—which we illustrate as interlocking gears to emphasize their synchronous and interdependent relationship. This grounded theory expands understanding of infidelity decision‐making by moving beyond the constraints of linear models and male‐oriented perspectives. Clinically, the findings highlight the importance of both relational dynamics and individual psychological processes when working with clients on infidelity‐related issues.

Infidelity is a common phenomenon across societies and cultures, including the United States. Despite 84% of US adults having a negative view of infidelity (Wike 2014), it is still relatively common, with 16% of married participants in the 2022 US General Social Survey (GSS) reporting that they had engaged in sexual infidelity at some point during their marriage (Davern et al. 2022). Consistent with these findings, Warach et al.'s (2024) large international meta‐analysis of 305 studies and over 500,000 participants found a lifetime prevalence of sexual infidelity of 17.45%. Scholars have examined the motivations and aftermath of infidelity (Blow and Hartnett 2005; Warach and Josephs 2021), yet relatively little is known about the processes that precede infidelity. Although scholars generally agree about the different risk factors for infidelity in men and women, very few studies have systematically explored the decision‐making process regarding infidelity (Perez et al. 2023). The purpose of this article is to present the results of a grounded theory study examining the decision‐making process of infidelity among emerging adult women.

1. Literature Review

1.1. Emerging Adults and Romantic Relationships

Emerging adulthood is a stage of life in which people make significant decisions and commitments that will shape their future, such as dating, marriage, parenthood, education, and long‐term employment (Arnett 2014; Bravo et al. 2017; Shulman and Connolly 2013). Scholars generally agree that emerging adulthood begins around age 18 when most individuals complete secondary education; however, the age at which the “emerging” period ends is a topic of debate among scholars, with some suggesting ages 25 or 29 (Arnett 2014). Although it is often associated with an age range, some scholars suggest that emerging adulthood is more appropriately characterized by specific experiences and challenges, marked by transitioning from relative dependence in adolescence to increased independence and responsibility (Wood et al. 2018).

Research indicates that romantic relationships during this stage are typically short‐term; young adulthood is seen as a time for exploration, and breakups are common (Morris and Reiber 2011; Norona et al. 2017; Roberson et al. 2017). Relationship dissolution among emerging adults is associated with lower levels of relationship support and romantic appeal (Lantagne et al. 2017), as well as unmet intimacy, identity, and autonomy needs (Norona et al. 2017). While there is a growing body of literature on relationship formation and break‐ups, there remains limited understanding of infidelity among emerging adults. Our objective is to address this gap by studying the decision‐making process of emerging adult women who participated in infidelity.

1.2. Definition and Impact of Infidelity

Infidelity is any betrayal of the implied or stated contract in a committed relationship regarding intimate exclusivity (Fife et al. 2024). While there are many types of infidelity, the most commonly reported are physical, emotional, and electronic (Blow and Hartnett 2005; Treas and Giesen 2000; Warach et al. 2024). Emotional infidelity involves developing an emotional closeness or connection with someone outside the committed relationship without the other partner's consent (Weeks and Fife 2014). Emotional infidelity often leads to or co‐occurs with physical infidelity, defined as having a physical or sexual relationship with someone outside the committed relationship. With the advancement of technology, infidelity occurs not only in person but also online through websites, apps, social media platforms, and virtual reality and metaverse platforms (Cravens et al. 2013; Warach et al. 2024).

Many scholars assert that people who experience infidelity see their partner's actions as a severe relational betrayal, which often results in adverse emotional, psychological, and relational consequences (Bird et al. 2007; Warach and Josephs 2021). A recent study found that reactions to infidelity range from negative emotional responses to ending the relationship (Apostolou et al. 2022). While the severity of consequences depends on several factors, such as the age of participants, the length of the relationship, and the quality of the committed relationship, infidelity is associated with increased rates of depression, anxiety, post‐traumatic stress, and poorer long‐term health among individuals whose partner engaged in infidelity (Hoy and Oh 2024; Roos et al. 2019; Shrout and Weigel 2018). Furthermore, betrayed partners often report experiencing intense emotions such as anguish, anger, self‐blame, and diminished feelings of self‐worth (Butler et al. 2022; Fife et al. 2022). Straying partners may also experience guilt, shame, ambivalence, or cognitive dissonance, particularly if engaging in infidelity contradicts their values or commitments (Butler et al. 2022; Perez et al. 2023).

Given the significant individual and relational impact, infidelity is one of the most common reasons couples seek therapy, yet it is one of the most challenging issues to treat (Whisman et al. 1997; Fife et al. 2008). Although clinical literature indicates a strong interest in infidelity, only a small percentage of publications on treating and recovering from infidelity are empirical research articles (Gossner et al. 2022; Stamps 2020). Given the negative effects of infidelity, more empirical research is needed to aid clinicians in understanding the etiology, risks, and treatment of infidelity. Without understanding why people engage in infidelity, it is difficult to help individuals and couples avoid this painful experience or assist with the healing process.

1.3. Factors Associated With Infidelity Risk and Decision‐Making

Several factors have been suggested to explain the decision to engage in infidelity, including demographic factors, individual characteristics and behaviors, relationship patterns, and contextual factors (for reviews see Blow and Hartnett 2005; Fincham and May 2017; Rokach and Chan 2023). For example, relationship dissatisfaction or lack of emotional connectedness are found to increase the risk of infidelity for both men and women (Jeanfreau et al. 2014b; Perez et al. 2023; Zapien 2016). Similarly, a qualitative study by Varma et al. (2023) found that motives for infidelity in dating relationships include relationship dissatisfaction, as well as uncertainty about having found “the one,” a desire for exploration, feeling neglected, seeking revenge for partners' infidelity, opportunity, and self‐worth validation. Recent studies also show that unrealistic or idealized beliefs about love are also linked to lower satisfaction and more negative interactions, as well as increased jealousy and infidelity (Ventura‐León et al. 2025). However, Previti and Amato's (2004) longitudinal study found that infidelity can be both a consequence and a cause of relationship dissatisfaction. For example, Whisman and Sanchez (2024) show that both engaging in extramarital sex and simply suspecting a partner of it are associated with lower relationship satisfaction for both husbands and wives. Other factors that influence the risk of infidelity are workplace, income, education level, and length of marriage (Atkins et al. 2001; Rokach and Chan 2023), as well as sexually permissive attitudes, previous infidelity, and numerous past sexual relationships (Barta and Kiene 2005).

1.4. Gender and Infidelity Decision‐Making

Existing research has shown that rates and reasons for men and women engaging in infidelity differ, highlighting the importance of gender in the study of infidelity (Allen et al. 2005; Blow and Hartnett 2005; Fincham and May 2017; Rokach and Chan 2023). Consistent with prior research emphasizing gendered patterns in infidelity, GSS data from 1991 to 2022 that show a persistent gender gap in reports of extramarital sex in the United States (Davern et al. 2022). Across the three decades, men consistently report higher rates of sexual infidelity than women, with men's rates generally ranging between 20% and 25% and women's between 10% and 17%. The gender gap, while fluctuating across years, remains substantial (often between 7% and 12% points), though it has narrowed slightly in recent years. Similarly, Warach et al.'s (2024) meta‐analysis of infidelity prevalence worldwide shows that males engage in infidelity significantly more than females.

Scholars have found that while men are more likely to engage in sexually motivated infidelity, women tend to engage more often in emotionally motivated infidelity (Barta and Kiene 2005; Jeanfreau et al. 2014b). Sexual dissatisfaction or unfulfillment is one of the principle reasons why men engage in affairs (Allen and Rhoades 2007; Jeanfreau et al. 2014b). Men are also more likely than women to have multiple affair partners during their relationships (Allen et al. 2005). Research indicates that men tend to distinguish sex from love, seeing sexual infidelity as “just sex” with limited emotional attachment (Blow and Hartnett 2005). In comparison, research indicates that women are more motivated by emotional and relational reasons and are more likely to engage in a combined type of infidelity, engaging in sexual and emotional affairs simultaneously (Rokach and Chan 2023). Women point to relationship problems, relationship dissatisfaction, lack of emotional support and quality time, unfulfilled needs, neglect, and lack of communication as reasons for engaging in infidelity (Barta and Kiene 2005; Jeanfreau et al. 2014b).

Although a few researchers have looked at factors related to infidelity decision‐making, relatively little is known about how the decision‐making process evolves when people engage in infidelity. A recent study of heterosexual men's infidelity decision‐making found that men follow a progressive process of justification and rationalization over time (Perez et al. 2023). This study shows that deciding to engage in infidelity is not a singular event for men but rather unfolds gradually through stages. Contextual factors such as relationship dissatisfaction or physical distance set the stage for small justifications that accumulate over time, like a snowball rolling down a hill, where personal moral boundaries are increasingly compromised. As the process advances, men engage in motivated reasoning, rationalizing their actions and suppressing their moral concerns to justify the infidelity.

Jeanfreau and her co‐authors (2014a, 2014b, 2016) published three studies on factors related to women's infidelity decisions. The first (Jeanfreau et al. 2014a) was an exploratory study of factors associated with four married women's decision to engage in infidelity. They found that relationship dissatisfaction and infidelity were related to a lack of communication, quality time, and intimacy in their primary relationship, along with attention from the affair partner and encouragement from friends. Mutual sharing of marital problems also led to deeper connection between the participants and their affair partners. A similar study (Jeanfreau et al. 2014b) found that lack of attention, inability to resolve relationship problems, and lack of quality time are risk factors for women engaging in infidelity. Similarly, Jeanfreau and colleagues (2016) studied infidelity decision‐making through the lens of permission‐giving. They identified four ways in which the women in their study reduced their cognitive dissonance, allowing them to give themselves permission to engage in infidelity: (a) emphasizing the negative characteristics of their husbands led women to think they (the husbands) were not worthy of their (the wives') loyalty, (b) rationalizing their decisions by modifying their values such that cheating was a more acceptable decision, (c) depersonalizing and compartmentalizing their decision by differentiating their affair relationship from their marriage, and (d) dehumanizing their husbands by focusing on their negative attributes and forms mistreatment they perpetrated.

Although the studies by Jeanfreau and her colleagues explore factors related to women's reasons for engaging in infidelity, the studies have several limitations. All were based on small samples (N = 4) and highly restrictive participant criteria. Although the studies report various factors associated with women's infidelity‐related decisions, only Jeanfreau et al. (2016) present findings related to decision‐making. Thus, there remains limited empirical knowledge regarding the process of women's infidelity decision‐making. Our study aimed to address this gap using a larger sample size, a diverse pool of participants, and robust methodological processes to investigate the process of infidelity decision‐making by emerging adult women and develop a grounded theory that illustrates this process. The primary research question guiding the study was: What is the process of women making the decision to engage in infidelity? An additional sub‐question was: What factors are involved in a woman's decision to engage in infidelity?

2. Methodology

2.1. Philosophical Stance

To accomplish the purpose of the study, we used constructivist grounded theory (CGT) methodology, as described by Charmaz (2014). Grounded theory is particularly useful when studying human processes, actions, and interactions about which there is relatively little knowledge or theory. With CGT, researchers aim to generate an inductively derived theory that is grounded in the experiences and meaning of participants. Moreover, CGT researchers acknowledge the researchers' influence on the investigative and interpretive process, influencing how they frame interview questions, engage with participants, analyze the resulting data, and interpret the findings (e.g., Charmaz 2014). Consistent with our constructivist perspective, the findings represent the our interpretive understanding of participants' experiences, co‐constructed through ongoing engagement with the data.

2.2. Participants and Procedures

Prior to beginning data collection, we obtained Institutional Review Board approval. Participation criteria included individuals who identified as female, were 18 years or older, and engaged in either a physical or emotional affair while being involved in a committed romantic relationship. Participants (n = 22) were recruited through online announcements posted to an online bulletin board system managed by a university in the Southwestern United States. This platform is accessible to the public, as well as university students, faculty, and staff. Participants were between ages 18 and 39 (M = 26; SD = 5.7) at the time of the interview and between ages 15 and 28 when they engaged in infidelity (M = 21; SD = 3.4). At the time of the reported infidelity, participants were in dating, cohabitating, and married relationships that had lasted anywhere from 4 months to 8 years, with an average length of about 19 months. Seven participants identified as Hispanic, five as White, three as African American, two as Asian, one as American Indian or Alaskan Native, and four as mixed race (two as Asian‐White and two as Latina‐White). Fifteen participants identified as heterosexual, four as bisexual, one pansexual, and one demisexual. Ten participants identified as atheist, four participants identified as Christian, four participants stated they did not have a religious affiliation, and one participant from each of these religious identities: Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, and traditional Native beliefs. At the time of the interview, seven participants had received a high‐school diploma, two an associate's degree, 10 a bachelor's degree, two a master's degree, and one a PhD.

We used purposeful sampling (Charmaz 2014) to identify participants who would provide rich information related to decision‐making and infidelity. We conducted in‐depth interviews over the phone (13), via zoom (5), and face‐to‐face (4) using a semi‐structured interview guide that permitted flexibility and follow‐up questions. Interviews focused on contextual factors and the decision‐making processes that contributed to the infidelity and included questions such as: “Will you describe your thought process when deciding to engage in infidelity?”, “Were there any thoughts/events that led up to you deciding to have an affair?”, “Can you tell me a little bit about the state of your relationship during the time when you were contemplating and deciding to engage in infidelity?”, and “What was the internal dialogue like when making the decision?” Depending on their responses, additional follow‐up questions were tailored to increase knowledge about participants' decision‐making thought processes and actions. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim by the research team. Participants were given a $20 gift card as compensation for their time.

2.3. Data Analysis

In this study, the process of data collection and analysis occurred concurrently, with the analysis of earlier interviews shaping the direction of subsequent interviews and analysis. We analyzed the data consistent with constructivist grounded theory methods including initial, focused, and theoretical coding and constant comparison (Charmaz 2014). The analysis commenced by conducting a line‐by‐line examination of the transcribed interviews and assigning labels to significant words or phrases that captured salient ideas conveyed by the participants (initial coding). Examples of initial codes include questioning the relationship, substance use, cognitive dissonance, self‐deception, rationalization, and escalation. During focused coding, the emphasis shifted to identifying recurrent, more robust codes that better elucidated the broader process of decision‐making. Prominent categories were refined through a recursive process of conducting additional interviews, reviewing the developing categories, and then returning to conduct further interviews. This iterative approach allowed us to further develop and refine the analytic categories, which were informed by new insights gleaned from subsequent interviews and analysis (Corbin and Strauss 2015). Examples of prominent categories include relationship dissatisfaction, motivation, and rationalizing. The final stage of analysis involved higher, more abstract theorizing, as we compared and organized primary categories and subcategories into a coherent theory of decision‐making. This included the construction of a conceptual model that depicts the interconnection between the primary categories and subcategories.

2.4. Reflexivity and Trustworthiness

Reflexivity denotes a process of acknowledging and justifying one's role in the development of the project, as well as the analytic judgments made throughout the course of the research. For instance, we purposefully examined the ways in which our personal values, experiences, perspectives, and distinct contexts influenced the research process. The research team is comprised of a diverse group of couple and family therapy scholars from a variety of racial, religious, and cultural backgrounds. The first author is a White, cisgender male who primarily researches infidelity and its clinical implications. This study was constructed as a follow‐up to a similar study examining the decision‐making process of men when engaging in infidelity (Perez et al. 2023). As such, the first author led the research team; however, acknowledging his privilege and its intersection with the subject matter, he intentionally created a diverse research team, including six women and one man, to mitigate the influence of his privilege on the research process. Team members identify as Asian, Caucasian, and Hispanic, and range in age from the mid‐20s to the mid‐30s, with the exception of the first author, who is in his early‐50s. The research team collaboratively designed the study, wrote the interview protocol, and analyzed the data. All interviews were conducted by a female member of the research team, and each transcript had at least one female coder. Each member of the team is academically qualified, having received advanced training in marital and family therapy and qualitative research. Each is a trained couple and family therapist and has clinical experience dealing with infidelity. We engaged in self‐reflection and multiple group discussions about how our professional and personal perspectives and experiences influenced the research process. We also utilized research meetings and reflexive and analytic memos to monitor and track our reflections and analytic decisions. It was our intent to prioritize the experience of the participants and honor their voices.

To ensure reliable and trustworthy data analysis and results, we employed several methods. Each interview was coded by a primary and a secondary coder. The use of multiple coders brought diverse perspectives to the analysis, provided different ideas and insights regarding the data's significance, and contributed to the theorizing process, which resulted in a collaboratively developed grounded theory. Multiple external auditors with experience in grounded theory provided feedback on the data analysis process and the results. Additionally, we adhered to established methodological procedures formulated by Charmaz (2014) and other scholars (Corbin and Strauss 2015) and held numerous team meetings to evaluate our process, question assumptions, advance our analysis, and develop the final model.

3. Results

Although each participant's experience was unique, our examination of data within and across participants resulted in a grounded theory that synthesizes common aspects of the decision‐making process for emerging adult women who engaged in infidelity. The theory is organized around three interrelated categories: unfulfilling relationships, motivation, and rationalizing. Through in‐depth analysis of participants' accounts, we came to understand that the process of deciding to have an affair unfolds in a non‐linear fashion, with the three key factors operating and interacting simultaneously. We depict these as interlocking gears to highlight the mutual and interdependent relationship between them (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Women's infidelity decision‐making process. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Although each gear and its subcategories represent different aspects of participants' experiences, these elements operated as an interconnected system, rather than as separate or independent categories. For instance, relationship dissatisfaction did not occur in isolation; it interacted with unproductive communication, which in turn deepened unmet needs and emotional deprivation. These unresolved frustrations created vulnerability and made participants more open to outside relationships. Many participants described how persistent unmet needs and the accessibility of opportunities led them to seek personal benefits such as validation, affection, or excitement outside of their committed relationship. Similarly, the perceived personal benefits helped participants reinterpret their actions as justifiable responses to unfulfilling circumstances. For instance, participants explained that reclaiming power often emerged alongside feeling stuck, and infidelity acted as a way to regain autonomy and agency. Likewise, comparing partners and weighing alternatives was not purely evaluative; it intensified ambivalence and provided justification for pursuing an affair. As dissatisfaction and unmet needs persisted, participants' rationalizations further reduced reservations and reinforced the cycle of motivation for engaging in infidelity. Thus, the subcategories across all three gears acted as mutually influential parts of the decision‐making process. Below, we provide a detailed explanation of each category and its subcategories.

3.1. Unfulfilling Relationship

Participants indicated their committed relationships were deeply unfulfilling and emphasized the importance of this in their decision to engage in infidelity. The majority expressed a sense of dissatisfaction with their committed relationship and that their needs were not being met by their partner. Furthermore, their efforts to communicate their dissatisfaction and desires for change in the relationship were unproductive, which perpetuated feelings of dissatisfaction and unmet needs. The combination of these factors, along with personal motivation and rationalization, fueled participants decision to engage in an outside relationship. One woman recalled, “My relationship was not okay. I felt we were not talking as much as before, and I wanted to talk more. And we were not that intimate anymore too. So, I wanted to feel loved, and … I was not feeling that from him.” Three interconnected subcategories elucidate this pattern: relationship dissatisfaction, unproductive communication, and a sense of frustration and hopelessness stemming from prolonged unmet needs.

3.1.1. Relationship Dissatisfaction

All participants noted that they experienced dissatisfaction in their committed relationship, as exemplified by one woman in the study who said, “I was unhappy with what the relationship… unsatisfied and unhappy with it.” The reasons for their dissatisfaction included not feeling intimately connected, loved, understood, appreciated, or respected by their partner, as well as not being included in relationship decisions, being in an abusive or controlling relationship, or being cheated on by their committed partner. Accounts from the women in the study indicated they were not receiving the attention they desired from their partner, leaving them feeling unappreciated and unhappy. A participant stated, “I was in that point in the relationship where I didn't enjoy his company. I actively didn't like being around him. I didn't like engaging in sexual activities with him. I just kind of didn't want anything to do with him.” Reflecting the sentiment of many participants, another said she was “feeling unfulfilled, unhappy, kind of unappreciated.”

Some participants reported being dissatisfied with their relationships because they were being mistreated in various ways. One woman said, “I wasn't happy in that relationship.” She elaborated, “It was kind of suffocating. He was very, very needy and needed to be with me all the time, to the point where anytime I wanted to spend time with my friends, family, he would get really upset.” Another participant whose partner was very controlling noted, “I was just so upset with my boyfriend, honestly. Just angry about how he treated me, in general…. He's so mean to me!” Unresolved emotional wounds resulting from their partner's infidelity also contributed to dissatisfaction for some participants. The accompanying pain and anger contributed to their justification of their own infidelity. One participant shared, “I think that I kind of held a grudge, resented him a little bit, and then that also led me to make my decision.”

3.1.2. Unproductive Communication

Despite efforts to discuss their dissatisfaction with their partners, participants' concerns were not addressed or effectively resolved through their communication. Although some participants reported not directly communicating their needs or concerns with their partner, in most cases, participants' concerns and issues were either ignored or remained unresolved. Several stated that the frequency and quality of communication with their partners had decreased, which contributed to their sense that the relationship was deteriorating. One participant described, “Things were not okay…we were not talking that much, not as much as we were talking before. I was feeling something was off. I felt he didn't want me anymore.” When participants tried to share their concerns with their partners, it often led to arguments and additional frustration, as illustrated by one participant: “That was when the relationship started to get really rocky. And it [infidelity] happened because we had gotten into this huge fight, and I called up the person that I had cheated on him with.” Being apart also negatively affected communication for some participants, who found that long‐distance communication was not as good as when they were in person. One participant described her frustration with being in different time zones, “I had to wait for him to call before we would talk. So that was a big strain on the relationship because … I also need [him] to be there for me, but then [he's] not available and then we have to wait for [his] schedule whenever [he's] free.”

3.1.3. Frustration, Resignation, and Hopelessness From Prolonged Unmet Needs

Along with the relationship dissatisfaction and unproductive communication, participants described experiencing frustration, resignation, and hopelessness arising from prolonged unmet needs. One participant described that she engaged in emotional infidelity because “my emotional needs were not being met.” This led many to give up on trying to change their relationship or resolve their issues, as shown by one woman who said, “I had decided in my mind that I wanted to end my relationship … because I didn't think we had any hope of working out.” Another participant described frustration that her efforts in the relationship were not being reciprocated by her partner. She said, “We got into an argument about that. And that's what led to me calling my friend” with whom she engaged in infidelity. Several participants described a lack of companionship in their relationship and that their emotional and sexual needs were not being met by their partner. One woman said that in addition to communication breakdowns in the relationship, “we were not that intimate anymore, too. So, I wanted to feel loved, and stuff that I was not feeling from him.” For many, their “craving for attention,” lack of companionship, and unmet needs led them to seek out someone else who could fulfill these needs.

3.2. Motivation

The second gear in our model describes motivating factors associated with participants' decision to engage in infidelity. As discussed above, participants described being in committed relationships that were generally unhappy and unfulfilling. This, in combination with motivation and rationalizing, played a significant role in participants' decision to engage in infidelity. One woman recalled, “I decided that this (the affair relationship) was better for me at the moment than [my current] relationship.” She decided to “[do] what I want to do … you know, ‘You only live once … I'm gonna do whatever I want.’” While each participant had personal reasons for engaging in infidelity, the motivating factors can be summarized as availability, personal benefits, and reclaiming power.

3.2.1. Availability

Participants' accounts indicated that both the availability of opportunities and their willingness to pursue them were significant factors in their decisions to engage in infidelity. This included both the affair partners being available and the women in the study making themselves available for these interactions. Several participants described the decision‐making process as “passive,” such that the opportunity presented itself, rather than them actively seeking a partner outside their committed relationship. One participant shared, “It felt passive because… I didn't have to actively do anything for it to happen since he made a move and not me.” Another participant detailed a similar process where the affair partner provided her with the opportunity by communicating, “If you want to cheat on your boyfriend with me, I'm not going to say ‘no.’” Other participants described availability as a combination of factors that created the right context for them to move forward with their decision to pursue the outside relationship. For instance, their committed relationship being in a state of distress combined with an opportunity led participants to be more open to infidelity. One woman explained, “I guess it was accessibility. The other person that I made this decision with happened to be in town at the same time that I was having issues with everything. So it just felt available.” Another participant described, “The people I committed the infidelities with were in the right place [at the] right time.” Another simply stated, “The opportunity presented itself and then [I] made a split‐second decision.”

3.2.2. Personal Benefits

Personal benefits emerged as a distinct motivational process characterized by participants' focus on self‐interest, affirmation, and the pursuit of personal rewards. Seeking personal benefits reflects an agentic shift away from emotional depletion toward prioritizing one's own desires by seeking validation, pleasure, or excitement. One woman described, “At the time, I was really craving attention, validation, and I really wanted someone to love me. I really wanted someone to like me. I really wanted someone to appreciate me.” Participants described choices made to feel good, gain confidence, or experience something enjoyable. A key dimension of personal benefit involved validation and self‐esteem boosts. Several participants described how attention from an outside partner increased their confidence and sense of desirability. One participant noted, “He was very handsome… it gave me a lot of confidence. It made me feel like I was really pretty… and really smart.” For many, feeling desired or appreciated generated a positive emotional response that motivated continued engagement in the affair. Another component of personal benefits involved thrill, curiosity, and pleasure‐seeking, where infidelity was experienced as exciting or liberating. As one participant stated, “I did not care about doing the right thing, or not hurting anybody, I just wanted to have fun and experiment.” Another highlighted the appeal of secrecy and novelty: “I'm young, this is fun, I'm having a good time, and no one is going to know about this and it's just going to be a little dirty secret that no one knows.” Participants also emphasized fear of missing out (FOMO) and a YOLO (you only live once)‐style mindset. One participant thought, “Why should I miss out on all the fun?” Another recalled, “I was trying to be like,… ‘I don't care what you think. I'm making this decision ‘cause I want to.’” Infidelity represented a self‐directed choice to prioritize one's own happiness, exploration, or personal benefit.

3.2.3. Reclaiming Power

Along with availability and personal benefits, reclaiming power was identified as a unique motivational process in which participants used infidelity to regain autonomy, agency, or control that felt lost within their committed relationships. This subcategory is grounded in experiences of disempowerment, coercive control, betrayal, and violations of sexual autonomy. Three participants described being in abusive or highly controlling relationships, and six had experienced their partner's infidelity or unfaithfulness, creating relational contexts in which infidelity functioned as an act of reclaiming personal power and authority in the relationship. One woman described this dynamic clearly:

I definitely feel like I had like, a loss of power within that relationship. And being able to make this decision for myself was the one situation where I was able to… get back some of that power and the ability to make decisions for myself.

For participants in controlling or restrictive relationships, infidelity served as an assertion of autonomy and control. One participant explained, “I was just in my own little rebellious phase…. I had this toxic boyfriend who wouldn't let me do anything, or didn't want me to do anything, so I was like, okay, like screw you. I'm my own person.” Some participants described the experience in explicitly empowering terms, referring to infidelity as “female empowerment” or noting simply, “It makes me feel powerful,” and “I felt empowered by it…going against those societal norms.” Additionally, one participant noted that reclaiming power was tied specifically to sexual autonomy, since she had experienced sexual trauma by her partner and felt sexually controlled. She shared, “I'd been raped a few times, and I did want to reclaim some of my sexual autonomy.” For her, choosing an affair represented a reassertion of control over her body and intimate choices.

3.3. Rationalizing

Participants' decision to engage in infidelity was facilitated by a dynamic interplay between experiencing a lack of fulfillment in their primary relationship, being motivated to find something better, and rationalizing their engagement with an affair partner. One participant recounted, “[I was] kind of gaslighting myself like, ‘This isn't a bad thing. You're not doing anything bad.’… I was justifying to myself that ‘Oh if he found out it wouldn't be that bad ‘cause it's not physical cheating; it was just emotional.’” She continued, “My inner dialogue was like, ‘No this is fine; you're gonna end it (the committed relationship) eventually, so it doesn't really matter that you're doing this now.’” Rationalizing infidelity involved the interaction of factors such as relationship ambivalence, comparing the affair partner with the existing partner, and participants feeling stuck in their current relationship.

3.3.1. Feeling Ambivalent

Accounts from many of the participants suggested they felt ambivalent about their committed relationship. Although participants expressed dissatisfaction with their current relationship and were considering other available partners, several participants expressed uncertainty about whether to pursue the outside relationship or stay in their current one. One participant expressed her conflicting feelings: “End the relationship you're in. It's the right thing to do; it's wrong to keep deceiving him,” versus “No, continue this relationship. It's the right thing to do, like a sort of obligation…because all the time invested.” Another described her ambivalence: “I didn't want to end it because it was my first one [and] he wanted to still be in the relationship,” along with “I don't think it's worth it, staying with this person like this.… I want to experience more.” Participants generally expressed a desire to leave their current relationship, but several had reservations about ending the relationship due to convenience, comfort, longevity, familiarity with the relationship, fear of being alone, or emotional or financial reliance on their partner.

3.3.2. Comparing Partners and Weighing Alternatives

In combination with feeling ambivalent, rationalizing infidelity was fueled by participants comparing their relationship partner with the affair partner. When comparing the two relationships, one participant said, “I convinced myself that that's (the affair relationship) what was best for me.” Moments of dissatisfaction with their current partner led some participants to justify turning toward the emerging relationship. For example, one participant said,

There was a moment where … I was like, “I don't need this; I can't stand this right now.” I feel like I hated him in that moment. So I was like, “You know what, I'm gonna do it,” and I remember in that moment I texted the other guy asking him if he was gonna be free that weekend, and he said “yes.” And then that was it.

Another woman described being unsure if she really cared about her current relationship anymore, noting that she felt less alone with her affair partner than her committed partner. The affair partner took an interest in her life, was concerned about her, and acted as a true friend. When considering her unmet needs in her current relationship, another woman who felt “unfulfilled, unhappy, and unappreciated” wondered if she “would feel more appreciated with somebody else.” Another was clear about the differences between the two, “I was enjoying the attention I was getting. I was enjoying the glimpse of love and someone wanting me more” than her current partner.

3.3.3. Feeling Stuck

For many participants, their struggle to resolve the ambivalence involved feeling stuck, which included controlling partners who made it difficult to end the relationship, as well as participants' personal limitations, such as lack of courage, conviction, or problem‐solving skills. For example, one participant who was in a controlling relationship reflected, “I think part of me was like, ‘He treats me so badly, it doesn't matter if I cheat on him. He treats me shitty anyways.’” Another said, “I wasn't happy in [the] relationship. I wanted to leave, and he kind of wouldn't let me.” Another explained, “I had decided I wanted to end my relationship, but I didn't have the courage to do it because I felt I liked him a lot and it was just hard doing that.” Personal struggles included not knowing how to advocate for themselves in their primary relationship. One woman reflected, “I should have been more firm about wanting to end the relationship.” Some noted that they did not have the experience or knowledge of how to end a relationship, given that this was their first significant relationship. One said, “It was kind of that fear of ending the relationship and hurting his feelings…. That's why I pushed that away. Didn't want to… face it.” Another thought to herself, “I could make it work, but I would be unhappy.”

When discussing feeling stuck and comparing alternatives, many participants noted that having a relationship with their affair partner was a justification and catalyst toward ending their relationship. One woman remembered thinking, “If he does find out then maybe I can use this as like the catapult to end things.” Another remarked that she came to realize how bad the relationship was as she engaged in infidelity and grew closer to the other guy, which led to her deciding to break up. Another woman said that after the infidelity, “I realized, ‘Hey, maybe I should break up with this dude’, … It was a really toxic relationship.” She continued, “One of the things he would always tell me was that no one else is ever going to love me, and I remember [thinking], ‘You know what? [He] still made out with me. He's lying. That is not true.’… It made me realize I can break up with this dude.”

4. Discussion

Previous literature suggests that women and men engage in infidelity for different reasons (Barta and Kiene 2005), yet relatively few studies have systematically explored the decision‐making process regarding infidelity. Our study provides an in‐depth explication of the decision‐making process of emerging adult women. We found that this process entails three mutually influential elements: being in an unfulfilling relationship, motivation, and rationalizing. For participants in this study, unfulfilling relationships led to feelings of frustration and hopelessness stemming from prolonged unmet needs. Our model indicates that individual motivation, coupled with an unfulfilling relationship, is instrumental in infidelity, with factors such as personal benefit, availability, and (re)claiming power contributing to women's decision‐making. Along with unfulfilling relationships and being motivated, rationalizing simultaneously plays a critical role in the decision to engage in infidelity, with the justification of the outside relationship being influenced by a combination of ambivalence, feeling stuck, and comparing partners. Our grounded theory illustrates that infidelity decision‐making for emerging adult women involves the concurrent engagement in these mutually influential processes.

In comparison with previous research on infidelity decision‐making by women (Jeanfreau et al. 2014a, 2016), our study offers a more robust and in‐depth analysis of this complex phenomenon. Jeanfreau and colleagues' (2016) study of four married women focused on how participants limited their cognitive dissonance to give themselves permission to have an affair. They found that focusing on their partners' negative qualities and compartmentalizing helped them rationalize their decision to engage in infidelity—results that align with part of the rationalizing process in our study. Similar to our findings about relationship dissatisfaction and unmet needs, participants in Jeanfreau's studies (2014a, 2014b) reported that the lack of quality time with their current partner and the positive attention from the affair partners shaped their infidelity‐related decisions (Jeanfreau et al. 2014a, 2014b). Our study expands on these findings, indicating that participants' unsuccessful attempts at communicating their dissatisfaction and unmet needs led to a sense of helplessness and motivation for change. The juxtaposition of the dissatisfaction in the current relationship alongside the positive attention from the affair partner worked in tandem to fuel a comparison process that was at the heart of rationalizing the infidelity.

In a similar vein, Perez et al. (2023) also highlighted rationalizing as central to infidelity decision‐making in men, with the process entailing a series of progressive justifications that led to the infidelity. Like our findings, they reported that participants focused on relationship problems, self‐focus, and moral compromises as contributing to their rationalization of infidelity. However, unlike Perez et al. (2023), whose grounded theory on men conceptualizes infidelity decision‐making as a linear process, our model describes a non‐linear process in which contributing factors interact in a simultaneous and reciprocal manner. Furthermore, our findings highlight aspects of infidelity decision‐making associated with gender, power, and control that are not reported by Perez et al. (2023) and Jeanfreau and colleagues (Jeanfreau et al. 2014a, 2014b; 2016).

4.1. Relationship Dissatisfaction

Although incidents of infidelity do not always indicate dissatisfaction with the primary relationship (Selterman et al. 2023), previous literature highlights relationship dissatisfaction as a common feature of infidelity for both males and females (e.g., Barta and Kiene 2005; Jeanfreau et al. 2014b; Perez et al. 2023; Treas and Giesen 2000; Varma et al. 2023; Whisman and Sanchez 2024). Our study confirms these findings, with participants highlighting relationship dissatisfaction as a significant factor in their decision to engage in infidelity. Furthermore, our results provide added nuance about how relationship dissatisfaction contributes to a decision to pursue another relationship. When women struggle to have their relationship concerns heard or their partners are unresponsive to these concerns, persistent unmet needs may combine with feelings of frustration and leave one feeling stuck and hopeless in the relationship. The combination of these factors and appealing alternatives fosters an environment conducive to rationalizing infidelity.

While participants in the study expressed considerable dissatisfaction with their relationships, they remained with their partners despite unmet needs and struggles with communication and problem solving. Research shows that due to progression bias in romantic relationships, people are more likely to make decisions that keep a relationship moving forward, even in situations where it might not be in their best interest to do so (Joel and MacDonald 2021). These authors argue that people see relationships as investments, and they often struggle to leave even if the relationship is unsatisfying or unhealthy. Although these authors do not focus specifically on infidelity, their results align with ours: rather than ending their current relationship before pursuing another one, participants in our study chose to stay in the relationship while engaging in infidelity, with many remaining ambivalent about their relationship or wanting to stay even after engaging in infidelity.

4.2. Gender and Power

A significant finding in our study is that participants frequently described infidelity as a way to feel more personally empowered or to reclaim power in their relationship. Previous literature has emphasized socio‐contextual factors, such as gender and power, as important contributors to engaging in infidelity (Perez et al. 2023; Williams 2011; Williams and Knudson‐Martin 2013). Williams (2011) highlights the connection between power imbalances and infidelity, suggesting that partners with more power, typically the male partner in heterosexual relationships, take less responsibility for sustaining committed relationships, and partners with less power engage in infidelity to establish more equality in the relationship (Williams 2011). Our participants' accounts support this idea, with several reporting that engaging in infidelity helped them claim or reclaim power in the relationship. Others highlighted cultural double standards for men and women related to extradyadic sexual relationships (Crawford and Popp 2003; England and Bearak 2014) and stated that they felt empowered by going against societal norms.

Although our analysis was not explicitly guided by feminist theory, issues related to gendered power and resistance consistently emerged from participants' narratives. Participants frequently positioned infidelity not merely as relational withdrawal but as an assertion of autonomy and authority. From a feminist lens, such accounts illustrate how women may use infidelity to challenge gender expectations and restore a sense of agency in contexts where their needs are minimized. Infidelity thus became a strategy for achieving influence and renegotiating power structures in the relationship, an interpretation strongly aligned with feminist understandings of sociocultural inequality in intimate partnerships (Williams and Knudson‐Martin 2013).

For example, one participant described witnessing her father's infidelity during childhood and internalizing messages that infidelity reflects strength and social power, while being cheated on signals weakness. She said, “I really always wanted to be like my dad…I don't want to be my mom because everybody is looking at her like she's weak.” This account demonstrates how intergenerational and cultural scripts about gendered power can shape women's choices in relationships, including using infidelity as a symbolic act of claiming power or self‐redefinition (Weiser et al. 2023).

These interpretations align with feminist scholarship that critiques traditional infidelity discourse for overlooking structural power and assuming equality between partners (Williams and Knudson‐Martin 2013). By foregrounding women's voices describing empowerment‐motivated affairs, our findings contribute to feminist calls for greater attention to gendered power in clinical conceptualization and treatment of infidelity (Weiser et al. 2023; Williams 2011; Williams and Knudson‐Martin 2013).

4.3. Rationalizing Infidelity

Although relationship dissatisfaction plays a significant role in infidelity decision‐making, previous research suggests that justifying infidelity involves more than just being dissatisfied in one's relationship. Perez et al. (2023) found that men's infidelity decision‐making entailed a progressive process of justification in which participants rationalized their involvement with other women. Like Perez et al. (2023) and Jeanfreau et al. (2016), we also found that rationalizing plays a key role in women's decision to engage in infidelity. Warner (2001) asserts that when a person violates their own moral standards or commitments, it triggers a process of self‐justification in which the person generates a narrative or explanation that makes the behavior appear to be acceptable or necessary. The justifying process of the women in our study included comparing their affair partner with their current partner and emphasizing the negative aspects of their committed relationships. Evidence of rationalizing also appeared in participants' accounts that suggested they were merely passive participants in the development of the infidelity, as well as justifying it as a precursor to dissolving their committed relationship.

4.4. Clinical Implications

Our findings have significant implications for therapists working with individuals and couples. In individual therapy, clients may be contemplating whether to remain in or dissolve a committed relationship. Clinicians can help empower clients in their relationship decision‐making through an honest evaluation of the relationship and by examining positive and negative relationship dynamics, the client's met and unmet needs, or their ambivalent feelings. If clients decide to end the committed relationship, therapist can help clients navigate this process. When clients express a desire to continue their committed relationships, clinicians can equip them with the tools they need to effectively communicate with their partner. They may also recommend couple's therapy to address relationship dissatisfaction, unmet needs, and lack of effective communication within the therapy room.

For couples in treatment for infidelity, clinicians may draw upon the study's results to help couples understand the factors that may have contributed to infidelity and how to prevent a recurrence. For many couples, communication problems limit their emotional closeness and intimacy, thus increasing their vulnerability to infidelity. When working with couples who are at risk for or have experienced infidelity, therapists should focus on prevailing relationship issues and help partners communicate effectively and develop greater intimacy in their relationship (Fife et al. 2023). This includes not only empowering discontented partners to assertively express areas of dissatisfaction and unmet needs but also helping partners learn to listen effectively so each feels heard and understood. Effective listening is particularly important, given our participants' experience of feeling like their concerns were not heard by their partners. Couple communication can be facilitated through enactments in which therapists coach couples in conversations intended to increase mutual understanding and facilitate relationally corrective experiences (Davis and Butler 2004; Whiting et al. 2025).

4.5. Limitations and Future Research

While the results provide a focused look at infidelity decision‐making in emerging adult women, there are some limitations of the study that should be noted, particularly related to the demographics of our sample. First, although the average age of participants at the time infidelity occurred was 21, one was only 15 at the time of the infidelity. We included this participant in the analysis because they were cohabitating with their partner at that time, suggesting they had begun transitioning from dependence in adolescence to greater independence (Wood et al. 2018). Additionally, the age of our participants at the time the infidelity occurred limits the generalizability of the data beyond emerging adult women. As noted above, emerging adult romantic relationships are generally temporary, and apart from one married participant, all other participants were in dating or cohabitating relationships when the infidelity occurred. Although the results provide an understanding of women's infidelity decision‐making within dating and cohabitating relationships, the findings may have limited transferability to those who engage in infidelity while married. Research suggests that commitment in dating relationships and marriage can differ (Monteiro et al. 2015), and the decision to engage in infidelity may manifest differently in the context of marriage. Furthermore, the participants were also in monogamous and heterosexual presenting relationships, which limits the generalizability of our findings to diverse relationship constellations and sexual orientations. Lastly, recruiting exclusively through an online bulletin board platform may have introduced self‐selection bias to the sample.

Given the focused nature of the data set, future research may expand to include greater diversity in age, ethnicity and culture, ability status, sexual orientation, gender identity, relationship status, and relationship structures, and also examine how these factors shape infidelity decision‐making. It would also be interesting for future research to more explicitly investigate the role of power in infidelity. As noted above, some participants discussed infidelity as a means to reclaim power in their relationships. This is a unique finding that deserves more focused attention. Similarly, scholars could study the role of power when ending relationships, as several participants noted that infidelity served as a catalyst to end their relationship. Future research could also look more closely at factors that hold women back from ending their relationships.

Previous literature on precursors to infidelity focuses primarily on risk factors, rather than the decision process. Our study, along with the findings by Jeanfreau et al. (2016) and Perez et al. (2023), provide a beginning understanding of infidelity decision‐making. However, more research needs to be done to understand how people decide to engage in infidelity and what additional factors beyond relationship dissatisfaction, unmet needs, motivation, and rationalization are part of the process.