IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i14p2235-d1698821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining Marital Infidelity via Game Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Limor Dina Gonen

    (Department of Economics and Business Administration, Ariel University, Ariel 4070001, Israel)

  • Tchai Tavor

    (Department of Economics, The Max Stern Academic College of Emek Yezreel, Yezreel Valley 1930600, Israel)

  • Uriel Spiegel

    (Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel)

Abstract

Objective: Marital infidelity significantly impacts both the community and the institution of marriage. This study aims to develop a theoretical framework for analyzing marital infidelity through a game-theoretic lens. Methodology/Design/Approach: This research employs a game-theoretic model to predict the decision-making processes of unfaithful partners. Static game models are utilized to explore the interactions between spouses, focusing on identifying Nash equilibria that encapsulate the complexities and uncertainties inherent in infidelity-related decisions, whether through pure or mixed strategies. Results: The analysis reveals strategic dynamics in marital infidelity, where Nash equilibria indicate scenarios where one or both partners may engage in extramarital affairs. A Nash equilibrium is established when both partners perceive the benefits of infidelity as outweighing the costs, leading to diminished trust and communication. The Mixed-Strategy Nash Equilibrium (MSNE) hypothesis suggests that spouses may oscillate between fidelity and infidelity based on probabilistic strategies. Research Implications: This study provides a game-theoretic perspective on marital infidelity, whose findings may be used to inform legal frameworks and social policies addressing the consequences of infidelity, potentially impacting family counseling and legal services. Value/Originality: This research introduces a game-theoretic approach to understanding trust and transgression in marriages, identifying two primary categories of Nash equilibria. It fills a theoretical gap while providing practical insights into marital behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Limor Dina Gonen & Tchai Tavor & Uriel Spiegel, 2025. "Examining Marital Infidelity via Game Theory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:14:p:2235-:d:1698821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/14/2235/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/14/2235/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fair, Ray C, 1978. "A Theory of Extramarital Affairs," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(1), pages 45-61, February.
    2. Schweitzer, Maurice E. & Hershey, John C. & Bradlow, Eric T., 2006. "Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal, 2018. "Marital Infidelity: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 16(1), pages 227-233, March.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    5. Batabyal, Amitrajeet & Beladi, Hamid, 2016. "Cheating on Your Spouse: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," MPRA Paper 75758, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    7. Kitae Sohn, 2008. "Why are there singles: Being single in equilibrium as a partner discipline device," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 10(10), pages 1-6.
    8. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, December.
    9. Bruce Elmslie & Edinaldo Tebaldi, 2008. "So, What Did You Do Last Night? The Economics of Infidelity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 391-410, August.
    10. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:10:y:2008:i:10:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Crawford, Vincent P & Sobel, Joel, 1982. "Strategic Information Transmission," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1431-1451, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marek Hudik, 0. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    2. Marek Hudik, 2020. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 349-368, October.
    3. Utikal, Verena, 2012. "A fault confessed is half redressed—Confessions and punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 314-327.
    4. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal, 2018. "Marital Infidelity: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 16(1), pages 227-233, March.
    5. Batabyal, Amitrajeet & Beladi, Hamid, 2016. "Cheating on Your Spouse: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," MPRA Paper 75758, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Shi, Yi & Deng, Yawen & Wang, Guoan & Xu, Jiuping, 2020. "Stackelberg equilibrium-based eco-economic approach for sustainable development of kitchen waste disposal with subsidy policy: A case study from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. Nasimeh Heydaribeni & Achilleas Anastasopoulos, 2019. "Linear Equilibria for Dynamic LQG Games with Asymmetric Information and Dependent Types," Papers 1909.04834, arXiv.org.
    8. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata, 2023. "Wage claim detracts reciprocity in labor relations: experimental study of gift exchange games," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 18(3), pages 573-597, July.
    9. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    10. Moreno, William Fernando, 2025. "Modeling Knowledge and Decision-Making with the Conditional Reasoning Framework," OSF Preprints zwpnv_v5, Center for Open Science.
    11. Sjur Didrik Flåm, 2013. "Reaching Market Equilibrium Merely by Bilateral Barters," CESifo Working Paper Series 4504, CESifo.
    12. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ian Smith, 2012. "Reinterpreting the economics of extramarital affairs," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 319-343, September.
    14. Lee, Natalie, 2023. "Feigning ignorance for long-term gains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 42-71.
    15. Bayer, Ralph C. & Renou, Ludovic, 2016. "Logical omniscience at the laboratory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-49.
    16. Horaguchi, Haruo, 1996. "The role of information processing cost as the foundation of bounded rationality in game theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 287-294, June.
    17. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2014. "On Self-Interest and Greed," CESifo Working Paper Series 4883, CESifo.
    18. Nicolas Jacquemet & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2018. "Coordination with communication under oath," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(3), pages 627-649, September.
    19. Wynn C. Stirling & Teppo Felin, 2016. "Satisficing, preferences, and social interaction: a new perspective," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(2), pages 279-308, August.
    20. Richard Jankowski, 2007. "Altruism and the Decision to Vote," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(1), pages 5-34, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:14:p:2235-:d:1698821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.