Canadians’ health care-seeking behaviour for physical and mental health issues was examined using the international Quality and Cost of Primary Care (QUALICOPC) survey that was conducted in 2013 in Canada. This study used the cross-sectional Patient Experiences Survey collected from 7260 patients in 759 practices across 10 Canadian provinces as part of the QUALICOPC study. A Responsive Care Scale (RCS) was constructed to reflect the degree of health care-seeking behaviour across 11 health conditions. Using several patient characteristics as independent variables, four multiple regression analyses were conducted. Patients’ self-reports indicated that there were gender differences in health care-seeking behaviour, with women reporting they visited their primary care provider to a greater extent than did men for both physical and mental health concerns. Overall, patients were less likely to seek care for mental health concerns in comparison to physical health concerns. For both women and men, the results of the regressions indicated that age, illness prevention, trust in physicians and chronic conditions were important factors when explaining health care-seeking behaviours for mental health concerns. This study confirms the gender differences in health care-seeking behaviour advances previous research by exploring in detail the variables predicting differences in health care-seeking behaviour for men and women. The variables were better predictors of health care-seeking behaviour in response to mental health concerns than physical health concerns, likely reflecting greater variation among those seeking mental health care. This study has implications for those working to improve barriers to health care access by identifying those more likely to engage in health care-seeking behaviours and the variables predicting health care-seeking. Consequently, those who are not accessing primary care can be targeted and policies can be developed and put in place to promote their health care-seeking behavior.

The present study aimed to quantify the magnitude of sex differences in humans' ability to accurately recognise non-verbal emotional displays. Studies of relevance were those that required explicit labelling of discrete emotions presented in the visual and/or auditory modality. A final set of 551 effect sizes from 215 samples was included in a multilevel meta-analysis. The results showed a small overall advantage in favour of females on emotion recognition tasks (d=0.19). However, the magnitude of that sex difference was moderated by several factors, namely specific emotion, emotion type (negative, positive), sex of the actor, sensory modality (visual, audio, audio-visual) and age of the participants. Method of presentation (computer, slides, print, etc.), type of measurement (response time, accuracy) and year of publication did not significantly contribute to variance in effect sizes. These findings are discussed in the context of social and biological explanations of sex differences in emotion recognition.

Infidelity is a leading cause of relationship discord and dissolution, and couples generally report expectations to maintain monogamy. However, a majority of men and women report engaging in some form of infidelity at least once in their lives. Research assessing judgments of the behaviors that constitute infidelity is lacking. The three studies reported here advanced the literature by developing and validating the Definitions of Infidelity Questionnaire (DIQ), a comprehensive measure examining infidelity judgments. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated four factors to the scale: sexual/explicit behaviors, technology/online behaviors, emotional/affectionate behaviors, and solitary behaviors. Investigation of the psychometric properties demonstrated the DIQ to be reliable and valid. Participants agreed that sexual/explicit behaviors comprised infidelity to the largest extent, whereas other types of behaviors (technology/online behaviors, emotional/affectionate behaviors, and solitary behaviors) were judged as comprising infidelity to a lesser extent. Men reported more permissive judgments than did women. This study provides insights regarding operationalizing infidelity and identifying areas of ambiguity and consensus. Implications of the findings for educators and practitioners working with individuals in intimate relationships are discussed.

Despite strong prohibition against infidelity and endorsement of exclusivity as a norm, many people report engaging in infidelity. The current study examined this paradox by employing a between-subject design using online surveys with 810 adults to assess actor-observer biases in the degree of permissiveness judging own versus partner's hypothetical behaviour, as well as hypocrisy in judgments of infidelity versus self-reported behaviour. Participants judged their own behaviour more permissively than their partner's, but only for emotional/affectionate and technology/online behaviours (not sexual/explicit or solitary behaviours). Many reported having engaged in behaviours that they judged to be infidelity, especially emotional/affectionate and technology/online infidelity behaviours. Sexual attitudes, age, and religion predicted inconsistencies in judgments of infidelity and self-reported behaviour (hypocrisy). This study has implications for educators and practitioners working with couples to improve communication and establish guidelines for appropriate and inappropriate behaviour.

Infidelity is defined as the violation of a couple's assumed or stated agreement concerning emotional and/or sexual exclusivity. The current study examined the utility of personality traits (i.e., the Big Five and SIS/SES - an individual's sexual response to sexual desires, arousal, and behaviours are based on the balance between sexual excitation and sexual inhibition; Bancroft & Janssen, 2000) relative to relationship quality and attraction to others in predicting reports of infidelity among a sample of young adults (ages 18–26 years). A total of 131 men and 164 women from the US who reported being in a romantic relationship were recruited using MTurk®, an online crowdsourcing survey tool. Participants completed a series of measures assessing demographics, relationship quality and investment, sexual experience, sexual attitudes, attraction to others, and personality traits, including the Big Five and SIS/SES. A notable minority (16.6%) of participants reported at least one occasion of past infidelity during their current romantic relationship (yes/no reports); however, reports of infidelity increased significantly when individuals reported actual sexual, romantic, and online infidelity activities (78.6%). Personality traits within the Big Five and SIS/SES models were not significant predictors of infidelity. With each occurrence of emotional attraction to a person other than their current partner, the odds of reporting infidelity increased by 51.6%. The findings are discussed in terms of implications for counselling and education regarding infidelity, as well as continued research on risk factors for infidelity among young adults.