Running head: CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Constructs of Shared Love

Lorena Olvera Moreno
Widener University

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Constructs of Shared Love

Individuals at any age are continuously receiving messages about how human beings
relate to each other. People have learned what types of relationships exist and which ones are
socially acceptable since they were children; they start to find mates and be sexually active. The
reality is that many couples end up sharing their sexual partners due to infidelity or to any kind
of open relationship; however, coping with it involves the use of many emotions. The idea of
sharing a sexual partner has the potential for jealous reactions or compersion depending on the
characteristics of the relationship, as well as the psychological characteristics of each partner.
Jealousy
The experience of jealousy is universal; it always has the same emotional and physical
components which vary in frequency and intensity. Pines and Aronson (1983) reported that
sexual jealousy is experienced at least once at some point in our lives.
Many researchers have conceptualized jealousy in different ways; some of them are more
focused on the people involved while others focused on the affected relationship or pair bond.
For instance, White and Mullen (1989) defined jealousy in relation to the people involved as a
complex of behaviors, thoughts, and emotions resulting from the perception of harm or threat to
the self and or the romantic relationship by a real or potential rival relationship (p.54).
However, Malach (1998) analyzed jealousy focusing on the possible loss of pair bond saying that
it is a complex reaction to a perceived threat to a value relationship or to its quality (p. 3) and
differentiating between the external and internal components of jealousy. The internal
components of jealousy are emotions (pain, anger, envy, sadness, grief, fear and humiliation),
and thoughts (resentment, self-blame, comparison with the rival, concern for ones public image
or self-pity). The external component of jealousy is expressed in different kind of behaviors.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Clanton and Smith (1977) asserted that the feeling of jealousy was centered in the
discomfort over a real or imagined experience the partner has with a third party; however,
Anapol (2010) affirmed that more than the real or imagined existence of a third party is the threat
of the need for control that triggers the jealousy reaction.
The evaluation of jealous normalcy is a topic that many researchers have talked about.
Buss (2000) declared that jealousy can be healthy, necessary, and useful because it helps in the
processes of maintaining sexual exclusivity, preventing a partners infidelity, and also it provides
the father the certainty of his fatherhood and the mother, her partners support. Clanton and
Smith (1977) suggested that some jealousy is normal and healthy and some is abnormal and
pathological. Nevertheless, Malach (1998) stated that jealousy is normal in the context of a
culture that considers it as an appropriate response.
It is important to make a distinction between jealousy and envy. Parrot and Smith (1993)
confirmed the differences in the feelings between these two emotions felt by people. They found
that envy was characterized by feelings of inferiority, longing, disapproval and ill will; jealousy
was characterized by anxiety, distrust, anger, fear of rejection. Malach (1998) explained that
while envy involves two people, jealousy involves three. The objects of both are different: envys
object is the other persons mate, a good relationship, a desirable treat in the rival such as
success, beauty or popularity; jealousys object is the loss of the partner. The reason that many
people confuse these terms is because a jealous response can include a component of envy
(Malach, 1998).
Two variables are related to the prevalence of jealousy: the characteristics of the
relationship and the psychological characteristics of each partner.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Characteristics of the Relationship

Researchers studied jealous behaviors analyzing the nature of the relationships. The
studies centered attention on more public aspects such as length and marital status while some
others analyzed the quality or the nature of the relationship. Mathes and Severa (1981) stated that
variables concerning to the relationship seem to be much more important than those concerning
personality (p. 29). They found, for instance, that couples that promote the development of
separate identities were less jealous than couples who were fused into just one identity.
Melamed (1991) focused on the public aspects of the relationship. He suggested that
length and relationship status are negatively correlated to jealousy and moderate the correlation
between self-esteem and jealousy. For example, a couple with a longer and more stable
relationship has less tendency to react jealously than a new couple with a less stable relationship.
This finding is related to the fact that people in longer and more stable relationships have
developed certain types of agreements and have better communication.
Another important factor is the quality of the relationship. The relationship needs rewards
in order to strengthen the link; Mathes, Adams, and Davies (1985) explained that loss of
relationship rewards leads to depression and loss of romantic partner to a rival is the primary
stimulus that leads to jealous emotion (p.1561). Another study (Barelds & Barelds-Dijkstra,
2007) described how the relationship quality related negatively to the levels of anxious jealousy,
but related positively to the levels of reactive jealousy. This means that when a relationships
quality is seen as positive it is more difficult to imagine a mates infidelity and experience
anxiety; however, this same positive relationship quality could create a negative reaction when a
persons mate is flirting or being unfaithful. Related to the quality of a relationship, the amount
of affection can be related to jealousy. Goodboy, Horan, and Booth-Butterfield (2012) suggested

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

that a jealous evocation is correlated inversely with the amount of affection received. When a
couple has affectionate communication, jealousy reactions are prevented perhaps because it is
associated with positive characteristics as relationship satisfaction, happiness, liking, and love.
Characteristics that are shared by both partners can diminish the levels of jealousy or
increase them. Dijkstra and Barelds (2008) observed that in a relationship formed by agreeable
individuals, partners seem to experience less jealousy. However, jealousy can be triggered by a
mates proclivity to respond jealously (Barelds & Barelds-Dijkstra, 2007). In brief, individuals
jealous responses affect their partners negatively; conversely, individuals agreeable responses
influence the relationship positively, avoiding jealousy.
When a relationship provides security, affection, positive rewards, and helps to strengthen
the self-esteem of all the partners, the feelings of jealousy diminish (Melamed, 1991). If each of
the partners is committed emotionally, feeling love and security, and spend and enjoy time
together as a couple, the possibility of a jealous reaction may only be present with evidence of
infidelity.
Psychological Characteristics
While some researchers suggested an association between relationship experiences such
as relationship satisfaction and happiness (Mathes & Severa, 1981; Mathes, et Al., 1985), many
others stated that the experience of jealousy is more an intrapersonal process than an
interpersonal one (Stieger, Preyss & Voracek, 2011; Rydell & Bringle, 2007; Buunk, 1997;
Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008).
There are many psychological characteristics that can be related to jealousy. One
psychological characteristic that has been researched is self-esteem. A damaged self-esteem is

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

one of the factors that can trigger a jealous reaction (Stieger, Preyss & Voracek, 2011; Rydell &
Bringle, 2007; Melamed, 1991). However, Buunk (1997) argued that just womens jealousy is
correlated with low self-esteem. Besides self-esteem, there are other aspects of personality that
can be related to a reaction of jealousy from a partners real or imagined experience: insecurity
(Clanton & Smith, 1977; Rydell & Bringle, 2007), dependence (Clanton & Smith, 1977),
anxious and avoidant attachment (Rydell & Bringle, 2007), social anxiety (Buunk, 1997),
rigidity, and hostility (Buunk, 1997; Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008).
One psychological characteristic that has been discussed in great detail is neuroticism.
Some researchers (Buunk, 1997; Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008; Melamed, 1991) asserted that
neuroticism can evoke jealousy. A neurotic person is worried about the possibility of infidelity
(anxious jealousy) and is more motivated to prevent interactions between his/her partner and the
possible rival (preventive jealousy), then react intensely when his/her partner engages with
another person (reactive jealousy) (Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008). However, Wade and Walsh (2008)
correlated the Big Five model with jealousy and found that neuroticism, one of the five
dimensions, was not related to the susceptibility of being jealous. More research on this topic is
necessary to find if jealousy and neuroticism are correlated or not.
A psychological aspect that has been studied in relation to jealousy is extraversion.
According to Wade and Walsh (2008) in the above mentioned research, extraversion was not
related to jealousy. Likewise, Dijkstra and Barelds (2008) claimed that extraverted individuals do
not react jealously. Furthermore, none of the rest of the dimensions of personality according to
the Big Fiveagreeableness, openness to experience, and conscientiousnesswere related to
the susceptibility of being jealous.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Another interesting study tried to identify which of the loving styles from Lees
classification was related to jealousy (Goodboy et al., 2012). Goodboy et al. (2012) found that
ludus and mania lovers could predict a jealous behavior even if they receive adequate amounts of
affection from their mate. Ludus lovers manipulate and play with their partners in order to keep
their relationship uncertain. Mania lovers are dependent and emotional, and they will try to test
the relationship and their mate for fidelity. This study shows how the personality characteristics
related to jealousy-evoking reactions are stronger even if the quality of the relationship is
adequate.
Compersion
According to some members of the polyamorous community in Mxico (personal
communication, numerous dates, 2012), jealousy is a learned reaction that can be unlearned.
Jealousy deals with the fear of losing a love object. However, in the context of an open
relationship, the loss of a partner is not seen as a loss but a part of the love network. Therefore,
jealousy has to be avoided or overcome.
In the context of unlearning jealousy, the term compersion emerges. This term, created by
the Kerista Commune, describes compersion as the feeling of joy and delight when ones
beloved loves or is being loved by another (Anapol, 2010). In the same way, Taormino (2008)
defined compersion as taking joy in your partners pleasure or happiness with another partner
(p. 163). Compersion might be associated with a state of empathy mixed with altruism in which
the person experiences the feelings of another person as his or her own, and seeks the welfare of
their partner. Furthermore, compersion must be differentiated from the acceptance of the
situation; acceptance means tolerance while compersion involves joy.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

Anderlini-DOnofrio (2004) in her definition added the idea of empathy, but at the same
time described compersion as an ability (opposite to jealousy) that can be developed:
Compersion is the ability to empathize with a lovers pleasure, to feel it like ones own,
even when the pleasure comes from a source other than oneself. [it is the] ability to turn
jealousys negative feelings into acceptance of, and vicarious enjoyment for, a lovers joy
(p. 4).
Empathy can be seen as one of the components of compersion but not as a synonymous
term. Moreover, compersion transcends empathy in two components: it is not just a passive
understanding of the mate but an active understanding of the other and the self; and the
appreciation of the mates happiness instead of just accepting it as real.
Furthermore, Anapol (2010) emphasized that compersion is a habit that can replace
jealousy and concluded that most of us have been raised with an expectation of jealousy, and
compersion is an alien concept [] It really is possible to feel joy and expansion rather than fear
and contraction in response to a loved ones sharing their love with others (p. 121-122). Briefly,
compersion has been described in different ways such as a type of ability, a feeling, and a
reaction with feelings. All of these definitions vary making understanding more difficult.
Furthermore, if compersion is considered a feeling, it cannot be controlled. If it is considered an
ability, however, it can be developed with practice.
Furthermore, Ferrer (2008) suggested that compersion can be compared with mudita, one
of the four divine emotions or brahma-viharas according to Buddhism. Mudita, also called
altruistic joy, sympathetic joy, or appreciative joy is the ability to be happy when you see others
happy. Their joy becomes your joy as you welcome less suffering and happiness of others
(Snyder, 2006, p. 180). If compersion is analyzed from this Buddhist perspective, the opposite

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

of Mudita should be envy instead of jealousy, which Oxford English Dictionary defines as to
feel displeasure and ill-will at the superiority of (another person) in happiness, success,
reputation, or the possession of anything desirable. This means that the term compersion might
not be the opposite of jealousy but might be the opposite feeling of envy.
Two researchers of polyamory tried to relate jealousy to compersion. Easton and Hardy
(2009) maintained that jealousy can be associated with other feelings such as envy, feelings of
grief and loss of the partner, feelings of loss of an ideal stereotypical relationship, and feelings of
competitiveness. Moreover, Taormino (2008) discussed the four emotions that are components of
jealousy: envy, insecurity or low self-esteem, possessiveness, and feeling excluded. Considering
this idea, compersion can be just part of the solution against jealousy. Compersion eliminates the
possible envy; however, the feelings of loss of the partner and the ideal, the possessiveness, the
insecurity, and the competitiveness can remain.
In the same way that jealousy was analyzed above, compersion will be detailed: the
characteristics of the relationship and the psychological characteristics of each partner related to
compersive behaviors.
Psychological Characteristics
Certainly, there is little research in the area of compersion because it is new terminology
in Academia. However, the scarce research on compersion plus some research that has been done
in the area of polyamory can help to explain and/ or hypothesize the psychological characteristics
related to compersion. This association between polyamory and compersion was proven by
Wolfe (2003) in a study with polyamorists, those who have long histories of poly relating might
be better equipped to handle emotional vagaries and thus would be more compersive (p. 82).

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

10

According to Duma (2009) there are five personality traits related to compersion: positive
feelings (taking pleasure in the others joy), tolerance and acceptance (inclusion of new partners),
growth of love, curiosity, and emotional security. These traits are also inversely correlated to
jealousy. Although this is one of the few studies done in compersion, the report is confusing and
there is a lack of validity in the procedure and instrumentation.
Wolfe (2003) reported that men tend to be more compersive than woman. Taking into
account that polyamory is the practice where compersion has its origin, and that polyamory is
considered a feminist practice (Deri, 2011), it is surprising that men were more compersive.
Wolfe (2003) tried to find correlations between compersion and other behaviors; however, she
could not find any correlation with compersion in these two areas: importance of sex in peoples
life; and social, emotional, and sexual independence. Surprisingly, 79% of her respondents
considered themselves to be socially, emotionally, and sexually independent prior to becoming
polyamorous, but this precursor showed to have no influence in compersive attitudes.
The relation between compersion and spiritual practice was a topic of interest for Deri
(2011) and for Wolfe (2003); nevertheless they found opposite results. In fact, Wolfe (2003)
reported that there was no correlation between religious style (belief in God or attendance to
religious rituals) and compersion. Conversely, Deri (2011) observed spiritual practice in relation
to the practice of compersion and polyamory. This difference in both studies can be understood
in light of the fact that they were looking for different constructs: Wolfe (2003) was probably
looking for an institutional religious correlation, while Deri (2011) was looking for correlation
based on spiritual practice. Therefore, a compersive person could practice non-possessiveness,
and unconditional love, but not necessarily have to belong to a specific religious group.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

11

Deri (2011) suggested that trust is an important a personal resource in developing

compersion; therefore, she compared two types of what she referred to as trusters in relation to
compersive reactions: moralistic trusters and strategic trusters. Moralistic trusters, people that
have an optimistic view towards others and easily trust their partners, were more compersive
than strategic trusters, people who are skeptical and depend on the accumulation of information
in order to trust.
Furthermore, there are some other studies in the field of polyamory. As stated above,
polyamorous people tend to develop compersion in order to remove jealousy from their lives.
The next personality characteristics are hypothesized to be helpful in the development of a
compersive style. For instance, polyamorous people tended to have high self-esteem before they
started practicing polyamory and had shown improvement in esteem (a 74% respondents
experienced a raised, according to Wolfe, 2003) in the midst of their polyamorous lifestyle
(Wolfe, 2003; Deri, 2011). Moreover, some personality traits are common in polyamory
according to Anapol (2010): flexibility, talent for intimate relationships, high intelligence
(included but not limited to emotional intelligence), accountability, self-awareness, high selfesteem, ability to multitask, love for intensity, appreciation for diversity, communication skills,
team spirit, sex positive, flexibility, creativity and spontaneity. These personality traits and a high
self-esteem should be studied in relation to compersion in order to see if people have the
proclivity towards being compersive. Also, this ideal research would help to find which
psychological characteristics should be developed personally or through a therapeutic process in
order to be compersive.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

12

Characteristics of the Relationship

Some authors stated that compersion is the opposite of jealousy (Anapol, 2010; Kerista
Commune). In that idea, Pines and Aronson (1983) declared that people with extra-marital
inclinations were less likely to feel jealous. Therefore, polyamorous people might be less jealous
than those in monogamous relationships (Duma, 2009). Wolfe (2003) found a high correlation
between polyamorous people and compersion. She found a median of 9.12 on an 11-point
compersive scale in polyamorous people, and only 7.9% were less than 7 points. However, this
research was done exclusively with polyamorous people and there was not any comparison
between them and non-polyamorous participants, such as monogamous or any other type of open
relationships.
Deri (2011) interviewed polyamorous people and found that there are five interpersonal
strategies in order to cultivate compersion: a) the development and negotiation of rules and
boundaries in their relationship, b) the feeling of security within the relationshipthe feeling
that their partners take care of them, c) communication as a central tool, d) awareness and
communication about ones own triggers for jealousy, and e) trust building. Deri (2011) declared
while monogamous people often depend on sexual exclusivity to maintain a feeling of
specialness, polyamorists find other ways to achieve this (p. 147).
When comparing different types of polyamory, Wolfe (2003) found a significant
correlation of 95% with compersion in those polyamorous people who said they loved each of
their lovers equally than those who had a favorite lover. This finding might mean that
considering someone as a favorite lover has the potential for developing more possessive
feelings of jealousy when they are sharing a lover. Even though Wolfe thought that it was
possible to find more correlations in other areas of the relationship, she did not find any. There

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

13

were no statistically significant correlations in any of the following areas: frequency of sexual
intercourse, engage in same sex activities, multiple primary partners over one, residence patterns,
relationship status, or sexual independence. This is an astonishing finding that could mean that
compersion is something that can be developed interpersonally more than intrapersonally;
however communication, trust, and negotiation can be important tools in the process. Moreover,
a full 97% of respondents in Wolfes (2003) study reported no interest in finishing their
relationships.
Need of New Constructs in Relationships
Although compersion emerged as the opposite pole of jealousy, researchers such as Deri
(2011) and Duma (2009) have found that both constructs can occur simultaneously. For instance,
Duma (2009) asserted that even though most of the people that scored high on compersion
scored low in jealousy and vice versa, there were some people who scored high in both
compersion and jealousy, or low in both. Moreover, Duma (2009) suggested compersion and
jealousy do belong to the same order of construct and are related to one another in an
antagonistic way because they correlate highly negatively (p. 89), and proposed the creation of
a new construct reaction patterns in romantic relationships regarding other potential mates
that embrace both compersion and jealousy.
This new proposal goes against the belief of some polyamorist writers such as Taormino
(2008) or Anapol (2010) who think that one step to learning compersion is unlearning jealousy.
Nevertheless, the creation of the word compersion has contributed to the potential for it to be
experienced (Deri, 2010, p. 168); language radically influences the way that many people
experience situations, therefore, generating more terminology open minds, and create new
opportunities to experience different feelings. It is necessary to create a word (the opposite of

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

14

jealous) in order to give the possibility not to view jealousy as the expected reaction because it is
the only reaction possible. Perhaps, the word compersion might be redefined or perhaps another
word is missing in this puzzle.
In addition, researchers stated that jealousy can have a component of envy (Malach,
1998; Ferrer, 2008; Taormino, 2008; Easton & Hardy, 2009); moreover, Ferrer (2008) stated that
compersion can be compared with mudita (altruistic joy) one of the four Buddhist divine
emotions. Therefore, envy could be the real opposite of compersion, and the need of a new
construct is evident. Taormino (2008) suggested that the emotions that compose jealousy were
envy, insecurity, possessiveness, and feeling excluded. As a result, this new construct should
include the opposite (positive) characteristics to jealousy that she suggested:

Compersion to fight envy

High self-esteem to fight insecurity
Generosity to fight possessiveness
Inclusive relationship with physical and emotional space to fight feelings of exclusion.

The creation of a new construct might help to diminish the emphasis that culture is posing on
jealousy, Its hard to eliminate jealousy entirely in a culture that emphasizes possessiveness and
exclusivity (Malach, 1998, p. 149).

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

15
References

Anapol, D. (2010). Polyamory in the 21st century: Love and intimacy with multiple partners.
UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Anderlini-D'Onofrio, S. (2004). Plural loves: Bi and poly utopias for a new millennium. Journal
of Bisexuality, 4(3), 1-6.
Barelds, D. P. H., & Barelds-Dijkstra, P. (2007). Relations between different types of jealousy
and self and partner perceptions of relationship quality. Clinical Psychology &
Psychotherapy, 14(3), 176-188. doi: 10.1002/cpp.532
Buunk, B. P. (1997). Personality, birth order and attachment styles as related to various types of
jealousy. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(6), 997-1006. doi: 10.1016/S01918869(97)00136-0
Buss, D. M. (2000). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex. New
York, NY: The Free Press.
Clanton, G., & Smith, L. G. (Eds.) (1977). Jealousy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Deri, J. H. (2011). Polyamory or polyagony? Jealousy in open relationships. (Doctoral
dissertation, Simon Fraser University). Retrieved from https://theses.lib.sfu.ca/thesis/etd6744
Dijkstra, P., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). Self and partner personality and responses to relationship
threats. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(6), 1500-1511. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.008

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

16

Duma, U. (2009). Jealousy and compersion in close relationships. (Doctoral dissertation,

Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz). Retrieved from http://www.grin.com/en/ebook/137595/jealousy-and-compersion-in-close-relationships?partnerid=googlebooks
Easton, D., & Hardy, J. W. (2009). The ethical slut: A practical guide to polyamory, open
relationships and other adventures. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Celestial Arts.
Ferrer, J. N. (2008). Beyond monogamy and polyamory: A new vision of intimate relationships
for the twenty-first century. ReVision, 30(1), 53-58.
Goodboy, A. K., Horan, S. M., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2012). Intentional jealousy-evoking
behavior in romantic relationships as a function of received partner affection and love styles.
Communication Quarterly, 60(3), 370-385. doi: 10.1080/01463373.2012.688792
Malach Pines, A. (1998). Romantic jealousy. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mathes, E. W., Adams, H. E., & Davies, R. M. (1985). Jealousy: Loss of relationship rewards,
loss of self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and anger. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 48(6), 1552-1561. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1552
Mathes, E. W., & Severa, N. (1981). Jealousy, romantic love, and liking: Theoretical
considerations and preliminary scale development. Psychological Reports, 49(1), 23-31.
doi: 10.2466/pr0.1981.49.1.23
Melamed, T. (1991). Individual differences in romantic jealousy: The moderating effect of
relationship characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(5), 455-461.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

17

Parrott, W. G., & Smith, R. H. (1993). Distinguishing the experiences of envy and jealousy.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 906-920. doi: 10.1037/00223514.64.6.906
Pines, A., & Aronson, E. (1983). Antecedents, correlates, and consequences of sexual jealousy.
Journal of Personality, 51(1), 108-136. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.ep7380827
Rydell, R. J., & Bringle, R. G. (2007). Differentiating reactive and suspicious jealousy. Social
Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 35(8), 1099-1114.
Rydell, R. J., McConnell, A. R., & Bringle, R. G. (2004). Jealousy and commitment: Perceived
threat and the effect of relationship alternatives. Personal Relationships, 11(4), 451-468.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00092.x
Snyder, D. N. (2006). The complete book of Buddhas lists- explained. Las Vegas, NV: Vipassana
Foundation. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?
id=69dNpJaVzkC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Stieger, S., Preyss, A. V., & Voracek, M. (2012). Romantic jealousy and implicit and explicit
self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(1), 51-55. doi:
10.1016/j.paid.2011.08.028
Taormino, T. (2008). Opening up: A guide to creating and sustaining open relationships. San
Francisco, CA: Cleis Press Inc.
Wade, T. J., & Walsh, H. (2008). Does the big-5 relate to jealousy, or infidelity reactions? The
Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(3), 133-143.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

White, G. L., & Mullen, P. E. (1989). Jealousy: Theory, research, and clinical strategies. New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
Wolfe, L. P. (2003). Jealousy and transformation in polyamorous relationships. (Doctoral
dissertation, The Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality). Retrieved from
http://drleannawolfe.com/dissertation.pdf

18

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

19
Addendum

Since I heard about polyamory I have been interested in the topic. I had discussed the idea
as humans of having the capacity to love more than one person at the same time. When I invited
a polyamorist to my TV show I was surprised when I heard the term compersion, it sounded to
me as the blessed solution for many people who suffer from jealousy. It was at least a valid
alternative in dealing with love. Later, some friends gave me information about the topic and I
joined a polyamorous group, I was a poly-curious, because I didnt practice polyamory and I just
learned about their practice.
In my class of 592, I decided to select this topic so I could expand my knowledge in this
area and also contribute something to the polyamorous community in Mxico. They helped me
with this paper by providing me with information or articles, and I promised that I would share
this paper with them. At the beginning of this paper I felt lost, because there was so much
information related to jealousy and so few about compersion. The topic of polyamory has not
been researched enough; there is scarcity of studies done in compersion. I could just find three
doctoral dissertations in compersion but not any research articles. However, when I started my
readings I felt very passionate about the subject and I experienced a relentless hunger for more
information. For example, I would read an article where they were citing another person so I
looked for that persons article and read more, and so on and so on. I read so many articles and
books for this paper, that I am surprised and proud of myself. Nevertheless, when I finished my
paper I noticed I had written 15 pages, and even after I tried to reduce the length of the paper, I
was only able to cut 2 pages out.

CONSTRUCTS OF SHARED LOVE

20

I learned many things about the assignment. I learned academic things such as differences
between envy, jealousy and compersion, the triggers of jealousy, how relationships affected us in
the way we feel about our partners, and how language modifies the way we experience things.
Furthermore, I found myself trying to fill the spaces in theory about compersion and proposing
the creation of a new construct. Moreover, I feel motivated to do more research and to analyze
my own experiences related to love. I also believe I am improving my writing skills and the
citing in APA style.