8 Cowardly Ways That Cheaters Will Justify Their Infidelity

No one's moral compass is as dysregulated as a cheater's. Here's how they use it to absolve themselves of wrongdoing.

By Mark Travers, Ph.D. | May 27, 2024

Moral disengagement is a psychological process through which individuals justify their own unethical behavior, making it acceptable to themselves and alleviating feelings of guilt or discomfort. This process provides insight into how people can engage in morally questionable actions such as infidelity without experiencing significant distress.

A new study published in Personal Relationships found that individuals high in moral disengagement committed more acts of "self-defined" infidelity, referring to how they cross their own and their partner's limits of what is permissible in romantic relationships.

Researchers also found that higher levels of moral disengagement are connected to lower relationship satisfaction in both partners, whether a partner knows they are being cheated on or not.

Moral disengagement involves eight cognitive mechanisms that disconnect inner moral standards from one's actions, allowing people to engage in behaviors they might otherwise find reprehensible.

"Individuals high in moral disengagement do not necessarily deny cheating on their partner but rather choose not to follow their inner moral compass," the researchers explain.

Here are the eight mechanisms of moral disengagement that can enable infidelity:

1. Moral justification. This involves framing harmful or unethical actions as serving a noble or moral purpose. For instance, one might justify their infidelity as beneficial for a greater good by believing it brings them happiness or fulfillment, which in turn makes them a better partner and more pleasant to be around.
2. Euphemistic labeling. Using euphemistic language to describe unethical behavior makes it appear less harmful and more acceptable. This involves sanitizing language to reduce the emotional impact of one's actions. For example, describing one's infidelity as "a harmless fling" instead of acknowledging it as an affair or betrayal.
3. Advantageous comparison. This mechanism involves comparing one's unethical actions to more "severe" actions, making the former appear trivial or acceptable by comparison. This can include flawed justifications such as "at least I'm not abusing my partner like some people do. A little affair is nothing in comparison."
4. Displacement of responsibility. Here, individuals attribute their actions to external pressures or influences to absolve themselves of personal responsibility. For instance, they might say "my friends kept pushing me to go out and have fun. I wouldn't have done it if it weren't for them."
5. Diffusion of responsibility. This involves sharing the blame with others involved to lessen personal accountability. For example, saying "my affair partner knew I was married and still pursued me, so it's not just my fault."
6. Distortion of consequences. This is a strategy of minimizing, ignoring or distorting the effects of one's actions to reduce feelings of guilt. Individuals convince themselves that their actions did not cause significant harm. A cheating partner might think "what they don't know won't hurt them."
7. Dehumanization. This involves perceiving the victims of unethical actions as less than human, making it easier to treat them poorly. For instance, thinking of a partner as boring or using a lack of romantic chemistry with them to rationalize cheating, as the partner is seen as less of a person with feelings and more as an obstacle to personal gratification.
8. Attribution of blame. Cheating partners often blame the victims for the harm they inflict, shifting the responsibility from the perpetrator to the victim. This can sound like—"if my partner paid more attention to me and made me feel appreciated, I wouldn't have needed to seek affection elsewhere." This enables infidelity by portraying it as a reaction to marital dissatisfaction or a partner's perceived shortcomings.

These mechanisms collectively facilitate moral disengagement, allowing individuals to maintain a relatively positive self-image while engaging in actions that violate their ethical standards.

In light of these insights, it's clear that moral disengagement is a powerful enabler of infidelity, providing a psychological safety net for individuals to bypass their moral compasses. However, while these mechanisms might offer temporary relief from guilt, they do not justify or absolve the actions taken.

The long-term impact on relationships can be devastating, eroding the foundation of trust and integrity essential for a healthy partnership. Recognizing the cognitive tricks we play on ourselves can pave the way for greater self-awareness, accountability and commitment to ethical behavior in our romantic lives, fostering stronger and more honest relationships.

Wondering whether you are inclined towards infidelity, even if you may morally disagree with it? Take this test to find out: Propensity Towards Infidelity Scale

A similar version of this article can also be found on Forbes.com, here.