"We Saw that Jealousy Can Also Bring Violence": A Qualitative Exploration of the Intersections between Jealousy, Infidelity and Intimate Partner Violence in Rwanda and Uganda

"[T]he findings of this study suggest that interventions that seek to not only prevent IPV but support healthy, equitable relationships may provide valuable avenues for IPV and HIV prevention and also for fostering positive and healthy expressions of love which do not include jealousy and controlling behaviours..."

Physical, sexual, emotional, and economic intimate partner violence (IPV) is prevalent in both Uganda and Rwanda. Efforts to prevent IPV that are grounded in the socio-ecological model recognise the role of relationship dynamics in IPV, including romantic jealousy or (suspicion of) infidelity. Informed by the qualitative evaluations of two IPV interventions, this paper explores the under-researched linkages between romantic jealousy and IPV and describes how SASA! in Uganda and Indashyikirwa in Rwanda used gender-transformative approaches to mitigate jealousy.

This study is guided by the work of Bram P. Buunk, who employs a multidimensional framework of jealousy, which subdivides romantic jealousy into: a) reactive jealousy, caused by intimate behaviour of a partner with a third party; b) anxious or past anxious jealousy, focused on the possibility that a partner is, or was, sexually or emotionally involved with someone else; and c) preventive jealousy, aimed at preventing intimate contact of the partner with a third party upon slight indications of interest.

In brief (see further details at Related Summaries, below), SASA! is a community mobilisation intervention designed by Raising Voices and implemented in Kampala by the Centre for Domestic Violence Prevention (CEDOVIP). SASA! uses positive, non-punitive programming to change social norms and address the imbalances in power between primarily heterosexual women and men that perpetuate both violence against women and HIV. Implemented in Rwanda, Indashyikirwa (meaning "agents for change" in Kinyarwanda) seeks to: reduce experiences of IPV; shift beliefs and social norms that sustain IPV; support equitable, non-violent relationships; and ensure more supportive and empowering responses to survivors of IPV. The couples' curriculum and community activism materials identify romantic jealousy as a key trigger of IPV and encourage participants to come up with positive alternatives to violence.

This paper reports on secondary data analysis from the qualitative evaluations of the SASA! intervention in Uganda, conducted in 2012 involving 40 community members, and the Indashyikirwa intervention in Rwanda, conducted between 2014 and 2018 involving 14 couples and 36 other stakeholders. For both evaluations, in-depth interviews were conducted with women and men, with focus group discussions also conducted in Rwanda. Notably, the language of jealousy emerged strongly in the qualitative data from Rwanda, whereas in Uganda, romantic jealousy was more often conceptualised using language relating to suspicion of infidelity and unfaithfulness.

Results from the studies are shared in combination and illustrated by quotations from study participants. All forms of romantic jealousy as theorised by Buunk were identified in the data yet played out differently across the two settings. Also, in terms of the types of IPV, the findings suggest that men who anticipate partner infidelity use controlling behaviours and economic IPV in response. Women's jealousy, on the other hand, is more often constrained by power asymmetries and structural constraints. Women often experience accusations of infidelity as a form of psychological IPV.

Overall, jealousy was common in both settings. In Rwanda, jealousy was normalised though generally perceived as a negative trait that undermines patience and understanding among couples. In Uganda, there was more variation in the normative acceptance of infidelity. Some participants described the infidelity in their relationship as affecting their wellbeing and increasing their health concerns, particularly in relation to the risk of contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. In both Rwanda and Uganda, participants described how relationships could become conflict-ridden and/or could be destroyed due to infidelity or rumours of infidelity, whether legitimate or not.

Jealousy was seen to operate through different gendered pathways. For instance, participants described women as questioning men about their whereabouts and intentions because of jealousy or the suspicion of infidelity, whereas they described men as jealous or suspicious of women socialising with, or attracting the attention of, other men and using violence in response. In both countries, women were at times blamed for their husband's infidelity, attributed to their perceived failure to fulfil their gender roles and expectations, including to meet their husband's sexual needs. IPV was also described to be triggered by men who were jealous when women brought money or more money than anticipated home, as they assumed it was from another man, challenging their male provider role. This and other pathways are illustrated in the below figure, which is derived from a 2020 systematic review conducted by Pichon et al. that summarises the mechanisms and pathways from romantic jealousy to IPV.

In light of these pathways, SASA! and Indashyikirwa used gender-transformative strategies to reduce the contribution of romantic jealousy to conflict and violence by: encouraging improved relationship faithfulness and honesty; supporting reduced suspicion through improved relationship trust and communication; and identifying jealousy and suspicion of, or real infidelity, as direct triggers of IPV. Notably, both programmes relied on a positive approach to support couples to consider the benefits of trusting relationships, rather than solely emphasising the consequences of jealousy and infidelity. Both programmes also supported development of skills, including open communication skills, as strategies to mitigate the commonality and consequences of romantic jealousy. In addition, SASA!'s use of community dramas was described as providing participants with an opportunity to critically reflect on how their own relationships could be similarly affected by infidelity and IPV, particularly in relation to HIV-related risk behaviours.

As detailed here, these approaches seem to show promising results. For instance, in Uganda, some male study participants credited SASA! for encouraging them to be less suspicious of their partner's behaviour as a means of reducing relationship tensions and violence that arose from their controlling behaviour. Improved faithfulness to one's spouse, particularly by men, was also described to have arisen out of engagement with Indashyikirwa given the heightened awareness of the relationship between jealousy and IPV, resulting in reduced relationship tension.

The researchers note that gaps remain, including a lack of standardised measures of the multidimensional concept of romantic jealousy. They call for a recognition that programmes should be evaluated for their ability to reduce romantic jealousy when identified as a trigger for IPV in a specific context. More research is also needed on the forms, gendered pathways, and consequences of romantic jealousy to inform context-specific programming.