4 “mental changes” which allow a cheater to be unfaithful – by a psychologist

Infidelity is often considered as an impulsive decision – a time of judgment or a moment of weakness. But in reality, cheating is rarely spontaneous. More often, it is preceded by a slow and subtle psychological process, which allows a person to justify their actions before leaving the relationship.

At the heart of this change is a change in perception – where dissatisfaction is amplified, past happiness is rewritten and the relationship itself is reinterpreted to justify the search for something new. It’s not just to fall in love, it’s about reshape the story The relationship to ensure that infidelity resembles an escape rather than betrayal.

If you have already wondered how someone can go deeply in love with Get out of their commitmentUnderstanding this mental transformation is the key. Here are four ways that this process takes place unconsciously.

1. Amplifying negatives

A key sign of the change of perception in a relationship is when a person suddenly begins to focus on the faults of their partner while minimizing or forgetting their forces. The same quirks that were in the past endearing now seem intolerable. The little troubles that were formerly brushed become proof of deeper relationship failures.

This phenomenon, known as “replacement of negative feeling”, was identified by the expert in relation Dr. John Gottman. It occurs when the accumulated disappointments filter a neutral or positive person through a negative lens. The brain, started by previous resentments, distorts reality – interpreting an occasional commentary as critical or neutral action as negligence.

Here’s how you could reframe the same incident with and without this way:

• Before the negative feeling replaces– “They sometimes forget the little things, but they are reflected and always have my back.”
• After negative replacements– “They never pay attention to me. I always have to repeat myself. I feel invisible in this relationship.

This change is not always deliberate – it is the way of the brain to give meaning to dissatisfaction. By rewriting the partner as the main source of misfortune, the person avoids confronting deeper internal struggles or external stressors that can also contribute to his dissatisfaction.

2. Rewrite the history of the relationship

Once the negatives are amplified, the next step is to reinterpret the past to adapt to the new perspective. This is where someone mentally revises the history of the relationship, minimizing moments of love and connection while emphasizing the past disappointments.

This may look like:

• “Honestly, I don’t think I was really in love with them.”
• “We have never been really compatible; I haven’t seen it before.”
• “I have been unhappy for a long time – I do not admit it to myself.“”

A 2000 study on memory biases in long -term relationships, published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, shows that people do not remember their past with precision – they revise it according to their current emotions. A study that follows wives over 20 years old revealed that their memories of the past have become more and more negative, even when their real relational experiences had not changed so spectacular. At 20, their memories of past happiness had faded, aligning more closely with their current conjugal satisfaction (often lower).

In addition, this process is motivated by cognitive dissonance – the discomfort we feel when our actions do not align with our self -perception. If someone considers himself a faithful person but is attracted to another relationship, his mind works to resolve the conflict.

The simplest way? Convince yourself that the relationship was doomed from the start. By reshaping the past, they make infidelity feel less like betrayal and more a natural escape of a relationship that has never been “to start.

3. Move the blame

One of the most critical stages in mental publishing is to move the partner’s personal responsibility. Instead of considering infidelity as a personal decision, the brain reappears it as something caused by the failures of the other person.

For example, it may look like:

• “If they were more affectionate, I wouldn’t feel that.”
• “They no longer make me feel special – why should I not find someone who does it?”
• “I tried everything, but they just don’t understand me.”

A 2024 Study On moral disengagement highlights this dynamic. Individuals with higher moral disengagement tend to disconnect from their moral standards, considering their actions as justified by the perceived failures of their partner. This disconnection allows them to frame infidelity not as a personal decision, but in response to the shortcomings of their partner, making betrayal feels less as a violation of confidence and more a natural consequence of circumstances.

This change serves two key objectives:

1. It reduces guilt. By depicting infidelity as a reaction to the partner’s behavior, it becomes easier to justify action, reducing feelings of guilt and framing as something they were “pushed” to do.
2. It avoids self-reflection. Rather than exploring personal emotional wounds, unmet needs or self-sabotage models, the accent is fully placed on the partner’s faults. This outsourcing of blame prevents the individual from confronting the deeper and more complex reasons behind his dissatisfaction.

Essentially, this step allows the person to feel victim of their situation rather than an active agent of their own actions.

4. Idealize the alternative

When someone begins to mentally “demo” his current partner, another person – whether a friend, a colleague or an acquaintance – can start to appear more attractive. This is where the Grass-Is-Greener illusion settles down. The brain, in its attempt to justify the search for something new, romance the alternative:

• Current partner. “We no longer have fun. They always seem to be distracted.”
• New person. “They are exciting and full of life! They really listen to me.”

This comparison is intrinsically imperfect because the long -term relationship is judged by reality – its ups and downs, stress and daily disappointments – while the new person is seen through the objective of novelty, with only their most attractive features.

A 2017 study On employment transitions reveals a similar model: when people change employers, they often experience a honeymoon effect – feeling more satisfied with their new job, only to see this satisfaction decrease as the novelty Warm. Likewise, the new person in a relationship is seen through an excitement lens, free from daily stressors and complexities of a long -term relationship. The “new” person has not yet been exposed to the complexity of a long -term connection, and their faults have not yet surfaced. Over time, however, as the novelty fades, the initial attraction will probably also decrease.

How to recognize and stop this process of “mental assembly”

If you notice this model in your relationship, here is how to break the cycle:

1. Defy your thoughts. Ask yourself: I focus only on their faults? Did I stop noticing the property?
2. Honestly revisit your story. Rather than rewrite the past with negativity, think about the complete image, including the moments of joy and love that you have shared.
3. Have your feelings. Disstablishment often stems from unmet personal needs. Are these needs clearly communicated to your partner?
4. Talk about it early. Do not wait until it’s too late. Many cases occur because people assume that their needs will not be met, but this hypothesis is rarely tested by an honest conversation.

Each relationship ultimately loses novelty and when this happens, the mind can seek explanations. It is rarely just “falling in love”, but often the result of a slow mental change.

Take science Relational satisfaction scale To become aware of your unconscious models and take proactive measures to preserve the foundations of true intimacy.