Is 'microcheating' a new kind of infidelity for the social media age?

Apnews - Apr 5th, 2025

Microcheating, a term popularized by Australian psychologist Melanie Schilling, refers to subtle behaviors that may not amount to full-blown infidelity but can still push the boundaries of a committed relationship. These include liking a co-worker’s photo on social media, sending direct messages, or increased interactions on platforms like Slack. The rise of remote work has made it easier for such digital relationships to form, according to William Schroeder, a therapist in Austin, Texas. He notes that in the work-from-home environment, these interactions are low-risk yet can still create significant tension in personal relationships.

In today's evolving landscape of relationship norms, behaviors once considered innocuous might now be viewed differently depending on individual preferences. Psychologist Abby Medcalf emphasizes that there is no universal right or wrong in relationships, but rather personal boundaries that need to be respected. The issue of microcheating becomes significant when it detracts from the primary relationship or remains hidden from a partner. Open communication about boundaries and exclusivity is crucial, and addressing changes in behavior early on can prevent potential conflicts. Schroeder suggests that microcheating can sometimes be a wake-up call, encouraging couples to reassess and strengthen their relationship dynamics.

Social Media Remote Work Relationships Infidelity Microcheating William Schroeder Melanie Schilling Abby Medcalf

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.6

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive overview of the concept of microcheating, supported by expert opinions from credible sources. It clearly explains the behaviors associated with microcheating and its potential impact on relationships. However, the article could benefit from additional empirical evidence and a broader range of perspectives to enhance its balance and impact. The topic is timely and relevant, addressing modern relationship dynamics in the digital age. While the article is engaging and easy to read, it could further stimulate discussion by including interactive elements or contrasting viewpoints. Overall, the article effectively raises awareness about microcheating and encourages readers to reflect on their digital interactions and relationship boundaries.

Accuracy

The story accurately describes the concept of microcheating, a term popularized by Australian psychologist Melanie Schilling. It provides specific examples such as liking a co-worker's photo, sending direct messages, and engaging in frequent digital interactions as forms of microcheating. The article quotes experts like William Schroeder and Abby Medcalf, who discuss the nuances of microcheating and its implications for relationships. While the article does not provide empirical data or studies to support the prevalence of microcheating, it aligns with the perspectives of professionals in the field. The claim that remote work has increased the prevalence of microcheating due to more digital interactions is plausible but would benefit from further verification through studies or surveys.

Balance

The article presents a balanced view by including multiple expert opinions on microcheating. It features perspectives from psychologists like Melanie Schilling and Abby Medcalf, providing a comprehensive understanding of the term. However, the article primarily focuses on the potential negative aspects of microcheating without exploring counterarguments or positive outcomes, such as increased digital communication strengthening relationships. Including perspectives from individuals who have experienced microcheating or relationship experts who may disagree with the concept could enhance the article's balance.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly explains the concept of microcheating. It uses straightforward language and provides concrete examples to illustrate the behaviors associated with microcheating. The inclusion of expert quotes adds depth to the discussion, and the article flows logically from defining microcheating to exploring its implications and how couples can address it. The tone is neutral and informative, making the content accessible to a general audience.

Source quality

The article cites credible sources, including psychologists and therapists, to discuss the concept of microcheating. William Schroeder, a therapist, and Abby Medcalf, a psychologist, provide authoritative insights into the topic. The inclusion of Melanie Schilling, who popularized the term, adds to the article's credibility. However, the article lacks direct links to studies or empirical evidence supporting the claims about the prevalence of microcheating, which could strengthen the source quality further.

Transparency

The article is transparent in its use of expert opinions and clearly attributes quotes to specific individuals. However, it does not disclose the methodology behind the experts' conclusions or provide data to support the claims about the prevalence and impact of microcheating. The article could improve transparency by explaining how the experts arrived at their conclusions and whether there are any conflicts of interest or biases in their perspectives.