KMAN Publication Inc. (KMANPUB) Applied Family Therapy Journal (AFTJ) 3041-8798 6 Serial Number 30 2025 12 28 Designing a Model of Marital Infidelity Proneness Based on Domestic Violence and Marital Distress with the Mediating Role of Marital Burnout Designing a Model of Marital Infidelity Proneness Based on Domestic Violence and Marital Distress with the Mediating Role of Marital Burnout 1 13 10.61838/kman.aftj.4399 EN Journal Article 2025 04 28 <p><strong>Objective:</strong> The present study aimed to design and test a structural model of marital infidelity proneness based on domestic violence and marital distress, with marital burnout serving as a mediating variable.</p> <p><strong>Methods and Materials: </strong>This research employed a descriptive–correlational design using the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach. The statistical population included married women residing in Shahriar County in 2024 who had at least five years of shared marital life. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 240 participants were selected from local cultural centers and mosques. Data were collected using the Polat Marital Infidelity Proneness Questionnaire (2006), the Domestic Violence Against Women Questionnaire by Mohseni Tabrizi et al. (2012), and Pines’s Marital Burnout Questionnaire (2004). Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, multiple regression, and SEM with SPSS 29 and LISREL 8.8.</p> <p><strong>Findings: </strong>Confirmatory factor analyses supported the construct validity of all study measures. Structural modeling results indicated that both domestic violence (β = 0.29, p &lt; .05) and marital distress (β = 0.29, p &lt; .05) significantly predicted marital infidelity proneness. Marital burnout had a significant direct effect on infidelity proneness (β = 0.27, p &lt; .05) and mediated the relationship between both domestic violence and marital distress with infidelity proneness. Sobel test results confirmed the mediation of marital burnout in both models (T = 2.54 for domestic violence; T = 2.74 for marital distress), with variance accounted for (VAF) estimates of 0.274 and 0.279 respectively, indicating partial mediation. Model fit indices (χ²/df = 2.37; RMSEA = 0.046; CFI = 0.90; NFI = 0.94; GFI = 0.87) confirmed a good model fit.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Addressing violence, conflict, and burnout reduction strategies in couples’ interventions may serve as effective preventive approaches to reduce infidelity tendencies and promote marital stability.</p> https://journals.kmanpub.com/index.php/aftj/article/download/4399/7927