Attachment and Parenting

Attachment and Parenting: The Mediating Role of Work-Family Balance in Portuguese
Parents of Preschool Children

Author(s): Joana Marina Vieira, Marisa Ávila and Paula Mena Matos
Source: Family Relations, Vol. 61, No. 1 (February 2012), pp. 31-50
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41403637
Accessed: 18-05-2019 21:08 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41403637?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Family Relations
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Sat, 18 May 2019 21:08:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Joana Marina Vieira, Marisa Ávila, and Paula Mena Matos University of Porto
Attachment and Parenting: The Mediating Role

of Work-Family Balance in Portuguese Parents
of Preschool Children
Given the increasingly challenging task of bal-spouses, parents, and workers. The present study
ancing multiple adult life roles in contempo-intends to analyze the relation between adult
rary society, this study examined the influencesattachment and both satisfaction and stress in
of both conflicting and (positively) synergisticthe parental role. It extends previous studies by
work and family roles in mediating associations considering both negative and positive spillover
between the quality of adult attachment and both effects of work-family dynamics in this relation,
parental satisfaction and parenting stress. Par- aiming thus to contribute to a more embracing
ticipants were 242 Portuguese fathers and moth-understanding of the complexities inherent to
ers involved in dual-earner relationships and in the balance of multiple life roles.
parenting preschool-aged children. Structural
Equations Modeling analyses yielded findings Adult Attachment
demonstrating that the paths from romantic
attachment (avoidance and anxiety) to parent- Bowlby (1969) described attachment as a
ing stress and satisfaction were fully explained "lasting psychological connectedness between
by work-family dimensions, especially the con- human beings" (p. 194), defining it as an emo-
tional bond established with someone that is
flict dimension. Implications of these findings for
parent education and intervention are discussed. perceived as a source of security and that pro-
vides a safe base from which individuals explore
the world (Bowlby, 1988). Attachment the-
One of the most emblematic aspects of the end ory stresses the centrality of emotionally close
of the 20th century and early 21st centuryrelationships in human development, influenc-
lies in the rapid pace of change that has ing the psychosocial adaptation of individuals
occurred in two central areas of life: work and the quality of the emotional ties they
and family. Contemporary adults in dual-earner
establish lifelong with emotionally significant
families with children face increasinglyfigures.
new This influence of the attachment bonds
challenges in balancing their multiple roles as the developmental trajectory of individu-
along
als would be achieved by what Bowlby (1969)
called representational models or internal work-
ing models , supposed vehicles of connection
Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da
Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Manuel Pereira da between
Silva, childhood experiences and those in
4200-392 Porto, Portugal (joanavieira@fpce.up.pt). which individuals will be participating and
acting on in the course of their development
Key Words: adult attachment, parenting satisfaction,
(Matos, 2002). These models configure impor-
parenting stress, work-family conflict, work-family positive
spillover. tant patterns of reading and interpreting reality,
Family Relations 61 (February 2012): 3 1 - 50 31

DOLIO. 11 1 1/j. 1741-3729.201 1.00680.x
32 Family Relations
integrating Two major lines of research

beliefs, and have been exp
and others found in empirical
that studies on adult attachment.
influence th
and relate to Traditionally,
the researchers
world. more familiar with a
Hazan and developmental
Shaver (1987)
psychology perspective tend to e
ment theory use qualitative
to methods,the mainly interviews and
domain
and found, usuallyadults,
in the Adult Attachment Interview
attachm (AAI;
to those identified with children. The authors George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985; see Hesse,
proposed that adults whose early caregivers sup- 1999, for a historical and current perspective
plied them with consistent, sensitive, and respon- on AAI). Conversely, researchers from a social
sive support were presumed to form a "secure" psychology and personality tradition tend to use
internal working model of close relationships. In self-report measures (Bartholomew & Shaver,
contrast, the experience of inconsistent sensitiv- 1998; Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). This
ity and responsiveness was assumed to promote difference in measurement techniques is related
an "anxious" orientation to close relationships, to major differences in conceptualizations of
whereas the early experience of cold, neglectfiil, attachment security. Whereas the AAI tradition
focuses mainly on coherence of mind, the
and rejecting parenting was presumed to forecast
the formation of "avoidant" adult attachment self-report tradition focuses mostly on the
orientation. Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991; dimensions of anxiety about abandonment
Bartholomew, 1990) subsequently differentiated and avoidance of interpersonal intimacy, as
two types of avoidant attachment in intimate expressions of the model of self and the
relationships: the avoidant-dismissing and the model of other, respectively. The present study
avoidant-fearful. On the basis of a bidimensional adopts the second approach to adult attachment,
model of adult attachment organized around the using quantitative self-report measures rather
positive and negative valences of "self' and than qualitative methods and privileging the
"other" models, these authors described four assessment of attachment as a dimensional
attachment patterns: (1) The securely attached variable rather than a typological one. On the
individuals, with positive models of self and basis of taxometric analysis, Fraley and Waller
others, tend to present high levels of self-esteem (1998) explored whether adult attachment
and self-confidence, positive views of their part- patterns were more indicative of latent types
ners and their relationships, and an ability to or latent dimensions. They found that adult
maintain close relationships without losing per- attachment organization is a quantitatively
sonal autonomy, being able to balance intimacy distributed variable - a variable on which people
and independence; (2) the preoccupied attached differ in degree rather than in kind - arguing that
adults, with a positive model of others but a dimensional models of adult attachment styles
negative model of the self, tend to present a low should be adopted by attachment researchers to
self-esteem, an exacerbated demand for inti- maximize measurement precision and validity.
macy, approval, and responsiveness from part- They also discussed how the attachment
ners, and an excessive involvement in relations, prototypes represent linear combinations of the
exhibiting high levels of emotional dependency, two dimensions of Avoidance and Anxiety (see
worry, separation anxiety, and fear of abandon- Fraley & Waller, 1998, for a fuller discussion on
ment; (3) the dismissing adults, with a positive this topic).
model of the self but a negative model of the oth-
ers, tend to view themselves as independent and
Adult Attachment, Work-Family
self-sufficient and invulnerable to attachment
Dynamics, and Parenting
feelings, suppressing their feelings and avoid-
ing intimacy; and (4) the fearful attached adults, The influence of adult attachment in work-family
with negative models of both self and others, dynamics has been clearly understudied, with
tend to present ambivalent feelings and chronic only a few studies explicitly applying adult
approach-avoidance conflicts regarding close attachment to work-family spillover. The present
relationships; they tend to present a great sensi- research aims to bridge this gap, considering that
tivity to rejection signs, a low self-confidence, adult attachment can offer important insights into
feeling uncomfortable with emotional close- work-family literature, namely, contributing a
ness although expressing the need for intimacy clearer understanding of individual differences
(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). in work-family experiences. Although scarce,
Attachment, Work-Family Balance, and Parenting 33
studies have found adult attachment levels of anxiety

styles and and avoidance) would be the
orientations to predict various aspects most likely
of theto seek and find support for work
work-family experience (Hazan & Shaver, stress at home
1990;while concurrently protecting
Sumer & Knight, 2001; Vasquez, Durik,
family &
relationships from being dominated by
Hyde, 2002) Hazan and Shaver (1990) found
occupational problems. Given their valuation of
that securely attached adults reported bothhigh
separateness
work and connectedness, securely
success and satisfaction and few work-related attached adults should be more likely to have
concerns. They had more positive attitudes flexible boundaries that permit supportive, yet
toward their work. Although they enjoyed worknot interfering, affective flow across psycholog-
activity and valued work, they tended to value ical worlds (Belsky & Cassidy, 1994).
family and relationships more. Furthermore, In another study, Vasquez et al. (2002) exam-
they were less likely to allow work to interfere ined the role of adult attachment style in meeting
with their relationships. Conversely, anxiousthe challenges of both work and family roles
adults tended to be preoccupied with relationship for parents of young children. Results indicated
issues and to experience much more interference that securely attached adults were able to man-
of "love concerns" on their work, to the degree age multiple roles (worker, spouse, and parent)
that they suffered poorer work performance. successfully, showing less anxiety at separa-
Avoidant adults were more likely to use work as tion from their child and fewer concerns about
a way to escape from relationship issues, tended family life. Women and men with fearful attach-
to let work interfere with relationships, and ment styles, however, characterized by views
experienced less success and less satisfactionthat the self is unlovable and others are untrust-
in their jobs. worthy, had marked difficulties in many family
Similarly, Sumer and Knight (2001) found domains and some work domains, reporting the
that adults with secure attachment were more most concerns about their family lives and their
likely to experience positive spillover in both relationship with partners and children.
work and family domains than those with pre- Research on the relationship between attach-
occupied or dismissing attachment. In turn, ment and cognitive-emotional regulation strate-
individuals with preoccupied attachment styles gies can bring important insights to the way
characterized by high levels of attachment anxi- attachment impacts on balancing work and
ety were more likely to experience more work- family domains. Studies suggest that securely
to-family and family-to-work negative spillover attached individuals are capable of preventing
compared to individuals with secure and dis- the spread of negative affect (Mikulincer &
missing styles who report low levels of attach- Orbach, 1995) and are more competent, resilient,
ment anxiety. Finally, preoccupied individuals and effective in functioning across a variety
were also found to be less able to draw protectiveof adjustment indicators. They present greater
boundaries between work and family than the capacity for effective self-regulation, more flex-
other attachment groups, as evidenced by their ible, integrative, and reflective information pro-
low work-family segmentation score. Belsky cessing abilities, a stronger sense of control and
and Cassidy (1994) argued that, because of their self-efficacy, and a broader repertoire of social
low self-differentiation and problems in main- skills (Avila, Cabral, & Matos, 2011; Lopez,
taining boundaries in relationships, the preoccu- 2009; Lopez & Fons-Scheyd, 2008). Empiri-
pied individuals (with low levels of avoidance cal research has also demonstrated how adult
and high levels of anxiety) were more likely to attachment plays an important role in determin-
transfer negative experiences from one sphere to ing the level of stress that individuals experience
another (e.g., work to family). In turn, dismissing (and the coping strategies they use) in vari-
individuals (with high levels of avoidance and ous stressful situations, including working tasks,
low levels of anxiety) would be least likely to functioning the working models of attachment
disclose their problems with their partner when as internal structures through which individu-
work experiences were going bad. They were als organize, experience, and cope with stress
also more likely to displace negative emotions (Lopez & Fons-Scheyd, 2008; Mikulincer &
onto intimate relationships, perhaps because Florian, 1998; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2004).
they are more concerned with occupational suc- Positive experiences with a caring, sensitive,
cess than with success in intimate relationships. responsive, and available attachment figure help
On the other hand, secure individuals (with low to create a sense of security and basic trust in
34 Family Relations
self and in increasingly

the blurredworld
boundaries between these and
tions that two central areas of life. The traditional
stressful model
experi
and of the male as "breadwinner"
demanding, may and the female be s
& Hazan, as "homemaker"
1993). has gradually given way to
Furthermo
ment can lead
a to
model where both elements optim
of the couple
strong provide
sense of economic support for the household.sel
control,
dence in This recent and increasingly
seeking common pattern
outside h
(Bartholomew &
of dual employment entailsHorowi
new responsibilities
& Shaver, and
2004; Shaver
challenges for both men and women, who
believe thatmust balance work and
this family while at the same
array of
that are time managing the large (andby
predicted often overlapping)
attac
role in the demands inherent
way to performing multiple roles
parents bal
roles and as romantic partners, parents,
manage to and deal
workers.
results fromPortugal
it. is one of the European Union countries
Regarding withthe the highest relation
rate of women working outside be
ment and the home (71.8%) while raising children
parenting experunder
ing evidence the age ofthat
5. Of these women, 84.0% work
sugges
more secure attachment tend to be more satis- full time (INE, 2005). In addition, Portugal has
fied in the parent-child relationship and show one of the highest percentages of full-time dual-
greater engagement, supportiveness, sensitivity, earner or dual-career couples in the European
responsiveness, and helpfulness with their chil- Union (Eurostat, 2008). Of increasing social
dren (Adam, Gunnar, & Tanaka, 2004; Rholes, relevance are empirical studies that focus on the
Simpson, & Blakely, 1995). Conversely, more impact that the effects resulting from work and
insecure adults (those with higher levels of family roles balance may have on the experience
attachment-related anxiety and avoidance) tend of parenting.
to have negative models of parenthood and There has been debate in the literature regard-
parent-child relations, feel less close to their chil- ing whether (a) the performance of multiple roles
dren, view themselves as less capable of rearing (e.g., worker, spouse, and parent) is a potential
children, and endorse harsher and more intru- source of stress, which may exhaust the individ-
sive and insensitive parenting practices (Rholes, uals' time and energy resources, undermining
Simpson, Blakely, Lanigan, & Allen, 1997; their physical and psychological well-being and
Rholes, Simpson, & Friedman, 2006). leading to feelings of conflict within and between
It is also important to highlight the bidirec- roles, or if (b) the performance of multiple roles
tionality of effects between family and work provides additional means of gratification and
domains. Romantic attachment can influence social rewards that lead to improvements in
work and parenting experiences, but can also personal welfare. The counterarguments that
be affected by positive or negative experienceslie at the heart of this debate form the basis
in work and parenting roles. Attachment the- of the two major hypotheses on the relation-
ory contemplates both possibilities of stabilityship between the engagement in multiple roles
and change of the representational models of and the experience of stress: (a) The scarcity
attachment. Over the life cycle, individualshypothesis , which emphasizes that participation
establish new attachment bonds susceptible to in multiple life roles depletes coping resources
contributing to the maintenance and stability ofand thus increases the risk of conflict and
attachment structures developed in childhood, negative spillover from one role domain to
but also to the revision, updating, and trans- another, has clearly dominated research on the
formation of the representational models of thework-family interface (for a review, see Allen,
self and others built upon previous relationshipsHerst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Byron, 2005),
(Matos, 2002; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005). and (b) the expansionist hypothesis (also called
the enhancement/enrichment hypothesis ), which
Work-Family Interface and Parenting
underlies the perspective of work-family posi-
tive spillover (Grzywacz, 2000), also referred
In the past decades, societies have been to in the literature as work-family facilita-
witnessing a rapid and profound metamorphosis tion (Grzywacz & Bass, 2003; Voydanoff,
in both work and family spheres, leading to 2005), work-family enhancement (Greenhaus &
Attachment , Work-Family Balance, and Parenting 35
Parasuraman, 1999), or work-family enrichment

over into other roles, including those involving
(Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Empirical
family andevi-
parent-child interactions (Hoffman
& Youngblade,
dence suggests that the gains and the constraints 1999). In sum, these divergent
perspectives
inherent to the performance of multiple and findings justify one of the
roles
are largely independent, should be considered
key aims of the present study: to analyze the
separately, and can co-occur (Grzywacz
impacts &of Bass,
both the negative/conflicting and
2003; Schultheiss, 2006; Voydanoff, 2005), so
the positive/synergistic effects of efforts to
that work and family roles may conflict in some
balance work and family roles on participants'
aspects while enhancing each other in other
parenting experience. Moreover, given the
respects (Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999).
scarcity of research on the effects of work- family
dynamics
Regarding the impact of work-family on parenting stress and satisfaction,
dynam-
ics in parenting experience, previous research
the current investigation specifically examined
these
suggests that many working fathers andoutcomes.
mothers
struggle on a daily basis to meet the demands
of both their work and family roles, experienc-
Parenting Satisfaction and Stress
ing time-related difficulties fiilfilling work and
family roles (Goldberg, Greenberger, Parenting
Hamill, can&be a potentially satisfying and
O'Neil, 1992) and feeling stressed emotionally
by the com- rewarding experience, conducive to
peting demands of multiple roles (Perry-Jenkins,
feelings of gratification and personal fulfillment,
Seery, & Crouter, 1992). Often, forwhile
working
at thepar-same time potentially generating
ents, these two types of conflict areexhaustion,
inextricably stress, and emotional tension,
linked, and work-family role conflict is fre-
given the highly demanding and multifaceted
quently conceptualized as a combination of that
challenges both the role entails. Indeed, empirical
time-related and psychological tensions
researchbetween
suggests that parents experience both
work and family roles. Indeed, while satisfaction
parenting and stress in their role (Crnic &
is a difficult job in and of itself, when combined
Greenberg, 1990), thus indicating that parental
with employment, its complexity is satisfaction
significantly and parental dissatisfaction and
increased (Friedman & Greenhaus,stress 2000). do not constitute a dichotomous concept
Parents' experience of multiple in role tension
which we might be able to find two extreme
between roles appears to have an adverse
poles alongimpact
the same continuum.
on their emotional and psychologicalThe well-being
term parental satisfaction has been used
(Frone, 2000), in parenting behaviors (MacEwen
to describe either satisfaction in the parenting
& Barling, 1991), and in the quality roleof
or parent-
satisfaction with children. Relevant to the
child interactions (Cinamon & Tzuk, parenting 2007;
role, Mouton and Tuma (1988) defined
Crouter, Bumpus, Maguire, & McHale,
parental 1999).
satisfaction as "a parent's feeling of
In their review of the literature, contentment
Crouter and or gratification regarding his or
Bumpus (2001) concluded that work stressresponsibilities
her parental is toward the child"
(p. 218),
apparently linked to parents' feelings and Johnston and Mash (1989) refer
of overload
and strain, which predict lowerto parent-child
parental satisfaction as "the quality of affect
acceptance and higher conflict. These processes,
associated with parenting" (p. 215).
in turn, are related to less positive Surprisingly,
adjustment however, parental satisfaction
of their children and adolescents. There is with the normative tasks of parenting has
received little research attention (Mammen,
also evidence that work stress exerts negative
effects on parents' family life satisfactionKolko, & Pilkonis, 2003). Rather, most studies
(Frone, Barnes, & Farrell, 1994) and increases
operationalize parental satisfaction either with
family distress (Frone, Yardley, & Markel, regard to children's educational, early interven-
1997). But if multiple roles may result in
tion, and/or health services quality or with regard
conflict and negative consequences, some study
to specific situations of parenting children with
findings suggest that multiple role involvements
some kind of disorder or disability (Mammen
can also be psychologically beneficial for et al., 2003). Still, some empirical studies sug-
individuals, allowing them to develop social gest that parental satisfaction varies depending
support and expand their coping repertoires and
on variables such as parent's gender (Abrantes
to experience an enhanced sense of self-esteem
& Matos, 2010), academic qualifications and
and purpose, all of which may favorably spillemployment or professional status (Gottfried &
36 Family Relations
Gottfried, Given the available

2006), and theory and evidence,
parent
Lansford, we expected that higher
Abbey, & levels of adult
Stewa
over, differences
attachment avoidance and have also
anxiety would each be
on gender of
negativelychildren
related to parenting satisfaction(Ele
and
& Bouffard, 2003),
positively related to parentalnumbe
stress. Similarly,
stage in the family's
we hypothesized that higher levels oflife
avoidance
son, Campbell-Grossman,
and anxiety would predict higher levels of work-El
man, 2003), and
family conflictsatisfaction
and lower levels of work-family
(Brage Hudson et
positive spillover. al.,
Consistent 2003).
with previous
Parental stress has
studies, we been
also anticipated defin
that the experience
tion of excessive
of work-familytension in
conflict would be predictive t
that disrupts the
of higher levels offamily bal
parenting stress and lower
and as the presumed resu
levels of satisfaction in the parental role.
discrepancy between
Conversely, paren
we hypothesized that work-family
personal coping resources
positive spillover would predict higher levels(Ö
& Hagelin, 2007). Examini
of parenting satisfaction and lower levels of
work-family stress
parental stress. Finally, is of
we expected thatpar
the
as several studies indicate that stress under- way individuals articulate work and family roles
mines caregiving and is associated with a higher
(i.e., either in a conflicting or synergistic manner)
incidence of insecure infant-caregiver attach- would mediate the expected association of adult
ment (De Wolff & Van Ijzendoorn, 1997). Withattachment insecurity to both satisfaction and
the accumulation of these daily parenting has-stress in parenting.
sles, relations can become more problematic
and conflicted, which in turn may precipitate the
occurrence of more frequent and intense daily Method
marital stressors (Crnic & Greenberg, 1990).
Participants and Procedure
This systemic process can eventually lead to
less responsiveness and satisfaction on the part The sample consisted of 242 Portuguese
of parents, putting parenting at risk and giv-participants and included 180 women (74.4%)
ing rise to potential behavioral difficulties in and 62 men (25.6%) who acknowledged being
children. In support of this conjecture are empir-in dual-earner relationships with their current
ical findings relating greater parental stress withpartners and living in households containing at
problems in parental and family functioning, least one preschool child. The majority were
including fewer positive parent-child interac-married (93.8%) or lived with a partner (6.2%),
tions (Östberg & Hagekull, 2000) and with and their ages ranged from 21 to 51 years (M =
parental abuse and neglect (Rodriguez & Green,34.68, SD = 5.26), with 71.9% being between
1997). the ages of 30 and 40. With regard to their
highest-obtained educational levels, 22.3% had
attended the ninth grade, 25.2% had completed
Study Aims and Hypotheses
secondary education, and more than half (52.5%)
had pursued higher education. Socioeconomic
The present study extends previous findings
by more sensitively examining the influencestatus (SES) of participants was assessed based
on their occupation. (For the codification of
of adult romantic attachment on the experience
participants' SES, we used the Portuguese
of parenting satisfaction and parenting stress,
Classification
respectively, while concurrently considering the of Occupations 2010 (CPP/2010)
of the National Statistics Institute, harmonized
potential mediating influences of both positive
with the International Standard Classification
and negative effects from work-family interface
dynamics on these outcomes with a sampleofofOccupations of 2008 (ISCO/2008). The
CPP/2010 classification system includes 10
Portuguese adults in dual-earner relationships
major
and in families with preschool children. Figure 1 groups, with Groups 0, 1, 2, and 3
illustrates the conceptual model underlyingcorresponding
our here to high/medium-high SES,
investigation. To the best of our knowledge,Groups
no 4 and 5 to medium SES, and Groups
prior studies have specifically examined these
6, 7, 8, and 9 to low/medium-low SES.) Thus,
interrelationships. 40.1% were designated as high/medium-high
Attachment, Work-Family Balance , and Parenting 37
Figure 1. Conceptual Models Underlying the Structural Models.
I AVOIDANT ' f '

I ATTACHMENT кг
(^>' /N. *' CONFLICT ^
^ ' '
XX IV STRESS J
/ ' 'У work-family'
I ANXIOUS V-
( I ATTACHMENT ANXIOUS J V-
( AVOIDANT 1 f '
I ATTACHMENT к » [ WORK-FAMILY L
/ >v S V C0NFLICT
^ ^ ' / N
yč SATISFACTION J
/ ' work-family '
/ AMYTriTTQ ' V_
f / ATTACHMENT AMYTriTTQ J V_
SES, 43.8% as medium SES, and 16.1% as prospective adult participants were approached
low/medium-low SES. The children of these during times when they visited nurseries and
playgroups with their children in the districts
participants were evenly distributed among the
ages of 3, 4, and 5 (28.9%, 35.1%, and of Porto and Aveiro. After requesting and
36.0%, respectively) and roughly balanced withobtaining permission from the institutions, the
respect to gender (55.4% girls and 44.6% boys).
general objectives of the study were explained
to parents, emphasizing the voluntary nature
Regarding participants' working situation, only
4.7% worked less than 5 days per week, 73.0%of participation in the study and ensuring the
worked 5 days per week, and 22.3% worked
confidentiality and anonymity of responses.
Those parents who agreed to participate were
more than 5 days per week, therefore including
weekends. Of these parents, 11.6% workedthen asked by one of the investigators or by
part time (up to 30 hours per week) and playground and nursery staff to complete the
88.4% worked full time (58.7% worked 35 to questionnaires described below.
40 hours per week and 29.7% worked more
than 40 hours per week). Of those working Measures
more than 40 hours per week, 5% exceeded
60 working hours per week. The majority of Demographic questionnaire. A brief question-
participants (86.8%) worked according to a fixed naire was used to collect sociodemographic data
schedule, and 13.2% worked on rotating shifts. from parents and their children (e.g., age, gen-
This is a convenience sample. In the interest der, academic qualifications and occupation of
of recruiting parents of preschool children, parents, temperament of children), along with
38 Family Relations
(CFI) = .94; standardized

other information root mean square
relevant to
ing study, namely,
residual (SRMR) == .06; structural
root mean square error
of approximation
family and labor (RMSEA) = .07. Cronbach's
domains (e.g.,
of children, full-time orscale,
as were .74 for the time-based conflict part-
.84
rotating schedule).
for the strain-based conflict scale, and .82 for
The Work-Family Relations
positive spillover scale, respectively.
The Parent Satisfaction and Stress Scale instr
(WFRQ) is a self-report
(PSSS) is an adaptation of the
to assess the relation of Parent Satis-
confl
between work factionand family
Scale developed by Halverson and Duke role
naire includes 15
(1991, cited initems
Martin, Halverson, from
Wampler, & t
scales, assessing (a)
Hollett-Wright, the
1991). positiv
This self-report instru-
effects of work-family
ment is organized along three main roles,
dimensions: (
work-family the conflict,
pleasure derived from the and parental role (c)t
work-family (10 items, e.g., "Having children
conflict. Onis worth
theall ba
posals (Carlson, Kacmar,
the sacrifices"), the importance attachedWayn to the
2006; Grzywacz experience of & Bass,
parenting 2003
(9 items, e.g., "Child-
mer, & Colton, rearing is one2006),
of the must stimulating we things cr
to assess work-family that I can think of'), and stress positive
or overload in
sion: "Havingthea job
parental role (10makes
items, e.g., "I feel veryme
the time spent with
overwhelmed with the my family,
task of taking care of
me a better father/mother," my child(ren)"). Again, this questionnaire was "
a better husband/wife," "Havi
translated to Portuguese according to Interna-
work leaves me in
tional Test a good
Commission mood
guidelines (Hambleton,
family responsibilities," 2005), and responses were assessed based and on a "
itive effects 6-point onLikert-type
my scalefamily
ranging from always lif
correlated with the others scales used in this disagree to always agree. Results obtained from
study in the expected direction. In addition, 10 a principal components factor analysis (varimax
items were adapted from the Work-Family Con- rotation) did not support the originally pro-
flict Scale , developed by Stephens and Sommer posed tripartite structure but rather supported
(1996), with 5 items assessing time-based con- a two-factor structure, with parental stress items
flict (e.g., "My work takes me from my family (five items) loading on one factor and items
more than I would like") and 5 items assess- addressing the importance and pleasure of par-
ing strain-based conflict (e.g., "The tension of enting (six items) on a separate factor. These
balancing my responsibilities at home and work items were then composited to create sub-
often causes me to feel emotionally drained"). scale scores for parenting stress and parental
This questionnaire was translated to Portuguese satisfaction. These two dimensions explained
according to International Test Commission 58.9% of the total variance, and a confirma-
guidelines (Hambleton, 2005). Responses were tory factor analysis with this structure presented
assessed based on a 6-point Likert-type scale adequate adjustment indices, within critical val-
ranging from always disagree to always agree. ues, x2(41) = 93.98; CFI = .96; SRMR = .04;
Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses RMSEA = .07. Cronbach's as were .79 for the
were gathered in order to test the WFRQ struc- parental stress scale and .85 for the parental
ture in the present study's Portuguese sample. satisfaction scale.
Results obtained from a principal components The Romantic Attachment Questionnaire
factor analysis (varimax rotation) supported a (RAQ; Matos, Barbosa, & Costa, 2001) is
factorial structure with three factors, with items a self-report instrument developed in Portu-
loading on three subscales: work-family time- gal for assessing the quality of attachment in
based conflict (three items), work-family strain- young adult and adult romantic relationships.
based conflict (five items) and work- family pos- It includes 52 items, divided into four dis-
itive spillover (five items). These three dimen- tinct dimensions: (a) trust (e.g., "I know that
sions explained 62.8% of the total variance, I can count on my husband/wife whenever I
and a confirmatory factor analysis presented need him/her"), (b) dependence (e.g., "When
adequate adjustment indices within critical val- I can't be with my husband/wife, I feel aban-
ues, x2(61) = 178.54; comparative fit index doned"), (c) avoidance (e.g., "When I have a
et al., 1998)
problem, I prefer being alone instead of and taking into account their con-
being
with my husband/wife"), and (d) ceptual overlap, we combined scores from the
ambivalence
(e.g., "Sometimes I think that he/she four RAQ is dimensions
very to create the two vari-
important in my life, other times ables ofIavoidance
don't"). and anxiety. As illustrated
Each of these four dimensions consists of 13 in Table 1, avoidant attachment and anxious
items, with responses assessed based on a 6- attachment were respectively represented in the
point Likert-type scale ranging from totally model as two independent predictor variables.
disagree to totally agree. Results from psy- Specifically, we used the three RAQ subscales of
chometric and validity studies with several trust (reverse keyed), ambivalence, and avoid-
independent samples indicate that the RAQ isance as observed indicators of the avoidance
a valid and reliable measure for studying the latent variable. Next, we created three parcels
quality of adult romantic attachment, showing from the RAQ dependence subscale (two parcels
adequate psychometric properties (Avila et al.,with four items and one with five items) as
2011; Matos et al., 2001). In the present study,observed indicators of an anxiety latent variable.
Cronbach'sa fortrustwas .91, .87 for avoidance, The work-family conflict and work-family pos-
.85 for dependence, and .86 for ambivalence. itive spillover subscales from the WFRQ were
In addition, the instrument was tested against then integrated to test for mediating effects.
the anxiety and avoidance dimensions of the Specifically, we created three parcels from the
Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR; work-family strain-based and time-based con-
Brennan et al., 1998). The analysis revealed that
flict subscales (two parcels with three items and
the ECR anxiety dimension correlated signifi-one with two items) as observed indicators of the
cantly with dependence (r = .61,/? < .001) andwork- family conflict latent variable and used the
that the ECR avoidance dimension correlated work- family positive spillover subscale to create
with avoidance (r = .31, /7 < .001), ambiva- two parcels (one with three items and one with
lence (r = .65, p < .001), and trust dimensionstwo items) as observed indicators of a work-
of the RAQ (r = -.71,/? < .001; Matos, 2004). family positive spillover latent variable. Finally,
parenting stress and parenting satisfaction sub-
scales from the PSSS constituted the dependent
Data Analyses
variables in our Models 1 and 2, respectively.
To test the hypothesized multiple mediation Accordingly, we created two parcels from the
models, we used EQS 6.1 for SEM analysis parenting stress subscale (one with three items
(Bentler & Wu, 2004) and the maximum- and one with two items) as observed indicators
likelihood method for estimation of the resulting of a parenting stress latent variable, and used
models. In comparison to tests of separate simple the parental satisfaction subscale to create three
mediation models, the advantages of performing parcels (each of them with two items).
a single multiple mediation model include the This process of random assignment led to
ability to (a) ascertain the unique mediating parcels of items that contained roughly equal
effect of a specific variable controlling for common factor variance. Table 1 shows that all
the presence of other possible mediators and loadings of the measured variables on the latent
effect of predictors, (b) reduce the likelihood variables were large (all standardized loadings
of parameter bias related to potentially omitted exceed .70) and statistically significant at p <
variables, and (c) test competing results between .001; therefore, all the latent variables appear
variables (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). to have been adequately measured by their
Prior to SEM analysis, all subscales from the respective indicators.
WFRQ, PSSS, and RAQ were parceled by aver- The means, standard deviations, and correla-
aging two or more items into aggregate level tions among the 16 observed indicators of the
indicators for each dimension or latent vari- measurement model used to test the structural
able (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, models described next are presented in Table 2.
2002). Regarding the definition of the observedOn the basis of Mardia's test, the multivariate
normality of the observed variables was
indicators (or parcels) and starting with romantic
examined to test whether or not the data
attachment, we took the following steps. First,
considering the correlations observed in previ-
met the normality assumption underlying the
ous studies with the mainstream dimensions of
maximum likelihood procedure used to test
anxiety and avoidance of the ECR (Brennanthe structural equation models. The results
40 Family Relations
Table 1. Unstandardized, Standa

Parentheses; N = 24
Parameter Estimate Unstandardized Standardized p
Measurement model estimates

Avoidant romantic attachment
Avoidance Parcel 1 -> XI 1.00 .91 .05
Avoidance Parcel 2 -+X2 0.71 (0.05) .75 .05

Avoidance Parcel 3 -> X3 0.96(0.07) .80 .05
Anxious romantic attachment
Anxiety Parcel 1 X4 0.73(0.07) .71 .05

Anxiety Parcel 2 ->X5 0.80(0.08) .77 .05
Anxiety Parcel 3 -> X6 1.00 .78 .05
Work-family conflict
WF Conflict Parcel 1 X7 1.00 .92 .05
WF Conflict Parcel 2 -► X8 0.89 (0.06) .82 .05

WF Conflict Parcel 3 -> X9 0.95(0.06) .82 .05
Work-family positive spillover
WF Positive Spillover Parcel 1 X10 0.79 (0.04) .87 .05
WF Positive Spillover Parcel 2 XI 1 1.00 .91 .05
Parenting stress
Parenting Stress Parcel 1 -► XI 2 1.00 .95 .05
Parenting Stress Parcel 2 X13 0.67 (0.16) .71 .05
Parenting satisfaction
Parenting Satisfaction Parcel 1 ->• X 14 1.13(0.11) .72 .05
Parenting Satisfaction Parcel 2 -> X15 1.00 .83 .05
Parenting Satisfaction Parcel 3 X16 1.28 (0.13) .76 .05
Covariance avoidant and anxious attachment -0.17 -.25 .05
Covariance WF conflict and WF positive spillover -0. 15 -.18 .05

Structural Model 1
Avoidant attachment -> WF conflict # 0.39 .28 .05

Anxious attachment WF conflict 0.25 .22 .05
Avoidant attachment - ► WF positive spillover -0.24 -.16 .05

WF conflict Parenting stress 0.10 .22 .05
WF positive spillover -*■ Parenting stress -0.07 -.17 .05
Residual for WF conflict 0.81 .95 .05
Residual for WF positive spillover 0.94 .99 .05

Covariance of residuals -0.15 -.17 .05
Structural Model 2
Avoidant attachment -* WF conflict 0.40 .28 .05
Avoidant attachment WF positive spillover -0.23 -.16 .05

Anxious attachment -* WF conflict 0.27 .24 .05
Anxious attachment -> Parenting satisfaction 0.18 .30 .05

WF conflict Parenting satisfaction -0.11 -.25 .05
Residual for WF conflict 0.80 .95 .05
Residual for parenting satisfaction 0.94 .99 .05
indicated that the data were not multivariate Therefore, in addition to the uncorrected x2, the
normal in either the parenting stress model, Satorra-Bentler scaled x2 (Satorra & Bentler,
X2(2, 432) = 27.64, p < .001, or the parenting2001) was used to adjust for the impact of
satisfaction model, x2(2, 432) = 32, p < .001. nonnormality.
* * * * * О г-н
** *** **** ití гЛ
vä ******* * ****|Ч352 гЛ
I* i* |- ' ' • ' |- ' ' f i* о и

* * * ^ % ^ -ri е1
-ri
** ** * * *** • »> H
1/-' ******* * ***| ft
,-н 0^"*tr-r->íOOcOOOr-OOr-(NO
(N<N*-H^^H^^4©^H©OU4iOV© 1 D сЗ
íi'í''' Г Г Г ' " Г Г ' § ^
Л /i«s
* * О "Tť
* ** * ** airi
Tj- * ***** * **| С Р
Tj- Д HMVOf>VOOO*ÛOO<jNH^tH **| 1 МЫ
1 w рц
f f f Г Г Г ' " Г Г so
ci S
* * 00 ^
* * Jo CJ
2 OOsfO^iNOTfCNinOinoO Й "tf
5" I II g .g
Já w
<N
*
* *v
*
t-t
*öd
II r'j * * ****| D •>
Хн *оо^го^нг-1пгч^на'г-- çx ъ •> ^
5. >- ' i*- ' i»- ' iOOO(N'--|(N'- ' ' ' ' '»-H D ^
Л ' ' ' I* ' Г ' ' ' f f ^ ft M

r; M S
fe
Q * * * j s S > а
С : 2§§2g§22íij «28
Г I
! * *
Ovo<NiOO'r-40ťNťN»o| -Г £ о
# ' rrt rn ' О' S
*-Н ' ' ' I S о 1/1
I Г Г Г ' ' ' Г i' i' 7, 1
ří :
*-4
» * * Ï i « « §
0'ЧОГ4г-нООтГЧОГ-
«Ч^ГОн^-нОГ-ЧО1 X
Й 11
11 И
-д -д
О
■S
§ . »V Г4 «3
****** ^ '-S
оо г^^г^отгочо I «Dee
°Q
I i < (N CN ťN <- i Г-~ I > > _
D tí
rv CL D
к * м м >н
0
<4 *©*
Г- 00 I Ü
»Г> 00 Яч
I «« S
t-, Яч d,
1
^ -h О <N О ~ О I » .£ сЛ
Ü -H M
Ö § M
S & Ь
1
* * * * еЗ л-.
* * * * i § Lb л-. U
ЧО M (S h Ю t i .Í ч -S ^
tN(N04040l JO ¡> ^
43 i i d § ~ « "
d ~ « m
Sí * * 32 ü
a * * * * * § P <N
(Л ^ О Ю H О
ř (Л ^ ^ ГН о VO I ^ Он ^
•S
a
*
111
* * 3
i !
+3
!
i ■* 221Я«J
22 I
D 1 'C
> ^ s
s
I 1 ^ ■§ s
Ìs * * I H J) I H I J) .H с
.H
СО
7 ^ 1 I >
1 loi >И
И "S
"S
<3
Со
8"
Г « (2
I <N
0
ЧО
1и
IT3
1 S ° î.
<U
c4 I Й Й й Щ
d
- I 8Í M
4 s I T
1 /-s ^tTj-OCNVOTt"*t<NO'- i O» t 0'
Q /-s Г-ЧООООЧООООО^ОЧОЧЧГО rv ^ ^
^ Ö Ö О О ö -н' '-H* '-н' О -н' Ö О 4 rv ^ iž ^
< fi « ^
oovo»nmfOTj-ooo4or-ror-oo ti 2 ^
(NHfNririfnrnrÒfÓ^rr^H £3 co 55 V
II л M й,
^(м ^ II !! ¿ D $
DD
DD Ctítí
> > .2^'S-b- M ^'S-b- I s M 9
.2 .2 <N
я •Д
я Д ^
•- M
Д M <S иi <S
(S (SI i(н^ DДЙ 1 ^á
•ДCO
со &1Й CO
D D £Ь
• -3 •Й
rt ^• 0/3
X3 O O Q¿
tí E fe ë
VVA
_ ^ ^CNCODDbbrtcece tí & S CL >
_ •- ifNm ^ 4_>4_l,(_,>.>.COC/JIZ5COC»'Q¡^*-Mj> CL >
d d d .2 .2 .2 'ö '-Ö ад м м ад öd "Я ^ w
1 d i d i d fr S- S- .2 g 1 .2 1 .2 I I ! ад i м I м I ад I öd "Я |šgs w
^ ri II 11 *
^Г4сО"3-10ЧОГ-000'--<*-«*-<^Н'-н^н^н rt (N
42 Family Relations
Results of the WF conflict variance, F{ 2, 195) = 9.52,

p = .000, rj2 = .086, and 3.1% of the WF pos-
Preliminary Analyses
itive spillover variance, F( 2, 200) = 3.41, p =
Previously, to test our hypothesized mediational
.035, rj2 = .03 1 . Similarly, avoidant and anxious
models, we conducted a hierarchical regression
attachment significantly and uniquely predicted
analysis in order to control key variables that
both parenting stress and parenting satisfac-
both parenting and work-family literature have
tion, explaining 3.1% of parenting stress vari-
ance,
found to influence either work- family (WF) pos- F(2, 201) = 3.34, p = .05, rj2 = .031,
itive and negative spillover (Byron, 2005; Eby,
and 9.6% of parenting satisfaction variance,
Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley, F( 2005)
2, 201) = 12.32, p = .000, rj2 = .096.
or parenting experience (Brage Hudson et al.,
2003; Gottfried & Gottfried, 2006). Specifi-
Mediational Models
cally, we tested whether the effects of avoidance
and anxiety attachment dimensions on WF con-present study, we tested the influence
In the
of adult romantic attachment on the expe-
flict, WF positive spillover, parenting stress,
rience of parenting satisfaction on the one
and parenting satisfaction remained significant
predictors of parenting outcomes after parents'
hand and parenting stress on the other hand,
age, academic qualifications and SES, number
while simultaneously considering the mediat-
of children, and number of working hours ingwere
influence of both positive and negative
controlled. Table 3 presents these results,effects
which from work-family interface dynam-
ics.men-
showed that, after controlling for the above The decision to test parenting satisfaction
and parenting stress in separate models was
tioned sociodemographic variables, the attach-
ment dimensions of avoidance and anxiety based on the differential pattern of correlations
found between each of the attachment and WF
remained significant predictors of WF conflict
and WF positive spillover, explainingspillover
8.6% dimensions and parenting satisfaction
Table 3. Hierarchical Regression Analysis: Predictors ofWF Conflict, WF Positive Spillover, Parenting Stress, and
Parenting Satisfaction
Outcome
WF Conflict WF Positive Spillover Parenting Stress Parenting Satisfaction
В SE В ß В SEE ß В SEE ß В В ß
Step 1
Constant 2.94 .883 4.00 .847 .772 .352 6.722 .475
Parents age -.021 .014 -.117 .019 .014 .108 .000 .006 -.001 -.007 .008 -.072
Parents qualifications .070 .068 .113 -.022 .065 -.036 .052 .027 .210 -.120 .037 -.342***
Parents SES -.092 .149 -.070 .270 .143 .209 .033 .059 .062 -.054 .080 -.072
No. of children -.002 .090 -.001 .006 .087 .005 .055 .036, .116 -.086 .049 -.129
No. of working hours .015 .008 .135 .002 .008 .015 .003 .003 .065 -.005 .004 -.077
Step 2
Constant 1.08 .963 3.26 952 .454 .396 6.864 .512
Parents age -.017 .014 -.092 .022 .014 .125 .000 .006 .007 -.007 .007 -.065
Parents qualifications .114 .066 .185 -.008 .066 -.012 .061 .027 .243 -.127 .035 -.360***
Parents SES -.050 .143 -.038 .276 .141 .214 .024 .059 .045* -.040 .076 -.053
No. of children -.022 .087 -.019 .017 .086 .015 .047 .036 .100 -.066 .046 -.100
No. of working hours .014 .008 .121 .002 .008 .019 .002 .003 .054 -.004 .004 -.060
Avoidant attachment .408 .105 .274*** -.049 .104 -.034 .112 .043 .185** -.228 .056 -.269***
Anxious attachment .220 .081 .192** .194 .080 .172* .016 .033 .035 .084 .043 .127
Note: WF conflict: R2 = .036 for Step 1 (и-s); AR2 = .086 for Step 2 ( ps < .001). WF po
Step 1 (/?s < .05); AR2 = .031 for Step 2 (ps < .05). Parenting stress: R2 = .042 for Ste
(ps < .05). Parenting satisfaction: R2 = .1 19 for Step 1 (ps < .001); AR2 = .096 for Step 2
*p < .05, **/?<. 01, ***/?<. 001.
Attachment , Work-Family Balance , and Parenting 43
and stress dimensions (see Table 1).MoreInspecifically,

addition, the link between higher lev-
although these parenting constructs els ofwere sub-
avoidance and lower levels of parenting
stantially interrelated (r = -.67), their shared
satisfaction was fully explained by higher levels
variance was less than 50%, thus
of WFindicating
conflict. We also found evidence sug-
that they were related but not redundant
gesting an inconsistent mediation in the relation-
constructs. ship between (higher) anxious attachment and
To test the proposed models, we followed (higher) parenting satisfaction in the presence of
Baron and Kenny's (1986) guidelines for (lower) WF conflict. In inconsistent mediation
mediation. Results from the two final structural models, the direct and mediated effects have
models tested are now presented. opposite signs, as contrasted with consistent
mediation models, in which the direct and medi-
Model for parenting stress. At the first step, ated effects have the same sign (MacKinnon,
which examined the direct effects of romantic Fairchild, & Fritz, 2007). Specifically, in our
attachment dimensions on parenting stress, model, the direct effect is positive ( ß = .35)
we found that attachment avoidance (but and the indirect effect via WF conflict is neg-
not attachment anxiety) positively predicted ative ( ß = -.25). This mediator (WF conflict)
parenting stress in the parental role. A structural seems to be acting here as a suppressor vari-
model was then used to test these effects able, "a variable which increases the predictive
considering the work-family dimensions.validity This of another variable (or set of variables)
final structural model (see Figure 2) indicated by its inclusion in a regression equation" (Con-
a good fit with the data, x 2 (5 7, 242) = pp. 36-37), where predictive validity
ger, 1974,
121.05, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .07, 90% CI: is assessed by the magnitude of the regression
lower bound = .052, upper bound = .087, andcoefficient. Indeed, we observed that when the
supported the mediational hypothesis to a greatinterference of WF conflict was considered, the
extent. In particular, we found that the relationmagnitude of the direct effect found between
between higher attachment avoidance and higher anxious attachment and parenting satisfaction
parenting stress was totally mediated by bothincreased from ß = .23 to ß = .35, instead of
higher work-family conflict and lower work-decreasing. According to Conger, to understand
family positive spillover. An indirect effect how this suppression effect works one should
(not present at first step), can also be observedconsider the direct relationship between the
between attachment anxiety and parenting stress independent and dependent variables and the
through the intervening of WF conflict (standardmediated relationship between these variables
coefficient = .10, SE = .20, Z = 3.260). Thus,when considering the suppressor variable and
then compare the magnitudes and signs of the
higher levels of anxiety were predictive of higher
levels of WF conflict, which in turn positively beta weights (standardized) across the two mod-
predicted higher levels of stress in the parentalels. And if we look into Figure 3, we can see
role. that the relationships among avoidant attach-
ment, anxious attachment, and WF conflict are
Model for parenting satisfaction. Again, fol- not consistent (-.30, +.28, +.23). Likewise, the
lowing a first step testing the direct effects of relationships among anxious attachment, WF
romantic attachment dimensions on parenting conflict, and parenting satisfaction are also not
satisfaction (which found that avoidance and consistent (+.23, -.25, +.35). Therefore, there
anxiety were, respectively, negative and positive seems to be reciprocal suppression in both sets
predictors of parenting satisfaction), a structural of variables.
model was then used to test these effects con- Finally, as there were multiple mediators in
sidering the work-family dimensions. This finalour models, we tested the relative proportion
structural model (see Figure 3) again indicatedof variance explained by the predictors in
a good fit with the data: x2(70, 242) = 147.16, our model. As we can see in Figures 2
p < .001, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .07, 90% CI: and 3, both attachment avoidance and anxiety
lower bound = .053, upper bound = .084, and predicted 10% of WF conflict variance, and
attachment avoidance predicted 3% of WF
partially supported the meditational hypothesis
positive spillover variance. Both WF spillover
by demonstrating that the path between attach-
ment avoidance and parenting satisfaction was dimensions (conflict and enrichment) explained
completely mediated by work-family conflict. 9% of the variance in parenting stress, and
44 Family Relations
Figure 2. Structural Model: Relations Between Attachment, Work-Family Conflict, and Positive Spillover
.28*
' WORK-FAMILY ' s>4

0 ' .28* y^CONF WORK-FAMILY nsy^CONF LICT^y '
N, / R2 = io I PARENTING^
17*
22*/ ( POSITIVE )
/ V spillover J
©/ 22*/ / ( V { work-family' spillover POSITIVE J ) R2 = .03 -.17* R2 = .03
Note : X2 (57, 242) = 121.05, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .07, 90% CI: lower bound = .052, upper bound = .087. Parentheses
show values found in an initial model that tested the direct effects of romantic attachment dimensions on parenting stress,
before taking into consideration work-family conflict and work-family positive spillover. *p < .05.
attachment anxiety and WF conflict explained on parenting outcomes would be differentially

16% of the variance on this index. mediated by the impacts of both conflicting
and synergistic work-family role management
experiences.
Discussion
Results supported our mediational hypothesis
with regard to parenting stress. In particular, we
Balancing work and family role responsibilities
found that the relationship of attachment avoid-
is a challenge faced by many working parents
ance and parenting stress was fully mediated by
today. Recent societal changes have increasingly
blurred boundaries between parents' work both work-family conflict and work-family pos-
lives
itive spillover. More specifically, higher levels
and family lives, making it even more crucial
of avoidance were predictive of higher levels of
that researchers examine the challenges involved
in parents' attempts to meet the demands of
parenting stress, an expected link that was com-
their multiple roles. Although studies inpletely
this explained by higher levels of WF conflict
and lower levels of WF positive spillover. This
general domain of inquiry have typically focused
suggests
on work-family conflict, there is evidence that that that the greater parenting stress
reported by avoidant adults is associated with
work role involvements can also have positive
spillover effects on family roles, and that
their experienced difficulty in balancing multiple
roles. More avoidantly attached adults appear to
negative and positive spillover effects emerge
as independent constructs (Grzywacz &experience
Bass, more conflict between work and fam-
2003; Schultheiss, 2006; Voydanoff, 2005).
ily roles and to have more difficulties in letting
Accordingly, we analyzed both the negative
both domains interact positively. In this regard,
and the positive effects associated with
ourthe
findings are consistent with those from previ-
ous studies,
management of work-family roles in order to in which dismissing-avoidant adults
advance a more holistic understanding of themore likely to let work interfere with rela-
were
complexities of work-family relations.tionships
More (Hazan & Shaver, 1990), experienced
less positive effects in areas of both work and
specifically, we hypothesized that the adverse
effects of insecure adult attachment orientations
family (Sumer & Knight, 2001), less satisfaction
Attachment , Work-Family Balance, and Parenting 45
Figure 3. Structural Model: Relations Between Attachment, Work-Family Conflic

and Parenting Satisfaction.
/I CONFUa S4
- 16* _ ig* parenting Л
~'3°* / N. > /W0RK-FAMILY' ^

/ POSITIVE ) >
/ .23* V SPILL0VER J У
I ANXIOUS '
I ATTACHMENT I
' J
R2 = .03
Note: X2 (70, 242) = 147.16, p < .001, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .07, 90% CI: lower bound = .053, upper bound = .084.
Parentheses show values found in an initial model that tested the direct effects of romantic attachment dimensions on parenting
satisfaction, before taking into consideration work-family conflict and work-family positive spillover. *p < .05.
and meaning and fulfillment from parenting, therefore, less likely to activate their attach-
greater feelings of emotional distance in the ment system than is the context of the romantic
relationship with their children, and the percep- relationship). Their disproportionate investment
tion of being less able to relate well to children in work may further lead avoidant adults to
(Rholes et al., 1995, 1997, 2006). Regarding experience higher levels of work-family con-
this last result, Rholes et al. (1997) justified their flict, a type of interrole conflict in which the role
findings by noting that within the Western cul- demands stemming from one domain (work)
ture the parental role tends to stipulate sensitivity are incompatible with the role demands stem-
and responsiveness to the needs of young chil- ming from another domain (family; Greenhaus
dren. Therefore, highly avoidant parents can be & Beutell, 1985).
caught in a difficult approach-avoidance conflict. Our findings also revealed that attachment
Continually responding in a sensitive and caring anxiety indirectly affected parenting stress
manner will keep their own attachment system through work-family conflict, indicating that
unpleasantly activated, but failing to do so would higher levels of anxiety were predictive of
be inconsistent with their expected role as par- higher levels of WF conflict, which in turn
ents. For this reason, highly avoidant parents predicted higher levels of stress in the parental
may find parenting especially stressful because role. This result is also consistent with previous
these conflicting pressures make the ordinary findings, in which individuals with preoccupied
stressors of parenting a young child even more attachment (with high levels of anxiety and
evident. Moreover, some of the factors that make low levels of avoidance) were more likely
parenting stressful may also prevent avoidant to experience more negative work-to-family
people from experiencing greater meaning and and family-to-work effects (Sumer & Knight,
satisfaction in parenthood. Our finding of a pos- 2001). Anxious adults' obsessive focus on
itive relation between attachment avoidance and their emotions and intense experiences of
work-to-family conflict may also be accounted negative affect, accompanied by their relatively
for by avoidant adults' stronger investments low complexity and differentiation of self
in work as opposed to intimate relationships and problems in maintaining boundaries in
(Hazan & Shaver, 1990), given that the work relationships, seems to translate into difficulty in
domain is less relational and intimate (and, discriminating aspects of themselves in different
46 Family Relations
roles (i.e., self as romanti

themselves negat
parent, self also
as indicatedworker),
a desire to have children. resu
spreading of Takennegative
together, these results provide sup- affe
domain to another.
port for our central hypothesis that the Indeed
quality
that insecurely
of adult attachmentattached
impacts the experience of i
less effective cognitive-em
parenting through the mediating influences of
strategies and
work-to-family skills (for
role management experiences a
on this topic,
(particularly thosesee Mikul
involving conflict). More-
Pereg, 2003),over,and
the effects of those
attachment avoidance and devel
(predicted byanxiety on both parenting and WF spillover
different patte
with dimensions were found
attachment even when known cor-
figures) ma
in the way parents
relates of parenting stress and balance
satisfaction and
roles. As expected, the
work-family spillover were controlled, expe
thus rein-
family conflict was
forcing the important found
role that adult attachment t
higher levels security
of playsparenting
in both work- family and parenting str
findings from
dynamics. previous st
1997; Stoeva,Although Chiù, our findings further & Green
clarify impor-
In a parallel tant interrelationships
to our amongfindings
adult attachment w
enting satisfaction, we
orientations, work-family role management, and foun
conflict completely
parenting experiences, several limitations
mediate
must
between attachment
be considered when interpreting these results. avoida
satisfaction. First, Morecaution should be exercised when gen-
specifical
avoidance eralizing ourpredictive
were findings to other populations. of
isfaction in Participants parental
the in this study were predominantly role,
mediated by dual-earner
higher married men and women, levels with of
avoidant adults,
moderately high SES, therefore,
and with preschool-aged
higher levels of
children. Therefore,parenting
these sample characteristics st
satisfaction, may thuslimit the generalizability of our findings
compoundi
in managingto more conflict
diverse groups of working parents, betwee
to
roles. families headed by a single parent, or to fam-
Somewhat ilies with older children. Second, our sample
unexpectedly, w
work-family conflict
was imbalanced with respect to gender and appare
thus
relationship precluded
between separate model tests by parent attach
gen-
parenting der. This raises the possibility that our findings
satisfaction, thereb
relationship better between attach
reflect the perspectives of mothers than of
parenting fathers. Studies involving larger, more diverse,
satisfaction. It is po
ducing the negative
and more gender-balanced samples aredimens needed
we controlled to conductfor the
multiple group analyses for verify-most
attachment ing the generalizability of our on
anxiety specified model.
parent
strengthened Third, additional
its research is needed to establish
positive rel
enting sátisfaction.
both reliability and validity of both theIfPSSS and we co
importance the WRQF subscales,
that given their limited use
preoccupied
viduals with high
in existing studies. Moreover, welevels
exclusively of
levels of avoidance) give
relied on self-report instruments to assess the to
their intense involvement
key constructs in our study, and, although they in
this result becomes more
have demonstrated acceptable scale reliabilities, co
important here to
these measures may have recall
been susceptible to th
parenting response and social desirability biases.
experiences includ
to the meaning of
Because only conflict parentin
and positive spillover
pleasure experienced in
dimensions from work to family were analyzed pare
Rholes et al. (1997)
in the current found
study, future efforts to replicate
to more avoidant
our findings would do welladults,
to also include m
had more both dimensions of conflict and positive
contradictory and
of parenting: In
spillover in short,
the opposite direction, that is, from alth
family to work. Finally, given theattachment].

single-time- Psicologia, Educação e Cultura , 14,
145-164.
point limitation of the present investigation,
longitudinal studies are needed Adam, E. K., Gunnar,
to assess the M. R., & Tanaka, A. (2004).
Adult attachment,
impacts of adult attachment orientations and parent emotion, and observed
parenting behavior:
work- family dynamics on parenting experiences
Mediator and moderator
over time. models. Child Development , 75, 110-122.
doi: 10. 1 1 1 l/j .1467-8624.2004.00657.X
Despite these limitations, our findings con-
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, С. S., & Sutton, M.
tribute to a more systemic understanding
(2000). Consequencesofassociated with work-to-
the puzzle of parental experience. Moreover, we
family conflict: A review and agenda for future
believe our findings have important implications
research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychol-
for both individual and systemic interventions.
ogy щ 5, 278-308. doi: 10. 1037/1076-8998.5.2.278
In brief, our findings supportÁvila,
organizational
M., Cabral, J., & Matos, P. M. (201 1). Parental
interventions and policies aimedattachment
at reducing
and romantic relationships in emerging
work-family role management conflict, such role of emotion regulation.
adults: The mediating
Family Science,
as flexible working hours, job-sharing 2 , 13-23.
options,
Baron,
parental leave opportunities to care forR.children,
M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The
moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
and the availability of quality within- workplace
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and
child-care services during after-school hours.
statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
Finally, our results support psychosocial inter-
and Social Psychology , 51, 1 173 - 1 182.
ventions with working parents designed to
Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An
enhance coping strategies and competencies for
attachment perspective. Journal of Social and
promoting both their experience of attachment
Personal Relationships , 7, 147 - 178. doi: 10.1 177/
security and their acquisition of skills for col-
0265407590072001
laboratively negotiating the demands of their
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attach-
respective working and parentingment roles. Also,
styles among young adults: A test of a four-
we need to provide parents with information
category model. and
Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology
explanation about attachment style and its poten-, 61, 226-244. doi: 10. 1037/0022-
3514.61.2.226
tial impact on the parenting experience and the
work- family balance experience in order toK.,
Bartholomew, & Shaver, P. (1998). Measures of
help
attachment:
them identify problematic and stressful Do they converge? In J. A. Simpson &
patterns
and identify specific areas where W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close
they need to
relationships (pp. 25-45). New York: Guildford.
intervene. Indeed, such efforts may be necessary
Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. W. (2004). EQS 6 J for
to help working parents with children to more
Windows. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
clearly delineate boundaries between
Bowlby, work and
J. (1969). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1:
family spheres and find a better balance
Attachment.in London:
their Hogarth Press.
roles as workers and parents, thereby
Bowlby, J. reduc-
(1988). A secure-base. Parent-child
ing negative and conflicting exchanges
attachmentwhile
and healthy human development.
promoting positive and synergisticLondon:
ones.Routledge.
Brage Hudson, D., Campbell-Grossman, C., Elek, S.,
Fleck, M., & Shipman, A. (2003). Effects of
Note the new parents network on first-time fathers'
We thank Frederick Lopez for his comments and careful parenting satisfaction during the transition to
editing. We also thank Anthony Conger and David Kenny parenthood. Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 26,
2 1 7 - 229. doi: 1 0. 1 080/0 1 460860390246687
for discussing with us statistical issues regarding inconsistent
mediation and suppression effects. This study was partially
Brennan, К. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998).
supported by a research grant (PTDC/PSI/654 16/2006) from
Self-report measurement of adult romantic attach-
the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology.
ment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson &
W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close
relationships (pp. 46-76). New York: Guilford.
References
Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work-
family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of
Abrantes, D., & Matos, P. M. (2010). Pais de adoles-
Vocational Behavior, 67, 169-198. doi: 10. 1016/j.
centes: Relação entre o sentido de generati vidade,
a satisfação parental e a vinculação aos pais jvb.2004.08.009
[Ado-
Belsky,
lescents' parents: The relation between sense ofJ., & Cassidy, J. (1994). Attachment and
close relationships: An individual difference
generativity, parenting satisfaction and parental
48 Family Relations
perspective. J. Psychological
A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment I
doi: 207/stheory
1 and
10.1 close relationships (pp. 77-1 14). New
5327965pli050 1
Carlson, D. York: Guilford.
S., Kacmar, K. M
Grzywacz, J. G.
Friedman, S. D., & (2006). Mea
Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work
side of the work-family inte
and family: Allies or enemies. New York: Oxford
and validation ofPress.
University a work-fami
Journal of Vocational
Frone, Beha
M. R. (2000). Work-family conflict and
doi: 1 0. 1 0 1 6/j
employee.jvb.2005. 02.002
psychiatric disorders: The national
Ceballo, R., Lansford, J.,
comorbidity survey. Journal of Applied Abb
Psychol-
(2004). Gaining a
ogy, 85, 888-895. child:
doi: 10. Com
1 037/002 1 -90 1 0.85.6.
riences of biological
888 parents
and stepparents. Family
Frone, M. R., Barnes, G. M., & Farrell, M. P. (1994). Re
doi: 1 0. 1 1 1 1 /j . 1 74 1 -3729.2
Relationship of work-family conflict to substance
Cinamon, G.,R. & Tzuk, K.
use among employed mothers: The role of negative
conflict within the family: Cr
affect. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56,
ceived parent-child 1019-1030. interacti
self-efficacy, and life role
Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. К., & Markel, К. S. (1997).
nal of Career Developme
doi:10.1 177/0894845307304066 Developing and testing an integrative model of
the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational
Conger, A. J. (1974). A revised definition for sup-
Behavior, 50, 145-167. doi: 10.1 006/jvbe. 1996.
pressor variables: A guide to their identification
1577
and interpretation. Educational Psychological
Measurement, 34, 35 - 46. doi: 10.11 77/00 131 6447George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). Adult
403400105 Attachment Interview. Unpublished manuscript,
Crnic, K. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (1990). Minor par- University of California, Berkeley.
enting stresses with young children. Child Devel-Goldberg, W. A., Greenberger, E., Hamill, S., &
opment, 61, 1628-1637. doi:10.1111/j. 1467-86 O'Neil, R. (1992). Role demands in the lives
24.1990.tb02889.x of employed single mothers with preschoolers.
Crouter, A. C., & Bumpus, M. F. (2001). Linking Journal of Family Issues, 13, 312-333. doi: 10.
parents' work stress to child and adolescent 1177/019251392013003004
psychological adjustment. Current Directions inGottfried, A., & Gottfried, A. (2006). A long-
Psychological Science, 10, 156-159. doi: 10. 1 1 11/ term investigation of the role of maternal and
1467-8721.00138 dual-earner employment in children's develop-
Crouter, A. C., Bumpus, M. F., Maguire, M. С., & ment. The Fullerton longitudinal study. Ameri-
McHale, S. M. (1999). Linking parents' work can Behavioral Scientist, 49, 1310- 1327. doi: 10.
pressure and adolescents' well-being: Insights into 1177/0002764206286557
dynamics in dual-earner families. Development Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources
Psychology, 35, 1453-1461. doi: 10.1 1 1 1/1467- of conflict between work and family roles.
8721.00138
Academy of -Management Review, 10, 76-88.
De Wolff, M. S., & Van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1997). doi: 10.2307/258214
Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis onGreenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1999). Research
parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child on work, family, and gender: Current status and
Development, 68, 571-591. doi: 10. Ill 1/j Л467- future directions. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook
8624. 1 997.tb042 1 8.x
of gender and work (pp. 391 -412). Thousand
Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C.,
Oaks, CA: Sage.
& Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work
IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the litera-
and family are allies: A theory of work-family
ture (1980-2002). Journal of Vocational Behav-
enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31,
ior, 66, 124-197. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2003.1 1 .003
72-92.
Elek, S., Brage Hudson, D., & Bouffard, C. (2003).
Marital and parenting satisfaction and infant Grzywacz, J. G. (2000). Work-family spillover and
care self-efficacy during the transition to parent- health during midlife: Is managing conflict every-
hood: The effect of infant sex. Comprehensive thing? American Journal of Health Promotion, 14,
236-243.
Pediatric Nursing, 26, 45-67. doi: 10. 1080/0146
0860390183065 Grzywacz, J. G., & Bass, B. L. (2003). Work, fam-
Eurostat (2008). Key figures on Europe (2009 ed.).ily, and mental health: Testing different models
Luxembourg: European Commission. of work-family fit. Journal of Marriage and Fam-
Fraley, R. C., & Waller, N. G. (1998). Adult attach- ily, 65, 248 - 262. doi: 10. 1 1 1 1/j. 1741-3737.2003.
ment patterns: A test of the typological model. In00248.x
Mammen,and
Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs О. К., Kolko, D. J., & Pilkonis, P. A.
tech-
nical guidelines for adapting tests(2003).
intoParental
multi- cognitions and satisfaction:
ple languages and cultures. In R. K.Relationship
Hambleton, to aggressive parental behavior in
P. F. Merenda, & С. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapt-
child physical abuse. Child Maltreatment, 8, 288-
301. doi:
ing educational and psychological tests for 10.1cross-
177/10775595032571 12
cultural assessment (pp. 3-38). Mahwah,
Martin, P., Halverson,
NJ: C. F., Wampler, К. S., &
Erlbaum. Hollett-Wright, N. (1991). Intergenerational dif-
Hanson, G. C., Hammer, L. В., & Colton, C. L. ferences in parenting styles and goals. Interna-
(2006). Development and validation of a multi- tional Journal of Behavioral Development, 14,
dimensional scale of perceived work-family pos- 1 95 - 207. doi: 1 0. 1 1 77/0 1 6502549 1 0 1 400205
itive spillover. Journal of Occupational Health Matos, P. M. (2002). (Des) continuidades na
Psychology , 77 , 249-265. doi: 10. 1037/1 076- vinculação aos pais e ao par amoroso em adoles-
8998.11.3.249 centes [(Dis) continuities in attachment to parents
Hazan С., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love con- and to romantic partner in adolescents ]. Porto:
ceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Faculdade de Psicologia, Instituto de Consulta Psi-
Personality and Social Psychology , 52, 5 1 1 - 524.cológica, Formação e Desenvolvimento. Retrieved
doi: 10. 1037/0022-35 14.52.3.5 1 1 from http://dited.bn.pt/2961 l/645/827.pdf
Matos, P. M., Barbosa, S., & Costa, M. E. (2001).
Hazan, С., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work:
Avaliação da vinculação amorosa em adolescentes
An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280. e jovens adultos: Construção de um instrumento
doi: 10. 1037/0022-35 14.59.2.270 e estudos de validação. [The romantic attachment
Hesse, E. (1999). The Adult Attachment Interview: questionnaire: Development and validation stud-
Historical and current perspectives. In J. Cassidy ies]. Revista Oficial de la Asociación Iberoamer-
& P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attach- icana de Diagnóstico e Evaluación Psicológica,
ment : Theory, research, and clinical applications 77,93-109.
(pp. 395-433). New York: Guilford. Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (1998). The relationship
Hoffman, L., & Youngblade, L. (1999). Mothers at between adult attachment styles and emotional
work: Effects on children 's well-being. New York: and cognitive reactions to stressful events. In J.
Cambridge University Press. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment
INE (2005). Estatísticas do emprego [Employment theory and close relationship (pp. 143 - 165). New
statistics]. Lisbon: Author. York: Guilford.
Johnston, C., & Mash, E. J. (1989). A measure of Mikulincer, M., & Orbach, I. (1995). Attachment
parenting stress and efficacy. Journal of Clinical styles and repressive defensiveness: The acces-
Child Psychology, 18, 167-175. sibility and architecture of affective memories.
Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61,
coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill. 321-331. doi: 10. 1037/0022-35 14.68.5.917
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2004). Security-
Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: based self-representations in adulthood: Contents
Exploring the question, weighting the merits. and processes. In W. S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson
Structural Equation Modeling , 9, 151-173. (Eds.), Adult attachment : Theory , research, and
doi: 1 0. 1 207/S 1 5328007SEM0902_1 clinical implications. New York: Guilford.
Lopez, F. G. (2009). Adult attachment security: The Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Attachment
relational scaffolding of positive psychology. In theory and emotions in close relationships: Explor-
C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of ing the attachment-related dynamics of emotional
positive psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford reactions to relational events. Personal Relation-
University Press. ships, 12, 149-168. doi:10.1 111/j. 1350-4126.20
Lopez, F. G., & Fons-Scheyd, A. (2008). Role bal- 05.00108.x
ance and depression among college students: The Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003).
moderating role of adult attachment orientations. Attachment theory and affect regulation: The
Journal of College Counseling, 11, 133 - 146. dynamics, development, and cognitive conse-
MacEwen, K. E., & Barling, J. (1991). Effects of quences of attachment-related strategies. Motiva-
maternal employment experiences on children's tion and Emotion , 2 7, 77 - 1 02. doi: 1 0. 1 023/A: 1 02
behaviour via mood, cognitive difficulties and 4515519160
parenting behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Mouton, P. Y., & Tuma, J. M. (1988). Stress, locus of
Family, 53, 635-644. control, and role satisfaction in clinic and control
MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. mothers. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 7 7,
(2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of 2 1 7 - 224. doi: 1 0. 1 207/s 1 5374424jccp 1 703_4
Psychology, 58, 593-614. doi:10.1146/annurev. Östberg, M., & Hagekull, В. (2000). A structural mod-
psych.58. 110405.085542 eling approach to the understanding of parenting
50 Family Relations
stress. abuse potential.

Journal of Child Abuse and Neglect, 21,
Clinical Chi
6 1 5 - 625. doi: 10.
367 - 377. doi: 1 0. 1 1 207/S
0 1 6/SO 1 45-2 1 34(96)00 1 77-91 537
Östberg, M., Hagekull,
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaledВ., &
Stability and prediction
difference chi-square test statistic for moment of
Infant and Child Developme
structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507-514.
doi : 1 0 .1 002/icd.
Schultheiss, E.516
P. (2006). The interface of work and
Perry- family M.,
Jenkins, life. Professional Psychology : ResearchВ.,
Seery, &
Linkages between and Practice, 37, 334-341. doi: 10. 1037/0735-
women's p
tudes, psychological 7028.37.4.334 well-be
relationships. Shaver, P. R., & Hazan, С. (1993). Adult romantic
Psychology of W
16, 311-329. doi: Theory
attachment: 10. Ill
and evidence. In D.1/j.
Perlman 1
00257.x & W. Jones (Eds.), Advances in personal rela-
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic tionships (Vol. 4, pp. 29 - 70). London: Jessica
and resampling strategies for assessing and com- Kingsley.
paring indirect effects in multiple mediator mod- Stephens, G. K., & Sommer, S. M. (1996). The mea-
els. Behavior Research Methods , 40, 879-891. surement of work to family conflict. Educational
doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 and Psychological Measurement, 56, 475-486.
Rholes, W. S., Simpson, J. A., & Blakely, B. (1995). doi: 1 0.1 1 77/00 1 3 1 64496056003009
Adult attachment styles and mothers' relation-Stoeva, A. Z., Chiù, R. K., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2002).
ships with their young children. Personal Rela- Negative affectivity, role stress, and work-family
tionships, 2, 35-54. doi: 10. 1 1 1 1/j . 1475-68 1 1 . conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60,
1995.tb00076.x 1 - 16. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1812
Rholes, W. S., Simpson, J. A., Blakely, B. S., Lani- Sumer, H. С., & Knight, P. A. (2001). How do people
gan, L., & Allen, E. A. (1997). Adult attach- with different attachment styles balance work
ment styles, the desire to have children, and and family? A personality perspective on work-
working models of parenthood. Journal of Per- family linkage. Journal of Applied Psychology,
sonality, 65, 357-385. doi: 10. Ill 1/j .1 467-6494. 86, 653-663. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.653
1997.tb00958.x Vasquez, К., Durik, A. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2002).
Rholes, W. S., Simpson, J. A., & Friedman, M. Family and work: Implications of adult attachment
(2006). Avoidant attachment and the experience of styles. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,
parenting. Personality and Social Psychology Bul- 28, 874-886. doi: 10. 1177/014616720202800702
letin, 32, 275-285. doi: 10. 1177/014616720528 Voydanoff, P. (2005). Social integration, work-family
0910 conflict and facilitation, and job and marital
Rodriguez, С. M., & Green, A. J. (1997). Parenting quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67,
stress and anger expression as predictors of child 666 - 679. doi: 10. Ill 1/j. 1741-3737.2005.00161 .x

Attachment and Parenting

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attachment and Parenting

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attachment and Parenting: The Mediating Role of Work-Family Balance in Portuguese

Parents of Preschool Children

Attachment and Parenting: The Mediating Role

Family Relations 61 (February 2012): 3 1 - 50 31

integrating Two major lines of research

studies have found adult attachment levels of anxiety

self and in increasingly

Parasuraman, 1999), or work-family enrichment

Gottfried, Given the available

Figure 1. Conceptual Models Underlying the Structural Models.

I AVOIDANT ' f '

(CFI) = .94; standardized

Table 1. Unstandardized, Standa

Parameter Estimate Unstandardized Standardized p

Measurement model estimates

Avoidance Parcel 2 -+X2 0.71 (0.05) .75 .05

Anxiety Parcel 1 X4 0.73(0.07) .71 .05

WF Conflict Parcel 2 -► X8 0.89 (0.06) .82 .05

Covariance WF conflict and WF positive spillover -0. 15 -.18 .05

Avoidant attachment -> WF conflict # 0.39 .28 .05

Avoidant attachment - ► WF positive spillover -0.24 -.16 .05

Residual for WF positive spillover 0.94 .99 .05

Avoidant attachment WF positive spillover -0.23 -.16 .05

Anxious attachment -> Parenting satisfaction 0.18 .30 .05

Residual for parenting satisfaction 0.94 .99 .05

I* i* |- ' ' • ' |- ' ' f i* о и

Л ' ' ' I* ' Г ' ' ' f f ^ ft M

Results of the WF conflict variance, F{ 2, 195) = 9.52,

WF Conflict WF Positive Spillover Parenting Stress Parenting Satisfaction

and stress dimensions (see Table 1).MoreInspecifically,

' WORK-FAMILY ' s>4

©/ 22*/ / ( V { work-family' spillover POSITIVE J ) R2 = .03 -.17* R2 = .03

attachment anxiety and WF conflict explained on parenting outcomes would be differentially

Figure 3. Structural Model: Relations Between Attachment, Work-Family Conflic

~'3°* / N. > /W0RK-FAMILY' ^

roles (i.e., self as romanti

family to work. Finally, given theattachment].

stress. abuse potential.

You might also like

©/ 22/ / ( V { work-family' spillover POSITIVE J ) R2 = .03 -.17 R2 = .03