This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Dual Earners and Balance in Their Family and Work Life: Findings from Pakistan
Naheed Abrar Chairperson Social Work Department, Federal Urdu University Science, Arts & Technology Abdul Haq Campus, Karachi, Pakistan Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Arsalan Mujahid Ghouri PHD Candidate, Institute of Business & Technology (BIZTEK) Email: email@example.com
Abstract In this globalize world, parent are searching for equitable life between their family and work roles. This study explored the insight aspects and difficulties of dual earner’s family and work life. Two thousand two hundred (2,200) questionnaires were distributed in 12 organizations of Karachi, Pakistan. The key findings of this study exposed the individual’s family and work role identity and value principles are the cause of role tenancy choices and decisions made by dual-earner parents. Gender based parental role identities are evenly account a work role identity or salient parental. Dual earners’ experience the concerns and rewards of work and family role accumulation. Family role participation rewards and conflicts arose for mothers and fathers with their family related life. Balancing work and family, their related issues and concerns are important for dual earners, regardless of their occupational field. Dual-earner parents also experience the interrole conflict and overload, which hurt their work or family domain. It makes intricacy to fulfill one’s role in response to fulfilling other role successfully.
Human life is associated with different aspects, like human activities, behaviors, roles, people etc. Participation in life’s many domains is facilitated by the occupation of distinct social roles, thereby defining an individual’s identity as a complex amalgam of many social roles (Ornstein & Isabella, 1993). Some roles are suggested to have more meaning and significance attached to them compared with others (Bielby, 1992) like man describe himself as an HR manager, father, husband, son, brother, golfer etc. In these roles the most essential role of a human is to build and support the family especially in Pakistan environment. Kelly & Kelly (1994) illustrated that adult men and women cite their family as the most central life interest. Since the 1960s, the family division of labor has changed markedly in at least one respect. In the majority of married couples of the 1990s, husbands are no longer the sole breadwinners (Wilkie, 1991). It is uncertain whether couples find shared breadwinning satisfying, particularly because there has been little change in wives' responsibility for family domestic work (Wilkie et al, 1998). Family builds intimate relationships which join social networks. The domain of work is the complement ingredient of any family. In other words paid work is the reason of family existence. Probert (1989) explained that paid work is considered a central life domain, more or less work is neither good nor bad. Moreover Le & Miller (2000) affirmed that lack of work due to unwanted unemployment is associated with social problems and economical disadvantage. Some commentators have declared that effectively balancing work and family responsibilities is, or will become, the central challenge in the lives of most people in modern society (Milkie & 28
lower productivity. They perform three jobs (two markets and one family) with the same two adult resources as the traditional breadwinner family (Piotrkowski & Hughes. such as what happens when she earns more than he earns. satisfaction in their marriage and parent-ing. Number 1 (2010) Peltola. Similarly. and increased negative feeling states and psychosomatic symptoms. and more stability in their incomes due to the buffering that two jobs provides in an uncertain economy (cf. increased tardiness (Greenhaus & Beutell.g. 1988. Goff et al. Coverman. 1993). 1990. an inequity which has sparked considerable interest on the part of family scholars (Berk. or makes compliance with. the individual’s personal coping ability and the level of support offered to employed parents through family-friendly workplace policies and strategies.. individuals attempting to meet all of the responsibilities of their multiple social roles are likely to experience role strain and conflict. According to Burke (1987). Frone et al. lower levels of social participation. work-family conflict). 1980. employed mothers and fathers and their family commitments.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. the pressures and expectations of other roles more difficult. Katz & Kahn (1978) define roles conflicts and their related problems that role conflict develops when fulfilling the expectations and demands of one role is incompatible with. 1999). The results of these problems often hurt the employed men and women and their family conflict with negative personal outcomes such as anxiety. Since then the work and family research field has burgeoned into an extensive area of study with the publication of an overwhelming volume of literature devoted to analyzing the work and family relationship (Zedeck & Mosier.. the presence of work/family conflict also linked with harmful outcomes for the organization. Moreover. like absenteeism. or that the experience of stress may lead people to mobilize their support resources but if their support sources are ineffective in helping to change the situation it may do little to help reduce the impact of the stressors. 1985). Bedeian et al. There is 29 . Ray and Miller (1994) suggested that it is possible that the development and maintenance of a support network may be inherently stressful. 1989. Even when both spouses are employed full-time. Gilbert & Rachlin (1987) explained this scenario that dual earner couples countenance with many challenges as they try to integrate and balance the multiple social roles occupied by both adults. 1985). 1990). These role conflicts often reason to disturb the one of the two different roles. others. Higgins et al. Pleck. Goode concluded that this strain is normal because “the individual’s total role obligations are over demanding”. 1992). Literature Review According to Perry-Jenkins et al (2000) the family and work research field emerged as a distinct area of interest in 1970s. dual earner couples are a predominantly interesting and vivid union of work and family roles.. depression and psychological distress (Burke et al. responsibility and role. job dissatisfaction. they find that respondents have warm and loving relationships with their children. Schwartz. In this scenario they face many difficult situation and time in multiple social roles. poor physical health (Frone et al. But Goode (1960) argued that total commitment and conformity to one role reduces the amount of time and energy available for investment in other role because of finite support of energy available for each day. 1992. For reducing the work family role conflict the Rapoport & Rapoport. Boston-area two-earner couples in which both spouses work full-time. (1980) discover in their early research that discovered that husbands’ reports of increased occupational demands were significantly related to spousal reports of decreased marital and life satisfaction. Burke et al. Although certain stress related work family issues confronting dual-earner couples have received considerable research attention ( e. (1980) suggested the availability of quality social support resources. have not. Burke and Weir (1981) found that occupational demands were significantly related to negative experiences in the participants’ non-work lives. 1994). 1986. Further Goode marked that therefore. staff turnover. So this study was conducted to understanding the relationship between these two variables or primary life domain. wives continue to perform the majority of household tasks. lower quality family life (AndersonKulman & Paludi. 1985. 1997). 1997) life dissatisfaction (Aryee.
Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients this questionnaire were . All role of life is measured with two subscales designed to judge the conceptually discrete dimensions of role reward value and role commitment. Deater-Deckard & Scarr. 1996. For example in the work domain the role occupant may seek to change performance expectations or levels of responsibility. The variables used in the study were Independent Variables Life role salience scales. and . or derive a more effective division of labor. 1983). employee counseling. to be analyzed systematically using both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. This quantify assumed at a seven 30 . representing an overall response rate of 22. Pakistan. 2001). power. 1984. Greenhaus (1988) has suggested that a number of family orientated personnel policies are in use in modern organizations. (1986) developed the Life Role Salience Scales (LRSS) to measure the attitude towards role involvement in work and family of men and women. satisfaction. Work role stress defined as the extent to which a person experiences incompatible role pressures within the work domain (Kopelman et al. The role value dimension assesses the personal importance or value attributed by the respondent to the particular role. flexible work schedules. Greenhaus and Parasuraman (1987) described problem-focused strategies as being used either within the work or family domains. in turn. which may.37%. Each role analyzed on five point Likert type scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) neither agree or disagree 4) agree 5) strongly agree. Potential respondents were appealed that to present the second questionnaire to their spouse if applicable. flexible modes of work attendance such as telecommuting. Covering letter was enclosed to every questionnaire and encouraged to participate to those who met the research selection. The instrument contains scales divided into four major life roles. Patterson. parental. All respondents were affianced in paid employment outside of the home and were primary care providers their child or children and living in a spousal relationship as the tradition of Pakistan. 1986). The respondents were selected on random basis by concern departments’ head.86 for parental involvement (commitment role value and parental role value). Amatea et al.200) questionnaires which were completely confidential and anonymous with the personal identity of the respondents and unknown by the principal researcher were distributed in 12 organizations of Karachi. The data were collected using standardized psychometrically stable pencil-andpaper research instruments.earner parents who are living in a couple spousal relationship and how they balance their work and family roles and responsibilities and commitments? All of the respondents were living in dualearner couple families. Juggling family work and paid work may increase the risk of role overload and stress for both men and women. and relocation benefits to name a few. and home-care. Methodology In this study the heterogeneous group of parents was involved in data collection process from a large heterogeneous group of parents who were the part of multiple social roles of work and family to find the answer of the research question ‘What are the work and family role participation experiences of dual. and the role commitment dimension determines the level of commitment of personal time and energy resources that the respondent is willing to provide to perform the role (Burke. while in the family domain the role occupant may source outside help for domestic or childcare tasks. All communication was done to higher authorities of concerning companies before the dispatch of the questionnaires. Number 1 (2010) considerable interest within both sociology and psychology in the relationship between earnings and such outcomes as marital quality. marital. such as childcare support. occupational. A total of 492 completed questionnaires were returned.81 for work involvement (commitment role value and occupational). and disruption within couples (Brennan et al.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. 1994). negatively affect parental functioning (Belsky. This variable was determined with an eightitem self-report questionnaire developed by Cooket et al (1981). Role stressors. Two thousand two hundred (2. parental leave.
parents dedicated their intentions and life for their children assistance.. The Dual Employed Coping Scale (DECS) was developed by Skinner & McCubbin (1987) for spouses to identify and measure coping behaviors in managing work and family roles. Coping. 1) a few times a year or less. (2) once in a while. The present study asked parents to nominate the type or types of childcare arrangements that they regularly accessed for their dependent children. Family role stressors adopts a seven point Likert type scale format 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree. (3) sometimes. family friendly HR policies and practices has potential and could be important to assist employed parents to condense the difficulty in balancing their multiple role commitments.75 calculated for the work role stressors scale and the work role stressors scale respectively. Emotional Exhaustion. Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for the two FACES III scales were . Family Role Stress defined as the extent in which a person experiences incompatible role in family domain from different pressures.82 and . Jr. Burnout is a psychological syndrome referring to a state emotional exhaustion and cynicism caused by excessive psychological and emotional demands (Maslach & Jackson. 5) a few times a week. (4) frequently. 1981). 3) a few times a month. Family version of the instrument was used for all of the participants in the current study. In Pakistan perspective. (2002) that. Participants were requested to rate 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree 31 .76 for cohesion and . Lechner & Creedon (1994) considered it as important factor in family and work related research. and (5) almost always was used in FACES. 1985) was designed by Olson and his colleagues. Family-Friendly HR Policies.72 for adaptability. The internal consistency of the MBI’s emotional exhaustion subscale was . The emotional exhaustion subscale contains nine items scored using the following seven point scale. 1978). 4) satisfactory helpful 4) helpful (5) very helpful.83 on Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient. 2) once a month or less. 4) once a week. Number 1 (2010) point Likert scale with 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree responses. Interrole conflict. 0) never. Each role investigated on five point Likert type scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) neither agree or disagree 4) agree 5) strongly agree. and 6) every day. Dependent Variables Childcare Arrangements. A Cronbach alpha of these questions were . Five point scale ranging from (1) almost never. Family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scales III. According to Schermerhorn.79. Rating scale was used to asked respondents were ranging from 1) not at all helpful. The Cronbach alpha reliability of DECS instrument was . They judge on their 7 response scales of 1) very easy 2) easy 3) slightly easy 4) Not at all easy or difficult 5) slightly difficult 6) difficult 7) very difficult and 1) very unhappy 2) happy 3) little unhappy 4) not at all unhappy or happy 5) little happy 6) happy 7) very happy.84. Interrole conflict occurs when fulfilling the role expectations in one role makes compliance with role expectations in another other role more difficult (Katz & Kahn.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. Measurement of Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient showed in the current study was . was used to assess the frequency with the target potential audience in the current study showed experiencing the affective answer of burnout in relation to their job. The Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES) self-report inventory (Olson et al. The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) which created by Maslach & Jackson (1981). 2) little helpful.
Social Embedded ness refers to the network of connections that individuals have to significant others within their social environment (Barrera.1 showing the results. social embedded ness. Enacted Social Support is conceptualized as the actions that others perform when they render social support or assistance (Barrera. 1986). Job Satisfaction. 1997). these results extracted from the ‘principal components extraction’ with varimax rotation. Job satisfaction is frequently defined as an individual's positive or negative evaluation of their work and work environment (O'Reilly. Social support..56% of the cumulative variance. Respondents specified their responses with a seven point Likert scale ranging 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) with . The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of . Family Satisfaction stated by Kinnunen & Mauno (1998) are family related affect and their influence on life. and enacted social support (Pierce et al. The variables are ordered and grouped according to item number to facilitate interpretation. Propensity to leave. 1996).86. The questionnaire items loaded onto two components accounting for 29.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. 1986).84 calculated for the adjusted measure of work and family enhancement. 1986). 32 . 1) very true. Enacted social support was assessed using Vaux. 2) true 3) neither true or not true 4) not true 5) not true at all. A Cronbach alpha estimate of internal consistency was . 1991). Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient calculated in this study was . Date Results & Interpretation Family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scales III. Interrole enhancement.86 in the study. This extraction was performed on the 20 items of the FACES III scale with the sample of 492 employed parents. Social support is multifaceted concept supporting three main subsidiary conceptualizations.89 overall Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient. perceived social support.82. Number 1 (2010) nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree responses. Users responses took on Likart rating scale ranging from 1) very dissatisfied to 6) very satisfied. Perceived Social Support is a prominent concept characterized by an adequate support would be available if it was needed (Barrera.78.89 for the work-family conflict (WFC) scale and . Sarason et al (1988) Social Support Questionnaire was employed to attain the results. Kopelman et al (1987) three-item General Job Satisfaction scale family satisfaction questionnaire employed and seven point Likert scale was used 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree amid with . Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients of . The intention of the participants to leave their current employer is considered an important construct because it is an immediate precursor to an individual’s choice to leave their job (Boles et al. Table 5. et al’s (1987) Socially Support Behaviors (SS-B) scale was utilize in questionnaire. The measure is attain by a seven point Likert scale with replies ranging from 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree. The calculated overall Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient was .85 for the family-work conflict (FWC) scale. The response measure adopts a seven point Likert scale with ranging from 1) strongly disagree 2) disagree 3) disagree slightly 4) neither agree nor disagree 5) agree slightly 6) agree 7) strongly agree with Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of . Sieber’s (1974) affirmed that interrole enhancement is role expansion that focuses on the rewards or privileges associated with the accumulation of multiple social roles.85 Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient.
12 -.47 . Rules change in our family.32 .51 .11 3. Family members feel closer to other family members than to people outside the family. Eigenvalues Variance (%) Cronbach’s alpha 12 -. Family togetherness is very important.47 .64 . everybody is present.47 .67% of the cumulative variance. 13. When our family gets together for activities.06 .34 . It is hard to identify the leader(s) in our family. 20. 12.45 . Cronbach’s alphas and Percentages of variance for Principal FACES III Questionnaire item number and component label 1 Cohesion 1. 5.43 .72 h2 .56 .47 . Family members ask each other for help 3.22 .49 .European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17.09 -. We approve of each other’s friends. 11. Number 1 (2010) Table 5. 4. 14.87 Life role salience scales. Family members like to spend free time with each other. the children’s suggestions are followed.53 .09 Compound 2 . In solving problems.01 .46 .04 .55 .33 . Eigenvalues. It is hard to tell who does which household chores.9 14.22 .08 -.76 . 9.12 .32 .15 -.15 . Family members feel very close to each other. Table 5.16 . 10.09 . 16. 15.59 . Communalities (h ). Cronbach’s alphas and the percentages of variance. The children make the decisions in our family. The two-component solution accounted for 48. We can easily think of things to do together as a family.48 .31 .21 . Children have a say in their discipline.56 . 33 ｲ Compound 2 .26 .07 .We shift household responsibilities from person to person.61 . 17.66 . Our family changes its way of handling tasks. communalities.7 15.53 .05 .31 .59 . Different persons act as leaders in our family. FACES III Questionnaire item number and component label 1 Adaptibility 2.33 -.19 . 6. 18. Family members consult other family members on their decisions. 19. 8.13 -.07 .57 .33 .41 2.1: FACES III Rotated factor item loadings.22 .42 . Parents and children discuss punishment together.61 .54 h2 .76 .73 . Principal components extraction with varimax rotation was executed on the twenty items of the LRSS subscales which divided into two parts ‘occupational role involvement’ and ‘parental role involvement’.58 .2 shows the loadings of variables on components.21 . 7. We like to do things with just our immediate family.
56 .12 -.07 .12 . 4. 12. Eigenvalues Variance (%) Cronbach’s alpha .08 . It is important to me that I have a job/career in which I can achieve something of importance. 14. 9.78 . 18. 13.11 -. Cronbach’s alphas and the percentages of variance are shown in table 5.09 . My life would be empty if I never had children.09 .56 .06 . LRSS Questionnaire item number and component label Parental Role Involvement 11. 8. If I chose not to have children.21 -. It is important to me to have time for myself and my own development rather than have children and be responsible for their care. but I do not want to have a demanding career. I expect to devote a significant amount of my time to building my career and developing the skills necessary to advance in my career.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17.40 .21 .28 .55 1 -.76 .32 . I expect to be very involved in the day-to-day matters of rearing my children. Building a name and reputation for myself through work/a career is not one of my life goals.37 -. 2.23 -. 20.46 . I do not expect to be very involved in child rearing. the love and enjoyment of children of one’s own are worth it all.09 . It is important to me to feel successful in my work/career.46 . Cronbach’s alphas and Percentages of variance variance for Principal Components Extraction with Varimax Rotation.03 .81 Compound 2 -.58 . 3.85 . I expect to make as many sacrifices as are necessary in order to advance in my work/career. I expect to devote a significant amount of my time and energy to the rearing of children of my own.66 . I would regret it.03 -.41 Compound 2 -64 . Communalities (h2).21 . Principal components extraction with varimax rotation was achieved on the 10 objects of the interrole conflict scales with the 492 respondents and this section was also divided into two distinct forms of interrole conflict ‘family-to-work conflict’ and ‘work-to-family’ with the cumulative variance of 57.22 .42 .3.95.2: LRSS Rotated factor item loadings.22 .10 4.49 h2 .20 . I value being involved in a career and expect to devote the time and effort needed to develop it.5 24. I expect to devote whatever time and energy it takes to move up in my job/career field. 7.23 .57 . 34 . 6.64 .44 . Eigenvalues.30 . Although parenthood requires many sacrifices.62 . It is important to me to feel I am (will be) an effective parent.27 .64 . than anything else I do.77 .38 . 15. 16.08 -. 5.27 .1 24.64 .10 . LRSS Questionnaire item number and component label 1 Occupational Role Involvement 1.57 . 19.19 . Having work/a career that is interesting and exciting to me is my most important life goal. I want to work.61 .86 h2 .64 4. Becoming involved in the day-to-day details of rearing children involves costs in other areas of my life which I am unwilling to make.42 . I expect my job/career to give me more real satisfaction than anything else I do. The whole idea of having children and raising them is not attractive to me.43 .27 .04 -.31 . Number 1 (2010) Table 5.45 Interrole conflict.34 . The loadings of variables on components communalities. 17. 10.
82 5 .81 .11 .09 .19 . 10.17 .07 .14 .81 .08 .61 .88 . Co Workers Social Support 5. Table 5.25 . Communalities (h2).86 . Friends Social Support 17.56 . My family goes out of their way to make my life easier.67 . The amount of time my job takes up makes it difficult to fulfil my family responsibilities.69 . Cronbach’s alphas and Percentages of variance for Principal Components Extraction with Varimax Rotation.55 .15 .75 .11 .14 . The demands of my family or spouse/ partner interfere with work related activities.06 .04 . accomplishing daily task.89 Compound 2 .European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17.73 . 16. Things I want to do at work don’t get done because of family demands.08 . Eigenvalues.12 -. It is easy to talk with my friends. The questionnaire items which loaded on five components had the 78.80 . 14.18 .82 .45 . 4.19 . 19. Things I want to do at home do not get done because of the demands my job puts on me.11 -.14 .70 3. WFC and FWC Questionnaire item number and component label 1 Work to family conflict 1. 18.14 . My friends go out of their way to make my life easier.13 -.14 .25 . Communalities (h2).08 . Eigenvalues Variance (%) Cronbach’s alpha .88 .87 .79 .12 . My friends can be relied on when things get tough forme at work.72 . The demands of my work interfere with my home and family work 2. .15 .11 .09 -.21 .11 .81 . 5.09 .07 .18 .78 .79 . Due to work related duties. 4.85 h2 .3: Work to Family Conflict (WFC) and Family to Work Conflict (FWC) Scales Rotated factor item loadings. Number 1 (2010) Table 5. Social Support Questionnaire item number and component label 1 Supervisor Social Support 1. My Spouse/ partner goes out of his/her way to make my life easier.56 .16 .78 . Cronbach’s alphas and Percentages of variance for Principle Components Extraction with Varimax Rotation.09 .15 .02 . Principal components extraction with varimax rotation was performed on the 20 items with the 492 participants. My job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfil my family duties. 3.11 . I have to make changes to my plans for family activites.77 .64 . My friends are willing to listen to my personal problems. My home life interferes with my responsibilities at work such as getting to work on time. It is easy to talk with my supervisor. It is easy to talk with my spouse/partner.12 .08 . My family can be relied on when things get tough for me at work.10 .19 . and working overtime.14 .13 .83 .08 . My supervisor goes out of his/her way to make my life easier.07 .03 -.76 .4: Perceptions of Social Support Scales Rotated Factor item loadings.75 .09 .82 .4.08 .07 .11 . Eigenvalues.04 -.73 . 12.11 .81 .11 .19 .15 .87 .09 . 20.7 29.88 . 10. Family Social Support 9. It is easy to talk with my family.52 . communalities.11 . My family are willing to listen to my personal problems.19 .82 .88 35 .08 . 15.13 . 3. 8.09 Component 3 4 .88 .18 .19 .20 .55 . 2.14 2 .17 .08 h2 .12 .44 Social support. Family related strain interferes with my ability to perform job related duties. I have to put off doing things at work because of demands on my time at home. My supervisor can be relied on when things get tough for me at work.89 . My co workers go out of their way to make my life easier. 9.15 .07 .05 .05 .05 .10 .81 .59 .79 .47 . My spouse/partner is willing to listen to my personal problems.66 . 11.10 .67 . My spouse/partner can be relied on when things gettough for me at work.70 . My supervisor is willing to listen to my personal problems. 7.85 .78 .06 . Spousal Social Support 13.69 .3 28.09 .82 .76 . The detail information of variables of components.64 . Family to Work Conflict 6.29 3. Cronbach’s alphas and the percentages of variance are shown in Table 5.43% cumulative variance.
01 and p<. Eigenvalues Variance (%) Cronbach’s alpha 3. and emotional exhaustion are joined together to prepare the dependent variable system of work and family affect.85 . Outcomes of work. Availability of workplace policies and practices.66 .6 15.08 .89 3.73 .18 -. It is easy to talk with my co workers. family and childcare satisfaction.14 . 7.01 level.89 .01 .10 -.06 . work and family affect. The affect outcomes of work. Availability of workplace policies and practices. and their use of personal coping strategies are glued to make the dependent variable system of personal and workplace resources.86 .05 levels.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. and work and family social support (table. intention to turnover.2 14.78 .01.08 .82 . Number 1 (2010) 6. 36 .8 16. the size of the parents’ support network.11 . their experience of socially supportive behaviors. Parents’ perception of social support.5).13 . My co workers can be relied on when things get tough for me at work. Parents’ perception of social support. and their satisfaction with their social support network variables are significantly correlated at the p<.05 and p<.1 15. their experience of socially supportive behaviors. intention to turnover.81 3.01.20 . 5.3 16.05 . a important verdict of present study is that for dual-earner parents the experience of coalescing work and family role relationships is not singularly negative.91 3. My co workers are willing to listen to my personal problems.19 3. In addition.65 78 In this study the age of the parent’s youngest child and their perception of the emotional climate of their family are theoretically clustered to combine the family environment. and their satisfaction with their social support network bonded together to figure personal and workplace resources. Significant differences found in the results of the four MANOVA analyses in the dependent work and family variable systems of family environment. The significant correlation of age of the parent’s youngest child and their perception of the emotional climate of their family is p<. and their use of personal coping strategies are significantly correlated at the p<.11 . family and childcare satisfaction. and emotional exhaustion significant correlations among these variables are p<.88 . workplace and personal resources.87 . 8. the size of the parents’ support network.02 .
00 0. Mode Employ 7.19 -0.10 0.02 -0.37 -0.310** -0.00 0.047 0.414** 0.053 -0.08 -0.26 0.301** 0.271** 37 .21 0.023 -0.06 0.114 -0.02 -0.138* 1. Work Involv 16.077 -0.22 -0.39 -0.09 1.235** 0.0.236** 1.272** -0.243** 0.299** 0.042 0.171* 0.06 0.162* 0.477** 0.389** -0.327** 0.04 0.299** 0.091 0.171** 0.07 0.145** -0.2 -0.00 0.290** 0.081 -0. Parent Involv 17.00 0.433* 0.5: Correlation Matrix 1.185** -0. Cohesion 11.04 0.256** 1.44 0.306** 1.23 -0.377** -0.21 -0.05 0.499** -0.00 0.125 -0.444** -0.1 0.12 1.192** 0.31 -0.159* -0.08 -0.049 0. Work stressors 23.17 -0.131* -0.015 0.139* 0.390** -0.02 -0.23 -0.225** 0.11 0.111 -0.00 -0.219** 1.367** -0.10 -0.10 -0.11 0.096 -0.410** 0.086* -0.00 -0.21 -0.311** 1.387** 0.076 -0.301** -0.198** 0.244** 0.162** -0.58 0.156* 0.184** 0.453** 0.032 -0.244** -0.194** 1.00 0.07 0.587** 0.065 0. Coping 19.00 0.163** 1.23 1.111 -0.098* 1.22 -0.00 -0.477** -0. behaviours 20. SSQ6-N 25.166** -0.02 0.48* -0.302** -0.179** 0.456** -0.08 -0.06 0.441** 0.11 0.158* 0.075 -0.167* 0.00 0.221** 0.222** -0.09 1.05 -0.092 0.19 0.321** -0.233* -0.07 0.00 -0.013 0. Age 3.133** 1.00 -0.00 -0.00 0.228** 0.02 -0. children 9.056 -0.17 0.301** 0.292** 0.19 -0.06 0. Turnover 15. Education 6. Fam stressors 22.201* -0. Job sat 13.058 0.141* 0.07 -0.06 0.65 0.222** 0.221** 0.389** 1.032 0.370** 0.19 -0.03 0.11 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1.09 -0. Industry 5.00 -0.04 -0.056 0.03 0.314** 0.00 0.355** 0.322** -0.04 1.193** -0.10 -0.06 0.032 .491** 0.133* -0.199** -0.18 -0.047 0.177** 0.269** 0.00 0.126* -0.455** -0.255** 0.201** -0.162** -0.02 -0.09 -0.1 0.399** -0.Occupation 4.08 0.301** -0.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. No.00 0.12 0. Number 1 (2010) Table 5.07 0.09 0.155** -0.055 0.232** ** 0.09 -0.005 -0.260** 0.045 -0.311** -0.067 -0.09 0.47 -0.010 0. Perception of Social Support 21.005 0.215** -0.003 -0. Burnout 24.436** 0.044 -0.166 0.09 -0.06 -0.099* -0. W/F Enhance 14.144* 0.611** -0.233** -0.21 -0.187** -0.198* 0.467** -0.032 -0.22 0.06 -0.19 0.333** -0.24 1.15 -0.372** -0.187** -0. Family sat 12.031 -0.211* -0.156** 0.08 -0.05 -0.2 0.291** -0.154* 0.343** -0.081 -0. Gender 2.43 -0.133** 1.512** 0.21 0.299** 1.241** -0.224** -0.44 -0.08 0..036 .00 -0.00 0.09 -0.07 -0.81 -0.131* 0.031 -0. W/F Conflict 18. Youngest child 8.144* 0.15 -0.21 1.15 -0.009 -0.077 0.33 -0.333** 1.00 -0.05 0.0.321** -0.18 0.315** 0.13 -0.02 -0.11 -0.355* -0.244** -0. Social Supp.144** 0.075 0.11 0.028 -0.33 0.067 -0.08 -0.019 0.00 0. Adaptability 10.43 -0.66 -0.5 0.123 -0.055 -0.165* -0.22 1.12 -0.211** 0. SSQ6-S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1.421** 0.204** 0.077 -0.311** 0.07 0.33 -0.10 -0.06 -0.062 -0.066 0.123 0.039 -0.02 0.279** -0.09 -0.488** 0.055 -0.355** 0.16 -0.08 0.00 0.
pp. Balancing work and family. 35. & Hair. Boles. 75. (1994). R. 281-302. 83-96. parents’ perceptions of conflicting associations and negative experiences in work and family domains. R. Johnston. J. 813-837. regardless of their occupational field. Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among married professional women: Evidence from Singapore. & Bobby. F. 28. E. & Moffett. Role stress. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. which hurt their work or family domain. Barrera. T. 14 (3). Occupational and life stress and the family: conceptual frameworks and research findings. Brennan. pp. Anderson-Kulman. Same is the case with the dual earners’ experience the concerns and rewards of work and family role accumulation. their related issues and concerns are important for dual earners. Family role participation rewards and conflicts arose for mothers and fathers with their family related life. D. Journal of Management. American Journal of Community Psychology. R. E. Outcomes of work-family conflict among married male and female professionals. Furthermore the results of this research present the confirmation to propose that presented family and work role accumulation research that adopts showed that role demand focus is deficient unaccompanied for illumination the complex interrelationship between the central life domains of family and work. Career and life values and expectations of university business students. 18. 48. S. pp. 38            . When She Earns More than He Does: A Longitudinal Study of Dual-Earner Couples. (1985). Number 1 (2010) Conclusion Present study revealed that that an individual’s family and work role identity and value principles causative to the role tenancy choices and decisions made by dual-earner parents. Clark. International Review of Applied Psychology. G. This research results suggested that gender based parental role identities are evenly account a work role identity or salient parental. pp. J. S. F. pp. 45. (1992). (1986).European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17.. L. J. Psychological Reports. measures. It makes intricacy to fulfill one’s role in response to fulfilling other role successfully. The determinants of parenting: A process model. Bielby.369. C.G. Moreover. W. Belsky. 475-491. & Paludi. pp. E. Human Relations. New York: Plenum. dual-earner parents also experience the interrole conflict and overload. Bedeian. work-family conflict and emotional exhaustion: Inter-relationships and effects on some work-related consequences. C. & Gareis. G. M. Barnett. 17-28. pp. Journal of Vocational Behavior. A. R. 63 (1). S. 831-838. (1988). 347. Jr. A. Distinctions between social support concepts.. K. 241. (1987). In addition. The gender factory: The apportionment of work in American households. (1997). (2001). M. This research also explored the attachment with meanings and values with work and family are critical for elucidation the work and family role accumulation experiences. Cross. 413-445. 55. S. Annual Review of Sociology.... Burke. Aryee. This study also illustrated that why accumulating family and work roles can be difficult and conflictual or beneficial and rewarding because of role identity and role value principles’ complex relationship. E. J. Assessing the work and family role expectations of career-orientated men and women: The Life Role Salience Scales. Burke. (1986). pp. C. 168182. References  Amatea. pp. Commitment to work and family. Child Development. G. 14 (4). B. Working mothers and the family context: Predicting positive coping. (1992).. R.253. Burke. Journal of Marriage and Family. R. 17. M. J. Berk. J. D. pp. and models. pp. 147-160.. (1986). Journal of Marriage and the Family. (1984).
R.. Greenhaus. A. (1996). Lechner. Milkie. W. Work demands on administrators and spouse well-being. W. Kelly. (1980). L. pp. 32. Work-family conflict in the dual.. Human Relations. E. & Weir. Number 1 (2010)           Burke. & Parasuraman. and interrole conflict: a construct validation study. American Sociological Review. Ornstein. 19(2). Multiple dimensions of meaning in the domains of work. pp. 42. (1994). & Warr. 25. 427-458. 61(2). N. (1983). pp. & Isabella. J. R. 793-809. Kinnunen. T. D. (1991). S. & Connolly. 483-496. & Scarr. 50. 965-982.). L. J. work/family conflict. T. California: Sage. Y. P. 253-278. 157-177.  Goldsmith (Ed. and organizational issues. Kopelman. Journal of Occupational Behavior. J. (1990). (1987). Academy of Management Review. 45-59. A. Coverman. & Markel. 43. T. Greenhaus. R. K. Greenhaus. London: Academic Press. S. Maslach. Yardley. & Rachlin. pp.. 76-88. & Beutell. & Jamison. R. pp. S. O'Reilly. Gilbert. 37-60. L. M. T.. 476-491.. and absenteeism: A field study. where we're going. K. family. 76(232). Olson. J. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Weir. (1992). Greenhaus. R. Group and Organization Studies. Deater-Deckard. (1960). S. K. Impact of occupational demands on nonwork experiences. S. Parenting stress among dual-earner mothers and fathers: Are there gender differences? Journal of Family Psychology. Human Relations. Katz. & Jackson. & Creedon.. Goode. A. 51. & Lavee. pp. & Miller. The social psychology of organizations. T. Journal of Vocational Behavior. J. H... A. Mount. Portner. research. B. R. K. Duxbury. 51 (2). L. A work-nonwork interactive perspective of stress and its consequences. Annual Review of Psychology. E. In E. D. (1981). Frone. family. 2. S.. (1989). Managing work and family life. J. 51-75. R. 472-485.. (1994). & Mauno. & Peltola. U. (1985). The experience of work: A compendium and review of 249 measures and their use.. J. Social Forces. Work and family: Theory. 145-167. and applications. Personnel Psychology. The intersection of work and family roles: Individual. J. role conflict. R. C. Role overload. A theory of role strain. Paul. H. (1978). 26(3). P. pp. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management. D. FACES III family social science. 74-104. 243-267. pp.. and leisure. Journal of Management. & Kelly. A. H.. (1998). Wall. A. interpersonal. J. The Counseling Psychologist.. A model of work. M. pp. Burke. S. (1999). & Irving. H. Minnesota: University of Minnesota. Cook. 8. 7-49. J. pp. & Kahn. & DuWors. C. St. S. M. J. Hepworth. 6 (4). Goff. pp. Playing all the roles: Gender and the work-family balancing act. Organizational behavior: Where we've been. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 99-113. Le. 10. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. J.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. The measurement of experienced burnout. (1997). P. pp. D. V. pp. (1981). A. pp. M. (1985). New York:John Wiley & Sons. J. Sources of conflict between work and family roles. F. pp. and stress: Addressing consequences of multiple role demands. Journal of Leisure Research. 15(1). L. 33 (4). J.. H. Higgins. Making sense of careers: A review 1989-1992.B. pp. New York: Springer Publishing. (1987). R. (2000). 250-274.career family. Australia’s unemployment problem. Mental health and psychological functioning of dual-career families. pp. (1981). S. 10. pp. (1988). R. (1993). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among employed women and men in Finland. The Economic Record. V. Employer supported child care. M.E. 67 (4). 198-215. C.               39 . Developing and testing an integrative model of the work-family interface.
New York: John Wiley & Sons. Riedel.. Joseph. C. Performance models for antisocial boys. S. Topics in health psychology. H. Toward a theory of role accumulation. Models of social support: The social support behaviors (SS-B) scale. New York: The Guilford Press. (1994). (2000). (1988). In F. G.). (1987). pp. C. J. S. Peer marriage: How love between equals really works. (1990). Victoria: McPhee Gribble. M. I. Pierce. Spielberger. 432-444.. personality.. American Psychologist. R. pp. Jr.R. 45. 62 (4). 60 (3). American Psychologist. home/work stress. Working life. Sarason. pp. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Schermerhorn. (Eds. American Sociological Review. pp. Wilkie. A. R. C. (7th Ed. & Rapoport. & Hughes. Wilkie.).. The decline in men's labor force participation nd earnings and the changing structure of family economic support. The impact of work on the family. D.). Repetti.. (1987). Normal family processes. I. London: Temple Smith. & Mosier. and health. Sarason. R. DECS: Dual employed coping scales.Maes. I.. G. New York: Plenum Press.. Pierce. L.G.. & Stewart. Handbook of Social Support and the Family. R. Probert. Schwartz. R. New York: Free Press. & Crouter. 15(2). (1980). Sarason (Eds. Work and family in the 1990s.). Perry-Jenkins. In G. 357-373. L. P. Social support. McCubbin & A. & Henderson. R. Fonda (Eds.). USA: University of Wisconsin-Madison. R. G. (1994). K. (1974). & I. 981-1018. (1991). pp. 53. Family Assessment Inventories for Research and Practice. R. Journal of Marriage & the Family. A. Social support. 39. Zedeck. R.. Thompson. Defares. M. 30(3). (2002).I. Skinner. American Journal of Community Psychology. A.. J. Work and the family. (1993). D.. S. Sarason (Eds. Vaux. Sieber. 240-254. & Miller. (1998). Dual-earner families in context: Managing family and work systems. J. B. R. 577-594. pp. & I. Rapoport. London: John Wiley & Sons. Moss & N. Work in the family and employing organization.European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 17. D.G. G. pp.). D.S. S. Piotrkowski. B.              40 . 567-578.I. J. E. Journal of Marriage and Family. 209-237. B. B. Ferree. In S.R.. R. P. (1986). 41. & McCubbin. In P. & Pierce. K. and burnout: Who can help? Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. In H. H. Sarason. A. M. Management. C. Number 1 (2010)    Patterson. G. Walsh (Ed.B. Ratcliff K. Conceptualising and assessing social support in the context of the family.. pp. Ray. Gender and Fairness: Marital Satisfaction in Two-Earner Couples. (1996).D. Sarason. Sarason. I. (1989). B. 111-122.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.