Front.

Educ China 2010, 5(2): 158–176

DOI 10.1007/s11516-010-0011-4

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Lili Zhang

A Study on the Measurement of Job-Related

Stress among Women Academics in Research
Universities of China

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2010

Abstract This study intends to gain an understanding of the sources of stress

among women academics in research universities of China. Studies have shown
that, compared with their male counterparts, women report higher level of stress
in work/family conflicts, gender barriers and career development. Based on the
results of this study, the following conclusions can be drawn about their
particular stress experiences. Firstly, women academics perceived the demands
for career development as highly stressful. The main career challenges for them
include the need for renewing knowledge, lack of research productivity, and slow
career progress. Secondly, gender related barriers increased pressure on women
academics. These barriers are difficulties in getting into male-dominated
networks, social stereotypes of women, and gender discrimination in promotion.
Finally, women academics experienced more difficulties in fulfilling both
academic work and family roles. The main conflict situations pertained to
“performing both work and family roles very well,” “children’s education and
future” and “lack of time to satisfy personal interests and hobbies.”

Keywords stress, women academics, research universities

Introduction
Overview

This study intends to gain an understanding of the particular stress among

women academics in research universities of China. The focus on this population
Received April 1, 2009
Lili Zhang ( )
School of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
E-mail: hkullzhang@gmail.com
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 159

has been decided upon because the stress problems for women academics in
research universities are more serious than those in non research-oriented
universities. They are required to have higher qualifications, and also work in a
more competitive profession than their counterparts in other universities.
The general theoretical basis for this study is the transactional theory of stress,
a cognitive phenomenological theory developed by Lazarus and his colleagues
(Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Lazarus, 1991). According to the transactional
model, stress is “a particular relationship between the person and the
environment that is appraised by the person as taxing or exceeding his/her
resources and endangering his/her well-being” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, p. 19).
Nevertheless the relationships between person and environment are not linear but
reciprocal, continuously unfolding over time.
Specifically, within the transactional perspective, this study conducts an
interview and measurement study to identify job-related stressors among women
academics. These stressors not only include the common job-related stressors
among all academics, but also the unique stressors for women. The unique
stressors are examined in terms of the theories on role conflicts, and career
experiences of academic women.

Statement of Research Problems and Theoretical Framework

Since 1978, China’s economy has changed from a planned to a market system.
Influenced by drastic changes in the economic system, there have been rapid
social-cultural changes regarding social issues (the role of women) and
organizational issues (e.g., unequal opportunities between females and males) for
women academics.
According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984), individual experiences are
ultimately inseparable from social circumstances. Thus, stress is always context-
oriented. Pearlin (1982, pp. 371–372) argues that “the uncertainties and
contradictions that arise in societies especially during periods of extensive
change, can act as precursors of stress.” Specifically, he differentiates three
levels of stress causes, which are: the society as stressor, the social organizations
as stressors, and individual stressful experiences. The nature and origin of the
unique challenges that women academics face are therefore discussed in the
following sections.
Social-Cultural Origins
In the period of the Cultural Revolution, affirmative action was used to support
women to participate in political, economic and educational activities. After
China adopted economic reform and opening-up policies, the main political goal
was changed from egalitarianism to the development of the national economy. It
160 Lili Zhang

is clear that reform has placed severe pressure on Chinese women. As described
by Rosen (1993, p. 1), these are “the costs of reform to Chinese women.”
Another important issue is that of the changing social expectations towards
women as related to political development. During the Cultural Revolution,
women were seen as “half of the sky”; their role model was the “masculine
warrior.” Gradually, Chinese women “had lost the discourse of femaleness” (Dai,
1995, p. 258). After 1978, influenced by the social political changes, there was a
reversal to the traditional image of women.
Organizational Issues
From the 1990s, the organizational structure of the universities has been changing
along with the changing market. Most of the universities have introduced new
personnel policies or reward measures to encourage competition. These policies
are usually not stable and academics find it difficult to follow (He, Mao, Mu, Zhou,
Li, & Shi, 1998).
From a “global” perspective, work and organizational life are undergoing
dramatic changes in the 1990s (Quick, Quick, & Nelson, 1997). Higher
education is also experiencing rapid changes and academics are facing more
challenges (Martin, 1999; Taylor, 1999; Acker & Feuerverger, 1996). Taking
into consideration current world trends and university circumstances of China,
increasing pressures and strains on academics are doubtlessly inevitable.
Moreover, since the Chinese government has advocated women’s
emancipation, the overall social demands made of women are as high as those of
men. Any differential concerns regarding gender specific issues and women’s
difficulties in response to work challenges are regarded as problems that women
must solve for themselves and without assistance from organizational structures.
This is a unique organizational challenge for Chinese women compared with the
challenge for women in other countries.
Psychological Issues: Role Conflict
Academic women are generally those in possession of high achievement
motivation and self-esteem. Many obstacles, however, are hindering their
professional aspirations. Literatures suggest that the main conflicts for academic
women are due to the discrepancies between their role aspirations and their
career situations; between their career demands and their family responsibilities;
and finally between the conflict of traditional and modern thinking on women.

Objectives of the Study

This study seeks to promote an understanding of women academics and their

stress problems in research universities of China. The empirical results of this
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 161

study are finally interpreted in the context of social transformation of China.

Below are the summarized objectives of this study:
(1) examine the major job-related stressors for women academics by means of
qualitative interviews;
(2) identify the gender-sensitive stressors for female academics by survey
method.

Literature Review
Definitions of Stress

Researchers are still in disagreement about the nature of stress (Dua, 1994), and
an all-inclusive, comprehensive definition of stress is impossible (Smith, 1992).
Based on the transactional theory of stress, stressors in this study are regarded as
conditions of threat, demand, or structural constraint that evoke responses
indicative of stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Due to individual differences,
almost any stimulus may evoke stress symptoms in a person. The definition of
stressors, however, should be based on the responses of a normal representative
population and are inferred from cumulative evidence of previous research
(Smith, 1992). Because it is the strains and conflicts of daily life (rather than
major life events) that are most stressful (De Longis, Coyne, & Dakof, 1982),
this study attempts to capture routine life events that might contribute to the
stress experiences of a particular environment. In order to gain a deeper
understanding of the stressors that exist among women academics, the following
review includes both descriptive findings of stress factors and an explanatory
analysis of causes of stress.

Descriptive Findings on Stress Factors

Researchers propose that working women experience not only the same
stressors as their male counterparts but also unique stressors, if they work in
male dominated, patriarchal organizations. These potential unique stressors
for working women are: discrimination, social isolation, lack of career
progress, and work/home (Nelson & Hitt, 1992). Moreover, research has
proved that the work/home conflicts are stressful for working women (Nelson
& Hitt, 1992).
Based on measurement data, Gmelch, Wike, and Lovrich (1986) have found
that women experience more stress in the areas of time constraints and
professional identity. Using the same instrument, Witt and Lovrich (1988) have
162 Lili Zhang

found that women report higher levels of stress in items relating to high
expectations, time constraints, and the general stress level.
Nevertheless, as Eichler (1997) has indicated, most mainstream studies fail
to recognize sexist biases in their research perspectives and research design.
They usually examine gender differences in stress only based on gender blind
scales.

Explanatory Analysis of Causes of Stress among Women Academics

Some researchers suggest that the demands from double roles constitute the main
causes of stress for working women (Witt & Lovrich, 1988). They argue that
although work/family role conflicts occur in both men and women’s lives, the
problems are keener for working women. Researchers also indicates that highly
educated women experience more work/family role conflict, because they may
set more rigid standards for family roles or perhaps face greater demands at work
(Barnett & Baruch, 1985).
Studies on women’s participation in higher education in different countries
have found that academic women are in less advantageous positions and there
are a lot of barriers to their career progress (Kelly & Slaughter, 1991; Eliou,
1991; Johnsrud & Wunsch, 1994; Caplan, 1993). Although the research is
often culture-bound, Eliou (1991) argues that universal patterns are emerging.
She suggests that the under-representation of women in the academic
professions, the inequity of distribution of women faculty members by
institutional prestige and rank, and the uneven and hampered careers of
academic women relative to their male peers are all aspects of a pervasive
pattern of gender inequality in academy. She also attributed the
organizational problems to a highly competitive male academic culture to
which women are rarely socialized.

Research Method
Theoretical Considerations

This study employs both quantitative and qualitative approaches to study the
causes of stress among women academics in research universities of China. To
examine whether women face certain unique stressors, comparisons between
males and females are required. Eichler (1988, 1997) suggests that researchers
should try to avoid sexist problems. The main sexist problems are gender
insensibility and sexual dichotomism. The first ignores the importance of gender;
the other ignores the overlaps between females and males. This study thus,
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 163

views the problem of stress as a common problem among academics, and on

the other hand, it draws attention to the particular experiences of female
academics.
This study includes a semi-structured interviewing study and a
measurement study. The semi-structured interviewing helps the researcher to
identify the stressors and coping strategies among women academics. The
empirical aim of the measurement study is to examine the levels of stress felt
by both male and female academics, and to explore gender differences in
sources of stress.

Population

Both male and female faculty members in research universities of China

are regarded as the target population. If a university is a key institute of higher
learning or has a graduate school, it is seen as a research university.

Procedure

Part One: Interview Study

Interview study adopted a purposeful sampling method (Patton, 1990) to choose
the subjects. The logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting
information-rich cases, 10 female academics in 4 research universities were
chosen. Each interview lasted about 45–120 minutes.
Part Two: Survey
Based on literature review and interview results, an item pool of potential
stressors among academics, especially female academics, was established. This
stressor scale was comprised of 42 items. Subjects were requested to rank each
stressor on the five-point measurement scale.
The questionnaires were distributed in Beijing, Changsha and Xi’an. A total of
700 questionnaires were distributed, 524 were returned, and the return rate was
about 75 %. Of these 524 questionnaires, 515 were usable.
In this study, the disciplinary distribution is only broadly considered as
science, technology, social science, humanities and arts. The present sample
includes one comprehensive university, three teacher training (normal)
universities, two science and technology universities, and one agriculture
university.
The subjects were 168 male and 347 female academics. To obtain a better
understanding of academic women’s stress experiences, the survey was
164 Lili Zhang

administered mainly among the female groups; the data for males exists for
comparative purposes.
The marital status of the subjects was: 12 % unmarried; 17 % married, but no
children; and 69 % married with children. Among the subjects, 8.2 % were
seeking for research degrees and 28 % had administrative duties. In particular,
24 % of the female academics, compared with 38 % of males, had administrative
duties.
The demographic information shows that, to some extent, the subjects in this
study represent the targeted population. The information is also helpful for a
better understanding of women’s status in Chinese higher education and for
interpreting the survey results on stress and coping.

Research Findings
Factor Structure of the Stressor Scale

In this study, the construct of the stressor scale is in the initial stage of
development. Exploratory factor analysis is therefore used to uncover the
dimensionality of the data collected. In particular, a principal-component, the
varimax rotation factor analysis has been adopted. The factors are extracted
according to the criteria used by Tung and Koch (1980):
(1) Items load high on a single vector and relatively low on all other vectors.
Factor loadings of > 0.30 are used as a minimally acceptable cut-off point.
(2) The inter-item correlations within factors are higher than between factors,
and the reliability of each factor is acceptable.
(3) The dimension extracted from factor analysis should have low-shared
variance.
(4) The factor structure is easy to explain theoretically.
The initial statistics and the screen plot yielded at least four factors beyond
which each following factor accounted for less than 5 % of the total variance.
Through analysis, four items were deleted and a varimax factor analysis was
carried out for the remaining 36 items. As shown in Table 1, the 8 factors
explaining 53.6 % of the total variance were defined as: (1) work/family conflicts;
(2) administrative duties; (3) interpersonal conflicts and competitions; (4) career
development; (5) condition and opportunities; (6) gender barriers; (7) teaching;
and (8) research.
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 165

Table 1 Varimax Rotation Factor Matrix of Stressors Excluding Items 8, 19, 37, 20, and 17
Factor labels Items Factor
Factor 1 Work/family 32. Believing that work is influenced by the heavy 0.80
conflicts family burden
(accounting 35. Believing that family life is influenced by the 0.69
for 20.4 % of heavy workload
the variance) 41. Having difficulties in performing both work and 0.68
family roles very well
39. Children’s education and future 0.65
33. Lack of time to satisfy personal interests and 0.65
hobbies
40. Unsatisfactory health situation 0.48
34. Lacking congruency in institutional, 0.47
departmental, and personal goals

Factor 2 Service 3. Having administrative responsibilities 0.75

(accounting 6. Too many administrative tasks 0.75
for 8.0 % of
27. Attending time-consuming meetings 0.71
the variance)
10. Being interrupted frequently by phone calls or 0.69
drop-in visitors
12. Lacking power in performing administrative 0.67
responsibilities

Factor 3 Interpersonal 24. Solving conflicts with my colleagues 0.78

conflicts and 22. Feeling the pressure to compete with colleagues 0.67
competition
23. Receiving insufficient recognition for work 0.66
(accounting
performance
for 5.9 % of
15. Harmonizing interpersonal relationships 0.60
the variance)
21. Academic promotion 0.50

Factor 4 Career 14. Lacking research productivity 0.65

development 16. Having the need to extend my knowledge 0.60
situations
13. Believing that my development opportunities are 0.59
(accounting
hindered by my English level
for 5.0 % of
26. Believing that the progress in my career is not 0.58
the variance)
what it should or could be
18. Unsatisfactory teaching results 0.51
Factor 5 Gender issues 31. Believing that social prejudice hinders my 0.89
(accounting personal development
for 4.8 % of 30. Having difficulties in integrating into male 0.86
the variance) network for gender reasons
0.77
36. Believing that gender has an effect on my
advancement opportunities

(Continued)
166 Lili Zhang

(Continued)
Factor 6 Job rewards 29. Facing housing difficulties 0.72
and working 9. Unsatisfactory working conditions
0.60
conditions
(accounting 28. Lack of opportunity to go aboard 0.59
for 4.3 % of 38. Receiving lower salary 0.56
the variance)

Factor 7 Teaching 7. Having repetitious teaching assignments 0.68

(accounting 5. Believing that my research was influenced by the 0.63
for 3.8 % of heavy teaching load
the variance) 2. University evaluation of teaching 0.60
25. Teaching a new course 0.45

Factor 8 Research 1. Securing research funding 0.72

(accounting 11. Attending academic conferences and giving
0.49
for 3.3 % of presentations
the variance) 4. Writing and publications 0.46

Note: Varimax rotation, listwise deletion; loadings lower than 0.30 were omitted.

In order to test the suitability of the above structure, a varimax factor analysis
was conducted among the Beijing sample and two randomly selected samples,
representing 50 % and 80 % of the total number of subjects. The results all
agreed with the eight-factor structure demonstrated in Table 1. Finally, three
experts in the area of higher education reviewed the above process and examined
the content of the factors.

Psychometric Properties of the Stressor Scale

The internal consistency reliability for each stress factor is presented in Table 2.
The Coefficients Alphas are all acceptable for the first seven factors, which
ranged from 0.65 to 0.80. The reliability of the factor “research” is relatively
lower, but it is still within the acceptable scope.

Table 2 Internal Consistency Reliability for the Stressor Scale

Factors Code Items Reliability
Work/family role conflicts SF1 7 0.80
Service SF2 5 0.79
Interpersonal conflicts and competition SF3 5 0.76
Career development SF4 5 0.67
Gender barriers SF5 3 0.86
Job-rewards and working conditions SF6 4 0.65
Teaching SF7 4 0.65
Research SF8 3 0.47
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 167

To investigate further the relationships among the specific stressor factors, a

correlation analysis is carried out. Table 3 presents the factor-factor and factor-total
correlation coefficients of the eight stress factors. All the correlations are very
significant (p < 0.001). This indicates that the stressor factors are not independent
of each other. Moreover, the factor-total correlations are relatively lower for SF2
(service), SF5 (gender barriers); and comparatively higher for other SF1
(work/family conflicts) and SF3 (interpersonal conflicts and competition).

Table 3 Correlations among Eight Stress Factors and the Overall Stresses
SF1 SF2 SF3 SF4 SF5 SF6 SF7 SF8 Total
SF1 －
SF2 0.30 －
SF3 0.39 0.29 －
SF4 0.43 0.16 0.44 －
SF5 0.31 0.03 0.31 0.26 －
SF6 0.38 0.16 0.39 0.36 0.27 －
SF7 0.29 0.17 0.36 0.43 0.27 0.44 －
SF8 0.28 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.22 0.34 0.40 －
Total 0.72 0.51 0.70 0.68 0.51 0.64 0.63 0.57 －

In view of the fact that the total or average stress score might not be an
accurate indicator of the overall stress, the stress questionnaire has two extra
items on the overall work stress and the overall life stress. The overall work
stress and the overall life stress may be used to examine the predictive validity of
the stressor construct or structure. Data shows that SF3 (interpersonal conflicts
and competition), SF4 (career development), SF6 (job-rewards and working
conditions) and SF8 (research) are good predictors of overall work stress,
because their correlation coefficients are around 0.40 which is comparatively
higher than the other factors. With the same approach, it is found that S5
(work/family conflicts) and SF6 (job-rewards and working conditions) are good
predictors of the overall life stress.

Gender Differences in Sources of Stress

One focus of concern of this study is to investigate gender differences in stress.

The examination of gender differences is carried out both in terms of overall
stress and particular stress factors.
Gender Differences in Overall Stress
In this study, overall stress is examined through a global measure of stress. The
stressor scale thus includes two items on overall work stress and overall life
stress. Results reveal no gender differences in overall stress levels, either for
work or life, which means that male and females appear to have the same levels
168 Lili Zhang

of overall stress. This result is similar to those of other studies (Witt & Lovrich,
1988).
Gender Differences in Sources of Stress
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrates that there are significant gender
differences in the four stress factors: service, work/family conflict, gender
barriers, and career development. Because more male academics in the sample
hold administrative duties, gender differences in service stresses are more likely.
Nevertheless, stress caused by administrative duties may have different meanings
for males and females. For males, it usually signifies career success; for females,
it may induce more work/family conflicts.

Particular Stressors among Women Academics

The above discussion support the theoretical assumption of the study, which
assumes that women academics face some unique career constraints and they
experience more conflicts between work and family than their male counterparts.
Career Development
The results indicate that women perceive the demands of career development as
more stressful than males do. Analysis further shows that research productivity,
extending their knowledge, and unsatisfactory progress in their career are the
three items females feel more stressed about than males. The interview data also
show that they feel a sense of guilt and regret about their slow career progress.
These results are partially congruent with findings from the US, where women
academics express more uncertainty regarding their ability to meet tenure and
promotion requirements than men (Johnsrud & Wunsch, 1994).
Gender Barriers
The study shows that women academics are stressed by “having difficulties in
getting into male networks,” “social stereotypes of women” and “gender
discrimination in promotion.” The results also suggest that different women
perceive gender barriers very differently. With age, women academics perceive
getting into male networks and gender stereotyping as less stressful. However,
those between the ages of 40 and 49 feel more stressed by gender discrimination
than other age groups. Interestingly, they are the groups who got their school
education under the slogan of “women can hold up half of the sky.” They may
thus have strong expectations towards gender equality and be more sensitive to
issues related to subtle gender discrimination. This suggests that the perceptions
of gender barriers are influenced significantly by social awareness of gender
issues.
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 169

Role Conflicts between Work and Family

The study further reveals that women feel more stressed than males by two
particular situations. They are “influenced by the heavy family burden” and
“fulfilling both their work and family roles very well.” As an interviewer
described: “As a middle-aged woman, I need to make sacrifices in order to
support my husband and educate my child. The life of middle-aged people is full
of difficulties. You need to take care of both younger and elders. You also worry
about being looked down upon by your colleagues.”
Since the social transitions in China have brought some gender role related
pressures upon women, if women really try to balance competence and caring,
role conflicts may result. The respondents of the study also indicate that time
spent in household duties is not just a problem of time itself; emotional
engagement also influences the ability to work. Mood related conflicts also occur
in situations when there are number of tasks needing to be done, but women
cannot prioritize effectively.

Discussion
Causes of Stress among Chinese Academics

This study espouses the notions that stress is influenced strongly by daily hassles
(Lazarus, 1993). The reported findings show that Chinese academics are
suffering from increasing levels of stress, and stress is playing an important role
in the lives of Chinese academics. Fontana (1989) suggests that stresses are
caused by the various challenges and constraints, which exist in the social and
organizational environment. In the Chinese context, the challenges and
constraints have produced a great many minor daily hassles among Chinese
academics and may be traced back to the social transition of China during the last
two decades. In the social transformation process, there have been strong
interactions among various parts of the social system. Reform in one area is
likely to have had considerable consequences in other areas and subsequently
bring about a series of chain reactions. For example, reform of the public housing
system will have a significant effect on the old personnel system, and in
consequence many universities are attempting to establish the contract system
and the academic job may not be very secure as before. This indicates that the
chain reactions of social reform are very significant.
Triandis, Bontempo, and Villareal (1988) suggest that collectivistic cultures
are generally less stressful than individualistic culture due to greater social
support, stability of social structure, and emphasis on harmony. In the last two
170 Lili Zhang

decades, China was influenced strongly by the ideology of individualism and the
nature of its culture has also changed dramatically. This study therefore supports
the conclusion of a recent study, which defines the nature of stress among
Chinese academics as “social-transformation stress” (He et al., 1998).
As a result of rapid social changes in personnel policies, most of the
respondents in the study have experienced the challenges of severe competition
in universities. Some respondents are concerned about it. For example, a female
associate professor said: “I value the academic profession because, to some
extent, the job is free and relaxing. I also think that a university should be a noble
place, with elegant and free spirit. It is a pity that universities are becoming an
unpleasant place. There have been so many requirements and nearly every day
you are asked to report your working output. In my opinion, if the academic
work is calculated in such a way, then a university may not be ‘university’ any
more.”

Gender Differences in Sources of Stress

Gender differences in stress may involve different focuses because from a

process perspective stress is related to stress stimulus, appraisal, and symptoms.
This study focused on gender differences in sources of stress among Chinese
academics. There have been mixed findings on gender differences in sources of
stress. With regard to stress in the academic profession, or even the border areas
of occupational stress, results are similarly inconsistent. The inconsistency may
be due to different research designs. Most empirical studies do not address
gender issues at the stage of scale development, and then examine gender
differences based on gender blind scales. In contrast, this study proposes that
women face unique job stressors and uses empirical methods to examine them.
Findings support the assumption that there are structural barriers for women
academics and these barriers are the particular causes of stress for them.
Qualitative data shows that Chinese women academics may have the following
characteristics: valuing a balanced life rather than merely professional success,
valuing evaluation from others, having less confidence, and paying attention to
process rather than product. These characteristics, nevertheless, are influenced by
women’s structural disadvantages in the social and organizational environment.
This supports the argument of Eichler (1980), that gender differences are related
to social inequalities.

Particular Career Problems for Women Academics

There are certain types of gender barriers in academic women’s lives, such as
difficulties in getting into male networks, stereotypes, and discrimination. These
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 171

barriers may create stress-provoking circumstances and induce stress experiences.

Aneshensel and Pearlin (1987) argue that the sources of gender related problems
are likely to be tied to women’s position in the organization of the society at
large. The following discussion focuses on the three major barriers for them.
Getting into Academic Networks
The interviews suggest that respondents do not pay enough attention to network
issues. The lack of suitable mentors and the lack of female role models put most
of women at a disadvantage. Some interviewers also report that their mentors
like to assign them administrative work. Although it is probably not deliberate,
they are often seen as playing a supportive role. Difficulty in getting into
networks may be influenced by the career status of women. Networks are built
through exchanges of intellectual resources. Without resources, there will be
little opportunity to build networks.
Stereotypes
Within every culture, gender is one factor that affects expectations of appropriate
behavior for women. According to the Chinese culture, women should not be
very determined and aggressive in their work role. If a woman behaves in that
way, she may be called a “superwoman” which often implicates the negative
evaluation towards her female role. As Eichler (1980) described, these
stereotypes towards women are caused by the double standard in behavior
expectations of males and females, which evaluate, reward and punish identical
behavior of women and men differently.
The study also proves that, society doubts women’s ability, and on the other
hand, even women themselves may doubt their ability. For example, an
interviewer believes that there are gender differences in intelligence and she
stresses that females are not good at critical thinking and problem-solving
ability. Influenced by the strong stereotypes, they may lower their career
expectations.
Discrimination
In Chinese universities, the opportunity structures for males and females are
different and the social prejudice against women is very strong. The respondents
feel that gender discrimination usually occurs in a subtle way in the academic
world. For example, they are often assigned to less important tasks and few can
be promoted to decision-making positions. Participant observations of the study
suggest that if a woman has been proved competent, her gender may have a less
negative impact on her development, especially in terms of social evaluation.
Nevertheless, if a woman is not very competent, her lack of progress will be
attributed to her gender identity. This may not be unique to China, just as Walker
172 Lili Zhang

(1997, p. 371) has described: “When we succeed we do so only as individuals;

when we stumble, we stumble as women and we fail as women.”

Role Conflicts between Work and Family

Career and Family Role Expectations

Although the women being interviewed strive hard to receive recognition, very
few claim to have high career goals. Most of the respondents believe that family
is more important than career, and their view of success is often related to feeling
good about both family and work. They rarely relate their career aspirations to
career success. These results suggest that they are more concerned about feeling
contented than seeking vertical career success.
A possible explanation for this is that there are different role expectations
between males and females and their views of success are also different. Men are
more concerned about their vertical career success, women, however, perceive
that career success alone is not adequate and want a balanced life. Because
university life is organized around a particular notion of success, such as research
output which requires high levels of time commitment (Zhang, 1999), achieving
contentment in both work and family seems to be less clear and unrealistic.
The Nature of Conflict
This study suggests that most women academics prefer to combine both work
and family roles and they are afraid of sacrificing too much for either role. As
described by Perlberg and Keinan (1986, p. 85): “In addition to the many
demanding, inner and external professional expectations, professional women are
still expected, in most cases, to perform effectively and efficiently in the
traditional roles of married women, without adequate help from their spouses.”
Research universities are bringing higher pressures to bear on academics, and
on the other hand, however, given the social expectations of women as “good
mothers and virtuous wives,” women still have to do most of the child-caring and
housework. They may therefore experience greater inter-role conflicts than men
because women’s multiple roles are likely to be salient simultaneously, whereas
men’s multiple roles are more likely to operate sequentially (Hall, 1972). The
problem is especially serious for women in the age cohort of 30 to 40 years
because family role overload often occurs in the process of child rearing.
Moreover, the double demands for Chinese women academics are influenced
not only by their internal need to perform both work and family roles effectively,
but also by the social-cultural context of China. One of the main findings of this
study thus is that role conflicts are particularly caused by the following social-
cultural reasons:
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 173

Firstly, social pressure on children’s education is very strong. Due to the one
child policy and the cultural value on children’s academic achievement many
Chinese parents, especially mothers, are paying great attention to every detail of
children’s development and see children’s education as “the way of the world.”
If a woman cannot educate and train her child well, she will see herself or can be
seen as a failure.
Secondly, traditional ideology is inherent in women’s role orientations. The
interview data show clearly that some of them often choose to sacrifice
themselves to support their husbands.
Thirdly, due to their “ethic of caring” (Gilligan, 1982), women experience
many difficulties in separating with their families to get training opportunities.
For those who have young children, separation is a very painful decision; some
of them may finally choose to give up such opportunities.
Finally, women often take on tasks assigned to them and therefore experience
great difficulty in setting priorities. They even believe that “taking any tasks too
seriously” or “having difficulties in saying no” is the main reason for it.

Implications for Women’s Higher Education

The above discussion suggests that academic profession is becoming very

stressful, and on the other hand, women experience some gender related
problems. It also indicates that both the disadvantaged position of women
academics in research universities and the cultural background of China are
structural causes of gender differences in stress.
Mechanic (1974, p. 33) argues that the ability of person to cope with stress
will depend not only on personal resources, but also on the social support
available or absent in the environment. The following institutional support,
therefore, is very important in helping women academics to cope with stressors.
(1) The findings of this study suggest that the demands placed upon women
academics present the need for university administrators to make special
provision for women in terms of mentoring, support networks, and other
measures for managing stress.
(2) Institutions should help women academics with young children to cope
with their work/family role conflicts.
(3) Institutions are also advised to adopt affirmative action to ensure more
deserving women gain recognition in the higher academic ranks and
administrative positions. Most respondents in this study raise the issue of a lack
of female role models in the higher levels of academic hierarchy. Some
respondents indicate that affirmative action may have a negative impact on
gender equality because successful women may be seen as the beneficiaries of
positive discrimination and some incompetent women may be wrongly selected
174 Lili Zhang

for higher positions. The researcher believes, however, that without affirmative
action, very few have the opportunity to be promoted to influential positions.

Suggestions for Future Research

Future investigations of stress among academics should modify the stressor scale
developed in this study and validate its factor structure. Although stressors in the
item levels may change over time, the structure of the scale may be stable. For
further development of this structure, more empirical studies are required. Future
research can be carried out to validate the stressor scale developed by this study,
to investigate the relationships between stress and related variables, and to
examine gender related problems in the lives of Chinese women academics.

References
Acker, S., & Feuerverger, G. (1996). Doing good and feeling bad: The work of women
university teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3), 401–422.
Aneshensel, C. S., & Pearlin, L. I. (1987). Structural contexts of sex differences in stress. In R.
C. Barnett, L. Biener, & K. B. Grace (Eds.), Gender and stress (pp. 75–95). New York: Free
Press; London: Collier Macmillan Publishers.
Barnett, R. C., & Baruch, G. K. (1985). Women’s involvement in multiple roles and
psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(1), 135–145.
Caplan, P. J. (1993). Lifting a ton of feathers: A woman’s guide for surviving in the academic
world. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Dai, J. H. (1995). Invisible women: Contemporary Chinese cinema and women’s film.
Position, 3(1), 254–277.
Dua, J. K. (1994). Job stressors and their effects on physical health, emotional health, and job
satisfaction in a university. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(1), 59–78.
Eichler, M. (1980). The double standard: A feminist critique of feminist social science. London:
Croom Helm.
Eichler, M. (1988). Nonsexist research methods: A practical guide. Boston: Allen & Unwin.
Eichler, M. (1997). Feminist methodology. Current Sociology, 45(2), 9–36.
Eliou, M. (1991). Women in the academic profession: Evolution or stagnation. In G. P. Kelly,
& S. Slaughter (Eds.), Women’s higher education in comparative perspective (pp. 145–164).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fontana, D. (1989). Managing stress. Leicester & London: British Psychological Society and
Routledge.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gmelch, W. H., Wilke, P. K., & Lovrich, N. P. (1986). Dimensions of stress among university
faculty: Factor-analytic results from a national study. Research in Higher Education, 24(3),
266–286.
Hall, D. T. (1972). A role model of coping with role conflict: The role behavior of college
educated women. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 17, 471–489.
He, X. X., Mao, R., Mu, R. H., Zhou, Y. A., Li, Z. Y., & Shi, J. (1998). 经济转轨时期我国高校
教师的精神压力 [Psychological stress among Chinese academics during the process of
Measurement of Job-Related Stress among Women Academics 175

economic transition]. 高教研究与探索 [Higher Education Research and Exploration], 39,

279–296.
Jick, T. D., & Mitz, L. F. (1985). Sex differences in work stress. Academy of Management
Review, 10(3), 408–420.
Johnsrud, L. K., & Wunsch, M. A. (1994). Barriers to success for women in academic life:
Perceptions of participants in a colleague paring program. Higher Education Research and
Development, 13(1), 1–12.
Keim, J., & Erickson, C. (1998). Women in academia: Work-related stressors. Equity and
Excellence in Education, 31(2), 61–67.
Kelly, G. P., & Slaughter, S. (1991). Women’s higher education in comparative perspective. In
G. P. Kelly, & S. Slaughter (Eds.), Women’s higher education in comparative perspective
(pp. 1–13). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Psychological stress in the work place. Journal of Social Behavior and
Personality, 6, 1–13.
Lazarus, R. S. (1993). Coping theory and research: Past, present, and future. Psychosomatic
Medicine, 55, 234–247.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Pub.
Co.
De Longis, A., Coyne, J. C., Dakof, G., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationships of
daily hassles, uplifts and major life events to health status. Health Psychology, 1, 119–136.
Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work: Developing the learning university. The Society
for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Mechanic, D. (1974). Social structure and personal adaptation: Some neglected dimensions. In
G. V. Coelho, D. A. Hamburg, & J. E. Adams (Eds.), Coping and adaptation (pp. 32–44).
New York: Basic Books.
Nelson, D. L, & Hitt, M. A. (1992). Employed women and stress: Implications for enhancing
women’s mental health in the work place. In J. C. Quick, L. R. Murphy, & J. J. Hurrell, Jr.
(Eds.), Stress and well-being at work: Assessments and interventions for occupational
mental health (pp. 164–177). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed). Newbury Park,
Calif.: Sage Publications.
Pearlin, L. I. (1982). The social contexts of stress. In L. Goldberger, & S. Breznitz (Eds.),
Handbook of stress: Theoretical and clinical aspects (pp. 367–379). New York: Free Press.
Perlberg, A., & Keinan, G. (1986). Sources of stress in academe: The Israeli case. Higher
Education, 15, 73–88.
Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L., & Hurrell, J. J. (1997). Preventive stress management
in organizations. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Rosen, S. (1993). The costs of reform to China’s women. Hong Kong: Asia Society, Hong
Kong Center.
Smith, E. (1992). A comparative study of occupational stress in African American and white
university faculty. Lewiston, NY: E. Mellen Press.
Taylor, P. (1999). Making sense of academic life: Academics, universities and change. The
Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism
and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-in-group relations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323–338.
Tung, R. L., & Koch, J. L. (1980). School administrators: Sources of stress and ways of coping
with it. In C. L. Cooper, & J. Marshall (Eds.), White collar and professional stress (pp. 63–
176 Lili Zhang

87). Chichester: J. Wiley.

Walker, M. (1997). Women in the academy: Ambiguity and complexity in a South African
University. Gender and Education, 9(3), 365–381.
Witt, S. L., & Lovrich, N. P. (1988). Sources of stress among faculty: Gender differences. The
Review of Higher Education, 11(3), 269–284.
Zhang, X. M. (1999). 妇女参与高等教育特殊性的思考 [Reflection on the characteristics of
women’s participation in higher education]. 高等教育研究 [Higher Education Research], 4,
86–89.