Individual related variables and work life balance

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter explains the relationship between various individual related variables and work
life balance, and the difference in work life balance of medical professionals at varied levels
of individual variables. In the present study, responses from respondents were collected,
coded and tabulated in SPSS 17.0. For analyzing the data both descriptive and inferential
statistical tools were employed. Descriptive statistics – mean, standard deviation, skewness,
kurtosis were calculated using SPSS to analyze the nature of the distribution of scores for
work life balance and its dimensions (work interference with personal life, personal life
interference with work and work/personal life enhancement) and for individual related
variable (work centrality).

The Pearson product moment correlation was applied to study the correlation between
various individual related variables (work centrality, age, gender and marital status) and work
life balance and its dimensions. One way ANOVA tests were used to examine the differences
among low, average and high groups (categorized on the basis of M±0.5 S. D.) of medical
professionals on the individual variable viz., work centrality with respect to work life balance
and its dimensions. Wherever, F values were found to be significant, post hoc tests were used
to determine the significant differences between the means of various groups taken in pairs. t-
test was used to test the difference in work life balance and its dimensions of medical
professionals with respect to age, gender and marital status.

6.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Table 6.1 gives the descriptive statistics – mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis
for individual related variable work centrality.

Table 6.1: Descriptive statistics for individual related variables (Work centrality (WCEN)) for doctors and nurses

Statistics WCEN
Doctors Nurses
N 141 216
Mean 36.57 38.18
Std. Deviation 6.79 8.84 Work Centrality-
Skewness .14 -.71 In case of doctors,
Std. Error of Skewness .20 .16 the scores on work
Skewness ratio .73 -4.3 centrality (WCEN)
Kurtosis -.05 .10 (see Table 6.1)
Std. Error of Kurtosis .40 .33
ranged between 19
Kurtosis ratio -.14 .32
Range 39 45
Minimum 19 13
Maximum 58 58
and 58. The mean was found to be 36.57 and standard deviation was reported 6.79. The
distribution of the scores on work centrality was found to be normal as the skewness ratio
of .73 was insignificant at 1% level of significance. The kurtosis ratio of -.14 was also found
to be insignificant at 1% significance level. In case of nurses, the scores on work centrality
(WCEN) (see Table 6.1) ranged between 13 and 58. The mean score was found to be 38.18
and standard deviation was reported as 8.84. The skewness ratio of -4.3 was found to be
significant at the 1 % level of significance level. Thus the distribution was found to be
negatively skewed. The kurtosis ratio of .32 was found to be within limits at 1% significance
level.

6.3 Classification of Doctors and Nurses on the basis of individual related variable
scores
The doctors and nurses were classified on the basis of their work centrality into three groups,
based on the scores obtained in the questionnaire as those with:

(a) Low work centrality:

Score < (Mean – 0.5 S.D.)
(b) Average work centrality:
Scores between (Mean – 0.5 S.D.) and (Mean + 0.5 S.D.)
(c) High work centrality:
Score > Mean + 0.5 S.D.)

Table 6.2: classification of doctors and nurses on the basis of their work centrality
Individual Classification
related Low Average High
variable N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean
Work Doctors 32 22.69 27.56 68 48.22 35.89 41 29.07 44.73
centrality Nurses 48 22.22 24.43 108 50.00 39.23 60 27.77 47.28

The above table reveals that on work centrality, majority of the doctors, are on average 48.22%,
29.07% are on high and 22.69% are on low work centrality. 50.00% of the nurses are on average,
27.77% are on high and 22.22% are on low work centrality. On the whole it shows that doctors and
nurses are more towards average work centrality.
6.4 WORK CENTRALITY AND WORK LIFE BALANCE

The correlation between work centrality and work life balance and its dimensions; and
differences in work life balance (and its dimensions) among medical professionals at varied
levels of work centrality are discussed below:

6.4.1 Correlation between work centrality and work life balance and its dimensions

Hypothesis HIa(i) : “There is significant correlation between work centrality and work life
balance (and its dimensions) of medical professionals in government hospitals of H.P.”

To test the hypothesis Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated. Table 6.3 shows the
correlation coefficient between work centrality and work life balance of doctors and nurses.

Table 6.3: Correlation coefficients between work centrality and work life balance of doctors and nurses
Work Life Balance Correlations
Doctors Nurses
Pearson Spearman’s rho
WIPL .32** .27 **
.28**
PLIW .06 .13 .09
WPLE .36** .33** .30**
WLBT .35** .33** .31**
**
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

In case of doctors, work centrality was found to be significantly positively correlated to work
interference with personal life (WIPL, r=.32**; p<.01), work personal life enhancement
(WPLE, r=.36**; p<.01), and overall work life balance (WLBT, r=.35**; p<.01). No
significant relationship was found between work centrality and PLIW (r=.06; p=n.s.). Hence,
in the case of doctors, the research hypothesis HIa(i) is accepted for the dimensions of work
interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement, and for overall work life
balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of personal life interference with work.
In case of nurses, both Pearson’s and Speraman’s found work centrality to be significant and
positively correlated to work interference with personal life (WIPL, r=.27**; p<.01), work
personal life enhancement (WPLE, r=.33**; p<.01), and overall work life balance (WLBT,
r=.33**; p<.01). No significant relationship was found between work centrality and PLIW
(r=.13; p=n.s.). Hence, in the case of nurses, the research hypothesis H Ia(i) is accepted for the
dimensions of work interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement, and for
overall work life balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of personal life
interference with work.
The results suggested that higher the wok centrality, the lower is the work interference with
personal life, higher is the work personal life enhancement, and higher is the overall work life
balance. The results are supported by the findings of a number of studies. Hyman et al.
(2003) found that organisational pressures, combined with lack of work centrality, result in
work intruding into non-work areas of employee lives. Walia (2011) also reported positive
correlation between work centrality and work life balance. The study reported that
individuals who have high work centrality, i.e., who give high priority to their work in life,
keep their work above other pursuits, derive satisfaction in life from work and have personal
life goals work oriented, tend to show less interference of work with personal life, are able to
derive energy from work for personal life and exhibit high level of work life balance. Carr et
al. (2008) indicated that individuals who are more work-centered are not negatively
influenced by work interference with family conflict. Burnett et al. (n.d.) found that that
those who rate work as being central to life may allow it to eclipse their personal
relationships, or in other words the findings actually suggest that those who are more fulfilled
in the work are also more fulfilled at home.

6.4.2 Work life balance of medical professionals at varied levels of work centrality
Hypothesis HIa(ii): “There is a significant difference in work life balance (and its dimensions)
among medical professionals at varied levels of work centrality (i.e., low, average and high
work centrality).”

a) Work life balance of doctors at varied levels of work centrality

Table 6.4: Test of homogeneity of variances – Work centrality (Doctors)

Work Life Levene df1 df2 Sig.
Balance statistic
WIPL 7.749 2 138 .001
PLIW 4.115 2 138 .018
WPLE 2.301 2 138 .104
WLBT 1.575 2 138 .211

Table 6.4 shows the results of Levene’s Test of Homogeneity of Variances. The sig. value is
greater than 0.05 for the dimension WPLE and overall WLBT, meeting the assumption of
homogeneity of variance. However the sig. value is less than 0.05 for the dimensions WIPL,
and PLIW. This suggests that the homogeneity of variance is not met for these dimensions,
therefore two robust tests (Welch and Brown-Forsythe) were conducted that should be
accurate when the homogeneity of variance does not hold true.

Table 6.5: Robust tests of equality of means – Doctors

Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
WIPL Welch 6.302 2 64.172 .003
Brown-Forsythe 6.391 2 91.290 .003
PLIW Welch .016 2 73.248 .984
Brown-Forsythe .014 2 96.222 .986

From the output of table 6.5, F value for WIPL was found to be significant (F=6.302,
p<0.05). The result implies that there is a significant difference in work interference with
personal life among doctors with low, average and high work centrality. The F value for
PLIW was found to be insignificant (F=.016, p>0.05), implying no significant difference in
personal life interference with work among doctors at varied levels of work centrality.
Table 6.6: ANOVA table for work life balance of doctors at varied levels of work centrality
Work Sources of variance Sum of squares Df Mean square F Sig.
life
balance
WPLE Between Groups 465.753 2 232.877 7.27 .001
Within Groups 4419.523 138 32.026
Total 4885.277 140
WLBT Between Groups 3108.363 2 1554.181 6.67 .002
Within Groups 32137.297 138 232.879
Total 35245.660 140

Table 6.6 shows the results of ANOVA analysis. F values were found to be significant on the
dimension WPLE (F=7.27, p<0.05) and WLBT (F=6.67, p<0.05). The results suggested
significant differences in work personal life enhancement and overall work life balance of
doctors at low, average and high levels of work centrality.

Since the groups were found to be significantly different on the dimensions WIPL, WPLE
and on WLBT in one-way ANOVA, the post hoc test was employed to identify the pair of
groups that contributed to significant differences. The results of the comparison are
summarised in Table 6.7.

Table 6.7: Games – Howell post hoc analysis for comparison of work life balance of doctors at varied levels of
work centrality
DV (I) (J) Mean Difference Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
wceng wceng (I-J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
WIPL Low Average -5.39706* 1.77275 .010 -9.6832 -1.1110
High -7.85976 *
2.39046 .004 -13.5821 -2.1374
Average Low 5.39706 *
1.77275 .010 1.1110 9.6832
High -2.46270 1.97824 .432 -7.2236 2.2982
High Low 7.85976 *
2.39046 .004 2.1374 13.5821
Average 2.46270 1.97824 .432 -2.2982 7.2236
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
** DV- Dependent variable

Table 6.7 shows the results of the Games-Howell post hoc analysis. The details presented in
the table revealed that the p-value for WIPL between low and average and low and high
groups was less than 0.05, implying that the mean scores between low and average and low
and high groups differed significantly at the 5 % level of significance. However, the p-value
for average and high groups was found to be greater than 0.05, implying that there were no
significant differences among these groups. The results imply that work interference with
personal life differed significantly among doctors with low and average and low and high
work centrality, however, does not differ significantly between doctors with average and high
work centrality. Work interference with personal life was found to be lowest among doctors
with high work centrality, followed by doctors with the average work centrality and doctors
with low work centrality.
Table 6.8: Tukey HSD analysis for comparison of work life balance of doctors at varied levels of work
centrality

DV (I) wceng (J) wceng Mean Difference Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
(I-J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
WPLE Low Average -4.10662 *
1.21316 .003 -6.9809 -1.2323
High -4.63567* 1.33488 .002 -7.7984 -1.4730
Average Low 4.10662 *
1.21316 .003 1.2323 6.9809
High -.52905 1.11896 .884 -3.1802 2.1221
High Low 4.63567 *
1.33488 .002 1.4730 7.7984
Average .52905 1.11896 .884 -2.1221 3.1802
WLBT Low Average -9.57169 *
3.27142 .011 -17.3226 -1.8208
High -12.70046 *
3.59964 .002 -21.2290 -4.1719
Average Low 9.57169 *
3.27142 .011 1.8208 17.3226
High -3.12877 3.01739 .555 -10.2778 4.0203
High Low 12.70046 *
3.59964 .002 4.1719 21.2290
Average 3.12877 3.01739 .555 -4.0203 10.2778
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
** DV- Dependent variable

Table 6.8 shows the results of Tukey HSD post hoc analysis. On the dimension WPLE, the p-
value between low and average and low and high groups was less than 0.05, implying that
the mean scores between low and average and low and high groups differed significantly at
the 5 % level of significance. However, the p-value for average and high groups was found to
be greater than 0.05, implying that there were no significant differences among these groups.
The results imply that work personal life enhancement differed significantly among doctors
with low and average and low and high work centrality, however, does not differ significantly
between doctors with average and high work centrality. Work personal life enhancement was
found to be highest among doctors with high work centrality, followed by doctors with the
average work centrality and doctors with low work centrality.

In addition the details presented in the table revealed that overall work life balance differed
significantly among doctors low and average and low and high work centrality (p<.05),
however, does not differ significantly among doctors with average and high work centrality
(p>.05). Overall work life balance was found to be highest among doctors with high work
centrality, followed by doctors with the average work centrality and doctors with low work
centrality.

Hence, in the case of doctors, the research hypothesis H Ia(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of
work interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement and for overall work
life balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of personal life interference with work.
 b) Work life balance of nurses at varied levels of work centrality

Table 6.9: Test of homogeneity of variances – Work centrality (Nurses)

Work life balance Levene statistic Df1 Df2 Sig.
WIPL 1.819 2 213 .165
PLIW .088 2 213 .916
WPLE .247 2 213 .782
WLBT 1.404 2 213 .248
Table 6.9 shows the results of Levene’s Test of Homogeneity of Variances. The sig. value is
greater than 0.05 for the all the dimensions and overall work life balance, meeting the
assumption of homogeneity of variance.

Table 6.10: ANOVA table for work life balance of nurses at varied levels of work centrality
Work life Sources of variance Sum of squares Df Mean F Sig.
balance square
WIPL Between groups 764.352 2 382.176 6.87 .001
Within groups 11846.463 213 55.617
Total 12610.815 215
PLIW Between groups 36.430 2 18.215 .715 .490
Within groups 5425.329 213 25.471
Total 5461.759 215
WPLE Between groups 631.264 2 315.632 8.49 .000
Within groups 7919.064 213 37.179
Total 8550.329 215
WLBT Between groups 3342.275 2 1671.138 8.57 .000
Within groups 41495.053 213 194.812
Total 44837.329 215

As noted in Table 6.10, F values were significant on the dimensions WIPL (F=6.87, p<0.05),
WPLE (F=8.49, p<0.05) and on WLBT (F=8.57, p<0.05). The results suggested significant
differences in work interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement and
overall work life balance between nurses at low, average and high levels of work centrality.
However, the F value was found to be insignificant for the dimension PLIW (F=.715, p>0.05)
which suggested that there is no significant difference in personal life interference with work
between nurses at varied levels of work centrality.
Since the groups were found to be significantly different on the dimensions WIPL, WPLE
and on WLBT in one-way ANOVA, the post hoc test was employed to identify the pair of
groups that contributed to significant differences. The results of the comparison are
summarized in Table 6.11.

Table 6.11: Tukey HSD analysis for comparison of work life balance of nurses at varied levels of work
centrality

DV (I) (J) Mean Difference Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
wceng wceng (I-J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
Wipl Low Average -4.40972 *
1.29370 .002 -7.4631 -1.3563
High -4.70417 *
1.44418 .004 -8.1127 -1.2956
Average Low 4.40972 *
1.29370 .002 1.3563 7.4631
High -.29444 1.20080 .967 -3.1286 2.5397
High Low 4.70417 *
1.44418 .004 1.2956 8.1127
Average .29444 1.20080 .967 -2.5397 3.1286
Wple Low Average -3.09954* 1.05774 .010 -5.5960 -.6031
High -4.82917 *
1.18076 .000 -7.6160 -2.0423
Average Low 3.09954 *
1.05774 .010 .6031 5.5960
High -1.72963 .98178 .185 -4.0468 .5876
High Low 4.82917 *
1.18076 .000 2.0423 7.6160
Average 1.72963 .98178 .185 -.5876 4.0468
Wlbt Low Average -8.28009 *
2.42124 .002 -13.9947 -2.5654
High -10.68750 *
2.70286 .000 -17.0668 -4.3082
Average Low 8.28009* 2.42124 .002 2.5654 13.9947
High -2.40741 2.24737 .533 -7.7117 2.8969
High Low 10.68750 *
2.70286 .000 4.3082 17.0668
Average 2.40741 2.24737 .533 -2.8969 7.7117
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
** DV- Dependent variable

Table 6.11 shows the results of Tukey HSD post hoc analysis. On the dimensions WIPL and
WPLE, the p-value between low and average and low and high groups was less than 0.05,
implying that the mean scores between low and average and low and high groups differed
significantly at the 5 % level of significance. However, the p-value for average and high
groups was found to be greater than 0.05, implying that there were no significant differences
among these groups. The results imply that work interference with personal life and work
personal life enhancement differed significantly among nurses with low and average and low
and high work centrality, however does not differ significantly between nurses with average
and high work centrality. Work interference with personal life was found to be lower among
nurses with high work centrality, followed by nurses with the average work centrality and
nurses with low work centrality. Work personal life enhancement was found to be highest
among nurses with high work centrality, followed by nurses with the average work centrality
and nurses with low work centrality.
Also from the details of the table it is clear that for WLBT, the p-value between low and
average and low and high groups was less than 0.05, implying that the mean scores between
low and average and low and high groups differed significantly at the 5 % level of
significance. However, the p-value for average and high groups was found to be greater than
0.05, implying that there were no significant differences among these groups. The results
imply that the overall work life balance differed significantly among nurses with low and
average and low and high work centrality, however, does not differ significantly between
nurses with average and high work centrality. Overall work life balance was found to be
highest among nurses with high work centrality, followed by nurses with the average work
centrality and nurses with low work centrality.

Hence, in the case of nurses, the research hypothesis H Ia(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of
work interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement and for overall work
life balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of personal life interference with work.

6.5 AGE AND WORK LIFE BALANCE

The correlation between age and work life balance and its dimensions; and differences in
work life balance (and its dimensions) among medical professionals at varied levels of age
are discussed below:

6.5.1 Correlation between age and work life balance and its dimensions

Hypothesis HIb(i) : “There is significant correlation between age and work life balance (and
its dimensions) of medical professionals in government hospitals on H.P.”

To test the hypothesis Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated. Table 6.12 shows the
results of Pearson correlation between age and work life balance and its dimensions.

Table 6.12: Correlation coefficient between age and work life balance and its dimensions for doctors and nurses

Work Life Balance Correlation

Doctors Nurses
WIPL .23** -.03
PLIW -.01 -.00
WPLE .26** -.12
WLBT .23** -.07
**
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
 In case of doctors, age was found to be significantly positively correlated to work
interference with personal life (WIPL, r=.23**, p<.01), work personal life enrichment
(WPLE, r=.26**, p<.01), and overall work life balance (WLBT, r=.23**, p<.01). Hence, in
the case of doctors, the research hypothesis HIb(i) is accepted for the dimensions of work
interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement, and for overall work life
balance for. However, it is rejected for the dimension of personal life interference with work.
In case of nurses, no correlations were found between age and work interference with
personal life (WIPL, r=-.03, p= n.s.), personal life interference with work (PLIW, r=-.00; p=
n.s.), work personal life enhancement (WPLE, r= -1.2, p=n.s.), and overall work life balance
(WLBT, r=-.07, p=ns.s ). Hence, in the case of nurses, the research hypothesis HIb(i) is
rejected for the dimensions of work interference with personal life, personal life interference
with work, work personal life enhancement and for overall work life balance.

6.5.2 Difference in work life balance (and its dimensions) among medical professionals
at varied levels of age

Hypothesis HIb(ii) : “There is a significant difference in work life balance (and its dimensions)
of medical professionals at varied levels of age.”

Independent sample t-test was employed to find whether there is any significant difference in
work life balance and its dimensions of medical professionals at varied levels of age. The
results of the test are discussed.

a) Difference in work life balance of doctors at varied levels of age

Table 6.13: t-test descriptive statistics for doctors (in relation to age)
Work life Age N Mean Standard
balance Deviation
WIPL Below 30 84 22.50 8.27
31 and above 57 27.78 9.75
PLIW Below 30 84 21.98 5.34
31 and above 57 21.85 5.32
WPLE Below 30 84 15.66 5.75
31 and above 57 18.38 5.79
WLBT Below 30 84 60.15 14.0
31 and above 57 68.03 17.3

As per details given in Table 6.13, the total sample of doctors belongs to two groups when
classified on the basis of their age. The groups are ‘below 30’ and ’31 and above’. The means
scores of work life balance and its dimensions of two groups were compared using t-test. The
result of this comparison is given in the table 6.14.

Table 6.14: Test for Equality of Means (Work Life Balance in relation to age of doctors)

Work Life Balance Levene’s t-test for Equality of Means

Test for
 Equality of
Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. T Df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper
tailed) differenc Difference
e
WIPL Equal .456 .501 -3.462 139 .001 -5.289 1.528 -8.310 -2.268
variances
assumed
Equal -3.354 106.8 .001 -5.289 1.576 -8.415 -2.163
variances
not
assumed
PLIW Equal .010 .920 .140 139 .889 .1284 .9157 -1.682 1.938
variances
assumed
Equal .140 120.7 .889 .1284 .9149 -1.683 1.939
variances
not
assumed
WPLE Equal .044 .834 -2.744 139 .007 -2.719 .9908 -4.678 -.7602
variances
assumed
Equal -2.744 119.8 .007 -2.719 .9921 -4.683 -.7549
variances
not
assumed
WLBT Equal 4.08 .045 -2.974 139 .003 -7.880 2.649 -13.11 -2.641
variances
assumed
Equal -2.974 103.2 .005 -7.880 2.757 -13.34 -2.441
variances
not
assumed

Table 6.14 shows details of work life balance in relation to age. The p-value or the
significance value corresponding to the F test of equal variances assumed is greater than 0.05
for WIPL (.501), PLIW (.920), and WPLE (.834). This suggested that independent two
sample t-test with equal variances assumed should be used to compare the mean scores of
work life balance and its dimensions at varied levels of doctors’ age. The p-value of t-test
with equal variances assumed is less than 0.05 for WIPL (.001) and WPLE (.007) which
means there are significant differences in work interference with personal life and work
personal life enhancement between doctors in age group ‘below 30’ and age group ‘31 and
above’. The p-value for the dimension PLIW (.889) was found to be greater than 0.05,
implying no significant difference in personal life interference with work among doctors at
varied levels of age.
Work interference with personal life was found to be higher among doctors below 30 years of
age (WIPL, M=22.50, see Table 6.13). The findings are in line with the findings of the
studies conducted by Adam (2008), Fub et al. (2008) and Welford (2008). Adam (2008)
found younger age as a predictor of work family conflict. Fub et al. (2008) also reported
younger age as predictors of work interference with family. Welford (2008) found that
employees in the age group 40 to 49 are happier with their work life balance. Also from the
details of table 6.13 work personal life enhancement (WPLE, M=18.38) was found to be
higher among doctors in the age group ‘31 and above’.

In addition, the sig. value for WLBT corresponding to the F-test of equal variances assumed
is less than 0.05 for WLBT. This suggested that independent two sample t-test with equal
variances not assumed should be used to compare the mean scores. The p-value of t-test for
WLBT (. 005) with unequal variances is less than 0.05, implying a significant difference in
the overall work life balance of doctors at varied levels of age. Overall work life balance was
found to be higher among doctors in the age group ‘31 and above’ (WLBT, M=68.03, see
Table 6.13) than doctors in the age group ‘below 30’ (WLBT, M=60.15, see Table 6.13).

The results imply that the doctors who are under 30 years of age face more difficulty in
balancing the demands of work and other domains of life. This could be due to the long
working hours, frequent night duties and calls, examinations, no post duty offs, low
discretion or control over how to carry out the job, workload, etc. In addition, doctors in this
age group may get married and start their family life which makes it even more difficult for
them to balance the demands of work and non-work domains. Hence, in the case of doctors,
the research hypothesis HIb(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of work interference with
personal life, work personal life enhancement and for overall work life balance. However, it
is rejected for the dimension of personal life interference with work.

b) Difference in work life balance of nurses at varied levels of age

Table 6.15 Descriptive statistics for nurses (in relation to age)

Work life Age N Mean Standard
balance Deviation
WIPL Below 30 73 30.27 7.34
31-45 67 27.52 7.82
46 ad above 76 29.28 7.67
PLIW Below 30 73 19.67 4.71
31-45 67 19.31 4.91
46 and Above 76 19.78 5.48
WPLE Below 30 73 21.01 5.56
31-45 67 18.23 5.42
46 and Above 76 18.90 7.37
WLBT Below 30 73 70.95 13.54
31-45 67 65.07 12.96
46 and Above 76 67.98 16.04
As per details given tin Table 6.15, the total sample of nurses belongs to three groups when
classified on the basis of their age. The groups are ‘below 30’, ’31-45’ and ‘46 and above’.
The means scores of work life balance and its dimensions of three groups were compared
using one-way ANOVA.

Table 6.16: Test of homogeneity of variances - Age (Nurses)

Work life Levene Df1 Df2 Sig.
balance statistic
WIPL .456 2 213 .635
PLIW 1.664 2 213 .192
WPLE 13.831 2 213 .000
WLBT 3.513 2 213 .032

One of the assumptions of the one-way ANOVA is that variances of the groups should be
similar. The table 6.16 shows the results of Levene’s test of homogeneity of variances, which
tests for similar values. The significance value is greater than 0.05 for WIPL and PLIW and
therefore the assumption of homogeneity of variance is supported. However, for the
dimension WPLE the sig. value is lower than 0.05. This suggests that the homogeneity of
variance is not met and therefore two robust tests (Welch and Brown-Forsythe) were
conducted that should be accurate when the homogeneity of variance does not hold true.

Table 6.17: Robust tests of equality of means (Age)

Statistic Df1 Df2 Sig.
WPLE Welch 4.733 2 141.118 .010
Brown-Forsythe 3.929 2 201.861 .021
WLBT Welch 3.431 2 141.739 .035
Brown-Forsythe 2.994 2 209.568 .052

Table 6.17 shows the details of robust tests of equality of means. From the results it can be
inferred that there is a significant difference in work personal life enhancement (WPLE,
F=4.73, p<0.05) and overall work life balance (WLBT, F=3.43, p<0.05) of nurses at different
levels of age.

Table 6.18: AOVA table for work life balance of nurses at varied levels of age
Work life Sources of variance Sum of squares Df Mean F Sig.
balance square
WIPL Between groups 269.946 2 134.973 2.33 .100
Within groups 12340.869 213 57.938
Total 12610.815 215
PLIW Between groups 8.600 2 4.300 .168 .845
Within groups 5453.159 213 25.602
Total 5461.759 215

Table 6.18 shows the output of ANOVA analysis. F values were found to be insignificant for
the dimensions WIPL (F=2.33, p>0.05) and PLIW (F=.168, p>0.05). The results imply that
 there is no significant difference in work interference with personal life and personal life
interference with work among nurses at different levels of age.

Since the groups were found to be significantly different on the dimension WPLE and on
WLBT in one-way ANOVA, the post hoc test was employed to identify the pair of groups
that contributed to significant differences. The results of the comparison are summarized in
Table 6.19

Table 6.19: Games-Howell post hoc test for comparison of work life balance of nurses at varied levels of age
DV (I) Ageg (J) Ageg Mean Difference Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
(I-J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
WPLE Below 30 31-45 2.77489 *
.92914 .009 .5734 4.9764
46 and above 2.10580 1.06768 .123 -.4236 4.6352
31-45 Below 30 -2.77489 *
.92914 .009 -4.9764 -.5734
46 and above -.66909 1.07474 .808 -3.2157 1.8775
46 and above Below 30 -2.10580 1.06768 .123 -4.6352 .4236
31-45 .66909 1.07474 .808 -1.8775 3.2157
WLBT Below 30 31-45 5.88428 *
2.24112 .026 .5744 11.1942
46 and above 2.97206 2.42988 .441 -2.7821 8.7262
31-45 Below 30 -5.88428 *
2.24112 .026 -11.1942 -.5744
46 and above -2.91222 2.42835 .456 -8.6648 2.8403
46 and above Below 30 -2.97206 2.42988 .441 -8.7262 2.7821
31-45 2.91222 2.42835 .456 -2.8403 8.6648

Table 6.19 shows the results of the Games-Howell post hoc analysis. Work personal life
enhancement differed significantly among age group ‘below 30’ and age group ‘31-45’
(p>0.05). However, no significant difference in WPLE was found between age group ‘below
30’ and ‘46 and above’ (p>0.05). Also WPLE did not differ significantly among age groups
‘31-45’ and ‘46 and above’ (p>0.05). Work personal life enhancement was found to be
highest among nurses in the age group ‘below 30’followed by age group ’46 and above’ and
‘31-45’.

In addition, overall work life balance differed significantly between age groups ‘below 30’
and ‘31-45’ (p<0.05). However, no significant difference in WLBT was observed between
age group ‘below 30’ and age group ‘46 and above’ (p>0.05) and age group ‘31-45’ and age
group ‘46 and above’ (p>0.05). Overall work life balance was found to be highest among
nurses in the age group ‘below 30’followed by age group ’46 and above’ and ‘31-45’.

Hence, in the case of nurses, the research hypothesis H Ib(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of
work personal life enhancement, and for overall work life balance for. However, it is rejected
for the dimensions of work interference with personal life and personal life interference with
work.
6.6 GENDER AND WORK LIFE BALANCE

The correlation between gender and work life balance and its dimensions; and differences in
work life balance (and its dimensions) among male and female doctors are discussed below:

6.6.1 Correlations between gender and work life balance and its dimensions

Hypothesis HIc(i): “There is significant correlation between gender and work life balance
(and its dimensions) of medical professionals in government hospitals of H.P.”

Table 6.20: Correlation coefficient between gender and work life balance and its dimensions for doctors
Work Life Balance Correlation
WIPL .13
PLIW .14
WPLE .16
WLBT .18*
*
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

Table 6.20 shows that there is significant correlation between gender and overall work life
balance (WLBT, r=.18) at the 5% level of significance. However, correlations were found to
be insignificant between gender and work interference with personal life (WIPL, r=.13, p =
n.s.), personal life interference with work (PLIW, r=.14, p = n.s.), and work personal life
enhancement (WPLE, r=.16, p = n.s.). Hence, in the case of doctors, the research hypothesis
HIc(i) is accepted for overall work life balance. However, it is rejected for the dimensions work
interference with personal life, personal life interference with work and work personal life
enhancement.

6.6.2 Difference in work life balance (and its dimensions) among male and female
medical professionals

Hypothesis HIc(ii): “There is a significant difference in work life balance (and its dimensions)
of male and female medical professionals.”

Independent sample t-test was employed to find whether there is any significant difference in
work life balance and its dimensions of male and female medical professionals. The results of
the test are discussed.

Table 6.21: t-test descriptive statistics in relation to gender

Group Statistics
Work Life Balance Gender N Mean Standard Deviation
WIPL Male 90 23.70 1.01
Female 51 26.29 1.17
PLIW Male 90 21.35 .590
Female 51 22.96 .650
 WPLE Male 90 16.05 .671
Female 51 18.01 .672
WLBT Male 90 61.11 1.75
Female 51 67.27 1.92

As per details given in Table 6.21, the total sample of doctors belongs to two groups when
classified on the basis of their gender. The groups are ‘male’ and ’female’. The means scores
of work life balance and its dimensions of two groups were compared using t-test. The result
of this comparison is given in table 6.22.
Table 6.22: Test for Equality of Means (Work Life Balance in relation to gender)

Work Levene’s t-test for Equality of Means

Life Test for
Balance Equality of
Variances
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. T Df Sig. Mean Std. Lower Upper
(2-tailed) difference Error
difference
WIPL Equal 1.701 .194 -1.61 139 .110 -2.594 1.611 -5.780 .592
variances
assumed
Equal -1.66 115.5 .098 -2.594 1.553 -5.67 .483
variances
not assumed
PLIW Equal 3.608 .060 -1.73 139 .085 -1.605 .925 -3.434 .224
variances
assumed
Equal -1.82 120.4 .070 -1.605 .878 -3.345 .134
variances
not assumed
WPLE Equal 3.965 .048 -1.91 139 .058 -1.964 1.025 -3.991 .063
variances
assumed
Equal -2.06 127.9 .041 -1.964 .949 -3.843 -.084
variances
not assumed
WLBT Equal 3.080 .081 -2.24 139 .026 -6.163 2.741 -11.58 -.742
variances
assumed
Equal -2.37 120.7 .019 -6.163 2.601 -11.31 -1.01
variances
not assumed

Table 6.22 shows an analysis of work life balance in relation to gender. The p-value or the
significance value corresponding to the F-test of equal variances assumed is greater than .05
for WIPL (.194), PLIW (.060), WPLE (.05) and WLBT (.081). This suggested that the
independent two sample T-test with equal variances should be used to compare the mean
scores. The p-value of t-test with equal variance was WIPL (.110), PLIW (.085), WPLE
(.058) and WLBT (.026). The p-value for WIPL, PLIW and WPLE was found to be greater
than .05 which suggested that there is no significant difference in WIPL, PLIW and WPLE of
male and female doctors. However, the p-value for overall work life balance was found to be
less than 0.05 which means that there is a significant difference in the overall work life
balance of male and female doctors at the 5 % level of significance. Overall work life balance
was found to be higher in case of female (M=67.27) than male (M=61.11) doctors. The
present study support the observation made by Doughty (2013) who reported that most of the
women are happy with the way their professional and personal lives are balanced, but men,
however, are less content with the conflicting demands of their job and home. However, the
finding of the present study goes contrary to the observations made by Ngo (1999), Higgins
et al. (1994) and Williams et al. (1994). Ngo (1999) reported the negative effects of work
interference with family are stronger for women than for men. Higgins et al. (1994)
concluded that women experiences more work interference with family and family
interference with work than men. Williams et al. (1994) noted that that women displayed
stronger spillovers from work to family and family to work than men. The results inferred
that women are better able to balance the demands of work and life. Women may be able to
separate the worries about work and family more effectively than men. In addition,
organizational support, managerial support and support from family could act as significant
buffering factors in preventing the negative impact of work-family conflict on women.

Doughty, S. (2013). Sixty per cent of women are happy with their work-life balance: Men are
more likely to feel the strain of juggling job and family. Mail Online, 24 th September.

Hence, in the case of doctors, the research hypothesis HIc(ii) is accepted for overall work life
balance. However, it is rejected for the dimensions of work interference with personal life,
personal life interference with work, and work personal life enhancement.

6.7 MARITAL STATUS AND WORK LIFE BALANCE

The correlations between marital status and work life balance and its dimensions; and work
life balance of single/divorced/widowed and married medical professionals are discussed
below:

6.7.1 Correlations between marital status and work life balance and its dimensions

Hypothesis HId(i):

“There is significant correlation between marital status and work life balance (and its
dimensions) of medical professionals in government hospitals of H.P.”
To test the hypothesis Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated. Table 6.23 shows the
results of Pearson correlation between marital status and work life balance and its
dimensions.

Table 6.23: Correlation coefficient between marital status and work life balance and its dimensions for doctors
and nurses
Work Life Balance Correlation
Doctors Nurses
WIPL .17* -.07
PLIW -.04 -.14*
WPLE .18* -.02
WLBT .15 -.10
*
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

In case of doctors, marital status was found to be significantly positively correlated to work
interference with personal life (WIPL, r=.17*; p=.05) and work personal life enhancement
(WPLE, r=.18*; p=.05). No significant correlations were found between marital status and
personal life interference with work (PLIW, r=-.04; p= n.s.) and overall work life balance
(WLBT, r=.15; p= n.s.). Hence, in the case of doctors, the research hypothesis H Id(i) is
accepted for the dimensions of work interference with personal life and work personal life
enhancement. However, it is rejected for the dimension personal life interference with work
and overall work life balance.

In case of nurses, marital status was found to be negatively correlated with personal life
interference with work (PLIW, r=-.14 *, p<0.05). No significant correlations were found
between marital status work interference with personal life (WIPL, r=-.07, p=n.s.), work
personal life enhancement (WPLE, r=-.02, p=n.s.), and overall work life balance (WLBT,
r=-.10, p=n.s.). Hence, in the case of nurses, the research hypothesis H Id(i) is accepted for the
dimension of personal life interference with work and is rejected dimensions of work
interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement and for overall work life
balance.

6.7.2 Difference in work life balance (and its dimensions) among single/ widowed/
divorced and married medical professionals

Hypothesis HId(ii):

“There is a significant difference in work life balance (and its dimensions) of single/
widowed/ divorced and married medical professionals."

Independent sample t-test was employed to find whether there is any significant difference in
work life balance and its dimensions of single and married medical professionals. The results
of the test are discussed.

a) Difference in work life balance of single/ widowed/ divorced and married doctors
 Table 6.24: t test descriptive statistics for doctors ( in relation to marital status)

Work life Marital Status N Mean Standard

balance Deviation
WIPL Single/Widowed/Divorced 79 23.22 9.08
Married 62 26.43 9.21
PLIW Single/Widowed/Divorced 79 22.12 5.33
Married 62 21.69 5.33
WPLE Single/Widowed/Divorced 79 15.79 5.85
Married 62 18.00 5.79
WLBT Single/Widowed/Divorced 79 61.15 15.21
Married 62 66.12 16.36

As per details given in Table 6.24, the total sample of doctors belongs to two groups when
classified on the basis of their marital status. The groups are ‘Single/Widowed/Divorced’ and
‘Married’. The means scores of work life balance and its dimensions of two groups were
compared using t-test. The result of this comparison is given in table 6.25.

Table 6.25: Test for Equality of Means (Work Life Balance in relation to marital status of doctors)

Work Levene’s Test t-test for Equality of Means

life for Equality of
balance Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. T Df Sig. Mean Std. Error Lower Upper
(2- difefrence difference
tailed)
WIPL Equal .127 .722 -2.068 139 .040 -3.207 1.550 -6.273 -.1413
variances
assumed
Equal -2.065 130.3 .041 -3.207 1.550 -6.280 -.1344
variances
not
assumed
PLIW Equal .018 .893 .479 139 .633 .4330 .9046 -1.355 2.221
variances
assumed
Equal .479 131.1 .633 .4330 .9046 -1.356 2.222
variances
not
assumed
WPLE Equal .003 .956 -2.228 139 .027 -2.202 .9883 -4.156 -.2483
variances
assumed
Equal -2.231 131.7 .027 -2.202 .9883 -4.155 -.2498
variances
not
assumed
WLBT Equal .237 .627 -1.865 139 .064 -4.977 2.668 -10.25 .2991
variances
assumed
Equal -1.849 126.3 .067 -4.977 2.668 -10.30 .3506
 variances
not
assumed

Table 6.25 shows analysis of work life balance in relation to marital status. The p-value or the
significance value corresponding to the F test of equal variances assumed is greater than 0.05
for WIPL (.722), PLIW (.893), WPLE (.956) and WLBT (.627). This suggested that
independent two sample t-test with equal variances assumed should be used to compare the
mean scores of work life balance and its dimensions for married and unmarried doctors. The
p-value of t-test with equal variances obtained for WIPL (.040) and WPLE (.027) is less than
0.05 which implied significant differences in work interference with personal life and work
personal life enhancement between married and unmarried doctors at the 5% level of
significance. Work interference with personal life was higher inthe case of unmarried doctors
(M=23.27) than married doctors (M=26.43). In addition, work personal life enhancement was
higher in the case of married doctors (M=18.00) than unmarried doctors (M=15.79).

Furthemor, p-value for PLIW (.633) and WLBT (.064) was found to be greater than 0.05. The
result suggested that there is no significant difference in personal life interference with work
and overall work life balance of married and unmarried doctors.

The results implied that the doctors who are single face more difficulties in managing the
demands of work and other domains of life in comparison to the married doctors. The
possible explanation for this can be the presence of various family-friendly policies such as
maternity/paternity leave, crèche facilities and other arrangement which mitigates the impact
of family demands on married professionals. Hence, in the case of doctors, the research
hypothesis HId(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of work interference with personal life and
work personal life enhancement. However, it is rejected for the dimension personal life
interference with work and for overall work life balance.

b) Difference in work life balance of single/ widowed/ divorced and married nurses

Table 6.26: t test descriptive statistics for nurses ( in relation to marital status)

Work life Marital Status N Mean Standard

balance Deviation
WIPL Single/Widowed/Divorced 53 30.01 7.55
Married 163 28.76 7.69
PLIW Single/Widowed/Divorced 53 20.86 3.49
Married 163 19.19 5.39
WPLE Single/Widowed/Divorced 53 19.71 5.14
Married 163 19.31 6.65
WLBT Single/Widowed/Divorced 53 70.60 11.81
Married 163 67.26 15.13
 As per details given in Table 6.26, the total sample of nurses belongs to two groups when
classified on the basis of their marital status. The groups are ‘Single/Widowed/Divorced’ and
‘Married’. The means scores of work life balance and its dimensions of two groups were
compared using t-test. The result of this comparison is given in table 6.27.

Table 6.27: Test for Equality of Means (Work Life Balance in relation to marital status of nurses)

Work Levene’s Test t-test for Equality of Means

life for Equality of
balance Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. T df Sig. Mean Std. Error Lower Upper
(2- difference difference
tailed)
WIPL Equal .154 .696 1.034 214 .302 1.25200 1.21081 -1.134 3.638
variances
assumed
Equal 1.044 89.689 .299 1.25200 1.19975 -1.131 3.635
variances
not
assumed
PLIW Equal 16.58 .000 2.122 214 .035 1.67774 .79055 .1194 3.236
variances
assumed
Equal 2.622 137.191 .010 1.67774 .63975 .4126 2.942
variances
not
assumed
WPLE Equal 15.08 .000 .404 214 .686 .40410 .99911 -1.565 2.373
variances
assumed
Equal .460 113.136 .646 .40410 .87805 -1.335 2.143
variances
not
assumed
WLBT Equal 5.64 .018 1.464 214 .145 3.33383 2.27743 -1.155 7.822
variances
assumed
Equal 1.659 112.077 .100 3.33383 2.01015 -.6489 7.316
variances
not
assumed

Table 6.26 shows analysis of work life balance in relation to marital status of nurses. The p-
value or the significance value corresponding to the F test of equal variances assumed is
greater than 0.05 for WIPL (.696). This suggested that independent two sample t-test with
equal variances assumed should be used to compare the mean scores of work interference
with personal life for married and unmarried nurses. The p-value of t-test with equal
variances obtained for WIPL (.302) is greater than 0.05 which implied no significant
differences in work interference with personal life between married and unmarried nurses at
the 5 % level of significance.
The p-value or the significance value corresponding to the F test of equal variances assumed
is less than 0.05 for PLIW (.000), WPLE (.000) and WLBT (.018). This suggested that
independent two sample t-test with equal variances not assumed should be used to compare
the mean scores of work interference with personal life, work personal life enhancement and
overall work life balance of married and unmarried nurses. The p-value of t-test with unequal
variances obtained for WPLE (.646) and WLBT (.100) is greater than 0.05 which implied no
significant differences in work personal life enhancement and overall work life balance
between married and unmarried nurses at the 5% level of significance. But p-value of t-test
with unequal variances for PLIW (.010) is less than 0.05 which implied significant
differences in personal life interference with work among single and married nurses. Personal
life interference with work was higher in the case of married nurses (M=19.19) than
unmarried nurses (M=20.86).

The results mean that nurse who are married, have greater personal life interfere with work
than unmarried nurses. This could be because married nurses are may be required to engage
in various household chores such as cooking, cleaning, shopping for groceries, washing, etc.
which may lead to more family work interference. In addition, they may also be involved in
taking care of children and elders at home which further contributes to the conflict. Hence, in
the case of nurses, the research hypothesis HId(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of personal
life interference with work. However, it is rejected for the dimension work interference with
personal life, work personal life enhancement and overall work life balance.