| Summary: | Past research suggests that the relationship between work hours and work-family conflict is not as strong as expected, suggesting a need to investigate moderators of the relationship. This dissertation explores whether the value placed on time spent in a domain (subjective influence) moderates the relationship between actual time spent (objective influence) and subsequent work-family conflict. Value on time spent in a domain is operationalized as centrality, which draws upon the works of Mead (1934) and reflects the self-ascribed importance of a role identity (Ritzer, 1992). The concept of role-identities originates in sociological theories of identity: Identity theory (Stryker, 1980) and role-identity-theory (McCall & Simons, 1978). This mediated model is tested in a cross-national sample consisting of participants from Sweden and the United States. Sweden and the United States have been chosen because they represent very different public policy conceptions, particularly in approaching the work-family issue. Swedish public policy supports the reconciliation of employment and parenthood while North American public policy supports the male breadwinner model.Results of a field study show that the moderating effect of centrality on the relationship between hours spent and work-family conflict is significant only for high earners. Analyses were also conducted to compare Sweden and the United States with regards to work and family hours, work and family centrality, and work-family conflict. As expected, Americans work longer hours than Swedes. However, there is no significant difference with regard to work-family conflict. Unexpectedly, Swedes reported higher work centrality. Antecedents and consequences of work-family were also investigated. Specifically, daycare satisfaction related negatively to work-family conflict, while work-family conflict related negatively to turnover intentions.
|
|---|
