o-laughlin-balancing parenthood and academia

http://jfi.sagepub.com/Journal of Family Issues

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0192513X04265942

2005 26: 79Journal of Family IssuesElizabeth M. O'Laughlin and Lisa G. Bischoff

Balancing Parenthood and Academia: Work/Family Stress as Influenced by Gender and Tenure Status

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Family IssuesAdditional services and information for

http://jfi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jfi.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Nov 22, 2004Version of Record >>

by guest on February 6, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from by guest on February 6, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jfi.sagepub.com/


http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79



http://jfi.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jfi.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jfi.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://jfi.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79.refs.html

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79.refs.html

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79.full.pdf

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/26/1/79.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml





10.1177/0192513X04265942 ARTICLEJOURNAL OF FAMILY ISSUES / January 2005O’Laughlin, Bischoff / PARENTHOOD AND ACADEMIA

Balancing Parenthood and Academia:Work/Family Stress as Influenced by

Gender and Tenure Status

ELIZABETH M. O’LAUGHLINLISA G. BISCHOFF

Indiana State University

The present research investigated the influence of gender and tenure status in academicians’experiences of balancing parenthood and an academic career. Men (n = 85) and women (n =179) employed full-time in tenure-track academic positions with at least one child youngerthan the age of 16 responded via the Internet to a 36-item questionnaire assessing experiencesand perceptions regarding work and family demands. Results revealed group differencesbased on gender but no differences based on tenure status alone and no significant interac-tions between gender and tenure status. Women reported greater academic and family stressand perceptions of less institutional support for balance of work and family as compared tomen. Results are discussed in terms of the rational and role demand models of work/familystress.

Keywords: parenting; stress; academia; role strain

Balancing career and parenthood is a challenging task for women and menfrom all career paths. Balancing parenthood and a successful career inacademia holds unique challenges, especially for women who oftenreport greater demands in terms of child care and family obligations (e.g.Dressel & Clark, 1990; Piotrkowski, Rapoport, & Rapoport, 1987). Al-though there are many models that examine work/family conflict, re-search specifically exploring work/family conflict in academic careers issparse. In addition, although parenthood is often mentioned as one factorinfluencing the success of women in higher education, no specific re-search has been conducted comparing the views of women and men inacademic careers with regard to work and family issues. The present studyconsiders both tenure status and gender in evaluating the survey responsesof full-time, tenure-track academicians regarding their experiences in bal-ancing the demands of parenthood with a career in academia.

79

JOURNAL OF FAMILY ISSUES, Vol. 26 No. 1, January 2005 79-106DOI: 10.1177/0192513X04265942© 2005 Sage Publications

by guest on February 6, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from



WORK/FAMILY CONFLICTAPPLIED TO ACADEMIC CAREERS

Several types of work/family conflict have been identified (e.g.Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) that are relevant to balancing family and anacademic career. Time-based conflict occurs when time pressures fromone role make it impossible to fulfill expectations of another role. Experi-ences of work/family conflict have been found to be positively associatedwith the number of hours worked per week (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).It has been estimated that the average academician works approximately55 hours per week. Strain-based conflict occurs when the stress of onerole impacts one’s performance in another role. Strain-based conflict maybe especially relevant for academicians, who are often expected to fulfillmultiple role demands within the work setting (e.g. teaching, research,service, consultation, etc.). Juggling several different tasks, whether fromthe same or different roles, has been found to be associated with higherwork/family distress (Williams & Alliger, 1991). Finally, behavior-basedconflict occurs when behaviors expected in one role are incompatible withbehaviors expected in another role. Although academic positions gener-ally have the advantage of a flexible work schedule, one outcome of thisflexibility is that work is often accomplished at home in the evening or onweekends. Working at home may create behavior-based conflict, as thefocus and energy needed to fulfill work expectations is likely to conflictwith demands for attention from children and/or spouses. Overload andstress related to work/family conflict have been found to be associatedwith a variety of negative outcomes, including individual health risks anddepression as well as business costs of poor morale, decreased productiv-ity, absenteeism, and turnover (Duxbury & Higgins, 1994). In terms ofacademic careers, it could be expected that higher levels of work/familyconflict could contribute not only to lower quality job performance butalso could potentially result in denial of tenure or promotion, profoundlyimpacting both career and family.

MODELS OF WORK/FAMILY CONFLICTAPPLIED TO ACADEMIA

There are a number of different models and perspectives that have beenproposed in examining different aspects of work/family conflict and rolestrain. In general, the different models tend to focus on three broad catego-ries of predictors: job type characteristics, such as flexibility and personalcontrol; individual characteristics, such as level of commitment and satis-

80 JOURNAL OF FAMILY ISSUES / January 2005




faction with work and parenting roles; and quantitative factors, such asweekly work hours and time spent meeting household and parentingdemands. Challenging the prevailing view that time demands primarilypredict work/family stress, Marks (1977) proposed that role strain andwork family conflict are the result of over- or under-commitment to onerole relative to the other. O’Neil and Greenberger (1994) did not find sup-port for Marks’s general hypothesis that balanced commitment to workand family roles would result in lesser role strain; however, they did findsupport for a refined version of Marks’s theory such that high commit-ment to dual roles was associated with less role strain among women inhigh control positions (e.g. professional and managerial jobs).

Duxbury and colleagues (Duxbury & Higgins, 1994; Duxbury,Higgins, & Lee, 1994) considered the rational model versus the job-strainmodel in exploring work/family conflict in a sample of dual-income andsingle-parent families. The rational model (e.g., Greenhaus, Bedeian, &Mossholder, 1987) proposes that the best predictor of work/family con-flict is objective time demands such as number of hours spent in meetingwork and family obligations. Greater investment in one or the other do-main (work, family) will result in greater interference from that domaininto the other domain (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). In contrast, the job-strain model (Karasek, 1979) considers job-type factors, such as role de-mands and perceptions of control in the workplace, in predicting work-related stress.

In a survey study that included more than 1,000 respondents, Duxburyand Higgins (1994) found that both the job-strain model and the rationalmodel could be used to explain gender differences in reports of family-to-work interference. Women, regardless of job type, reported more time inchild care than did men, resulting both in more time investment and per-ceptions of greater family demands for women than for men. Only the job-strain model, however, could explain differences found in work-to-familyinterference reported by career women as compared with dual-earnerwomen who were employed in clerical, administrative, or productionpositions with lower work involvement. Duxbury and Higgins found thatcareer women reported less work-to-family interference than did dual-earner women, despite longer work hours. In addition, career parentsreported less overall stress than did dual-earner parents, regardless of gen-der. Duxbury and Higgins surmised that increasing control of work andfamily demands can lessen work/family conflict, particularly for womenwho tend to carry the burden of work role obligations, with no relativedecrease in family obligations.

O’Laughlin, Bischoff / PARENTHOOD AND ACADEMIA 81




Two other recent studies consider gender differences in the experienceof work/family stress. Milkie and Peltola (1999) examined a number ofdifferent quantitative (e.g., number of work hours) and qualitative (e.g.,marital satisfaction, tradeoffs made between work and family) variablesin predicting women’s versus men’s reports of success in balancing workand family demands. Their results revealed that longer work hours pre-dicted lack of balance among men but was only marginally significantamong women. Reports of work demands leading to sacrifices in familywere related to reports of imbalance among women. Finally, marital dis-satisfaction was a predictor of imbalance among both men and women.Rwampororo, Mock, and Schafft (2002) used a mixed-methods approachin examining sources of stress and support among dual-earner couples.They found longer work hours to be associated with greater work stressfor men and women yet longer work hours to be associated with greaterfamily stress for women only. For men and women, satisfaction with childcare was found to lessen the negative spillover associated with familydemands. The authors note partial support for their hypothesis that genderroles predict different effects of work/family stress in that women re-ported somewhat greater negative spillover than did men.

Desrochers, Hilton, and Larwood (2002) tested hypotheses related tothree different perspectives of work/family conflict in predicting rolestrain among 100 business professors with preadolescent-aged children.These researchers found partial support for the role strain perspective(time commitment to work predicted greater role strain), the role balanceperspective (strong commitment to parenting identity, but not work iden-tity, predicted lower levels of role strain), and the identity conflict per-spective (time commitment to work predicted greater role strain for par-ents with high identity commitments to both work and parenting). Theresults of this study suggest that investment of time in work and familyroles as well as role commitment are important factors to consider in eval-uating work/family stress.

Studies that have considered gender differences in the experience ofwork/family stress (Duxbury & Higgins, 1994; Milkie & Peltola, 1999;Rwampororo et al., 2002) have found differences between men andwomen primarily in regard to the influence of longer work hours.Duxbury and Higgins (1994) and Desrochers et al. (2002) both found thatwomen participants reported greater work/family stress overall comparedto men. Milkie and Peltola (1999), however, found that employed men andwomen look very similar in their reports of success in balancing work andfamily.





Thus, in the research to date, the findings with regard to gender differ-ences in the experience of work/family stress are somewhat mixed. Onlyone study (Desrochers et al., 2002) has examined models of work/familystress specifically among academicians, and this study did not considergender differences other than overall report of work/family stress.

A primary purpose of the present study was to evaluate work/familystress among individuals in academic careers, specifically focusing on theinfluence of tenure and gender. Like Duxbury et al. (1994), we consideredKarasek’s (1979) job-strain model as compared with the rational modelof work/family stress in predicting work/family stress among men andwomen employed in academic careers. In considering the job-strainmodel, we considered factors related to role demands and perception ofcontrol related to both work and family, thus the broader term of “roledemand” rather than“ job strain” is used in describing this model. Thepresent study did not assess levels of commitment or satisfaction to workor parenting roles, so we were unable to consider the role balance or iden-tity conflict perspectives presented in the findings of Desrochers et al.(2002). However the role-strain perspective, defined by Desrochers et al.as “commitment of time and effort to multiple roles” (p. 3), is quite similarto the rational model, allowing for comparisons with findings in regard toobjective time demands.

HYPOTHESES

Impact of job type. Tenure status was used as an indicator of differingwork demands and expectations. The rigid 7-year tenure review periodtypical of most academic institutions is perhaps one of the most signifi-cant influences on pretenured academicians who are starting families orraising young children. Individuals facing tenure review must demon-strate high levels of competence and research productivity in the earliestyears of their academic career to avoid losing their jobs. Work/family con-flict has been found to be stronger in situations in which there are negativesanctions for noncompliance with role demands (Greenhaus & Beutell,1985), thus the risk of being denied tenure is likely a very significant fac-tor in the work/family stress of pretenured academicians. Considering therational and role-demand models of work/family conflict, both modelswould predict that pretenured individuals would report greater levels ofwork-related stress due to greater demands, perceptions of less control,and greater investment in work hours.





Impact of gender. A number of studies have indicated that women con-tinue to carry the primary burden of child care and household responsibili-ties (Bielby & Bielby, 1989; Biernat & Wortman, 1991; Hochschild,1989). It is not surprising then that studies have also found greater reportsof work/family conflict for women than for men (Cleary & Mechanic,1983; Duxbury et al., 1994; Wortman, Biernat, & Lang, 1991). In therealm of academia, a great deal of attention has been paid to quantitativesex differences such as number of women in higher education and differ-ences in promotion, pay, and research productivity, with little attention tothe possible impact of work/family stress for women in academia. Anec-dotal reports highlight the difficulties women experience in juggling aca-demic careers and children (J. Williams, 2002), particularly women whoare not tenured (e.g., Wilson, 1995). Although parental status has not beenfound to be related to productivity (Cole & Zuckerman, 1987; Sax,Hagedorn, Arredondo, & DiCrisi, in press; Sonnert & Holton, 1996),recent research (e.g., Milkie & Peltola, 1999) suggests that the experienceof balancing family and career may be somewhat different for womenthan for men. Cole and Zuckerman (1987) found that women scientistswere more likely to report giving up discretionary time and flexibility tobalance family and job responsibilities. Duxbury and Higgins (1994) alsofound that working mothers spent less time in leisure activities than didfathers. Loss of leisure time may increase stress, and loss of flexibilitymay increase role strain. Loss of flexibility related to family may alsoreduce opportunities for travel, which may impact opportunities for col-laboration and research recognition important to success in academia(Fouad et al., 1999).

Potential difficulties related to combining parenthood and academiamay be lessened by personal factors such as spousal support and adequatechild care arrangements. Duxbury and Higgins (1994) suggested that fac-tors that influence perceptions of control of work and family appear to beparticularly salient in predicting work/family stress for women. For exam-ple, Valian (1998) suggested that women in full-time, tenure-track posi-tions may be those who have found satisfactory child care, whereaswomen who have not found solutions may be in part-time or nontenure-track positions. Thus, exploration of the impact of gender on work/familystress in academia should consider key variables such as level of work andfamily demands, social support, and child care satisfaction.

We hypothesized that predictors of work and family stress would differfor women versus men in academic careers. Consistent with the rationalmodel, we proposed that number of hours worked per week would be asignificant predictor of work-related stress for both men and women.





However, considering the role-demand model, we hypothesized that fac-tors influencing women’s perceptions of control of family and workwould better predict work and family stress than would time investment inwork or family demands. Thus, factors likely associated with one’s per-ceptions of control of work demands and schedules, such as tenure statusand perceived support from one’s department and institution, were antici-pated to be associated with less work-related stress (Duxbury & Higgins,1994). Likewise, home environment variables, such as satisfaction withday care and spousal support for parenting and career, were expected to beassociated with lower levels of family stress. Although these variableswere expected to predict work and family stress for both men and women,we hypothesized that family-related variables, such as day care satisfac-tion and spouse support for parenting, would be particularly significantfor women, because women traditionally bear greater responsibility forchild care than do men. In summary, we hypothesized that the rationalmodel (hours invested in work and family demands) would account forsome of the variance in work and family stress for both men and women,but that consideration of variables related to the role-demand model (fac-tors related to perceptions of control, demands at work and home) wouldaccount for a significant portion of additional variance, particularly forwomen in predicting both work and family stress.

Interaction of family demands and job type. It is often the case that menand women pursuing careers in academia delay parenthood until aftersecuring their first academic position (Blinn & Ryan, 1990). Thus, thestresses of first-time parenthood may be compounded with the significantand multiple demands of proving competence in one’s academic career tosecure tenure. Because women often bear greater responsibility for childcare, particularly for preschool-age children (Duxbury & Higgins, 1994),it was anticipated that pretenured women with preschool-age childrenwould report the highest levels of family- and work-related stress.

METHOD

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included 85 men and 179 women employed full-time intenure-track positions at 4-year universities and colleges. All but 29(11%) of the respondents were married or living as married. These 29cases (respondents reporting no partner) were not included in analyses





that involved consideration of partner support, household division oflabor, and the like. Respondents who reported having no spouse or partnerincluded 28 women and 1 man. This group was somewhat older (x = 54.5)and had been employed in an academic position for a greater number ofyears (x = 12.2) than respondents with partners or spouses. This subgroupof single/divorced respondents did not differ significantly from respon-dents with spouses/partners on any of the major variables in the primaryanalyses and thus were retained in the sample. Some respondents hadmissing data for specific questions; correct group ns are noted in thetables.

The largest number of respondents were living and working at institu-tions in the Midwest (50%), with 22% from the Northeast, 16% from theSoutheast, 8% from the Southwest, 2% from the Northwest, and 2%employed at universities outside of the United States. The sample con-sisted primarily of assistant and associate professors (90%). Approxi-mately half of the participants were tenured (45%), with the remaining55% being pretenured. Table 1 and Table 2 present sample characteristicsby gender and tenure status. Consistent with previous reports regardingthe common occurrence of dual-career academicians (Gee, 1991; Smart& Smart, 1990; Sweet & Moen, 2002), 26% of participants in the presentsample reported having spouses or partners also employed in academicpositions.

MEASURES

Data were collected using a 36-item questionnaire posted on the Inter-net. The Parenthood and Academia Questionnaire (PAQ) was developedfor the present study based on previous literature in the area of work/family conflict. At the time the survey was developed, there was little to noresearch on parenting issues among academicians and no existing ques-tionnaires published that had been used with this population. An initialpool of 45 questions was developed and piloted with a group of 35 full-time academicians. Respondents were asked to provide comments onwording and clarity of the questions as well as to comment on what addi-tional questions or issues might be included. Based on responses from thepilot study, the current 36-item questionnaire was developed.

Information on reliability and validity for the PAQ is not currentlyknown. Several items in the questionnaire were collected for other re-search purposes and are not reported here. Those items relevant to the cur-rent study are discussed below





87

TA

BL

E 1

Cha

ract

eris

tics

of

Res

pond

ents

by

Gen

der

and

Ten

ure

Stat

us

Gen

der

Tenu

re S

tatu

s

Fact

orM

ale

Fem

ale

Tenu

red

Unt

enur

edPo

p. M

ean

Age

(n

= 2

64)

40.0

(6.

4)39

.8 (

6.4)

43.4

(5.

8)37

.0 (

5.3)

***

39.8

(6.

3)Y

ears

in c

aree

r (n

= 2

52)

8.8

(6.0

)9.

3 (6

.3)

9.1

(6.2

)5.

7 (3

.9)*

**9.

1 (6

.2)

Ave

rage

wor

k ho

urs

(n=

262

)53

.8 (

7.9)

52.5

(10

.1)

51.6

(9.

7)54

.0 (

9.1)

*52

.9 (

9.2)

Part

ner

wor

k ho

urs

(n=

239

)26

.4 (

19.7

)39

.6 (

19.0

)***

36.0

(20

.2)

33.8

(20

.3)

34.8

(20

.3)

Invo

lvem

ent i

n ho

useh

old

task

s (%

) (n

= 2

35)

42.3

(13

.1)

56.1

(15

.9)*

**52

.7 (

14.2

)50

.2 (

17.6

)51

.2 (

16.0

)N

o. o

f ch

ildre

n (n

= 2

64)

2.1

(0.9

0)1.

7 (0

.78)

1.8

(0.7

6)1.

8 (0

.90)

1.8

(0.8

3)A

vera

ge %

teac

hing

(n=

262

)51

.0 (

21.3

)51

.1 (

21.0

)47

.8 (

20.9

)53

.6 (

20.8

)*51

.0 (

21.0

)A

vera

ge %

res

earc

h (n

= 2

62)

26.2

(18

.6)

24.5

(19

.0)

23.6

(18

.2)

26.2

(19

.2)

25.0

(18

.8)

Ave

rage

% s

ervi

ce (

n=

257

)19

.4 (

12.6

)19

.5 (

13.4

)23

.5 (

15.9

)16

.3 (

9.3)

***

19.4

(13

.1)

Part

ner

supp

orts

par

entin

g6.

7 (0

.58)

6.2

(1.2

) **

*6.

3 (1

.2)

6.5

(1.0

)6.

4 (1

.1)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

239

)Pa

rtne

r su

ppor

ts c

aree

r6.

0 (1

.1)

5.8

(1.4

)6.

0 (1

.3)

5.9

(1.3

)5.

9 (1

.3)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

239

)D

epar

tmen

t sup

port

ive

5.3

(1.5

)5.

0 (1

.6)*

**5.

0 (1

.6)

5.2

(1.5

)5.

1 (1

.5)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

264

)In

stitu

tion

supp

ortiv

e4.

3 (1

.6)

3.9

(1.6

)*3.

9 (1

.6)

4.0

(1.7

)4.

0 (1

.6)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

264

)A

cade

mic

str

ess

4.8

(1.3

)5.

4 (1

.1)*

**5.

1 (1

.2)

5.3

(1.2

)5.

2 (1

.2)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

264

)Fa

mily

str

ess

4.2

(1.4

)4.

8 (1

.3)*

**4.

5 (1

.4)

4.7

(1.3

)4.

6 (1

.4)

(ran

ge 1

to 7

;n=

264

)

NO

TE

: Sta

ndar

d de

viat

ions

are

in p

aren

thes

es.n

s va

ry d

ue to

som

e re

spon

dent

s no

t res

pond

ing

to a

ll qu

estio

ns.

*p<

.05.

**p

< .0

1. *

**p

< .0

01; i

ndic

ates

sig

nific

ance

for

mal

e/fe

mal

e or

tenu

re/u

nten

ured

.




The primary independent variables, tenure status and gender, wereevaluated through single-item responses in the demographic section of thequestionnaire. Other demographic information such as age, rank, years inacademic career, type of academic institution, number of children, daycare arrangements, and spouse employment were used in describing thesample and in eliminating respondents who were working less than full-time or were employed in nontenure-track positions.

Information regarding experiences of work and family stress was col-lected through both Likert-type scale items and open-ended questions.Family stress was assessed by asking respondents to indicate on a 7-point,Likert-type scale “your overall level of current stress in regard to yourfamily responsibilities” (1 = no stress, 7 = extreme stress). Likewise, workstress was assessed by asking respondents to indicate on a 7-point, Likert-type scale “your overall level of current stress in regard to your academicresponsibilities.” Two open-ended items also requested information onwork-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Participants were asked,“What impact, if any, has your academic career had on your children and/or family?” and, conversely, “What impact, if any, has your family had onyour academic career?” Responses to these open-ended items allowed us


TABLE 2Work-Related Variables by Gender

Gender

Factor Male (n = 85) Female (n = 179)

RankAssistant professor 47% 56%Associate professor 39% 32%Full professor 14% 11%

Tenure statusTenured 46% 44%Untenured 54% 56%

Type of academic institutionPrimary teaching emphasis 45% 34%Primary research emphasis 19% 25%Research and teaching equally emphasized 34% 40%Other (medical schools) 2% 1%

Spouse employmentLess than 30 hours a week 35% 18%30 to 40 hours a week 38% 32%Greater than 40 hours a week 27% 50%**

*Chi-square significant at p < .01. **Chi-square significant at p < .001.




to elicit, in an unstructured, free-response manner, both positive and nega-tive comments about work-to-family and family-to-work influences.Seven percent of respondents provided no response for the family-to-work item, and 8% provided no response to the work-to-family question.Women respondents tended to provide longer and more detailed re-sponses than did men.

In addition to the primary independent variables of gender and tenurestatus, we considered several other factors related to perceptions of con-trol including partner- and work-based support and demands in the workand home setting. Social support was assessed through four Likert-typescale items that assessed level of partner support for parenting, partnersupport for career, departmental support, and institutional support in bal-ancing work and family demands. All four items used a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely supportive). An addi-tional Likert-type scale item elicited information on satisfaction with daycare arrangements (1 = not satisfied, 7 = extremely satisfied). Quantity ofwork demands was operationalized as the number of hours worked in atypical week, including time spent at home on work-related activities.

Family demands were assessed through several individual items tap-ping specific family obligations as well as a composite variable. Respon-dents were asked to indicate the typical division of labor between therespondent and his or her spouse or partner in seven areas including childcare, cleaning, cooking, laundry, paying bills, medical and miscellaneouschild appointments, and lawn and garden care. A division of 50-50 wouldindicate equal levels of involvement in the task, whereas percentagesgreater or less than 50% would indicate primary or lesser responsibilityfor the task. Percentage of involvement in household tasks was calculatedas the sum of percentage reported for specific tasks, divided by the num-ber of tasks reported (up to seven). This variable served as an overall indi-cator of respondent versus spouse involvement in family demands andwas considered in addition to average work hours per week as a quanti-tative indicator of time demands.

Analysis of open-ended items. Responses to open-ended items wereevaluated by two raters. The two raters first worked together in evaluatinga sample of 25% to 30% of the questionnaires to generate and agree oncategories for the most common responses. Raters then independentlyevaluated all the participant responses and grouped them into the prede-termined categories. Responses were scored as 0 (did not meet this re-sponse category) or 1 (response fit with the response category) for eachindividual response category (see Table 3 for a listing of response catego-






TABLE 3Responses to Select Open-Ended Questions

Grouped by Gender (n = 264)

What effect, if any, has parenthood had on your academic career?

Gender of Respondent

Response Category Male Female

Negative influence categoriesLess time for research 22% 32%Harder to balance work and home demands 5% 6%More stress in general 7% 4%Less time to get work done 23% 12%Less travel/networking 5% 12%Miscellaneous negative 11% 15%Totala 73% 81%

Positive or neutral influence categoriesMore efficient in work 11% 10%Changed my perspective on career vs. family 14% 8%Change in career plans due to family 5% 12%Family has had no impact on career 14% 7%Miscellaneous positive or neutral 6% 12%Totala 50% 49%

No response 8% 4%

What impact, if any, does your career have on your family?

Gender of Respondent

Response Category Male Female

Negative influence categoriesTake home stress 12% 16%Less time with family 32% 28%Low income 5% 0%Miscellaneous negative 1% 16%Totala 50% 60%

Positive or neutral influence categoriesPositive role model for children 7% 14%Flexibility 26% 22%No impact on family 6% 4%Miscellaneous positive 10% 13%Miscellaneous neutral 7% 6%Totala 56% 59%No response 8% 8%

NOTE: Participant responses could be scored in more than one response category, thus totalsfor negative, positive/neutral, and no response categories will be greater than 100%.a. Indicates sum of negative influence and positive/neutral influence subcategories or totalpercentage of respondents providing negative influence versus positive/neutral influenceresponses.




ries). Participant responses that fit more than one category were scored as1 for each category, thus the totals sum is greater than 100%. Responsesthat did not fit into a predetermined category were included in a “miscel-laneous” category. Individuals who did not respond to the open-endeditem were scored in the “no response” category. Raters agreed on fit of re-sponses into predetermined categories on more than 80% of all responses.A third rater evaluated responses on which the first two raters disagreedand responses were categorized based on consensus agreement (e.g.,agreement by two thirds of raters on a particular category).

PROCEDURE

The Parenting and Academia Questionnaire was posted on the Internetfor a period of 10 months from 1998 to 1999 and for 4 months in 2002.Although the Web site was not secure, information about the online sur-vey was distributed in a very specific and targeted manner, making itunlikely that individuals other than faculty members at academic institu-tions would have received specific information giving the Web address forthe questionnaire. Participants were recruited through a variety of meansincluding word of mouth from one faculty member to another, e-mailmessages addressed to chairs of more than 150 departments at variousacademic institutions, postings to academic newsgroups on the Internet,postings to various faculty bulletin boards on the Internet, and fliers dis-tributed at academic conferences. In recruitment notices, potential partici-pants were directed to the Web address of the posted questionnaire andensured of confidentiality. The returned questionnaires in no way identi-fied the identity or e-mail address of the participant but did include thedate and time that the responses were submitted. By examining the dateand time the survey was returned, as well as the specific content of open-ended questions, we were able to detect and delete 12 cases in which thesame survey was returned twice. More than 90% of respondents includedresponses to open-ended questions. These responses were all unique. Wealso examined the specific numeric and categorical responses of the indi-viduals who did not respond to open-ended items and found that theseresponses were also unique, indicating that no respondent returned morethan one survey with identical or even similar information. In addition, thedemographics of the current sample of academicians were quite similar tothe demographics reported in other recent samples of academician par-ents, further supporting the representativeness of the current sample. Con-sistent with procedures typically used for online research, informed con-sent was presented online prior to presentation of the questionnaire. Thus,





respondents were first presented with the consent information and thenrequired to click on a link indicating agreement to the informed consent inorder to access the questionnaire. Although this procedure does not guar-antee that participants fully read and understood the informed consent,this issue is not unique to online research and is a potential problem withwritten informed consent as well.

RESULTS

The results are presented in three parts. To begin, we report specificsample characteristics and present the means and standard deviations forthe major variables in the study. Next, we report a MANOVA evaluatinggender and tenure status differences for the full sample of respondents. Asecond MANOVA is presented examining dependent variables related tospouse/partner support, eliminating the 29 participants who reportedbeing single or divorced parents. We used a conservative alpha level of .01for the MANOVAs and ANOVAs. Finally, we present the results of aseries of hierarchical ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysesconducted to examine predictors of family and academic stress for menand women participants. For the regression analyses, time commitmentvariables were entered in the first step of the analyses followed byjob-type and home-environment types of variables to assess the incre-mental contribution of factors related to the role-demand model. Home-environment variables included spouse/partner support, thus the 29 singleor divorced respondents were also excluded from the hierarchical regres-sion analyses.

SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS

Means and standard deviations for all the study variables, as well asdescriptive measures of the respondents, are presented in Table 1 andTable 2. Both women and men had an average of two children, and 59% ofrespondents had at least one preschool-age child, 52% had at least oneschool-age child, and 22% had at least one adolescent child. In terms ofday care, 28% reporting having a child in day care full-time, 13% reportedpart-time day care, 20% used after-school programs, 11% reported home-based (nonfamily) day care, and 30% reported that a family member tookcare of the children during the workday. A majority of pretenured facultyhad preschool-age children (73%), whereas only 42% of tenured facultyhad preschool-age children. Overall, 51% of respondents reported having





their first child after beginning their academic careers. This percentagewas similar for women respondents (51%) as compared with men re-spondents (47%).

Group differences. Years in academia did not differ between men andwomen. However, as would be expected, tenured faculty were older andreported significantly more years in academic careers than did preten-ured faculty (see Table 1). Differences were also noted in self-report ofteaching versus service activities between tenured and pretenured faculty,with tenured faculty reporting significantly more involvement in serviceactivities and pretenured faculty reporting a greater percentage of timeteaching.

Spousal employment and division of household tasks were found todiffer significantly between men and women respondents who were mar-ried or living as married. Although 50% of women and 27% of menreported having a spouse who worked more than 40 hours a week on aver-age, 37% of men versus 18% of women reported having a spouse or part-ner who worked less than full-time (see Table 2). These results suggestthat dual-career relationships, in which both partners worked in excess of40 hours a week, were more common among women in the present sampleas compared to men. Women in the present sample also reported greaterinvolvement in child care and household tasks as compared to their part-ners (see Table 1).

EFFECTS OF GENDER AND TENURE STATUS

Results of a MANOVA considering both tenure and gender in self-report of stress and perceived support in the workplace for work/familybalance revealed a main effect for gender only, F(4, 257) = 4.81, p = .001.There were no significant group differences based on tenure status and nosignificant interactions between gender and tenure. Univariate analysesbased on gender indicate that women respondents reported significantlyhigher levels of academic stress, F(1, 260) = 11.55, p < .01, and alsohigher levels of family stress, F(1, 260) = 13.10, p < .001, as comparedwith men. Women also reported perceptions of less support from the aca-demic institution for balancing work and family; however, this findingwas significant at the .05 level only. Men and women did not differ inreport of perceived support for balance of work and family at the depart-mental level.

A separate MANOVA, excluding the 29 respondents who did not pro-vide information on partner/spouse support (e.g., divorced or single re-





spondents) and again grouping by gender and tenure status, was con-ducted entering perceptions of spousal support for career and parentingresponsibilities and perceived division of household labor. Results of thisMANOVA revealed a main effect both for gender, F(3, 228) = 19.21,p < .001, and for tenure, F(3, 228) = 4.61, p = .004. No interaction wasfound. Univariate analyses revealed that women reported significantlylower levels of perceived spousal support for parenting than did men, F(1,230) = 12.0, p = .001. Women also reported greater involvement in house-hold tasks relative to their partners, as compared to men, F(1, 230) =45.90, p < .001 (see Table 1 for group means). Perceptions of spouse/partner support for career did not differ between men and women. Interms of tenure, a trend was noted (p = .055) for tenured respondents toreport more involvement in household responsibilities as compared topretenured respondents; however, there were no group differences basedon tenure that reached statistical significance at the p = .05 level.

Gender differences in work/family responsibilities among dual-careercouples. Given that more woman than men in the present sample reportedbeing in a dual-career relationship (as indicated by having a spouse thatworks more than 30 hours a week), and because previous research (e.g.,Bielby & Bielby, 1989) has suggested that women in dual-career couplescontinue to shoulder a greater responsibility of household demands ascompared to men, we considered division of family responsibilitiesamong dual-career respondents specifically. A MANOVA, grouping bygender and including a subgroup of respondents having a partner whoworked 30 hours or more a week (n = 151) was conducted entering per-centage of time relative to partner spent in child care responsibilities aswell as three household chores (cleaning, cooking, and laundry). Resultsof the MANOVA were significant, F (4, 146) = 21.3, p < .001, indicatingthat among dual-career academicians, women reported spending a greaterpercentage of time on child care and household tasks relative to their part-ners or spouses. Univariate analyses revealed that women reported greaterpercentages of time than their spouses on child care, cleaning, cooking,and laundry. The mean percentage of time reported by women academi-cians on child care and household tasks, relative to their spouse or partner,ranged from 59% (cleaning) to 67% (laundry), whereas the average per-centage of time reported by men academicians ranged from 27% (laun-dry) to 49% (cooking). We also considered the respondents’ preferencefor engaging in various tasks, as previous research has indicated that it isnot the specific pattern of sharing parenting and household tasks thatdetermines satisfaction in dual career families but rather, perceptions of





fairness and support (Gilbert, 1994). There were no significant differ-ences in men’s and women’s preference ratings for various child care andhousehold tasks.

RISK FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TOACADEMIC AND FAMILY STRESS

Hierarchical ordinary least squares regression analyses were used toexamine the relationship between average hours worked per week, house-hold responsibilities, satisfaction with day care, and the support variables(support of spouse, support of department) for academic stress and familystress. We conducted separate regressions for men and women respon-dents as previous analyses indicated that men and women differ in theirwork and family experiences (e.g., gender effect in the MANOVA) andthus likely differ also in their experiences of work and family stress. Sup-port of institution was not included as a predictor as this variable corre-lates highly with support of department (r = .67). Correlations betweenpredictor variables were all less than r = .35, except for a correlation of r =.47 between reports of academic stress and parenting stress. The regres-sion analyses predicting family and academic stress included only thoserespondents who were married or living as married (n = 239) because sev-eral predictor variables were not relevant for single-parent respondents.

Table 4 presents the results of the first regression predicting work-related stress for men respondents only. The first step of the regression,entering work hours and percentage of household responsibility simulta-neously, was significant, accounting for 8% of the overall variance. Workhours was a significant individual predictor, yet share of household re-sponsibilities was not a predictor. In the second step of the regression,work hours was no longer a significant individual predictor; however,family stress was a very strong individual predictor of academic stress.Higher levels of family stress predicted higher levels of academic stress.The second step of the regression accounted for an additional 10% of thevariance, for a total of 18%.

For women respondents, the first step of the regression (work hoursand household responsibilities) was also significant, accounting for 9% ofthe variance (see Table 5). As with men respondents, work hours was asignificant individual predictor, whereas household responsibilities wasnot. The second step of the regression, adding family stress, day care satis-faction, tenure, and support of department, was also significant, account-ing for an additional 10% of the variance. In the second step, both workhours and family stress were significant individual predictors, indicating





that a greater number of average work hours and higher levels of familystress were both associated with higher ratings of academic stress. Tenurestatus approached significance (p = .08), with pretenure status associatedwith greater reports of academic stress for women.

Predicting family stress among men, the first step entering time de-mand variables was significant, accounting for 8% of the variance (see


TABLE 4Multiple Regression of Work and Family Variables on Perceptions

of Work-Related Stress for Male Respondents (n = 84)

Predictors R2 df F p β

Step 1: .08 2, 77 3.20 .05Average work hours .26**Household responsibility –.07

Step 2: .18 7, 72 3.39 .003Average work hours .18Household responsibility –.17Family stress .40***Tenure status –.08Satisfaction with day care .11Support of institution –.14Spouse/partner support for career –.04

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.


of Work-Related Stress for Female Respondents (n = 151)


Step 1: .09 2, 147 7.63 .001Average work hours .31***Household responsibility .01

Step 2: .19 7, 142 9.88 .000Average work hours .21**Household responsibility –.07Family stress .42**Tenure status .13Satisfaction with day care –.03Support of department –.08Partner/spouse support for career –.07

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.




Table 6). Work hours was a significant individual predictor, and house-hold responsibility approached significance as an individual predictor(p = .06). In the second step of the regression, academic stress, satisfactionwith day care, number of preschool-age children, and spouse/partner sup-port for parenting were entered as additional predictor variables. The sec-ond step was also significant, accounting for an additional 20% of the



of Family Stress For Male Respondents (n = 84)


Step 1: .08 2, 77 3.41 .04Average work hours .21*Household responsibility .19

Step 2: .28 7, 72 4.05 .001Average work hours .11Household responsibility .19Work-related stress .37***Satisfaction with day care –.25*Support of partner—career –.11Support of partner—parenting .11Preschool-age children .02

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.


of Family Stress For Female Respondents (n = 151)


Step 1: .02 2, 147 1.5 .23Average work hours .10Household responsibility .12

Step 2: .29 7, 142 8.40 .000Average work hours –.04Household responsibility .05Work-related stress .44***Preschool-age children .03Satisfaction with day care –.06Support of partner—career –.24*Support of partner—parenting .05

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.




variance. Both academic stress and satisfaction with day care were signifi-cant individual predictors. Less satisfaction with day care and higher lev-els of academic stress were associated with greater reports of familystress.

The regression equation predicting family stress for women respon-dents yielded quite different results (see Table 7). The first step of theequation (work hours and household responsibility) was not significant,accounting for less than 2% of the variance. However, the second step ofthe equation, in which academic stress, perceptions of support, number ofpreschool-age children, and day care satisfaction were entered, was sig-nificant, accounting for an additional 27% of the variance. In this secondstep, academic stress and spouse/partner support for career were signifi-cant individual predictors of family stress. Higher levels of academicstress and lower levels of spousal support for career were associated withgreater reports of family stress.

Analysis of qualitative data. A MANOVA grouping by gender and ten-ure status and entering number of positive and negative comments withregard to impact of parenthood on career and impact of career on parent-ing, revealed no significant group differences or interactions for tenurestatus and gender. Overall, men and women tended to provide a similarnumber of positive and negative comments in response to open-endedquestions. Tenured and pretenured respondents also provided similar per-centages of positive, negative, and neutral influences regarding the effectof family on career and effect of career on family. As can be seen in Table3, although overall percentages of positive versus negative responses didnot differ, there were some gender differences in the content of response.For example, women were more likely than men (12% women versus 5%men) to indicate that parenthood resulted in less travel or career-relatednetworking opportunities. Women were also more likely to report thatparenthood influenced a change in career plans, most often in the direc-tion of seeking jobs with less research emphasis that allowed for moretime with family. Men were found to be more likely to report that parent-hood had no impact on their careers (14% of men) as compared to asmaller percentage (7%) of women. Finally, women were more likely toreport miscellaneous negative comments with regard to the impact ofcareer on their family, such as family members being unhappy with mov-ing due to career, stress in the marital relationship, spouse employmentdissatisfaction, and delayed childbirth.





DISCUSSION

The present investigation found support for the rational model of work/family conflict in predicting academic stress for both men and women.For both men and women, average number of work hours per week ac-counted for a significant portion of the variance in self-report of work-related stress. Interestingly, report of household responsibility relative toone’s partner or spouse was not a significant predictor for either workor family stress. Although women respondents reported a significantlygreater percentage of child care and household responsibility relative totheir partners, this family demand variable did not predict academic- orfamily-related stress. Thus, it appears that support for the rational modelin predicting work-related stress is related primarily to demands in thework environment.

Consistent with our hypotheses, we found greater support for the role-demand model and less support for the rational model in predicting familystress among women respondents. Neither average work hours nor house-hold demands predicted reports of family stress among women. Rather,level of academic stress and perceptions of spouse/partner support forcareer were the only significant individual predictors of family stress forwomen, suggesting greater support for the role-demand model in predict-ing family-related stress. Women did not differ from men, however, inpredictors of work stress, suggesting more similarities than differences inthe experience of work-related stress for men and women employed inacademic positions.

Contrary to expectations, results of this study did not reveal differencesin reports of work or family stress for tenured versus pretenured partici-pants. Neither quantitative nor qualitative analyses revealed significantdifferences based on tenure status alone. A trend was noted for tenuredparticipants to report somewhat greater involvement in family respon-sibilities, suggesting the possibility that tenured respondents perceivedmore opportunities to take advantage of a flexible schedule to attend tochild care and household demands. We also did not find support forthe hypothesized interaction between tenure status and gender. Althoughlack of tenure approached significance as a predictor of work stress forwomen, there was no effect for tenure status in MANOVA analyses. Giventhe relatively high ratings of work stress given by both tenured (x = 5.0/7.0)and untenured respondents (x = 5.2/7.0) and reports of average workhours exceeding 50 hours per week, it appears that work-related demandsmay have been similar for tenured and pretenured respondents.





Although predictors of work stress were similar for men and women,predictors of family stress differed by gender. Satisfaction with day carewas a significant predictor in explaining family-related stress for men butnot for women, with lower ratings of family stress among men reportinggreater satisfaction with child care arrangements. As mentioned, manymore men than women in the present sample had spouses who worked lessthan full-time, thus the association between satisfaction with day care andlower levels of family stress may reflect men’s contentment with having astay-at-home parent with their children, thus minimizing the need for out-of-home day care. Supporting this hypothesis, satisfaction with day carewas found to be significantly and negatively correlated with average part-ner work hours for men (r = –.26, p = .03), whereas this relationship wasnonsignificant for women respondents (r = –.17, p = .07). Men with stay-at-home partners may experience lower demands for equal sharing inhousehold and child care tasks, thus minimizing family stress.

Interestingly, partner support for career and work responsibilities wasrelated to reports of less family stress among women but not men. Onepossible explanation is that women in the present study were more likelyto be involved in dual-career relationships, thus creating greater competi-tion for career emphasis. It is also important to note, however, that “sup-port” was not specifically defined in the questionnaire, thus perceptions ofthis variable likely varied across participants. The present finding regard-ing the importance of spouse or partner support corresponds somewhatwith previous research on work/family stress that has found marital-rolequality (Barnett, Marshall, Raudenbush, & Brennan, 1993; Baruch &Barnett, 1986; Milkie & Peltola, 1999), and spouse support of career spe-cifically (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985), to be associated with lower levelsof work/family conflict.

The significance of family stress in predicting academic stress andvice versa among both men and women suggests that work-to-family andfamily-to-work interference may be common among men and women.Another possibility is that a third variable, such as life satisfaction or traitanxiety, may account for the significant correlation between work stressand family stress.

In the family realm, women in the present sample reported less partnersupport in parenting demands than did men and also greater time invest-ment in specific household and child care tasks relative to their partners.Previous research has found that women’s level of work/family conflict isrelated to the number of hours that a spouse works (Greenhaus & Beutell,1985) and that career outcomes for women may be worse if they are part-ners in a dual-career relationship (Adler et al., 1989). On the other hand,





a recent study of dual-career couples in which both are employed inacademic positions (Sweet & Moen, 2002) found coworking in an aca-demic setting to buffer work and family strain. Future research maywish to explore specific factors associated with greater and lesser work/family conflict among dual-career couples in similar and dissimilar careerareas.

IMPLICATIONS

The factors found to best predict higher levels of stress are consistentwith previous models of work/family conflict. Individuals who work lon-ger hours, perceive less job-based support for work/family issues, havespouses who demonstrate less support for career goals, and who are lesssatisfied with day care arrangements report greater levels of work andfamily stress. Quality day care services and departmental support for bal-ancing work/family demands are two factors that could be easily ad-dressed by most institutions. Academic institutions could help to reducework/family stress among faculty, thereby improving job performance,by ensuring the availability of quality day care services. Although mostrespondents in the present sample indicated that their institution had anon-site day care facility, many commented that infant and after-schoolchild care was very limited or unavailable. In addition, it was suggestedthat administrators be provided with sensitivity training in work/familyissues to increase both departmental and institutional support, thus allow-ing faculty to make greater use of the flexible nature of academic positionswithout feelings of guilt or fears of negative evaluation.

Spouse support for career is an influence that must be addressed at afamily level rather than institutional level. However, as the present sam-ple indicates, it is not uncommon for academicians to have partners orspouses also employed or seeking employment in academic positions.Furthermore, women academicians in particular are likely to be in dual-career relationships. Thus, institutions that provide employment servicesfor spouses, or encourage hiring of spouses in academic positions, couldfurther support faculty members in balancing work and family demands.A recent study of 276 couples in which at least 1 spouse worked for a uni-versity found that men whose wives worked at the same universityreported greater family success and less spillover of stress from home towork (Sweet & Moen, 2002). Women who had husbands working at thesame university reported being more satisfied with their marriage andfamily life as compared with other married women in the study. Thus, co-





working relationships among academicians may help to buffer work andfamily stress.

Finally, higher levels of work stress reported by pretenured as com-pared to tenured respondents and women as compared to men suggests theimportance of available mentoring programs for new academicians, par-ticularly women. Townsend (2002) noted that as long as women remainthe primary child care and household managers, they will disproportion-ately feel the impact of longer work hours, particularly women in dual-career relationships. Evaluating life quality among dual-earner couples,Townsend found that both men and women in high commitment couples,in which both partners worked 45 or more hours weekly, considered them-selves significantly less successful in balancing work and family as com-pared to other dual-earner couples. Men in dual-committed couplesreported less marital satisfaction. Tolbert, Valcour, and Marler (2002) alsofound that women who reported long work hours felt more successful intheir work careers but less successful in balancing work and family. Thesefindings suggest the importance of social support for new academicianswho may be struggling to find balance in long work hours and developingfamily responsibilities. Institutional support may include awareness onthe part of department and university administrators in understanding theunpredictable stresses involved in balancing parenthood and academia.Additional research is needed to determine the important components ofsupport for facilitating work success and emotional health for both menand women.

LIMITATIONS

Additional research is needed to assess the generalizability of theresults reported in the present research. Although we attempted to recruitparticipants from diverse areas of study and from as many different aca-demic institutions as possible, our sample is self-selected and includes ahigh percentage of respondents from the Midwest and specifically fromthe social sciences. Thus, the present sample may not represent parents inacademic positions nationwide. In addition, some of the present resultswere based on specific subgroups of academician parents (e.g., two-parent families, dual-career couples) and thus cannot be generalized toacademician parents in general. Future studies on academician parentsmay wish to assess experiences and factors associated with work/familystress among specific parent subgroups, such as single or divorced par-ents, dual-career academician couples, and dual-career couples in whichonly one parent is employed in an academic position.





Future research might also engage in a more comprehensive assess-ment of variables such as work-role quality, marital-role quality, andparental-role quality as these types of “enhancement” variables have beenfound to be significantly related to work/family stress (Desrochers et al.,2002; Greenberger & O’Neil, 1993; Hyde, Klein, Essex, & Clark, 1995).Tolbert et al. (2002) suggested that future research on work/family stresscontinue to explore perceptions of “success” in balancing work and fam-ily roles as well as correlates or successful balance such as better health,life satisfaction, and job performance. The PAQ was intentionally briefand open-ended; however, the lack of reliability and validity for this mea-sure, as well as the use of single-item measures, limits conclusions. Futureresearch would benefit from expanding the PAQ and including multipleitems in each area. Reliability and validity of responses is an additionalarea of study. Given the limitations of the current study, the present resultsmust be interpreted with caution, and additional research is needed to fur-ther clarify the role of gender and tenure status in the experience of work/family stress among academicians. Finally, the variables included in thepresent study accounted for only a small percentage of the variability inwork and family stress, suggesting that a more extensive questionnaire orinterview format of data collection might reveal the influence of othervariables on work/family stress among academics.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The results of the present study indicate that greater support and under-standing of family issues in academia could significantly lessen the work/family stress experienced by many academician parents and thereby im-prove job performance and job satisfaction. Support for the rational modelin the present study would suggest that greater balance of work time ver-sus family and personal time may be a primary consideration in reducingwork-related stress for men and women. Reducing work hours may alsobe effective in reducing family-related stress for men. For women, the fac-tors contributing to family stress appear to be more relationship-oriented,particularly with regard to reliance on spouse or partner, a finding previ-ously reported in literature examining parenthood and scientific careers(Grant, Kennelly, & Ward, 2000). Our results specifically suggest the im-portance of spouse support with regard to career as opposed to familydemands, thus suggesting the need for frank discussion between academ-ics and their spouses or partners pertaining to career and family priorities.Finally, the perceptions of minimal institutional support relative to familyand department support indicated in the current study point to the need for





more attention to family issues at an administrative level. Recent findingssuggest that satisfaction with child care (Rwampororo et al., 2002) andwith working relationships in the academic setting (Sweet & Moen, 2002)are two factors found to buffer work and family strain, thus suggesting twoareas of continued development concerning family-friendly policies inhigher education.

REFERENCES

Adler, P. A., Adler, P., Ahrons, C. R., Perlmutter, M. S., Staples, W. G., & Warren, C. A. B.(1989). Dual-careerism and the conjoint-career couple. The American Sociologist, 20,207-226.

Barnett, R. C., Marshall, N. L., Raudenbush, S., & Brennan, R. (1993). Gender, and the rela-tionship between job experiences and psychological distress: A study of dual-earner cou-ples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 794-806.

Baruch, G. K., & Barnett, R. T. (1986). Role quality, multiple role involvement, and psycho-logical well-being in midlife women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,578-585.

Bielby, W. T., & Bielby, D. (1989). Family ties: Balancing commitments to work and familyin dual earner households. American Sociological Review, 54, 776-789.

Biernat, M., & Wortman, C. (1991). Sharing of home responsibilities between professionallyemployed women and their husbands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60,844-860.

Blinn, L. M., & Ryan, C. M. (1990, November). Faculty attitudes toward maternity andparenting issues. Impact of gender, rank, number of children and age of youngest child.Paper presented at the National Council on Family Relations Annual Meeting, Seattle,WA.

Cleary, P., & Mechanic, D. (1983). Sex differences in psychological distress among marriedpeople. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 111-121.

Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1987). Marriage, motherhood, and research performance inscience. Scientific American, 256, 119-125.

Desrochers, S., Hilton, J., & Larwood, L. (2002). Predicting work-family role strain amongbusiness professors from their identity-based and time-based commitments to profes-sional and parenting roles (Working Paper No. BLCC #02-05). Ithaca, NY: Cornell Uni-versity, Cornell Careers Institute.

Dressel, P. L., & Clark, A. (1990). A critical look at family care. Journal of Marriage andFamily, 52, 769-782.

Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (1994). Interference between work and family: A status reporton dual-career and dual-earner mothers and fathers. Employee Assistance Quarterly, 9,55-80.

Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., & Lee, C. (1994). Work-family conflict: A comparison of gender,family type, and perceived control. Journal of Family Issues, 15, 449-466.

Fouad, N., Brehm, S., Hall, C., Hyde, J. S., Kite, M., & Russo, N. (1999). Women psycholo-gists in academe: Celebrating successes, confronting challenges (Report of the TaskForce on Women in Academe). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.





Gee, E. G. (1991, Winter). The dual-career couple: A growing challenge. Educational Re-cord, 72(1), 45-47.

Gilbert, L. (1994). Current perspectives on dual-career families. Current Directions in Psy-chological Science, 3, 101-105.

Grant, L., Kennelly, I., & Ward, K. B. (2000). Revisiting the gender, marriage and parenthoodpuzzle in scientific careers. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 28, 62-85.

Greenberger, W., & O’Neil, R. (1993). Spouse, parent, worker: Role commitments and role-related experiences in the construction of adults’well-being. Developmental Psychology,29, 181-197.

Greenhaus, J., & Beutell, N. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.

Greenhaus, J., Bedeian, A., & Mossholder, K. (1987). Work experiences, job performance,and feeling of personal and family well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 200-215.

Hochschild, A. (1989). The second shift. New York: Viking.Hyde, J. S., Klein, M. H., Essex, M. J., & Clark, R. (1995). Maternity leave and women’s

mental health. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 257-285.Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: Implications for

job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-307.Marks, S. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: Some notes on human energy, time, and

commitment. American Sociological Review, 42, 921-936.Milkie, M., & Peltola, P. (1999). Playing all the roles: Gender and the work-family balancing

act. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 476-490.O’Neil, R., & Greenberger, E. (1994). Patterns of commitment to work and parenting: Im-

plications for role strain. Journal of Marriage and Family, 56, 101-118.Piotrkowski, C. S., Rapoport, R. N., & Rapoport, R. (1987). Families and work. In

M. Sussman & S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 251-283).New York: Plenum.

Rwampororo, R., Mock, S., & Schafft, K. (2002). Work-family demands and stress: A mixedmethods examination of gender differences and mediating variables (Working Paper No.BLCC 02-01). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Cornell Careers Institute.

Sax, L., Hagedorn, L., Arredondo, M., & DiCrisi, F. (in press). Faculty research productivity:Exploring the role of gender and family-related factors. Research in Higher Education.

Smart, M. S., & Smart, R. C. (1990). Paired prospects: Dual career couples on campus. Aca-deme, 76, 33-37.

Sonnert, G., & Holton, G. (1996, January-February). Career patterns of women and men inthe sciences. American Scientist, 84, 63-71.

Sweet, S., & Moen, P. (2002). Intimate academics: Co-working couples in two Americanuniversities (Working Paper No. BLCC 02-03). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CornellCareers Institute.

Tolbert, P. S., Valcour, P. M., & Marler, J. H. (2002). Work schedules, work-family balance,and perceived stress in work life and in family life (BLCC Working Paper No. 02-01).Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Townsend, B. (2002). Dual-earner couples and long work hours: A structural and life courseperspective (Working Paper No. BLCC 02-11). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CornellCareers Institute.

Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Williams, J. (2002). How academe treats mothers. Chronicle of Higher Education Career

Network. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/jobs/2002/06/2002061701c.htm





Williams, K., & Alliger, G. M. (1991). Role stessors, mood spillover, and perceptions ofwork-family conflict in employed parents. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 837-857.

Wilson, R. (1995). Scheduling motherhood. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 41, A14.Wortman, C. B., Biernat, M. R., & Lang, E. L. (1991). Coping with role overhead. In

M. Frankenhaeuser, M. Chesney, & U. Lundberg (Eds.), Women, work and health: Stressand opportunities (pp. 85-110). New York: Plenum.





o-laughlin-balancing parenthood and academia

Documents

family demands

demands of parenthood

workfamily stress

bischoffbalancing parenthood

academiabalancing parenthood

bischoff parenthood

tenure statuselizabeth

tenure statuspublished