There is growing evidence that heterosexual relationships in which traditional gender roles are reversed because women have attained higher societal status than their male partner are more precarious. We argue that this is the case because both partners in role-reversed relationships are evaluated more negatively than partners in more egalitarian or traditional gender role relationships. In two experimental studies conducted in the United States (N = 223) and the Netherlands (N = 269), we found that when encountering role-reversed relationships, participants perceive the woman as the more dominant and agentic one and the man as the weaker one in the relationship. They also perceive women in role-reversed relationships as less likeable, have less respect for men in role-reversed relationships, and expect that such relationships are less satisfying. In addition, in a third partner study (N = 94 heterosexual couples), we found that both male and female partners in role-reversed relationships considered the man to be the weaker one and the woman to be the more dominant one. Moreover, perceiving the man as the weaker one predicted lower relationship satisfaction in role-reversed couples. Overall, this research indicates that gender stereotypes about heterosexual relationships should be considered in efforts to achieve gender equity.

In two studies, we find that climbing the societal ladder has positive associations with women's well-being and relationship outcomes but can also have negative consequences when women surpass their male partners in status. In Study 1 (N = 314), we found that women who reported having higher personal status also reported several positive relationship outcomes (e.g., higher relationship quality than women with lower personal status).However, these associations reversed for women who surpassed their partners in social status. In Study 2, a diary study (N = 112), we show how women's implicit endorsement of gender stereotypes qualifies the negative associations of surpassing one's partner in status. Among women with higher status than their partner, traditional women intend to adjust their behavior to fit the gender norm (e.g., thinking about reducing work hours in favor of their time at home), whereas egalitarian women did not, but felt guilty toward their partner. We show how the relationship dynamics of women who have surpassedThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Despite global commitments and efforts, a gender-based division of paid and unpaid work persists. To identify how psychological factors, national policies, and the broader sociocultural context contribute to this inequality, we assessed parental-leave intentions in young adults (18-30 years old) planning to have children (N = 13,942; 8,880 identified as women; 5,062 identified as men) across 37 countries that varied in parental-leave policies and societal gender equality. In all countries, women intended to take longer leave than men. National parental-leave policies and women's political representation partially explained cross-national variations in the gender gap. Gender gaps in leave intentions were paradoxically larger in countries with more gender-egalitarian parental-leave policies (i.e., longer leave available to both fathers and mothers). Interestingly, this cross-national variation in the gender gap was driven by cross-national variations in women's (rather than men's) leave intentions. Financially generous leave and gender-egalitarian policies (linked to men's higher uptake in prior research) were not associated with leave intentions in men. Rather, men's leave intentions were related to their individual gender attitudes. Leave intentions were inversely related to career ambitions. The potential for existing policies to foster gender equality in paid and unpaid work is discussed.

There is growing evidence that couples in non-traditional relationships in which the woman attains higher status than her male partner experience more negative relationship outcomes than traditional couples. A possible reason is that non-traditional couples violate persisting gender stereotypes that prescribe men to be breadwinners and women to be caregivers of the family. In the current study (N = 2,748), we investigated whether a country’s gender-stereotypical culture predicts non-traditional men and women’s relationship and life outcomes. We used the European Sustainable Workforce Survey, which is conducted in nine European countries. Two indicators of countries’ gender-stereotypical culture are used: Gender Empowerment Measure and implicit gender stereotypes. We found that women’s income and -to a lesser extent- education degree relative to their male partner affected outcomes such as relationship quality, negative emotions, and experienced time pressure. Furthermore, men and women living in countries with a traditional gender-stereotypical culture (e.g., Netherlands, Hungary) reported lower relationship quality when women earned more than their partners. Relative income differences did not affect the relationship quality of participants living in egalitarian countries (e.g., Sweden, Finland). Also, couples in which the woman is more highly educated than the man reported higher relationship quality in egalitarian countries, but not in traditional countries. Our findings suggest that dominant beliefs and ideologies in society can hinder or facilitate couples in non-traditional relationships.

Using a task approach, this study examined the extent to which employee regulatory focus would "gravitate" employees towards promotion-versus prevention-oriented tasks within their jobs, and whether a subsequent regulatory fit/misfit would be associated with their well-being (i.e., mental health and job satisfaction). In a pre-study among 37 employees, we determined the regulatory focus of work tasks from the Netherlands Skill Survey, which are relevant to the general working population, resulting in a selection of 7 promotion and 11 prevention tasks. For our main study, we used the Dutch Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) panel and collected data from 1,606 respondents. In 2011, we collected respondents' regulatory focus and in 2012, we collected their work tasks and well-being. Promotionoriented employees considered both promotion and prevention tasks to be highly relevant in their jobs, and this relevance was associated with their mental health. Prevention-oriented employees, however, did not respond to the relevance of promotion or prevention tasks and generally reported lower well-being, irrespective of the regulatory focus of their tasks. We tentatively conclude that promotion focus gravitates employees towards job with a richer task content, containing both promotion and prevention tasks.