His and Her Perspectives: Gender Ideology, Work-to-Family Conflict, and Marital Satisfaction

Abstract

This study examines the relationships between gender ideology, work-to-family conflict, and marital satisfaction. We hypothesize that gender ideology will moderate relationships between both the respondent's work-to-family conflict and their spouse's work-to-family conflict in predicting marital satisfaction, and that spouses' gender ideologies will interact in predicting marital satisfaction. The hypotheses are addressed using data from a random sample of U.S. dual-earner couples (N=156) in a western state. The findings indicate that the more egalitarian women's gender ideologies, the stronger the negative relationship between women's marital satisfaction and women's work-to-family conflict. The results also indicate that the dependence of men's marital satisfaction on wives' gender ideologies varies according to men's own gender ideologies. Implications of the study are discussed.

Gender Conformity, Perceptions of Shared Power, and Marital Quality in Same- and Different-Sex Marriages

“…Specifically, our finding that gender conformity predicted perceptions of shared power among women and men in different-sex marriages, and that perceptions of shared power was then associated with marital quality, supports literature showing that women who hold traditional views about gender roles tend to have more relationship satisfaction than women in different-sex relationships who hold more egalitarian views about gender roles. This may be because the former see these inequalities as in line with their traditional gender role beliefs (Amato and Booth 1995; Greenstein 1996; Lavee and Katz 2002; Minnotte et al 2010). …”

Traditional Gender Role Orientation and Dyadic Coping in Immigrant Latino Couples: Effects on Couple Functioning

“…In other words, stronger traditional gender role views may increase psychological aggression and lower relationship satisfaction for Latino men, but it may have the opposite effect for Latinas. It has also been found, however, that it is the difference in partners' gender role ideologies rather than gender role orientation by itself that contributes to conflict and relationship dissatisfaction (Minnotte, Minnotte, Persen, Mannon, & Kiger, 2010;Zvonkovic, Schmiege, & Hall, 1994). Among Latinos, a traditional gender role orientation structure is associated with family stability when both partners expect such a structure and are satisfied with it (Hirsch, 2003).…”

Marital Satisfaction among Dual‐Earner Couples: Gender Ideologies and Family‐to‐Work Conflict

“…This study redressed a gap in the existing literature by examining whether gender ideology moderates how each spouse's family‐to‐work conflict relates to the marital satisfaction of dual‐earner couples, thereby exploring a number of cross‐partner effects. In general, our results showed some evidence of moderation and crossover, thus adding to the growing literature highlighting how gender ideologies of spouses moderate how work–family dynamics relate to marital outcomes (Minnotte et al, ; Roehling & Bultman, ). Altogether, such studies draw attention to the continued salience of gender ideologies in shaping the experiences of people navigating work and family, and to the importance of exploring crossover among married couples.…”

“…Little research, however, has investigated how gender ideology relates to how work -family conflicts are viewed, thereby leading such conflicts to be associated with marital satisfaction differently contingent on gender ideology. The few existing studies have focused on how gender ideology and workto-family conflict relate to marital satisfaction (Minnotte, Minnotte, Pedersen, Mannon, & Kiger, 2010;Zvonkovic, Schmiege, & Hall, 1994), with little, if any, attention paid to familyto-work conflict. Further, the role of the spouse's gender ideology has been acknowledged (e.g., Hochschild, 1989) but remains subject to far less empirical investigation-typically because scholars lack access to dyadic data (for an exception, see Roehling & Bultman, 2002).…”