Leisure Inequality in the United States: 1965–2003

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. www.econstor.eu The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit organization supported by Deutsche Post Foundation. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its international network, workshops and conferences, data service, project support, research visits and doctoral program. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SIZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author.

Trends in Spouses’ Shared Time in the United States, 1965–2012

“…Conversely, because the extant evidence suggests that married men’s time spent in housework is substituting for married women’s time in the labor force (Bianchi et al 2000), couples’ housework time may be no more overlapping today than it had been. Americans’ leisure time increased between 1965 and 2003 (Aguiar and Hurst 2007; Sevilla et al 2012), suggesting that couples may have more time to spend together than they once did, and this supposition is supported in limited research on couples’ shared time in leisure (Sevilla et al 2012; Voorpostel et al 2009, 2010). However, the average increases in leisure time and minimal change in work hours over this period may mask the disparate nature of both work and leisure, with varying change by demographic groups and by socioeconomic status (Jacobs and Gerson 2004; Sevilla et al 2012).…”

“…Previous research on couples’ shared time has found that couples’ time spent alone together has decreased since 1975 (Dew 2009), and shared leisure time has increased (Sevilla et al 2012; Voorpostel et al 2009, 2010). We extend this limited research on changes in couples’ shared time in three ways.…”

“…Most of this research has considered couples’ shared time in leisure activities (Sevilla et al 2012; Voorpostel et al 2009, 2010). Voorpostel et al (2009, 2010) showed that free time shared with a partner increased between 1965 and 2003, and the proportion of individuals’ total free time spent with a spouse increased over the period.…”

Teens and twenties: cultural and preferences differences in the uses of time in Spain

“…Among the reasons to investigate this topic, we find that the time individuals spend on their daily activities is important for their well-being, as individuals experience "hedonic flows of pleasure or pain" (Kahneman et al, 2004, Kahneman and Krueger;2006;Krueger, 2007;Sevilla et al, 2012). The analysis of the uses of time is important, given the limitations of GDP as a measurement of well-being and development (Folbre, 2006).…”

Disentangling income and price effects in the demand for time online

“…The leisure measure gathers time spent on social life and entertainment, sports and outdoor activities, hobbies and games, and mass media, i.e. activities that we cannot pay somebody else to do for us and that are not biological needs (Sevilla et al 2012). Additionally, 1 X includes a dummy for the presence of a teenager in the household, the number of cell phones owned by the household members (which I view as a proxy for optimism toward technology), and whether the household owns the home (owners may be more likely to bear technology installation costs).…”