The Effects of Job Characteristics on Marital Quality: Specifying Linking Mechanisms

Hughes, Diane; Galinsky, Ellen; Morris, Anne

doi:10.2307/353273

Cited by 132 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This process appears to operate straightforwardly in one direction; however, it has been suggested that exposure to strain may result in an increased vulnerability to additional stressors (Ursano, Grieger, & McCarroll, 1996), and it is therefore possible that increased strain in one domain (e.g., work) may increase the salience of interference arising from another domain (e.g., family-to-work conflict). Research by Hughes, Galinsky and Morris (1992) supports this proposition by finding that work pressures and work-related insecurity predicted employees' tendency to attribute to their job any difficulties they were experiencing in fulfilling their family role.…”

Section: Work Stressorssupporting

confidence: 55%

Are organizations shooting themselves in the foot?

Beauregard

2006

Equal Opportunities International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo examine the direct effects of work domain variables on family‐to‐work conflict (FWC), beyond their indirect effects via the mediating variable of work‐to‐family conflict (WFC), and sex differences in the effects of work role expectations and supervisor support on FWC.Design/methodology/approachA survey was conducted among 208 UK public sector employees. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis tested main and moderating effects of work domain variables and sex on FWC. To test for mediation, the procedure recommended by Baron and Kenny was used.FindingsWork domain variables had a significant effect on FWC above and beyond the effects of family domain variables, and independent of WFC. The relationship between work role expectations and FWC was found to be significantly stronger for men than for women.Research limitations/implicationsThe cross‐sectional design of the study does not permit firm conclusions regarding causality, and the results may be influenced by common method bias.Practical implicationsIn the face of evidence that organizations are causing the very phenomenon that hurts them, the responsibility to assist employees with reducing FWC is enhanced. Particularly for men, management of organizational expectations to work long hours and prioritize work over family is an area in which employers can and should play a key role if gender equity with regard to organizational work‐family climate is to be established.Originality/valueThis study indicates that organizational work demands may have more influence over the degree to which employees’ family lives interfere with their work than has previously been assumed, especially for men.

show abstract

Section: Work Stressorssupporting

confidence: 55%

Are organizations shooting themselves in the foot?

Beauregard

2006

Equal Opportunities International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies on the experiences of positive work-family interface reported that JI was also associated with lower work-to-family enrichment (over-time effect if baseline of enrichment was not taken into account; Cheng, Mauno, & Lee, 2014a), lower work-tofamily facilitation (only if other work characteristics were not taken into account, Voydanoff, 2005), and lower satisfaction with work-family balance (via WFC as a mediator; Beham & Drobnic, 2009). Furthermore, JI was found to be associated with poorer marital role quality (Barling & Macewen, 1992;Cheng, Mauno, & Lee, 2014b;Hughes & Galinsky, 1994;Hughes et al, 1992;Larson, Wilson, & Beley, 1994;Mauno & Kinnunen, 1999a; see Table 2) in the form of marital dissatisfaction, marital tension, and poorer marital adjustment. Finally, JI was related to parenting behaviors through overall poorer family functioning (Larson et al, 1994), negative work spillover into parenthood (in mothers; Mauno & Kinnunen, 1999b), parent's slighter participation in child-related activities (in fathers; Roeters, van der Lippe, & Kluwer, 2009) as well as higher parental stress and parental dissatisfaction (Ruokolainen et al, 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In these studies, mediator analyses showed that WFC mediated the relationship between JI and family outcomes such as marital tension (Hughes et al, 1992) and employees' satisfaction with work-family balance (Beham & Drobnic, 2009), and FWC (Voydanoff, 2005). Moreover, moderator analyses revealed that some work characteristics, e.g., high job commitment/engagement, rendered employees more vulnerable to the harmful role of JI in family (parental dissatisfaction; Ruokolainen et al, 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Far-Reaching Consequences of Job Insecurity: A Review on Family-Related Outcomes

Mauno

Cheng

Lim

2017

Marriage & Family Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Job insecurity (JI) appears a fairly stable job stressor in working life today and likely to impair employee well-being. This review article presents the key findings of studies examining the effects of perceived JI on family well-being (e.g., marital/parental role quality, work-family conflict). The results, based on 25 published peer-reviewed studies, suggest an association between JI and impaired family well-being. Thus, JI spills over into family life as proposed in the spillover theory of work-family interface. Furthermore, studies have found some evidence of crossover effects of 2 JI from parents to children: parents' JI relates to negative outcomes in children. These results support the view that JI is very likely a severe stressor not only for employees' well-being and health but also for their families' well-being. Limitations, future directions and implications are also discussed.

show abstract

“…Studies in this tradition have examined the association between levels of perceived spillover or role conflict and measures of marital functioning (e.g., Hughes, Galinsky, & Morris, 1992). Typically, participants are asked to estimate the degree to which job experiences influence their behavior at home.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%