copyright and citation considerations for this thesis...
TRANSCRIPT
COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION
o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
How to cite this thesis
Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za (Accessed: Date).
WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT AND PERSONALITY: THE
MODERATING ROLE OF GENDER
by
CHERISE LOUW
A minor dissertation submitted in fulfilment for the Degree
of
Magister Commercii
in
Industrial Psychology
Faculty of Management
UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG
Supervisor: Dr Carolina Henn
2013
ii
DECLARATION
I certify that the minor dissertation submitted by me for the degree Master’s of Commerce
(Industrial Psychology) at the University of Johannesburg is my independent work and has
not been submitted by me for a degree at another university.
CHERISE LOUW
(Name in block letters – no signature)
i
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the following people:
• Dr Carolina Henn, my supervisor, for providing me with her knowledge, support and
guidance throughout this process. Without her help and motivation, it would have
taken me much longer to complete this study.
• Professor Deon de Bruin and Dr Nicola Taylor (JvR Africa) for permission to use the
Basic Traits Inventory (BTI).
• Jillian Williamson, Tracy Opie and Mirriam Mathabela for collection of the data
utilised in the analysis.
• My father for supporting me and motivating me to do my best and to work hard.
• My God, for giving me the strength to finish my dissertation.
ii
ABSTRACT
Orientation – Working men and women are finding it increasingly challenging to establish a
balance between their family environments and working environment, especially with the
increase in the number of roles they have adopted. Personality may impact the experience of
work-family conflict.
Research purpose – The main objective of this study was to determine whether gender
moderates the relationship between personality variables- specifically extraversion,
conscientiousness and neuroticism- and work-family conflict. This study also looked at
whether levels of work-family conflict, extraversion, neuroticism and conscientiousness
differ significantly between men and women.
Motivation for the study – There is little research done on working men and women and
how they experience work-family conflict.
Research design, approach and method – A quantitative, cross-sectional survey design was
utilised to gather information. The sample (N=791) was comprised of working men and
women from a variety of organisations. Data were gathered by making use of the Work-to-
Family Conflict Questionnaire (Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian, 1996) and the Basic Traits
Inventory (BTI) (Taylor & De Bruin, 2006).
Main finding – The results indicated that levels of work-family conflict do not differ
significantly between working men and working women, however, differences did occur in
personality between men and women. Women experience higher levels of conscientiousness
and neuroticism than men. Men and women, however, do not differ in terms of levels of
extraversion. Neuroticism positively predicted work-family conflict. The results also
iii
indicated that gender does not moderate the relationship between these three personality
variables and work-family conflict.
Practical/ managerial implications - The study supplements a thin database on the
experiences in terms of work-family conflict among working men and women in South
Africa. Organisations should provide men and women with equal opportunities as well as
support in facing challenges of work-family conflict (e.g. flexible working hours).
Key words: work-to-family conflict, extraversion, conscientiousness, neuroticism, males and
females
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background to the study 1
1.3 Problem statement 3
1.4 Research objective 3
1.5 Research questions 3
1.6 Layout of dissertation 4
1.7 Summary 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Personality in the workplace 5
2.2.1 The Big Five model of personality 6
2.2.1.1 Extraversion 7
2.2.1.2 Conscientiousness 8
2.2.1.3 Neuroticism 9
2.2.2 The role of personality in the workplace 10
2.3 Work-Family Conflict 11
2.3.1 Personality and work-family conflict 15
v
2.4 Gender in the workplace 17
2.4.1 Work in the 21st century 17
2.4.2 Challenges faced by working men and women 18
2.4.3 Expectations of working men and women 20
2.4.4 Dual-earner couples 21
2.4.5 Personality and Gender 22
2.5 Work-family conflict and gender 23
2.5.1 The moderating role of gender in work-family conflict 25
2.6 Marital status, age and education 26
2.7 Research questions 27
2.8 Summary 27
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD 29
3.1 Introduction 29
3.2 Research Questions 29
3.3 Research Design 30
3.4 Research Method 30
3.4.1 Population and Sampling 30
3.4.2 Description of the Sample 30
3.4.3 Measuring Instruments 31
vi
3.4.3.1 Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) 31
3.4.3.2 Work-to-Family Conflict Questionnaire 32
3.4.4 Statistical Analysis 32
3.4.5 Ethical Considerations 33
3.5 Summary 33
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS 34
4.1 Introduction 34
4.2 Descriptive Statistics 34
4.3 T-Test 35
4.4 Regression Analysis 36
4.5 Summary 38
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION 39
5.1 Introduction 39
5.2 Demographic variables 39
5.3 Work-family conflict and gender 39
5.4 Extraversion and gender 40
5.5 Conscientiousness and gender 40
5.6 Neuroticism and gender 40
5.7 Neuroticism and work-family conflict 41
vii
5.8 Gender as a moderator 41
5.9 Summary 42
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 43
6.1 Introduction 43
6.2 Reason for undertaking the research 43
6.3 Summary of the findings 44
6.4 Implications of the study 44
6.5 Limitations of the study 45
6.6 Recommendations for future research 45
6.7 Conclusion 46
Reference List 48
viii
List of tables:
Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s inter-correlation of variables 34
Table 4.2 Independent Sample T-Test 35
Table 4.3 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting work-family conflict from
Neuroticism 37
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
This section serves as a background to the study by introducing the variables of interest
and the hypothesised relationships between them. The problem statement and objectives of
the study are given. The chapter ends with the layout of the dissertation.
1.2 Background to the study
Working individuals are faced with the need to strike a balance between family
demands and roles in the family domain, and work demands and roles in the work domain
(Allport, 1960). This is obviously a challenge for many individuals (Mostert, 2008). An
aspect that can be expected to influence how individuals handle this challenge is the inherent
personality traits that they bring into their work and personal environments (George, Helson,
& John, 2011). In fact, it has been shown that personality influences workplace behaviours
such as absenteeism (Furnham & Bramwell, 2006) and job performance (Barrick & Mount,
1991).
Personality can be described by many perspectives that determine the way in which
individuals behave, think and feel (Roberts & Wood, 2006). A widely known
conceptualisation of personality is the Big Five model, according to which the five key traits
that inform our personality are agreeableness, openness to experience, extraversion,
neuroticism and conscientiousness (McCrae & John, 1992). This study specifically focuses
on extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, as these personality traits have been
linked to work-family conflict in several studies done outside of the South African context
(Bruck & Allen, 2003; Stoeva, Chiu, & Greenhaus, 2002; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004)
and only limited studies are available on the relationship between openness to experience and
2
agreeableness. Both extraversion and conscientiousness has shown to have a negative
relationship with work-family conflict (McCrae & Costa, 1991; Wayne et al., 2004) and
neuroticism has been shown to have a positive relationship with work-family conflict (Bruck
& Allen, 2003; Stoeva et al., 2002).
Substantial research attention has been given to work-family conflict (Allen, Herst,
Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Repetti, 1988; Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys,
2013). Voydanoff (2004) pointed out that the family and work domains are no longer
separate, but go hand in hand. This may lead to men and women experiencing increased
pressure as they have to adapt to changes in their roles (Mauno, Kinnunen, & Ruokolainen,
2006). Today, men have started to take on more domestic responsibilities and women’s
participation in the workplace has increased. Having to fulfil the role of being a parent, wife
or husband, and a working individual can cause conflict and stress between these roles
(Theunissen, Van Vuuren, & Visser, 2003). The pressure experienced in the work and family
domains can become irreconcilable which can result in work-family conflict (Dugan,
Matthews & Barnes-Farrell, 2012; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). With dual-earner couples
becoming the norm, men and women are increasingly sharing domestic responsibilities
(Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Zvara, Schoppe-Sullivan & Dush, 2013).
The relationship between family and work is bidirectional (Gutek, Searle, & Klepa,
1991; Stoeva, Chiu, & Greenhaus, 2002). As research has shown that work-family conflict
has a greater impact on the well-being of individuals than family-work conflict, this study
focuses on work-family conflict rather than family-work conflict (Donald & Linington, 2008;
Mauno, Kinnunen, & Ruokolainen, 2006). Gender differences in terms of work-family
conflict (Parasuraman & Simmers, 2001) and personality (Feingold, 1994; Furnham &
Bramwell, 2006; Lippa, 2010) do exist. These differences could exist because men and
3
women are orientated differently (Cinamon & Rich, 2002) and derive meaning from different
things in life (Rothbard, 2001).
1.3 Problem statement
The intensity of work-family conflict experienced by working men and women is
changing due to changes in their roles and responsibilities. Men are increasingly contributing
at home and women are taking on more work responsibilities (Chant & Gutmann, 2000).
Research has focused mostly on women and their experience of work-family conflict (Franks,
Schurink, & Fourie, 2006; MacDonald, 2004), yet men are not unaffected. Personality traits
(e.g. neuroticism) affect the levels of work-family conflict (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Few
studies, however, have investigated the relationships among these specific variables within
the South African context in particular.
1.4 Research objective
This study aims to establish whether gender moderates the relationship between
personality variables (extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism) and work-family
conflict. A secondary aim is to determine whether there are significant gender differences in
terms of levels of extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, as well as levels of work-
family conflict.
1.5 Research questions
The study aimed to answer the following research questions:
1. Do levels of work-family conflict differ significantly between men and women?
2. Do levels of extraversion, neuroticism and conscientiousness differ significantly
between men and women?
4
3. Does gender moderate the relationship between extraversion and work-family
conflict?
4. Does gender moderate the relationship between neuroticism and work-family
conflict?
5. Does gender moderate the relationship between conscientiousness and work-family
conflict?
1.6 Layout of dissertation
Chapter 2 presents a detailed overview of the constructs in this study. The literature
focuses on the relationships among the constructs of interest. These are: extraversion;
conscientiousness; neuroticism; work-family conflict; and gender. Chapter 3 presents the
research process, which includes the research design, research procedure, description of the
measuring instruments used, the statistical analysis and the ethical considerations. Chapter 4
contains the research results. Chapter 5 provide a discussion of the findings. Chapter 6
provides the conclusion that incorporates an overview of the aims and findings, the meaning
of these findings, as well as limitations and recommendations for future studies.
1.7 Summary
This chapter set the context for the study and introduced the variables of interest. The
problem statement, aims of the study and research questions was stated. An overview of the
remainder of the dissertation was provided.
5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Chapter one presented a broad overview of the study and introduced the research
problem. The literature review provides a detailed overview of the literature findings related
to the variables in this study. The discussion commences with an investigation of personality
and in particular, the role it plays in the workplace. Work-family conflict is discussed, as well
as the role of gender in the relationship between work-family conflict and personality. The
chapter concludes by indicating possible hypotheses related to the key variables in the study,
namely: personality, work-family conflict and gender.
2.2 Personality in the workplace
Several definitions of personality have been proposed by a number of theorists, but
only a few will be highlighted in this study. Hofstee (1994) defines personality from an
outside-in perspective by stating that an outsider’s perspective of a person can serve as a
definition of that person’s personality. An individual’s implicit ideas can also serve as a
definition of their structure of personality (Hofstee, 1994). Allport (1945) linked personality
to a number of dimensions, including learning, attitude and participation or behaviour.
Allport (1960) furthermore states that personality should be viewed as an open system, as it is
in interaction with the environment in that individuals respond to stimuli and try to maintain
equilibrium in their lives. He also states that personality can be defined according to
interaction with others, and with the culture or roles that people adopt. Allport’s definition
highlights the multifaceted nature of personality. In fact, Roberts and Wood (2006) proposed
that personality can be divided into four categories, namely: an individual’s capability of
doing something; personality traits that explain what an individual thinks, feels and how
he/she behaves; an individual’s motives; and the life stories of an individual. Adding to this,
6
McAdams (1995, 1996) describes personality as consisting of three levels. These include: the
trait level which describes the person and their psychological characteristics; the second level
which consists of the individual’s ambitions, the way he/she copes with problems and the
things that motivate him/her; and the third level which is the individual’s actual identity.
A prominent school of thought that emerged in personality is the trait-based theory. In
this study, the trait-based theory of personality was applied. This is the school of thought
most often utilised when including personality variables in a study (Roberts, Jackson,
Duckworth, & Von Culin 2011). Tellegen (1991) defined a personality trait as ‘‘a
psychological (therefore) organismic structure underlying a relatively enduring behavioural
disposition, i.e., a tendency to respond in certain ways under certain circumstances” (p. 622).
Eysenck and Eysenck (1980) defined personality traits as “individual differences with respect
to their location on semi-permanent personality dispositions” (p. 191). One of the most
influential trait conceptions of personality is the Big Five (Branco e Silva & Laher, 2012).
2.2.1 The Big Five model of personality
The Big Five model of personality (McCrae and Costa, 1990) puts emphasis on five
broad dimensions of personality in an attempt to describe individual differences in a
meaningful way (De Haan, Dekovic, & Prinzie, 2012).
The Big Five comprise the following five factors: openness to experience, extraversion,
agreeableness, neuroticism and conscientiousness (Caspi, 1998; Digman, 1990; Goldberg,
1993; Hendriks, Hofstee, & De Raad, 1999a, 1999b; McCrae & John, 1992; McCrae &
Costa, 1999). The Big Five has proven to have convergent and discriminant validity and can
therefore be applied to adults for the foreseeable future (McCrae & Costa, 1990). The Big
Five personality traits which have been linked to work-family conflict, include extraversion
(Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004), conscientiousness (Bruck & Allen, 2003) and
7
neuroticism (Stoeva, Chiu, & Greenhaus, 2002). Extraversion, conscientiousness and
neuroticism were chosen for this study for two reasons. Firstly, research has found a
relationship between these traits and work-family conflict and secondly, gender differences
have also been evident in research related to these personality traits.
2.2.1.1 Extraversion
Extraversion is based on interaction and relationships between people (Pervin, 1996).
When a person displays extraversion they usually have an interest in people and they seek
interaction, impact and status or power in the workplace and at home (George, Helson, &
John, 2011). Extraverts display the following characteristics: they are sociable and outgoing;
they are assertive and speak their minds; they are optimistic about the future; and they are
energetic, talkative and cheerful (McCrae & Costa, 1999). Individuals receiving a low score
on this personality dimension are known as introverts and are less outspoken, more reserved
and like to do things by themselves (McCrae & Costa, 1999).
Extraverted individuals usually have a need for interaction with other individuals as this
interaction leads to experiencing feelings of happiness, positivity and energy (Taylor & De
Bruin, 2004). In the workplace, extraverted individuals may display specific behaviours
including approaching workplace challenges with energy, having an enthusiastic approach to
work, enjoying social events and leading a team, being opinionated, accomplishing a greater
number of tasks in a given period, being less prone to stress or fatigue, displaying a need for
challenging or stimulating work, and seeking opportunities to be innovative (Digman, 1990;
John & Srivastava, 1999; McCrae & John, 1992; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004).
8
2.2.1.2 Conscientiousness
Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2001) define conscientiousness as “the degree to which a person
is persevering, responsible and organised as opposed to lazy, irresponsible and impulsive” (p.
438). A conscientious individual is determined, punctual, organised and strong-willed and is
usually successful both academically and in the workplace (Costa & McCrae, 1991). An
individual who is low on conscientiousness does not set goals for himself/herself, and is an
unreliable person because he/she does not perform and is careless (Costa & McCrae, 1991).
Some of the main characteristics of a conscientious individual includes the need to keep
everything neat and tidy and to follow certain steps before acting or making a decision,
finishing tasks that have been started, being reliable and following certain principles, being
diligent and ambitious when it comes to setting and carrying out goals, and thinking and
checking the facts before acting (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). Specific workplace behaviours
that can be expected from conscientious employees include the following: being achievement
orientated; being efficient or thorough in carrying out tasks; being a hard worker and being
productive; accepting responsibility for actions taken; accomplishing much in a given period;
having high self-esteem at work; easily developing good interpersonal relationships; being
trustworthy; and putting others’ interests before their own when necessary (Barrick & Mount,
1991; Judge & Higgins, 1999; McCrae & John, 1992; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004).
Despite all the above positive descriptors of conscientiousness, the trait may also have
some negative aspects attached to it. A strong sense of achievement and competitive nature
can interfere with relationships (McCrae & John, 1992). According to Andreassen, Hetland
and Pallesen (2010) conscientious individuals tend to be over-achievers with high
expectations for themselves, and can therefore spend a lot of time at work. In addition, they
state that this can lead to undesirable consequences such as stress and burnout.
9
2.2.1.3 Neuroticism
Kokkinos (2007, p.230) defines neuroticism as “the susceptibility to psychological
distress, inability to control urges, proneness to unrealistic ideas and inability to cope with
stress”. An individual who is emotionally unstable will score high on neuroticism and will
experience feelings such as worry or fear, guilt, sadness, anger, embarrassment, and disgust
(Costa & McCrae, 1991). When individuals score low on neuroticism, they are usually more
emotionally stable and will be more even-tempered and relaxed (McCrae & Costa, 1999). An
emotionally stable person may handle stressful situations and pressure more easily than an
emotionally unstable person who is more impulsive and experiences stress easily when under
pressure (McCrae & Costa, 1999). A neurotic person usually experiences distressing
emotions such as shame, depression and anger (Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001).
The main characteristics of a neurotic individual are anxiety, depression or feelings of
hopelessness, sensitivity to criticism or being easily embarrassed, and easily becoming upset
or feeling angry (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). Eysenck and Eysenck (1975) describe an
emotionally unstable (i.e., neurotic) individual as someone who is a worrier and who
constantly thinks that things will go wrong. Neurotic individuals or people experiencing
negative affectivity tend to focus on their mistakes and disappointments in their life and they
are very sensitive to frustrations and failures in daily activities (Watson & Clark, 1984).
Specific emotions experienced by neurotic employees include the following: experiencing
anxiety or stress when put under pressure or when the work load increases; becoming
defensive when criticised or questioned by fellow workers; experiencing insecurity in jobs
and daily tasks and responsibilities; increased worry and stress leading to the person not
finishing tasks on time (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Judge & Higgins, 1999; McCrae & John,
1992; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004).
10
Previous studies have examined the relationship between the above personality
dimensions and employee behaviour in the workplace, and found that personality traits have
an influence on work-related outcomes (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Judge & Ilies, 2002). These
findings will be elaborated on in the next section.
2.2.2 The role of personality in the workplace
An individual’s personality is part of who he/she is and determines the way in which
he/she behaves and responds to situations (De Haan, Dekovic, & Prinzie, 2012). As it would
in other spheres of a person’s life, personality influences the way in which an individual
interprets and reacts to a situation in the work environment (George, Helson, & John, 2011;
Matthews & Deary, 1998). Personality traits influence the way in which people see
themselves and may even determine whether they are selected into a work environment or not
(Caspi & Roberts, 2001; Roberts, Caspi, & Moffit, 2003). An individual’s personality can
influence mood, self-esteem as well as perceptions of support received from fellow workers
(Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004). Previous research findings showed that personality traits
can predict certain work behaviours such as absenteeism (Ones, Viswesvaran, & Schmidt,
2003), other counterproductive work behaviours such as theft, fraud and bullying (Roberts,
Harms, Caspi, & Moffitt, 2007) and productive behaviours such as job satisfaction (Judge,
Heller, & Mount, 2002). These findings will be further explored below.
In a study by Oh, Lee, Ashton and de Vries (2011) it was found that extraversion does
not predict deviant behaviour in the workplace, but when combining low honesty-humility
with high extraversion, deviant behaviour is likely to occur. In addition, Furnham and
Bramwell (2006) showed that extraversion is a predictor of absenteeism in the workplace.
Joseph, Luyten, Corveleyn and De Witte (2011) established that neuroticism has shown to
have a positive relationship with emotional exhaustion (burnout) and depersonalisation,
however, has shown to be negatively related to personal achievement and work engagement.
11
Neal, Yeo, Koy and Xiao (2012) found that neuroticism was negatively related to all
dimensions of work role performance (e.g., individual and team effectiveness).
Roberts, Jackson, Duckworth and Von Culin (2011) state that individuals who are
sociable, gregarious, assertive and lively tend to perform better in the workplace than
individuals who are more introverted. Extraversion and conscientiousness are negatively
associated to emotional exhaustion (burnout) and depersonalisation, and positively associated
to personal accomplishment and work engagement (Joseph, Luyten, Corveleyn, & De Witte,
2011). Roberts, Jackson, Duckworth and Von Culin (2011) found that conscientiousness
predicts job performance better than any of the other Big Five personality traits. Higher
conscientiousness has also been related to a lower rate of absenteeism among males and
female employees (Furnham & Bramwell, 2006; Stӧrmer & Fahr, 2013). According to Neal,
Yeo, Koy and Xiao (2012) conscientiousness is positively related to all dimensions of work
role performance. In their study George, Helson and John (2011) found that
conscientiousness and extraversion were related to major aspects of the work environment
such as the nature of work; job satisfaction; work status; and persistence at work. Furnham
and Bramwell (2006) did a study on traits from the Big Five model of personality and found
that extraversion and conscientiousness is significantly negatively correlated with
neuroticism. In addition they found that conscientiousness is significantly positively
correlated with extraversion. Work-family conflict is another aspect connected to the
workplace that can be influenced by personality. The next section discusses this aspect.
2.3 Work - Family Conflict
Over the years, people have deemed work life and family life as separate domains, but
the overlapping of the two domains has become the norm and people have started to believe
that these domains are dependent on each other (Voydanoff, 2004). Owing to its impact on
12
work and people (employees and families), work-family conflict has been increasingly
studied by researchers (Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000).
The variety of terminology utilised by researchers, when investigating the relationship
between family and work, has found to be confusing. Work-family conflict has been referred
to as work-family tension (Herman & Gyllstrom, 1977), job-family role strain (Kelly &
Voydanoff, 1985), work role incompatibility (Jones & Butler, 1980), inter-role conflict
(Kopelman, Greenhaus, & Connolly, 1983) and work-to-family interference (Magee,
Stefanic, Caputi, & Iverson, 2012). Work-family conflict has been defined as “a form of
inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually
incompatible in some respect” (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985, p. 77).
According to Netemeyer, Boles and McMurrian (1996) work-family conflict occurs
when an individual’s job demands interfere with his/her ability to meet family-related
demands and family-work conflict occurs when domestic responsibilities or demands
interfere with job demands. This study will refer to the term work-family conflict or work-to-
family conflict specifically. When an individual has to participate in a work role, it becomes
harder for that individual to participate in their family roles or vice versa (Duxbury &
Higgins, 1991). Kelly and Voydanoff (1985) define work-family conflict as something that
occurs when an individual has many roles to fulfil (e.g., worker, spouse, and parent). Every
role is accompanied by new demands that require the individual’s time, energy and
commitment.
An individual’s involvement with his/her work has been referred to as a psychological
response, a psychological identification with work, and a part of forming a person’s idea of
themselves (Yogev & Brett, 1985). In a study done on managers, it was found that when
individuals spend most of their time at work, they tend to experience higher levels of work-
family conflict (Repetti, 1988). Researchers have linked this relationship between work
13
involvement and work-family conflict to the number of hours an individual spends on work
and family. Wille, De Fruyt and Feys (2013) found that individuals who work extensive
hours and have many children experience higher levels of work-family conflict. Pleck (1979)
also mentions that if an individual is psychologically involved in a role he/she will become
increasingly aware of the challenges within that role. This may increase role conflict
(Simunic & Gregov, 2012). When an individual spends more time and energy on one role,
they have less time and energy to spend on another role (Calvo-Salguero, Martinez-de-Lecea,
& Aguilar-Luzon, 2012). An individual will also invest more of his/her time and energy in
roles perceived to be important (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Reinardy, 2007). This lack of
time to spend on certain roles can lead to the following negative consequences for the
individual: depression; work or family stress; lower levels of family or job commitment;
being absent at work or even at home; and changing jobs continuously (Allen, Herst, Bruck,
& Sutton, 2000; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1997; Spector, Miller, Poelmans, Cooper,
Berwier, Hart et al., 2005).
Work-family conflict becomes more extreme if the individual’s work or family roles
form a central part of their self-concept (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) and this again may
result in negative outcomes such as burnout (Bacharach, Bamberger, & Conley, 1991), a
decrease in the well-being of the individual at home and at work (Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998),
psychological and/or physical strains such as depression or headaches (Frone, Russel, &
Cooper, 1992), and/or dissatisfaction at home or at work (Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian,
1996). Apart from work-family conflict being related to work and family roles, the direction
and type of work-family conflict needs to be considered as well.
In the past, work-family conflict was studied as conflict occurring when work demands
interfere with family or domestic demands and was therefore measured uni-directionally
(Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Over time, however, it became apparent that work-family
14
conflict takes place in two directions namely family-to-work conflict and work-to-family
conflict (Bruck & Allen, 2003; Stoeva, Chiu, & Greenhaus, 2002; Duxbury, Higgins, &
Mills, 1992; Frone, Russel, & Cooper, 1992; Gutek, Searle, & Klepa, 1991). The
bidirectional nature of work-family conflict can be seen as consisting of two components,
namely: work activities interfering with family responsibilities (WIF); and family activities
interfering with work responsibilities (FIW) (Gutek et al., 1991). For individuals to
completely understand the interface of work-family, both these directions of work-family
conflict need to be taken into consideration (Frone et al., 1992; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).
In this study however, only work-to-family conflict was included as research has shown that
work-to-family conflict has a greater impact on individuals than family-to-work conflict
(Donald & Linington, 2008). In addition, researchers have deemed work-to-family conflict to
be of great concern as it has been associated with negative consequences such as distress,
strain and condensed family bonds (MacDermid & Harvey 2006; Stevens, Kiger, & Riley,
2002).
There are three dimensions of work-family conflict, namely, time-based conflict, strain-
based conflict and behaviour-based conflict (Carlson, 1999; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).
Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) explain these dimensions as follows: an individual experiences
time-based conflict when the time they spend on responsibilities and demands in one role
hinders the time they have to spend on responsibilities and demands in other roles; strain-
based conflict takes place when an individual experiences pressure (work pressure or family
pressure) in one role and this interferes with their fulfilment of other roles; and an individual
experiences behaviour-based conflict when their performance in one role does not match their
performance in another role.
According to Carlson (1999) the study of personality variables such as the Big Five can
form a part of the foundation of work-family conflict, because research has indicated that
15
aspects of personality and work-family conflict are related. This relationship will be further
explored in the next section.
2.3.1 Personality and work-family conflict
As has been pointed out before, the way in which an individual behaves at home and at
work, and the way in which an individual interprets his/her work and home life, can be
influenced by that individual’s personality (Matthews & Deary, 1998). A number of studies
have found that perceptions of work-family conflict and certain personality traits are related
(Bruck & Allen, 2003; Michel & Clark, 2009).
In a study by Wayne, Musisca and Fleeson (2004) extraversion was linked to positivity
and energy. These factors led to participants getting more tasks done in a certain amount of
time and being less burnt out or tired. They also stated that extraverts are more focussed on
the positive side of a challenging situation and may therefore see the situation as being less
stressful and, in turn, handle work-family conflict with more ease than others. Wille, De
Fruyt and Feys (2013) did a study on career success and work-family conflict, and found that
neurotic individuals experience the impact of work-family conflict more intensely than
extraverted individuals. The latter is strongly associated with inter-role conflict and work-
family conflict.
Conscientious individuals put in great amounts of effort to attain their goals at home
and at work. This may create an opportunity for conflict, but these individuals are efficient
and organised, which enables them to accomplish goals with less inter-role conflict (McCrae
& Costa, 1991). Conscientious individuals tend to finish work and home activities quickly
and on time as they do not attend to work tasks while at home and do not bring their personal
issues into the workplace, which results in them being able to separate their work life from
their family life (Wayne et al., 2004). Conscientious individuals have the ability to organise
and plan which aids them in preventing family or work conflicts (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Role
16
ambiguity at work or at home tends to have a less harmful effect on the well-being of
conscientious individuals. This is essential as stress related to role ambiguity has a
relationship with work-family conflict (Aryee, 1992).
Conscientious individuals experience less work-family conflict due to their ability to
manage their time, demands and responsibilities (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Baltes, Zhdanova
and Clark (2011) showed that conscientiousness was significantly related to WIF and FIW.
Other studies have also linked conscientiousness to lower levels of WIF or work-family
conflict (Bruck & Allen, 2003; Wayne et al., 2004).
According to Bolger and Zuckerman (1995) individuals who display high levels of
negative affectivity usually place themselves in situations that involve more stress. In
addition, Bruck and Allen (2003) found that individuals displaying negative mood states or
emotions tend to experience more work-family conflict. They also found that neuroticism had
a significant relationship with work-family conflict, WIF, FIW, time-based conflict and
strain-based conflict. According to Carlson (1999) negative affectivity has a strong
relationship with strain-based conflict and relates positively to time-based and behaviour-
based conflict as well. Negative affectivity may be a characteristic of certain personality
types. For example, a neurotic individual may experience increased levels of stress at home
and at work. This might lead to the individual experiencing increased levels of work-family
conflict (Stoeva et al., 2002). According to Wayne et al. (2004), neurotic individuals spend
much time worrying and focusing on the negative side of a situation which gives them less
time to spend on work and family tasks and responsibilities. In addition, they also found that
neuroticism is related to low levels of time management as well as the individual being
consumed by role demands and therefore experiencing increased levels of stress. Neuroticism
has been shown to be the personality trait with the greatest influence on self-reported job
strain measures (Kokkinos, 2007; Stelmack, 2004; Tai & Liu, 2007; Zuckerman, 2005). It
17
therefore seems plausible that neuroticism may increase work-family conflict through factors
such as job strain.
As mentioned earlier, several studies have found gender differences in the experience
of work-family conflict. Similarly, studies have also found gender differences in personality.
The following section will focus on gender differences in the workplace, and more
specifically, the role of gender in the relationship between work-family conflict and
personality.
2.4 Gender in the workplace
2.4.1 Work in the 21st century
According to the literature, the traditional family model of the husband being the
provider and the wife taking care of domestic chores and childrearing is becoming something
of the past (Hall & Hall, 1980; Piotrkowski, Rapoport, & Rapoport, 1987). The traditional
division of labour between partners has changed and work and family can no longer be
organised in the traditional way (Duxbury & Higgins, 1991). Men have started to perceive
family roles and responsibilities to be very important while still having their traditional work
role, and women consider their work role as being very important while still maintaining their
traditional family roles (Cinamon & Rich, 2002).
Many of the theories on globalisation are either gender-neutral or gender-blind which
means that most of the theories ignore the way in which globalisation may shape gender
relationships and the differing effects it has on men and women (Chow, 2003). In fact Chow
contends that gender is at times taken for granted as if it is not really an important concept in
the workplace.
18
2.4.2 Challenges faced by working men and women
The literature clearly shows that much less research has been done on the experiences
of men in the workplace than of women. This may be owing to the relatively recent increase
in employed women (Velamuri, 2012), and also the fact that women have been marginalised
to a large extent for many years (Conradie, 2013). Although the bulk of this discussion will
thus relate to working women, it should be borne in mind that men also face particular
workplace challenges and are not exempt from the challenge of balancing work and family.
In a democratic country such as South Africa the attainment of equality between men
and women in all spheres of life (e.g., social, cultural and economical) is of prime
importance. Gender equality in the workplace has not yet been fully achieved in South Africa
and remains a challenge (Michailidis, Morphitou, & Theophylatou, 2012).
Despite the fact that there is an increase in powerful women in the working world
(King, 2006; Sarra, 2005; Scott & Nolan, 2007), research indicates that men still earn more
than women (Besen & Kimmel, 2006; Blau & Kahn, 2004; Burress & Zucca, 2004; Ngo,
Foley, Wong, & Loi, 2003) and women in leadership positions are under-represented in the
workplace (Noble & Moore, 2006; Probert, 2005).
In a recent study it was found that women face more obstacles (e.g., sexual harassment
and discrimination) than men in the workplace and therefore many well-educated,
experienced women are overlooked for promotion in favour of their male co-workers
(Michailidis, Morphitou, & Theophylatou, 2012). Schneider, Swan and Fitzgerald (1997)
state that sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace have damaged many
women’s psychological and physical well-being, and even led to many women leaving their
jobs. Some men tend not to take women seriously at work because they feel that all women
will leave the workplace at some point to start a family and will therefore not be prepared to
19
work the hours that men would (Hymowitz, 2005). In many instances, women who have
made it to top management positions do leave these positions, for a number of reasons,
including that they find it difficult to combine their work with their family life; they are in
continuous battles with traditional organisational cultures that are male-dominated; and some
women feel dominated or intimidated by the male leader stereotype (Haywood, 2005; Noble
& Moore, 2006; Probert, 2005).
In the past women were led to believe that their first and most important priority was to
be a wife and a mother and to put their career second (Gilbert, 1993). The stereotype that a
women’s place is in the home taking care of her family and doing household chores has had
an influence on women’s lives as “gender stereotypes influence beliefs, behaviours and self-
concepts at both conscious and unconscious levels” (Rhode 2003, p. 7). Another stereotype
that exists about men and women in the workplace is that “women take care and men take
charge” (Bible & Hill, 2007, p. 66).
There is an increasing need for men to be included in studies on gender discrimination,
as there is a misleading impression about the power and privileges of men remaining stable
and fixed, which is not the case (Kajifusa, 1998). Men are becoming more involved in the
home environment and they are focusing their attention more on their families (Michelson,
1983; Pleck, 1979, 1985; Zvara, Schoppe-Sullivan & Dush, 2013). More research needs to be
done on men in the workplace and how the changes in women’s work and family lives have
led to changes in the work and family lives of men as well, for example, changes in male-
female power relations (Chant & Gutmann, 2000).
The gender stereotype of the male being the breadwinner has damaged the status and
identity of the male population in that it has led to society believing that men are detached
from their family life and only care about work (Silberschmidt, 1999). Changing times have
20
led to men being confused about their roles in the family environment and about the meaning
of masculinity (Chant & Gutmann, 2000). In addition, these authors state that men feel more
and more insecure in their jobs because women are entering the workplace and are taking
over some of the projects that men used to run. When men are increasingly spending time
with their family or in their home environment and behave in ways contradictory to what
society expects, they experience higher levels of work-family conflict (Duxbury & Higgins,
1991). According to Schwartzberg and Dytell (1996) women feel a certain sense of obligation
to their family role that may cause them to experience more family-to-work conflict than
men. Some men feel that their primary role is to work which causes them to experience
greater work-to-family conflict than women (Cinamon & Rich, 2002).
2.4.3 Expectations of working men and women
Men and women have different expectations with regard to work (Bowen, Cattell, &
Distiller, 2008). O’Neil, Hopkins and Bilimoria (2008) state that, when it comes to women,
success at work and job satisfaction are closely related to life issues in that women want to
succeed both in their careers and in their personal life. Gilbert and Walker (2001) found that
women tend to be motivated by flexible working hours, maternity leave and a safe working
environment, while men tend to be motivated by remuneration and achievement. These
expectations could lead to men and women being orientated differently in their careers as
well as choosing specific careers that would meet these expectations. Despite changes in
gender roles, traditional socialisation still has an impact as women are more likely to choose
service-orientated or health-orientated careers, whereas men are more likely to occupy top
management positions (Burress & Zucca, 2004).
Another reason for men and women’s choice in careers relate to the meaning they
derive from their careers. According to Rothbard (2001) men experience more enrichment
21
from their work roles than family roles and women experience more enrichment from their
family roles than work roles. Women may therefore consciously search out careers and
occupations that allow them more leave benefits and fewer or flexible working hours (O’Neil,
Hopkins, & Bilimoria, 2008). Unfortunately this has a negative impact on their earning
potential as well as promotional opportunities (Fransen, Plantenga, & Vlasblom, 2012). This
may be one of the reasons why men hold more management positions than do women (Bible
& Hill, 2007; Wentling, 2003).
2.4.4 Dual-earner couples
With the increase in female employment there has naturally been a significant increase
in the number of dual-earner couples (Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Bond, Galinsky,
& Swanberg, 1998). With both partners working, research shows that both men and women
take responsibility for household and work duties (Bond et al., 1998; Gilbert, Hallett, &
Eldridge, 1994). However, women are still carrying the bulk of home responsibilities such as
washing clothes and taking care of the children (Daniels, 2010). Some researchers found that
men and women are able to balance their work and family roles by sharing domestic and
child rearing responsibilities (Novack & Novack, 1996; Spade & Reese, 1991; Willinger,
1993). On the other hand, Bosch (1999) found that women who are not at home much tend to
cause more stress for their husbands.
Ho, Chen, Cheung, Liu and Worthington, Jr. (2013) did not find a significant
relationship between personality traits and work-family conflict for dual-earner couples. They
stated that a reason for this may be that couples with similar personality traits tend to share
similar gender role expectations and may be more understanding towards each other and end
up experiencing work-family enhancement, rather than work-family conflict. On the other
hand, negative spill-over could occur, where individuals’ problems and conflict at work cause
22
them to become drained or preoccupied, making it difficult for them difficulty to participate
in family life (Duxbury & Higgins, 1991).
2.4.5 Personality and gender
Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) conducted a study on the differences of gender in
personality traits and found that men and women differ in cognition, temperament and social
behaviour. Specifically they found that men are more assertive and less nervous than women.
Lippa (2010) found that men and women have different personality traits and this can either
be due to the way they were raised or their genes. In terms of the Big Five personality traits,
males’ scores are higher than females when it comes to being assertive and dominant, but
males score lower than females when it comes to being sociable and warm (Costa,
Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Feingold, 1994; Schmitt, Realo, Voracek, & Allik, 2008).
Feingold (1994) found that women are less assertive than men, but tend to be more
extraverted, anxious, trustworthy and tender-minded than men. Whereas Feingold (1994)
found that women scored higher on extraversion than men, Lynn and Martin (1997) found the
opposite. George, Helson and John (2011) showed that introverted and extraverted women
have an equal tendency to prepare themselves for a career and seek employment outside the
home. In Feingold’s study (1994) women scored higher than men on conscientiousness.
Women who score high on conscientiousness showed greater commitment to wife and
mother roles and maintaining the careers they had (George, Helson, & John, 2011). Furnham
and Bramwell (2006) stated that gender was negatively correlated to extraversion as well as
conscientiousness, but positively correlated to neuroticism (with higher scores for women).
Studies have shown that females score significantly higher than males on neuroticism
(Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Feingold, 1994; Schmitt, Realo, Voracek, & Allik,
2008; Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys, 2013) which means they are more prone to experiencing
23
anxiety, anger, shame and even depression (Lynn & Martin, 1997). In another study done on
men and women, Kling, Hyde, Showers and Buswell (1999) state that women score lower on
self-esteem than men. Men, on the other hand, reported higher levels of anger than women
(Scherwitz, Perkins, Chesney, & Hughes, 1991). Wille, De Fruyt and Feys (2013) found that
gender was significantly related to the Big Five, in that women scored significantly higher on
neuroticism than men. Bouchard Jr and Loehlin (2001) showed that, in terms of the Big Five,
the largest gender differences appeared to be found in neuroticism.
Schmitt et al. (2008) found that in general, females score higher than males on
extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism. According to John et al. (1997) there is a
universal pattern of gender differences in response to the Big Five personality inventory
items, with women scoring higher than men on neuroticism and men scoring higher than
women on extraversion and conscientiousness.
Women have shown increased presence in the workplace and men in the home
environment which has led to men and women experiencing higher levels of work-family
conflict due to the challenge of maintaining a balance between work and family demands
(Duxbury & Higgins, 1991). Research findings regarding the relationship between gender
and work-family conflict follows.
2.5 Work-family conflict and gender
Gender differences can be expected in terms of work-family conflict, as work and
family carry specific gender roles which can be in conflict with each other (McElwain,
Korabik, & Rosin, 2005). In fact, Parasuraman and Simmers (2001) found gender to be one
of the contributory elements to work-family conflict because of work and family role
pressures, such as parental demands and lack of flexibility.
24
Results of studies on gender differences and the experience of work-family conflict are
contradictory. Wallace (1997), for example, found no gender differences in the experience of
work-family conflict. He did, however, state that men do experience work-family conflict
when it comes to work expectations and they tend to put their family responsibilities second,
creating an imbalance between family and work for men, which may increase their
experience of work-family conflict. In support of this, Cook and Minnotte (2008) did a study
on the work-family interface and found that women reported lower levels of work-family
conflict than men. In contrast, Duxbury and Higgins (1991) established that, for females,
work demands made it more difficult to carry out their responsibilities at home and this led to
an increase in work-family conflict. Males on the other hand, did not experience such high
levels of work-family conflict because they had fewer responsibilities to fulfil at home. These
authors also found that women who experience a lot of work-family conflict choose to leave
their work or work part time.
A few studies have shown that women report higher levels of family-to-work conflict
and men report higher levels of work-to-family conflict (Anderson & Leslie, 1991; Ho et al.,
2013; Pleck, 1977). While some researchers found that women experience more FIW than
men and men experience more WIF than women, other researchers found that the opposite is
starting to occur (Byron, 2005; Cinamon & Rich, 2002).
As pointed out by Kerpelman and Schvaneveldt (1999), men and women vary in what
they believe to be important when it comes to work and family roles, and findings therefore
cannot be generalised. Duxbury and Higgins (1991) found that working men expect their
families to adapt and adjust in such a way as to accommodate the work demands they face,
whereas working women adjust their careers and reduce their work demands in order to meet
family demands. Support from family may therefore also have an effect on the level of work-
family conflict experienced.
25
A study by Cinamon and Rich (2002) found that men spend more time on work than
women, but women spend more hours on work and family activities together than men.
Duxbury and Higgins (1991) found that many men take their work home or use family time
to relax and recover from a stressful day at work. This could lead to an increase in work-
family conflict as it interferes with quality time spent with their family or on family
responsibilities.
Ho et al. (2013) found that men who feel supported by their work report significantly
less work-to-family conflict. They also found that women who feel supported by family
report less family-to-work conflict. Moreover, their findings indicated that work-family
conflict experienced by an individual (male or female) has a positive relationship to the work-
family conflict experienced by his/her spouse. Duxbury and Higgins (1991) state that men
seemed to adapt more easily than women to stressors in the work environment and women
adapt or handle stresses more easily than men in the home environment.
2.5.1 The moderating role of gender in work-family conflict
Gutek, Searle and Klepa (1991) found that gender can have an influence on perceived
conflict and can moderate the relationship between the time an individual spends at work or
with family, and work-family conflict. They specifically found that full-time employees who
spend more than thirty five hours at work per week experienced more WIF. In addition to
this, they found that individuals (male and female) who work full time spend less time on
family responsibilities than they spend at work. Stewart-Sicking, Ciarrocchi, Hollensbe and
Sheep (2011) found that gender moderated the relationship between workplace conditions
and the wellness of employees.
26
2.6 Marital status, age and education
Furnham and Bramwell (2006) found a significant positive correlation between
conscientiousness and age (older participants were more conscientious), and a significant
negative correlation between neuroticism and age (younger participants were more neurotic).
On the other hand, Charles, Reynolds and Gatz (2001) stated that older individuals are able to
cope better with negative feelings that may be caused by factors such as work-family
imbalance, when compared to younger individuals. Mazerolle, Bruening and Casa (2008)
conducted a study on work-family conflict within the athletic profession and found that no
differences were detected between gender, or marital status, and work-family conflict. They
added that these specific demographic variables were not considered to be antecedents of
work-family conflict. In fact, married individuals, with or without children, did not differ in
their experience of work-family conflict than that of single individuals (Mazerolle, Bruening,
& Casa, 2008). Certain personality traits have been linked to certain demographic variables.
Slavin-Mulford, Sinclair, Malone, Stein, Bello and Blais (2013) found that antisocial
behaviour and carelessness is negatively correlated to an individual’s educational level.
Similarly, in this study, demographic variables will be controlled for.
In summary, individuals (male and female) possess certain personality traits. These
traits determine an individual’s workplace behaviours and how he/she reacts to certain things
such as work-family conflict (De Haan, Dekovic, & Prinzie, 2012; George, Helson, & John,
2011). Studies have shown that the personality factors extraversion, conscientiousness and
neuroticism lead to an increase or decrease in the experience of work-family conflict (Bruck
& Allen, 2003; Michel & Clark, 2009; Stoeva et al., 2002; Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys, 2013).
Prior research therefore indicates that a relationship does exist between personality and work-
family conflict. Whether men or women experience more work-family conflict remains vague
as previous findings are contradictory, but studies have shown that there is a relationship
27
between gender and work-family conflict (McElwain, Korabik, & Rosin, 2005; Parasuraman
& Simmers, 2001). Studies have also shown that men and women differ in terms of the levels
of different personality traits that are measured (Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Lippa,
2010). Due to the fact that certain personality traits predict work-family conflict, it seems
likely that personality may influence the work-family conflict experienced by men and
women respectively. Gender could therefore play a moderating role in the relationship
between personality and work-family conflict. Based on the above, the research questions are
presented in the section that follows.
2.7 Research Questions
The following research questions were investigated:
1. Do levels of work-family conflict significantly differ between men and women?
2. Do levels of extraversion, neuroticism and conscientiousness differ significantly
between men and women?
3. Does gender moderate the relationship between extraversion and work-family
conflict?
4. Does gender moderate the relationship between neuroticism and work-family
conflict?
5. Does gender moderate the relationship between conscientiousness and work-family
conflict?
2.8 Summary
An overview of current literature on extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism,
and work-family conflict was provided in this chapter. Although no studies could be found
28
that examine the moderating effect of gender on the relationship between personality and
work-family conflict, research does show that men and women experience work-family
conflict differently. Similarly, levels of some personality factors also differ between men and
women. It could be argued, therefore, that gender can influence the strength of the
relationship between personality traits and work-family conflict, in a similar fashion as it
does in the relationship between workplace conditions and well-being (Stewart-Sicking et al.,
2011). This study sets out to investigate this hypothesis. The research questions that flow
from this discussion were also presented in this chapter. The next chapter will address the
methodology used in the study.
29
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD
3.1 Introduction
In the previous chapter, an overview of the existing literature concerning the research
variable was provided. This chapter consists of an overview of the research process including
the main objectives of the study. The data gathering instruments are described and ethical
considerations are discussed. The statistical analysis is also presented in this chapter.
3.2 Research Questions
The main aim of this study was to determine whether gender moderates the relationship
between selected personality factors and work-family conflict. A secondary aim was to
determine whether levels of work-family conflict, extraversion, neuroticism and
conscientiousness differ significantly between men and women. To this end, the following
research questions were investigated:
1. Do levels of work-family conflict significantly differ between men and women?
2. Do levels of extraversion, neuroticism and conscientiousness differ significantly
between men and women?
3. Does gender moderate the relationship between extraversion and work-family
conflict?
4. Does gender moderate the relationship between neuroticism and work-family
conflict?
5. Does gender moderate the relationship between conscientiousness and work-family
conflict?
30
The independent variables in this study were gender, extraversion, conscientiousness
and neuroticism, while the dependent variable in the study was work-family conflict.
3.3 Research Design
The study followed a quantitative cross-sectional survey design. Quantitative data
analysis was used in order to determine whether there is a relationship between personality
and work-family conflict and whether gender moderates this relationship. Questionnaires
were used to gather the data.
3.4 Research Method
3.4.1 Population and Sampling
This study formed part of a larger study on well-being in the workplace. An existing
data set was utilised. The sample comprised working men and women from several
organisations. Questionnaires were sent out via email, completed online and sent to a portal
from which the data was captured on a spreadsheet. Participants were working people older
than 18 years of age.
3.4.2 Description of the Sample
The sample consisted of 519 working females and 272 working males which made up a
total of 791 participants. The majority of participants (93.4%) worked full-time and 4.8% of
participants worked part-time. Most of the participants (95.4%) worked for an employer and
3.8% of participants were self-employed. The mean age of the participants was 37.3 years old
(SD=10.84) of which the minimum was 18 years old and the maximum was 67 years old.
About half of the participants were married (49.7%), while 50.2% were not married. With
regard to the number of children, 30.7% of participants had no children, while the rest had
between one and seven children. Most of the participants in the study had post school
31
qualifications (51.1%) while the rest of the participants had a grade 12 level of education
(46.9%). The majority of the sample was White (50.8%) followed by Black (25.5%),
Coloured (13.8%), Indian (8.6%) and other ethnicities (0.8%). Most of the participants were
English speaking (49.8%) or Afrikaans speaking (24.9%) while the remainder of participants
spoke other South African languages. In the case of variables not adding up to 100%, this is
due to missing values.
3.4.3 Measuring Instruments
A biographical section in the questionnaire requested information concerning the
following: gender; marital status; age; number of children; and educational status. To
measure the research constructs, the following instruments were employed:
3.4.3.1 Basic Traits Inventory (BTI)
The BTI is a South African instrument and has proven to be valid across cultures. This
instrument was developed by Taylor and De Bruin (2006) and it is based on the Big Five
personality factors. It therefore measures personality in terms of extraversion, openness to
experience, neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness by making use of 193 items. A
sample item of extraversion is “I like to take risks for fun”. A sample item for
conscientiousness is “I plan tasks before doing them” and a sample item for neuroticism is “I
find it difficult to control my feelings”.
In this study, the short version of the BTI was used. The short version consists of 60
items and represents a brief measure of the Big Five personality traits (Taylor & De Bruin, in
press). Each of these traits is measured by 12 items. Items are rated by participants on a five-
point Likert-type scale with the responses ranging from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly
Disagree”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the short version for extraversion (∝=
32
0.80), neuroticism (∝= 0.86) and conscientiousness (∝= 0.85), relevant to this particular
study, were found by Taylor and De Bruin (2006) to be satisfactory. Overall the reliability of
the BTI-short version is > 0.80 and is therefore satisfactory.
3.4.3.2 Work-to-Family Conflict Questionnaire
The Work-to-Family Conflict Questionnaire developed by Netemeyer, Boles and
McMurrian (1996) was utilized. This questionnaire measures the extent to which work
demands interfere with family life. It consists of a five-point Likert-type scale with responses
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). This measure consists of five items
and a sample item is “The demands of my work interfere with my home and family life”. The
Work-to-Family Conflict Questionnaire reports a high internal consistency of 0.86, which is
satisfactory.
3.4.4 Statistical Analysis
SPSS Version 20 (2013) was used as the statistical program for statistical analysis.
Correlations were calculated to determine the strength and direction of significant
relationships among the research variables (Cohen, 1988). In cases where significant
correlations were found, moderated hierarchical regressions were performed. T-tests were
conducted to determine whether there are significant differences in terms of levels of work-
family conflict, extraversion, conscientiousness, and neuroticism between men and women.
The dependent variable in the study was work-family conflict. The personality factors
extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism were independent variables. A regression
analysis was performed for each of these independent variables. In the first step, marital
status, age and education were controlled for. In the case of marital status and education,
categories were lapsed into two sub-categories each and marital status was renamed
33
“relationship status”. In the second step, the personality variable, neuroticism, was entered. In
the third step gender was entered. In the fourth step the interaction term, NeuroXGender, was
entered. A significant Rsquare change in the 4th step indicated that gender moderated the
relationship between work-family conflict and the independent variable. A relaxed criterion
of p < 0.10 was used (Aiken & West, 1991) to determine significant interaction effects.
3.4.5 Ethical Considerations
Participants were informed that participation was voluntary and that they were free to
withdraw at any time. They were assured of confidentiality and anonymity and were
encouraged to answer the questions honestly. Individual feedback was not given, but
participants were given the opportunity to send an email to the researcher if they wished to
receive a copy of the final research report.
3.5 Summary
This chapter described the method that was followed to conduct the study. The research
questions were stated, the sampling method and measuring instruments were discussed and
the statistical analysis utilised was described. Ethical aspects were dealt with last.
34
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
4.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the results are presented. First, the sample is described and descriptive
statistics are tabulated and explained. Second, the results for the independent samples t-test
are provided. Following this, the results of one moderated hierarchical regression analysis are
presented.
4.2 Descriptive Statistics
Table 4.1 contains the mean scores, standard deviation scores, Cronbach alpha
coefficients and Pearson’s inter-correlations.
Table 4.1: Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s inter-correlation of variables
Measures Mean SD α 1 2 3
1. WFC 13.29 5.36 .95
2. Extraversion 43.68 6.80 .85 -.03
3. Conscientiousness 48.00 6.73 .89 -.03 .28**
4. Neuroticism 30.26 9.21 .91 .18** -.23** -.17**
**p < 0.01 (2-tailed)
Table 4.1 shows that work-family conflict (WFC) displayed a significant positive
correlation with neuroticism (r = .18, p ˂ .01). Extraversion displayed a significant positive
correlation with conscientiousness (r = .28, p ˂ .01) and a significant negative correlation
with neuroticism (r = -.23, p ˂ .01). Conscientiousness displayed a significant negative
correlation with neuroticism (r = -.17, p ˂ .01). The effect sizes for all these correlations were
small (r = .10 to .29) (Cohen, 1988).
35
4.3 T-Test
Table 4.2 provides the results for the independent samples t-test.
Table 4.2: Independent Sample T-Test
Variables Men Women t p
Mean SD Mean SD
WFC 13.64 5.37 13.12 5.35 -1.32 .19
Extraversion 43.54 6.72 43.75 6.85 .40 .69
Conscientiousness 47.09 7.13 48.48 6.48 2.72 .01
Neuroticism 28.37 8.78 31.27 9.29 4.15 .00
Table 4.2 shows that there was no significant difference in work-family conflict (WFC)
scores between men (M = 13.64, SD = 5.37) and women (M = 13.12, SD = 5.35; t (783) = -
1.32, p = .19, two-tailed). There was also no significant difference in extraversion between
men (M = 43.54, SD = 6.72) and women (M = 43.75, SD = 6.85; t (758) = .40, p = .69, two-
tailed). There was, however, a significant difference in conscientiousness between men (M =
47.09, SD = 7.13) and women (M = 48.48, SD = 6.48; t (770) = 2.72, p = .01, two-tailed). The
magnitude of the differences in the mean scores (mean difference = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.39 to
2.38) was very small (eta squared = .001). There was a significant difference in neuroticism
scores between men (M = 28.37, SD = 8.78) and women (M = 31.27, SD = 9.29; t (753) =
4.15, p = .00, two-tailed). The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference =
2.9, 95% CI: 1.53 to 4.27) was very small (eta squared = .001).
36
4.4 Regression Analysis
Owing to the fact that only neuroticism was significantly correlated with work-family
conflict, only one regression analysis was performed to determine whether gender moderates
the relationship between neuroticism and work-family conflict.
The data was inspected to ensure that all the assumptions of multiple regression were
met. Scores were centred in order to address the problems associated with multicollinearity
(Aiken & West, 1991). Correlations of variables, Tolerance and VIF were also inspected.
Mahalanobis distances were inspected to check for extreme scores and Cook’s Distance was
studied to ensure that there were no significant outliers. The Normal Probability Plot (P-P) of
the regression standardised residuals showed no major deviance for normality, and the
Scatterplot of the standardised residuals also showed that no assumptions were violated. Thus
the assumptions of outliers, normality, linearity, homoscedasticity and independence of
residuals were met.
Table 4.3 shows the results of the moderated hierarchical regression analysis.
37
Table 4.3: Hierarchical regression analysis predicting work-family conflict from neuroticism
Variable Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Un-standardised Regression Coefficients (b)
Constant 14.3 13.96 13.77 13.84
Relationship
status
-1.14** -1.25** -1.22** -1.25**
Age -.02 -.02 -.02 -.02
Education .77 1.06** 1.00* .95*
Neuroticism .11*** .12*** .10***
Gender .70 .76
NeuroXGender .05
Model 𝑹𝟐
Model ∆𝑹𝟐
.02*
.02*
.05***
.04***
.06
.00
.06
.00
Notes *** p ˂ .001, ** p ˂ .01, * p ˂ .05
As can be seen in Table 4.3 relationship status, age and education, were controlled for
in the first step. The total variance explained by these variables was 1.5% [R² = 0.015, F
(3,721) = 3.71, p ˂ .05] and it was significant. An inspection of the beta coefficients shows
that, of these three demographic variables, it was only relationship status that contributed
significantly to the variance explained.
Neuroticism was entered in the second step. This accounted for an additional 3.7% of
the variance [R²∆ =, F (1,720) = 28.09, p ˂ 0.001] and this was also significant. Gender was
entered in the third step. This accounted for an additional 0.4% of the total variance [R²∆ =, F
(1,719) = 2.85, p ˃ .05]. This was not significant. In the fourth step the interaction term
38
(NeuroXGender) was added, which accounted for an additional 0.2% of the variance [R²∆ =,
F (1,718) = 1.32, p ˃ .10]. This was not significant.
4.5 Summary
The results of the study were presented in this chapter. The sample was described and
descriptive statistics were presented. The results showed no significant differences in levels
of work-family conflict between men and women. Women scored significantly higher on
conscientiousness and neuroticism than men. Neuroticism was the only personality variable
that positively predicted work-family conflict. No support was found for the moderating role
of gender in the relationship between extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, and
work-family conflict. The next chapter provides a discussion of the research findings.
39
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will discuss the research findings from this study and compare them to
existing literature. The results will be discussed according to the research questions.
5.2 Demographic variables
Relationship status, age and education were included as demographic variables in this
study. The results showed that relationship status was the only demographic variable that
made a statistically significant contribution to work-family conflict. An inspection of the beta
coefficients shows that only relationship status significantly predicted work-family conflict,
with those in relationships experiencing higher levels of work-family conflict than those who
are not in relationships. This is contrary to the finding of Mazerolle, Bruening and Casa
(2008).
5.3 Work-family conflict and gender
The first question in the study was whether levels of work-family conflict differ
significantly between men and women. The results in this study showed that there was no
significant difference in work-family conflict scores between men and women. This finding
is in line with some studies (Duxbury & Higgins, 1991; Wallace, 1997), yet contradicts some
other findings (Pleck, 1977; Anderson & Leslie, 1991).
This finding may reflect recent shifts in gender roles, as men are increasingly carrying
more responsibilities at home while also working (Cinamon & Rich, 2002; McElwain,
Korabik & Rosin, 2005), whereas women, on the other hand, are taking on more
responsibilities in the workplace (Cook & Minnotte, 2008). The current finding could also be
a result of the increase in dual-earner couples which may even out the stress between partners
40
because they are both earning and family responsibilities are shared (Ho et al., 2013). The
experiences of men and women, in terms of work-family conflict, may be in the process of
becoming more similar.
5.4 Extraversion and gender
The results showed that there was no significant difference in levels of extraversion
between men and women. This result contradicts previous findings such as Feingold (1994)
who found that women are more extraverted than men and Lynn and Martin (1997) who
found the opposite. Research findings on extraversion and gender appear to remain
inconsistent.
5.5 Conscientiousness and gender
The results showed that there was a significant difference in levels of conscientiousness
between men and women. Women were found to be more conscientious than men, which is
similar to Feingold’s (1994) finding.
A reason for this may be that women are more efficient in planning and being organised
than men (Costa & McCrae, 1991). Women may also have a greater tendency to keep things
neat and tidy and to follow certain steps before making a decision (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
Today, women still carry the bulk of domestic responsibilities combined with work
responsibilities which requires them to display characteristics commonly ascribed to
conscientiousness.
5.6 Neuroticism and gender
The results showed that there was a significant difference in levels of neuroticism
between men and women, with women scoring higher than men. This is in line with most
41
literature findings (Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Feingold, 1994; Schmitt, Realo,
Voracek, & Allik, 2008; Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys, 2013).
Women are more likely to experience feelings of worry, guilt, sadness, anger or
embarrassment (Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). This may
be exacerbated by the stress that women experience at work owing to the multitude of roles
that they have to fulfil.
5.7 Neuroticism and work-family conflict
The findings showed that neuroticism is significantly correlated with work-family
conflict. This is in line with the majority of previous literature findings (Bruck & Allen,
2003; Carlson, 1999; Kokkinos, 2007; Stelmack, 2004; Stoeva et al., 2002; Tai & Liu, 2007;
Zuckerman, 2005). A reason for this may be that neurotic individuals experience negative
mood states (e.g. worry) which could increase the levels of stress they experience at home
and in the workplace (Wayne et al., 2004).
5.8 Gender as a moderator
Gender did not significantly moderate the relationship between extraversion,
conscientiousness and neuroticism, on the one hand, and work-family conflict on the other
hand. This was an unexpected finding as some studies have found that gender could be a
moderator between time spent at home or work and work-family conflict (Gutek, Searle, &
Klepa, 1991) or workplace conditions and wellbeing (Stewart-Sicking, Ciarrocchi, Hollensbe,
& Sheep, 2011). This study’s finding, coupled with the finding that there are no differences in
the way that men and women experience work-family conflict may indicate that men and
women do not experience stressors that differently, as might be generally expected.
42
5.9 Summary
This chapter presented a discussion of the findings in the current study. Relationship
status was the only demographic variable that significantly predicted work-family conflict.
No difference was found when it came to gender and work-family conflict. No significant
differences were found between men and women in terms of levels of extraversion. However,
women showed significantly higher levels of conscientiousness and neuroticism than men.
Neuroticism was the only personality variable that significantly and positively predicted
work-family conflict. Finally, no support was found for the moderating role of gender in the
relationship between extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, and work-family
conflict. Implications of the findings, limitations of the study, and recommendations for
future research are discussed in Chapter 6.
43
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Introduction
In this chapter, a broad overview of the study is provided. The main findings, according
to the problem statement and research questions, are integrated in this chapter to serve as a
summary of the results. The value-add, in terms of theory, practice and methodology of the
study will be given in this chapter. The final part of this chapter will present suggestions for
future research as well as limitations of the study.
6.2 Reason for undertaking the research
The 21st century has led to many changes in the roles that men and women play at
home and in the work environment. Women are increasingly entering the workplace and
many of these women hold top management positions. Women do, however, still carry the
bulk of domestic responsibilities. Men need to adapt to changes regarding gender in the
workplace as well as societal expectations. Men have also started to take on domestic
responsibilities. These changes in the roles of men and women have increased the necessity
for individuals to find a balance between work and home. This may, however, be challenging
and lead to men and women experiencing work-family conflict.
This study inspected the role of extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism in the
experience of work-family conflict among South African men and women because there is a
lack of information available on this topic. The moderating role of gender was inspected for
the same reason.
6.3 Summary of the findings
The results of the study showed that, in this sample, women had significantly higher
levels of conscientiousness and neuroticism than men. There were no significant differences
44
in the levels of work-family conflict between men and women. Neuroticism significantly
predicted work-family conflict. Limited research was found on the moderating role of gender
in the relationship between extraversion, conscientiousness, and neuroticism on the one
hand, and work-family conflict on the other. Given the existing research findings, this lack of
any significant interaction effects, was counter-intuitive, and may have been sample-specific.
It may also reflect changes in society, where the roles of men and women are becoming
increasingly more egalitarian, and the experiences of men and women, in terms of work-
family conflict, are becoming more similar.
6.4 Implications of the study
This study contributes to the available information on work-family conflict in South
Africa. The study also validates certain findings on the Big Five model of personality and
work-family conflict. The study confirmed numerous other research findings showing that
women score consistently higher on neuroticism than men. It also provided further evidence
that neuroticism significantly predicts work-family conflict. Individuals with high levels of
neuroticism may struggle to find balance in their lives and may experience increased levels
of stress. Organisations should take this into account when selecting employees and
employers should consider alternatives such as the option of flexible work hours for men and
women who adopt multiple roles. Contradictory to previous findings, this study indicated
that the way in which men and women experience work-family conflict does not differ. This
could be due to the fact that women are entering the workplace more and men are adopting
more family responsibilities. Both men and women share home responsibilities. Couples
should provide each other with support by sharing responsibilities in the home and work
environment. Organisations should therefore consider men and women in terms of providing
flexible working hours as many men adopt the majority of family and home responsibilities
while their wives are at work, and vice versa.
45
6.5 Limitations of the study
A limitation of this study was that only three of the Big Five personality factors were
examined. A second limitation is the lack of qualitative data used in the study. This could
have provided more in depth information on how men and women perceive work-family
conflict (Cook & Minnotte, 2008). As self-report questionnaires were utilised, response bias
may have influenced the results. Participants may have answered questions dishonestly due to
social desirability (Grumm & von Collani, 2009). Self-reported data can lead to problems of
common method variance, perception bias or common method bias (Ho et al., 2013; Ten
Brummelhuis, Haar, & van der Lippe, 2010). The current study is a cross-sectional study
which means that causality, regarding relationships between variables, could not be
established (Ten Brummelhuis, Haar, & van der Lippe, 2010). The cross-sectional design of
the study only provided information on a specific time period in the participant’s lives, which
could lead to inaccurate representations of the constructs in the study (Jenkins-Guarnieri,
Wright, & Hudiburgh, 2012).
6.6 Recommendations for future research
In this study, work-family balance was mainly approached from a conflict perspective.
The integration of work and family domains could produce beneficial outcomes; therefore,
future research could consider the positive spill over between work and family roles. This
study focused on extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism as personality variables
from the Big Five. Future studies could focus on the other two personality variables-
agreeableness and openness to experience. Longitudinal studies would shed more light on the
relationships between the variables included in the study and could aid in detecting
significant interaction effects more effectively (Ho et al., 2013). A larger sample size would
also yield more statistical power.
46
6.7 Conclusion
There have been only a few studies that have investigated the impact of work-family
conflict on working men and women in South Africa. Today, men and women struggle to
maintain a balance between their job and family life. This often leads to these individuals
experiencing work-family conflict. To increase the understanding of factors that may
contribute to male and female experiences of work-family conflict, three of the Big Five
personality variables, namely extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, were
considered. The moderating role of gender was also investigated. The Work-to-Family
Conflict Questionnaire (Netemeyer et al., 1996) and the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) (Taylor
& De Bruin, 2006) was used to gather information. These measuring instruments have a
quantitative, cross-sectional design.
The results indicated that the levels of work-family conflict do not differ significantly
between men and women. There was no difference in levels of extraversion between men and
women. Women scored significantly higher on conscientiousness and neuroticism than men.
The study also confirmed that neuroticism significantly predicts work-family conflict. No
support for the moderating role of gender in the relationship between the specific personality
variables and work-family conflict was found.
The findings of the current study add to the limited research available on work-family
conflict and gender, work-family conflict and personality, and gender and personality among
South African working men and women. Practically, organisations should consider men or
women who are low in levels of neuroticism in the selection and placement of employees.
Organisations should be aware of the fact that men also experience work-family conflict.
Supportive measures (e.g. flexible working hours) should therefore not be provided only to
female employees, but to male employees as well. Both men and women should be aware of
47
the possible strain experienced by their spouse due to managing multiple roles and
responsibilities and trying to maintain balance between work and family. Couples should
negotiate time spent on family and home responsibilities in order to relieve some of the stress
created by work-family conflict. This study contributes to the field of Industrial Psychology
in that the increased experience of work-family conflict leads to a decrease in work-life
balance, which is one of the key focus areas in Industrial Psychology.
48
Reference List:
Aiken, L. S. & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated
with work-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278–308.
Allport, G. W. (1945). The Psychology of participation. The Psychological Review, 53(3).
Allport, G. W. (1960). The open system in personality theory. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 61(3), 301-310.
Anderson, E. A., & Leslie, L. A. (1991). Coping with employment and family stress:
Employment arrangement and gender differences. Sex Roles, 24, 223-231.
Andreassen, C. S., Hetland, J., & Pallesen, S. (2010). The relationship between workaholism,
basic needs satisfaction at work and personality. European Journal of Personality, 24,
3–17.
Aryee, S. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among married
professional women: Evidence from Singapore. Human Relations, 45, 813–837.
Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P, & Conley. S. (1991). Work-home conflict among nurses and
engineers: Mediating the impact of role stress on burnout and satisfaction at work.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 39-53.
Baltes, B. B., Zhdanova, L. S., & Clark, M. A. (2011). Examining the relationships between
personality, coping strategies, and work-family conflict. Bus Psychol , 26, 517–530.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job
performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.
49
Besen, Y., & Kimmel, M. K. (2006). At Sam’s Club, no girls allowed: The lived experience
of sex discrimination. Equal Opportunities International, 25, 172–187.
Bible, D., & Hill, K. (2007). Discrimination: Women in business. Journal of Organizational
Culture, Communication and Conflict, 11(1), 65–76.
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2004). The U.S. gender pay gap in the 1990s: Slowing
convergence (Working paper No. 10853). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of
Economic Research.
Bolger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A framework for studying personality in the stress
process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 890–902.
Bond, J. T., Galinsky, E., & Swanberg, J. E. (1998). Study of the changing workplace. New
York: Family and Work Institute.
Bosch, G. (1999). Working time: Tendencies and emerging issues. International Labour
Review, 138, 131–150.
Bouchard Jr, T. J., & Loehlin, J. C. (2001). Genes, Evolution, and Personality. Behavior
Genetics, 31(3), 243-273.
Bowen, P., Cattell, K., & Distiller, G. (2008). South African quantity surveyors: Issues of
gender and race in the workplace. Journal for the Physical and Development Sciences,
15 (1), 1-21.
Branco e Silva, L., & Laher, S. (2012). Exploring the utility of the Neo-PI-R in a sample of
South African University students. Ife Psychology IA, 20(1), 19-43.
50
Bruck, C. S., & Allen, T. D. (2003). The relationship between big five personality traits,
negative affectivity, type A behaviour, and work–family conflict. Journal of
Vocational Behavior 63, 457-472.
Burress, J. H., & Zucca, L. J. (2004). The gender equity gap in top corporate executive
positions. Mid-American Journal of Business, 19(1), 54–62.
Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work-family conflict and its antecedents.
Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 67, 169-198.
Calvo-Salguero, A., Martinez-de-Lecea, J. S., & Aguilar-Luzon, M. C. (2012). Gender and
work–family conflict: Testing the rational model and the gender role expectations
model in the Spanish cultural context. International Journal of Psychology, 47(2),
118-132.
Carlson, D. S. (1999). Personality and role variables as predictors of three forms of work
family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 236–253.
Caspi, A. (1998). Personality development across the life course. In W. Damon & N.
Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality
development (pp. 311–388). New York, NY: Wiley.
Caspi, A., & Roberts, B. W. (2001). Personality development across the life course: The
argument for change and continuity. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 49–66.
Chant, S. & Gutmann, M.C. (2000). Mainstreaming men into gender and development:
debates, reflections, and experiences. Oxford: Oxfam.
51
Charles, S.T., Reynolds, C.A., & Gatz, M. (2001). Age-related differences and change in
positive and negative affect over 23 years. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 80, 136–151.
Chow, E. N. (2003). Gender Matters: Studying Globalization and Social Change in the 21st
Century. International Sociology, 18(3), 443–460.
Cinamon, R. G., & Rich, Y. (2002). Gender differences in the importance of work and family
roles: Implications for work–family conflict. Sex Roles, 47, 531–541.
Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Conradie, I. (2013). Can Deliberate Efforts to Realise Aspirations Increase Capabilities? A
South African Case Study. Oxford Development Studies, 41(2), 189-219.
Cook, A., & Minnotte, K. L. (2008). Occupational and Industry Sex Segregation and the
Work–Family Interface. Sex Roles, 59, 800–813.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1991). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and
NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional Manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001).Gender differences in personality
across cultures: Robust and surprising results. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 81, 322–331.
Daniels, J. (2010). Women learners and their virtual handbags: Invisible experiences and
everyday contexts in vocational education. International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 29(1), 77-91.
52
De Haan, A. D., Dekovic, M., & Prinzie, P. (2012). Longitudinal Impact of Parental and
Adolescent Personality on Parenting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
102(1), 189–199.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: emergence of the 5-factor model. Annual Review
of Psychology, 41, 417–40.
Donald, F. & Lingington, J. (2008). Work family border theory and gender role orientation in
male managers. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 659-671.
Dugan, A. G., Matthews, R. A., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (2012). Understanding the roles of
subjective and objective aspects of time in the work-family interface. Community,
Work & Family, 15(2), 149-172.
Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work-family conflict. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 60-74.
Duxbury, L. E., Higgins, C. A., & Mills, S. (1992). After-hours telecommuting and work
family conflict: A comparative analysis. Information Systems Research, 3, 173–190.
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Eysenck, M. W., & Eysenck, H. J. (1980). Mischel and the concept of personality. British
Journal of Psychology, 71, 191-204.
Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 116, 429–456.
53
Franks, K., Schurink, W., & Fourie, L. (2006). Exploring the social construction of life roles
of career-oriented women. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 32(1), 17-
24.
Fransen, E., Plantenga, J., & Vlasblom, J. D. (2012). Why do women still earn less than men?
Decomposing the Dutch gender pay gap. Applied Economics, 44(33), 4343-4354.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work–
family conflict: Testing a model of the work–family interface. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 77, 65–75.
Frone, M., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. (1997). Relation of work–family conflict to health
outcomes: A four – year longitudinal study of employed parents. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70, 325–335.
Furnham, A., & Bramwell, M. (2006). Personality Factors Predict Absenteeism in the
Workplace. Individual Differences Research, 4(2), 68-77.
George, L. G., Helson, R., & John, O. P. (2011). The “CEO” of Women’s Work Lives: How
Big Five Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Openness Predict 50 Years of Work
Experiences in a Changing Sociocultural Context. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 101, (4), 812–830. DOI: 10.1037/a0024290.
Gilbert, L. A. (1993). Two careers one family. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Gilbert, L. A., Hallett, M., & Eldridge, N. S. (1994). Gender and dual career families:
Implications for the career counselling of women. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow
(Eds.), Career counseling for women (pp. 135-164). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
54
Gilbert, G. L. & Walker, H. T. (2001). Motivation of Australian white-collar construction
employees: a gender issue? Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 8(1), 59-66.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American
Psychologist, 48, 26-34.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.
Academy of Management Review, 10, 76–88.
Grumm, M., & Von Collani, G. (2009). Personality types and self-reported aggressiveness.
Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 845–850.
Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for
work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560-568.
Hall, D., & Hall, F. (1980). Stress and the two-career couple. In C. Cooper & R. Payne
(Eds.), Current concerns in occupational stress (pp. 243-266). New York: Wiley.
Haywood, S. (2005). Women leading. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave.
Hendriks, A. A. J., Hofstee, W. K. B., & De Raad, B. (1999a). The Five Factor Personality
Inventory. Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets.
Hendriks, A. A. J., Hofstee, W. K. B., & De Raad, B. (1999b). The Five-Factor Personality
Inventory (FFPI). Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 307–325.
Herman, J. B., & Gyllstrom, K. K. (1977). Working men and women: Inter- and intra-role
conflict. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 1, 319-333.
55
Ho, M. Y., Chen, X., Cheung, F. M., Liu, H., & Worthington, Jr. E. L. (2013). A Dyadic
Model of the Work-Family Interface: A Study of Dual-Earner Couples in China.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18(1), 53-63.
Hofstee, W. K. B. (1994). Who should own the definition of personality? European Journal
of Personality, 8, 149-162.
Hymowitz, C. (2005). Women Internalize Stereotypes of Themselves as Weaker Leaders.
Retrieved from http://www.careerjournal.com
Jenkins-Guarnieri, M. A., Wright, S. L., & Hudiburgh, L. M. (2012). The relationships
among attachment style, personality traits, interpersonal competency, and Facebook
use. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33, 294–301.
John, O. P. & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: history, measurement and
theoretical perspectives, in L. A. Pervin and O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of
Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 102–38). New York: Guilford Press.
Jones, A. P., & Butler, M. C. (1980). A role transition approach to the stresses of
organizationally-induced family role disruption. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
42, 367-376.
Joseph, E. N., Luyten, P., Corveleyn, J., & De Witte, H. (2011). The Relationship Between
Personality, Burnout, and Engagement Among the Indian Clergy. The International
Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 21, 276-288.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job
satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541.
56
Judge, T. A., & Higgins, C. A. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability,
and career success across the lifespan. Personal Psychology, 52, 621–653.
Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A
meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797–807.
Kajifusa, H. (1998). Towards mainstreaming gender issues in development institutions: the
possibilities and limitations of men’s involvement in WID/GAD. Brighton: Institute of
Development Studies University of Sussex.
Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (2001). Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications
and Issues (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kelly, R., & Voydanoff, P. (1985). Work/ family role strain among employed parents. Family
Relations, 34, 367-374.
Kerpelman, J. L., & Schvaneveldt, P. L. (1999). Young adults' anticipated identity
importance of career, marital, and parental roles: Comparisons of men and women
with different role balance orientation. Sex Roles, 42, 189-217.
King, E. B. (2006). Report from SIOP: Current industrial/organizational psychology
perspectives of women in organizations. Equal Opportunities International, 25, 215–
218.
Kinnunen, U, & Mauno, S. (1998). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among
employed women and men in Finland. Human Relations, 52, 157-177.
Kling, K. C, Hyde, J. S., Showers, C. J., & Buswell, B. N. (1999). Gender differences in self-
esteem: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 470-500.
57
Kokkinos, C.M. (2007). Job stressors, personality and burnout in primary school teachers.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 229-243.
Kopelman, R., Greenhaus, J., & Connolly, T. (1983). A model of work, family and interrole
conflict: A construct validation study. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 38, 198-215.
Lippa, R. A. (2010). Sex differences in personality traits and gender-related occupational
preferences across 53 nations: Testing evolutionary and social-environmental
theories. Arch Sex Behav, 39, 619-636.
Lynn, R., & Martin, T. (1997). Gender differences in extraversion, neuroticism, and
psychoticism in 37 countries. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 369-373.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
MacDermid, S. M., & Harvey, A. (2006). The work–family conflict construct:
Methodological implications. In M. Pitt-Catsouphes, E. E. Kossek, & S. Sweet (Eds.),
The work and family handbook: Multi-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp.
567–586). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
MacDonald, I. (2004). Women in management: A historical perspective. Employee Relations,
26(3), 307–319.
Magee, C. A., Stefanic, N., Caputi, P., & Iverson, D. C. (2012). The Association Between Job
Demands/Control and Health in Employed Parents: The Mediating Role of Work-to-
Family Interference and Enhancement. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
17, 2, 196–205.
58
Matthews, G., & Deary, I. J. (1998). Personality traits. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Ruokolainen, M. (2006). Exploring work and organisation
based resources as moderators between work-family conflict, well-being and job
attitudes. Work and Stress, 20(3), 210-233.
Mazerolle, S. M., Bruening, J. E., & Casa, D. J. (2008). Work-Family Conflict, Part I:
Antecedents of Work-Family Conflict in National Collegiate Athletic Association
Division I A Certified Athletic Trainers. Jüitrmil of Athletic Training, 43(5), 505.
McAdams, D. P. (1995). What do we know when we know a person? Journal of Personality,
63(3), 363-395.
McAdams, D. P. (1996). Alternative futures for the study of human individuality. Journal of
Research in Personality, 30, 374-388.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York, NY, USA: The
Guilford Press.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1991). Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The full five-factor
model and wellbeing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 227–232.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin
& O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp.
139–153). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its
applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215.
59
McElwain, A., Korabik, K., & Rosin, H. (2005). An examination of gender differences in
work family conflict. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 37, 283–298.
Michailidis, M. P., Morphitou, R. N., & Theophylatou, I. (2012). Women at work equality
versus inequality: barriers for advancing in the workplace. The International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 23(20), 4231-4245.
Michelson, W. (1983). The logistics of maternal employment: Implications for women and
their families [Child in the City Report No. 18]. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University
of Toronto, Centre for Urban and Community Studies.
Michel, J. S., & Clark, M. A. (2009). Has it been affected all along? A test of work-to family
and family-to-work models of conflict, enrichment, and satisfaction. Personality and
Individual Differences, 47, 163–168.
Mostert, K. (2008). Time-based and strain-based work-family conflict in the South African
police service: Examining the relationship with work characteristics and exhaustion.
Acta Criminologica, 21(3), 1-18.
Neal, A., Yeo, G., Koy, A., & Xiao, T. (2012). Predicting the form and direction of work role
performance from the Big 5 model of personality traits. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 33, 175-192.
Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of
work–family conflict and family–work conflict scales. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81, 400–410.
Ngo, H., Foley, S., Wong, A., & Loi, R. (2003). Who gets more of the pie? Predictors of
perceived gender inequity at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 227–241.
60
Noble, C., & Moore, S. (2006). Advancing women and leadership in this post feminist, post
EEO era. Women in Management Review, 21, 598–603.
Novack, L. L., & Novack, D. R. (1996). Being female in the eighties and nineties: Conflicts
between new opportunities and traditional expectations among White, middle class,
heterosexual college women. Sex Roles, 35, 57-77.
Oh, I., Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., & de Vries, R. E. (2011). Are Dishonest Extraverts More
Harmful than Dishonest Introverts? The Interaction Effects of Honesty-Humility and
Extraversion in Predicting Workplace Deviance. Applied psychology: An
International Review, 60 (3), 496–516.
O’Neil, D. A., Hopkins, M. M., & Bilimoria. D. (2008). Womens Careers at the Start of the
21st Century: Patterns and Paradoxes. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 727–743.
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C. & Schmidt, F. L. (2003) Personality and absenteeism: a meta-
analysis of integrity tests. European Journal of Personality, 17, 19–38.
Parasuraman, S., & Simmers, C. (2001). Type of Employment, Work–Family Conflict and
Well-Being: A Comparative Study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(5), 551–
568.
Pervin, L. A. (1996). The science of personality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
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 Press.
Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work family role system. Social Problems, 24, 411-421.
61
Pleck, J. (1979). Work-family conflict: A national assessment. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Society for the Study of Social Problems, Boston.
Pleck, J. (1985). Working wives/working husbands. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Probert, B. (2005). “I just couldn’t fit it in”: Gender and unequal outcomes in academic
careers. Gender, Work and Organization, 12(1), 50–72.
Reinardy, S. (2007). Satisfaction vs. sacrifice: Sports editors assess the influences of life
issues on job satisfaction. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(1), 105-
121.
Repetti, R. (1988). Family and occupational roles and women's mental health. In R. Schwartz
(Eds.), Women at work (pp. 97-129). Los Angeles: University of California at Los
Angeles, Center for the Study of Women.
Rhode, D. (2003). The Difference “Difference” Makes: Women and Leadership, Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Roberts, B. W., Caspi, A., & Moffit, T. E. (2003). Work experiences and personality
development in young adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84,
582–593.
Roberts, B. W., Harms, P. D., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2007). Can we predict the
counterproductive employee? Evidence from a child-to-adult prospective study.
Evidence from a 23-year longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1427-
1436.
62
Roberts, B., Jackson, J. J., Duckworth, A. L., & Von Culin, K. (2011). Personality
Measurement and Assessment in Large Panel Surveys. Forum for Health Economics
& Policy, 14 (3), 1-32.
Roberts, B. W., & Wood, D. (2006). Personality development in the context of the Neo-
Socioanalytic Model of personality. In D. Mroczek & T. Little (Eds.), Handbook of
Personality Development (pp. 11-39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or Depleting? The Dynamics of Engagement in Work and
Family Roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 655–684.
Sarra, J. (2005). Class act: Considering race and gender in the corporate boardroom. St.
John’s Law Review, 79, 1121–1160.
Scherwitz, L., Perkins, L., Chesney, M., & Hughes, G. (1991). Cook- Medley Hostility Scale
and subsets: Relationship to demographic and psychosocial characteristics in young
adults in the CARDIA study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 53, 36-49.
Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M. & Allik, J. (2008). Why can’t a man be more like a
woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 168–82.
Schneider, K. T., Swan, S., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects
of sexual harassment in the workplace: empirical evidence from two organizations.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 401-415.
Schwartzberg, N. S., & Dytell. R. S. (1996). Dual-earner families: The importance of work
stress and family stress for psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 1, 211-223.
63
Scott, J., & Nolan, J. (2007). New technology and gendered divisions of labour: Problems
and prospects for equality in the public and private spheres. Equal Opportunities
International, 26, 89–95.
Silberschmidt, M. (1999). Women forget that men are the masters’: gender, antagonism and
socioeconomic change in Kisii District, Kenya. Uppsala: The Nordic Africa Institute.
Simunic, A., & Gregov, L. (2012). Conflict between work and family roles and satisfaction
among nurses in different shift systems in Croatia: A questionnaire survey. Archives
of Industrial Hygiene & Toxicology, 63(2), 189-197.
Slavin-Mulford, J., Sinclair, S. J., Malone, J., Stein, M., Bello, I., & Blais, M. A. (2013).
External Correlates of the Personality Assessment Inventory Higher Order Structures.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(4), 432-434.
Spade, J. Z., & Reese, C. A. (1991). We've come a long way, maybe: College students' plans
for work and family. Sex Roles, 24, 309-321.
Spector, P., Miller, K., Poelmans, P., Cooper, C., Berwier, P., Hart, P., et al. (2005). An
international comparative study of work–family stress and occupational strain. In S.
Poelmans (Eds.), Work and family: An international research perspective (pp. 71–84).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stelmack, R.M. (2004). On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in Honor of Marvin
Zuckerman. Ottawa, Canada: Elsevier.
Stevens, D., Kiger, G., & Riley, P. (2002). Coming unglued? Workplace characteristics, work
satisfaction, and family cohesion. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 289–302.
64
Stewart-Sicking, J. A., Ciarrocchi, J. W., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2011).
Workplace characteristics, career/vocation satisfaction, and existential well-being in
Episcopal clergy. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 14(7), 715-730.
Stoeva, A. Z., Chiu, R., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2002). Negative affectivity, role stress, and
work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 1–16.
Störmer, S., & Fahr, R. (2013). Individual determinants of work attendance: evidence on the
role of personality. Applied Economics, 45(19), 2863-2875.
Tai, W. & Liu, S. (2007). An investigation of the influences of job autonomy and neuroticism
on Job stressor-strain relations. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(8), 1007-1020.
Taylor, N., & De Bruin, G. P. (in press). The Basic Traits Inventory. In S. Laher & K.
Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and
Applications. Johannesburg: Wits University Press.
Taylor, N., & De Bruin, G. P. (2004). The construction of a South African five-factor
personality questionnaire (Unpublished master’s thesis). Rand Afrikaans University,
South Africa.
Taylor, N., & De Bruin, G. P. (2006). Basic Traits Inventory. Johannesburg, SA: Jopie Van
Rooyen and Partners.
Tellegen, A. (1991). Personality traits: Issues of definition, evidence, and assessment. In D.
Cicchetti & W. M. Grove (Eds.), Personality and psychopathology (pp. 6–9).
Minneapolis, MN, US: University of Minnesota Press.
65
Ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Haar, J. M., & van der Lippe, T. (2010). Crossover of distress due
to work and family demands in dual-earner couples: A dyadic analysis. Work &
Stress, 24(4), 324-341.
Theunissen, B., Van Vuuren, L. J., & Visser, D. (2003). Communication of job-related
information and work-family conflict in dual-career couples. South African Journal of
Industrial Psychology, 29(1), 18-25.
Velamuri, M. (2012). Taxes, health insurance and women's self-employment. Contemporary
Economic Policy, 30(2), 162-77.
Voydanoff, P. (2004). The effects of work demand and resources on work-to-family conflict
and facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(2), 398-412.
Wallace, J. E. (1997). It's about time: A study of hours worked and work spillover among law
firm lawyers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 227-248.
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience
aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96(3), 465-490.
Wayne, J. H., Musisca, N., & Fleeson, W. (2004). Considering the role of personality in the
work-family experience: Relationships of the Big five to work-family conflict and
facilitation. Journal of vocational behaviour, 64, 108-130.
Wentling, R. M. (2003). The career development and aspirations of women in middle
management– revisited. Women in Management Review, 18, 324–331.
Wille, B., De Fruyt, F., & Feys, M. (2013). Big Five Traits and Intrinsic Success in the New
Career Era: A 15-Year Longitudinal Study on Employability and Work–Family
Conflict. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 62 (1), 124–156.
66
Willinger, B. (1993). Resistance and change: College men's attitudes toward family and work
in the 1980s. In J. C. Hood (Eds.), Men, work, and family: Research on men and
masculinities (pp. 108-130). Newbury Park. CA: Sage.
Yogev, S., & Brett, J. (1985). Patterns of work and family involvement among single- and
dual-earner couples. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 754-786.
Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of Personality (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Cambridge
University Press.
Zvara, B. J., Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., & Dush, C. K. (2013). Fathers’ Involvement in Child
Health Care: Associations with Prenatal Involvement, Parents’ Beliefs, and Maternal
Gate keeping. Family Relations, 62, 649–661.