Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work–Family Interface
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work–Family Interface
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Overview
- Part II Assessing Cultural and Structural Differences
- Part III Methodological Considerations
- Part IV Review of Research in Regions across the Globe
- Part V Cultures within Cultures
- Part VI Organizational Perspectives
- Part VII Family Perspectives
- 32 Gender, Gender Norms, and National Culture: Global Work–Family at Multiple Levels of Analysis
- 33 Fatherhood, Work, and Family across the Globe: A Review and Research Agenda
- 34 Crossover, Culture, and Dual-Earner Couples
- 35 Cultural Considerations in the Division of Labor
- 36 Affective Processes in the Work–Family Interface: Global Considerations
- 37 Implications of Work–Family Connections for Children’s Well-Being across the Globe
- Part VIII Individual Perspectives
- Part IX Conclusion
- Index
- References
32 - Gender, Gender Norms, and National Culture: Global Work–Family at Multiple Levels of Analysis
from Part VII - Family Perspectives
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 April 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work–Family Interface
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work–Family Interface
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Overview
- Part II Assessing Cultural and Structural Differences
- Part III Methodological Considerations
- Part IV Review of Research in Regions across the Globe
- Part V Cultures within Cultures
- Part VI Organizational Perspectives
- Part VII Family Perspectives
- 32 Gender, Gender Norms, and National Culture: Global Work–Family at Multiple Levels of Analysis
- 33 Fatherhood, Work, and Family across the Globe: A Review and Research Agenda
- 34 Crossover, Culture, and Dual-Earner Couples
- 35 Cultural Considerations in the Division of Labor
- 36 Affective Processes in the Work–Family Interface: Global Considerations
- 37 Implications of Work–Family Connections for Children’s Well-Being across the Globe
- Part VIII Individual Perspectives
- Part IX Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
Worldwide, across various norms of national culture, there are perhaps few constructs that affect the intersection of work and family more than gendered norms. Work and family is, in many ways, inextricably linked with gender. Historically, the domains of work and of family have been characterized as “men’s” or “women’s” domains, and research on this topic has often discussed the role of gender, particularly as “male” or “female”. This chapter moves beyond this characterization to address the ways in which gender and gendered norms interact with national culture to affect work and family. Focusing on the multilevel nature of gender, it is defined and discussed at an individual-level, a family-level, an organization-level, and a national-level. Recommendations are made that researchers should examine the nested nature of gender and gendered norms in nuanced ways in both conceptualization and measurement as they approach and design future research on global work and family.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work–Family Interface , pp. 599 - 613Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
American Psychological Association. (2010). APA manual (publication manual of the American Psychological Association). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354.Google Scholar
Beutell, N. J., & Greenhaus, J. H. (1983). Integration of home and nonhome roles: Women’s conflict and coping behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(1), 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bielby, W. T., & Bielby, D. D. (1992). I will follow him: Family ties, gender-role beliefs, and reluctance to relocate for a better job. American Journal of Sociology, 1241–1267.Google Scholar
Bittman, M., England, P., Sayer, L., Folbre, N., & Matheson, G. (2003). When does gender trump money? Bargaining and time in household work. American Journal of Sociology, 109(1), 186–214.Google Scholar
Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. Examining Lives in Context: Perspectives on the Ecology of Human Development, 619, 647.Google Scholar
Budig, M. J., Misra, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2012). The motherhood penalty in cross-national perspective: The importance of work–family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 19(2), 163–193.Google Scholar
Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work–family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67(2), 169–198.Google Scholar
Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747–770.Google Scholar
Clark, R., Ramsbey, T. W., & Adler, E. S. (1991). Culture, gender, and labor force participation: A cross-national study. Gender and Society, 47–66.Google Scholar
Clark, M. A., Rudolph, C. W., Zhdanova, L., Michel, J. S., & Baltes, B. B. (2015). Organizational support factors and work–family outcomes exploring gender differences. Journal of Family Issues, 0192513X15585809.Google Scholar
Colley, A., Mulhern, G., Maltby, J., & Wood, A. M. (2009). The short form BSRI: Instrumentality, expressiveness and gender associations among a United Kingdom sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(3), 384–387.Google Scholar
Coltrane, S. R. (1989). Household labor and the routine production of gender. Social Problems, 36(5), 473–490.Google Scholar
Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1208–1233.Google Scholar
Derks, B., Van Laar, C., Ellemers, N., & De Groot, K. (2011). Gender-bias primes elicit queen-bee responses among senior policewomen. Psychological Science, 22(10), 1243–1249.Google Scholar
Donnelly, K., & Twenge, J. M. (2016). Masculine and feminine traits on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory, 1993–2012: a cross-temporal meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 1–10.Google Scholar
Dow, S. (2010). Neither man nor woman. June 27, 2010. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved January 6, 2017.Google Scholar
Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work–family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 60.Google Scholar
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2011). Social role theory. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, 2, 458–478.Google Scholar
Ferree, M. M. (1991). The gender division of labor in two-earner marriages: Dimensions of variability and change. Journal of Family Issues, 12(2), 158–180.Google Scholar
Fortin, N. M. (2005). Gender role attitudes and the labour-market outcomes of women across OECD countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3), 416–438.Google Scholar
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(1), 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, M. J., Major, V. S., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L. H., & O’Brien, K. (2006). Negotiating relationally: The dynamics of the relational self in negotiations. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 427–451.Google Scholar
Ghosh, D. (2014). Transgenders are the ‘third gender’, rules Supreme Court. NDTV. April 15, 2014. Retrieved January 6, 2017.Google Scholar
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76–88.Google Scholar
Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1986). Vocational and organizational behavior, 1985: A review. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29(2), 115–176.Google Scholar
Grove, C. N. (2005). Worldwide differences in business values and practices: Overview of GLOBE research findings. Grovewell LLC. Global leadership solutions.Google Scholar
Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work–family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, R. J., & Firestone, J. M. (1998). Changes in predictors of gender role ideologies among women: A multivariate analysis. Sex Roles, 38(3–4), 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2), 75–89.Google Scholar
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 498.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., & Livingston, B. A. (2008). Is the gap more than gender? A longitudinal analysis of gender, gender role orientation, and earnings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 994.Google Scholar
Kaufman, G. (2000). Do gender role attitudes matter? Family formation and dissolution among traditional and egalitarian men and women. Journal of Family Issues, 21(1), 128–144.Google Scholar
Livingston, B. A., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Emotional responses to work–family conflict: An examination of gender role orientation among working men and women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 207–216.Google Scholar
Livingston, M. M., Burley, K., & Springer, T. P. (1996). The importance of being feminine: Gender, sex role, occupational and marital role commitment, and their relationship to anticipated work–family conflict. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11(5), 179.Google Scholar
Lyness, K. S., & Judiesch, M. K. (2014). Gender egalitarianism and work–life balance for managers: Multisource perspectives in 36 countries. Applied Psychology, 63(1), 96–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McCreary, D. R., Saucier, D. M., & Courtenay, W. H. (2005). The drive for muscularity and masculinity: Testing the associations among gender-role traits, behaviors, attitudes, and conflict. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6(2), 83.Google Scholar
McDonald, P. (2000). Gender equity, social institutions and the future of fertility. Journal of the Australian Population Association, 17(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Parboteeah, K. P., Hoegl, M., & Cullen, J. B. (2008). Managers’ gender role attitudes: a country institutional profile approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 795–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedulla, D. S., & Thébaud, S. (2015). Can we finish the revolution? Gender, work–family ideals, and institutional constraint. American Sociological Review, 80(1), 116–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rousseau, D. M., Ho, V. T., & Greenberg, J. (2006). I-deals: Idiosyncratic terms in employment relationships. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 977–994.Google Scholar
Ruppanner, L., & Huffman, M. L. (2013). Blurred boundaries: Gender and work–family interference in cross-national context. Work and Occupations, 41(2), 210–236.Google Scholar
Shockley, K.M., Shen, W., Denunzio, M., Arvan, M., & Knudsen, E. (2014). Clarifying gender and work–family conflict: A meta-analytic approach. In M.J. Mills (Chair) Work–Life Interface Meets Employee Gender: Challenge and Opportunity. Symposium presented at the Work Family Researchers Network conference. New York, NY.Google Scholar
Sjöberg, O. (2010). Ambivalent attitudes, contradictory institutions ambivalence in gender-role attitudes in comparative perspective. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 51(1–2), 33–57.Google Scholar
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Poelmans, S., Allen, T. D., O’DRISCOLL, M., Sanchez, J. I., Siu, O. L., Dewe, P., Hart, P. & Lu, L. (2004). A cross‐national comparative study of work‐family stressors, working hours, and well‐being: China and Latin America versus the Anglo world. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 119–142.Google Scholar
Spence, J. T. (1991). Do the BSRI and PAQ measure the same or different concepts? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15(1), 141–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, J. T. (1993). Gender-related traits and gender ideology: evidence for a multifactorial theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 624.Google Scholar
Voydanoff, P. (1988). Work role characteristics, family structure demands, and work/family conflict. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 749–761.Google Scholar
Weichselbaumer, D., & Winter‐Ebmer, R. (2005). A meta‐analysis of the international gender wage gap. Journal of Economic Surveys, 19(3), 479–511.Google Scholar
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), 125–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1994). “Cultural scripts”: A new approach to the study of cross-cultural communication. In Pütz, M. (Ed.), Language Contact and Language Conflict (pp. 69–87). John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, C., & Francis, L. J. (1997). Beyond gender stereotyping: Examining the validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory among 16-to 19-year old females in England. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2015). Two traditions of research on gender identity. Sex Roles, 73(11–12), 461–473.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum. (2013). The Global Gender Gap Report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
Yang, N., Chen, C. C., Choi, J., & Zou, Y. (2000). Sources of work‐family conflict: a Sino‐US comparison of the effects of work and family demands. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 113–123.Google Scholar