The Effects of Work History and Timing of Marriage on the Division of Household Labor: A Life-Course Perspective
The Effects of Work History and Timing of Marriage on the Division of Household Labor: A Life-Course Perspective
复制标题
工作经历和结婚时间对家庭劳动分工的影响：生命历程的视角
DOI：
10.2307/353378
复制
发表时间：
1996
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
D. Blanchard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Pittman;D. Blanchard
美国国家家庭和住户调查（National Survey of Families and住户）对1467对初婚夫妇进行了调查，以评估两项生命历程指标——工作经历和结婚时间——如何预测夫妻双方做家务的时间。每个配偶的家务劳动时间估计在分层回归中回归到生命历程测量、背景因素、性别角色态度和基于工作的资源。配偶双方的工作经历与丈夫的家务贡献有直接关系。然而，只有间接关系支持婚姻时间和就业历史与妻子的家务贡献。结婚的时间与家庭组成有关，而家庭组成又反过来影响妇女的家务劳动。此外，女性的就业历史预测了她们可能从事的工作类型，这影响了她们做家务的时间。几十年来，研究人员一直在努力研究影响家庭内部劳动分工的因素。虽然女性以前所未有的速度进入就业市场，但研究表明，男性对家庭劳动的贡献仅略有增加（Berk & Berk, 1978; Coverman & Sheley, 1986; Spitze, 1988）或根本没有增加（Berk, 1985; Rexroat & Shehan, 1987; Shelton, 1990）。事实上，家庭工作文献的基本主题是，无偿工作是根据性别系统地划分的（Thompson & Walker, 1989）。尽管一些研究人员注意到家务劳动逐渐向更平等的分工转变（Blair & Johnson, 1992; Douthitt, 1989; Pleck, 1985），但解释任务分配或预测其平等分工的变量集和过程都没有得到充分的确定。迄今为止，有三种理论观点在这一领域得到了最大的研究关注。这些观点考察了资源、性/性别角色和家庭结构（包括个人和家庭特征）。最近，与生命历程视角相关的第四个模型（Bengtson & Allen, 1993; Elder, 1978）似乎在文献中获得了突出地位。本研究旨在促进这一发展。文献回顾家庭工作分配的资源方法有着悠久的历史（Blood & Wolfe, 1960）。收入、教育和职业地位等资源被认为有助于配偶在关系中的声望或权力，使其有可能避免“平凡的”家务（Huber & Spitze, 1983）。以下资源度量在解释家庭劳动分工的差异方面取得了相当一致但不太成功的结果：妻子的收入（Antill & Cotton, 1988; Kamo, 1988; Model, 1981），丈夫和妻子的教育水平（Coverman, 1985; Ross, 1987），以及丈夫和妻子的职业地位（Berardo, Shehan, & Leslie, 1987; Maret & Finlay, 1984）。与预测一致，拥有更多的资源通常与较少的家务劳动有关。时间是另一种资源（Rice & Tucker, 1986），在家庭工作文献中也得到了相当大的关注（例如，Coverman, 1985; Presland & Antill, 1987）。然而，空闲时间并不是一种以权力为中心的资源，它似乎迫使它的主人更多地做家务。因此，与其他资源不同，可用时间往往与做家务的数量呈正相关（Coltrane & IshiiKuntz, 1992; Geerken & Gove, 1983; Presland & Antill, 1987）。虽然时间和以权力为基础的资源在家务的分配方式中起着一定的作用，但它们并不能提供一个完整的解释。因此，研究人员开始关注社会心理因素，如性别角色态度（Hiller & Philliber, 1986; Kamo, 1988; Model, 1981; Pleck, 1985; Ross, 1987）和其他性别问题（例如Thompson & Walker， 1989），以帮助解释家庭工作。．．．
First-married couples (n = 1,467) interviewed for the National Survey of Families and Households were studied to evaluate how two life-course measures, work history and marital timming, predicted the time each spouse spent doing mundane housework. Housework time estimates of each spouse were regressed on life-course measures, background factors, sex role attitudes, and work-based resources in hierarchical regressions. Direct relations were found for each spouse 's work history on husbands' contributions to housework. Only indirect relations, however, were supported for marital timing and employment histories with wives' housework contributions. Timing of marriage was related to family composition, which, in turn, affected women's housework. In addition, women's employment history predicted the types of jobs women were likely to have, which influenced their time spent doing housework. For decades researchers have struggled with the question of what factors influence the division of labor within the household. While women have entered the job market at unprecedented rates, research has shown that men's contributions to household labor have risen only slightly (Berk & Berk, 1978; Coverman & Sheley, 1986; Spitze, 1988) or not at all (Berk, 1985; Rexroat & Shehan, 1987; Shelton, 1990). In fact, the underlying theme of the family work literature is that unpaid work is divided systematically according to gender (Thompson & Walker, 1989). Although several researchers note a gradual change toward a more egalitarian division of household work (Blair & Johnson, 1992; Douthitt, 1989; Pleck, 1985), neither the set of variables nor the processes that explain the allocation of tasks or predict their egalitarian division have been identified adequately. To date, three theoretical perspectives have received the lion's share of the research attention in this area. These perspectives examine resources, sex/gender roles, and family structure (including personal and family characteristics). More recently, a fourth model associated with the life-course perspective (Bengtson & Allen, 1993; Elder, 1978) seems to be gaining prominence in the literature. This study is intended to contribute to this development. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The resource approach to the allocation of family work has a long history (Blood & Wolfe, 1960). Resources such as income, education, and occupational status are thought to contribute to a spouse's prestige or power in a relationship, making it possible to avoid "mundane" housework (Huber & Spitze, 1983). The following resource measures have met with fairly consistent but modest success in the explanation of variance in the division of household labor: wives' income (Antill & Cotton, 1988: Kamo, 1988; Model, 1981), husbands' and wives' education levels (Coverman, 1985; Ross, 1987), and husbands' and wives' occupational statuses (Berardo, Shehan, & Leslie, 1987; Maret & Finlay, 1984). Consistent with predictions, possession of greater resources is typically associated with performing less household labor. Time is another resource (Rice & Tucker, 1986) and has also received considerable attention in the family work literature (e.g., Coverman, 1985; Presland & Antill, 1987). Rather than a power-focused resource, however, available time seems to obligate its owner to contribute more to housework. Therefore, available time, unlike other resources, tends to be positively related to the amount of housework done (Coltrane & IshiiKuntz, 1992; Geerken & Gove, 1983; Presland & Antill, 1987). Although time and power-based resources play a part in the way housework is allocated, they do not offer a complete explanation. Consequently, researchers have looked to psychosocial factors such as sex-role attitudes (Hiller & Philliber, 1986; Kamo, 1988; Model, 1981; Pleck, 1985; Ross, 1987) and other gender issues (e.g., Thompson & Walker, 1989) to assist in explaining family work. …