Workload and the trajectory of marital satisfaction in newlyweds: Job satisfaction, gender, and...

Workload and the Trajectory of Marital Satisfaction in Newlyweds:Job Satisfaction, Gender, and Parental Status as Moderators

Elianne F. van Steenbergen andEsther S. KluwerUtrecht University

Benjamin R. KarneyUniversity of California Los Angeles

Stress, on average, is bad for relationships. Yet stress at work is not always associated withnegative relationship outcomes. The premise of the current study was that associationsbetween workload and trajectories of marital satisfaction depend on circumstances that mayconstrain or facilitate partners’ ability to negotiate their multiple roles. We hypothesized thatthe covariance between changes in workload and marital satisfaction over time should bemoderated by (a) the extent to which spouses like their work, (b) their parental status, and (c)their gender. Analyses drawing upon eight waves of data on workload, work satisfaction, andmarital satisfaction from 169 newlywed couples assessed over four years confirmed thesepredictions. Specifically, across couples, demands at work covaried positively with maritalsatisfaction for spouses who were more satisfied with their jobs. For nonparent couples,increases in husbands’ workload covaried with increases in marital satisfaction for bothspouses. For parent couples, however, increases in husbands’ workload covaried withdeclines in marital satisfaction for both spouses. Unexpectedly, for parent couples, increasesin wives’ workload corresponded with increased marital satisfaction. Finally, consistent withpredictions, wives were more affected by their husbands’ workload than vice versa. Thus,tension between work and marriage is not inevitable, instead depending on circumstances thatfacilitate or impair performance in multiple roles. Couples, employers, and practitionersshould recognize the role that external circumstances play in determining how work andmarital life interact.

Keywords: spillover, crossover, workload, marital satisfaction, longitudinal

Being employed and having a good marriage are bothassociated with greater life satisfaction (e.g., Glenn &Weaver, 1981), but the domains of work and marriage arenevertheless frequently experienced as in conflict with eachother. Indeed, a substantial body of cross-sectional andlongitudinal research has shown that work demands, such asa high workload or work stress in general, are associatedwith lower marital quality (e.g., Ford, Heinen, & Langka-mer, 2007; Repetti, 1989; Roberts & Levenson, 2001). Yet,although demands at work are associated with strains athome on average, recent theory and research suggest that

work demands are not always associated with negativemarital outcomes, and indeed can be associated with posi-tive outcomes for some couples. To date, the conditions thatdetermine whether couples facing elevated demands at worksuffer or thrive have remained an open question (Repetti &Saxbe, 2009). The goal of the current study was to addressthis question and identify the conditions under which havinga demanding job may enhance or detract from the quality ofmarital relationships. We focus specifically on demandsassociated with workload, a salient dimension of almost alljobs that has been identified as a major source of stress onmarriages, especially in dual-earner couples (e.g., Repetti,1989). Prior research has not examined moderators of theassociations between workload and marital satisfaction di-rectly, but it has identified variables that should play animportant moderating role (Barnett & Hyde, 2001; Pleck,1977; Repetti & Saxbe, 2009). In the present research, weargue that work satisfaction, parental status, and gendershould moderate the associations between changes in work-load and variability in marital quality over time.

To elaborate on these issues, the rest of this introductionis organized into three sections. First, we summarize theprior literature on work-family tensions, highlighting com-peting theories of how demands at work may impact mar-riages. Second, we describe how examining work satisfac-tion, parental status, and gender as potential moderators

This article was published Online First May 9, 2011.Elianne F. van Steenbergen, Department of Social and Organi-

zational Psychology, Utrecht University; Esther S. Kluwer, De-partment of Social and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht Uni-versity; Benjamin R. Karney, Department of Social Psychology,University of California Los Angeles.

Preparation of this article was supported by the Grant MH59712from the National Institute of Mental Health awarded to the thirdauthor. We want to express our gratitude to Jennifer Krull for herhelpful advice on HLM techniques.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed toElianne F. van Steenbergen, Utrecht University, Department ofSocial and Organizational Psychology, P.O. Box 80.140, 3508 TCUtrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]

Journal of Family Psychology © 2011 American Psychological Association2011, Vol. 25, No. 3, 345–355 0893-3200/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0023653

345

may help to explain the conflicting results of prior studies ofthese associations. Finally, we provide an overview of thecurrent study, designed to examine these issues throughlongitudinal data from newlywed couples over the first fouryears of their marriages.

Competing Theories of the Impact of Workload onMarital Quality

The scarcity theory on human energy (Goode, 1960;Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) posits that personal resourceslike time and energy are finite, such that devoting attentionto one role necessarily depletes the resources available todevote to other roles. As a result, demands in one role (e.g.,work) should impair performance in other roles (e.g., mar-ital relationships). Guided by this perspective, scholars haveexamined how work affects marital quality via processes ofspillover and crossover. Spillover occurs when being over-loaded or frustrated in one role undermines one’s ability ormotivation to meet obligations in another role, thus contrib-uting to withdrawal and anger in interaction, and loweredperformance in and satisfaction with that other role (Bolgeret al., 1989). Crossover occurs when one person’s experi-ences affect the partner’s emotions and satisfaction within acouple (Westman, 2001).

Consistent with scarcity theory, a growing body of re-search finds that higher demands at work are associated withdecreased marital satisfaction. Cross-sectional research hasshown that an individual’s high workload or general feelingof work stress is associated with a more negative mood athome (van Emmerik & Jawahar, 2006), increased maritaltension (Hughes, Galinsky, & Morris, 1992), and decreasedmarital satisfaction in that individual (Ford et al., 2007), andalso negative moods in the spouse (Westman, 2001). Diarystudies further indicate that changes in workload or workstress from day to day predict short-term changes in moodand relationship functioning at home. In a sample of maleair traffic controllers, for example, husbands’ reports of ahigh demands at work predicted increased withdrawal athome (Repetti, 1989). Moreover, a high workload and feel-ings of work stress have been found to predict increasedanger and withdrawal in wives (Schulz, Cowan, Cowan, &Brennan, 2004; Story & Repetti, 2006) and increased angerin husbands (Bolger et al., 1989).

Yet despite evidence of the negative effects of workdemands on marital processes and outcomes, other perspec-tives raise the possibility that, for some couples, demands atwork may generate positive outcomes in the marriage. Forexample, role expansion theory (Marks, 1977) posits thatthe work role does not necessarily deplete an individual andcan even create energy for use in that or another role.Barnett and Hyde (2001) elaborate on this perspective,suggesting that role quality shapes the effects one role hason performance in another. In particular, when individualsare satisfied with one role (e.g., work), fulfillment of thatrole should benefit their satisfaction with and performancein other roles (e.g., being a spouse). Most relevant to thepresent study, Barnett and Hyde argue that role demandscan interact with role quality such that individuals working

long hours may benefit psychologically if the work is per-ceived as satisfying.

Scholars have only begun to examine the implications ofrole expansion theory for marriages, but recent studies sup-port the idea that participation in work can generate feelingsof enjoyment, meaning, and competence (Schaufeli, Bak-ker, & Salanova, 2006) that can enhance functioning inother roles (Wayne, Grzywacz, Carlson, & Kacmar, 2007).Consistent with the suggestion of Barnett and Hyde (2001),cross-sectional, qualitative, and diary studies show that in-dividuals who report greater fulfillment from their jobs alsotend to report greater marital satisfaction (Heller & Watson,2005; van Steenbergen, Ellemers, & Mooijaart, 2007).

Work Satisfaction as Moderator of Effects ofWorkload on Marital Satisfaction

To date, we are aware of no studies that have directlyexamined work satisfaction as moderator of the effects ofworkload on marital satisfaction, but consistent with Barnettand Hyde’s (2001) line of reasoning, some evidence sug-gests that facing high demands at work does not causedepletion in employees who find their work satisfying. Forexample, Hewlett and Luce (2006) examined senior man-agers and executives who had fast-paced jobs, and workedat least 70 hours per week under high workload. Theseemployees reported high work satisfaction, and did notappear to suffer from their demanding jobs. On the contrary,they scored high on psychological well-being on average.Similarly, interviews with employees who felt highly en-gaged and satisfied with their work revealed that they sawtheir work as “fun” and were working long hours and takingon extra work because they loved their jobs (Beckers et al.,2004). This suggests that, for people with satisfying jobs,even high demands at work may not result in depletion, andso may not have a negative impact on marital life. Consis-tent with this view, one study that directly examined asso-ciations between work demands and marital outcomesfound that, among upper-middle class male professionals—who may be more satisfied with their work than blue-collar workers— high “time demands” (i.e., frequentoverwork, weekend work, work-related travel) were notassociated with reports of marital tension at home(Hughes et al., 1992).

Together, these findings suggest that satisfaction withwork should moderate the effects of workload on maritalsatisfaction. In the present study, we predict that, whenspouses do not like their jobs, increases in workload willcause frustration and will be experienced as a burden and adrain on energy. Consistent with scarcity theory, (Goode,1960), this should have detrimental effects on marital sat-isfaction in both spouses via negative spillover and cross-over. However, when spouses find their jobs satisfying,working hard may be seen as sign of success and progressin the work role and may provide individuals energy. In thiscase, consistent with expansion theory (Marks, 1977; Bar-nett & Hyde, 2001), a high workload should have positivespillover and crossover effects on marital satisfaction.

346 VAN STEENBERGEN, KLUWER, AND KARNEY

Parenthood as Moderator of Effects of Workload onMarital Satisfaction

Family circumstances, especially whether or not the cou-ple has children, should moderate the effects of workload onthe marriage (Repetti & Saxbe, 2009). Besides the work andspousal role, parenthood is another role that makes substan-tial demands on individuals’ time and energy. Havingyoung children in particular is associated with a sharpincrease in household and childcare chores that mostly needto be done at set times of the day (e.g., picking up thechildren on time, Kluwer, Heesink, & Van de Vliert, 1996).To the extent that one’s culture values and expects involvedparenting from both parents, facing an elevated workloadcan conflict with being a good parent and partner. ForWestern couples especially, being a good parent and partnermeans being present, spending considerable time with thechildren, and timely performing one’s household and child-related responsibilities (Ford et al., 2007; Roeters, van derLippe, & Kluwer, 2009). Spouses with children are alsoknown to be more interdependent because both spousesneed to coordinate and fulfill their household and child-related obligations in order for the family to function (Klu-wer et al., 1996). Moreover, spouses who are parents haveless time together as a couple compared to spouses withoutchildren. Hence, when parents need to pay more time andenergy to work, this is more likely to interfere with meetingfamily related obligations and couple time, which can de-crease marital satisfaction (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985;Repetti & Saxbe, 2009).

In contrast, for spouses without children, the work roledoes not conflict with one’s role as a spouse, but rather maycomplement it. That is, handling a high workload mightsignal investment in a career, which should relate to highermarital satisfaction, especially in the earlier years of mar-riage when career-building may be valued and normative(Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Warr, 2007). Moreover, de-spite a high workload, spouses without children may stillhave time to share in activities that facilitate recovery fromstress at work, such as engaging in social activities, per-forming sports, and getting enough sleep (Sonnentag,2001). To our knowledge, no previous empirical study hasexamined parenthood as moderator of the effects of work-load on marital satisfaction. However, in line with thisargument, Hughes and Galinsky (1994) found that havinglimited control over one’s work hours was related to in-creased marital tension and decreased marital support forspouses with children, but was unrelated to marital tensionand support for spouses without children.

Gender as Moderator of Effects of Workload onMarital Satisfaction

Husbands and wives are not equally affected by their ownand each others’ work stressors (Neff & Karney, 2007).Asymmetrical boundary theory (Pleck, 1977) suggests thatthe work role is seen as the primary role for men, whereasprimary responsibility for the family and household affairsare frequently assigned to women regardless of their em-

ployment status. As a consequence, the boundaries of thehome domain are thought to be more permeable for men inthat men feel more permitted to “take their work home,”thus allowing husbands’ experiences at work to color theirexperiences of the marriage more than wives’ experiences atwork. It follows that demands in the work role should havea stronger impact on marital relationships for husbands thanfor wives (Pleck, 1977). Indeed, evidence suggests thatwomen take more active steps to prevent their work stressfrom affecting relationships at home (Roeters et al., 2009).Moreover, a recent meta-analysis (Ford et al., 2007) showedthat gender does moderate the relationship between jobstress and family satisfaction (operationalized as marital,parental, and general nonwork satisfaction) in that men’sfamily satisfaction is more affected by work stress thanwomen’s.

With respect to crossover, Bolger and colleagues (1989),in a now classic diary study, found that wives increased theamount of housework they took on when their husbandsexperienced a high workload, thereby facilitating their hus-bands’ recovery from work, whereas there was no evidenceof husbands responding in this way to their wives’ work-load. Moreover, women are, on average, more empathicthan men (Eagly & Crowly, 1986) which suggests thatwomen may be more likely to notice and thus be affected bytheir husbands work experiences than vice versa. Further-more, husbands’ general stress levels have been found toaffect wives’ well-being more strongly than vice versa (seeLarson & Almeida, 1999, for a review). Together, theseresults suggest that husbands’ workload should have stron-ger spillover and crossover effects than wives’ workload.

Overview of the Current Study

Although prior research suggests that work satisfaction,parenthood, and gender are each likely to moderate associ-ations between workload and marital satisfaction, this liter-ature has also been limited in important ways. First, many ofthe existing studies assess the work and marital experiencesof individuals only (Westman, 2001), allowing for exami-nation of spillover effects but not crossover effects or gen-der differences within couples. Second, prior research hasalmost exclusively been cross-sectional or has focused onshort-term changes in relationship functioning across days.Because systematic change in marital satisfaction and sta-bility occurs over years rather than days or weeks, longitu-dinal research over the span of several years is requiredbefore we can draw strong conclusions about whether workstressors predict the deterioration of relationship satisfactionand which factors exacerbate or ameliorate these effects(Neff & Karney, 2007).

To address these limitations, the present study examinedhow fluctuations in workload may spill over and cross overto predict changes in newlyweds’ marital satisfaction overthe first four years of their marriage, as well as how theseassociations may be moderated by work satisfaction, par-enthood, and gender. Newlyweds are an appropriate samplein which to examine these issues, for several reasons. First,compared to more established marriages, these couples ex-

347WORKLOAD AND MARITAL SATISFACTION

perience more dramatic changes in relationship quality andare at elevated risk of disruption (Cherlin, 1992). Second,because couples in their early years of marriage may beespecially likely to experience a high workload (e.g., ac-companied with starting a new job, working for the finalexams, or combining work and school), it is particularlyrelevant to examine how variations in workload affectchanges in relationship quality during this stage. Third,because the early years of marriage are when many, but notall, couples become parents, examining this period allowsus to compare nonparent couples to couples who had chil-dren during the study, while holding the duration of themarriage constant.

Workload and marital satisfaction were assessed in asample of 169 first-married newlywed couples every sixmonths for the first four years of their marriages, resultingin eight waves of data. A preliminary assumption of theanalyses described here was that fluctuations in workloadacross assessments would covary with variability in maritalsatisfaction over time. However, we had no hypothesesabout the overall direction of this association in this sample,in light of three hypotheses about how these associationswould be moderated.

Hypothesis 1: Work satisfaction should moderate thecovariance between workload and marital satisfactionsuch that increases in a spouse’s workload will beassociated with increases in the marital satisfaction ofthe spouse (spillover) and the partner (crossover) whenwork satisfaction is high, and with decreases in themarital satisfaction of the spouse and the partner whenwork satisfaction is low.

Hypothesis 2: Parenthood should moderate the covari-ance between workload and marital satisfaction suchthat, for nonparents, increases in workload will beassociated with increases in the marital satisfaction ofthe individual (spillover) and the spouse (crossover),whereas for parents increases in workload will beassociated with decreases in marital satisfaction forboth spouses.

Hypothesis 3: Workload should have a stronger spill-over effect on marital satisfaction for husbands than forwives and should cross over more strongly from hus-bands to wives than from wives to husbands.

Data Analysis

In a sample of 169 couples, work satisfaction andparenthood were examined as potential moderators of theeffects of workload on husbands’ and wives’ maritalsatisfaction. This required both within-subject andbetween-subjects analyses. A within-subject approach al-lowed us to examine changes and interactions among thetime varying variables: marital satisfaction, workload, andwork satisfaction. The between-subjects approach allowedus to evaluate whether these within-subject associationswere themselves moderated by whether or not the couplehad children during the four years of the study.

To address both the within-subject and between-subjectshypotheses, data were examined with Hierarchical LinearModeling (HLM; Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992), for severalreasons. First, in contrast to other approaches to analyzingmultilevel models (e.g., structural equation modeling),HLM provides reliable estimates of within-subject parame-ters even when sample sizes are relatively small. Second,HLM handles missing data well because it provides maxi-mally efficient estimates of parameters by weighting indi-vidual estimates according to empirical Bayes theory. Whenthe within-subject parameter for an individual can be esti-mated precisely, the final estimate relies heavily on theindividual data. When the parameter cannot be estimatedprecisely (e.g., missing data because spouses failed to com-plete a questionnaire), the final estimate relies more heavilyon the mean of the sample. Because the most precise esti-mates therefore contribute more to the final estimated vari-ance of the sample, variances estimated in this way tend tobe more conservative than those obtained through tradi-tional OLS methods. Two missing data issues were specificto this study. First, 12 wives temporarily quit workingduring the study (six nonparent wives and six wives afterchildbirth). Because we had data from these wives whenthey returned to work, the covariance between their reportsof work and marriage could still be estimated. Second, 16couples divorced and 11 wives permanently quit work(three nonparent wives and eight wives after childbirth).HLM allows participants who did not provide all eightwaves of data to be included in all analyses. Nevertheless, torule out that these couples influenced our findings, weexamined whether omitting the divorced couples, and thecouples in which wives permanently stopped working,would change our findings. In both cases, the pattern ofresults remained identical, so we have reported results fromall 169 couples. To control for the nonindependence ofcouple data, husbands’ and wives’ parameters were esti-mated simultaneously in one model.

Method

Participants

Couples were recruited through advertisements placed incommunity newspapers and bridal shops surrounding alarge public university in Florida, and via letters sent tocouples who had applied for marriage licenses in the sur-rounding county. Couples responding to either method ofsolicitation were screened in a telephone interview to de-termine whether they met the following criteria: (a) this wasthe first marriage for each partner, (b) both spouses wereabove 18 years old, (c) neither partner had children at thebeginning of the study, and (d) the couple had been marriedfewer than six months. The final sample consisted of 169couples. On average, husbands were 25.6 (SD � 4.1) yearsold, and had received 16.3 (SD � 2.4) years of education.Wives averaged 23.4 (SD � 3.6) years old and had received16.2 (SD � 2.0) years of education. Slightly over 65% ofthe sample was Christian and 94% of husbands and 86% ofwives were White.


At the baseline assessment, the average household in-come of these couples was under $20,000, when 17% ofhusbands and 23% of wives were full-time students, 24% ofhusbands and 26% of wives were actively working and inschool, and 59% of the husbands and 51% of wives wereemployed full time. By the third year of the marriage, theannual income had risen to over $55,000, when 78% of thehusbands and 59% of the wives were working full time.

By the final assessment, approximately four years afterthe baseline assessment, 153 couples were still married and16 couples (9.5%) had divorced. At this assessment, only3% of husbands and 5% of wives were full-time students,7% of husbands and 4% of wives were actively working andin school, and 90% of husbands and 84% of wives wereworking full time. Eleven wives (7%) were not in work orschool anymore. As described above, the results reportedare based on the data from all 169 couples.

Procedure

Within the first six months of their marriage, coupleswere scheduled for a laboratory session. Prior to this ses-sion, couples received a packet of questionnaires that in-cluded self-report measures of workload, work satisfaction,and marital satisfaction, and a letter instructing couples tocomplete all questionnaires independently of one another.Couples brought their questionnaires to the lab, where theyparticipated in interactions tasks that were not analyzed hereand will not be discussed further. At seven additional as-sessments occurring every six months subsequent to thebaseline assessment, couples again completed question-naires. Couples were paid a nominal compensation in cashafter each assessment. All procedures were reviewed andapproved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at thehome institution of the principle investigator.

Materials

Marital satisfaction. Marital satisfaction was measuredat every assessment with the Quality Marriage Index (QMI;Norton, 1983). The QMI is a 6-item scale asking spouses toreport the extent to which they agree or disagree withgeneral statements about their marriage (e.g., “We have agood marriage”). Five items ask spouses to respond accord-ing to a 7-point scale, whereas one item asks spouses torespond on a 10-point scale, yielding scores from 6 to 45.High scores reflect higher marital satisfaction. Internal con-sistency of this measure was high across all eight waves ofdata (at least � � .92 for husbands and � � .93 for wives).

Workload. At every assessment, participants were in-structed to think about the amount of workload they expe-rienced in work, in school, or in both domains, and com-pleted an adapted version of the 5-item workload scaledeveloped by Repetti (1989). The scale was adapted byomitting references to “daily” workload. The five itemswere: (a) “It is the sort of workload that people havenightmares about”, (b) “There are too many demands on mytime,” (c) “It is usually very busy,” (d) “I often feel I barelyhave the chance to breathe,” and (e) “I could use more time

for a break”. An additional item asked participants to indi-cate whether they completed the items based on work,school, or both. Scores on the workload measure rangedfrom 1 to 4 with a higher score indicating a higher work-load. Internal consistency of this measure was high acrossall eight waves of data (at least � � .83 for husbands and� � .84 for wives).

Work satisfaction. Work satisfaction was measured atevery assessment with a single item: “How satisfied are youwith your work life?”. When participants were in schoolthey completed the item: “How satisfied are you with yourschool life?” Participants who were engaged in work andschool completed both items and the average of the twoitems was calculated. Scores ranged from 1 to 7 with higherscores indicating higher satisfaction.

Parental status. At each assessment, couples were askedto indicate if they had had children since the prior assess-ment. At the outset of the study, none of the couples hadchildren. By the end of the Study, four years into theirmarriages, 47 couples (28%) had made the transition toparenthood. On average, these couples had their first childafter 2.06 years of marriage (SD � 0.96), approximatelyhalfway through the four year study period.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Table 1 presents means for the time-varying variables,calculated at each assessment for everyone who provideddata at that assessment. On average, spouses reported highlevels of marital satisfaction and high levels of work satis-faction across all assessments. For people who provideddata at Time 1 and Time 8, marital satisfaction declinedsignificantly over time [for husbands t(124) � 5.33, p �.001; for wives t(124) � 4.44, p � .001], consistent withprevious investigations of the early years of marriage (Neff& Karney, 2007). There was no significant mean change inhusbands’ workload [t(83) � - 0.18, ns], but wives’ work-load increased significantly over time, [t(76) � - 2.70, p �.01]. Mean work satisfaction did not change significantlyover time [for husbands t(121) � 1.00, ns; for wivest(104) � 1.32, ns].

Table 2 presents the correlations among the means of thestudy variables across all eight waves of data. The associ-ation between mean workload and mean work satisfactionwas not significant for husbands or wives, and this held truewithin each assessment as well (r’s ranged from �.05 to .16for husbands and �.19 to �.09 for wives). Thus, spouses’work satisfaction was independent of their perceptions ofthe demands of work. The correlations between mean work-load and mean marital satisfaction were not significant forhusbands or wives either, indicating that mean levels ofworkload and marital satisfaction were relatively indepen-dent as well. In sum, all study variables appeared to bebehaving as expected, justifying further analyses of howthese variables covaried across the multiple assessments.


Modeling Change Over Time

The overarching goal of these analyses was to examinehow variations in one’s own and one’s partner’s workloadcovaried with both partners’ marital satisfaction over thefirst four years of marriage. To examine work satisfaction asa moderator of the effects of workload on marital satisfac-tion, work satisfaction and workload were centered withinpersons and interaction terms were built. Centering withinpersons enables one to examine how increases or decreasesin individuals’ workload covary with changes in their ownand partners’ marital satisfaction over time, controlling forbetween-subjects variability in levels of these variables.Main effects as well as the interaction terms were includedin the model. Husbands’ and wives’ marital satisfactionwere estimated simultaneously to control for the noninde-pendence of couple data. This resulted in the followingwithin-subjects model to account for the marital satisfactionof each spouse at each assessment:

Marital satisfaction � �0j � �1j (time) � �2j (own worksatisfaction) � �3j (own workload) � �4j (own workload �work satisfaction) � �5j (partner’s work satisfaction) � �6j(partner’s workload) � �7j (partner’s workload � worksatisfaction) � error.

After estimating this model for the entire sample,between-subjects differences between couples that did anddid not become parents during the study were assessed byincluding parenthood (0 � did not become parents, 1 � didbecome parents) in the Level-2 model as a predictor of eachof these within-subject parameters.1 Table 3 presents theresults for the entire sample, and the results broken down by

parental status. Below, we first describe how work satisfac-tion and workload covary with marital satisfaction overtime, and then turn to our moderation hypotheses.

Do Work Satisfaction and Workload Covary WithMarital Satisfaction?

The coefficients for the overall model (without account-ing for parenthood) are presented in columns 1 and 5 ofTable 3. The high intercepts and negative slopes for hus-bands and wives show that, marital satisfaction on averagebegins high and then declines over time. After controllingfor this general trend, variability in spouses’ reports of worksatisfaction accounted for additional variability in the tra-jectory of their marital satisfaction. On average, whenspouses were more satisfied with their work than normal,they reported higher marital satisfaction as well, and thiswas true to the same degree for husbands and for wives. Wealso observed crossover effects for work satisfaction, buthere an unexpected gender difference emerged. Husbandswere marginally more satisfied with the marriage duringperiods when their wives were feeling more work satisfac-tion. Wives, however, were less satisfied with marriageduring periods when their husbands were experiencing in-creases in work satisfaction. Although having a husbandwho is generally satisfied with work is positively associated

1 None of the results reported here changed in separate analysesthat controlled for when couples became parents over the course ofthe study.

Table 1Means of Marital Satisfaction, Workload, and Work Satisfaction at Each Point in Time for Husbands and Wives

Spouse Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Time 6 Time 7 Time 8

Marital satisfactionHusbands

M 41.7 40.4 40.2 40.9 40.3 39.7 38.7 39.2SD 4.6 5.7 6.2 4.9 6.6 7.1 7.4 6.5n 169 163 161 150 140 113 127 125

WivesM 42.2 40.8 41.1 41.8 40.5 40.5 39.7 40.3SD 4.4 5.9 5.8 4.6 5.9 6.5 6.5 6.3n 169 162 161 151 142 116 128 125

WorkloadHusbands

M 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.4 2.5SD 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8n 168 154 144 133 124 99 92 84

WivesM 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.6SD 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8n 164 151 144 131 120 94 83 80

Work satisfactionHusbands

M 6.4 6.1 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.1 5.9 6.1SD 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.9 2.0 1.7 1.9 1.6n 166 163 158 145 137 106 125 122

WivesM 6.2 5.5 5.6 6.0 6.0 6.1 5.9 5.9SD 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.9n 167 155 151 139 124 97 111 106


with marital satisfaction, for wives an increase in his satis-faction with work may be perceived as threatening hismotivation to devote time and energy to the relationship.

Controlling for these effects, does variability in workloadaccount for additional variance in the trajectory of maritalsatisfaction? In the whole sample, the covariance betweenworkload and marital satisfaction was significant for hus-bands only. When husbands experienced increases in theirworkload this spilled over to an increase in their maritalsatisfaction. For wives, this coefficient was not significant,nor were significant crossover effects of workload observedfor either spouse.

Does Work Satisfaction Moderate the Effects ofWorkload on Marital Satisfaction?

The fifth and eighth rows of Table 3 present estimates ofthe workload x work satisfaction interactions. In Hypothesis1, we predicted that work satisfaction would moderate as-sociations between workload and marital satisfaction suchthat increases in workload would be positively associatedwith marital satisfaction in the individual (spillover) and inthe spouse (crossover) during periods when work satisfac-tion was high, and negatively associated during periodswhen work satisfaction was low. Work satisfaction wasrarely low for the spouses in this sample. Nevertheless,consistent with the hypothesis, in the whole sample, resultsindicated a significant positive interaction in the spillovereffect for both spouses. That is, for husbands and wivesoverall, the positive association between own workload andown marital satisfaction was magnified in periods whenthey were more satisfied at work. In the whole sample, thecrossover effect was not significant for either spouse.

Does Parental Status Moderate the Effects ofWorkload on Marital Satisfaction?

The second and third columns of Table 3 present theresults for husbands that did and did not become parentsover the course of the study; the sixth and seventh columnspresent the estimates for wives. Table 3 reveals that, aftercontrolling for declines in marital satisfaction over time,whether or not a couple became parents moderated severalof the effects of work satisfaction and workload estimated inEquation 1.

In Hypothesis 2, we predicted that, for nonparents, in-creases in workload would be associated with increases inthe marital satisfaction of the individual (spillover) and thespouse (crossover), whereas for parents increases in work-load would be associated with decreases in marital satisfac-tion for both spouses. Hypothesis 2 was supported forhusbands. As predicted, in nonparent couples, husbandswere especially satisfied with their marriages during periodswhen they reported elevated workload (column 2), and theirwives were also significantly more satisfied with the mar-riage when their husbands were experiencing higher thannormal workload (column 6). Additionally, the significantand marginally significant interaction terms show that thesepositive effects of husbands’ workload on both spouses’marital satisfaction were magnified when husbands werefeeling satisfied with their work.

As predicted, a substantially different picture emerges inthe analysis of the parent couples. Whereas for husbandswho did not have children, workload and own marital sat-isfaction were positively associated, this association wasnegative for husbands who were parents. Although thisnegative coefficient for fathers did not reach significancelevels, the difference between fathers and nonfathers wassignificant (column 4). Moreover, the crossover of hus-bands’ workload on wives’ satisfaction was positive fornonparent couples, but was negative for parent couples.Thus, wives who were parents reported lower marital sat-isfaction when their husbands were experiencing a higherworkload than normal.

Finally, consistent with Hypothesis 3 about gender mod-eration, we found, for nonparent couples, that husbands’workload had a stronger spillover effect on their own mar-ital satisfaction than for wives, and crossed over morestrongly from husbands to wives than vice versa (column10). Unexpectedly, for wives who became parents, increasesin their workload were associated with increases in theirmarital satisfaction. Thus, wives who became parents en-joyed higher marital satisfaction during periods when theirworkload was greater than normal, relative to wives who didnot become parents. Consistent with Hypothesis 3, wives’experiences at work did not significantly cross over to affecthusbands’ marital satisfaction, regardless of whether cou-ples became parents or not.

Table 2Correlations Among Means of Study Variables

Variables Ma SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Husband’s work satisfaction 6.12 1.13 (—)2. Husband’s workload 2.50 0.55 .04 (—)3. Wife’s work satisfaction 5.88 1.29 �.01 .06 (—)4. Wife’s workload 2.49 0.53 .01 �.06 �.11 (—)5. Parental statusb 27.81 — .08 �.02 �.05 �.02 (—)6. Husband’s marital satisfaction 40.18 4.45 .26�� .10 .23�� .06 .06 (—)7. Wife’s marital satisfaction 40.83 4.29 .21�� .24�� .36�� .05 .17� .64��

a Means are computed per respondent across all available waves of data, b Percentage of couples that has children.� p � .05. �� p � .01. �� p � .001. All significance tests were two-tailed tests.


Discussion

Informed by scarcity theory (Goode, 1960), marital re-searchers have frequently described a tension between workand family life, such that demands at work deplete time andenergy, leaving couples with less to devote toward main-taining their relationships. Yet expansion theory (Marks,1977) raises the possibility that engagement in work cancreate energy, thereby contributing to relationships. To rec-oncile these perspectives, the current study drew upon mul-tiple waves of data on workload and marital satisfactionover the first years of marriage to identify the conditionsunder which elevations in husbands’ and wives’ workloadwere associated with increases or decreases in their maritalsatisfaction.

In general, the results highlight the powerful role ofcontext in shaping the relationship between work life andmarried life. Whereas, across the entire sample, elevationsin workload were associated with increases in marital sat-isfaction in these newlywed couples, this general trend wasmoderated in significant ways by each of the three moder-ators examined here.

First, as theorized by Barnett and Hyde (2001), we foundthat increases in husbands’ and wives’ workload were morestrongly associated with increases in marital satisfactionwhen they were more satisfied with their work. Consistentwith the expansion perspective, this suggests that handlinghigh demands at work is more likely to leave partnersenergized when the work is perceived to be fulfilling. Al-though the interaction was statistically significant in thepredicted direction, it is worth noting that we did not findevidence for a full cross-over effect. That is, we did not findthe predicted negative association between workload andmarital satisfaction for spouses who were less satisfied withtheir work. One possible explanation for failure to observethe negative effect may be that this was a sample of peoplewho were, on average, highly satisfied with their work.Samples containing a wider range of work satisfactionwould offer a stronger test of both sides of this hypothesis.Second, these findings highlight the profound ways that thedynamics between work and marriage differ for coupleswho become parents and couples who do not. This differ-ence was not just a difference in the degree of associationbetween workload and marital satisfaction, but a differencein the direction of the association as well. Specifically, thepositive spillover and crossover effects observed for hus-bands’ workload were observed only in couples that did notbecome parents. This supports the idea that, when there areno children in the home, working hard can be energizingand can complement one’s role as a spouse, translating intohigher marital satisfaction (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Forfathers, however, more time and energy devoted to workhad significant effects in the opposite direction, spillingover into declines in satisfaction for husbands and crossingover into declines in satisfaction for wives. This pattern isconsistent with scarcity theory and the idea that attending toincreases in workload can interfere with meeting familyobligations, diminish time spent together as a couple (andfamily), and possibly cause tension and conflict betweenT

able

3T

heE

ffec

tsof

Wor

kSa

tisf

acti

onan

dW

orkl

oad

onH

usba

nds’

and

Wiv

es’

Mar

ital

Sati

sfac

tion

Acc

ordi

ngto

Par

enta

lSt

atus

Pred

icto

rs

Hus

band

s’sa

tisfa

ctio

nW

ives

’sa

tisfa

ctio

nG

ende

rdi

ffer

ence

s

Who

lesa

mpl

e�

Non

-pa

rent

s�

Pare

nts

�N

on-

pare

nts/

Pare

nts

t-ra

tio

Who

lesa

mpl

e�

Non

-pa

rent

s�

Pare

nts

�N

on-

pare

nts/

Pare

nts

t-ra

tio

Who

lesa

mpl

e�

2

Non

-pa

rent

s�

2Pa

rent

s�

2

Inte

rcep

t41

.50�

��

41.2

2��

42.2

7��

1.30

42.0

8��

41.6

1��

43.3

6��

2.40

�1.

960.

602.

82†

Slop

e�

0.26

��

�0.

20��

�0.

44��

�1.

29�

0.25

��

�0.

22��

�0.

35�

�0.

710.

040.

030.

58O

wn

wor

ksa

tisfa

ctio

n0.

25��

0.31

��

�0.

01�

1.32

0.17

�0.

080.

34��

1.68

†0.

392.

68†

1.75

Ow

nw

orkl

oad

0.83

��

1.31

��

�0.

40�

2.97

��

0.28

0.20

0.62

�1.

062.

36†

7.29

��

3.60

�

Ow

nw

orkl

oad�

wor

ksa

tisfa

ctio

n0.

47�

0.71

��

0.10

�1.

88†

0.39

��

0.39

�0.

42�

0.10

0.10

0.95

2.90

†

Spou

se’s

wor

ksa

tisfa

ctio

n0.

16†

0.12

0.22

†0.

61�

0.23

��

�.2

8��

�0.

130.

7216

.28�

��

13.7

4��

2.84

†

Spou

se’s

wor

kloa

d0.

03�

0.07

0.28

0.73

0.42

0.90

��

�0.

72�

2.57

��

1.36

6.05

��

2.86

†

Spou

se’s

wor

kloa

d�

wor

ksa

tisfa

ctio

n�

0.16

�0.

15�

0.20

�0.

230.

040.

34†

�0.

66�

�3.

43��

0.97

3.29

†3.

24†

†p

�.1

0.�

p�

.05.

��

p�

.01.

��

p�

.001

.A

llsi

gnifi

canc

ete

sts

wer

etw

o-ta

iled

test

s.


parents, hence leading to decreased marital satisfaction forboth partners (Kluwer et al., 1996).

Unexpectedly, we did not find evidence for the scarcityperspective for mothers. On the contrary, mothers werehappier with their marriages during periods when theirworkloads were higher than normal. Consistent with theexpansion perspective, this was especially true when theyexperienced their work as satisfying. A possible, post hoc,explanation for the different implications of high workloadfor mothers and fathers could be that husbands and wivesrespond to fluctuations in each other’s workload differentlywhen they are parents. Consistent with this idea, a recentstudy among parent couples showed that, when their wiveshad high demands at work, fathers increased the time theyspent on childcare (Roeters et al., 2009). To the extent thatwives usually engage in a disproportionate share of child-care and household tasks, such a response from husbandsduring periods of high workload for wives may move cou-ples closer to an equitable distribution of labor within thehome. In this way, demands at work may liberate wivesfrom some of the burdens of juggling the two worlds ofwork and family life, increasing their satisfaction with themarriage. Indeed, wives’ satisfaction with the division ofthese tasks is an important predictor of marital satisfactionfor women (Grote & Clark, 2001). Future research mightexamine directly whether changes in and satisfaction withdivision of labor within the home accounts for the positiveassociations between mothers’ workload and their maritalsatisfaction.

Finally, we observed mixed evidence for predictionsabout gender differences in spillover and crossover fromworkload to marital satisfaction. Consistent with asymmet-rical boundaries theory (Pleck, 1977), fluctuations in hus-bands’ workload crossed over to account for changes inwives’ marital satisfaction, whereas the reverse was not thecase. Thus this study extends the findings from daily diarystudies that women are more likely to be affected by hus-bands’ high demands at work than vice versa (e.g., Bolgeret al., 1989), showing similar effects over the first years ofmarriage. With respect to spillover, changes in workloadwere associated with changes in marital satisfaction morestrongly for nonparent husbands than for nonparent wives,also consistent with the theory. For parents, however, wefound, contrary to predictions, that workload spilled overmore strongly into marital satisfaction for mothers than forfathers. This could be taken as a sign that, for dual-earnerparents, the meaning of men’s and women’s work haschanged, to the extent that women now allow their worklives to affect their home lives. But it bears noting that theoriginal theory focuses primarily on the negative effects ofwork on family life, suggesting that wives were less per-mitted to acknowledge such effects than men. In the currentstudy, workload corresponded with increased marital satis-faction for mothers. Whether negative spillover effects ofwork into the marriage would also be stronger for mothersthan fathers remains an open question.

In light of these findings, the challenge for workingcouples and their employers is to recognize the role thatcircumstances play in determining how work and married

life fit together, and to bring about circumstances in whichboth roles can enhance, rather than detract from, each other(van Steenbergen & Ellemers, 2009). When employees aresatisfied with the work they do, and when their workload fitstheir life phase, the effects on family life are more likely tobe beneficial. In discussing these topics with employees,supervisors should pay extra attention to fathers, as theirworkload had especially detrimental effects on marital life.Spouses themselves and clinical practitioners should alsorecognize that their engagement in work has the potential todetract from, but also to enhance, their marital quality.

Strengths and Limitations

A number of strengths in the design and methodology ofthis study enhance our confidence in its findings. First,whereas most prior work-family research has been cross-sectional, this was an eight-wave longitudinal study. Havingmultiple waves of data allowed us to estimate the associa-tion between changes in workload and changes in spouses’marital satisfaction over time, while controlling for individ-ual differences in the way spouses evaluated their workloadand their marriages. Second, in contrast to prior work onthese issues that tends to examine only a single partner (e.g.,Westman, 2001), the present study included data from cou-ples, allowing us to examine spillover, crossover, and gen-der differences in the associations between workload andmarital satisfaction. Third, this was a relatively homogenoussample of recently married couples, reducing the likelihoodthat our findings result from uncontrolled differences inspouse’s age or marital duration. Finally, in contrast to diarystudies that have examined these issues over periods of daysor weeks, this study drew from four years of data to showthat changes in workload account for changes in maritalsatisfaction in the early years of marriage.

Yet despite these strengths, interpretations of these re-sults should also note several limitations. First, all datadescribed here were correlational. Such data cannot deter-mine the direction of influence between workload and mar-ital satisfaction, so we have avoided using causal languageto describe these results. Second, although the use of arelatively homogenous sample strengthens the internal va-lidity of these results, it also restricts the generalizability ofour findings. Whereas the couples examined here weremostly White, college-educated, young American couples,older, more affluent couples may experience different asso-ciations between work demands and marital satisfaction(e.g., because they can afford better childcare, have moreflexible jobs, etc.). The findings may also be bound tospecific expectations within Western cultures. The contem-porary United States in particular emphasizes the value ofworking hard and building a career (Brett & Stroh, 2003),but at the same time stresses the importance of spendingtime with your children (e.g., Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).In cultures that place less emphasis on fathers participatingin child rearing, differences between couples that becomeparents and those who do not might be smaller or evenabsent. Third, because we had too few postpartum waves ofdata for the couples that became parents during the study,


we compared couples who had children to those who didnot. We were unable, however, to examine the transition toparenthood directly. A logical step for future research wouldbe to test the robustness of the present findings by examin-ing, within couples, how experiences at work affect maritalsatisfaction, before and after couples experience the birth oftheir first child.

Conclusion

The implications of specific stressors for married lifecannot be understood completely without acknowledgingthe context of these stressors. In the current study, a narrowfocus on workload and marriage would have offered at bestan incomplete and at worst a misleading description of howcouples manage the demands of these two domains. Ac-knowledging how the effects of demands at work can varyacross different work and family circumstances and forhusbands and wives highlights the need to examine multiplework and family demands on couples simultaneously todevelop an accurate understanding of how these circum-stances can affect husbands’ and wives’ experiences withinthe relationship.

References

Barnett, R. C., & Hyde, J. S. (2001). Women, men, work, andfamily. American Psychologist, 56, 781–796. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.56.10.781

Beckers, D. G. J., Van der Linden, D., Smulders, P. G. W.,Kompier, M. A. J., Van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., & Van Yperen,N. W. (2004). Working overtime hours: Relations with fatigue,work motivation, and the quality of work. Journal of Occupa-tional and Environmental Medicine, 46, 1282–1289. doi:10.1097/jom. 0000147210.95602.50

Bolger, N., Delongis, A., Kessler, R. C., & Wethington, E. (1989).The contagion of stress across multiple roles. Journal of Mar-riage and the Family, 51, 175–183. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/352378

Brett, J. M., & Stroh, L. K. (2003). Working 61 plus hours a week:Why do managers do it? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88,67–78. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.88.1.67

Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linearmodels. Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park,CA: Sage.

Cherlin, A. J. (1992). Marriages, divorce, remarriage. (2nd ed.).Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Eagly, A. H., & Crowly, M. (1986). Gender and helping behavior:A meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature.Psychological Bulletin, 100, 283–308. doi:10.1037/0033–2909.100.3.283

Ford, M. T., Heinen, B. A., & Langkamer, K. L. (2007). Work andfamily satisfaction and conflict: A meta-Analysis of cross-domain relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 57–80. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.92.1.57

Glenn, N. D., & Weaver, C. N. (1981). The contribution of maritalhappiness to global happiness. Journal of Marriage and theFamily, 43, 161–168. http://www.jstor.org/stable/351426

Goode, W. J. (1960). A theory of role strain. American Sociolog-ical Review, 25, 483–496. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2092933

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. (1985). Sources of conflict be-

tween work and family roles. Academy of Management Review,10, 76–88. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258214

Grote, N. K., & Clark, M. S. (2001). Perceiving unfairness in thefamily: Cause or consequence of marital distress? Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 80, 281–293. doi: 10.1037//0022–3514.80.2.281

Heller, D., & Watson, D. (2005). The dynamic spillover of satis-faction between work and marriage: The role of time and mood.Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1273–1279. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.90.6.1273

Hewlett, S. A., & Luce, C. B. (2006) Extreme jobs: The dangerousallure of the 70-hour work week. Harvard Business Review,49–59. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/magazine

Hughes, D., & Galinsky, E. (1994). Work experiences and maritalinteractions: Elaborating the complexity of work. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 15, 423–438. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2488214

Hughes, D., Galinsky, E., & Morris, A. (1992). Effects of jobcharacteristics on marital quality: Specifying linking mecha-nisms. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 31–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/353273

Kluwer, E. S., Heesink, J. A. M., & Van de Vliert, E. (1996).Marital conflict about the division of household labor and paidwork. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58, 958–969. Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/353983

Larson, R. W., & Almeida, D. M. (1999). Emotional transmissionin the daily lives of families: A new paradigm for studyingfamily processes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 5–20.Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/353879

Marks, S. P. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: Some notes onhuman energy, time and commitment. American SociologicalReview, 42, 921–936. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094577

Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2007). Stress crossover in newlywedmarriage: A longitudinal and dyadic Perspective. Journal ofMarriage and Family, 69, 594–607. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4622469

Norton, R. (1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at thedependent variable. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45,141–151. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/351302

Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Prob-lems, 24, 417–427. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/800135

Repetti, R., L., & Saxbe, D. (2009). The effects of job stress on thefamily: One size does not fit all. Handbook of Families & Work.New York: University Press of America.

Repetti, R. L. (1989). Effects of daily workload on subsequentbehavior during marital interaction: The roles of social with-drawal and spouse support. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 57, 651–659. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/psp/

Roberts, N. A., & Levenson, R. W. (2001). The remains of theworkday: Impact of job stress and exhaustion on marital inter-action in police couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63,1052–1067. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3599813

Roeters, A., Van der Lippe, T., & Kluwer, E. (2009). Parentalwork demands and the frequency of child-related routine andinteractive activities. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 1193–1204. doi: 10.1111/j.1741–3737.2009.00663

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). Themeasurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: Across-national study. Educational and Psychological Measure-ment, 66, 701–716. doi:10.1177/0013164405282471

Schulz, M. S., Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., & Brennan, R. T.


(2004). Coming home upset: Gender, marital satisfaction, and thedaily spillover of work experience into couple interaction. Jour-nal of Family Psychology, 18, 250–263. doi: 10.1037/0893–3200.18.1.250

Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individualwell-being: A diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psy-chology, 6, 196–210. doi: 10.1037//1076–8998.6.3.196

Story, L. B., & Repetti, R. (2006). Daily occupational stressors andmarital behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 20, 690–700.doi: 10.1037/0893–3200.20.4.690

van Emmerik, I. J., & Jawahar, I. M. (2006). The independentrelationships of objective and subjective workload with couples’mood. Human Relations, 59, 1371–1392. doi: 10.1177/0018726706071649

van Steenbergen, E. F., & Ellemers, N. (2009). Is managing thework-family interface worth while? Benefits for employee healthand performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 617–642. doi: 10.1002/job. 569

van Steenbergen, E. F., Ellemers, N., & Mooijaart, A. (2007). Howwork and family can facilitate each other: Distinct types ofwork-family facilitation and outcomes for women and men.Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 279–300. doi:10.1037/1076–8998.12.3.279

Warr, P. (2007). Work, Happiness, and Unhappiness. London:Erlbaum.

Wayne, J. H., Grzywacz, J. G., Carlson, D. S., & Kacmar, K. M.(2007). Work-family facilitation: A theoretical explanation andmodel of primary antecedents and consequences. Human Re-source Management Review, 17, 63–76. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.01.002

Westman, M. (2001), Stress and strain crossover, Human Rela-tions, 54, 717–751. doi: 10.1177/0018726701546002

Received December 20, 2010Revision received March 3, 2011

Accepted March 10, 2011 �

Call for Papers for a Special Section of the Journal of Family Psychology:Genetics and Epigenetics in a Family Context

Editors: Steven Beach and Mark Whisman

The Journal of Family Psychology invites manuscripts for a special section on Genetics andEpigenetics in a Family Context. Family psychology touches on the field of genetics in many ways.As we enter a period of continued dynamic growth in our understanding of genetic and epigeneticprocesses, it is timely and appropriate to consider the best way to include family relationships incontextualized models of genetic effects, whether the focus is on genetic effects associated withfamily dynamics, genetic moderation of the effects of family context, or the role of epigeneticchange in family dynamics. Empirical studies of processes that are pertinent to any aspect of thisbroad emerging area will be considered for publication.

The intent of this special section is to provide a resource of comprehensive papers on issuesrelated to this emerging topic within family psychology. Authors will be asked to provide data thataddress the question of how incorporation of genetic and epigenetic variables may enhance the studyof families. Data addressing questions of public health utility, clinical utility, impact on models ofrelationship development and functioning, as well as potential connections to treatment outcome ortreatment planning are all examples of topics that would be welcomed in the special section.

The deadline for receipt of papers for this special section is December 15, 2011. Empirical paperson any topic within the area will be considered. Intention to submit a paper should be sent to theguest special section editor by August 15, 2011 ([email protected]). Please follow the journal’sInstructions to Authors for information about how to prepare an article, which can be found on thejournal’s web page: www.apa.org/pubs/journals/fam. Manuscripts must be submitted electronicallythrough the Manuscript Submission Portal of the Journal of Family Psychology (www.apa.org/pubs/journals/fam). Please be sure to specify in the cover letter that the submission is intended forthe special section on genetics and epigenetics in a family context. All papers will be initiallyscreened by the editors, and papers that fit well with the theme of this special section will be sentout for masked peer review.


Workload and the trajectory of marital satisfaction in newlyweds: Job satisfaction, gender, and...

Documents

Transcript of Workload and the trajectory of marital satisfaction in newlyweds: Job satisfaction, gender, and...