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 [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg.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.