IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v83y2002i4p905-920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stress at Home, Peace at Work: A Test of the Time Bind Hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Susan L. Brown
  • Alan Booth

Abstract

Objective. We test the central thesis of Hochschild’s (1997) The Time Bind: people who are unsatisfied with housework, parenting, or their marriage work more hours, or at a minimum prefer to work more hours, especially if satisfaction with work is high. Methods. Using the data from the 1987–1988 National Survey of Families and Households, we analyzed the influence of work and home satisfaction on the actual and desired work hours of 1,533 respondents who were employed, married to an employed spouse, and had one or more resident children under age 18. Results. We found that people who were more satisfied with work than home or who were dissatisfied with home life in general did not work more hours or even desire to do so. Conclusions. Contrary to Hochschild’s assertions, there was little evidence that working parents dissatisfied with home life worked more hours or desired to spend more time at work.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan L. Brown & Alan Booth, 2002. "Stress at Home, Peace at Work: A Test of the Time Bind Hypothesis," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(4), pages 905-920, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:83:y:2002:i:4:p:905-920
    DOI: 10.1111/1540-6237.00121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6237.00121
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1540-6237.00121?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:83:y:2002:i:4:p:905-920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.