Intra-household work time synchronization
If partners derive utility from joint leisure time, it is expected that they will coordinate their work schedules in order to increase the amount of joint leisure time. This paper tries to answer three questions using a new matching procedure where couples are matched to other couples. (1) Do partners coordinate their work schedules and does this result in work time synchronization, (2) which partners synchronize more work hours, and (3) is there a preference for togetherness. We find that (1) coordination results in more synchronized work hours. (2) the presence of children is the main cause why some partners synchronize their work times less than other couples, and (3) partners coordinate their work schedules in order to have more joint leisure time, which is evidence for togetherness preferences.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 84 (2007)
Issue (Month): 1 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2002.
"Timing, togetherness and time windfalls,"
Journal of Population Economics,
Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(4), pages 601-623.
- Hallberg, Daniel, 2003.
"Synchronous leisure, jointness and household labor supply,"
Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 185-203, April.
- Hallberg, Daniel, 2002. "Synchronous Leisure, Jointness and Household Labor Supply," Working Paper Series 2002:11, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
- Jenkins, Stephen P. & Osberg, Lars, 2003.
"Nobody to Play With? The Implications of Leisure Coordination,"
IZA Discussion Papers
850, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Jenkins, Stephen P. & Osberg, Lars, 2003. "Nobody to play with? The implications of leisure coordination," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-19, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
- Stephen P. Jenkins & Lars Osberg, 2003. "Nobody to Play with?: The Implications of Leisure Coordination," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 368, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
- Daniel Hallberg & Anders Klevmarken, 2003.
"Time for children: A study of parent's time allocation,"
Journal of Population Economics,
Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 16(2), pages 205-226, 05.
- Hallberg, Daniel & Klevmarken, Anders, 2001. "Time for Children, a Study of Parents’ Time Allocation," Working Paper Series 2001:21, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
- Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2000. "Togetherness: Spouses' Synchronous Leisure, and the Impact of Children," NBER Working Papers 7455, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hamermesh, Daniel S, 1999. "The Timing of Work over Time," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(452), pages 37-66, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:84:y:2007:i:1:p:39-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.