Sex Roles

pp 1–16 | Cite as

Housework Allocation, Negotiation Strategies, and Relationship Satisfaction in Cohabiting Emerging Adult Heterosexual Couples

  • Andréanne CharbonneauEmail author
  • Mylène Lachance-GrzelaEmail author
  • Geneviève Bouchard
Original Article


The purpose of the current study was twofold; first, to examine the association between equity and equality by comparing heterosexual romantic partners’ distribution of time as a function of their perceptions of equity and second, to investigate the antecedents of the housework negotiation process, its dyadic nature, and its influence on relationship satisfaction. Data from 204 newly cohabiting Canadian heterosexual couples indicated that men and women perceived inequity to self and equity to self, respectively, when the distribution of time was equal at home, yet men spent more time on paid work or academics than their partners did. Moreover, men and women perceived equity to self and inequity to self, respectively, when women did the bulk of the housework and men spent more time on paid work or academics than their partners did. Results also revealed that women’s personal contribution is linked to their relationship satisfaction through self-use of equity-restoring strategies when their partners’ use of equity-resisting strategies is high. For men, the conditional indirect effect of personal contribution on relationship satisfaction was significant when their attempts to restore equity were met with low resistance from their partners. Overall, our results highlight gender differences that could help raise awareness around issues of housework inequality and inform the development of educational programs for romantic partners who face ongoing challenges of housework allocation.


Equity Division of labor Negotiation strategies Relationship satisfaction Emerging adulthood Heterosexual couples 



We thank Meghan Beaudin, Josée Boudreau, Jolène Doucet, Colombe Mazerolle, Karine Roy, Manon Vautour, and Mylène Richard for their assistance with data collection. The present research was supported by a Joseph-Armand Bombardier CGS Doctoral Scholarship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

A certification of compliance with ethical principles was obtained from the research ethics board of the Université de Moncton. All procedures performed were in accordance with the approved protocol.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest associated with this publication.


  1. Alberts, J. K., Tracy, S. J., & Trethewey, A. (2011). An integrative theory of the division of domestic labor: Threshold level, social organizing and sensemaking. Journal of Family Communication, 11, 21–38. Scholar
  2. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood. A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480. Scholar
  3. Arnett, J. J. (2007). Emerging adulthood: What is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Perspectives, 1, 68–73. Scholar
  4. Arrighi, B. A., & Maume, D. J. J. (2000). Workplace subordination and men’s avoidance of housework. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 464–487. Scholar
  5. Bartley, S. J., Blanton, P. W., & Gilliard, J. L. (2005). Husbands and wives in dual-earner marriages: Decision-making, gender role attitudes, division of household labor, and equity. Marriage & Family Review, 37, 69–74. Scholar
  6. Baxter, J. (2000). The joys and justice of housework. Sociology, 34, 609–631. Scholar
  7. Berridge, C. W., & Romich, J. L. (2011). “Raising him . . . to pull his own weight”: Boys’ household work in single-mother households. Journal of Family Issues, 32, 157–180. Scholar
  8. Bianchi, S. (2000). Maternal employment and time with children: Dramatic change or surprising continuity? Demography, 37, 410–414. Scholar
  9. Braun, M., Lewin-Epstein, N., Stier, H., & Baumgärtner, M. K. (2008). Perceived equity in the gendered division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 1145–1156. Scholar
  10. Canary, D. J., Emmers-Sommer, T. M., & Faulkner, S. (1997). Sex and gender differences in personal relationships. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Carriero, R. (2011). Perceived fairness and satisfaction with the division of housework among dual-earner couples in Italy. Marriage & Family Review, 47, 436–458. Scholar
  12. Carriero, R., & Todesco, L. (2017). The interplay between equity and gender ideology in perceived housework fairness: Evidence from an experimental vignette design. Sociological Inquiry, 87, 561–585. Scholar
  13. Chethik, N. (2006). VoiceMale. What husbands really think about their marriages, their wives, sex, housework, and commitment. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc..Google Scholar
  14. Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73–81. Scholar
  15. Claffey, S. T., & Manning, K. R. (2010). Equity but not equality: Commentary on Lachance-Grzela and Bouchard. Sex Roles, 63, 781–785. Scholar
  16. Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1208–1233. Scholar
  17. Croft, A., Schmader, T., Block, K., & Baron, A. S. (2014). The second shift reflected in the second generation: Do parents’ gender roles at home predict children’s aspirations? Psychological Science, 25, 1418–1428. Scholar
  18. DeMaris, A., & Longmore, M. A. (1996). Ideology, power, and equity: Testing competing explanations for the perception of fairness in household labor. Social Forces, 74, 1043–1071. Scholar
  19. Dempsey, K. (1997). Trying to get husbands to do more work at home. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 33, 216–225. Scholar
  20. Eldridge, K. A., Sevier, M., Jones, J., Atkins, D. C., & Christensen, A. (2007). Demand-withdraw communication in severely distressed, moderately distressed, and nondistressed couples: Rigidity and polarity during relationship and personal problem discussions. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 218–226. Scholar
  21. Evertsson, M. (2014). Gender ideology and the sharing of housework and child care in Sweden. Journal of Family Issues, 35, 927–949. Scholar
  22. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications, Ltd..Google Scholar
  23. Gerson, K. (2010). The unfinished revolution: How a generation is reshaping family, work, and gender in America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2000). The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 737–745. Scholar
  25. Hatfield, E., Salmon, M., & Rapson, R. L. (2011). Equity theory and social justice. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 8, 101–121. Scholar
  26. Hawkins, A. J., Marshall, C. M., & Meiners, K. M. (1995). Exploring wives’ sense of fairness about family work: An initial test of the distributive justice framework. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 693–721. Scholar
  27. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  28. Horne, R. M., Johnson, M. D., Galambos, N. L., & Krahn, H. J. (2017). Time, money, or gender? Predictors of the division of household labour across life stages. Sex Roles, 78, 731–743. Scholar
  29. Impett, E. A., Gable, S. L., & Peplau, L. A. (2005). Giving up and giving in: The costs and benefits of daily sacrifice in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 327–344. Scholar
  30. Klein, W., Izquierdo, C., & Bradbury, T. N. (2007). Working relationships: Communicative patterns and strategies among couples in everyday life. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 4, 29–47. Scholar
  31. Kluwer, E. S. (2010). From partnership to parenthood: A review of marital change across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2, 105–125. Scholar
  32. Kluwer, E. S., Heesink, J. A. M., & Vliert, E. V. D. (1997). The marital dynamics of conflict over the division of labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59, 635–653. Scholar
  33. Knight, K., & Alberts, J. K. (2018). Response thresholds and demand/withdraw communication in domestic labor conflict. Journal of Family Communication, 18, 110–123. Scholar
  34. Knudsen, K., & Wærness, K. (2008). National context and spouses’ housework in 34 countries. European Sociological Review, 24, 97–113. Scholar
  35. Knudson-Martin, C., & Mahoney, A. (2009). Couples, gender, and power. In Creating change in intimate relationship. New York: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.Google Scholar
  36. Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2009). La cohabitation et le mariage, deux mondes à part? Un examen des caractéristiques démographiques, individuelles et relationnelles [Cohabitation and marriage, two worlds apart? A review of demographic, individual and relational characteristics]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 41, 37–44. Scholar
  37. Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the lion’s share of housework? A decade of research. Sex Roles, 63, 767–780. Scholar
  38. Lively, K. J., Steelman, L. C., & Powell, B. (2010). Equity, emotion, and household division of labor response. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 358–379. Scholar
  39. Mannino, C. A., & Deutsch, F. M. (2007). Changing the division of household labor: A negotiated process between partners. Sex Roles, 56, 309–324. Scholar
  40. Mikula, G. (1998). Division of household labor and perceived justice: A growing field of research. Social Justice Research, 11, 215–241. Scholar
  41. Mikula, G., Freudenthaler, H. H., Brennacher-Kröll, S., & Schiller-Brandl, R. (1997). Arrangements and rules of distribution of burdens and duties: The case of household chores. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 189–208.<189::AID-EJSP814>3.0.CO;2-O.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mintz, S. G. (2002). Love, honor and value: A family caregiver speaks out about the choices and challenges of caregiving. Sterling: Capital Books, Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Misra, J., Lundquist, J. H., & Templer, A. (2012). Gender, work time, and care responsibilities among faculty. Sociological Forum, 27, 300–323. Scholar
  44. Mitnick, D. M., Heyman, R. E., Malik, J., & Slep, A. M. S. (2009). The differential association between change request qualities and resistance, problem resolution, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 464–473. Scholar
  45. Natalier, K. (2003). 'I’m not his wife': Doing gender and doing housework in the absence of women. Journal of Sociology, 39, 253–269. Scholar
  46. Neilson, J., & Stanfors, M. (2014). It’s about time! Gender, parenthood, and household divisions of labor under different welfare regimes. Journal of Family Issues, 35, 1066–1088. Scholar
  47. Newkirk, K., Perry-Jenkins, M., & Sayer, A. G. (2017). Division of household and childcare labor and relationship conflict among low-income new parents. Sex Roles, 76, 319–333. Scholar
  48. Öun, I. (2013). Is it fair to share? Perceptions of fairness in the division of housework among couples in 22 countries. Social Justice Research, 26, 400–421. Scholar
  49. Pedersen, D. E., & Minnotte, K. L. (2012). Dual earner husbands and wives: Marital satisfaction and the workplace culture of each spouse. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 33, 272–282. Scholar
  50. Riforgiate, S. E., & Boren, J. P. (2015). “I just can’t clean the bathroom as well as you can!”: Communicating domestic labor task equity-resistance and equity-restoring strategies among married individuals. Journal of Family Communication, 15, 309–329. Scholar
  51. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28. Scholar
  52. Sprecher, S. (2018). Inequity leads to distress and a reduction in satisfaction: Evidence from a priming experiment. Journal of Family Issues, 39, 230–244. Scholar
  53. Stevens, D. P., Kiger, G., & Mannon, S. E. (2005). Domestic labor and marital satisfaction: How much or how satisfied? Marriage & Family Review, 37, 49–67. Scholar
  54. Sullivan, O., Gershuny, J., & Robinson, J. P. (2018). Stalled or uneven gender revolution? A long-term processual framework for understanding why change is slow. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 10, 263–279. Scholar
  55. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  56. Treas, J., & Tai, T. (2016). Gender inequality in housework across 20 European nations: Lessons from gender stratification theories. Sex Roles, 74, 495–511. Scholar
  57. Uppal, S. (2015). Insights on Canadian society. Employment patterns of families with children. Statistics Canada Catologue no. 75-006-X. Ottawa, Ontario. 1–12.Google Scholar
  58. Van Willigen, M., & Drentea, P. (2001). Benefits of equitable relationships: The impact of sense of fairness, household division of labor, and decision making power on perceived social support. Sex Roles, 44, 571–597. Scholar
  59. Walster, E., & Walster, W. G. (1975). Equity and social justice. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 21–43.Google Scholar
  60. Young, M., Wallace, J. E., & Polachek, A. J. (2015). Gender differences in perceived domestic task equity: A study of professionals. Journal of Family Issues, 36, 1751–1781. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyUniversité de MonctonMonctonCanada

Personalised recommendations