Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 719–754 | Cite as

Are Women Happier When Their Spouse is Teleworker?

Research Paper

Abstract

This study explores the household production allocation and happiness of women when their spouse is teleworker using data from the British Household Panel Survey over the years 1991–2009. The study aims to answer whether the women spend additional time on housework and are happier when they or their partner is teleworker. Also, we explore whether are happier when they share the household–domestic production with their partners. Fixed effects estimates take place, and we consider a Bayesian Network framework and a directed acyclic graph for causal inference. The results show that women are more likely to state that the household allocation, such as cooking, cleaning, ironing and childcare is shared when their partner teleworks. Shopping is an exception which can be regarded as an outdoor activity while one partner may be mainly responsible for this chore. In addition, women are happier when they or their spouse is teleworker, and they report higher levels of happiness when the household production allocation is a shared process. This may indicate men teleworkers may contribute extra to the household production releasing a burden for the partners and improving their well-being.

Keywords

Bayesian Networks Directed acyclic graphs Gender roles Household production Quality-of-life Teleworking 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship (IF) Grant [652938-TELE]. The author gratefully acknowledges the funding provided by European Commission to carry out this research. The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments, suggestions and constructive comments that greatly contributed to the improvement of the quality of this paper.

References

  1. Anderson, G., Brosnan, P., & Walsh, P. (1994). Homeworking in New Zealand: Results from a workplace survey. International Journal of Employment Studies, 2, 229–247.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, A. J., Kaplan, S. A., & Vega, R. P. (2015). The impact of telework on emotional experience: When, and for whom, does telework improve daily affective well-being? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(6), 882–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Argyle, M. (2001). The psychology of happiness. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2007). Shift work, parenting behaviors, and children’s socioemotional well-being: A within-family study. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 727–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnett, R., & Rivers, C. (1996). She works, he works: How two-income families are happy, healthy, and thriving. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Baxter, J. (2000). The joys and justice of housework. Sociology, 34, 609–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker, G. S. (1981). A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Benjamin, O., & Sullivan, O. (1996). The importance of difference: Conceptualising increased flexibility in gender relations in the home. Sociological Review, 44(2), 225–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bentley, T. A., Teo, S. T. T., McLeod, L., Tan, F., Bosua, R., & Gloet, M. (2016). The role of organizational support in teleworker wellbeing: A socio-technical systems approach. Applied Ergonomics, 52, 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bourguignon, F., Browning, M., & Chiappori, P. A. (2009). Efficient intra-household allocations and distributions factors: Implications and identification. Review of Economic Studies, 76, 503–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, H., & Roberts, J. (2014). Gender role identity, breadwinner status and psychological well-being in the household. Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series SERPS No. 2014004, Institute for Economic Analysis of Decision-Making.Google Scholar
  12. Browning, M., Chiappori, P. A., & Weiss, Y. (2014). Economics of the family. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bulos, M., & Chaker, W. (1995). Sustaining a sense of home and personal identity. In D. Benjamin & D. Stea (Eds.), The home: Interpretations, meanings and environments. Avebury: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  14. Chiappori, P. A. (1988). Rational household labor supply. Econometrica, 56, 63–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chiappori, P. A. (1992). Collective labor supply and welfare. Journal of Political Economy, 100, 437–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark, A. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics, 4, 341–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of Public Economics, 61, 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coltrane, S. (1989). Household labour and the routine production of gender. Social Problems, 36, 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dauphin, A., El Lhaga, A., Fortin, B., & Lacroix, G. (2011). Are children decision-makers within the household? Economic Journal, 121, 871–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2010). Why teleworkers are more satisfied with their jobs than are office-based workers: When less contact is beneficial. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38, 336–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frisco, M. L., & Williams, K. (2003). Perceived housework equity, marital happiness, and divorce in dual-earner households. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Giovanis, E. (2014). Relationship between well-being and recycling rates: Evidence from life satisfaction approach in Britain. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(2), 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goldberg, D. P., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the GHQ. Windsor: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
  24. Golden, T. D. (2006). Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Telework and the intervening impact of work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 176–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Golden, T. D., & Veiga, J. F. (2005). The impact of extent of telecommuting on job satisfaction: Resolving inconsistent findings. Journal of Management, 31, 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommutings differential impact on work-family conflict: Is there no place like home?’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1340–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goossens, R. C., & de Vos, E. L. (1987). Huishoudvoering met een laag inkomen: Theoretische aanzetten voor de bestudering van strategieën in het huishoudelijk handelen bij beleidsminima. Vakgroep Huishoudkunde: Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen.Google Scholar
  28. Greenhill, A., & Wilson, M. (2006). Haven or hell? Telework, flexibility and family in the e-society: A Marxist analysis. European Journal of Information Systems, 15, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gregson, N., & Lowe, M. (1994). Waged domestic labour and the renegotiation of the domestic division of labour within dual career households. Sociology, 28, 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gronau, R. (1977). Leisure, home production, and work—The theory of the allocation of time revisited. Journal of Political Economy, 85(6), 1099–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Han, W. J. (2004). Nonstandard work schedules and child care decisions: Evidence from the NICHD study of early child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 231–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heckerman, D. (1996). Tutorial on learning Bayesian networks. Technical Report MSR-TR-95-06. Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/heckerman95tutorial.html.
  33. Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hersch, J., & Stratton, L. S. (1994). Housework, wages, and the division of housework time for employed spouses. The American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, 84(2), 120–125.Google Scholar
  35. Hochschild, A. (1989). The second shift. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
  36. Hochschild, A. R. (1997). The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
  37. Huws, U., Podro, S., Gunnarsson, E., Weijers, T., Arvanitaki, K., & Trova, V. (1996) Teleworking and Gender. Report 317, Institute for Employment Studies.Google Scholar
  38. Ilahi, N. (2000). The intra-household allocation of time and tasks: what have we learnt from the empirical literature? The World Bank Development Research Group/Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network.Google Scholar
  39. Kalisch, M., & Buhlmann, P. (2007). Estimating high-dimensional directed acyclic graphs with ¨ the PC-algorithm. Machine Learning, 8, 613–636.Google Scholar
  40. Levinson, A. (2012). Valuing public goods using happiness data: The case of air quality. Journal of Public Economics, 96(9–10), 869–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lim, V. K. G.,Thompson, T. H., & Har, W. S. (1997). Working at home-Myth or reality: An empirical study of factors affecting attitudes towards teleworking. Research Paper Series, Faculty of Business Administration, National University of Singapore, 1997.Google Scholar
  42. Lundberg, S., & Pollak, R. A. (1996). Bargaining and distribution in marriage. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Madsen, S. R. (2006). Work and family conflict: Can home-based teleworking make a difference? International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 9(3), 307–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mansfield, P., & Collard, J. (1988). The beginning of the rest of your life? A portrait of newly-wed marriage. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mazzocco, M., Ruiz, C., & Yamaguchi, S. (2013). Labor supply, wealth dynamics, and marriage decisions. Mimeo: University of California Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  46. Morris, L. (1993). Household finance management and the labour market: a case study in Hartlepool. Sociological Review, 41(3), 506–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Neapolitan, R. (2003). Learning Bayesian networks. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Series in Artificial Intelligence, Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  48. Nichols, S., & Metzen, E. (1982). Impact of wife’s employment upon husband’s housework. Journal of Family Issues, 3, 199–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Oláh, L. S., Richter, R., & Kotowska, I. E. (2014). State-of-the-art report. The new roles of men and women and implications for families and societies. Families and societies. Working Paper Series. Changing families and sustainable societies: Policy contexts and diversity over the life course and across generation.Google Scholar
  50. Ozdamar, O. (2015a). Does public spending on parental leave benefits promote child health? Evidence from panel data analyses of OECD countries. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 32–49.Google Scholar
  51. Ozdamar, O. (2015b). Gendered economic policy making: The case of public expenditures on family allowances. Economics Discussion Papers, No 2015-37, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.Google Scholar
  52. Pahl, J. (1983). The allocation of money and the structuring of inequality within marriage. Sociological Review, 31(2), 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems. California: San Mateo.Google Scholar
  54. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality. Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Pearl, J. (2009). Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statistical Surveys, 3, 96–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pennartz, P., & Niehof, A. (1999). The domestic domain: Chances, choices and strategies of family households. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  57. Pina, D., & Bengston, V. (1993). The division of household labor and wives’ happiness: Ideology, employment and perceptions of support. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 901–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Presser, H. B. (1994). Employment schedules among dual-earner spouses and the division of household labor by gender. American Sociological Review, 59, 348–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Silver, H. (1993). Homework and domestic work. Sociological Forum, 8(2), 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sironi, M., & Mencarini, L. (2012). Happiness, housework and gender inequality in Europe. European Sociological Review, 28(2), 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, prediction, and search (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Sullivan, O. (2000). The division of domestic labour: Twenty years of change? Sociology, 34, 437–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sullivan, C., & Lewis, S. (2001). Home-Based telework, gender and the synchronization of work and family: Perspectives of teleworkers and their co-residents. Gender, Work and Organization, 8(2), 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taylor, M. F., Brice, J., Buck, N., & Prentice-Lane, E. (2010). British household panel survey user manual volume A introduction, technical report and appendices. Colchester: University of Essex.Google Scholar
  65. Thompson, L. (1991). Family work: Women’s sense of fairness. Journal of Family Issues, 12, 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Van Praag, B., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2004). Happiness quantified: A satisfaction calculus approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Soest, A. (1995). Structural models of family labor supply: A discrete choice approach. Journal of Human Resources, 30(1), 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Soest, S., & Stancanelli, E. (2010). Does income taxation affect partners’ household chores? IZA Discussion Paper No. 5038, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
  69. Vega, R. P., Anderson, A. J., & Kaplan, S. A. (2015). A within-person examination of the effects of telework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 313–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vittersø, J., Akselsen, S., Evjemo, B., Julsrud, T. E., Yttri, B., & Bergvik, S. (2004). Impacts of home-based telework on quality of life for employees and their partners. Quantitative and qualitative results from a European survey. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 201–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vogler, C., & Pahl, J. (1993). Social and economic change and the organisation of money within marriage. Work, Employment & Society, 7(1), 71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vogler, C., & Pahl, J. (1994). Money, power and inequality within marriage. Sociological Review, 42(2), 263–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Voydanoff, P., & Donnelly, B. W. (1999). The intersection of time in activities and perceived unfairness in relation to psychological distress and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 739–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Waldfogel, J. (1998). Understanding the “family gap” in pay for women with children. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(1), 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Warde, A., & Hetherington, K. (1993). A changing domestic division of labour? Issues of measurement and interpretation. Work, Employment & Society, 7, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wheelock, J. (1990). Husbands at home: The domestic economy in a post-industrial society. Londen: Routledge.Google Scholar
  77. Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., & Garud, R. (2001). Organizational identification among virtual workers: The role of need for affiliation and perceived work-based social support. Journal of Management, 27, 213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wight, V. R., Raley, S. B., & Bianchi, S. M. (2008). Time for children, one’s spouse and oneself among parents who work nonstandard hours. Social Forces, 87, 243–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wilkie, J. R., Ferree, M. M., & Ratcliff, K. S. (1998). Gender and fairness: Marital satisfaction in two-earner couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 577–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zuidberg, A. C. L. (1981). Het verzorgingsniveau van huishoudens. SWOKA Onderzoeksrapporten, 4. ‘s-Gravenhage: SWOKA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsVerona UniversityVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations