Abstract
In this chapter, we review a selection of topics regarding inequality between and within families: public definitions of family, parent-sibling relations, the household division of labor, and the treatment of mothers in the workforce. Our review of the family and inequality literature suggests that families, as the primary basis for social organization and for the reproduction of inequalities, provide an ideal test of many social psychological theories. Indeed, we highlight a number of important contributions that have been made when insights from social psychologists, family scholars, and social stratification scholars have been merged. Despite these recent gains, there is still a need for even more discussion across these groups. We conclude by discussing avenues for future research that explicitly integrates social psychological insights into the study of family inequality. For example, we suggest that multi-theoretical and methodological work may be especially well suited for answering questions related to family inequality. Further, we argue that future studies can attend more fully to cross-cultural variation, diversity of family forms, and the interaction of familial roles with other institutional roles in the study of family inequality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Because the 2003 survey was conducted before same-sex couples were allowed to legally marry anywhere in the U. S., the authors did not ask about married same-sex couples, although in a later survey (2010), this living arrangement was included.
- 2.
Because such a small percentage of respondents considered roommates as family, Powell et al. only briefly refer to this living arrangement in their book.
- 3.
Whether or not this relationship will continue, however, is unclear. Interestingly, among young adults, the question of controllability is not as closely linked to views regarding inclusivity. Or to put it another way, it does not appear to matter as much for young adults whether sexuality is due to factors beyond individuals’ control. The absence of a relationship may be due to young adults being less likely than their older counterparts to see homosexuality as a stigma.
- 4.
Similarly, Schneider (2011, 2012) finds a curvilinear relationship between women’s earnings and time spent on household labor—when women earn more than their partners, they compensate by doing more housework, not less.
- 5.
The “doing gender” perspective also has been invoked to understand how different tasks themselves are gendered. For example, women report spending over twice as much time as their husbands on meals, cleaning, daily childcare, and everyday shopping (Sayer 2005). Men’s and women’s contributions to household labor are more similar on measures of teaching/playing with children, and male/shared tasks (“outdoor chores, repairs, and household paperwork”) (Sayer 2005, p. 290). Further, Schneider (2012) finds that men who work in traditionally female careers and women who work in traditionally male careers compensate for their gender deviance at work by engaging in more traditionally gendered household tasks at home.
- 6.
Although men (i.e., fathers) could choose to enact behaviors associated with mothering, very few would actually claim the identity of mother (but see Callero 1994). Moreover, even if a man claimed the identity of mother, it is unlikely that he would receive support for that identity among his immediate social networks.
- 7.
Evaluation-Potency-Activation scores (also referred to as EPA values) refer to how good or bad (E), how powerful or impotent (P) and how active or inactive (A) an identity, behavior, attribute, emotion, or setting is deemed to be within a particular culture. These values range from − 4 to 4.
- 8.
For more information about how Interact works, see Heise (2007) or go to http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact.htm.
- 9.
Small group experiments have frequently shown that in the absence of task-related information, individuals with higher diffuse status characteristics tend to emerge as leaders, and that the contributions from individuals with lower status characteristics tend to be ignored, refuted, or co-opted by higher status others. Further, in mixed-sex task groups, men tend to emerge as the instrumental or task leaders, whereas women are more likely to emerge as the social leaders and to exhibit more socio-emotional support and other “helping” behaviors (Ridgeway and Johnson 1990).
- 10.
There are some exceptions. For example, in contrast to less powerful women in cross-sex relationships, less powerful men in same-sex partnerships do not frequently back channel or use tag questions. Being a less powerful partner in a same-sex male relationship may be uncomfortable. Picking up on this discomfort, the more powerful partner in same-sex male relationships will back channel, ask questions, and use tag questions to draw the less powerful partner into the interaction (Kollock et al. 1985).
- 11.
Although Kornrich et al. (2012) attempt to account for structural or opportunity variables that may affect individuals’ desire of access to sex, it is not clear that the authors have comprehensively explored other possibilities that may explain the patterns that they find. For example, although they include a control for self-reported health in some of their multivariate models, they are less successful in accounting for both partner’s overall health and other out-of-the-ordinary situations that might encourage men to do the lion’s share of the work. Given the rarity of men doing more than an equal share of the household labor, it is worth investigating the situation of those men who do.
- 12.
In stark contrast to mothers, however, fathers appear to earn a wage premium (Correll et al. 2007).
- 13.
In contrast, cultural ideas of fatherhood do not cast men in this all-or-nothing role, especially because fathers can fulfill their parenting responsibilities primarily in their role as breadwinners (Ridgeway 2011).
- 14.
To test the applicability of their findings in a real-world setting, Correll et al. (2007) conducted a second audit study. Here, the researchers sent out resumes similar to those used in the laboratory experiment to employers seeking similarly qualified applicants, monitoring the number of callbacks they received for each applicant. They found that mothers were less than half as likely as non-mothers to receive a call back from a job application. Further, fathers received slightly more callbacks than non-fathers, although this difference was not significant.
- 15.
Information regarding section membership was provided by the American Sociological Association (personal communication, February 19, 2013).
- 16.
Even the overlap with these two sections may reflect less the perceived commonalities of interests of the family section and social psychology section and instead may merely reflect the relatively large size of the sex and gender and race-gender-class sections.
References
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchy, jobs, and bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and Society, 4(2), 139–158.
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 267–299.
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Alwin, D. F., & Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Aging, cohorts, and the stability of sociopolitical orientations over the life span. American Journal of Sociology, 97(1), 169–195.
Alwin, D. F., & McCammon, R. J. (2003). Generations, cohorts and social change. In J. Mortimier & M. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 23–49). New York: Kluwer/Plenum Publishers.
Austin, W. (1977). Equity theory and social comparison processes. In J. Suls & R. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison theory (pp. 279–305). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Austin, W., & Walster, E. (1974). Reactions to confirmation and disconfirmation of expectations of equity and inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(2), 208–216.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small g roups. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley Press.
Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital. New York: Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Becker, G. S. (1980). A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Becker, G. S. (1985). Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor. Journal of Labor Economics, 3(1), S33–S58.
Becker, G. S., & Tomes, N. (1976). Child endowments and the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 84(4), S143-S162.
Benard, S., & Correll, S. J. (2010). Normative discrimination and the motherhood penalty. Gender and Society, 24(5), 616–646.
Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M. Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37(3), 241–255.
Berger, J., Conner, T. L., & Fisek, H. M. (1974). Expectation states theory: A theoretical research program. Cambridge: University Press of America.
Berger, J., Fisek, H. M., Norman, R., & Zelditch, M. Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction. New York: Elsevier.
Bianchi, S. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2010). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 705–725.
Bittman, M., England, P., Folbre, N., Sayer, L., & Matheson, G. (2003). When does gender trump money? Bargaining and time in household work. The American Journal of Sociology, 109(1), 186–214.
Blau, P., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York: Wiley.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interaction: Perspective and method. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Bourdieu, P. (with Passeron, J. C.). (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture (Theory, culture, and society series). London: Sage.
Bramel, D. (2004). The strange career of the contact hypothesis. In J. T. Ling, S. Worchel, C. McCauly, & F. Moghaddam (Eds.), The psychology of ethnic and cultural conflict (pp. 49–67). New York: Praeger.
Brennan, R. T., Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2001). When she earns more than he does: A longitudinal study of dual-earner couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 168–182.
Brewster, K. L., & Padavic, I. (2000). Change in gender-ideology, 1977–1996: The contributions of intracohort change and population turnover. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(2), 477–487.
Britton, D. M. (1990). Homophobia and homosociality: An analysis of boundary maintenance. Sociological Quarterly, 31(3), 423–439.
Brooks, C., & Bolzendahl, C. (2004). The transformation of U. S. gender role attitudes: Cohort replacement, social-structural change, and ideological learning. Social Science Research, 33(1), 106–133.
Brooks, C., & Manza, J. (1997). Why welfare states persist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review, 66(2), 204–225.
Burgess, E. W. (1926). The family as a unity of interacting personalities. Family, 1, 3–9.
Burgess, E. W., & Locke, H. J. (1945). The family: From institution to companionship. New York: American Book Company.
Callero, P. L. (1994). From role-playing to role-using: Understanding role as resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(3), 228–243.
Carrington, C. (1995). No place like home: Relationships and family life among lesbians and gay men. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cha, Y. (2010). Reinforcing separate spheres: The effect of spousal overwork on men’s and women’s employment in dual-earner households. American Sociological Review, 75(2), 303–329.
Cheng, S., & Powell, B. (2007). Under and beyond constraints: Resource allocation to young children from biracial families. American Journal of Sociology, 112(4), 1044–1094.
Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848–861.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94(Special Issue), S95–S120.
Conley, D. (2005). The Pecking Order: A bold new look at how family and society determine who we become. New York: Vintage.
Conely, D., & Glauber, R. (2006). Parental educational investment and children’s risk: Estimates of the impact of sibship size and birth order from exogenous variation in fertility. Journal of Human Resources, 41(4), 722–737.
Connell, R. (2009). “Doing gender” in transsexual and political retrospect. Gender and Society, 23(1), 104–111.
Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 43(5), 721–739.
Cooley, C. H. (1909). Social organization. New York: The Free Press.
Correll, S. J., & Ridgeway, C. L. (2003). Expectation states theory. In J. Delamater (Ed.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 29–52). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology, 112(5), 1297–1338.
Corse, S. J. (1990). Pregnant managers and their subordinates: The effects of gender expectations on hierarchical relationships. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 26(1), 25–48.
Cotter, D., Hermsen, J. M., & Vanneman, R. (2011). The end of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes form 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 259–289.
Craig, L., & Mullan, K. (2011). How mothers and fathers share childcare: A cross-national time-use comparison. American Sociological Review, 76(6), 834–861.
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn’t cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4), 701–718.
Deutsch, F. M. (2007). Undoing gender. Gender and Society, 21(1), 106–127.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Kawakami, K. (2004). Intergroup contact: The past, present, and the future. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6(1), 5–21.
Downey, D. B. (1995). When bigger is not better: Family size, parental resources, and children’s educational performance. American Sociological Review, 60(5), 746–761.
Dumont, A. ([1890] 2012). Dépopulation et Civilisation: Étude Démographique. Charleston: Nabu Press.
Durkheim, E. ([1897] 1977). Suicide. New York: Free Press.
Featherman, D. L., & Hauser, R. M. (1978). Opportunity and change. New York: Academic Press.
Fingerman, K. L., Pitzer, L. M., Chan, W., Birditt, K., Franks, M. M., & Zarit, S. (2010). Who Gets what and why? Help middle-aged adults provide to parents and grown children. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 66B(1), 87–98.
Fisher, A. P. (2003). Still “not quite as good as having your own”? Toward a sociology of adoption. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 335–361.
Foeman, A. K., & Nance, T. (1999). From miscegenation to multiculturalism: Perceptions and stages of interracial relationship development. Journal of Black Studies, 29(4), 540–557.
Ford, D. Y., Feist-Price, S., Jones, D. L., Wright, L. B., Strutchens, M., Stephens, J. E., & Harris, J. III (1996). Family diversity: Perceptions of university students relative to gender and college major. Urban Education, 31(1), 91–106.
Fuegen, K., Biernat, M., Haines, E., & Deaux, K. (2004). Mothers and fathers in the workplace: How gender and parental status influence judgments of job-related competence. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4), 737–754.
Fuwa, M. (2004). Macro-level gender inequality and the division of household labor in 22 countries. American Sociological Review, 69(6), 751–767.
Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. London: Macmillan.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Geist, C., & Cohen, P. N. (2011). Headed toward equality? Housework change in comparative perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73(4), 832–844.
Gerson, K. (2010). The unfinished revolution: How a new generation is reshaping family, work, and gender. New York: Oxford University Press.
Glass, J., & Fujimoto, T. (1994). Housework, paid work, and depression among husbands and wives. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35(2), 179–191.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
Goode, W. J. (1960). A theory of role strain. American Sociological Review, 25(4), 483–496.
Goodwin, J., Jasper, J. M., & Polletta, F. (2001). Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guo, G., & VanWey, L. (1999). Sibship size and intellectual development: Is the relationship causal? American Sociological Review, 64(2), 169–187.
Haider-Markel, D. P., & Joslyn, M. R. (2008). Beliefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights: An empirical test of attribution theory. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(2), 291–310.
Halpert, J. A., Wilson, M. L., & Hickman, J. (1993). Pregnancy as a source of bias in performance appraisals. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(7), 649–663.
Hamilton, L., Cheng, S., & Powell, B. (2007). Adoptive parents, adaptive parents: Evaluating the importance of biological ties for parental investment. American Sociological Review, 72(1), 95–116.
Hays, S. (1996). Cultural contradictions of motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hegtvedt, K. A. (1990). The effects of relationship structure on emotional responses to inequity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53(3), 214–228.
Hegtvedt, K. A., & Markovsky, B. (1995). Justice and injustice. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 257–280). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 51(6), 358–374.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
Heise, D. R. (2007). Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions. New York: Springer.
Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1996). “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup contact and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men: Results from a national sample. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 239–244.
Herek, G. M. (1998). Stigma and sexual orientation: Understanding prejudice against lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Hill, R. B. (1999). The strengths of black families: Twenty-five years later. Landham: University Press of America.
Hochschild, A. R. (1989). The second shift: Working parents and the revolution at home. New York: Viking.
Hochschild, A. R. (1997). The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work. New York: H. Holt.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. (1999). What is family? Further thoughts on a social constructionist approach. Marriage and Family Review, 28(3/4), 3–20.
Homans, G. ([1961] 1974). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Hook, J. L. (2010). Gender inequality in the welfare state: Sex segregation in housework, 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology, 115(5), 1480–1523.
Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (2004). The time divide: Work, family, and gender inequality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kemper, T. D. (1978). A social interactional theory of emotion. New York: Wiley.
Kohn, M. L. (1969). Class and conformity: A study in values (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kollock, P., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1985). Sex and power in interaction: Conversational privileges and duties. American Sociological Review, 50(1), 34–46.
Kornirch, S., Brines, J., & Leupp, K. (2012). Egalitarianism, housework, and sexual frequency in marriage. American Sociological Review, 78(1), 26–50.
Krehbiel, P. J., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability and emotion. Social Justice Research, 13(4), 339–360.
Kroska, A. (2001). Do we have consensus? Examining the relationship between gender ideology and role meanings. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64(1), 18–40.
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (1999). Bringing emotions into social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 217–244.
Lee, Y. S. (2005). Measuring the gender gap in household labor: accurately estimating wives’ and husbands’ contributions. In B. Schneider & L. J. Waite (Eds.), Being together working apart: Dual-career families and the work-life balance (pp. 229–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lennon, M. C., & Rosenfield, S. (1994). Relative fairness and the division of housework: The importance of options. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 506–531.
Lewis, G. B. (2011). The friends and family plan: Contact with gays and support for gay rights. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 217–238.
Lively, K. J. (2000). Reciprocal emotion management: Working together to maintain stratification in private law firms. Work and Occupations, 27(1), 32–63.
Lively, K. J., & Heise, D. (2004). Sociological realms of emotional experience. American Journal of Sociology, 109(5), 1109–1136.
Lively, K. J., Powell, B., Geist, C., & Steelman, L. C. (2008). Inequity among intimates. Advances in Group Processes, 25, 87–115.
Lively, K. J., Steelman, L. C., & Powell, B. (2010). Equity, emotion, and the household division of labor. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(4), 358–379.
Loftus, J. (2001). America’s liberalization in attitudes toward homosexuality. American Sociological Review, 66(5), 762–782.
Lonner, W. (1980). The search for psychological universals. In H. C. Triandis & W. W. Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 143–204). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Mandel, H., & Semyonov, M. (2005). Family policies, wage structures, and gender gaps: Sources of earnings inequality. American Sociological Review, 70(6), 949–967.
Mannheim, K. ([1928] 1952). The problem of generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowledge (pp. 276–320). London: Routledge and Kagan.
Massey, D. S. (2002). Emotion and the history of human society: The origin of role and emotion in social life. American Sociological Review, 67(1), 1–29.
McLanahan, S. S. (2000). Family, state, and child wellbeing. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 703–706.
Mikula, G., Scherer, K. R., & Athenstaedt, U. (1998). The role of injustice in elicitation of differential emotional reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(7), 769–783.
Milkie, M. A., Bierman, A., & Schieman, S. (2008). How adult children influence older parents’ mental health: Integrating stress-process and life-course perspectives. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71(1), 86–105.
Moore, M. R. (2008). Gendered power relations among women: A study of household decision making in black, lesbian stepfamilies. American Sociological Review, 73(2), 335–356.
Moore, M. R. (2011). Invisible families: Gay identities, relationships, and motherhood among Black Women. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Murdock, G. P. (1949). Social structure. New York: Macmillan.
Offer, S., & Schneider, B. (2011). Revisiting the gender gap in time-use patterns: Multitasking and well-being among mothers and fathers in dual-earner families. American Sociological Review, 76(6), 809–833.
Oliver, R. L., Shor, M., & Tidd, S. T. (2004). Induced over-benefitting and under-benefitting on the web: Inequity effects on feeling and motivations with implications for consumption behavior. Motivation and Emotion, 28(1), 85–106.
Parsons, T., & Bales, R. ([1956] 2007). Family: Socialization and interaction process. New York: Free Press.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.
Pfeffer, C. A. (2010). “Women’s work”? Women partners of transgender men doing housework and emotion work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(1), 165–183.
Powell, B. (2012). Changing counts, counting change: Toward a more inclusive definition of family. Presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Denver, CO.
Powell, B., Bolzendahl, C., Geist, C., & Steelman, L. C. (2010). Counted out: Same-sex relations and Americans’ definitions of family. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Raley, S., Bianchi, S. M., & Wang, W. (2012). When do fathers care? Mothers’ economic contribution and fathers’ involvement in child care. American Journal of Sociology, 117(5), 1422–1459.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 637–655.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2006). Linking social structure and interpersonal behavior: A theoretical perspective on cultural schemas and social relations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(1), 5–16.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persist in the modern world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ridgeway, C. L., Backor, K., Li, Y. E., Tinkler, J. E., & Erickson, K. G. (2009). How easily does a social difference become a status distinction? Gender matters. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 63–82.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Motherhood as a status characteristic. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4), 683–700.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Johnson, C. (1990). What is the relationship between socioemotional behavior and status in task groups? American Journal of Sociology, 95(5), 1189–1212.
Risman, B. J. (2009). From doing to undoing: Gender as we know it. Gender and Society, 23(1), 81–84.
Rodgers, J., & Rowe, D. (1994). Birth order, spacing and family size. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of intelligence (pp. 204–209). New York: Macmillan.
Sanchez, L., & Kane, E. W. (1996). Women’s and men’s constructions of perceptions of housework fairness. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 358–387.
Sayer, L. C. (2005). Gender, time and inequality: Trends in women’s and men’s paid work, unpaid work and free time. Social Forces, 84(1), 285–303.
Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72(1), 92–115.
Schneider, B., & Coleman, J. (Eds.). (1993). Parents, their children and schools. Boulder: Westview Press.
Schneider, D. (2011). Market earnings and household work: New tests of gender performance theory. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73(4), 845–860.
Schneider, D. (2012). Gender deviance and household work: The role of occupation. American Journal of Sociology, 117(4), 1029–1072.
Sewell, W., Haller, A., & Portes, A. (1969). The educational and early occupational attainment process. American Sociological Review, 34(1), 82–92.
Simmel, G. (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel (translated by K.H. Wolff). Glencoe: Free Press.
Smith, D. E. (1993). The standard North American family: SNAF as an ideological code. Journal of Family Issues, 14(1), 50–65.
Smith, H. W. (2002). The dynamics of Japanese and American interpersonal events: Behavioral settings versus personality traits. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 26(1–2), 71–92.
Smith, H. W., Matsuno, T., & Umino, M. (1994). How similar are impression-formation processes among Japanese and Americans? Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(2), 124–139.
Smith-Lovin, L., & Douglass, W. (1992). An affect control analysis of two religious subcultures. Social Perspectives on Emotions, 1, 217–248.
Smock, P. J. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: An appraisal of research themes, findings, and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 1–20.
Soldo, B. J. (1996). Cross pressures on middle-aged adults: A broader view. Journal of Gerontology, 51(6), 271–273.
Sprecher, S. (1986). The relation between inequity and emotions in close relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49(4), 309–321.
Steelman, L. C., & Powell, B. (1996). The family devalued: The treatment of the family in small groups literature. Advances in Group Processes, 13, 11–36.
Steelman, L. C., & Powell, B. (1991). Sponsoring the next generation: Parental willingness to pay for higher education. American Journal of Sociology, 96(6), 1505–1529.
Steelman, L. C., Powell, B., Werum, R., & Carter, S. (2002). Reconsidering the effects of sibling configuration: Recent advances and challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 243–269.
Stets, J. (2003). Justice, emotion, and identity theory. In P. Burke, T. Owens, R. Serpe, & P. Thoits (Eds.), Advances in identity theory and research (pp. 104–122). New York: Plenum Press.
Stone, P. (2007). Opting out? Why women really quit careers and head home. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 284–297.
Suitor, J. J., & Pillemer, K. (2006). Choosing daughters: Exploring why mothers favor adult daughters over sons. Sociological Perspectives, 49(2), 139–161.
Suitor, J. J., & Pillemer, K. (2007). Mothers’ favoritism in later life: The role of children’s birth order. Research on Aging, 29(1), 32–55.
Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth order, family dynamics, and creative lives. New York: Pantheon.
Thomas, W. I., & Thomas, D. S. (1928). The child in America: Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf.
Thornton, A., & Freedman, D. (1979). Changes in the sex role attitudes of women, 1976–1977: Evidence from a panel study. American Sociological Review, 44(5), 831–842.
Trost, J. (1990). Do we mean the same by the concept of family? Communications Research, 17(4), 431–443.
U. S. Census Bureau, Population Division. (2009). Table 2-C. Projections of the Population by Selected Age Groups and Sex for the United States: 2010 to 2050 Constant Net International Migration Series (NP2009-T2-C). http://www.census.gov/population/www/projections/2009cnmsSumTabs.html.
Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (2002). The evolution of expectation states theories. In M. Zelditch Jr. & J. Berger (Eds.), Contemporary sociological theories (pp. 41–78). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Waldfogel, J. (1997). The effect of children on women’s wages. American Sociological Review, 62(2), 209–217.
Waller, W. (1938). The family: A dynamic interpretation. New York: Cordon.
Walster, E. G., Walster, W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Weigel, D. J. (2008). The concept of family: An analysis of laypeople’s views of family. Journal of Family Issues, 29(11), 1426–1427.
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 3–25.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement, motivation, and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573.
Weiss, H. W., & Suckow, K. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(5), 786–794.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1(2), 125–151.
Weston, K. (1997). Families we choose: Lesbians, gays, kinship (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
Whitley, B. E. (2001). Gender-role variables and attitudes toward homosexuality. Sex Roles, 45(11-12), 691–721.
Williams, J. C. (2000). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, G. B. (1975). Birth order and intellectual development. Psychological Review, 82 (1), 74–88.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Sciences + Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lively, K., Oslawski-Lopez, J., Powell, B. (2014). Unequal but Together: Inequality Within and Between Families. In: McLeod, J., Lawler, E., Schwalbe, M. (eds) Handbook of the Social Psychology of Inequality. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9002-4_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9002-4_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9001-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9002-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)