Predictors of conflict over the household division of labor among women employed full-time

This empirical study examined predictors of conflict over the household division of labor among a group of 319 middle class, less traditional married women in order to examine the degree to which equity factors predicted conflict. Forty of the women were either African American, Hispanic, Native American, or Asian. An analysis of covariance indicated that there were no differences by race/ethnicity. The study explored the following: (1) the degree to which equity factors predict conflicts over household labor, (2) which equity factors best account for conflict, (3) the degree to which particular equity factors mediate the relationship of conflict with other variables, (4) whether equity factors are more compelling in predicting conflicts than practical or status variables, and (5) whether women's perceptions of the reasons for conflict put more emphasis on equity than on other issues. Results indicated that while both equity and practical factors predicted conflict, equity factors were more statistically significant. The best overall model of conflict suggested that it was predicted by lower satisfaction with the division of labor (which, in turn, was contingent upon time differentials between spouses and the time a womans' spouse spent on traditional women's tasks), a larger number of household members, a woman's younger age, and performing a greater number of overall household tasks. Equity is important to such women and constitutes a basis for making arguments about justice. However, these employed women devote twelve hours more per week to household labor than their partners and are relatively satisfied with the division. Chaeftz's theory of gender equity identifies where this sample of employed women may be located in the process of change.Thanks to Diane Blohowiak for statistical assistance and to Susan Jacquet, Laura Thieme, Annette Tierrien, and Mark Hoven Stohs for assistance with data gathering. Special thanks to the reviewers.