Sociology Mind
2012. Vol.2, No.2, 213-222
Published Online April 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/sm) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/sm.2012.22028
Wives’ Employment and Marital Dissolution: Consideration of
Gender Ideology and Marital Interaction
Deniz Yucel
Department of Sociology, William Paterson University of New Jersey, Wayne, USA
Received December 8th, 2011; revised January 17th, 2012; accepted February 22nd, 2012
This study examines both the mediating effects of marital interaction and gender ideology, as well as the
moderating effect of gender ideology in understanding the relationship between wives’ work hours and
marital dissolution. This paper also explores the role of gender for couples who disagree in their relation-
ship assessments. Wives’ additional work hours are positively associated with marital dissolution, an ef-
fect that operates through increased gender egalitarianism (for both spouses and for wives only) and de-
creased marital interaction (for both spouses and for wives only). Lastly, for couples who differ in their
reports of gender ideology and marital interaction, the likelihood of marital dissolution is contingent upon
wives’ assessments of their relationship. The implications of this study and the avenues for future re-
search are also discussed.
Keywords: Wives’ Employment; Marital Dissolution; Gender Ideology; Marital Interaction
Introduction
Wives’ employment has long been studied and considered as
one determinant of marital instability (Booth, Johnson, White,
& Edwards, 1984; Greenstein, 1990, 1995; Johnson, 2004;
South & Spitze, 1986; Spitze & South, 1985). However, schol-
ars do not yet agree about the underlying mechanisms that link
wives’ work hours to marital dissolution. Using three theoreti-
cal frameworks–the attachment hypothesis (Hill, 1988), role
strain theory (Goode, 1960), and the ideological consistency
argument (Ross & Sawhill, 1975)—this study tests how and
when wives’ work hours are associated with marital dissolution
(i.e., the mediating and moderating mechanisms). Specifically,
this study explores: 1) whether there is a direct relationship
between wives’ work hours and marital dissolution; 2) whether
couples’ marital interaction mediates the effect of wives’ work
hours on marital dissolution (testing the attachment hypothesis);
3) whether couples’ gender ideology mediates the effect of
wives’ work hours on marital dissolution (testing role strain
theory); 4) whether couples’ gender ideology moderates the
relationship between wives’ increased work hours and marital
dissolution (testing the ideological consistency hypothesis); and
5) whether, among couples with conflicting reports, marital
dissolution depends on the spouses’ respective assessments of
the relationship. Here, marital interaction is defined as the
amount of any time spent between spouses, while gender ide-
ologies denote “how a person identifies herself or himself with
regard to marital and family roles that are traditionally linked to
gender” (Greenstein, 1996b: p. 586). I tested these five ques-
tions using nationally representative data from the first two
waves of the National Survey of Families and Households
(NSFH). NSFH is a nationally representative dataset that is
designed to provide a broad range of information on family life,
to serve as a resource for research across disciplinary perspec-
tives. Each “wave” of data represents a time when interviews
(in this case, with couples) are conducted. In this study, I used
the first two waves: interviews in 1987-1988 (first wave) and in
1992-1994 (second wave).
Literature Review and Hypotheses
Wives’ Work Hours and Marital Dissolution
Most prior studies have confirmed that wives’ work hours
are positively associated with marital dissolution (Booth et al.,
1984; Johnson, 2004; South & Spitze, 1986; Spitze & South,
1985). Some other research, however, has tested the reverse
relationship: the effect of anticipated divorce risk on labor sup-
ply (Greene & Quester, 1982; Montalto & Gerner, 1998; Sen,
2000). Sen (2000) constructs a longitudinal dataset and com-
pares two cohorts: the National Longitudinal Survey of Young
Women NLSYW for 1968-1983 and the National Longitudinal
Survey of Youth (NLSY) 1979 for 1979-1993. Her measure of
divorce risk was a dummy variable indicating whether divorce
or separation occurred in the next three years. Her results sug-
gest that the risk of divorce significantly increased the labor
supply, but by less in the more recent cohort.
Despite these inconsistent findings, only a few studies have
tested the mediating and moderating mechanisms of this asso-
ciation (Greenstein, 1995; Poortman, 2005; Spitze & South,
1985). This study makes a contribution to research by including
couple-level measures of marital interaction and gender ideol-
ogy, and by testing the mediating effects of couples’ gender
ideology and marital interaction, and the moderating effect of
couples’ gender ideology, to explain the relationship between
wives’ work hours and marital dissolution. I expect to find a
significant and positive relationship between wives’ work hours
and marital dissolution, even after controlling for couples’ cha-
racteristics (Hypothesis 1 ).
The Mediating Effect of Marital Interaction—Testing
the Attachment Hypothesis
According to the attachment hypothesis, marital interaction is

D. YUCEL
one of the key factors that affect marital stability. Couples who
interact fewer hours per week are more likely to have a failed
marriage (Spitze & South, 1985). Prior research also has shown
that employed mothers have a more strained experience of bal-
ancing work-family roles, and that marital interaction and qual-
ity are compromised when dual-earner couples have children
(Hill, 1988; Kingston & Nock, 1987; Voydanoff, 1988). Con-
sistent with the attachment hypothesis, Hill (1988) argued that
pleasurable, shared time is marriage-specific capital that dis-
courages divorce. Her study of the use of leisure time, in rela-
tion to marital dissolution five years later, supports this argu-
ment. Indeed, in multivariate models that include both spouses’
earnings and gender role conflicts, a lack of leisure time is sec-
ond only to short marital duration in increasing the risk of divorce.
On the other hand, a limited number of studies have found
that marital interaction has no mediating effect between wives’
work hours and an increased divorce risk (Poortman, 2005).
Poortman, however, suggested an explanation for this insig-
nificant effect. First, her study was based on a sample from the
Netherlands, which is characterized by a strong welfare system
and a strong focus on family life. According to Poortman, we
might expect the mediating effect (if any) to be smaller in such
a sample. Second, her study was limited to couples in their
early marriage; she argues that marital interaction is usually
more important during early marriage. Nevertheless, some re-
search has suggested that the effect of marital interaction on
marital quality is stronger in long-term marriages (Schmitt,
Matthias, & Shapiro, 2007), and that the mediating effect of
marital interaction on the association between wives’ work
hours and marital dissolution is likewise stronger in long-term
marriages (Yucel, 2012). Despite these inconsistent findings, I
expect to find that couples’ marital interaction mediates the
effect of wives’ employment hours on marital dissolution (Hy-
pothesis 2).
The Mediating and Moderating Effect of Gender
Ideology—Testing Role Strain Theory a nd
Ideological Consistency Hypothesis
Goode’s role strain theory (1960) suggests that people cannot
perform as effectively when they are given different roles to
play. Women’s paid employment may influence their ideologi-
cal support for gender equality by increasing their exposure to
social networks that support gender equality, and by providing
them with a greater stake in improving women’s economic
position (Bolzendahl & Myers, 2004). In addition, many studies
have found that paid employment increases women’s support
for an equal division of domestic roles between men and
women (Coverdill, Kraft, & Manley, 1996; Davis & Greenstein,
2009; Fan & Marini, 2000; Huber & Spitze, 1981; Minnotte,
Minnotte, Pederson, Mannon, & Kiger, 2010). This gender ega-
litarianism might lead to strain between wives’ work and family
roles, leading to more dissatisfaction with the gendered division
of labor—which may in turn lower marital quality and increase
marital dissolution. Consistent with these approaches, research
has found that gender ideology mediates the effect of wives’
employment on marital dissolution (Greenstein, 1995; Sayer &
Bianchi, 2000). Overall, I expect to find that the effect of
wives’ work hours on marital dissolution operates through
wives being more supportive of gender equality than their hus-
bands are (Hypothesis 3 ).
The effect of wives’ work hours on marital dissolution may
also be contingent on couples’ gender ideology. Gender ideol-
ogy defines expectations about the “appropriate” male and fe-
male marital roles (Greenstein, 1995, 1996a). The ideological
consistency argument (Ross & Sawhill, 1975) suggests that in-
consistency between these gender ideologies and marital roles
decreases marital stability. Previous studies have explored the
moderating effect of gender ideology on marital dissolution
(Greenstein, 1995; Spitze & South, 1985). These studies found
that the effect of wives’ work hours on divorce is stronger and
indeed only significant for couples in which the husband disap-
proved of his wife working (Spitze & South, 1985). Research
found that wives’ work hours have no significant effect on
marital dissolution when wives support traditional gender ide-
ology, a nearly statistically significant effect for women with mod-
erate gender ideology, and a strong positive effect on marital insta-
bility for non-traditional women (Greenstein, 1995).
Other studies have found that gender ideology has a moder-
ating effect on marital quality (Greenstein, 1996a; Nordenmark
& Nyman, 2003). Greenstein (1996a) found that inequalities in
the division of household labor were strongly related to percep-
tions of inequality, which were then related to the perceived
quality of the marital relationship. The results in this study
suggest that these associations are significantly stronger for
egalitarian wives than they are for traditional wives. Therefore,
I expect to find that the effect of wives’ work hours on marital
dissolution is strongest when wives hold more egalitarian views
than their husbands. In other words, I predict that when the
wives have a more egalitarian gender ideology than their hus-
bands, an increase in wives’ work hours will be a destabilizing
force in their marriage, leading to a higher likelihood of marital
dissolution. Conversely, I predict that when wives have a more
traditional gender ideology than their husbands, an increase in
wives’ work hours will have less or no effect on the likelihood
of divorce (Hypothesis 4).
The Role of Gender
The family has always been a gendered institution, and re-
search suggests that the characteristic roles of husbands and
wives have different influences on marital disruption. Specifi-
cally, Heaton and Blake (1999) found a positive relationship
between marital disagreement and marital dissolution for both
spouses, as well as a negative relationship between marital
happiness and marital dissolution for both spouses; the wives’
coefficients were significantly higher than the husbands’. They
concluded that wives’ evaluations of marital quality are better
predictors of marital dissolution than their husbands’. However,
Sanchez and Gager (2000) and Gager and Sanchez (2003) found
the opposite result: husbands’ negative perceptions of disagree-
ments and unhappiness were better predictors of marital disso-
lution than were negative reports by the wives. They argued
that wives’ views might be discounted in their relationships and
that wives might experience less marital power, higher barriers
to leaving a marriage, and fewer alternatives to their current
situation. Hochschild (1989) argues that gender inequality in
society has an impact on wives’ expectations of their marriages
such that, despite their desire for equality and personal satisfac-
tion in their marriages, they cannot fight for equality and feel
pressured to disregard negative feelings.
Past research also concludes that the financial consequences
of divorce might be more severe for wives than for husbands
(Duncan & Hoffman, 1985; Holden & Smock, 1991). Therefore,
214

D. YUCEL
wives might be discouraged by the consequences of divorce
and less inclined to end their marriages, even if they are un-
happy (Sanchez & Gager, 2000). On the other hand, even
though social and economic changes have reduced husbands’
power in marriage, male privilege is still expected to protect
men against the detrimental effects of a bad marriage. There-
fore, men might prefer an unsatisfactory marriage to no mar-
riage at all, and, thus wives’ assessments of their relationship
might be more important in determining marital success (Nock,
1998). I used couple-level measures for each variable from both
husbands and wives. Measuring the relative characteristics of
husbands and wives has several benefits. First, we can test the
effect of spouses having consistent or conflicting views on
marital dissolution. Second, it highlights the role of gender in
married couples’ assessments of their relationships (Brown,
2000). Despite these different approaches and findings, I expect
to find that consistency between spouses’ reports is correlated
with lower marital dissolution; however, conflicting reports are
correlated with higher marital dissolution. I also expect to find
that, when there is inconsistency between spouses’ reports in
gender ideology and marital interaction, wives’ assessments of
the relationship determine marital dissolution (Hypothesis 5).
Data and Methods
This study used data from the first two waves of the National
Survey of Families and Households (NSFH). The NSFH is a
national sample that includes 13,007 primary respondents, aged
19 and older, who were first interviewed in 1987-1988. The
sample includes a main cross-section of 9643 households, and
oversamples Blacks, Puerto Ricans, Mexican Americans, sin-
gle-parent families, families with step-children, cohabiting
couples, and recently married persons. In Wave 1, one adult per
household was randomly selected as the primary respondent. In
addition, a shorter self-administered questionnaire was given to
the respondent’s spouse or cohabiting partner. Wave 2 (1992-
1994) included interviews with the original respondents from
Wave 1, the current spouse or cohabiting partner, and, in cases
where the relationship from Wave 1 had ended, with spouses or
partners from the previous relationships. This study’s sample
included the married primary respondents from Wave 1 (N =
6877) whose spouses completed the questionnaire (N = 5637);
this constitutes 82 percent of the married couples surveyed.
From the 5637 married couples who fit these criteria, this
study’s sample was limited to the respondents who had an iden-
tifiable marital status at Wave 2 because at least one member of
the original couple was interviewed (N = 4581). This group
made up 81 percent of the married couples who completed the
questionnaire. In addition, there were too few individuals be-
longing to American Indian or Asian racial groups; thus, they
were removed from the sample (both husbands (N = 61) and
wives (N = 29)), leaving a sample of 4491 couples. Overall, the
sample contains Whites, African Americans, and Hispanic re-
spondents.
The use of this dataset has several advantages. First, unlike
many other studies, this study collected data from both wives
and husbands. It is important to include both spouses’ reports
because their reports might vary, and each may affect marital
outcomes differently. Second, the NSFH includes indicators of
many aspects of family life, including detailed individual char-
acteristics, marital experiences, employment histories, and in-
formation about employment and income (Sweet, Bumpass, &
Call, 1988). Therefore, the NSFH is an excellent source of data
for analyzing the determinants of marital disruption. Despite
the many advantages of using NSFH data, there are some limi-
tations. One limitation is that I did not use the third wave of
NSFH data (2001-2003). By using the third wave, studies might
investigate data on married couples at Wave 1 and changes in
employment, marital interaction, and gender ideology between
the first two waves, and analyze the effects of these changes on
marital outcomes in Wave 3. Thus, these analyses could test the
causal relationship between wives’ work hours and marital
dissolution. In addition, this would permit researchers to exam-
ine whether the adverse effects of wives’ work hours may have
decreased in recent years, and also test whether it is among
those unstable marriages that the wives work longer hours to be
economically independent.
This study uses only the first two waves of the NSFH data
because data for the third wave from 2001-2003 (NSFH3;
Sweet & Bumpass, 2002) were collected through telephone
interviews with only primary respondents who were either
above age 45 or had a child who was interviewed in wave 2, as
well as with their spouses and their previously interviewed
children. Therefore, the sample size of the third wave survey is
considerably lower than in the first two waves. Given the attri-
tion from the third wave, the serious limitations of this data set
may increase in future waves of data. A second limitation is
that the initial wave of the NSFH data is now more than fifteen
years old, which raises the question of whether patterns docu-
mented using these data are valid for today’s marriages. From
Amato, Johnson, Booth, And Rogers’ (2003) comparison of
marrieds from samples drawn in 1980 and 2000, it appears that
divorce proneness has not changed much. The proportion of
women who worked outside their homes increased rapidly from
the 1960s to the 1990s, but in the 1990s, women's labor-force
participation rate leveled off, and even slightly decreased in the
early 2000s (Percheski, 2008; Vere, 2007). Thus, as the purpose
of our analysis is to examine the effect of wives’ work hours on
marital dissolution, I can be more confident that the findings of
this study are applicable to today’s marriages.
Handling Missing Data
Contrary to conventional methods, this study imputed miss-
ing values using the ICE (imputation by chained equations)
multiple-imputation scheme in STATA. This procedure gener-
ates five data sets in which missing information is imputed by
regressing each variable with missing data on all observed
variables, and adding random error to the imputed values to
maintain variability. This approach allowed me to use the
study’s entire sample (N = 4491 married couples).
Measurement of Variables
Table 1 summarizes the measurement of the variables used
in this analysis. With the exception of the dependent variable,
marital dissolution, all of the variables were measured at Wave
1. The dependent variable measures the marital status of the cou-
ples at Wave 2, thereby distinguishing between couples who sepa-
rated or divorced from those who remained married at Wave 2.
Independent Variab le s
Wives’ Work Hours
The primary independent variable was wives’ work hours.

D. YUCEL
216
Table 1.
Measurement of variables.
Variables Measurement
Dependent variable
Marital dissolution Dummy variable was coded 1 if permanent separation or divorce took place between Waves 1 and 2 and 0 if they stayed married.
Independent variables
Wives’ work hours Hours worked in the previous week if that is the usual number of hours worked; usual hours worked per week if otherwise.
Marital interaction One item asking, “During the past month, about how often did you and your spouse spend time alone with each other, talking, or
sharing an activity?” (1 = never to 6 = almost every day). Dummy variables: both spouses have high marital interaction; both
spouses have low marital interaction; wives have high and husbands have low marital interaction; husbands have high and wives
have low marital interaction. Both spouses reporting high marital interaction is the reference category.
Gender ideology Four items indicating how much they agree with the first four statements (1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree) and
two items indicating how much they approve of the final two circumstances (1 = strongly approve to 7 = strongly disapprove).
1) “It is much better for everyone if the man earns the main living, and the woman takes care of the home and family.”
2) “Preschool children are likely to suffer if their mothers are employed.”
3) “If a husband and a wife both work full-time, they should share household tasks equally.”
4) “Parents should encourage just as much independence from their daughters as their sons.”
5) “Mothers who work full-time when their youngest child is under age 5.”
6) “Mothers who work part-time when their youngest child is under age 5.”
Dummy variables: both spouses egalitarian; both spouses moderate; both spouses traditional; wives have more egalitarian
views than their husbands; husbands have more egalitarian views than their wives. Both spouses sharing traditional views
is the reference category.
Control variables
Age of the youngest child
living in the household
Dummy variables: the presence of the youngest child under six years old living in the household; children aged between six
and twelve years old; children aged between thirteen and seventeen years old; and childless couples (couples who have no
children living in the household, or the youngest child living in the household is at least 18 years old). Childless couples
are the reference category.
Husbands’ work hours Husbands’ hours worked in the previous week if that is the usual number of hours worked; usual hours worked per week
if otherwise.
Duration of marriage Continuous measure, in years, of the length of a couple’s marriage until the date of the interview. I used a logarithmic
transformation due to its skew.
Age at marriage Dummy variables: both spouses were younger than 20 when married; the wife, but not the husband, was less than 20 when
married; the husband, not the wife, was less than 20 when married; and both spouses married at age 20 or older. Both
spouses marrying at age 20 or older is the reference category.
Wives’ education Dummy variables: wife has less than a high school diploma; wife has a high school diploma; wife has some college; wife has
a college degree or above. Wife having a college degree or above is the reference category.
Husbands’ education relative
to wives’ education
Continuous variable measured by the difference between husbands’ and wives’ education in degree.
Marital order Dummy variables: both spouses are in their first marriage; both spouses are remarried; husband is in his first marriage, and
wife is remarried; wife is in her first marriage, and husband is remarried. Both spouses being in their first marriage is the
reference category.
Race-ethnicity Dummy variables: both spouses are White; both spouses are Black; both spouses are Hispanic; spouses are from different
races. Both spouses being White is the reference category.
Total income of the
household
Dummy variables: total income is $30,000 or less; between $30,001 and $50,000; or over $50,000. A total income of
over $50,000 is the reference category.
The following question was administered to the primary re-
spondent and spouse: “How many hours do you usually work
per week?” This variable was treated as continuous. To test the
nonlinear effect of wives’ work hours, I coded this variable into
four dummies: not employed (0 hours), part time (less than 35
hours), full time (between 35 and 40 hours), and overtime
(more than 40 hours per week). The results showed that there is
a linear effect; thus, I continued to treat wives’ work hours as
continuous. Wives’ work hours were centered (deviated from
the mean), and I then created multiplicative interaction terms to
examine the hypothesized moderator effects. This approach
reduces multi-colinearity among the predictors (Aiken & West,
1991) and aids in the interpretation of results (Cohen, Cohen,
West, & Aiken, 2003).
Marital Interaction
Marital interaction was measured by asking the primary re-
spondent and spouse how often they spend time alone together
(1 = never to 6 = almost every day). Among both genders, 75
percent reported spending time with their spouses almost every
day. With such a skewed distribution, I create a dummy vari-
able that coded 1 for the response, “almost every day,” and 0
otherwise for both genders. Spending time with a spouse almost
every day was coded as high marital interaction, and spending
time with a spouse less often was coded as low marital interac-
tion. I then created a couple-level measure of marital interaction
with four dichotomous variables (see Table 1).
Gender Ideology
Both the primary respondents and their spouses were asked
how much they agreed with six statements measuring gender
ideology. Each item was coded so that higher scores indicated a
more egalitarian gender ideology. The indicators were stan-
dardized and totaled to create a continuous gender ideology

D. YUCEL
index for husbands and wives, respectively. The scale ranged
from –13.69 to 8.84 for wives and from –12.55 to 10.41 for
husbands. The alpha level was .67 for wives and .65 for hus-
bands. Since the gender distribution was almost normal for both
gender ideology scales, I divided this index into three equal
parts: the lowest third was traditional, the middle third was a
transitional (moderate) gender ideology, and the highest third
represented an egalitarian gender ideology (Greenstein, 1995). I
created a couple-level measure of gender ideology with five
dichotomous variables (see Table 1).
Control Variables
Several control variables were selected based on their asso-
ciation with wives’ work hours and marital dissolution in ear-
lier empirical studies. They include: age of the youngest child
living in the household, husband’s work hours, log of marital
duration, age at marriage, wife’s education, husband’s educa-
tion relative to his wife’s, marital order, race-ethnicity, and total
household income (see Table 1).
Results
Descriptive Findings
Table 2 displays the means and standard deviations for the
variables in this analysis for two subsamples: couples who re-
mained married and couples who separated or divorced. Twelve
percent of marriages ended in separation or divorce between
Waves 1 and 2 (N = 555). The table shows t-tests for continu-
ous variables and chi-square tests for the categorical variables,
to test whether the means and distributions in these groups were
significantly different.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics of independent variables in the analysis.
Still married at Wave 2 Divorced or separated at Wave 2
Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation
Independent variables
Wives’ work hours 21.46*** 20.31 25.46*** 19.85
Marital interaction
Both spouses have high marital interactiona 0.38*** 0.49 0.22*** 0.42
Both spouses have low marital interaction 0.34*** 0.47 0.47*** 0.50
Husbands have low and wives have high marital interaction 0.16 0.37 0.14 0.34
Wives have low and husbands have high marital interaction 0.12*** 0.32 0.17*** 0.37
Gender ideology
Both spouses are traditionalb 0.21*** 0.40 0.12*** 0.32
Both spouses are moderate 0.13 0.34 0.11 0.32
Both spouses are egalitarian 0.17* 0.38 0.22* 0.41
Wives with a more egalitarian ideology than their husbands 0.23*** 0.42 0.31*** 0.46
Husbands with a more egalitarian ideology than their wives 0.26 0.44 0.24 0.43
Control variables
Age of youngest child living in the household
No children presentc 0.44*** 0.50 0.28*** 0.45
Youngest child under 6 years old 0.30*** 0.46 0.44*** 0.50
Youngest child between 6 and 12 years old 0.17* 0.37 0.21* 0.40
Youngest child between 13 and 17 years old 0.09 0.29 0.07 0.26
Husbands’ work hours 36.86*** 19.71 41.24*** 17.20
Marital duration (log) 2.60*** 0.01 1.98*** 0.03
Age at current marriage
Both over 20d 0.68*** 0.47 0.60*** 0.49
Both younger than 20 0.12 0.33 0.14 0.35
Spouses are not the same age 0.20** 0.40 0.26** 0.44
Wives’ education
Wife has college degree or abovee 0.23** 0.42 0.19** 0.39
Wife has some college 0.21 0.41 0.20 0.40
Wife is a high school graduate 0.40 0.49 0.42 0.49
Wife has less than a high school diploma 0.16 0.37 0.19 0.40
Husbands’ education relative to wives’ education 0.07 0.98 0.05 1.04
Marital order
Both spouses in first marriagef 0.71*** 0.45 0.58*** 0.49
Both spouses not in first marriage 0.12*** 0.32 0.20*** 0.40
Husband in first marriage, wife not 0.08 0.27 0.10 0.30
Wife in first marriage, husband not 0.09** 0.29 0.12** 0.33
Race-ethnicity
Both spouses Whiteg 0.83** 0.37 0.79** 0.40
Both spouse Black 0.09* 0.28 0.12* 0.32
Both spouses Hispanic 0.05 0.21 0.04 0.20
Spouses not in the same racial-ethnic group 0.03** 0.17 0.05** 0.22
Total household income
Total Income is over $50,000h 0.22 0.41 0.20 0.39
Total Income is $30,000 or less 0.46** 0.50 0.53** 0.50
Total Income is between $30,001 and $50,000 0.32* 0.46 0.27* 0.44
Total N 3936 3936 555 555
Based on one of the imputed data sets (N = 4491). I reported t tests for continuous variables and chi square tests for the categorical variables. Letter superscripts show the
eference group for each variable. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05 (two-tailed test). r

D. YUCEL
Compared to stable married couples, divorcing couples av-
eraged longer weekly work hours and were more likely to re-
port low marital interaction (both spouses and wives only) and
egalitarian views (both spouses and wives only). These results
support this study’s hypotheses. Divorcing couples were more
likely to be low-income, remarried, heterogamous in terms of
race and age, and have preschoolers in the household; they
were also more likely to have been married for fewer years at
Wave 1 and to include wives with less education. These de-
scriptive characteristics are consistent with theoretical argu-
ments and previous research findings. In what follows, I exam-
ine these relationships in a multivariate context.
Logistic Models
Because the dependent variable is a dichotomous variable (1
= separated or divorced, 0 = remained married), all the models
were estimated using logistic regression. Table 3 displays the
unstandardized logistic regression coefficients and odd ratios
(calculated as ex).
Hypothesis 1: Wives’ Work Hours and Marital Dissolution
The bivariate logistic regression between wives’ work hours
and marital dissolution (not shown) shows a positive and sig-
nificant association between wives’ work hours and marital
dissolution. For instance, wives who work 40 hours per week
are around 49 percent [100*(e(.010*40) – 1)] more likely to dis-
solve their marriages than those who do not work at all (p
< .001). Net of all the couple-level control measures, the posi-
tive association between wives’ work hours and marital disso-
lution is still significant, but the coefficient size and the sig-
nificance levels are reduced (Model 1). After this adjustment,
wives who work 40 hours per week are around 27 percent
[100*(e(.006*40) – 1)] more likely to dissolve their marriages than
those who do not work at all (p < .05). All the control variables
Table 3.
Unstandardized coefficients for the logistic regression of wives’ work hours, marital interaction, gender ideology and control variables on marital
dissolution (N = 4491).
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
Logit Odds Logit Odds Logit Odds Logit Odds Logit Odds
Wives’ work hours 0.006*
(0.003)
1.01 0.004
(0.003)
1.00 0.004
(0.003)
1.00 0.003
(0.008)
1.00 0.003
(0.003)
1.00
Marital interaction
Both low marital interaction 0.678***
(0.136)
1.97 0.670***
(0.136)
1.95
Husband low, wife high marital interaction 0.189
(0.165)
1.21 0.179
(0.166)
1.20
Husband high, wife low marital interaction 0.694***
(0.159)
2.00 0.684***
(0.160)
1.98
Gender ideology
Both moderate
0.191
(0.203)
1.21 0.196
(0.211)
1.22 0.171
(0.204)
1.19
Both egalitarian 0.475**
(0.184)
1.61 0.579**
(0.198)
1.78 0.482**
(0.186)
1.62
Wives with more egalitarian views
than their husbands
0.555***
(0.170)
1.74 0.556**
(0.179)
1.74 0.519**
(0.171)
1.68
Husband with more egalitarian
views than their wives
0.274
(0.176)
1.31 0.279
(0.192)
1.32 0.241
(0.177)
1.27
Wives’ hours* both moderate
0.006
(0.011)
1.01
Wives’ hours* both egalitarian –0.008
(0.011)
0.99
Wives’ hours* wives with more
egalitarian views than their husbands
0.003
(0.009)
1.00
Wives’ hours* husbands with more
egalitarian views than their wives
0.002
(0.010)
1.00
Intercept –0.841*** –0.960*** –1.247*** –1.252*** –1.352***
–2 Log Likelihood 1485.206 1467.789 1477.293 1475.010 1460.543
χ2 388.842*** 423.676*** 404.670*** 409.234*** 438.168***
DF 20 23 24 28 27
Pseudo-R2 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.13
Standard errors are in parentheses. All models include the following control variables (not shown): age of the youngest child living in the household, husbands’ work hours,
log of marital duration, age at marriage, wives’ education, husbands’ education relative to wives’, marital order, race-ethnicity, and total household income.***p < .001; **p
< .01; *p < .05 (two-tailed test).
218

D. YUCEL
operated in the expected direction. Model 1 supports the first
hypothesis that there is a positive and significant relationship
between wives’ work hours and marital dissolution; this asso-
ciation holds net of all controls.
Hypothesis 2: The Mediating Effect of Marital Interaction
Model 2 tested the mediating effect of marital interaction us-
ing the attachment hypothesis. Controlling for marital interac-
tion, the effect of wives’ work hours is no longer significant,
which suggests that couples’ marital interaction mediates this
effect. When both spouses report low marital interaction and
when only wives report low marital interaction, couples are
about twice as likely to dissolve their marriages (p < .001). In
contrast, when only husbands report low marital interaction,
couples are not significantly more likely to dissolve their mar-
riages than are spouses who both report high marital interaction.
In addition, marital interaction measures fully mediate the ef-
fect of the presence of a child under 6 years old and partially
mediate the effect of a child between 6 and 12 years old on
marital dissolution (not shown in Table 3). Once I added the
marital interaction measures, couples with a preschooler living
in the household were no longer more likely to dissolve their
marriages. Furthermore, couples with children between 6 - 12
years old were about 39 percent more likely to dissolve their
marriages than childless couples, but the significance effect was
reduced (p < .05; not shown). Model 2 shows that the effect of
wives’ work hours on marital dissolution operates through de-
creased marital interaction (for both spouses and wives only).
Hypothesis 2 is therefore supported, and the inclusion of mari-
tal interaction dummies significantly improves the previous
model (chi-square change between Model 1 and Model 2 =
34.83 with 3 df, p < .001).
Hypothesis 3: The Mediating Effect of Gender Ideology
Model 3 tested the additive effect of gender ideology and
supported the gender role strain hypothesis. When the model
controlled for couple-level control variables and couples’ gen-
der ideology, the effect of wives’ work hours was no longer
significant. This finding suggests that the effect of wives’ work
hours on marital dissolution is mediated by couples’ gender
ideology. Specifically, the effect of wives’ increased work
hours on marital dissolution operates through increased egali-
tarianism (for both spouses and wives only), which is consistent
with the gender role strain argument. Couples’ gender ideology
dummies mediate the effect of wives’ work hours on marital
dissolution (as shown in Model 3). Couples who share an
egalitarian perspective are around 61 percent more likely to end
their marriages than spouses with a traditional outlook (p < .01),
while couples in which wives have a more egalitarian view-
point than their husbands are about 74 percent more likely to
end their marriages than couples who share a traditional view-
point (p < .001). The effects of the other control variables re-
main the same as in Model 1. The pseudo R-square also re-
mained the same, but the chi-square change between Model 1
and Model 3 was 15.83 with 4 df and is significant (p < .01).
Thus, the inclusion of the additive effects of gender ideology
improved on Model 1, and Hypothesis 3 was supported. Con-
sistent with the role strain theory, gender egalitarianism (for
both spouses and wives only) mediates the effect of wives’
work hours on marital dissolution.
Hypothesis 4: The Moderating Effect of Gender Ideology
To test the multiplicative effect of gender ideology, Model 4
included the interaction terms between wives’ work hours and
gender ideology variables. None of the interactions between
gender ideology and wives’ work hours were significant. I can
therefore conclude that the effect of wives’ work hours on
marital dissolution does not differ across couples’ gender ide-
ology. The chi-square change between Model 3 and Model 4
was 4.56 with 4 df and is not significant. The insignificant in-
teraction terms between wives’ work hours and gender ideology
did not improve on the previous model. Thus, the interaction
terms between wives’ work hours and gender ideology dum-
mies were excluded from the subsequent analyses. Overall, this
result does not support the ideological consistency hypothesis,
and Hypothesis 4 is not supported.
Hypothesis 5: Comparison of Wives’ or Husbands’
Assessments of Their Relationship in Predicting Marital
Dissolution among Couples with Inconsistent Reports
I included marital interaction and gender ideology dummies
in the final model, Model 5. The inclusion of these variables
significantly improved Model 3 (chi-square change between
Model 3 and Model 5 = 33.50 with 3df, p < .001). This model
shows that the simultaneous inclusion of marital interaction
measures and gender ideology measures added significantly to
our prediction of marital dissolution. Model 5 shows that cou-
ples who share egalitarian ideas and couples with more egali-
tarian wives are around 62 and 68 percent (respectively) more
likely to dissolve their marriages, compared with spouses who
share a traditional outlook (p < .01). In addition, spouses who
both report lower marital interaction and couples in which only
the wife reports low marital interaction are around twice as
likely to dissolve their marriages than spouses who both give
reports of high marital interaction (p < .001).
Sometimes couples give different reports of relationship as-
sessment. For couples who evaluate their marriages differently,
is marital dissolution equally affected by the husbands’ and
wives’ reports? In addition, is marital dissolution equally af-
fected when husbands report more egalitarianism (than their
wives) versus when wives report more egalitarianism (than
their husbands)? This study’s results suggest that when wives
report low levels of marital interaction, marital dissolution is
more likely. However, when husbands report low levels of
marital interaction, marital dissolution is more likely only when
their wives agree. Similarly, when wives report egalitarian
gender roles, regardless of their husbands’ gender roles, marital
dissolution is more common. In contrast, a husband’s egalitar-
ian gender ideology is only a significant predictor of marital
dissolution when his wife also espouses an egalitarian gender
role. Overall, when there is inconsistency between spouses’
reports, the effect of relationship assessment on marital dissolu-
tion is contingent on gender. This finding signals the impor-
tance of wives’ assessments of their relationships on marital
dissolution. Thus, Hypothesis 5 is supported.
Discussion and Conclusion
Despite inconsistent findings, some prior research has con-
cluded that wives’ work hours are correlated with higher mari-
tal dissolution. However, researchers have not yet clarified the
underlying mechanisms that link wives’ work hours to marital
dissolution. The results in this study suggest that wives’ in-

D. YUCEL
creased work hours are positively correlated with higher marital
dissolution. In addition, the effect of wives’ work hours on
marital dissolution operates through low marital interaction (for
both spouses and for wives only). This study also found that the
effect of wives’ increased work hours on marital dissolution is
mediated through higher gender egalitarianism (for both
spouses and for wives only). Lastly, the results suggest the im-
portance of women’s assessment of their relationships on mari-
tal dissolution. Specifically, this study concludes that, among
couples with different perceptions of their marriages, wives’
assessments of low marital interaction and egalitarian gender
ideology both predict marital dissolution, and that husbands’
assessments alone have no significant effect.
One of the most rapid changes since the twentieth century in
the United States has been the substantial increase in married
women’s participation in the labor force. About 60 percent of
all women are in the labor force, compared with nearly 75 per-
cent of all men (US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2008). Researchers have long studied wives’ em-
ployment, which has been considered a determinant of marital
instability. This study extends and enriches the existing litera-
ture in two important ways, by testing some of the mediating
and moderating mechanisms to better understand this relation-
ship. The results emphasize the importance of attachment hy-
pothesis and role strain theory. First, this study found that mar-
riages face the challenges of the time factor (i.e., reduced time
for marital interaction) associated with wives’ employment and
of changes in gender ideologies as more women participate in
the labor force. Second, this study builds upon prior studies by
using couple-level measures and data from both husbands and
wives. In doing so, this study differentiates the effects of each
spouse’s views on marital dissolution when there is either con-
sistency or inconsistency between couples’ reports of gender
ideology and marital interaction. The results suggest that per-
ceptions of marriages vary between husbands and wives.
Therefore, this study suggests the importance of future research
taking the relative characteristics of husbands and wives into
account.
Despite these contributions, this study also has some limita-
tions. Although the results suggest that wives’ increased work
hours outside the home might decrease marital interaction and
increase gender egalitarianism, I cannot make a causal argu-
ment about these correlations because the variables for wives’
work hours and gender ideology were both measured at the
same time. Greene and Quester (1982) also found that women
who think about divorce are more likely to be in the labor force
and to work more hours than women who do not think about
divorce. I would need more than two waves of data to rule out
the causal role of wives’ work hours on marital dissolution.
Thus, the results presented in this study should be classified as
“correlates” and not true “causes” of marital dissolution.
This study has opened new avenues for future research. For
example, would a sample of first-marriage couples who have
been married for a short duration yield the same results? Cou-
ples who are older, have been married for a long time, and are
in their first marriages are less likely to divorce overall, and
may be less affected by variations in wives’ work hours. Over-
all, the results do not suggest that these are the only two
mechanisms that explain this association between wives’ in-
creased work hours and marital dissolution. For example, the
time constraints associated with wives’ work hours might also
create stress associated with not having enough time for child
care and housework. This stress leads to weaker perceptions of
marriage and thus increases the likelihood of martial dissolution.
On the other hand, wives’ increased gender egalitarianism
might lead them to perceive their marriages as unfair; this per-
ception lowers marital quality and increases the risk of marital
dissolution. Future research could also consider the mediating
and/or moderating effects of other indicators such as wives’
education (Bumpass, Sweet, & Cherlin, 1991), wives’ econo-
mic resources (Teachman, 2010) and work schedule (Kalil, Ziol-
Guest, & Epstein, 2010; Kingston & Nock, 1987; Presser, 2000;
White & Keith, 1990), the division of household labor (Cun-
ningham, 2007), and perceptions of fairness within the marriage
(Blair, 1993; Greenstein, 1996a). These analyses would shed
additional light on the conditions under which wives’ work
hours predict marital dissolution. The same question could also
be explored using the third wave of the NSFH. Studies might
investigate data on married couples at Wave 1 and changes in
employment, marital interaction, and gender ideology between
the first two waves, and analyze the effects of these changes on
marital outcomes in Wave 3. These analyses would be able to
test causality and permit researchers to examine whether the
adverse effects of wives’ work hours may have decreased in
recent years. However, given the attrition from the third wave,
the serious limitations of the NSFH data set may be exacerbated
in future waves of data.
These results suggest that the relational tensions associated
with wives’ increased work hours and the associated gender
egalitarianism explain some of the relationships between wives’
work hours and marital dissolution. As more women join the
labor force, dual-earner families will face more challenges,
such as time constraints and ideological change. Although it
should be noted that the husbands of employed women and of
egalitarian wives participate in more housework and child care
(Orbuch & Eyster, 1997; Pleck, 1985; Presser, 1994) and that
there is near equality in spouses’ employment statuses, the di-
vision of domestic labor (e.g., the household division of labor
and child care) is far from equal (Bianchi, Milkie, Sayer, &
Robinson, 2000). It is still the case that, in response to wives’
employment change, husbands increase their participation in
domestic work much less than wives decrease theirs. This find-
ing indicates that there is a lag in husbands’ adaptation to the
change in their wives’ employment status (i.e., when wives
enter full-time, paid work) (Gershuny, Bittman, & Brice, 2005).
Overall, wives might still experience time pressure and the need
to balance work and family roles. This finding indicates that
husbands need to take on more of the responsibilities that are
traditionally associated with women, such as housework and
child care. Unless these adaptations take place, it is possible
that wives will be less satisfied in their marriages, which de-
creases marital interaction and increases the likelihood of mari-
tal dissolution.
This study emphasizes the time factor of wives’ employment,
which is found to predict marital dissolution. This factor leads
not only to decreased marital interaction but also may cause
stress, especially for wives, associated with the need to balance
work and family roles. Thus, as more women join the labor
force, employers might provide family-friendly benefits, such
as emergency child-care, to reduce some of the negative con-
sequences of these time constraints. Moreover, these results
also suggest that spouses’ relationship assessments differ. Thus,
it is important for future studies of relationship outcomes to
include information from both husbands and wives, not just
220

D. YUCEL
information from one spouse.
There has indeed been extensive research on the question of
how wives’ work hours may be linked to marital dissolution.
Still, this study takes an important step forward by emphasizing
that more research is needed to better understand the mediating
and moderating mechanisms between wives’ work hours and
marital dissolution. In addition, this study’s use of data sets
such as the NSFH that collect data from both spouses, and its
measurement approaches to capture consistency as well as con-
flict between spouses’ views, is critical to further improving
research in this area.
Acknowledgements
I appreciate the comments of Dr. Douglas Downey, Dr. Mar-
garet Gassanov, and Dr. Donna Bobbitt-Zeher.
REFERENCES
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Amato, P. R., Johnson, D. R., Booth, A., & Rogers, S. J. (2003). Con-
tinuity and change in marital quality between 1980 and 2000. Jour-
nal of Marriage and Famil y, 65, 1-22.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00001.x
Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., & Robinson, J. P. (2000). Is
anyone doing the housework? Trends in gender division of labor. So-
cial Forces, 79, 191-228.
Blair, S. L. (1993). Employment, family, and perceptions of marital
quality among husbands and wives. Journal of Family Issues, 14,
189-212. doi:10.1177/019251393014002003
Bolzendahl, C. I., & Myers, D. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support
for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974-1998.
Social Forces, 83, 759-790. doi:10.1353/sof.2005.0005
Booth, A., Johnson, D. R., White, L., & Edwards, J. N. (1984). Women,
outside employment, and marital instability. American Journal of
Sociology, 90, 567-583. doi:10.1086/228117
Brown, S. L. (2000). Union transitions among cohabitors: The signify-
cance of relationship assessments and expectations. Journal of Mar-
riage and the Family, 62, 833-846.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00833.x
Bumpass, L., Sweet, J., & Cherlin, A. (1991). The role of cohabitation
in declining rates of marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53,
913-927. doi:10.2307/352997
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Labor force participation rates,
1975-2008. URL. http://www.bls.gov/opub/working/page3b.htm
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied mul-
tiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd
ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coverdill, J. E., Kraft, J. M., & Manley, K. S. (1996). Employment
history, the sex typing of occupations, pay and change in gender-role
attitudes: A longitudinal study of young married women. Sociologi-
cal Focus, 29, 47-60.
Cunningham, M. (2007). Influences of women’s employment on the
gendered division of household labor over the life course: Evidence
from a 31-year panel study. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 422-444.
doi:10.1177/0192513X06295198
Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Compo-
nents, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35,
87-105. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115920
Duncan, G. J., & Hoffman, S. D. (1985). A reconsideration of the eco-
nomic consequences of marital dissolution. Demography, 22, 485-497.
doi:10.2307/2061584
Fan, P., & Marini, M. M. (2000). Influences on gender-role attitudes
during the transition to adulthood. Social Science Research, 29, 258-
283. doi:10.1006/ssre.1999.0669
Gager, C. T., & Sanchez, L. (2003). Two as one? Couples’ perceptions
of time spent together, marital quality, and the risk of divorce. Jour-
nal of Family Issues, 24, 21-50. doi:10.1177/0192513X02238519
Gershuny, J., Bittman, M., & Brice, J. (2005). Exit, voice, and suffering:
Do couples adapt to changing employment patterns? Journal of Mar-
riage and Family, 67, 656-665.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00160.x
Goode, W. J. (1960). A theory of role strain. American Sociological
Review, 25, 483-496. doi:10.2307/2092933
Greenstein, T. N. (1990). Marital disruption and the employment of
married women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 657-676.
doi:10.2307/352932
Greenstein, T. N. (1995). Gender ideology, marital disruption, and the
employment of married women. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
57, 31-42. doi:10.2307/353814
Greenstein, T. N. (1996a). Gender ideology and perceptions of the
fairness of the division of labor: Effects on marital quality. Social
Forces, 74, 1029-1042.
Greenstein, T. N. (1996b). Husbands’ participation in domestic labor:
Interactive effects of wives’ and husbands’ gender ideologies. Jour-
nal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 585-595. doi:10.2307/353719
Greene, W. H., & Quester, A. O. (1982). Divorce risk and wives’ labor
supply behavior. Social Scie n c e Quarterly, 63, 16-27.
Heaton, T. B., & Blake, A. M. (1999). Gender differences in determi-
nants of marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues, 20, 25-45.
doi:10.1177/019251399020001002
Hill, M. S. (1988). Marital stability and spouses’ shared time. Journal
of Family Issues, 9, 427-451. doi:10.1177/019251388009004001
Hochschild, A. (1989). The second shift: Working parents and the re-
volution at home. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.
Holden, K. C., & Smock, P. J. (1991). The economic costs of marital
dissolution: Why do women bear a disproportionate cost?” Annual
Review of Sociology, 17, 51-78.
doi:10.1146/annurev.so.17.080191.000411
Huber, J., & Spitze, G. (1981). Wives’ employment, household behave-
iors, and sex-role attitudes. Social Forces, 6 0, 50-69.
Johnson, J. H. (2004). Do long work hours contribute to divorce? Top-
ics in Economic Analysis and Policy, 4, 1-23.
doi:10.2202/1538-0653.1118
Kalil, A., Ziol-Guest, K. M., & Epstein, J. L. (2010). Nonstandard work
and marital instability: Evidence from the national longitudinal sur-
vey of youth. Journal of Marr ia g e and Family, 72, 1289-1300.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00765.x
Kingston, P. W., & Nock, S. L. (1987). Time together among dual-earner
couples. American So c i ological Review, 52, 391-400.
doi:10.2307/2095358
Minnotte, K. L., Minnotte, M. C., Pedersen, D. E., Mannon, S. E., &
Kiger, G. (2010). His and her perspectives: Gender ideology, work-
to-family conflict, and marital satisfaction. Sex Roles, 63, 425-438.
doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9818-y
Montalto, C. P., & Gerner, J. L. (1998). The effect of expected changes
in marital status on labor supply decisions of women and men. Jour-
nal of Divorce and Remarriage, 28, 25-51.
doi:10.1300/J087v28n03_02
Nock, S. L. (1998). Marriage in men’s lives. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Nordenmark, M., & Nyman, C. (2003). Fair or unfair? Perceived fair-
ness of household division of labour and gender equality among
women and men: The Swedish case. European Journal of Women’s
Studies, 10, 181-209. doi:10.1177/1350506803010002004
Orbuch, T. L., & Eyster, S. L. (1997). Division of household labor
among black couples and white couples. Social Forces, 76, 301-332.
Percheski, C. (2008). Opting out? Cohort differences in professional
women’s employment rates from 1960 to 2005. American Socio-
logical Review, 73, 497-517. doi:10.1177/000312240807300307
Pleck, J. H. (1985). Working wives, working husbands. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
Poortman, A. (2005). How work affects divorce. The mediating role of
financial and time pressures. Journal of Family Issues, 26, 168-195.
doi:10.1177/0192513X04270228
Presser, H. B. (1994). Employment schedules among dual-earner spouses
and the division of household labor by gender. American Sociologi-
cal Review, 59, 348-364. doi:10.2307/2095938

D. YUCEL
222
Presser, H. B. (2000). Nonstandard work schedules and marital insta-
bility. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 93-110.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00093.x
Ross, H. L., & Sawhill, I. V. (1975). Time of transition: The growth of
families headed by women. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Sanchez, L., & Gager, C. T. (2000). Hard living, perceived entitlement
to a great marriage, and marital dissolution. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 62, 708-722. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00708.x
Sayer, L. C., & Bianchi, S. M. (2000). Women’s economic independ-
ence and the probability of divorce: A review and reexamination.
Journal of Family Issues, 21, 906-943.
doi:10.1177/019251300021007005
Schmitt, M., Matthias, K., & Shapiro, A. (2007). Marital interaction in
middle and old age: A predictor of marital satisfaction? International
Journal of Aging and Human Development, 65, 283-300.
doi:10.2190/AG.65.4.a
Sen, B. (2000). How important is anticipation of divorce in married
women’s labor supply decisions? An intercohort comparison using
NLS data. Economics Letters, 67, 209-216.
doi:10.1016/S0165-1765(99)00259-1
South, S. J., & Spitze, G. (1986). Determinants of divorce over the
marital life course. American Sociological Review, 51, 583-590.
doi:10.2307/2095590
Spitze, G., & South, S. J. (1985). Women’s employment, time expen-
diture, and divorce. Jo u r n a l o f Family Issues, 6, 307-629.
doi:10.1177/019251385006003004
Sweet, J. A. & Bumpass, L. L. (2002). The national survey of families
and households—Waves 1, 2, and 3: Data description and documen-
tation. Retrieved from University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for
Demography and Ecology website.
http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/nsfh/home.htm
Sweet, J., Bumpass, L., & Call, V. (1988). The design and content of
the national survey of families and households. Center for Demog-
raphy and Ecology, University of Wisconsin.
Teachman, J. (2010). Wives’ economic resources and risk of divorce.
Journal of Family Issues, 31, 1305-1323.
doi:10.1177/0192513X10370108
Vere, J. P. (2007). Having it all no longer: Fertility, female labor supply,
and the new life choices of generation X. Demography, 44, 821-828.
doi:10.1353/dem.2007.0035
Voydanoff, P. (1988). Work role characteristics, family structure de-
mands, and work/family conflict. Journal of Marriage and the Fam-
ily, 50, 749-761. doi:10.2307/352644
White, L., & Keith, B. (1990). The effects of shift work on the quality
and stability of marital relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
52, 453-462. doi:10.2307/353039
Yucel, D. (2012). Wives’ work hours and marital dissolution: Differen-
tial effects across marital duration. Sociology Mind, 2, 12-22.