Sexuality and the Dual-earner Couple, Part II: Beyond the Baby Years - Statistical Data Included

Journal of Sex Research, Feb, 2001 by Janet Shibley Hyde, John D. DeLamater, Amanda M. Durik

Two patterns warrant the attention of those who study sexuality in close relationships: the large influx of women into the labor market over the past 3 decades, and the fact that a substantial minority of employees work considerably more than 40 hours per week. According to the U.S. Census Bureau (1998), 8.5% of Americans work 60 or more hours per week and an additional 11.7% work between 49 and 58 hours per week. Given these trends, some sex researchers and therapists have raised concerns about whether sexual expression will be dampened for dual-earner couples, and especially for those who work long hours (e.g., Sarrel & Sarrel, 1984). Despite these concerns, there is remarkably little empirical research addressing these questions. The purpose of the studies reported here is to provide empirical tests of the hypothesis that sexual expression suffers in dual-earner couples. The research is framed by two theoretical perspectives on the relationship between multiple roles and psychosocial functioning; to these we add a third theoretical perspective that insists on the importance of salience of identities.

Theoretical Frameworks

Two broad hypotheses have been advanced regarding the relationship between multiple roles and psychological functioning. One is the scarcity hypothesis or role-strain perspective (Baruch, Biener, & Barnett, 1987; Goode, 1960), which rests on the premise that humans have a fixed amount of time and energy. Adding a role (e.g., motherhood, worker) therefore creates stress and negative psychological consequences for the individual and her or his marital relationship, including the quality of sexual expression. Negative outcomes are especially likely when the demands associated with work and family roles are particularly high, for example, when a mother works full time or more than full time (Rogers, 1996).

The enhancement hypothesis, in contrast, argues that multiple roles enhance psychological and interpersonal functioning (Baruch et al., 1987; Coser, 1991; Marks, 1977; Thoits, 1983). According to this view, multiple roles provide people with additional resources that help them cope with the demands of and reduce stress associated with multiple obligations (Wethington & Kessler, 1989). Epstein (1987), for example, argued that two positive consequences of multiple roles are variety and buffering. Variety refers to the idea that multiple roles expose individuals to diverse situations that help them to take a broad perspective. Buffering occurs when the impact of stresses or dissatisfactions in one role can be buffered by success and satisfaction in another. More generally, Linville (1985, 1987) has argued that considering oneself in terms of a greater number of, and more differentiated, self-aspects buffers one from the effects of stressful life events. Other theorists have noted that employed women benefit from additional opportunities to build a sense of competence and from the additional social support available at work (e.g., Aneshensel, 1986). Employed women have more power within the family because of their earnings, and this enhanced power leads to decreased psychological symptoms such as depression (Rosenfield, 1989). Furthermore, the woman's economic contribution reduces financial strain for the family, improving marital quality (Barnett & Rivers, 1996).

Empirical research does not support the scarcity hypothesis when the outcome variable is psychological distress; in general, employment for women is associated with better mental health (e.g., Glass & Fujimoto, 1994; Wethington & Kessler, 1989), supporting the enhancement hypothesis. An exception occurs when the person works more than 54 hours a week, which is associated with increased psychological distress (Glass & Fujimoto, 1994).

When the outcome variable is marital quality, the preponderance of studies find that work status per se (wife employed or not) is unrelated to marital quality (e.g., Houseknecht & Macke, 1981; Smith, 1985). This finding, rather than disconfirming the scarcity and enhancement hypotheses, may instead suggest that both scarcity and enhancement processes occur and can balance each other.

Current theorizing and research framed by the enhancement hypothesis no longer focuses simply on the number of hours of employment or the number of roles, but rather takes into account the quality of roles (e.g., Barnett, Marshall, Raudenbush, & Brennan, 1993; Baruch & Barnett, 1986; Hyde, Klein, Essex, & Clark, 1995; Klein, Hyde, Essex, & Clark, 1998). According to this view, a person's psychological distress or relationship distress is influenced not so much by whether the person is employed or by the number of hours of employment, but rather by the quality of the work role. Empirical research supports this view (e.g., Bartlett et al., 1993; Greenberger & O'Neill, 1993).

The scarcity and enhancement perspectives take little account of individual differences, specifically individual differences in identities. Identity theory (Stryker & Serpe, 1994; Stryker & Statham, 1985), in contrast, introduces the related constructs of commitment and identity salience. The individual has multiple role identities--for example, wife, mother, and attorney. The construct of identity salience rests on the notion that the individual's identities fall into a hierarchy from most to least salient, based on the individual's readiness to enact a role identity. The salience of a role identity is a function of commitment to that role; commitment reflects the social and personal costs that would result if the person no longer fulfilled the role (Stryker & Serpe, 1994). Insofar as salience indicates the individual's readiness to enact a role, high family salience (compared with work salience) should be associated with more positive relationship outcomes. Inter-role conflicts will be strong only for salient identities; thus for people who are high in both work salience and family salience, the conflict should be strong and should be reflected in negative outcomes for the relationship. Statistically, this leads to a prediction of an interaction between work salience and family salience in predicting relationship outcomes.