Journal of Family Issues 2014 Cooklin 0192513X14553054

http://jfi.sagepub.com/Journal of Family Issues

http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/23/0192513X14553054The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0192513X14553054 published online 27 October 2014Journal of Family Issues

Angela Martin and Jan M. NicholsonAmanda R. Cooklin, Elizabeth M. Westrupp, Lyndall Strazdins, Rebecca Giallo,

and Parenting in an Australian CohortFamily EnrichmentFamily Conflict, WorkFathers at Work: Work

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Family IssuesAdditional services and information for

http://jfi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jfi.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Oct 27, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>

at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Journal of Family Issues 1 25

The Author(s) 2014Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0192513X14553054

jfi.sagepub.com

Article

Fathers at Work: WorkFamily Conflict, WorkFamily Enrichment and Parenting in an Australian Cohort

Amanda R. Cooklin1, Elizabeth M. Westrupp1,2, Lyndall Strazdins3, Rebecca Giallo2, Angela Martin4, and Jan M. Nicholson1

AbstractContemporary fathering is characterized by the combined responsibilities of employment and parenting. Relationships between workfamily conflict, workfamily enrichment, and fathering behaviors have not been widely investigated. Secondary data from fathers of 4- to 5-year-old children participating in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children were analyzed (N = 2,679). Results revealed that higher workfamily conflict was associated with irritable ( = .06, p < .001), less warm ( = 0.04, p < .01), inconsistent parenting ( = .07, p < .001), when sociodemographic and child characteristics were controlled for. Protective associations were found between workfamily enrichment and optimal parenting behaviors ( = .10 warmth; = .05 irritability, p < .01). These results were largely unchanged when mental health was included in analyses. Sole-earner fathers and those employed for long hours were

1La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia2Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia3The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia4University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

Corresponding Author:Amanda R. Cooklin, Judith Lumley Centre, La Trobe University, Level 3, 215 Franklin St, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia. Email: [email protected]

553054 JFIXXX10.1177/0192513X14553054Journal of Family IssuesCooklin et al.research-article2014

at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014jfi.sagepub.comDownloaded from

2 Journal of Family Issues

most likely to report high workfamily conflict. Findings provide impetus for workplace and public policy to extend optimal, family-friendly employment conditions to all parents, including fathers.

Keywordsfathers, parenting, workfamily conflict, workfamily enrichment, father mental health

Introduction

The challenge of combining paid work with raising children is often framed as a gendered problem, that is, as a problem for mothers. The unprecedented increase in mothers employment over recent decades has precipitated this framing and provided the impetus for much of the research in this field. However, mothers increased participation in paid work has altered fathers lives as well as mothers. In the developed economies of the 21st century, fathering is no longer a role centered on breadwinning, with new ideologies and expectations of fathering as active and engaged. This fundamental change in fathers engagement with raising children, which is interlinked with moth-ers changing engagement with the labor market, raises new questions on how fathers are managing to do both. In this article, we therefore focus solely on fathers, exploring the rewards, challenges, and consequences of employment for contemporary fathering. We investigate these connections in the Australian context using a nationally representative cohort of families with young chil-dren (aged 4 to 5 years), and our aim is to understand how the rewards and conflicts fathers experience from combining working with raising children may influence parenting behaviors and the fatherchild relationship.

In Australia, as in other comparable industrialized countries, fathers are typically employed full-time, and often for an extended long working week (Charlesworth, Strazdins, OBrien, & Sims, 2011; Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Strazdins, Korda, Lim, Broom, & DSouza, 2004). Yet, social institutions, including workplaces, have not made the accompanying shifts in policy or workplace culture that would support fathers to be more involved in parent-ing and care giving (Fine, 2010; Hill, 2005; Holt & Lewis, 2011; Hook, 2006; OBrien, Brandth, & Kvande, 2007). Most policies and family-friendly ini-tiatives, either explicitly or implicitly target mothers, entrenching gendered inequalities in employment and in domestic work (Bianchi & Milkie, 2010; Todd & Binns, 2013). Organizational cultures treat mens paternity as a ghost in the organizational machine that is of little relevance to either mens lives or to the workplace (Burnett, Gatrell, Cooper, & Sparrow, 2012). Few


Cooklin et al. 3

men request flexibility or caring leave, and those who do are more likely to be refused than women (Skinner, Hutchinson, & Pocock, 2012). Accordingly, fathers have more difficulty than mothers accessing flexible, family-friendly working arrangements, and there is evidence that their workfamily conflict is increasing over time (Charlesworth et al., 2011; Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Skinner et al., 2012). Australian mothers often work part-time to manage the competing demands of work and family care, but this is an option rarely fea-sible for fathers (Strazdins, Shipley, & Broom, 2007). Thus, persistent, gen-dered social and institutional expectations and inequalities structure the way families negotiate paid work and care, generating qualitative differences between fathers and mothers in their ability and options for managing the workfamily interface (Bass, Butler, Grzywacz, & Linney, 2009; Ford, Heinen, & Langkamer, 2007).

Work and Family Conflict and Enrichment

In the present study, we operationalize the concept of workfamily conflict and workfamily enrichment using the measures of workfamily strains and workfamily gains developed by Marshall and Barnett (1993). Workfamily conflict is based on the scarcity hypothesis of limited time and energy (Goode, 1960). Multiple and competing roles (i.e., employment and family responsi-bilities) can generate tensions between energy and time, which can result in overload and strain (Froberg, Gjerdingen, & Preston, 1986). For both moth-ers and fathers, work-to-family conflict has been associated with poorer physical and mental health outcomes, poorer quality of life, low job satisfac-tion, low job commitment, and high job turnover (Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Birinley, 2005; Nomaguchi, Milkie, & Binachi, 2005). Some theories propose that workfamily conflicts would alter parenting behaviors, because of the drain on fathers energy, time, and mood (Goldberg, Clarke-Stewart, Rice, & Dellis, 2002; Repetti, 1994).

Workfamily enrichment stems from the alternative concept that an accu-mulation of diverse roles enhances opportunities for social support, interac-tion, self-esteem, status, and skill building that delivers benefits to individuals and to their families, despite time or energy constraints (Grzywacz, Carlson, Kacmar, & Wayne, 2007; Marshall & Barnett, 1993; Sieber, 1974). Indeed, participation in high-quality and rewarding employment may confer benefits to parent mental health, cognitive, and emotional well-being (Bianchi & Milkie, 2010; Cooksey, Menaghan, & Jekielek, 1997; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003). Potentially, workfamily enrichment can support fathers parenting via increased satisfaction, intellectual stimulation, self-esteem, skill mastery,



responsiveness, and self-efficacy. As per earlier research, we use the con-structs of conflict and enrichment simultaneously to capture the influence on fathering of the mix of rewards and costs embedded in the workfamily inter-face (Barnett, 1998; Bass & Grzywacz, 2011; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Marshall & Barnett, 1993; Rothbard, 2001).

WorkFamily Conflict, Enrichment and Fathering

An analysis of fathers workfamily conflict and enrichment has been slow to emerge, yet a developing evidence base is revealing that fathers mental health and mood can spill over and influence family interaction quality, which is highly salient to children (Almeida, Wethington, & Chandler, 1999; Galinsky, 1999; Giallo, Cooklin, Wade, DEsposito, & Nicholson, 2013; Sallinen, Kinnunen, & Ronka, 2004; Strazdins, OBrien, Lucas, & Rodgers, 2013). Ecological perspectives of parenting and childrens development pro-pose that parenting is influenced by interaction and engagement with broader social, community, structural, and institutional environments (Bronfenbrenner & Crouter, 1982; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Parke, 2004). The workfamily interface is one such environmental influence. Children do not experi-ence their fathers work directly, yet fathers jobs can shape family resources, routines, and time together, contributing to family atmosphere and emo-tional exchanges. Lamb and Plecks four-factor model of the influences on fathering and fathers involvement with children (motivation, self-efficacy, social support, institutional barriers) identifies the workplace as a key institu-tional barrier to fathers parenting involvement (Lamb, Pleck, Charnov, & Levine, 1987; Pleck, 1997). Workplaces restrict fathers time and they can place expectations and demands on fathers that might hinder their capacity to be emotionally attuned and engaged with their children.

Strazdins, Clements, Korda, Broom, and DSouza (2006) identify two key processes via which this influence occurs: parent mental health and par-entchild interactions. These processes link parents work to their family environments and ultimately help explain how parents jobs contribute to childrens outcomes (Strazdins et al., 2013). While mental health is an estab-lished influence on fatherchild interactions (Giallo et al., 2013; Wilson & Durbin, 2010), other stressors (or supports) may also shape parenting. The workfamily interface appears to be one such stressor, or potential support. Broadly, workfamily conflict and rewards appear to influence family and parenting satisfaction, family functioning, and family stress (Crouter & Bumpus, 2001; Galambos, Sears, Almeida, & Kolaric, 1995; Galinsky, 1999; Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998; Repetti, 1994). However, the particular role of the workfamily interfaceas a putative stress, but also a potential


Cooklin et al. 5

protective supportin influencing fathering and fathers parenting prac-tices and behaviors has not been comprehensively described (Allen et al., 2000; Eby et al., 2005), particularly in the preschool years when workfam-ily conflict is likely to peak (Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Eby et al., 2005; Higgins, Duxbury, & Lee, 1994).

Fathers play a unique role in childrens outcomes. Recent evidence has identified that fathering contributes to childrens development and function-ing in ways that are as important, yet patterned distinctly from mothering (Bogels & Phares, 2008; Cabrera, Tamis-LeMonda, Bradley, Hofferth, & Lamb, 2000; Johnson, Li, Kendall, Strazdins, & Jacoby, 2013). Contemporary discourses have changed the expectations and desires of fathers themselves to be involved, responsible, hands-on nurturers for their children. Consequently, fathers are now spending more time with their children than they were several decades ago, increasingly setting the emotional tone and expectations for childrens behavior (Craig, 2006; Holter, 2007; Koivunen, Rothaupt, & Wolfgram, 2009; Premberg, Hellstrom, & Berg, 2008). Three key aspects of fathers parenting have been shown to influence childrens social, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes longitudinally. Warmth has been defined as fathers responsiveness toward their child; the degree to which they support individuality, self-regulation, and self-assertion by being attuned to childrens needs (Baumrind, 1991). Paternal warmth is associated with optimal academic and socioemotional outcomes for children and also influences the quality and tone of the time fathers spend with their children (Baxter & Smart, 2011; Cabrera et al., 2000; Webster, Low, Siller, & Kisst-Hackett, 2013). Sensitive, warm, and supportive fathering may also act as a buffer for children in families when maternal supportive parenting is low (Martin, Ryan, & Brooks-Gunn, 2010). Consistency, or persistence in fathers discipline and behavior management, is associated with prosocial conduct in children: academic and social school readiness and lower conduct and exter-nalizing problems (Herbert, Harvey, Lugo-Candelas, & Breaux, 2013; Martin et al., 2010). Conversely, irritability in fatherchild interactions, including frequent parental rejection, harsh or hostile responding results in increased externalizing and internalizing behavior, poorer academic achievement, more conduct problems and aggression, poorer adjustment, and less prosocial behavior (Bogels & Phares, 2008; Giallo et al., 2013; Kawabata, Alink, Tseng, van Ijzendoorn, & Crick, 2011; Low & Stocker, 2005; Repetti, Taylor, & Seeman, 2002).

Emerging evidence suggests that workfamily conflict and enrichment may be potent influences on fathers warmth, consistency, and irritability with their children. This evidence is drawn from research on related, broad con-structs such as parenting stress, quality of family life, and family satisfaction



(Bass et al., 2009; Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Ford et al., 2007; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992; Frone, Yardley, & Markel, 1997; Goodman, Crouter, Lanza, Coz, & Vernon-Feagans, 2011). In the Australian sample used in the present study, associations have been reported between higher workfamily conflict and lower parental self-efficacy, less time spent in child care activities, and less parenting warmth (children aged 2 to 3 years; Alexander & Baxter, 2005; Baxter & Smart, 2011). In one of few studies looking at specific parenting behaviors, Stewart and Barling (1996) found that fathers negative work expe-riences (low autonomy, insecurity, high demands, and interrole conflict) adversely affected fathers parenting via fathers job-related affect (mood, sat-isfaction, and tension) in a Canadian sample of 189 employed fathers of pri-mary schoolaged children. Fathers with poorer job-related affect reported higher rejecting, hostile, and punishing parenting sufficient to explain varia-tion in childrens social and behavioral outcomes. Similarly, in a study of over 500 employed fathers of 8- to 18-year-old children in Hong Kong, fathers workfamily conflict was associated with low availability, low emotional sta-bility, and inconsistency in discipline (Lau, 2010). A small body of literature has reported on the effect of fathers workfamily conflict on time spent with their children (Bass et al., 2009; Baxter & Smart, 2011; Johnson et al., 2013; Nomaguchi et al., 2005; Roeters, van der Lippe, & Kluwer, 2009). In a sample of 639 Dutch couples with children aged less than 12 years, Roeters et al. (2009) found that fathers increased working hours interfered with fathers per-forming daily routine activities for their children (meals, bathing, and school drop-offs). Overall, however, direct investigation of the relationship between three critical elements of fathers parenting behaviors (warmth, consistency, and irritability) and fathers workfamily conflicts is lacking.

Evidence regarding the relationship between workfamily enrichment and fathers parenting is even more sparse (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Two small American studies (n = 59 and n = 296) have found that stimulating jobs, characterized by control, autonomy, and innovation have been associated with fathering that is less punitive and controlling and higher in warmth and acceptance for children under 12 years of age (Greenberger & ONeil, 1993; Grimm-Thomas & Perry-Jenkins, 1994). Marshall and Barnett (1993) reported that over two thirds of fathers in their sample of 300 dual-earner couples in the United States reported that their work made them a better par-ent, though no specific parenting behaviors were investigated.

Taken together these findings suggest that both workfamily conflict and workfamily enrichment influence the specific fathering behaviors under consideration here (warmth, consistency, and irritability), albeit in different ways. We argue that workfamily conflict is particularly relevant for fathers irritable or harsh responses toward their child. High stress at work has been


Cooklin et al. 7

linked to fathers irritability, frustration, and impatience, and can undermine their capacity for self-regulation in stressful situations (Rothbard, 2001), including parentchild interactions. Workfamily conflict might also restrict fathers warm and affectionate behaviors; affection may be overlooked when fathers perception of time-based conflict is high. Both parenting warmth and parenting consistency require engagement, and attention, yet conflict and stress often lead to emotional withdrawal in fathers (Repetti, 1994). Reduced emotional energy might also be a mechanism via which warm, consistent fathering behaviors suffer when work demands and work stress are high (Goldberg et al., 2002).

On the other hand, workfamily enrichment could transfer positive experi-ences and capabilities from one role to another (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Optimism, self-esteem, and flexibility gained in the workplace may enrich fathers interactions at home. It is also plausible that patience, mastery, self-efficacy, optimism, and satisfaction garnered in ones job would improve motivation and efficacy to parent effectively. Specifically, workfamily enrichment might promote fathers warmth and consistency directly, net of any influence that workfamily enrichment may have on parenting via fathers mental health. Workfamily enrichment could also prevent or buffer against fathers irritability within parentchild interactions, a possibility we explore.

The Current Study

The first aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between fathers workfamily conflicts and enrichment and parenting (warmth, irrita-bility, and consistency) in a nationally representative sample of fathers of 4- to 5-year-old children. We hypothesize the following:

1. Workfamily conflict will be positively associated with fathers irrita-bility and negatively associated with fathers warmth and consistency.

2. Workfamily enrichment will be positively associated with fathers warmth and consistency and negatively associated with irritability.

We adjust for a number of demographic, parent, and child variables shown in research to influence parenting and/or fathers work functioning. For example, low resourced families are particularly vulnerable to work-related stresses (Butterworth et al., 2011). The intensity of workfamily conflict may also be worse for dual-earner families compared to those accommodating only one job with family care (Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Ford et al., 2007). Child health and disability is likely to limit parental workforce engagement and amplify



conflict. Similarly, demanding child behaviors are likely to affect parenting and possibly work functioning (Shibley-Hyde, Else-Quest, Goldsmith, & Biesanz, 2004). Therefore, we adjust for demographic characteristics in these analyses (father age, country of birth, number of children, child gender), family socio-economic position, sole- versus dual-earner families. Furthermore, all analyses adjust for child temperament and special health care needs. Fathers work hours are a key predictor of workfamily conflict (Eby et al., 2005). To ensure that any observed association between workfamily conflict, workfamily enrich-ment, and parenting are not (or not only) a function of fathers time pressure, we include consideration of fathers work hours. Finally, we repeat all models including fathers mental health to ascertain the direct relationship between workfamily variables and parenting, net of any relationship between workfamily conflict and enrichment and mental health. We also explore (Aim 2) whether some fathers are more likely than others to experience workfamily conflicts or enrichment, especially fathers who work long (or conversely short) full-time hours or whose spouse is employed (or at home).

Method

Participants

Data for the current study were taken from the Kindergarten (K) cohort of the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC); full sample details, design, and field methods are published elsewhere (Misson & Sipthorp, 2007; Soloff, Lawrence, & Johnstone, 2005). LSAC was approved by the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee (Gray, Misson, & Hayes, 2005; Gray & Sanson, 2005; Soloff et al., 2005). Briefly, LSAC used a two-stage cluster sampling design using Australian postcodes and Australias universal health insurance database (Medicare Australia). This sample was broadly rep-resentative of all Australian children. Data were collected in 2004 from two parents via face-to-face interview and a self-report questionnaire (Department of Family and Community Services, 2004; Soloff et al., 2005). Data are from Wave 1 (collected in 2004) when children were aged 4 to 5 years. Data were collected for a study, or focus child, so data collected refers to (only) one child in each family. Of the contactable families selected and residing in the sampled postcode, 4,983 took part in LSAC (59% response rate).

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Fathers were included in the present study if they were the childs biologi-cal, foster, or adopted father; were employed at the time of data collection;


Cooklin et al. 9

were residing permanently with their child; and had complete data across all study variables. Partial or complete data was available for 4,285 fathers via self-report on the secondary (Parent 2) carer questionnaires or via sec-ondary report from the Parent 1 respondent (for a limited amount of demo-graphic data). Fathers without self-report data, or with incomplete data on the model variables, were excluded (n = 1,606), leaving a final sample of 2,679 fathers.

Measures

All measures used are father-report.

Fathers WorkFamily Conflict. A four-item adaptation of the scales developed by Marshall and Barnett (1993) assessed employment-related constraints on family life and parenting (e.g., Because of my work responsibilities; I have missed out on home or family activities that I would like to take part in; My family time is less enjoyable and more pressured) and constraints from fam-ily responsibilities that affect employment (e.g., Because of my family responsibilities; My work time is less enjoyable and more pressured; I have to turn down work activities or opportunities that I would prefer to take on). Respondents indicated degree of agreement using a scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, to create a continuous scale, using mean imputation to account for missing data on up to one item missing, with higher scores indicating more strain.

Fathers WorkFamily Enrichment. Similarly, a six-item adaptation of Marshall and Barnetts (1993) scales assessed the benefits of combining employment with parenting. Three items assessed fathers views of the benefits for their children (e.g., My working has a positive effect on my children; Working helps me to better appreciate the time that I spend with my children) and themselves (e.g., Having both work and family responsibilities; Makes me a more well-rounded person; Makes me feel more competent). Respondents indicated their agreement or disagreement using a scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, to create a continuous scale, using mean imputation to account for missing data on up to one missing item, with higher scores indicating more gains.

Fathers Parenting Behaviors

Irritable parenting was measured with five items (5-point scale, 1 = not at all to 5 = all the time) assessing the frequency of hostile behaviors and feelings



toward the child (Statistics Canada, 2000). Example items include I have been angry with this child; I have lost my temper with this child. Parenting warmth was measured using six items (5-point scale, 1 = never/almost never to 5 = always/almost always) assessing frequency of positive and affectionate verbal and physical behaviors and feelings toward the child, for example, How often do express affection by hugging, kissing, or holding this child; How often do you have warm close times together with this child? Parenting consistency was measured using six items (5-point scale, 1 = never/almost never to 5 = always/almost always) assessing consistency in parenting behav-iors toward the child (e.g., How often does this child get away with things that you feel should have been punished?). Scores for irritable parenting, parenting warmth, and parenting consistency were the mean of individual items (with no more than two missing items), creating a continuous variable with higher scores indicating more irritability, higher warmth, and higher consistency.

Demographic Characteristics

Demographic characteristics including paternal age at time of data collec-tion, fathers country of birth, family type, marital status, primary language, and the number of children in the household (only available indicator) were collected. Socioeconomic position (SEP) was rated using a continuous, com-posite variable, ranking each familys relative socioeconomic position based on (combined) parental income, education, and occupational prestige (Blakemore, Strazdins, & Gibbings, 2009). Families with a standardized score at or below the 25th percentile were classified as low SEP, those above the 75th percentile were classified as high SEP, and the remainder were classified as medium SEP, as recommended by the authors of this measure. Father sole earner in family was recorded, as were fathers employ-ment hours performed each week. Maternal employment hours were also recorded.

Paternal psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler-6, a brief assessment tool that measures the frequency of symptoms of psychological distress over the previous 4 weeks (Furukawa, Kessler, Slade, & Andrews, 2003). Responses to the six items (5-point rating scale) were summed to give a total score of 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater psycho-logical distress. As in other Australian studies (Martin, Hiscock, Hardy, & Wake, 2007; Strazdins et al., 2007), this study used a threshold of 8 to identify not only those with a probable clinical diagnosis but also those with significant psychological distress, including symptoms of depression and anxiety.


Cooklin et al. 11

Child Characteristics

A single item recorded any child special health care needs. Child tempera-ment was assessed using the Sociability, Persistence, and Reactivity sub-scales of the Short Infant Temperament Scale (Smart & Sanson, 2005), each of which contains four items. The sociability scale assesses how comfortable the child is in new situations or with unfamiliar children or adults, the persis-tence scale assesses the childs capacity to see tasks through to completion, while the reactivity scale assesses how intense and volatile the child is. Items from each subscale were averaged for participants with no more than one missing item, to create continuous scales, with high scores indicating more sociability, persistence and reactivity.

Statistical Approach

Data were analyzed in Stata 12.0 (Statacorp, 2009). LSAC sample weights and adjustment for complex sampling design were applied to all analyses. All analyses were weighted for nonresponse and account for unequal probability of selection into the sample. First-order Taylor linearization was used to obtain estimates of standard error, taking into account the multistage, clus-tered sampling design.

Means, standard errors, range, and Cronbachs alpha (if relevant) were calculated for all variables. To test for association, unadjusted linear regres-sion analyses were performed with parenting variables as the outcomes, and workfamily conflict and enrichment as predictors. Multiple linear regres-sion analyses were performed with parenting (three models) variables as the primary dependent variables. Workfamily conflict and enrichment and all control variables were entered into the models (Aim 1). These models were repeated with paternal mental health included as an additional control in a third model. For Aim 2, multiple linear regression analyses were also per-formed using workfamily conflict and workfamily enrichment as the out-comes (two models), with key demographic and employment variables entered into the models.

To create standardized and unstandardized regression coefficients, the regression models were run twice. First using unstandardized predictor vari-ables (binary and continuous), and then replacing the continuous variables with standardized variables. As an additional sensitivity analysis, to check the impact of listwise deletion to account for missing data, multiple imputa-tion was performed using multivariate normal regression and an iterative Markov Chain Monte Carlo method. The imputation model included all model variables. Data were imputed for biological, adoptive, or foster fathers



with some questionnaire data available on the main outcome and workfam-ily conflict and workfamily enrichment variables, though data did not have to be complete (N = 2,829).

Results

Sample characteristics are presented in Table 1. Compared to those included in analyses (N = 2,679), fathers who were eligible but excluded due to miss-ing data were more likely to be the sole earner in the family (excluded 49% vs. included 39%, p < .01), and less likely to have more than two children (excluded 85% vs. included 92%, p < .01). However, there were no differ-ences between included and excluded fathers on social economic position, country of birth, and work hours. Fathers were employed for a mean (SD) of 47.4 (12.6) hours per week, comparable to the long employment hours observed in other Australian studies of fathers employment (Charlesworth et al., 2011). Only one father in the included sample who identified as being a sole carer, therefore specific analyses on lone fathers could not be undertaken.

WorkFamily Conflict, WorkFamily Enrichment and Parenting

Unadjusted linear regression analyses provided initial support for significant bivariate associations between fathers workfamily conflict and less par-enting warmth ( = .05, p < .001); less consistency ( = .07, p < .01); and more irritability ( = .06, p < .001). Workfamily enrichment was associated with more warmth ( = .10, p < .001) and less irritability ( = .06, p < .001) but not with more parenting consistency (see Table 2, Model 1).

Table 2 presents the results of the multiple linear regression analyses. These models test for the relationship between workfamily conflict and enrichment and parenting warmth, irritability, and consistency, adjusting for demographic and child characteristics. Higher workfamily conflict was significantly, independently associated with less parenting warmth, greater parenting irritability, and more inconsistent parenting with little change to the estimates (). Additional analyses considered the extent to which these relationships between workfamily conflict and parenting remained significant when fathers mental health was added into the mod-els (Model 3). While the estimates of the relationships between workfamily conflict and parenting were attenuated somewhat, significant independent associations remained for all parenting variables. Higher workfamily enrichment was significantly associated with higher


Cooklin et al. 13

parenting warmth and lower irritability (Model 2). These relationships were largely unchanged in the additional analyses that also controlled for fathers mental health (Model 3). For all models, results from the multiple imputation sample did not differ from those presented for the main study sample.

Table 1. Weighted Sample Characteristics (N = 2,679).

Variables M/% SD RangeNo. of items

Workfamily gains 3.57 0.73 1-5 6 .94Workfamily strains 2.81 0.71 1-5 4 .83Parenting Parenting warmth 4.07 0.54 1-5 6 .82 Parenting irritability 2.29 0.60 1-4.5 4 .70 Parenting consistency 3.98 0.67 1-5 5 .63Social/demographic factors Fathers age (years) 37.39 5.60 19-69 1 Fathers country of birth not

Australia or New Zealanda20.8% 0-1 1

Main language other than English 12.7% 1 Married 91.0% 1 Two or more children in familyb 92.2% 0-1 1 Low household SEP quartilec 24.7% 1 High household SEP quartilec 25.0% 1 Father sole earner in familyd 39.2% 0-1 1 Fathers work hours (increasing) 47.43 12.61 0-120 1 Mothers work hours (increasing) 13.8 15.82 0-46 1 Current psychological distress for

father3.32 3.21 0-24 6 .82

Child characteristics Age of study child (months) 56.86 2.60 51-67 1 Child has special health care needs 12.7% 0-1 1 Child temperament Sociability 3.82 1.23 1-6 4 .82 Persistence 3.96 0.92 1-6 4 .78 Reactivity 2.67 0.92 1-6 4 .66

Note. SEP = socioeconomic position. Comparison groups for categorical variables: aCompared with father born in Australia/New Zealand. bCompared with single-child family. cCompared with households in the middle 50% range for SEP. d Compared with dual-earning families.



Factors Associated With Higher WorkFamily Conflict, WorkFamily Enrichment

We then explore which fathers are most likely to experience higher conflict or enrichment (see Table 3). We found no relationship between socioeco-nomic status and conflict or enrichment. Fathers who worked longer hours were more likely to report workfamily conflict and less likely to report workfamily enrichment. This was not explained by socioeconomic

Table 2. Summary of Three Unadjusted and Adjusted Multiple Regression Modelsa: WorkFamily Conflict and Enrichment Predicting Parenting Warmth, Irritability, and Consistency.

Parenting warmth Parenting irritabilityParenting

consistency

B SE B B SE B B SE B

Model 1: Unadjusted Workfamily

conflict.07 .02 .05*** .10 .02 .07*** .11 .02 .08***

Workfamily enrichment

.13 .02 .10*** .08 .02 .06*** .01 .02 .01

Model 2: Adjusteda

Workfamily conflict

.05 .02 .04** .09 .02 .06*** .09 .02 .07***


.14 .02 .10*** .09 .02 .06*** .01 .02 .01

Model 3: Full adjusted model with fathers mental healthb

Workfamily conflict

.04 .02 .03** .05 .02 .04** .06 .02 04**


.13 .02 .10*** .08 .02 .06*** .001 .02 .002

a.Model adjusted for the following: family socioeconomic position for household (parents education, occupational level, and income); fathers age; two or more children in family; marital status; child gender; maternal-rated child special health care needs; fathers country of birth not Australia or New Zealand, primary language, fathers work hours, father sole earner in family, mothers work hours, child temperament (social, persistence, and reactivity).b.Model adjusted for the following: family socioeconomic position for household (parents education, occupational level, and income); fathers age; two or more children in family; marital status; child gender; maternal-rated child special health care needs; fathers country of birth not Australia or New Zealand, primary language, fathers work hours, father sole earner in family, mothers work hours, child temperament (social, persistence, and reactivity), and fathers mental health.*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.


Cooklin et al. 15

position. There were no significant differences between employment hours for fathers of high versus medium socioeconomic status (47.9 vs. 48.1 hours, ns). Those of low socioeconomic position were employed for significantly fewer hours (45.8 hours, p < .001) than fathers of medium socioeconomic status, but independent main effects remained for hours in the multivariate analyses. Being the sole earner in the family was associated with higher workfamily conflict only.

Discussion

This article is one of very few investigating the relationship between the workfamily interface and specific fathering behaviors known to influence childrens outcomes during a key phase of childrens developmentthe year prior to the commencement of formal schooling. The striking finding in our study was that fathers workfamily conflict was significantly and indepen-dently associated with less optimal parenting behaviors, including reduced

Table 3. Regression Coefficients Showing Predictors of WorkFamily Conflict and WorkFamily Enrichment.

Workfamily conflict Workfamily enrichment

B SE B B SE B

Father income (increasing) .01 .01 .02 .01 .01 .04Occupational classificationa

Unskilled .01 .04 .02 .01 .04 .02 Skilled .06 .05 .08 .03 .05 .04Year 12 educationb .01 .03 .01 .02 .03 .03Father sole earner in

familyc.06 .03 .09^ .02 .03 .02

Fathers work hours (increasing)

.01 .001 .12*** .003 .001 .05**

Two or more children in familyd

.03 .05 .04 .08 .06 .10

Fathers country of birth not Australia or New Zealande

.06 .04 .08 .01 .04 .01

Fathers age (years) .01 .003 .05* .003 .003 .02

Note. Comparison groups for categorical variables: aCompared with labor/clerical. bCompared with


warmth, less consistency in discipline, and more irritability, hostility, and frustration in interactions with their child. These associations were largely unchanged when all father, employment, and child characteristics were included in the model. Findings suggest that stress, time constraints, demands, and adverse experiences in one domain (e.g., work) spill over into the other domain (e.g., family). It is possible that adequate time for warm, affectionate, patient, and supportive fatherchild interactions is eroded when the demands imposed by a job are high. Supporting Stewart and Barlings results (1996), we found that fathers who feel frustrated, pressured, or stressed by competing workfamily demands may have a compromised capacity to self-regulate, resulting in more harsh discipline and irritable responding toward their child and less responsive, nurturing interactions.

We also found less consistency in the way fathers parented, when workfamily conflict was high. Consistent parenting behaviors require a high level of engagement and attention; workfamily conflict seems to result in emo-tional and cognitive withdrawal, plausibly reducing fathers capacity to per-sist with maintaining consistent expectations and reinforcing behavior norms (Lau, 2010; Repetti, 1994). Recent evidence has described workfamily con-flict as a possible risk for childrens development (Strazdins et al., 2013). Our results indicate that adverse parenting behaviors may be an important path-way via which workfamily conflict adversely affects children.

The workfamily interface embeds both costs and rewards from employ-ment participation. We find a positive association between workfamily enrichment and parenting warmth. Satisfaction, efficacy, and self-esteem conveyed in the workplace are likely to promote self-efficacy and optimism, encouraging fathers to engage and persist with warm, affectionate parenting. Alternatively, fathers who have limited time with their children might priori-tize affection and emotional closeness, improving the quality of time with their children, even when the quantity of time is short. While workfamily enrichment was not associated with consistent parenting behaviors, we found a significant, protective association between higher workfamily enrichment and less irritable or hostile parenting. Flexible, calm, and effective approaches to managing difficulties in the workplace might strengthen fathers sense of efficacy to respond sensitively in demanding situations. These skills might then be utilized to manage difficult child behaviors, without resorting to yell-ing, angry or punitive responding. Overall, it appears that workfamily enrichment is potentially promoting of fathers optimal parenting practices.

Current theoretical understandings of parenting, including fathering in particular, note that parenting is influenced by a range of factorssocial, contextual, child, family, and institutionalas well as fathers mental health (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Parke, 2004). Thus, we would expect to see


Cooklin et al. 17

an independent influence of workfamily conflict and enrichment on parent-ing, separate to that conveyed by fathers mental health. Our study findings supported this. Even when fathers mental health was included in the multi-variate models, independent associations remained between workfamily conflict and parenting. The relationships between workfamily enrichment, higher warmth, and lower irritability remained largely unchanged by the inclusion of mental health in analyses. Together, these results support emerg-ing evidence (Strazdins et al., 2013) that the workfamily interface is an important, independent influence on parenting and childrens home environ-ments, independent of any influence workfamily may have on fathers men-tal health.

We further explored if some fathers were more at risk of workfamily conflict, and what characteristics might also be linked to the experience of workfamily enrichment. In support of existing evidence (Byron, 2005; Skinner et al., 2012), we found that longer employment hours was the key factor associated with both conflict and enrichment, outweighing socioeco-nomic position, an indicator comprised of income, education, and occupa-tional status. Long hours spent at work reduce the time available to spend with family, generating time-based conflict and strain. Fathers who are absorbed and engaged for long hours at work might also find it difficult to switch into parent mode when they are with their children; long hours at work might drain fathers physical and emotional energy, amplifying time-based conflict. It is not surprising that longer working hours were also associ-ated with lower workfamily enrichment, albeit to a smaller degree. Along with direct conflict and costs to fathers, there appear to be associated reduc-tions in the benefits or rewards conveyed by longer working hours. Fathers working long hours may find themselves feeling distant from their children, with reduced opportunities for involvement in daily activities and routines (Giallo, Treyvaud, Cooklin, & Wade, 2012). The overall positive spill over from work to family appears to be eroded too by the stress and exhaustion inherent in longer working hours.

We acknowledge some limitations to our approach. These data are cross-sectional, so causal relationships cannot be established and any potential reverse causality of the variables cannot be precluded (e.g., adverse parenting influencing perception of workfamily conflict). We used fathers self-reports to assess our criterion variables, which may be subject to social desirability and other forms of reporting bias. The included sample was comparable to eligible fathers who were excluded due to missing data in terms of work hours, socioeconomic position, and country of birth. However, excluded fathers were less likely to have more than two children, and more likely to be the sole-earner in the family. It is possible that our results



are an underestimate of the relationship between workfamily conflict, workfamily enrichment, and parenting for sole-earner fathers, or those with fewer children, where the opportunities and costs associated with workfam-ily conflict may have a different pattern of effects on parenting. We acknowl-edge that two of the measures used in our study had a lower than acceptable internal validity (i.e., parenting consistency and child reactivity). This might explain the absence of associations detected between workfamily variables and parenting consistency. The findings around parenting consistency must therefore be interpreted with caution. Similarly, we acknowledge that all measures used here are, by necessity, brief. Consequently, the effect sizes we report are modest as the measures might insensitive to all variations in fathers parenting and workfamily interface.

Nonetheless, we contribute new evidence from a large, contemporary national cohort of employed fathers. We address a significant gap in the workfamily literature by investigating the potential effects of workfamily conflict and enrichment on fathers parenting behaviors at a life stage when workfamily conflict is likely to peak (Duxbury & Higgins, 2001; Eby et al., 2005). Our findings suggest that parenting may be one pathway via which workfamily conflict adversely affects childrens home environments, ulti-mately contributing to childrens well-being, independent of fathers mental health. Importantly, we also report an association between higher workfamily enrichment and more warm, affectionate, less irritable, less punitive parenting. Together, these findings suggest that the workfamily interface can either support or erode family relationships, including parentchild interactions.

Implications of Study Findings

Our findings provide further impetus for the provision of optimal employ-ment conditions. It is well established that high-quality jobs are those associ-ated with higher levels of workfamily enrichment and lower levels of workfamily conflict (Allen et al., 2000; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). High-quality jobs, those that optimize opportunities for workfamily enrichment, ultimately improving family environments, are characterized by manageable workloads, flexibility, optimal supervisor support, job security, and a sense of control/autonomy over work (Gronlund, 2007; Strazdins, Shipley, Clements, Obrien, & Broom, 2010). For fathers of young children, quality employment would also include provision of paid family-related leave, flexible start and finish times, and workfamily specific supervisor support. Improving fathers access and uptake of flexible employment conditions is also warranted. In Australia, fathers are significantly less likely to request flexible working


Cooklin et al. 19

arrangements compared with mothers and their request is more likely to be refused (Skinner et al., 2012). While policy change (e.g., paid paternity leave) is likely to support a shift in gendered expectations and norms in workplaces, further research is also required to ascertain elements of workplace culture that would facilitate fathers uptake of these policies. Based on our findings, we also pose that appropriate policy interventions, reviewing and restricting the need for a long working week, are vital. While full-time employment is currently normative for Australian fathers, working longer than full-time hours was common and appears to heighten workfamily conflict, with an attendant negative influence on parenting.

Conclusion

Using a nationally representative sample, and adjustment for a wide range of control variables, this study demonstrated associations between workfamily rewards and enrichment and key indicators of fathers parenting behaviors. These findings show the potential for fathers experiences of employment to ultimately affect children both positively and negatively. While fathers, and by extension, fathering have undergone significant shifts in expectations, contemporary workplaces have been slow to respond. Yet full-time employ-ment remains the norm for the majority of fathers, and this is particularly so during the early years of parenting. The workfamily interface is an impor-tant dimension of family functioning, family relationships, and childrens home environments. This study provides further impetus for workplaces and public policy to provide optimal employment conditions to parents of young childrenmothers and fathers, given the flow-on implications work has on families, family relationships, parentchild interactions, and ultimately, chil-drens development.

Authors Note

This article uses unit record data from Growing Up in Australia, the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. The study is conducted in partnership between the Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA); the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS); and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). The findings and views reported are those of the authors and should not be attributed to FaHCSIA, AIFS, or the ABS.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.



Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children study design and data collection were funded by Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Authors AC, EW, RG and JN were employees of the Parenting Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia, when this research was conducted and were supported by fund-ing from the Victorian Government (AC, RG, EW), and the Australian Research Council (LS, Discovery Grant DP0774439). Authors AC, EW and JN are currently supported by the Roberta Holmes Transition to Contemporary Parenthood Program, Judith Lumley Centre, La Trobe University.

References

Alexander, M., & Baxter, J. (2005). Impacts of work on family life for partnered par-ents of young children. Family Matters, (72), 18-25.

Allen, T., Herst, D., Bruck, C., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and adgenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278-308.

Almeida, D., Wethington, E., & Chandler, A. (1999). Daily transmission of tensions between marital dyads and parent-child dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 49-61.

Barnett, R. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualisation of the work/fam-ily literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124, 125-182.

Bass, B., Butler, A., Grzywacz, J., & Linney, K. (2009). Do job demands undermine parenting? A daily analysis of spillover and crossover effects. Family Relations, 58, 201-215.

Bass, B., & Grzywacz, J. (2011). Job adequacy and work-family balance: Looking at jobs as a whole. Journal of Family Issues, 32, 317-345.

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.

Baxter, J., & Smart, D. (2011). Fathering in Australia among couple families with young children: Research highlights. Family Matters, 88, 15-26.

Bianchi, S., & Milkie, M. (2010). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 705-725.

Blakemore, T., Strazdins, L., & Gibbings, J. (2009). Measuring family socioeconomic position. Australian Social Policy, 8, 121-168.

Bogels, S., & Phares, V. (2008). Fathers role in the etiology, prevention and treat-ment of child anxiety: A review and new model. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 539-558.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Crouter, A. (1982). Work and family through time and space. In S. Kamerman & C. Hayes (Eds.), Families that work: Children in a changing world (pp. 39-83). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.


Cooklin et al. 21

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (2006). The bioecological model of human devel-opment. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 793-828). New York, NY: Wiley.

Burnett, S. B., Gatrell, C. J., Cooper, C. L., & Sparrow, P. (2012). Fathers at work: A ghost in the organisational machine. Gender, Work & Organization, 20, 632-646. doi:10.1111/gwao.12000

Butterworth, P., Leach, L., Strazdins, L., Olesen, S., Rodgers, B., & Broom, D. (2011). The psychosocial quality of work determines whether employment bas benefits for mental health: Results from a longitudinal national household panel survey. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 68, 806-812.

Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work-family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 67, 169-198.

Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C., Bradley, R., Hofferth, S., & Lamb, M. (2000). Fatherhood in the twenty-first century. Child Development, 71(1), 127-136.

Charlesworth, S., Strazdins, L., OBrien, L., & Sims, S. (2011). Parents jobs in Australia: Work hours, polarisation and the consequences for job quality and gender equality. Australian Journal for Labour Economics, 14(1), 35-57.

Cooksey, E., Menaghan, E., & Jekielek, S. (1997). Life-course effects of work and family circumstances on children. Social Forces, 76, 637-667.

Craig, L. (2006). Does father care mean fathers share? A comparison of how mothers and fathers in intact families spend time with children. Gender & Society, 20, 259-281.

Crouter, A., & Bumpus, M. (2001). Linking parents work stress to childrens and adolescents psychological adjustment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 156-159.

Department of Family and Community Services. (2004). Growing up in Australia: The longitudinal study of Australian childrenAnnual report 2004. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2001). Work-life balance in the new millennium: Where are we? Where do we need to go? Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Policy Research Networks.

Eby, L., Casper, W., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Birinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980-2002). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124-197.

Fine, C. (2010). The glass workplace. In C. Fine (Ed.), Delusions of gender: The real science behind gender differences. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Ford, M., Heinen, B., & Langkamer, K. (2007). Work and family satisfaction and con-flict: A meta-analysis of cross-domain relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 57-80.

Froberg, D., Gjerdingen, D., & Preston, M. (1986). Multiple roles and womens men-tal and physical health: What have we learned? Women & Health, 11, 79-84.

Frone, M., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 65-78.



Frone, M., Yardley, J., & Markel, K. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145-167.

Furukawa, T., Kessler, R., Slade, T., & Andrews, G. (2003). The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-being. Psychological Medicine, 33, 357-362.

Galambos, N., Sears, H., Almeida, D., & Kolaric, G. (1995). Parents work overload and problem behaviour in young adolescents. Journal Research on Adolescence, 5, 201-223.

Galinsky, E. (1999). Ask the children. New York, NY: William Morrow.Giallo, R., Cooklin, A., Wade, C., DEsposito, F., & Nicholson, J. (2013). Fathers

postnatal mental health and child wellbeing at aged five: The mediating role of parenting behaviour. Journal of Family Issues, 35, 1543-1562.

Giallo, R., Treyvaud, K., Cooklin, A., & Wade, C. (2012). Mothers and fathers involvement in early home learning activities with their children: The role of parental self-efficacy. Early Child Development and Care, 183, 343-359.

Goldberg, W., Clarke-Stewart, K., Rice, J., & Dellis, E. (2002). Emotional energy as an explanatory construct for fathers engagement with their infants. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2, 379-408.

Goode, W. (1960). Towards a theory of role strain. American Sociological Review, 25, 483-496.

Goodman, W., Crouter, A., Lanza, S., Coz, M., & Vernon-Feagans, L. (2011). Paternal work stress and latent profiles of father-infant parenting quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 588-604.

Gray, M., Misson, S., & Hayes, A. (2005). Young children and their grandparents. Family Matters, 72, 10-17.

Gray, M., & Sanson, A. (2005). Growing up in Australia: The longitudinal study of Australian children. Family Matters, 72, 4-9.

Greenberger, E., & ONeil, R. (1993). Spouse, parent, worker: Commitments and role-related experiences in the construction of adults well-being. Developmental Psychology, 29, 181-197.

Greenhaus, J., & Powell, C. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72-92.

Grimm-Thomas, K., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (1994). All in a days work: Job experi-ences, self-esteem, and fathering in working-class families. Family Relations, 43, 174-181.

Gronlund, A. (2007). More control, less conflict? Job demand-control, gender and work-family conflict. Gender, Work & Organization, 14, 476-497.

Grzywacz, J., & Bass, B. (2003). Work, family, and mental health: Testing different models of work-family fit. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 248-261.

Grzywacz, J., Carlson, D., Kacmar, M., & Wayne, J. H. (2007). A multi-level per-spective on the synergies between work and family. Journal of Occupation and Organizational Psychology, 80, 559-574.

Grzywacz, J., & Marks, N. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover


Cooklin et al. 23

between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 111-126.

Herbert, S., Harvey, E., Lugo-Candelas, C., & Breaux, R. (2013). Early fathering as a predictor of later psychosocial functioning among preschool children with behav-ior problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41, 691-703.

Higgins, C., Duxbury, L., & Lee, C. (1994). Impact of life-cycle stage and gender on the ability to balance work and family responsibilities. Family Relations, 43, 144-150.

Hill, E. (2005). Family facilitation and conflict, working fathers and mothers, work-family stressors and support. Journal of Family Issues, 26, 793-819.

Holt, H., & Lewis, S. (2011). You can stand on your head and still end up with lower pay: Gliding segregation and gendered work practices in Danish family-friendly workplaces. Gender, Work & Organization, 18(Suppl. 1), e202-e221.

Holter, O. (2007). Mens work and family reconciliation in Europe. Men and Masculinities, 9, 425-456.

Hook, J. (2006). Care in context: Mens unpaid work in 20 countries, 1965-2003. American Sociological Review, 71, 639-660.

Johnson, S., Li, J., Kendall, G., Strazdins, L., & Jacoby, P. (2013). Mothers and fathers work hours, child gender and behavior in middle childhood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 56-74.

Kawabata, Y., Alink, L., Tseng, W., van Ijzendoorn, M., & Crick, N. (2011). Maternal and paternal parenting styles associated with relational aggression in children and adolescents: A conceptual analysis and meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 31, 240-278.

Kinnunen, U., & Mauno, S. (1998). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among employed women and men in Finland. Human Relations, 51, 157-177.

Koivunen, J., Rothaupt, J., & Wolfgram, S. (2009). Gender dynamics and role adjust-ment during the transition to parenthood: Current perspectives. Family Journal, 17, 323-328.

Lamb, M., Pleck, J., Charnov, E., & Levine, J. (1987). A biosocial perspective on paternal behavior and involvement. In J. Lancaster, J. Altmann, A. Rossi, & L. Sherrod (Eds.), Parenting across the lifespan: Biosocial dimensions (pp. 11-142). Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Grutyer.

Lau, Y. (2010). The impact of fathers work and family conflicts on childrens self-esteem: The Hong Kong case. Social Indicators Research, 95, 363-376.

Low, S., & Stocker, C. (2005). Family functioning and childrens adjustment: Associations among parents depressed mood, marital hostility, parent-child hos-tility, and childrens adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 394-403.

Marshall, N., & Barnett, R. (1993). Work-family strains and gains among two-earner couples. Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 64-78.

Martin, A., Ryan, R., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2010). When fathers supportiveness matters most: maternal and paternal parenting and childrens school readiness. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 145-155.



Martin, J., Hiscock, H., Hardy, P., & Wake, M. (2007). Adverse association of infant and child sleep problems and parent health: An Australian population study. Pediatrics, 119, 947-955.

Misson, S., & Sipthorp, M. (2007). Wave 2 weighting and non-response (LSAC Technical Paper, No. 5). Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Nomaguchi, K., Milkie, M., & Binachi, S. (2005). Time strains and psychological well-being: Do dual earner mothers and fathers differ? Journal of Family Issues, 26, 756-792.

OBrien, M., Brandth, B., & Kvande, E. (2007). Fathers, work and family life. Community, Work & Family, 10, 375-386.

Parke, R. (2004). Development in the family. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 356-399.

Pleck, J. (1997). Paternal involvement: Levels, sources, and consequences. In M. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (3rd ed., pp. 66-103). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Premberg, A., Hellstrom, A., & Berg, M. (2008). A view from inside the familyBecoming a father: Experiences of the first year as father. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 22, 56-63.

Repetti, R. (1994). Short-term and long-term processes linking job stressors to father-child interactions. Social Development, 3(1), 2-15.

Repetti, R., Taylor, S., & Seeman, T. (2002). Risky families: Family social environ-ments and the mental and physical health of offspring. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 330-366.

Roeters, A., van der Lippe, T., & Kluwer, E. (2009). Parental work demands and the frequency of child-related routine and interactive activities. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 1193-1204.

Rothbard, N. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 655-684.

Sallinen, M., Kinnunen, U., & Ronka, A. (2004). Adolescents experiences of paren-tal employment and parenting: Connections to adolescent well-being. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 221-237.

Shibley-Hyde, J., Else-Quest, N., Goldsmith, H., & Biesanz, J. (2004). Childrens temperament and behaviour problems predicted their employed mothers work functioning. Child Development, 75, 580-594.

Sieber, S. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological Review, 39, 567-578.

Skinner, N., Hutchinson, C., & Pocock, B. (2012). The big squeeze: Work, life and care in 2012The Australian Work and Life Index. Adelaide, Australia: Centre for Work + Life.

Smart, D., & Sanson, A. (2005). A comparison of childrens temperament and adjust-ment across 20 years. Family Matters, 72, 97-104.

Soloff, C., Lawrence, D., & Johnstone, R. (2005). Longitudinal study of Australian children. Technical Paper No. 1: Sample design. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.


Cooklin et al. 25

Statacorp. (2009). Stata (Release 11) [Statistical software]. College Station, TX: Author.

Statistics Canada. (2000). National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) Cycle 3 survey instruments: Parent questionnaire. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.

Strazdins, L., Clements, M., Korda, R. J., Broom, D. H., & DSouza, R. M. (2006). Unsociable work? Nonstandard work schedules, family relationships and chil-drens well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 394-410.

Strazdins, L., Korda, R., Lim, L., Broom, D., & DSouza, R. (2004). Around-the-clock: Parent work schedules and childrens well-being in a 24-h economy. Social Science & Medicine, 59, 1517-1527.

Strazdins, L., OBrien, L., Lucas, N., & Rodgers, B. (2013). Combining work and family: Rewards or risks for childrens mental health? Social Science & Medicine, 87, 99-107.

Strazdins, L., Shipley, M., & Broom, D. (2007). What does family-friendly really mean? Well-being, time and the quality of parents jobs. Australian Bulletin of Labour, 33, 202-225.

Strazdins, L., Shipley, M., Clements, M., Obrien, L., & Broom, D. (2010). Job quality and inequality: Parents jobs and childrens emotional and behavioural difficul-ties. Social Science & Medicine, 70, 2052-2060.

Todd, P., & Binns, J. (2013). Work-life balance: Is it now a problem for management? Gender, Work & Organization, 20, 219-231.

Webster, L., Low, J., Siller, C., & Kisst-Hackett, R. (2013). Understanding the contri-bution of a fathers warmth on his childs social skills. Fathering, 11(1), 90-113.

Wilson, S., & Durbin, C. (2010). Effects of paternal depression on fathers parenting behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 167-180.


Documents

Journal of Family Issues 2014 Cooklin 0192513X14553054