Beth A. Livingston

Emotional responses to work-family conflict: an examination of gender role orientation working men and women.

The present study tested the effect of work-family conflict on emotions and the moderating effects of gender role orientation. On the basis of a multilevel design, the authors found that family-interfering-with- work was positively related to guilt, and gender role orientation interacted with both types of conflict (work-interfering-with-family and family-interfering-with-work) to predict guilt. Specifically, in general, traditional individuals experienced more guilt from family-interfering-with-work, and egalitarian individuals experienced more guilt from work-interfering-with-family. Additionally, a higher level interaction indicated that traditional men tended to experience a stronger relationship between family-interfering-with-work and guilt than did egalitarian men or women of either gender role orientation.

Is the gap more than gender? A longitudinal analysis of gender, gender role orientation, and earnings.

This study investigated the relationships among gender, gender role orientation (i.e., attitudes toward the gendered separation of roles at work and at home), and earnings. A multilevel model was conceptualized in which gender role orientation and earnings were within-individual variables that fluctuate over time (although predictors of between-individual differences in gender role orientation were also considered). Results indicated that whereas traditional gender role orientation was positively related to earnings, gender significantly predicted the slope of this relationship: Traditional gender role orientation was strongly positively associated with earnings for men; it was slightly negatively associated with earnings for women. Occupational segregation partly explained these gender differences. Overall, the results suggest that although gender role attitudes are becoming less traditional for men and for women, traditional gender role orientation continues to exacerbate the gender wage gap.

Do Nice Guys—and Gals—Really Finish Last? The Joint Effects of Sex and Agreeableness on Income

Sex and agreeableness were hypothesized to affect income, such that women and agreeable individuals were hypothesized to earn less than men and less agreeable individuals. Because agreeable men disconfirm (and disagreeable men confirm) conventional gender roles, agreeableness was expected to be more negatively related to income for men (i.e., the pay gap between agreeable men and agreeable women would be smaller than the gap between disagreeable men and disagreeable women). The hypotheses were supported across 4 studies. Study 1 confirmed the effects of sex and agreeableness on income and that the agreeableness-income relationship was significantly more negative for men than for women. Study 2 replicated these results, controlling for each of the other Big Five traits. Study 3 also replicated the interaction and explored explanations and paradoxes of the relationship. A 4th study, using an experimental design, yielded evidence for the argument that the joint effects of agreeableness and gender are due to backlash against agreeable men.

Bargaining Behind the Scenes Spousal Negotiation, Labor, and Work–Family Burnout

This study focuses on the negotiation process that partners in a couple engage in behind the scenes to negotiate whose career will take precedence in the household and the resulting effort and burnout that individuals experience at work and at home. The author finds that gender moderates the relationship between competitive negotiation tactics and an individual’s career responsibilities. Gender also moderates the relationship between both competitive and cooperative negotiation tactics and the emotional work conducted by one’s spouse or partner. The author also observes a moderating effect of gender between emotional and career effort and burnout—both from one’s job and from one’s relationship. Results suggest that men and women react differently to negotiation tactics used within a couple and tend to be affected by gendered norms regarding the work and family domains.

Not What You Expected to Hear: Accented Messages and Their Effect on Choice

In this article we address the increasingly important yet understudied phenomenon of nonnative accentedness on decision making. In three experimental studies, we investigated whether messages about a company delivered in nonstandard-American-accented speech influenced choice. In Study 1, we found that individuals were more likely to choose a company or a product when a message was read in a standard American English accent than when the message was delivered with a Mandarin Chinese or a French accent. In Study 2, we found that expectations regarding company messages are violated when speakers have accents and that, in turn, expectation violations mediated the relationship between accent and choice. In Study 3, we replicated the findings of the effect of accent on choice using Indian and British accents. We also hypothesized and found support for a conditional indirect effects model such that implicit pro-American bias moderated the indirect relationship between accent and choice as mediated by expectation violations. Theoretical and practical implications of this topic of study are discussed.