We aimed to analyze perceptions of the costs and benefits of family and work sacrifices. In Study 1, participants (n = 222) rated the associated benefits and costs of a sacrifice (work vs. family). In Study 2, participants (n = 213) rated the associated benefits and costs of a work sacrifice, their willingness to sacrifice, and their sense of authenticity. In Study 3, participants (n = 186) reported on commitment and relationship satisfaction, rated the associated benefits and costs of a work sacrifice, and their life satisfaction. Participants perceived that work sacrifices were costlier for men and more beneficial for women and that women felt more authentic for making them. For women, higher commitment or relationship satisfaction was associated with greater perception of benefits, which was associated with greater life satisfaction. These findings highlight the relevance of gender differences in work sacrifices and hence in women’s professional advancement.
AarntzenL.DerksB.van SteenbergenE.RyanM.van der LippeT. (2019). Work-family guilt as a straightjacket. An interview and diary study on consequences of mothers’ work-family guilt. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 103336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103336
2.
AdelsonM. J. (2020). Division of labor and conflict across three stages of heterosexual romantic relationships. The University of Texas at Dallas.
3.
ÁlvarezG.RomoN.GarcíaA. B. (2018). Doing gender in Spanish same-sex couples. The distribution of housework and childcare. Journal of Gender Studies, 27(6), 672–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2017.1287067
4.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollanD. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596
5.
AronA.FraleyB. (1999). Relationship closeness as including other in the self: Cognitive underpinnings and measures. Social Cognition, 17(2), 140–160. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1999.17.2.140
6.
BaùM.SiegerP.EddlestonK. A.ChiricoF. (2017), Fail but try again? The effects of age, gender, and multiple-owner experience on failed Entrepreneurs’ reentry. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 41(6), 909–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12233
7.
BauerG. (2016). Gender roles, comparative advantages and the life course: The division of domestic labor in same-sex and different-sex couples. European Journal of Population, 32(1), 99–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-015-9363-z
8.
BecharaA.DamasioH.DamasioA. R. (2000). Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10(3), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/10.3.295
9.
BerscheidE.SnyderM.OmotoA. M. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 792–807. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792
10.
Cabañero-MartínezM. J.Richard-MartinezM.Cabrero-GarciaJ.Orts-CortésM. I.Reig-FerrerA.Tosal-HerreroB. (2004). Reliability and validity of the satisfaction with life scale of Diener in pregnant and puerperium women. Psicothema, 16(3), 448–455.
11.
ColumbusS.MolhoC.RighettiF.BallietD. (2021). Interdependence and cooperation in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(3), 626–650. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000253
12.
DayL. C.ImpettE. A. (2018). Giving when it costs: How interdependent self-construal shapes willingness to sacrifice and satisfaction with sacrifice in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(5), 722–742. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0265407517694965
13.
DahmP. C.KimY.GlombT. M. (2019). Leaning in and out: Work–life tradeoffs, self-conscious emotions, and life role satisfaction. The Journal of Psychology, 153(5), 478–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2019.1566685
14.
DienerE. D.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR. J.GriffinS. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
15.
EaglyA. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Psychology Press.
16.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (2016). Social role theory of sex differences. In NaplesN.HooglandR. C.WickramasingheM.WongW. C. A. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of gender and sexuality studies. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss183
European Institute for Gender Equality. (2014). Gender equality and economic independence: Part-time work and self-employment. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2839/74174
19.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
20.
GerpottF. H.BallietD.ColumbusS.MolhoC.de VriesR. E. (2018). How do people think about interdependence? A multidimensional model of subjective outcome interdependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(4), 716–742. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000166
21.
GinoF.WilmuthC. A.BrooksA. W. (2015). Compared to men, women view professional advancement as equally attainable, but less desirable. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(40), 12354–12359. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502567112
22.
GómezA.BrooksM.L.BuhrmesterM.VázquezA.JettenJ.Swann. (2011). On the nature of identity fusion: Insights into the construct and validation of a new measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 918–933. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022642
23.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
24.
HerrarteA.Moral-CarcedoJ.SáezF. (2012). The impact of childbirth on Spanish women’s decisions to leave the labor market. Review of Economics of the Household, 10(3), 441–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-012-9151-z
25.
HochschildA.MachungA. (2012). The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home. Viking.
26.
HorneR. M.BreitkreuzR. S. (2018). The motherhood sacrifice: Maternal experiences of childcare in the Canadian context. Journal of Family Studies, 24(2), 126–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2015.1109540
27.
ImpettE. A.GereJ.KoganA.GordonA. M.KeltnerD. (2014). How sacrifice impacts the giver and the recipient: Insights from approach-avoidance motivational theory. Journal of Personality, 82(5), 390–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12070
28.
ImpettE. A.JavamL.LeB. M.Asyabi-EshghiB.KoganA. (2013). The joys of genuine giving: Approach and avoidance sacrifice motivation and authenticity. Personal Relationships, 20, 740–754. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.2013.20.issue-4
29.
JohnstonA. M.DiekmanA. B. (2015). Pursuing desires rather than duties? The motivational content of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 73(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0494-9
30.
KimY. S. (2022). A study on the effects of gendered social norms on the tradeoff between paid and unpaid work in Korea. Journal of Family and Economic Issues. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-022-09878-5
31.
KoganA.ImpettE. A.OveisC.HuiB.GordonA. M.KeltnerD. (2010). When giving feels good: The intrinsic benefits of sacrifice in romantic relationships for the communally motivated. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1918–1924. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610388815
32.
KulikL.Shilo-LevinS.LibermanG. (2016). Work–family role conflict and well-being among women and men. Journal of Career Assessment, 24(4), 651–668. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072715616067
33.
MandalE. (2020). Sacrifices of women and men in close relationships: The types and structure of sacrifices. The approach and avoidance motives for making sacrifices. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 8(4), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2020.101952
NsairV.PiszczekM. (2021). Gender matters: The effects of gender and segmentation preferences on work-to-family conflict in family sacrifice climates. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 94(3), 509–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12361
ParkY.ImpettE. A.MacDonaldG.LemayE. P.Jr. (2019). Saying “thank you”: Partners’ expressions of gratitude protect relationship satisfaction and commitment from the harmful effects of attachment insecurity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(4), 773–806. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000178
PowellC.van VugtM. (2003). Genuine giving or selfish sacrifice? The role of commitment and cost level upon willingness to sacrifice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(3), 403–412. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.154
40.
RapoportB.SoferC.SolazA. (2011). Household production in a collective model: Some new results. Journal of Population Economics, 24(1), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-010-0308-x
41.
ReisH. T.CollinsW. A.BerscheidE. (2000). The relationship context of human behavior and development. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 844–872. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.6.844
42.
RighettiF.ImpettE. (2017). Sacrifice in close relationships: Motives, emotions, and relationship outcomes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(10), Article e12342. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12342
43.
RighettiF.VissermanM. L.ImpettE. A. (2022). Sacrifices: Costly prosocial behaviors in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 74–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.031
44.
RuppelE. K.CurranM. A. (2012). Relational sacrifices in romantic relationships: Satisfaction and the moderating role of attachment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(4), 508–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407511431190
45.
RusbultC. E.MartzJ. M.AgnewC. R. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5(4), 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
SutherlandC. A.YoungA. W.MootzC. A.OldmeadowJ. A. (2015). Face gender and stereotypicality influence facial trait evaluation: Counter-stereotypical female faces are negatively evaluated. British Journal of Psychology, 106(2), 186–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12085
48.
van der DriftL. E.AgnewC. R.WilsonJ. E. (2014). Spanish version of the investment model scale. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12016
49.
van LangeP. A. M.RusbultC. E.DrigotasS. M.ArriagaX. B.WitcherB. S.CoxC. L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1373–1395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1373
50.
Villanueva-MoyaL.ExpósitoF. (2020). Spanish women making risky decisions in the social domain: The mediating role of femininity and fear of negative evaluation. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 561715. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.561715
51.
Villanueva-MoyaL.ExpósitoF. (2021a). Gender differences in decision-making: The effects of gender stereotype threat moderated by sensitivity to punishment and fear of negative evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 34(5), 706–717. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2239
52.
Villanueva-MoyaL.ExpósitoF. (2021b). Women’s evaluation of costs and benefits in public versus private spheres: The role of gender ideology. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 21, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12238
53.
Villanueva-MoyaL.ExpósitoF. (2022). Are gender roles associated with well-being indicators? The role of femininity, fear of negative evaluation, and regret in decision-making in a Spanish sample. Current in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03142-7
54.
VissermanM. L.RighettiF.MuiseA.ImpettE. A.JoelS.Van LangeP. A. (2020). Taking stock of reality: Biased perceptions of the costs of romantic partners’ sacrifices. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1948550619896671
55.
WachterI.Holz-RauC. (2022). Gender differences in work-related high mobility differentiated by partnership and parenthood status. Transportation, 49, 1737–1764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-021-10226-z
XueB.FleischmannM.HeadJ.McMunnA.StaffordM. (2020). Work-family conflict and work exit in later career stage. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 75(3), 716–727. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby146
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
