Work-family conflict can create challenges for women in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers. Little is known, however, about how young women in STEM reason about future work-family conflict. The current study examines work-family conflict expectations among undergraduate and graduate women in STEM. Participants (N = 156) responded to open- and closed-ended survey questions about work-family conflict and academic attitudes. Qualitative analyses revealed two orientations relative to work-family conflict. Women with a challenge orientation anticipated work and family strain, whereas women with an opportunity orientation anticipated that balancing work and family would enhance their lives. Women differed in the strategies they planned to employ to resolve future work-family conflict and in their levels of quantitative constructs such as STEM identity. Findings suggest avenues for improving STEM retention such as mentoring interventions with exposure to role models who are balancing work and family.
AdamsG. A.KingL. A.KingD. W. (1996). Relationships of job and family involvement, family social support, and work–family conflict with job and life satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.411
2.
AllenT. D.HerstD. E.BruckC. S.SuttonM. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(2), 278–308. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8998.5.2.278
3.
ArnettJ. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
BishopJ. L.RobersonP. N.NoronaJ. C.WelshD. P. (2018). Does role balance influence the effect of personality on college success? A mediation model. Emerging Adulthood, 6(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696817711341
10.
BradleyE. H.CurryL. A.DeversK. J. (2007). Qualitative data analysis for health services research: Developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Services Research, 42(4), 1758–1772. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00684.x
11.
BradtJ.BurnsD. S.CreswellJ. W. (2013). Mixed methods research in music therapy research. Journal of Music Therapy, 50(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmt/50.2.123
BudgeonS. (2015). Individualized femininity and feminist politics of choice. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 22(3), 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506815576602
14.
CarlsonD. S.KacmarK. M.WayneJ. H.GrzywaczJ. G. (2006). Measuring the positive side of the work–family interface: Development and validation of a work–family enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 131–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.02.002
15.
CarlsonD. S.KacmarK. M.WilliamsL. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(2), 249–276. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713
CastroF. G.KellisonJ. G.BoydS. J.KopakA. (2010). A methodology for conducting integrative mixed methods research and data analyses. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4), 342–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689810382916
18.
CeciS. J.WilliamsW. M. (2010). Sex differences in math-intensive fields. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 275–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410383241
19.
CeciS. J.WilliamsW. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(8), 3157–3162. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014871108
20.
ChemersM. M.ZurbriggenE. L.SyedM.GozaB. K.BearmanS. (2011). The role of efficacy and identity in science career commitment among underrepresented minority students. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 469–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01710.x
21.
ChoS.CrenshawK. W.McCallL. (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1086/669608
22.
CinamonR. G. (2006). Anticipated work-family conflict: Effects of gender, self-efficacy, and family background. The Career Development Quarterly, 54(3), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2006.tb00152.x
23.
CinamonR. G. (2010). Anticipated work-family conflict: Effects of role salience and self-efficacy. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 38(1), 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069880903408620
24.
ConstantineM. G.FloresL. Y. (2006). Psychological distress, perceived family conflict, and career development issues in college students of color. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(3), 354–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072706286491
25.
CoyleE. F.Van LeerE.SchroederK. M.FulcherM. (2015). Planning to have it all: Emerging adults’ expectations of future work-family conflict. Sex Roles, 72(11-12), 547–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0492-y
26.
CrenshawK. (1990). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
27.
CreswellJ. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.
28.
DayA. L.ChamberlainT. C. (2006). Committing to your work, spouse, and children: Implications for work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.001
DiekmanA. B.WeisgramE. S.BelangerA. L. (2015). New routes to recruiting and retaining women in STEM: Policy implications of a communal goal congruity perspective. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 52–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12010
31.
DriscollD. L.Appiah-YeboahA.SalibP.RupertD. J. (2007). Merging qualitative and quantitative data in mixed methods research: How to and why not. Ecological and Environmental Anthropology, 3(1), 19–28. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmeea/18
32.
EcclesJ. S.WangM. T. (2016). What motivates females and males to pursue careers in mathematics and science?International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(2), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415616201
EriksonE.E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton.
35.
Ernst KossekE.OzekiC. (1998). Work–family conflict, policies, and the job–life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior–human resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.139
36.
EstradaM.WoodcockA.HernandezP. R.SchultzP. W. (2011). Toward a model of social influence that explains minority student integration into the scientific community. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020743
37.
EzzedeenS. R.BudworthM. H.BakerS. D. (2018). Can I have it all? Emerging adult women’s positions on balancing career and family. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 37(6), 566–581. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-06-2017-0138
FerrimanK.LubinskiD.BenbowC. P. (2009). Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(3), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016030
40.
FetterolfJ. C.EaglyA. H. (2011). Do young women expect gender equality in their future lives? An answer from a possible selves experiment. Sex Roles, 65(1-2), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9981-9
41.
FettersM. D.CurryL. A.CreswellJ. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6.2), 2134–2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
42.
FouadN.FitzpatrickM.LiuJ. P. (2011). Persistence of women in engineering careers: A qualitative study of current and former female engineers. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 17(1), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v17.i1.60
43.
FoxM. F.FonsecaC.BaoJ. (2011). Work and family conflict in academic science: Patterns and predictors among women and men in research universities. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 715–735. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711417730
44.
FuschP. I.NessL. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408–1416. https://works.bepress.com/d101mentor/4/
45.
GreenhausJ. H.BeutellN. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4277352
46.
GreenhausJ. H.PowellG. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.19379625
47.
GrzywaczJ.MarksN. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.5.1.111
48.
HalpernD. F.BenbowC. P.GearyD. C.GurR. C.HydeJ. S.GernsbacherM. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x
49.
HegelsonV. S. (2012). Psychology of gender (4th ed.). Routledge.
50.
HuffJ. L.SmithJ. A.JesiekB. K.ZoltowskiC. B.OakesW. C. (2019). Identity in engineering adulthood: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of early-career engineers in the United States as they transition to the workplace. Emerging Adulthood, 7(6), 451–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696818780444
51.
JeanV. A.PayneS. C.ThompsonR. J. (2015). Women in STEM: Family-related challenges and initiatives. In MillsM. (Ed.), Gender and the work-family experience: An intersection of two domains (pp. 291–311). Springer.
52.
JohnsonA.BrownJ.CarloneH.CuevasA. K. (2011). Authoring identity amidst the treacherous terrain of science: A multiracial feminist examination of the journeys of three women of color in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20411
53.
JohnsonD. R. (2011). Women of color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(152), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.410
LeaperC.StarrC. R. (2019). Helping and hindering undergraduate women’s STEM motivation: Experiences with STEM encouragement, STEM-related gender bias, and sexual harassment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318806302
57.
LentR. W.BrownS. D.HackettG. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36
58.
MasonM. A.GouldenM. (2004). Marriage and baby blues: Redefining gender equity in the academy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 596, 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716204268744
MatthewsR. A.BulgerC. A.Barnes-FarrellJ. L. (2010). Work social supports, role stressors, and work-family conflict: The moderating effect of age. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.06.011
61.
McCarverV. (2011). The rhetoric of choice and 21st-century feminism: Online conversations about work, family, and Sarah Palin. Women’s Studies in Communication, 34(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2011.566532
62.
MeyersD. T. (1987). Personal autonomy and the paradox of feminine socialization. The Journal of Philosophy, 84(11), 619–628. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil198784117
63.
MichelJ. S.KotrbaL. M.MitchelsonJ. K.ClarkM. A.BaltesB. B. (2011). Antecedents of work–family conflict: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(5), 689–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.695
OjedaL.LopezC.SharerA. (2020). A gendered look at work-family conflict among diverse U.S. immigrants. In Nagayama HallG.C. (Ed.), Mental and behavioral health of immigrants: Cultural, environmental, and structural factors (pp. 95–112). Elsevier.
68.
OngM.WrightC.EspinosaL.OrfieldG. (2011). Inside the double bind: A synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 172–209. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.t022245n7x4752v2
69.
ÖzbilginM. F.BeauregardT. A.TatliA.BellM. P. (2011). Work–life, diversity and intersectionality: A critical review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 177–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00291.x
70.
PepinJ. R.CotterD. A. (2018). Separating spheres? Diverging trends in youth’s gender attitudes about work and family. Journal of Marriage and Family, 80, 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12434
71.
PetropanagosA. (2010). Reproductive ‘choice’ and egg freezing. In WoodruffT.ZolothL.Campo-EngelsteinL.RodriguezS. (Eds.), Oncofertility (pp. 223–235). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6518-9_17
72.
RantaM.DietrichJ.Salmela-AroK. (2014). Career and romantic relationship goals and concerns during emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 2(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696813515852
73.
RobnettR. D. (2013). The role of peer support for girls and women in STEM: Implications for identity and anticipated retention in STEM. International Journal of Gender, Science, and Technology, 5, 232–253.
74.
RobnettR. D. (2016). Gender bias in STEM fields: Variation in prevalence and links to STEM self-concept. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315596162
75.
RobnettR. D.ChemersM. M.ZurbriggenE. L. (2015). Longitudinal associations among undergraduates’ research experience, self-efficacy, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 847–867. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21221
RosserS. V. (2004). Using POWRE to advance: Institutional barriers identified by women scientists and engineers. NWSA Journal, 16(1) 50–78. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4317034
78.
RosserS. V.LaneE. O. N. (2002). Key barriers for academic institutions seeking to retain female scientists and engineers: Family-unfriendly policies. Low numbers, stereotypes, and harassment. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8(2), 161–189. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v8.i2.40
SaldañaJ. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Sage.
81.
SalleeM. W.PascaleA. B. (2012). Multiple roles, multiple burdens: The experiences of female scientists with children. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 18(2), 135–152. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2012001669
82.
SandbergS.ScovellN. (2013). Lean in: Women, work and the will to lead. Alfred A. Knopf.
83.
SettlesI. H.CortinaL. M.MalleyJ.StewardA. J. (2006). The climate for women in academic science: The good, the bad, and the changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 47–58.
84.
SeymourE.HewittN. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Westview Press.
85.
ShockleyK. M.SinglaN. (2011). Reconsidering work—Family interactions and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37(3), 861–886. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310394864
86.
ShulmanS.LaursenB.DicksonD. J. (2014). Gender differences in the spillover between romantic experiences, work experiences, and individual adjustment across emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 2(1), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696813515853
87.
StarrC. R. (2018). “I’m Not a Science Nerd!” STEM stereotypes, identity, and motivation among undergraduate women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(4), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318793848
WangM. T.DegolJ. L. (2016). Gender gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
90.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
91.
WilliamsM. M.George-JacksonC. (2014). Using and doing science: Gender, self-efficacy, and science identity of undergraduate students in STEM. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 20(2), 99–126. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2014004477
WolfingerN. H.MasonM. A.GouldenM. (2008). Problems in the pipeline: Gender, marriage, and fertility in the ivory tower. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(4), 388–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772108
Supplementary Material
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.
