Role conflict and well‐being among employed mothers: the mediating effects of self‐efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the importance of self‐efficacy in facilitating the joint management of work and family and in predicting the well‐being of employed mothers. Design/methodology/approach Via a self‐report questionnaire, data were obtained from 300 full‐time professional women on measures of: work interfering with family (WIF), family interfering with work (FIW), self‐efficacy, emotional health, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relations among these variables and to test for the mediation effects of self‐efficacy. Findings Three key findings emerged: self‐efficacy was a significant predictor of FIW and WIF, and of all three indices of well‐being; the greater the interference between work and family, the more women felt emotionally exhausted, the less committed they were, and the more likely they were to consider changing jobs or opting out of the market; and self‐efficacy mediated the relationships between FIW and WIF and all three indices of well‐being. Originality/value Findings confirm the importance of self‐efficacy in the adjustment of employed mothers. They also extend previous works by showing that efficacy beliefs not only impact general areas of well‐being, such as emotional health, but more active components of functioning as well like turnover intentions. Exactly how self‐efficacy leads to effective coping and limits the negative impacts of FIW and WIF on women's well‐being are critical issues that deserve additional attention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".