Part-time work, women’s work–life conflict, and job satisfaction: A cross-national comparison of Australia, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, and the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) 2013 ‘Family and Changing Gender Roles’ module ( N = 1773) to examine cross-country differences in the relationship between women’s part-time work and work–life conflict and job satisfaction. We hypothesize that part-time work will lead to less favorable outcomes in countries with employment policies that are less protective of part-time employees because the effects of occupational downgrading counteract the benefits of increased time availability. Our comparison focuses on the Netherlands and Australia while using Germany, the United Kingdom, and Sweden as benchmarks. Part-time employment is prevalent in all five countries, but has the most support and protection in the Dutch labor market. We find little evidence that country of residence conditions the effects of part-time work. Overall, the results suggest that part-time work reduces work–life conflict to a similar extent in all countries except Sweden. The effects on job satisfaction are negligible. We discuss the implications for social policies meant to stimulate female labor force participation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".