When She Brings Home the Job Status: Wives’ Job Status, Status Leakage, and Marital Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women are increasingly represented in high status organizational positions. While the advancement of women into high status roles offers them many organizational benefits, the spillover and crossover effects of these high status positions on their marital relationships remain under explored. In this study, we focus on potential costs to the marital relationship when women in high status positions hold higher job status roles than their husbands. First, we examine the spillover effects of wives’ job status relative to their husbands’ on marital instability. We suggest that this relationship is indirect and mediated by negative thoughts and feelings toward their partners’ lower job status (which we refer to as “wives’ status leakage”) and decreased relationship satisfaction. Second, we investigate plausible crossover effects on husbands’ marital instability when wives have higher job status and suggest that husbands’ spousal support can moderate the indirect relationship between wives’ job status and wives’ marital instability. We explored these questions on 209 women in positions of high job status, a sample of 53 matched husband–wife dyads, and 92 of the wives who also completed questionnaires three years later. Full cross-sectional and longitudinal support emerged for the indirect spillover effects of wives’ job status on marital instability of wives, and direct crossover effects on husbands’ marital instability. In addition, the indirect relationship between wives’ job status on marital instability of wives was moderated by instrumental support. Theoretical contributions, practical implications, and future research suggestions are discussed. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1120 .
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".