Homeschooling during COVID-19: Gender Differences in Work–Family Conflict and Alcohol Use Behaviour among Romantic Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homeschooling due to COVID-19 school closures is likely to increase conflict between work and family demands, potentially leading to adverse substance-use effects. We conducted a survey with 758 couples focusing on homeschooling, work–family conflict, and alcohol use (April 2020). The 211 homeschooling couples reported more work–family conflict than the 547 non-homeschooling couples; there also were stronger effects on family interference with work in women. Among the homeschooling couples, homeschooling hours were associated with greater partner drinking. In distinguishable dyad analyses by gender, women’s hours homeschooling were associated with greater drinking frequency by both parents. Men’s hours homeschooling were associated with lower drinking frequency in their partners. Increased work–family conflict in homeschooling couples is particularly worrisome given its link to increased stress and poor mental health. Moreover, women’s increased drinking may impede their ability to support their families during the pandemic. Men’s increased drinking could put homeschooling mothers at risk for escalating conflict/domestic violence, given links of male drinking to intimate partner violence. Finally, the protective-partner effects of men’s homeschooling hours on women’s drinking frequency suggests that more egalitarian division of homeschooling labor may have protective cross-over effects.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".