Pregnancy and Beyond: Nuances of the Work-Family Interface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past few years has heightened the need to understand how work and family impact each other. While there exists a plethora of research exploring the interface between work and family, particularly for working parents, existing research tends to present the experience through the lens of work-family conflict, neglecting that the work- family interface goes beyond interrole conflict (Allen, 2012) and overlooks important nuances that could deepen our understanding of the work-family interface. For example, in a recent systematic review, Arena and colleagues (2023) point out that, despite decades of research, the literature on maternity in the workplace still assumes that “women underwent a seemingly normal and intentional pregnancy that resulted in a live birth” while paying limited attention to maternity experiences such as pregnancy loss. Additionally, while previous work-family research has examined the crossover effect (the interpersonal process that occurs when experiences, emotions, and attitudes of one individual affect another individual in the same social system; Bolger et al., 1989), the focus has been mainly on spousal dyads (e.g., Carlson et al., 2019; Li et al., 2021) while overlooking other family members such as one’s children. The purpose of this symposium is to explore such nuances within the work-family interface overlooked by the existing literature. Our curated collection of four interrelated papers examines the interplay between work and various stages of parenthood (from pregnancy to adult children) while highlighting the impact on both the parents as well as their children. Specifically, research in our symposium looks at the influence of being pregnant at work (Presentation 1), pregnancy loss at work (Presentation 2), parents work characteristics on their children’s leadership motivations (Presentation 3), and the relative earnings of mothers on children’s gender attitudes (Presentation 4). Our symposium addresses the various stages of working parents and our discussant, Dr. Julie Holliday Wayne, will synthesize the impacts of these stages on workers, their children, and organizations as a whole. Ultimately, this symposium contributes to the AOM 2023 theme of “Putting the Worker Front and Center” by using multiple methodologies and research questions to highlight one of the most important role domains of many workers, that is of being a parent, and examining how this role influences various aspects of their own lives and that of their children. The Influence of Pregnancy on Leader Role Occupancy Author: Shani Pupco; Smith School of Business, Queen's U. Author: Julian Barling; Queen's U. Postpartum Depression following Pregnancy Loss: Role of Supervisor Support on Turnover Intention Author: Mikaila Ortynsky; Telfer School of Management, U. of Ottawa Author: Jennifer Dimoff; Telfer School of Management, U. of Ottawa Author: Stephanie Gilbert; St. Mary's U. Author: Jacquelyn Brady; San Jose State U. Do Parents Influence Children’s Affective Motivation to Lead? Author: Jennifer McNeil; Department of Psychology, Carleton U. Author: Kathryne Dupre; Carleton U. Author: Anika Cloutier; Rowe School of Business, Dalhousie U. Mother’s and Father’s Relative Earning and Children’s Gender Role Attitudes Author: Yanhong Li; Odette School of Business, U. of Windsor Author: Alyson Byrne; Memorial U. of Newfoundland Author: Anika Cloutier; Rowe School of Business, Dalhousie U.
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 | 0.016 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".