How Do Family-Friendly Policies Impact Marital Satisfaction: A Mediation Analysis of Korean Working Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between family-friendly policies and marital satisfaction and whether couple bonding activities mediate this association. This study used data from the Korean Longitudinal Survey of Women & Families (KLoWF), a nationally representative study of Korean women, and estimated fixed-effects models examining whether family-friendly policies are associated with marital satisfaction. Sobel mediation analyses were conducted to investigate whether couple bonding activities mediate the association. Family-friendly workplace policies were positively associated with marital satisfaction (β = 0.531), after accounting for individual-level confounders. Family-friendly workplace policies were also associated with more engagement in cultural activities and physical activities with a partner (βs = 0.042 and 0.068, respectively). Mediation analyses showed that couple bonding activities explained 16.7% of the association between family-friendly workplace policies and marital satisfaction. Family-friendly policies may enhance the quality of working women’s marital life through an increase in engagement in couple bonding activities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".