Sex Roles

, Volume 70, Issue 7–8, pp 329–342 | Cite as

The Role of Couple Discrepancies in Cognitive and Behavioral Egalitarianism in Marital Quality

  • Brian G. Ogolsky
  • Renée Peltz Dennison
  • James Kale Monk
Original Article


Although gender ideologies and perceptions of equity in the division of household tasks have been associated with marital quality, there is limited understanding of the relationship between discrepancies (in husbands’ and wives’ subjective ideals and accounts of the division of labor) and relationship quality. We examined cognitive egalitarianism (beliefs about gender roles), behavioral egalitarianism (perceptions of the division of household tasks and management), and marital quality among 220 heterosexual, newlywed couples (N = 440) living in east and central regions of the United States. We used multi-level modeling to examine associations between cognitive egalitarianism, behavioral egalitarianism, and marital quality with a specific focus on discrepancies in the reports of husbands and wives. As hypothesized, both husbands and wives had lower marital quality when their cognitive egalitarianism was discrepant from their partner, and such a discrepancy had a greater influence on wives’ reports of marital quality, especially for wives with higher cognitive egalitarianism. Although we expected similar results for the associations between behavioral egalitarianism and marital quality, we found that the strength of the association between wives’ behavioral egalitarianism and marital quality decreased as the discrepancy from their husbands’ behavioral egalitarianism increased. The association between cognitive egalitarianism and marital quality also increased as behavioral egalitarianism increased for wives but not for husbands. The results of this study illustrate the central role of spousal discrepancy in perceptions and enactment of household labor.


Equity Egalitarianism Marital quality Newlyweds Couple discrepancy Household labor 



This research was supported by a USDA/NIFA HATCH grant (Grant # ILLU-793-356) to the first author.


  1. Acitelli, L. K. (1992). Gender differences in relationship awareness and marital satisfaction among young married couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 102–110. doi: 10.1177/0146167292181015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, S. M., & Hawkins, A. J. (1999). Maternal gatekeeping: Mothers’ beliefs and behaviors that inhibit greater father involvement in family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 199–212. doi: 10.2307/353894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Artis, J. E., & Pavalko, E. K. (2003). Explaining the decline in women’s household labor: Individual change and cohort differences. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 746–761. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00746.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bahr, C., Chappell, B., & Leigh, G. K. (1983). Age at marriage, role enactment, role consensus, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 795–803. doi: 10.2307/351792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ball, F. L. J., Cowan, P., & Cowan, C. P. (1995). Who’s got the power? Gender differences in partners’ perceptions of influence during marital problem-solving discussions. Family Issues, 34, 301–321. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1995.00303.x.Google Scholar
  7. Bartley, S. J., Blanton, P. W., & Gilliard, J. L. (2005). Husbands and wives in dual-earner marriages: Decision-making, gender role attitudes, division of household labor, and equity. Marriage & Family Review, 37, 69–94. doi: 10.1300/J002v37n04_05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beere, C. A., King, D. W., Beere, D. B., & King, L. A. (1984). The Sex-Role Egalitarianism Scale: A measure of attitudes toward equality between the sexes. Sex Roles, 10, 563–576. doi: 10.1007/BF00287265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bernard, J. S. (1981). The good provider role: Its rise and fall. American Psychologist, 36, 1–12. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.36.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., & Robinson, J. P. (2000). Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Social Forces, 79, 191–228. doi: 10.2307/2675569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blair, S. L., & Johnson, M. P. (1992). Wives’ perceptions of the fairness of the division of household labor: The intersection of housework and ideology. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 570–581. doi: 10.2307/353243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bolzendahl, C. I., & Myers, D. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974–1998. Social Forces, 83, 759–789. doi: 10.1353/sof.2005.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brooks, C., & Bolzendahl, C. (2004). The transformation of US gender role attitudes: Cohort replacement, social-structural change, and ideological learning. Social Science Research, 33, 106–133. doi: 10.1016/S0049-089X(03)00041-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Claffey, S. T., & Manning, K. R. (2010). Equity but not equality: Commentary on Lachance-Grzela and Bouchard. Sex Roles, 63, 781–785. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9848-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1208–1233. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01208.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cunningham, M. (2001). Parental influences on the gendered division of housework. American Sociological Review, 66, 184–203. doi: 10.2307/2657414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis, S., & Greenstein, T. (2004). Cross-national variations in the division of labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1260–1271. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00091.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DeMaris, A. (2007). The role of relationship inequity in marital disruption. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 177–195. doi: 10.1177/0265407507075409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elloy, D. F., & Smith, C. R. (2003). Patterns of stress, work-family conflict, role conflict, role ambiguity and overload among dual-career and single-career couples: An Australian study. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 10, 55–66. doi: 10.1108/13527600310797531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erickson, R. J. (2005). Why emotion work matters: Sex, gender, and the division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 337–351. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00120.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan, P., & Marini, M. M. (2000). Influences on gender-role attitudes during the transition to adulthood. Social Science Research, 29, 258–283. doi: 10.1006/ssre.1999.0669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferree, M. M. (1987). The struggles of superwoman. In C. Bose, R. Feldberg, & N. Sokoloff (Eds.), Hidden aspects of women’s work (pp. 161–180). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  23. Ferree, M. M. (1990). Beyond separate spheres: Feminism and family research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 52, 866–884. doi: 10.2307/353307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frisco, M., & Williams, K. (2003). Perceived housework equity, marital happiness, and divorce in dual-earner households. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 51–73. doi: 10.1177/0192513X02238520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Galinsky, E., Aumann, K., & Bond, J. T. (2011). Times are changing: Gender and generation at work and home. New York: Families and Work Institute.Google Scholar
  26. Goldberg, A. E., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (2004). Division of labor and working-class women’s well-being across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 18, 225. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.18.1.225.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greenstein, T. N. (1996a). Husbands’ participation in domestic labor: Interactive effects of wives’ and husbands’ gender ideologies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 585–596. doi: 10.2307/353719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greenstein, T. N. (1996b). Gender ideology and perceptions of fairness of the division of household labor: Effects on marital quality. Social Forces, 74, 1029–1042. doi: 10.1093/sf/74.3.1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Greenstein, T. N. (2009). National context, family satisfaction, and fairness in the division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 1039–1051. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00651.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hackel, L. S., & Ruble, D. N. (1992). Changes in the marital relationship after the first baby is born: Predicting the impact of expectancy disconfirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 944–957. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.944.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Helms-Erikson, H. (2001). Marital quality ten years after the transition to parenthood: Implications of the timing of parenthood and the division of housework. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1099–1110. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01099.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hochschild, A. R., & Machung, A. (2003). The second shift. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  33. Huston, T. L. (1994). Courtship antecedents of marital satisfaction and love. In R. Erber & R. Gilmore (Eds.), Theoretical framework for personal relationships (pp. 43–65). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Huston, T. L., Caughlin, J. P., Houts, R. M., Smith, S. E., & George, L. J. (2001). The Connubial Crucible: Newlywed years as predictors of marital delight, distress, and divorce. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 237–252. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.2.237.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson, M. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (1999). Topographical assessment of marital interaction and longitudinal change in newlywed marriage. Personal Relationships, 6, 19–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00209.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3–34. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Karney, B. R., Davila, J., Cohan, C. L., Sullivan, K. T., Johnson, M. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). An empirical investigation of sampling strategies in marital research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 909–920. doi: 10.2307/353411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  39. Klumb, P., Hoppmann, C., & Staats, M. (2006). Division of labor in German dual-earner families: Testing equity theoretical hypotheses. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 870–882. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00301.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kluwer, E. A., Heesink, J. A. M., & Van de Vliert, E. (1997). The marital dynamics of conflict over the division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 635–653. doi: 10.2307/353951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the lion’s share of housework? A decade of research. Sex Roles, 63, 767–780. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9797-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lavee, Y., & Katz, R. (2002). Division of labor, perceived fairness, and marital quality: The effect of gender ideology. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 27–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00027.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lively, K., Stellman, L. C., & Powell, B. (2010). Equity, emotion, and household division of labor. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 358–379. doi: 10.1177/0190272510389012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. G. (1992). You can’t always get what you want: Incongruence between sex role attitudes and family work roles and its implications for marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 537–547. doi: 10.2307/353240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mederer, H. J. (1993). Division of labor in two-earner homes: Task accomplishment versus household management as critical variables in perceptions about family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55, 133–145. doi: 10.2307/352964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Nontraditional undergraduates. Retrieved from the Institute of Education Sciences:
  47. Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2005). To know you is to love you: The implications of global adoration and specific accuracy for marital relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 480–497. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.480.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Norton, R. (1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 141–151. doi: 10.2307/351302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Patterson, C. J. (1995). Families of the baby boom: Parents’ division of labor and children’s adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 31, 115–123. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.31.1.115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Peplau, L. A. (1983). Roles and gender. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L. Houston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L. A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 220–264). New York: WH Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
  51. Perry-Jenkins, M., & Crouter, A. C. (1990). Men’s provider-role attitudes: Implications for housework and marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Issues, 11, 136–156. doi: 10.1177/019251390011002002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Perry-Jenkins, M., & Folk, K. (1994). Class, couples, and conflict: Effects of the division of labor on assessments of marriage in dual-earner families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 165–180. doi: 10.2307/352711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Piña, D. L., & Bengtson, V. L. (1993). The division of household labor and wives’ happiness: Ideology, employment, and perceptions of support. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 901–912. doi: 10.2307/352771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  55. Raudenbush, S. W., Brennan, R. T., & Barnett, R. C. (1995). A multivariate hierarchical model for studying psychological change within married couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 161–174. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.9.2.161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rogers, S. J., & Amato, P. R. (2000). Have changes in gender relations affected marital quality? Social Forces, 79, 731–753. doi: 10.1093/sf/79.2.731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shaw, S. M. (1988). Gender differences in the definition and perception of household labor. Family Relations, 37, 333–337. doi: 10.2307/584572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. South, S. (1995). Do you need to shop around? Age at marriage, spousal alternatives, and marital dissolution. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 432–449. doi: 10.1177/019251395016004002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Steil, J. (1997). Marital equality: Its relationship to the well-being of husbands and wives. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  60. Stevens, D., Kiger, G., & Riley, P. J. (2001). Working hard and hardly working: Domestic labor and marital satisfaction among dual-earner couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 514–526. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00514.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stohs, J. H. (2000). Multicultural women’s experience of household labor, conflicts, and equity. Sex Roles, 42, 339–361. doi: 10.1023/A:1007094120408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Suitor, J. J. (1991). Marital quality and satisfaction with the division of household labor across the family life cycle. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53, 221–230. doi: 10.2307/353146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sullivan, O. (2013). What do we learn about gender by analyzing housework separately from child care? Some considerations from the time-use evidence. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 5, 72–84. doi: 10.1111/jftr.12007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thornton, A., Alwin, D. F., & Camburn, D. (1983). Causes and consequences of sex-role attitudes and attitude change. American Sociological Review, 48, 211–227. doi: 10.2307/2095106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2003). Parenthood and marital satisfaction: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 574–583. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00574.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Usdansky, M. L. (2011). The gender‐equality paradox: Class and incongruity between work‐family attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 3, 163–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-2589.2011.00094.x.Google Scholar
  67. Utne, M. K., Hatfield, E., Traupmann, J., & Greenberger, D. (1984). Equity, marital satisfaction, and stability. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 323–332. doi: 10.1177/0265407584013005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Yperen, N. W., & Buunk, A. P. (1990). A longitudinal study of equity and satisfaction in intimate relationships. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 287–309. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420200403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Voydanoff, P., & Donnelly, B. W. (1999). The intersection of time in activities and perceived unfairness in relation to psychological distress and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 739–751. doi: 10.2307/353574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151. doi: 10.1177/0891243287001002002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zimmerman, T. S. (2003). Intimate partnership: Foundation to the successful balance of family and work. American Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 107–124. doi: 10.1080/01926180301126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian G. Ogolsky
    • 1
  • Renée Peltz Dennison
    • 2
  • James Kale Monk
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.St. Mary’s College of MarylandLexington ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations