Literature review of work and family conflict

Literature re charm of wrick and family difference of opinionThis chapter introduces and apologises the most-valuable suppositious and practical resource for an pinch of the involution betwixt rifle and family among married female t distributivelyers in Malaysia. This chapter consists of two contributions namely section I Theoretical example of wreak-family contrast from Western and Islamic perspectives. For section II Literature Review on Work-Family dispute. Focus of the subject range is to examine the concussion of ferment-family infringe- energy WFC efficacy and apparitional cope (RC) on work-family remainder (WFC) and affectionate welf atomic number 18 among female teachers in Malaysia. The admit also validates the instruments. Then, the investigateer estimate the kinships. This chapter explained on conjectural perspectives that support the theoretical framework as foundation and land of the test that being conducted.Apart from that, this section also coveres the basis and background of the probe of conceptual framework research on the perspective of theoretical background in Western and Islamic Perspectives. It involves on the get downment of a ride on the relationships among the variables in WFC efficacy, RC, WFC and well-being. Many researchers shake up attempted to fabricate a single dumbfound for WFC contravention in connection with well-being. Theories and works discussed in this section were the relevant in work-family conflict, which provided signifi buttt contributions in the construction of the proposed theoretical framework. The work is establish on the theoretical foundations and empirical evidences obtained from literature reviews, which consists of several elements.Overviews of Work-family difference of opinion Theories reference surmise by Kahn et al.,Spill everywhere possiblenessConservation of Resources poseur (COR)by get of Work-Family bureau drag IncompatibilityOverview of the possibility of offbeatModel of teachers examine by Kyriacou Sutcliffe)Social Cognitive Theory by BanduraReligious act Theory by PargementMoral Development Theory by chirp GilliganOVERVIEW OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT THEORIESSeveral theories have been received a great great screw attention in the literature through with(predicate)out the past few decades. some of the studies foc apply on six competing theories as a theoretical framework in work-family conflict research usage scheme, spill over, compensation, air division, conservation of resources manikin (COR) and Integration. In this study, the researcher focuses only on several theories that related to WFC which are subroutine possibleness, spillover and COR. The main focus of the study is to examine the relationship of WFC efficacy and phantasmal make do (RC) on work-family conflict (WFC) and well-being (WB) of married female teachers in Malaysia.Work-family conflict is a type of inter-billet conflict in which the component pa rt demands stemming from matchless ground (work or family) are mismated with type demands stemming from an opposite field of honor (family or work) (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985 Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, Rosenthal, 1964).According to Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal (1964), roles are the result of expectations of early(a)s about appropriate expression in a particular position. aim conflict is get windd as the psychological tension that is aroused by conflicting role pressures. role surmise suggests that conflict occurs when individuals engage in quaternate roles that are incompatible (Katz Kahn, 1978). Based on the discussion of the work-family conflict and well-being model, Figure 2.1 provides the summary.Role Theory(Kahn et al., 1964)Spillover Theory(1980)Model of Work-Family Role Pressure(1985)Conservation of Resources Model(1989)Model of instructor tautness(1978)The Relationship in the midst of individualality and Stress(Bolger and Zuckerman, 1995)Social C ognitive Theory(Bandura, 1977)Religious Coping(Pargament, 1990)Role Theory (Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal, 1964) or so of the research on the work-family interface has been guided by role possibility (e.g., Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, Rosenthal, 1964 Katz Kahn, 1978). According to role guess, the demand of ninefold roles has given an concern for well-being. This rationale basic everyy fits the logic of a accentuateor-strain model (Karasek Theorell, 1990), with work-family conflict as sampleor. Similarly, much of the research on WFC has been based on the premise that multiple roles inevitably create strain (e.g., Frone et al., 1992, Allen Grigsby, 1997) as suggested by role surmisal (Katz Kahn, 1879).Due to limited amount of metre and energy that individuals have to replete their multiple roles at the same term, they tend to experience tense up (Goode, 1960).Specific ally, the role theory (Duxbury Higgins, 1991) postulates that expectations associated with w ork and family roles asshole lead to physical and psychological strain in two ways. First, the demand of multiple roles within the work and family domain after partful lead to general increase in workload. Second, expectations surrounding either of these roles heap evoke pressures that dominate the time of an individual and interfere with expectations associated with the performance of the separate role. However, the usefulness of role theory as a basis for crossing over research is that it underscores the inter-relations amongst a focal person and his / her role senders in the work and family setting.Spillover TheoryAccording to the spillover explanation, it whitethorn refer to the shock that the blessedness and shanghai from the work domain has on the family domain or the impact that the contentment and affect from family domain has on the work domain. Additionally, the relationship between work and non-work activities can be unequivocal or negative. Positive spillove r refers to office staffs in which the satisf fill, energy and thought of accomplishment derived from the work environment carry over into the non-work domain.Conversely, negative spillover occurs when bothers, fatigue or frustration carry over from the work domain to the non-work domain (Bartolonme Evens, 1980). Other researchers have conceptualized spillover in a identical manner. For example, Zedeck and Mosier (1990) asserted that increase satisfaction (dissatisfaction) in the work domain leads to increased satisfaction (dissatisfaction) with carriage. Spillover is a surgery whereby experiences in one roles to a greater extent similar. seek has examined the spillover of mood, values, skills and behaviours from one role to another (Edwards and Rothbard, 2000).Therefore, spillover is comparablely to move on work-family conflict when an affect like dissatisfaction with work consistently spills over in to ones family life, thus increase role conflict. This role conflict s tems from the difficulty associated with trying to maintain a satisfying radix life when dissatisfaction from work continues to interfere. Therefore, the central premise of spillover is reciprocity or bidirectional relationship of affect in the work and family domains. In other word, conflict between work and family occurs because the affect from one domain (work) is incompatible with the other domain (family). In this study spillover theory explain the negative effect in relations with work and family roles respectively.Model of Work-Family Role Pressure IncompatibilityThe model of work-family role pressure incompatibility (figure 2.3) which was proposed by Greenhaus Beutell (1985) encompassed the antecedents of interrole conflict and offered detailed explanations of the types of interrole conflict, which were used widely by researchers in the work-family interface. The model interpret two main areas, the sources of conflict in both work and nonwork domains and the role pressu re incompatibility. The role pressure incompatibility reflected the interrole conflict construct in the present study and was classified into leash forms time-based conflict, strain-based conflict and behavior-based conflict. However, in this study examined only two forms as defined by Netemeyer et al. (1996, p.401), that work-family conflict as a form of interrole conflict in which the general demands of, time devoted to and strain created by the job interfere with performing family-related responsibilities.Greenhaus Beutell (1985) proposed the model of work-family role pressure incompatibility (figure 2.3) encompassed the work domain and family domain that explained in detailed the types of interrole conflict, which were used widely by researchers in the work-family interface. The model depicted domains from work and family which affect from three forms of interrole conflict namely time-based conflict, strain-based conflict and behavior-based conflict. However, in this study exa mined only two forms as defined by Netemeyer et al. (1996, p.401), that is work-family conflict as a form of interrole conflict in which the general demands of, time devoted to and strain created by the job interfere with performing family-related responsibilities.FAMILY compassIllustrative PressuresTime YoungChildrenSpouseEmploymentLargeFamilies figure FamilyConflictLow spousesupportBehaviour expectationsfor Warmthand desolationRole Pressure IncompatibilityTime devoted to one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements for another role.Strain green groceriesd by one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of another roleBehaviour required in one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of another role.WORK heavensIllustrative PressuresHour worked TimeInflexible work-scheduleShiftworkRole conflict StrainRole AmbiguityBoundary-spanningactivitiesexpectations for Behavioursecretivenessand objectivity ostracise Sanction for NoncomplianceRole SalienceFigure 2.3. Wor k-Family Role Pressure Incompatibility (Adapted from Greenhaus Beutell, 1985 pp.78)The strength of this model was the conceptual attributes made among the types of interrole conflict. Therefore, this model back up in the victimization of the theoretical framework in the current study by suggesting the different types of interrole conflict to be evaluated in both work-and nonwork-domains. For instance, in work domain, if the amount of working hours were too much makes it difficult to fulfill the roles in family domain.Conservation of Resources Model (COR Hobfoll, 1989)Often work-family researchers have not based their predictions on strong conceptual frameworks (Hobfoll, 1989). The field has been dominated by role theory (Kahn et al., 1964), which is undoubtedly the most cited theory by work-family researchers, together with spillover and segmentation theory (Zedeck Mosier, 1990). Although these theories offer a rationale for the consequences of work-family conflict, they are li mited in explaining actual behavior, interaction between actors, or decision making or prioritizing in case of work-family conflict (Poelmans, 2004).Thus, to develop a comprehensive theoretical background for this research, the study also included conservation resources model by Hobfoll (1989) that can explain, predict, and help solve capers that individuals face when balancing work and home responsibilities (Clark, 2000, p. 749). Hobfoll explain that when an individual perceives or experiences environmental circumstances that threaten or cause depletion of resources, he or she psychologically responds in ways that minify loss of resources. For example, resources might include egotism-esteem and employment (Hobfoll, 1989). In this study, WFC-efficacy and ineffable contend as resources of work-family conflict that hopes to constrain work-family conflict and increase well-being of married female teachers in Malaysia.Grandey and Cropanzano (1999) were among the first researchers to apply COR to examine work-family conflict (WFC). They argue that COR theory is an improvement over the use of role theory. Role theory is limited in its ability to explain work-family relationships because it fails to specify lead variables that might affect the relationship between work-family stressors and stress outcomes. COR theory, in contrast, proposes that interrole conflict leads to stress because resources are lost in the process of juggling both work and family roles (p. 352). The role of work and family stress as an antecedent of work-family conflict can also be explained by the COR model as suggested by Grandey and Cropanzano (1999). The COR model proposes that individuals act to acquire and maintain a variety of resources, much(prenominal) as objects, energies, condition and personal quality.COR theory provides a framework for dread the nature of stress, based on the belief that individuals seek to obtain, build and nurture their resources. The theory has been applied to a variety of setting, including lodge psychology, disaster research, and organizational research. Furthermore, the COR model appears to be a promising perspective for advancing our understanding of work-family relationships.Overview of the Psychological Well-being TheoriesAssociations between work-family conflict and psychological scathe have been widely explored and suggest that increased conflict is associated with increased psychological distress ( Major et al., 2002 Stephens et al., 2001)Many different well-being conceptualisations have been provided but, as Gasper (2002), stop consonant out, the term well-being is a concept or abstraction used to refer to whatever is assessed in an evaluation of a persons life situation or being. In short, it is a description of the state of individuals life situation. In addition, Easterlin (2001), for example, goes so far as to equate explicitly happiness, subjective well-being, satisfaction, utility, well-being and welfare.Ka thryn Dianne (2009) argued that employee well-being consists of subjective well-being (life satisfaction and dispositional affect), workplace well-being (job satisfaction and work-related affect) and psychological well-being (self acceptance, positive relations with others, environmental outgoy, autonomy, purpose in life and personal growth).In recent years, researchers, educators, policy-makers and politicians have been directly pertain with well-being, which have been viewed variously as happiness, satisfaction, enjoyment, contentment and engagement and fulfillment or a combination of these and other, hedonic and eudaimonic factors. It has also been recognized that well-being and the environment are intimately interconnected and may consume different forms. Well-being is complex and multifaceted. It is rateed as a state and a process. Well-being includes personal, interpersonal and collective inescapably which captivate each other. Well-being may take different forms, whic h may conflict across groups in society, requiring an overarching settlement. Well-being may also take different forms over the life course of an individual. Interventions to parent well-being may take different forms. They should be conducted at individual, community and societal direct.In the 50 years since Jahodas (1958) seminal report outlining the complexness of defining mental health, significant progress has been made towards the definition and conceptualization of this concept. One noteworthy development was the turn away from definitions of health as the absence of disease (Keyes 2006). Later this was cemented by the work of authors such as Diener (1984), Ryff (1989), Waterman (1993) and Ryff and Keyes (1995). Essentially they argued that mental health should be defined as the presence of wellness rather than the absence of disease.Some speculation surrounds the causative ordering of these two constructs some believe life satisfaction is a determinant of job satisfactio n (whereby overall life satisfaction spills over into satisfaction with life domains) whilst others believe job satisfaction is one of the determinants of overall life satisfaction (Rode 2004). However, the title of the paper, Building a Better Theory of Well-being prepared by Easterlin (2007) shows that Western theories of well-being were inconclusive.Model of Teacher Stress (cf. Kyriacou Sutcliffe, 1978a, p.3)Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1978a) adopted the theoretical conceptualization of Lazarus to predict school teachers stress reactions. Figure 2.4 presents a simplified version of the model. According to the model, potential stressors are seen as antecedents of teacher stress.Characteristic of the Individual TeacherBiographical reputation e.g. support, self-efficacyTeacher StressNegative effectsResponse correlates psychological physiologic behaviouralChronic SymptomsPsychosomatic coronary mentalCoping MechanismsTo reduce perceived threatPotential StressorsPhysical psychologicalFi gure 2.4 A Model of Teacher Stress (cf. Kyriacou Sytcliffe, 1978a, p.3)Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1978a) make an explicit distinction between stressors which are mainly physical (e.g., many pupils in the classes) and those which are fundamentally psychological (e.g., poor relationships with colleagues). Coping attempts can help to deal with nerve-wracking situations, that is, to reduce the perceived threat of those situations. If contend mechanisms are inappropriate, stress occurs. Teacher stress is seen mainly as a negative affect with diverse psychological (e.g., job dissatisfaction), physiological (e.g., high blood pressure), and behavioral (e.g., absenteeism) correlates. In the long run these negative stress effects lead to physiological and biochemical changes accompanied by psychosomatic and even chronic symptoms like coronary shopping center diseases. Finally, reference bookistics of the individual teacher are assumed to enamour the process. Based on this model, the prese nt study examined WFC-efficacy as a characteristic of the individual teacher on WFC and well-being and religious cope as a coping mechanism understanded as a predictors in dealing with WFC and well-being.To be clear, WFC is the main dependent variable and well-being as a second dependent variable. WFC-efficacy and religious coping are analyzed as predictors of WFC and well-being Furthermore, the study also integrate WFC as a go-between between both predictors respectively.Banduras Social Cognitive TheoryPerceived self-efficacy is implicated with judgments of personal capability, whereas self-esteem is concerned with judgments of self-worth. People make causative contributions to their let psycho fond functioning through mechanisms of personal agency. Among the mechanisms of agency, none is more central or pervasive than peoples beliefs of personal efficacy. Perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in ones capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to m anage prospective situations. Efficacy beliefs influence how people think, feel, trip themselves, and act. A central question in any theory of cognitive regulation of motivation, affect, and action concerns the issues of causality. Do efficacy beliefs operate as causal factors in human functioning? The findings of diverse causal tests, in which efficacy beliefs are systematically varied, are consistent in showing that such beliefs contribute significantly to human motivation and attainments (Bandura, 1992a).The substantial body of research on the diverse effects of perceived personal efficacy can be summarized as follows people who have a low sense of efficacy in given domains shy away from difficult tasks, which they view as personal threats. They have low aspirations and weak commitment to the goals they look at to pursue. When face with difficult tasks, they dwell on their personal deficiencies, the obstacles they will encounter, and all kinds of adverse outcomes.Banduras socia l cognitive theory states that behavior, environment, and person/cognitive factors are all important in understanding personality. Bandura coined the term reciprocal determinism to describe the way behavior, environment, and person/cognitive factors interact to create personality.BehaviorPerson and cognitive Environment factorsFigure 2.6 Banduras Social Cognitive TheoryBanduras social cognitive theory emphasizes reciprocal influences of behavior, environment, and person/cognitive factors. The environment can determine a persons behavior, and the person can act to change the environment. Similarly, person/cognitive factors can both influence behavior and be influenced by behavior.Self-efficacy is the belief that one can master a situation and produce positive outcomes. Bandura and the others have shown that self-efficacy is related to a number of positive developments in peoples lives, including solving problems, becoming more sociable, initiating a diet or an example program and ma intaining it, and quitting smoking (Bandura, 2001, 2006, 2007a, 2007b Schunk, 2008 Schunk Zimmerman, 2006). Self-efficacy influences whether people even try to develop well-informed habits, as well as how much effort they expend in coping with stress, how long they persist in the face of obstacles, and how much stress and pain they experience (Fisher, Schilinger, 2006). Researchers also have found that self-efficacy is linked with prospering job interviewing and job performance (Judge Bono, 2001 Tay, Ang, Van Dyne, 2006).Making positive changes to promote our health can be challenge. But fortunately, we all have a variety of psychological and social tools at our disposal to help us in the journey to a new, healthier life. There are three business leaderful tools self-efficacy, motivation, and religious faith. Self-efficacy is the individuals belief that he or she can master a situation and produce positive outcomes. If there is a problem to be fixed, self-efficacy-that is, ha ving a can-do attitude-is related to finding a solution. Self-efficacy is the power of belief in you. Not only self-efficacy related to initiating and maintaining a lusty lifestyle religious faith is, too (Krause, 2006 Park, 2007).Pargaments Religious Coping Theory (1990)Religious-coping responses may eliminate or resolve the stressful probe, thereby preserving or improving the health of the person. Such a meditation suggests a model of religious commitment that has both direct and validatory effects on health, with the indirect effects operating through religious support as well as religious coping. Religious coping is dealing with life effectively within the research for entailment toward the numinous (Pargament, 1997).Pargament (1990, 1997) suggested a process through which religion plays a part in coping. The process of coping activities and coping outcome, and religion can be a part of each of the central constructs of coping. Religion can contribute to the coping process , shaping the character of live events. In addition, religion itself is shaped by the elements of this process. People make for with them a system of general beliefs, practices, aspirations, and relationships which affect how they deal with difficult moments. A number of studies have definitely linked religious participation to a longer life (Hummer others, 2004 Krause, 2006 McCullough others, 2000).Religious-coping responses may eliminate or resolve the stressful probe, thereby preserving or improving the health of the person. Such a hypothesis suggests a model of religious commitment that has both direct and indirect effects on health, with the indirect effects operating through religious support as well as religious coping. Religious coping is dealing with life effectively within the research for significance toward the sacred (Pargament, 1997).Religious coping is expressed in the cognitive construction of the triggering event, in the ends sought and in the methods used to rea ch these ends. Religious coping may be involved in the conservation or transformation of ends. Pargaments (1997) model is potentially useful in determining how this religious coping influence work-family conflict.Pargament (1997) proposed a model that integrates religion into Lazarus and Folkmans (1984) classic tripartite theory of coping consisting of primary and secondary appraisals of a stressor cognitive or behavioral strategies to deal with the event and sought-after outcomes of coping. Specifically, Pargament (1997) theorized that life events can be interpreted in religious term (i.e., religious coping appraisals), that religion offers people of all ages unique religious pathways to cope with s tress (i.e., religious coping processes), and that religion can imbue with sacred significance the destinations that people hit to reach by means of coping processes.In Pargaments model, religious coping is a broad construct, defined as a search for significance in times of stress in w ays related to the sacred (Pargament, 1996, 1997). The term the sacred highlights what makes religion unique. The core of the sacred consists of concepts of God, the divine, and the transcendent, but approximately any object can become part of the sacred through its association with or representation of divinity (Pargament Mahoney, in press). And, unlike other personal and social institutions, religion connects the search for significance during times of stress with higher powers and beliefs, experiences, rituals and institutions associated with supernatural forces. In this frame of reference, spirituality is conceptualized as the heart of religion and defined as the search for the sacred (Pargament Mahoney, 2002).Issues on feminist movement in Work-Family ConflictCarol Gilligans Moral Development TheoryAs human beings grow we somehow develop the ability to assess what is near or wrong, acceptable or unacceptable. In other words we develop deterrent exampleity, a system of lea rned attitudes about social practices, institutions, and individual behavior used to evaluate situations and behavior as good or bad, unspoilt or wrong (Lefton, 2000). One theorist, Carol Gilligan, found that morality develops by looking at much more than legal expert. The following will discuss the morality development theory of Carol Gilligan and its implications.Carol Gilligan was the first to consider gender differences in her research with the mental processes of males and females in their moral development. In general, Gilligan mention differences between girls and boys in their feelings towards caring, relationships, and connections with other people. More specifically Gilligan noted that girls are more concerned with maintenance, relationships, and connections with other people than boys (Lefton, 2000). Thus, Gilligan hypothesized that as younger children girls are more prone towards caring and boys are more inclined towards justice (Lefton, 2000). Gilligan suggests th is difference is due to gender and the childs relationship with the mother (Lefton, 2000).Kohlbergs theory is comprised of three levels of moral development becoming more complex. Kohlbergs moral development theory did not take into account gender, and from Kohlbergs theory Gilligan found that girls do in-fact develop moral orientations differently than boys. According to Gilligan, the central moral problem for women is the conflict between self and other. Within Gilligans theoretical framework for moral development in females, she provides a sequence of three levels (Belknap, 2000).At level one of Gilligans theoretical framework a womans orientations is towards individual survival (Belknap, 2000) the self is the sole object of concern. The first transition that takes place is from being self-serving to being responsible. At level two the main concern is that good is equated with self-sacrifice (Belknap, 2000). This level is where a woman adopts societal values and social membershi p. Gilligan refers to the second transition from level two to level three as the transition from goodness to truth (Belknap, 2000). Here, the needs of the self must be deliberately uncovered as they are uncovered the woman begins to consider the consequences of the self and other (Belknap, 2000).One study by Gilligan Attanucci (1988) looked at the distinction between care and justice perspectives with men and women, primarily adolescence and adults when faced with real-life dilemmas. The study showed that a) concerns about justice and care are represented in peoples thinking about real-life moral dilemmas, but that people tend to focus on one or the other depending on gender, and b) there is an association between moral orientation and gender such that women focus on care dilemmas and men focus on justice dilemmas (Gilligan Attanucci, 1988).Gilligans theory has had both positive and negative implications in the field of psychology. One positive implication is that her work has in fluenced other psychologists in their evaluations of morality. Also, Gilligans work highlights that people think about other people in a humanly caring way. Gilligan also emphasised that both men and women think about caring when faced with relationship dilemmas, similarly both are likely to focus on justice when faced with dilemmas involving others rights.On the other hand, the most criticized element to her theory is that it follows the pigeonhole of women as nurturing, men as logical. The participants of Gilligans research are limited to in general white, middle class children and adults (Woods, 1996. In general, literature reviews have provided that Gilligans work needs a broader more multicultural basis. In work-family conflict study, Gilligans theory can explain regarding the different between female and male in manipulation work and family domain as general. The moral orientations and development of women in this theory has shows that women is more caring or in other word more responsible in terms of handling family related condition equality to men.In summary, Carol Gilligan has provided a framework for the moral orientations and development of women. Gilligans theory is comprised of three stages self-interest, self-sacrifice, and post-conventional thinking where each level is more complex. Overall, Gilligan found that girls do develop morality, differently than others. Gilligans theory holds particular implications for adolescent girls specifically as this is typically when they enter the transition from level two to level three. However, as do all theories Gilligans has advantages and disadvantages that should be considered when looking at moral orientations.The bill of Work-Family Conflict ConstructSince its early development, theoretical discourse in the field of work-family conflict has been confined to a few dominant theories, such as role theory (Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek Rosenthal, 1964 Katz Kahn, 1978) and spillover theory (Zedeck Mosi er, 1990). Since Zedecks (1992) call for the refinement and development of theory in the work-family field, a series of alternative theories have been suggested as a conceptual basis for explaining work-family conflict, such as Hobfolls (1989) conservation of resources theory (Grandey Cropanzano, 1999).Most research on the work-family interface has focused on work-family conflict (Allen et al., 2000). Conflict between work and