Work, family, work-family conflict and psychological distress: A revisited look at the gendered vulnerability pathways

Abstact This paper revisited the vulnerability hypothesis to explain the greater level of psychological distress among working women compared to working men. A comprehensive vulnerability model was tested in which work and family stressors and psychosocial resources are directly related to psychological distress and indirectly through work-to-family (WFC) and family-to-work (FWC) conflicts. Data came from a random sample of 989 women and 1,037 men working in 63 Canadian establishments. Multilevel path analyses were performed separately for men and for women. The results show that many work/family stressors and resources are linked to men's or women's psychological distress directly and indirectly through WFC and FWC. However, the z-test used to assess whether the relationships differed significantly between women and men indicated that only two relationships differ significantly between the two groups: experimenting problems with children and a low self-esteem are associated positively to psychological distress through FWC only for women. In addition to showing the specific involvement of work-family conflict in the psychological distress inequality, this study contributes to revealing that testing the differences in the magnitude of the relation offer a more suitable appraisal of the vulnerability mechanism involved in the psychological distress inequality between men and women.