ABSTRACT
Little empirical research exists on attributions that people make regarding work-family conflict that they experience. Our study used attribution theory to examine the aftermath of work-family conflict episodes. We used a diary method in which respondents reported their daily encounters with work-family conflict, attributions they made about its causes, feelings of guilt and shame they experienced, and their levels of daily family engagement and well-being after work. Based on Ilies et al. (2012) we hypothesized that internal attributions of work-family conflict would be associated with feelings of guilt and shame, and that these emotions would in turn be differentially associated with daily after-work outcomes. We also hypothesized that the degree to which individuals were satisfied with the resolution of their work-family conflict would moderate the relationship between internal attribution and guilt/shame. Results largely supported our hypotheses, with guilt demonstrating a positive link to family engagement while shame showed a negative association. We also found that shame, but not guilt, was negatively associated with daily well-being. One's level of satisfaction with the resolution of work-family conflict emerged as a key variable as well. Lastly, we discuss the theoretical and practical ramifications of our findings.
