A cross-national meta-analytic examination of predictors and outcomes associated with work-family conflict.

Through the lens of boundary theory, we systematically examined cultural context as a moderator of relationships between work-family conflict and its key theoretical predictors (work/family hours and work/family demands) and outcomes (job satisfaction, family satisfaction, and life satisfaction). We used 2 different approaches to examine cultural variation in the strength of work-family conflict relationships: (a) individual cultural values (collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance); and (b) regional cluster configurations (e.g., Eastern Europe, South Asia). Our meta-analytic investigation is based on data drawn from 332 studies (2,733 effect sizes) that represent 58 different countries. Consistent with prediction, results revealed that collectivism moderated WIF/FIW and satisfaction outcomes such that relationships were weaker in more collectivistic contexts than in less collectivistic contexts. Little evidence was found to support power distance or uncertainty avoidance as individual cultural moderators. Findings also indicated that work-family conflict relationships differ in strength as a function of regional clusters, lending support to the use of configural approaches to examine cross-cultural variation. Overall, our findings suggest that domain demands are a robust predictor of work-family conflict across countries and that affective correlates to work-family conflict meaningfully vary in strength as a function of cultural context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

A meta-analysis of work-family conflict and social support.

The relationship between social support and work-family conflict is well-established, but the notion that different forms, sources, and types of social support as well as contextual factors can alter this relationship has been relatively neglected. To address this limitation, the current study provides the most comprehensive and in-depth examination of the relationship between social support and work-family conflict to date. We conduct a meta-analysis based on 1021 effect sizes and 46 countries to dissect the social support and work-family conflict relationship. Using social support theory as a theoretical framework, we challenge the assumption that social support measures are interchangeable by comparing work/family support relationships with work-family conflict across different support forms (behavior, perceptions), sources (e.g., supervisor, coworker, spouse), types (instrumental, emotional), and national contexts (cultural values, economic factors). National context hypotheses use a strong inferences paradigm in which utility and value congruence theoretical perspectives are pitted against one another. Significant results concerning support source are in line with social support theory, indicating that broad sources of support are more strongly related to work-family conflict than are specific sources of support. In line with utility perspective from social support theory, culture and economic national context significantly moderate some of the relationships between work/family support and work interference with family, indicating that social support is most beneficial in contexts in which it is needed or perceived as useful. The results suggest that organizational support may be the most important source of support overall. (PsycINFO Database Record