Reducing Work-Life Conflict: What Works? What Doesn't?

4.2 Coping with Work-Life Conflict: What Should Employees Do?

As noted above, Canadian employees use a number of strategies to cope with the different forms of work-life conflict. Which ones are effective at helping employees cope with work-life conflict and which are not? This question drives the analysis undertaken below. To answer this question, we looked at the relationship between each of the 13 individual coping strategies and the four forms of work-life conflict included in this study. To determine if different strategies are effective for different groups, the analysis was done twice. Analysis one looked at the impact of gender and job type on the relationship between coping and work-life conflict while analysis two focused on gender and dependent care status. The complete set of findings is provided in Appendix F. Key findings (R² of .04 or higher, α < than .01, Δ in work-life conflict of 0.3 or greater³⁸) are summarized in Tables 15 and 16 and discussed in the section below. Information on how to read Tables 15 and 16 is given in Box Nine.

Table 15: Impact of Individual Coping Strategies on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Dependent Care Analysis
a. Main Effects

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Talked with family or friends	R2 = .038	R2 = .017	R2 = .039	R2 = .041 *
Talked with colleagues at work	R2 = .038	R2 = .017	R2 = .038	R2 = .042 **
Sought help from family or friends	R2 = .038	R2 = .017	R2 = .038	F = 8.77, α = .000 R2 = .044, Δ = 0.3
Sought help from colleagues at work	R2 = .038	R2 = .017	R2 = .038	R2 = .044 **
Just work harder	F = 1163.8, α = .000 R2 = .141, Δ = 0.8	Interaction	Interaction	F = 36.16, α = .000 R2 = .057, Δ = 0.4
Prioritize	Interaction	R2 = .024	R2 = .038	R2 = .038
Delegate	Interaction	R2 = .026	Interaction	R2 = .042 *
Just try to forget about it	F = 226.5, α = .000 R2 = .064, Δ = 0.4	R2 = .028	Interaction	R2 = .052 **
Find another activity to take mind off things	Interaction	R2 = .017	Interaction	Interaction
Reduce the quality of things I do	Interaction	Interaction	Interaction	F = 30.94, α = .000 R2 = .058, Δ = 0.4
Schedule, organize and plan	Interaction	R2 = .017	R2 = .038	R2 = .041 **
Have an alcoholic drink	R2 = .042 **	R2 = .023	R2 = .041 **	R2 = .042 **
Use prescription or other drugs	F = 119.81, α = .000 R2 = .048, ***	R2 = .023	F = 18.29, α = .000 R2 = .041, ***	F = 35.04, α = .000 R2 = .057, ***

Table 15: Impact of Individual Coping Strategies on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Dependent Care Analysis
b. Significant Interactions

Individual coping strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Just work harder	ns	F = 3.44, α = .002 R2 = .091	F = 3.79, α = .001 R2 = .051	ns
Prioritize	F = 2.97, α = .008 R2 = .047	ns	ns	ns
Delegate	F = 5.01, α = .000 R2 = .049	ns	F = 7.22, α = .000 R2 = .046	ns
Just try to forget about it	ns	ns	F = 2.78, α = .01 R2 = .049	ns
Find another activity	F = 6.35, α = .000 R2 = . 041	ns	F = 5.87, α = .000 R2 = .041	R2 = .041 **
Reduce the quality of things do	F = 5.99, α = .000 R2 = .111	F = 3.61, α = .001 R2 = .067	F = 2.45, α = .01 R2 = .071	ns
Schedule, organize, plan	F = 28.5, α = .000 R2 = .041	ns	ns	ns

Table 16: Impact of Individual Coping Strategies on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Job Type
a. Main Effects

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Talked with family or friends	R2 = .025	R2 = .035	R2 = .002	R2 = .028
Talked with colleagues at work	R2 = .026	R2 = .035	R2 = .002	R2 = .030
Sought help from family or friends	R2 = .025	R2 = .025	R2 = .002	R2 = .030
Sought help from colleagues at work	R2 = .025	R2 = .034	R2 = .003	R2 = .028
Just work harder	F = 1194.6, α = .000 R2 = .124, Δ = 0.8	Interaction	R2 = .017	R2 = .045 **
Prioritize	F = 124.8, α = .000 R2 = .041, Δ = 0.3	Interaction	R2 = .002	R2 = .026
Delegate	R2 = .031	R2 = .034	R2 = .002	R2 = .029
Just try to forget about it	F = 243.2, α = .000 R2 = .044, Δ = 0.4	F = 184.9, α = .000 R2 = .048, Δ = 0.3	R2 = .009	R2 = .035
Find another activity to take mind off things	R2 = .030	R2 = .037	R2 = .005	R2 = .028
Reduce the quality of things I do	F = 750.9, α = .000 R2 = .081, Δ = 0.7	F = 663.5, α = .000 R2 = .082, Δ = 0.7	R2 = .028	F = 52.8, α = .000 R2 = .041, Δ = 0.4
Schedule, organize and plan	R2 = .026	R2 = .035	R2 = .003	R2 = .030
Have an alcoholic drink	R2 = .031	F = 103.1, α = .000 R2 = .041, Δ = 0.3	R2 = .002	R2 = .029
Use prescription or other drugs	F = 750.9, α = .000 R2 = .041 ***	F = 112.5, α = .000 R2 = .045, ***	R2 = .002	R2 = .037

Table 16: Impact of Individual Coping Strategies on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Job Type
b. Significant Interactions

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Just work harder	ns	F = 7.2, α = .000 R2 = .111	ns	ns
Prioritize	ns	F = 6.1, α = .000 R2 = .041	ns	ns

Individuals with high role overload use a wide variety of personal coping strategies

Use of eight of the thirteen personal coping strategies examined in this study can be meaningfully linked to the incidence of role overload.³⁹ In all but one of these cases (i.e. prescription drug use), the higher the level of role overload, the greater the use of the coping strategy (i.e. positive association between use of coping strategies and overload). The following observations can be drawn with respect to the relationship between role overload and the use of the various coping strategies.

• There is a strong positive relationship between role overload and the use of three coping strategies for all employees, regardless of gender, job type or dependent care status:
  • just working harder (Δ = +0.7)
  • just trying to forget about it (Δ = +0.4)
  • taking prescription drugs or other medications⁴⁰
• Men and women with higher levels of role overload are, regardless of job type, more likely to try to cope with high overload by:
  • reducing the quality of things they do (Δ = +0.7)
  • prioritizing (Δ = +0.3)

The relationship between the use of the other three coping strategies, find another activity to take one's mind off things, delegate, and schedule and plan, and role overload is more complex and depends on both the gender of the individual and their dependent care status. A more detailed discussion of these strategies (along with the use of priority setting, which is also related to both gender and dependent care status) will be given later in this report.

The following conclusions can be drawn about the link between role overload and personal coping:

• Canadian employees do not use their social support networks to cope with role overload.
  Active coping strategies such as scheduling, prioritizing and delegating appear to help those with dependent care responsibilities cope with role overload.
• Reactive coping techniques, such as working harder, while widely used by Canadian employees in an attempt to cope with all that they have to do, are associated with higher, not reduced, levels of role overload.
• Higher levels of role overload are associated with a reduction in the quality of work. This means that employers that associate long hours with increased productivity are misinformed.
• Escapist strategies are not an effective way to cope with role overload as people who use these strategies report higher levels of role overload.

To understand how employees cope with work-to-family interference you need to understand their work situation

While work-to-family interference is significantly associated with the use of 11 of the 15 coping strategies, only 6 can be considered substantive using the criteria outlined above. The fact that 4 of these associations were observed only in the gender by job type analysis suggests that an employee's ability to cope with this form of work-life conflict depends more on their work situation than their circumstances at home.

All Canadian employees with higher levels of work-to-family interference, regardless of gender, job type or dependent care status, are more likely to try to cope with this form of work-life conflict by

• just working harder (Δ = +1.1)
• reducing the quality of things they do (Δ = +0.8)

In addition to the above, when job type is taken into account, men and women, with high levels of work-to-family interference, were more likely to:

• just try to forget about it (Δ = +0.4)
• have an alcoholic drink (Δ = +0.3)

The relationship between the final two coping strategies, take prescription medication and prioritize, depends on both gender and job type. More details on these findings will be given below.

This study indicates that employees tend to use reactive coping and avoidance strategies to cope with work-to-family interference. The fact that such strategies are focused on reducing the unpleasant physical and mental symptoms associated with work-life conflict, not with the identification and elimination of the cause of the interference, is consistent with the fact that these strategies are associated with higher rather than lower levels of interference.

To understand how employees are coping with family-to-work interference, you need to understand their family circumstances

The relationship between personal coping and family-to-work interference is very different from those reported with respect to role overload and work-to-family interference in a number of key ways. First, the relationship between this form of work-life conflict and the individual coping strategies was very weak when gender and job type were taken into account. None of the relationships was significant and in 8 of the 13 cases, the R² (i.e. the amount of variation in family-to-work interference explained by the coping strategy when gender and job type are considered) was less than 1%. This suggests that this form of interference is not influenced by the extent to which an employee engages or does not engage in a particular coping strategy. It would also suggest that coping with this form of work-life conflict is not associated with job type. Second, while six of the strategies (work harder, delegate, try to forget, reduce the quality of things you do, find another activity to take mind off things, take prescription drugs) were substantively associated with family-to-work interference, in all cases the impact of the strategy depended on the employee's gender and dependent care status. Details on each of these relationships will be outlined later in this section.

None of the personal coping strategies examined in this study help to reduce caregiver strain

This research initiative was not able to identify any personal coping strategies that were associated with reduced levels of caregiver strain. The data did, however, identify several links between coping and the incidence of caregiver strain that are worthy of note. These include the following:

• Employees with higher levels of caregiver strain are, regardless of their gender, their job type or their dependent care status, more likely to try to cope by reducing the quality of the things they do (Δ = +0.3).
• Employees with higher levels of caregiver strain are, regardless of their gender or their dependent care status, more likely to try to cope by:
  • just working harder (Δ = +0.4)
  • seeking help from family or friends (Δ = +0.3)

The relationship between use of prescription drugs and caregiver strain, while also substantive, does not appear to be linear. Details on this relationship are presented below.

Social support is not linked to the incidence of work-life conflict

The data indicate that the use of social support coping strategies (i.e. getting help from colleagues at work and from friends and family, talking to colleagues at work and friends and family) is not linked to work-life conflict. With one exception,⁴¹ none of these strategies was significantly associated with any of the forms of work-life conflict examined in this research. These findings suggest two things. First, an individual's level of work-life conflict is not a good predictor of whether or not they will seek help from others -- some people (regardless of their gender, job type and dependent care responsibilities) will seek help, while others will not. Second, none of these strategies is associated with a decline in work-life conflict. This is unfortunate as many Canadians try to cope with work-life conflict by looking for social support (i.e. 45% of employees talk with family and friends daily and one in three talks to their colleagues at work daily as a way of coping with stress).

Active coping strategies help employees with dependent care responsibilities cope with high levels of role overload

Employees who use active coping strategies to cope with work-life conflict try to attack the source of the stress by prioritizing, delegating work to others and scheduling, planning and organizing their time more effectively.

The analysis indicates that the use of all three of these strategies is significantly and substantively associated with higher levels of role overload (i.e. the more overloaded the individual, the more likely they are to try to cope by prioritizing, delegating and scheduling/planning). As noted earlier, the impact that the use of these coping techniques has on role overload depends on the dependent care status of the employee. The relationship in all three cases is similar (Figure 42):

• For men and women without dependent care, greater use of all these coping strategies is associated with higher levels of role overload (i.e. a positive association between the use of these strategies and role overload).
• For men and women with dependent care, on the other hand, the use of these strategies is not associated with a substantive increase in role overload (i.e. role overload does not change substantively with increased use of these strategies).

These findings suggest that the use of active coping strategies is an effective way for those with dependent care to cope with role overload (i.e. these strategies stave off an increase in overload). This conclusion is supported by the fact that in the gender by job type analysis, when dependent care status is not taken into account:

• The use of two of the active coping strategies (scheduling and delegating) is not significantly associated with role overload.
• Prioritizing is positively associated with increased levels of role overload, regardless of gender or job type.

Active coping strategies are not linked to the incidence of role interference or caregiver strain

The results indicate that the use of active coping strategies is not linked to the incidence of work-to-family interference, family-to-work interference or caregiver stain. With two exceptions, ⁴² none of these strategies was significantly associated with these three forms of work-life conflict. These findings are unfortunate as many Canadians seek to cope with work-life conflict by prioritizing (69% use this strategy daily), scheduling (29% use this strategy daily) and delegating (27% use this strategy daily).

The use of prioritizing was positively associated with work-to-family interference in the gender by job type analysis. Unfortunately, these findings reflect the increased tendency on the part of those in managerial and professional positions to cope with such conflict by putting the completion of work responsibilities ahead of their duties at home.

The use of delegation was positively associated with family-to-work interference in the gender by dependent care analysis. This suggests that men and women with dependent care cope with this form of conflict by delegating, to others, family responsibilities that get in the way of work.

Escapist tactics help employees without dependent care cope with work-life conflict

Employees who use escapist strategies to cope with work-life conflict try to forget about the source of their conflict and find another activity to take their mind off things. Both these strategies leave the original source of the stress unscathed and focus on healthful strategies to improve how people feel. While escapist strategies may partially help those without dependent care responsibilities to cope with role overload (Figure 43) and family-to-work interference (Figure 44), they are not effective for those with dependent care responsibilities. Consider the following:

• For men and women without dependent care responsibilities, finding another activity to take their mind off things is negatively associated with role overload (Δ = -0.3). No such relationship was observed for those with dependent care responsibilities.
• For men and women without dependent care responsibilities, just trying to forget about it and finding another activity to take their mind off things was associated with either a plateau effect (of trying to forget) or a decline in (finding another activity) family-to-work interference. No such impact was noted for those with dependent care responsibilities. In fact, employees with child care and/or elder care who try to cope with family-to-work interference by just trying to forget about their problems experience increased levels of such conflict with greater use (Δ = +0.3).

Our conclusion that escapist strategies are not an effective way to cope with work-life conflict is further supported by the following findings:

• Employees who just try to forget about things are, regardless of gender, job type or dependent care status, more likely to report higher levels of role overload (Δ = +0.4) than their counterparts who do not use such strategies.
• Employees who just try to forget about things are, regardless of gender or job type, more likely to report higher levels of work-to-family interference (Δ = +0.3) than their counterparts who do not use such strategies.

Employees who use reactive coping techniques are significantly more likely to experience increased work-life conflict

Employees who use reactive coping techniques try to deal with the stress associated with higher levels of work-life conflict in an unhealthy fashion. They drink alcohol, take prescription drugs or other medication, just try to work harder, and reduce the quality of their work. All of these strategies, while perhaps able to make employees feel temporarily better, are not sustainable in the long term. The link between the use of reactive coping strategies and work-life conflict is described in detail below.

Working harder does not help employees cope with work-life conflict

About 43% of the respondents attempted to cope with work-life conflict by just working harder. This suggests that this strategy certainly does not help employees cope and may exacerbate work-life conflict. This conclusion is supported by the fact that greater use of this coping strategy is associated with substantially higher levels of role overload, work-to-family interference, family-to-work interference and caregiver strain for both men and women (i.e. a positive association between the use of this strategy and all four forms of work-life conflict).

Employees who cope by working harder report higher role overload

The relationship between this coping strategy and role overload is very important for several reasons. First, working harder is the single strongest predictor of role overload. Second, working harder has a very strong direct impact on levels of role overload as it is positively associated with the use of this strategy, regardless of gender, job type and dependent care status. Third, the difference in role overload between those who rarely use this strategy and those who use it on a daily basis is quite substantive (Δ = +0.8). While the causality of this finding is difficult to ascertain (i.e. people who are overloaded may work harder in an attempt to cope and/or people who cope by working harder experience an increase in role overload), the conclusion one arrives at in either case is the same: this strategy does not help employees deal with role overload.

Busy people who try to cope by working harder report greater role interference

Similar to what was observed in the role overload analysis, working harder is a very strong predictor of work-to-family interference. In this case, however, the relationship between working harder and work-to-family interference depends on the situation at home and work. The following observations can be drawn from this phase of the analysis.

• Working harder has a stronger association with work-to-family interference for men and women in management and professional positions (Δ = +0.7) than for their counterparts in other positions (Δ = +0.5). This relationship, shown in Figure 45a, suggests that employees with heavier demands and expectations at work (i.e. managers and professionals) who think that they can cope by working harder will experience higher levels of work-to-family interference.
• Working harder has a stronger association with work-to-family interference for men and women with dependent care responsibilities (Δ = +0.8) than for men and women without dependent care (Δ = +0.6). This relationship, shown in Figure 45b, suggests employees with heavier demands and expectations at home (i.e. employees with child and/or elder care) who think that they can cope by working harder will experience higher levels of work-to-family interference.

Figure 42: Impact of Active Coping on Role Overload
a. Prioritize

Figure 42: Impact of Active Coping on Role Overload
b. Schedule, Organize and Plan Time More Effectively

Figure 42: Impact of Active Coping on Role Overload
c. Delegate to Others

Figure 43: Impact of Escapism on Role Overload

Figure 44: Impact of Escapism on Family-to-Work Interference
a. Just Try to Forget About It

Figure 44: Impact of Escapism on Family-to-Work Interference
b. Find Another Activity to Take Mind Off Things

Figure 45: Relationship Between Just Work Harder and Work-to-Family Interference
a. Gender by Job Type

Figure 45: Relationship Between Just Work Harder and Work-to-Family Interference
b. Gender by Dependent Care

A comparable set of findings can be observed with respect to family-to-work interference (Figure 46). The association between family-to-work interference and working harder is stronger for men and women with dependent care responsibilities (Δ = +0.4) than for men and women who do not have such responsibilities at home (Δ = +0.2). These findings suggest, regardless of the source of the demands (home or work), employees who try to cope by working harder will experience greater role interference.

Reducing the quality of work does not help employees cope with work-life conflict

One in ten of the Canadian employees in our sample indicated that they lowered the quality of the things they did on a daily basis in an attempt to cope with work-life conflict. The findings with respect to the use of this strategy and work-life conflict are very similar to those observed with working harder and support our contention that reactive coping is associated with increased levels of work-life conflict.

There is a strong association between higher levels of role overload and lower quality work

There is a strong association between reducing the quality of one's work and role overload. While the relationship between the use of this strategy and role overload is fairly straightforward when gender and job type are taken into account (strong positive association between reducing the quality of things done and role overload regardless of gender or job type), the same cannot be said when dependent care status is taken into account (Figure 47). It would appear that while the positive association between the use of this strategy and role overload still holds, regardless of gender, the effect varies depending on responsibilities outside of work. The nature of this relationship suggests that lowering the quality of things one does is a more effective coping strategy for those with dependent care (Δ in role overload from use rarely to use daily of +0.5 for men and women with dependent care) than those without (Δ in role overload from use rarely to use daily of +0.8 for men and +0.7 for women without dependent care).

While the causality of this finding is difficult to ascertain (e.g. people who are overloaded may reduce quality in an attempt to cope and/or people who cope by reducing quality experience an increase in role overload as they have to re-do some tasks), the conclusion one arrives at in either case is the same: this strategy does not help employees deal with role overload. Also worthy of note is that this relationship was not observed in the job type analysis, suggesting that those with dependent care are coping by lowering the quality of things they do at home, rather than at work.

Lowering standards seems to help females cope with work-to-family interference

The findings with respect to the link between lowering quality of work and work-to-family interference are very similar to those reported for role overload. Again, we can see that the relationship is strong. We also note the strong positive association between reducing the quality of things done and work-to-family interference when gender and job type are taken into account. Finally, we can see that the impact of this strategy varies depending on both gender and dependent care status (Figure 48). In this case, it would appear that men, regardless of their dependent care status, do not appear to benefit from this strategy (Δ = +0. 7 in work-to-family interference from use rarely to use daily). For women, on the other hand, especially those without dependent care, this strategy may offer some form of assistance in terms of coping with work-to-family interference (Δ in interference from use rarely to use daily of +0.5 for women without dependent care and +0.6 for women with dependent care).

The findings with respect to role overload and work-to-family interference led us to ask the following question: Where are employees reducing the quality of things they do -- at work or at home? Examination of the findings with respect to lowering the quality of things one does and family-to-work interference provides us with some insights into this question. As can be seen in Figure 49, the use of this strategy is not associated with family-to-work interference for men and women without dependent care. It is, however, positively associated with the incidence of family-to-work interference for men and women with dependent care (Δ = +0.5). This implies that men and women with dependent care are able to cope with work-to-family interference by lowering standards at work. The cost of this strategy is higher family-to-work interference. The implication of these findings is that employers interested in quality of work need to implement strategies to reduce role overload and enhance work-life balance.

Figure 46: Relationship Between Just Work Harder and Family-to-Family Interference
a. Gender by Dependent Care

Figure 47: Relationship Between Lower Quality of Things Done and Role Overload

Figure 48: Relationship Between Lower Quality of Things Done and Work-to-Family Interference

Figure 49: Relationship Between Lower Quality of Things Done and Family-to-Work Interference

Figure 50: Relationship Between Have Alcoholic Drink and Family-to-Work

Figure 51: Relationship Between Take Prescription Medicine and Work-Life Conflict
a. Gender by Dependent Care

Figure 51: Relationship Between Take Prescription Medicine and Work-Life Conflict
b. Gender by Job Type

Employees with higher levels of role interference are more likely to cope by using alcohol

With two exceptions, the relationship between work-life conflict and using alcohol to cope with stress is not significant. The first exception is worthy of note in that it shows a substantive relationship between family-to-work interference and alcohol consumption for men with dependent care responsibilities (Figure 50). No such relationship was observed for men and women without dependent care or for women with dependent care. The second relationship is between alcohol consumption and work-to-family interference. In this case, higher forms of interference are associated with an increased use of alcohol (Δ = +0.3), regardless of gender or job type.

Moderate use of prescription medicine is associated with highest levels of conflict

As can be seen by looking at the relationships outlined in Figure 51, the data paint a consistent picture with respect to the use of prescription medicine and work-life conflict. While employees with low levels of work-life conflict are significantly less likely to use prescription medicine, moderate users of prescription medicine (i.e. weekly) report significantly greater work-life conflict than employees who take medication daily to cope with stress. Our confidence in these findings is strengthened by the fact that the curvilinear form of these relationships is virtually identical, regardless of the type of work-life conflict being considered. It appears that prescription medicine can partially alleviate all four forms of work-life conflict, but only if taken on a daily basis.

Reactive coping does not reduce caregiver strain

Finally, it is important to note that the association between the use of a number of reactive coping strategies and caregiver strain was substantive. Respondents with higher levels of caregiver strain, regardless of gender, are more likely to try to cope with this form of work-life conflict by:

• just working harder (Δ = +.04)
• reducing the quality of things they do (Δ = +0.4)

As noted earlier, employees with higher levels of caregiver strain also make more use of prescription drugs.

Four coping strategies are linked to all forms of work-life conflict

Only four of the individual coping strategies were significantly associated with all four forms of work-life conflict: schedule and plan, reduce the quality of things done, use prescription drugs and work harder. Furthermore, three of these coping strategies fall into the category of reactive coping, a form of coping that focuses on reducing the symptoms of stress but is not sustainable over time. These findings are important as they indicate that:

• Canadians are not coping effectively with work-life conflict.
• There is no one personal coping strategy that will effectively reduce all forms of work-life conflict.

Table 17: Link Between Work-Life Conflict and Decision to Have Children

Coping Strategies	% Who Use Frequently
	Males		Females		Total
	Mgr/Prof	Other	Mgr/Prof	Other
Had fewer children because of their job	15	15	35	25	24
Not started/delaying starting family because of work demands	19	17	42	28	28

Table 18: Impact of Childbearing Decisions on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Dependent Care Analysis
a. Main Effects

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Had fewer children because of work	F = 558.3, α = .000 R2 = .094, Δ = 0.5	F = 1061.2, α = .000 R2 = .111, Δ = 0.8	F = 446.1, α = .000 R2 = .059, Δ = 0.5	F = 23.56, α = .000 R2 = .046, Δ = 0.3
Not started family because of career	F = 107.6, α = .000 R2 = .051, Δ = 0.6	F = 384, α = .000 R2 = .073, Δ = 0.7	Interaction	Interaction

Table 18: Impact of Childbearing Decisions on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Dependent Care Analysis
b. Significant Interactions

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Not started family because of career	ns	ns	F = 7.72, α = .000 R2 = .047	F = 4.59, α = .000 R2 = .051

Table 19: Impact of Childbearing Decisions on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Job Type
a. Main Effects

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Had fewer children because of work	Interaction	Interaction	Interaction	R2 = .038
Not started family because of career	R2 = .034	F = 335.5, α = .000 R2 = .082, Δ = 0.7	R2 = .012	R2 = .035

Table 19: Impact of Childbearing Decisions on Work-Life Conflict: Gender by Job Type
b. Significant Interactions

Individual Coping Strategy	Overload	Work to Family	Family to Work	Caregiver Strain
Had fewer children because of work demands	F = 7.13, α = .000 R2 = .094	F = 10.48, α = .000 R2 = .131	F = 7.0, α = .000 R2 = .054	ns