This article is a response to the commentaries made regarding our original article (Lachance-Grzela and Bouchard 2010), which reviewed the state of research on the division of household labor and summarized the main theoretical perspectives used to explain why women continue to complete the larger share of household tasks. In the following pages, we underline how the commentators were helpful in identifying some limitations of the current research on the allocation of household labor and in suggesting relevant paths for future studies. We discuss points on which the commentators agree, such as the need to achieve a better understanding of all forms of inequalities, and points on which they disagree, such as the way researchers should proceed when studying the impact of national context. We also reply to each individual commentary. In response to Coltrane (2010), we discuss the causal loops that exist between gender inequalities in the private and public spheres. We agree with Davis (2010) who proposed that studying the question from other angles could help understand why household labor continues to be divided along gendered lines. We add to Claffey and Manning’s discussion (2010) of the paradox which stems from the fact that couples often perceive an objectively unequal division of household labor as fair to both partners. In conclusion, we take the opportunity to address additional issues related to the division of household labor. For instance, from a clinical psychology standpoint, we discuss how couples who strive to achieve a more egalitarian division of household labor do so.
Sex Roles – Springer Journals
Published: Nov 11, 2010
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera