Today’s Research That Should Make You Really Angry
Posted on 19. Feb, 2010 by Brian Reid in moms, research
The “mommy wars” idea that woman can and do judge each other based on their current employment status is a real tragedy and something that has — for years — driven me bonkers. But at the end of the day, we’re all adults, and if some at-home moms want to give the stinkeye to go-to-work moms, it’s not the end of the world. Stupid, yes. Unnecessary, yes. But not off-the-charts tragic.
What is tragic is some new research from Kansas State. Here’s how it went down (from the K-State press release):
The researchers did a study involving undergraduate students, all of whom were single, and 99 percent of the sample had no children. Each participant first listened to one of three interviews that reflected a working mother, a stay-at-home mother and what the researchers called a middle mother.
The working mother said in the interview that she went back to work two weeks after giving birth and worked more than 40 hours per week. The stay-at-home mother reported having stopped working outside of the home after giving birth. The middle mother described taking 18 months away from work after giving birth and then going back to work part time and gradually increasing her work hours.
Then, each participant watched the same video of a mother and her 4-year-old son completing a puzzle and playing a game together. Because of the audiotape, the participants either thought she was a working mother, a stay-at-home mother or a middle mother.
The results? Not only were the go-to-work moms rated more negatively than the other two groups, that negativity extended to the kids. So, apparently, not only are we judgmental of the moms nowadays, we’re punishing the children as well. (I should be clear on the caveats here: these are undergraduates doing the evaluation, and 19-year-old college kids are probably not the most thoughtful or representative group on the planet. But that doesn’t make me less bothered.)
Of course, what I would be fascinated to see is a similar analysis of dads: I’m guessing that no one thinks that kids of working dads are screwups …
Matt
19. Feb, 2010
Glad to have you back! I have to say, this isn’t particularly surprising to me. They researchers paint a pretty negative picture of the working mother. Whether by choice, or economic necessity, going back to work two weeks after giving birth is pretty tragic. They also paint a pretty rosy picture of the middle mother- 18 months off and then easing back to work, what a privilege.
Brian
19. Feb, 2010
You’re absolutely right. The “middle” case was pretty soft. And I don’t think the 2-week leave was all the realistic. I know a lot of high-powered, high-hours go-to-work moms, and pretty much all of them took a good chunk of maternity leave.
Maybe it says something deeper that the working moms were set up to lose here …
Matt
19. Feb, 2010
The study seems to be couched in the “perception” that others have of a mother’s decision. Perhaps Ms. Livengood is really just out to help the working mother considering her quote below:
“Women are going to continue working, and they’re going to continue having children,” Livengood said. “Knowing how their decisions in these arenas are perceived by others may help us understand the foundations of these potential biases and identify ways to support mothers in their work-family decisions.”
That being said, why sample undergraduates rather than people in HR or some other work-life balance decision making roles? (because she is likely a PhD student with no access to HR or people in work-life decision making roles). This is the kind of research that scares me because their seems to be no check on flawed methodology. Look for this research to be quoted by the wingnuts who think Moms should be at home and Dads should be out shooting moose for the evening stew.