Work hard, play hard?: a comparison of male and female lawyers' time in paid and unpaid work and participation in leisure activities.

Wallace, Jean E. ; Young, Marisa C.

THERE HAS BEEN A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT of research that documents how women and men spend their time in different work and home tasks (e.g., Becker and Moen 1999; Bird and Fremont 1991; Leete and Schor 1994; Sayer 2005). This research has clearly demonstrated that women spend more time performing household and childcare tasks and men spend more time in paid work (Duxbury and Higgins 2001). While a sizable body of literature has examined gender differences in paid work and housework, little research has investigated how these gender differences in paid and unpaid work relate to participation in leisure activities (Sayer 2005). There are a few exceptions, including Sayer's (2005) recent work as well as Bianchi and her colleagues' (e.g., Bianchi et al. 2000; Bianchi, Robinson, and Milkie 2006), but other studies are often out dated or based on small, nonrepresentative samples. Much of these data, while providing detailed minute-by-minute descriptions of how individuals spend their time in specific household or childcare activities, do not typically examine the relationships between the work, family, and leisure domains, nor whether the relationships among these domains differ for women and men.

The first goal of this paper is to examine how much time professional women and men devote to paid and unpaid work and how this time relates to their participation in different leisure activities. That is, is the amount of time spent in paid work and unpaid work (i.e., housework and childcare) associated with how much individuals participate in active, passive, or social leisure activities? Our second goal is to explore whether time in paid and unpaid work has gender-specific effects on leisure participation for professional women and men. Canadian literature clearly shows that women and men spend different amounts of time in paid and unpaid work (Duxbury and Higgins 2001; Frederick 1995; Zukewich 2003), but what is less clear is whether this has different relationships with their participation in leisure. For example, does each additional hour women spend in household or childcare activities have the same relationship with their leisure participation as each additional hour in unpaid labor has for men? Or does each additional hour men spend in paid work have the same relationship with leisure participation as it does for women?

In examining these issues, we rely on data collected from lawyers working in a variety of different legal settings. Lawyers are ideal for several reasons, one being that they are renowned for the long hours they work and another is that many lawyers are required to keep careful track of the hours they work for clients on their cases or files. Thus, they are an ideal sample when it comes to asking them to report on the time they spend in various activities as many are quite accomplished at doing so during their work days. In addition, Canadian literature on the legal profession has clearly demonstrated that lawyers work hard and long hours (Hagan and Kay 1995; Wallace 2005) and we examine in this paper whether they play hard as well. That is, are the demands of their work negatively related to their ability to engage in leisure activities and disengage from work? Many lawyers may have the financial resources to afford the monetary costs associated with leisure, but we examine whether they have the time. In addition, by focusing on a single occupation, such as law, it allows us to control for certain work-related factors that may reflect shared professional norms and expectations regarding allocations of time.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, we introduce literature on leisure that distinguishes different types of leisure activities as well as presents explanations as to the benefits of participating in leisure activities. Next, we discuss the intersection of paid work, unpaid work, and leisure and how these may differ for men and women. Following this, we indicate the control variables included in the subsequent analyses. Next, data and methods are presented and the results of our analyses are summarized. We close by discussing the findings of this study and their implications for research in this area.

WHY STUDY LEISURE?

In the literature, leisure is defined as activities that a person voluntarily engages in when they are free from any work, social, familial, or personal care responsibilities (Esteve, San Martin, and Lopez 1999). It is a vital part of life that may offer time to relax, recover, or refresh from other responsibilities, particularly those associated with paid and unpaid work (Mattingly and Bianchi 2003). It is important to note, however, that leisure activities are not always completely devoid of work and/or family involvement. For example, parents may engage in leisure with their children (Bianchi et al. 2006; Mattingly and Bianchi 2003) and professionals may include colleagues and/or clients in their leisure activities (Coleman 1990; Kay and Hagan 1999).

Caldwell (2005) identifies a number of different features of leisure that may enhance a person's resiliency in encountering difficult life experiences and offer a respite from the demands of their work and nonwork responsibilities. These features include leisure activities that: are personally meaningful, intrinsically interesting, and/or challenging; offer social support and friendships; contribute to a sense of competence and/or self efficacy; offer a sense of personal control, choice, and self-determination; and are relaxing and/or distract the individual from their other responsibilities.

Several different explanations have been posed to explain the benefits of leisure that highlight how leisure may offer opportunities for recovery, protection, and/or resiliency in response to the challenges of daily life. For example, Sonnentag and her colleagues (Fritz and Sonnentag 2006; Zijlstra and Sonnentag 2006) suggest that recovering from the daily strains and demands of work is an important part of a healthy lifestyle. Sonnentag (2003) explains how the effort and energy expended at work draws upon an individual's resources that may negatively affect their performance, mood, and overall well-being. Zijlstra and Sonnentag (2006) propose that leisure may offer an opportunity for replenishing one's resources or recovering from daily life demands through simply changing activities or by being involved in activities that are freely or intrinsically chosen rather than externally prescribed and regulated.

Iwasaki and his colleagues (Iwasaki 2003, 2006; Iwasaki, Mactavish, and MacKay 2005; Iwasaki and Mannell 2000) illustrate how leisure may be characterized as "a positive diversion or 'time out' from stress-inducing situations and thoughts, and a context for rejuvenation and renewal" (Iwasaki et al. 2005:93). In this way, participating in leisure activities may act as a diversion by offering alternative, positive experiences that deflect thoughts about the current responsibilities and demands in an individual's life (Trenberth and Dewe 2002). In terms of rejuvenation and renewal, leisure may help in the formation of a different perspective toward a particular difficult situation or help individuals feel refreshed when returning to their regular day-to-day activities. Through a "time out," gaining a better sense of perspective, or feeling renewed, individuals may be more resilient in responding to their work and family obligations and better able to cope with the challenging events in their lives.

In this paper, professionals' participation in leisure is examined in terms of passive, active, and social leisure activities. Passive leisure refers to activities that are restful, restorative, or recuperative in nature (Bird and Fremont 1991; Mannell and Kleiber 1997) or a quiet "time out" from stressful situations (Iwasaki et al. 2005). Passive leisure activities are not physically exertive and include, for example, watching television or movies, listening to music, and reading books or newspapers. For the purposes of our study we focus more on forms of passive leisure, such as reading or watching television, rather than general relaxation. Active leisure, in contrast, involves some degree of physical exertion (Bird and Fremont 1991; Iwasaki et al. 2005; Mannell and Kleiber 1997) and includes a variety of recreational activities, such as running, walking, swimming, and cycling.

A third form of leisure that is explored in this paper is social leisure. Social leisure refers to leisure activities that involve interaction with other people. This form of leisure has received minimal attention in the literature possibly because research tends to focus on the social support derived from participating in such activities rather than the amount of participation in the activities themselves (Caltabiano 1994; Iwasaki et al. 2005). Social leisure activities can include spending time with friends, attending a social function or party, or a host of other interactive behaviors (Iwasaki et al. 2005). Such pursuits can contribute to a sense of community or belonging that is fostered through communication and interaction among members of a social group (Lloyd and Auld 2002). This form of leisure is not active in that it is neither exertive nor physical. It also differs from passive leisure, because conversing and attending social events involve either participation and/or some type of attention directed toward others (Lee and McCormick 2006). The literature suggests that social activities can be significant in fostering positive perceptions of life quality (Lee and McCormick 2006; Lloyd and Auld 2002) and mental health (Caltabiano 1994; Iwasaki et al. 2005).

THE INTERSECTION OF PAID WORK, UNPAID WORK, AND LEISURE FOR MEN AND WOMEN

How we allocate our time to different activities can be viewed in terms of choices and trade-offs, since time is a finite resource (Hilbrecht, Zuzanek, and Mannell 2008). The time availability perspective suggests that the more time spent in one role means the less time available for another. For example, the more time allocated to meeting work, home, and family obligations results in less time available for leisure. This is consistent with the idea of role strain that is often used in examining the difficulty in simultaneously fulfilling the competing demands associated with work and family roles.

As more women are employed than ever before, even when they become mothers, more attention has been paid to the consequences of having a busy life on free time or leisure for both men and women. Terms, such as "the double shift" and the "time squeeze," suggests that the combination of work and family roles are squeezing out time for leisure and negatively impacting North Americans' quality of life (Hochschild 1989, 1997; Schor 1991). Recent research highlights these trends among Canadian men and women (Duxbury and Higgins 2001). As professionals are increasingly placing priority on both their work and family roles and responsibilities, it may compromise the time and energy they have left over for leisure activities. Based on the trends reported in the literature, we hypothesize:

H1: Greater time spent in paid and unpaid work will be negatively related to participation in leisure activities.

The amount of time spent in paid and unpaid work and leisure may differ for men and women. Societal expectations of women's commitment to the domestic sphere can influence their participation in leisure activities (see Blair-Loy 2003; Hays 1996). As well, gender inequalities in leisure may be a product of different societal constraints placed on women's and men's paid and unpaid work as certain behaviors associated with being a "man" or "woman" are acted and reenacted according to prescribed gender norms (see Connell 2002; Ferree 1991; Hochschild 1989 for more discussion on gender construction in domestic and paid labor).

Hays (1996) articulates common understandings of motherhood, characterized as intensely child-focused and completely selfless. Personal leisure may not necessarily align with these expectations of intensive mothering because the latter activities are self-rewarding, personally fulfilling, and individually oriented. The disjuncture between definitions of motherhood and leisure activities suggest mothers are less likely to participate in leisure, compared with fathers and Hill and Stafford's (1980) research supports these claims. The authors found that an employed mother's ability to work and care for her children was "financed" by reductions in her personal care time, including sleeping, and in passive leisure, such as watching television. Some have suggested that women may feel uncomfortable or even guilty about spending time on leisure and relaxing for their own personal enjoyment (Henderson and Bialeschki 1991). Working mothers with the combination of paid work, housework, and childcare tend to allocate their time at the expense of their leisure time, health, and well-being (Duxbury and Higgins 2001; Zukewich 2003). These results provide further evidence of the negative consequences associated with the double shift working women experience across paid and unpaid work.

As a result of their heavier care giving responsibilities, women not only experience less total leisure time than men but also lower quality leisure time (Mattingly and Bianchi 2003). Women have less time to relax from the demands of paid and unpaid work, and the time they do spend in leisure often involves other activities that are related to their primary responsibilities of housework and childcare. These trends are particularly acute among professional women, but may vary by age (Duxbury and Higgins 2001; Gauthier 2002). A recent Canadian study highlights that professional and managerial women spend approximately 12 hours more on childcare per week compared with professional and managerial men and compared with women in more blue or pink collar types of occupations (Duxbury and Higgins 2001). Duxbury and Higgins suggest that these trends may reflect professional women's personal expectations to be "super moms" and outperforming others when it comes to childcare. The additional time professional women spend on childcare suggests that female lawyers likely have less time for themselves, including leisure time. Furthermore, research suggests that women are more likely to multitask as they combine housework or childcare with leisure activities (Bianchi et al. 2006; Bittman and Wajcman 2000; Mattingly and Bianchi 2003).

In contrast, men appear to be better at protecting their free time from their family responsibilities, whereas women's leisure is more likely interrupted, intertwined, and fragmented because of the demands of their family's needs. While women have increased their participation in the labor force, both Canadian and American data suggest men spend more time in paid work with higher wages and more prestigious jobs in addition to more time in leisure activities (Beaujot and Lui 2005; Frederick 1995; Mattingly and Bianchi 2003; Spain and Bianchi 1996; Zukewich 2003).

H2: Women will spend more time in household and childcare activities than men, whereas men will spend more time in paid work and participate in more leisure than women.

Even though men have increased the amount of time they spend in childcare and housework, Canadian and American data suggest that women continue to spend roughly seven hours more in these unpaid activities per week (Bianchi et al. 2000; Marshall 2006; Sayer 2005). Moreover, the household activities that men perform can generally be done when it is convenient for them (e.g., yard work, household repairs) in contrast to the tasks that women remain largely responsible for (e.g., tending to children's needs, cooking dinner), which often require daily attention usually at specific times. Thus, the time men spend in household activities generally offers more flexibility and opportunity for leisure activities. As well, research shows that women have less free time than men and that employment, marriage, and children restrict women's free time more than men's (Sayer 2005). Since women face a more significant time shortage compared with men, because their work time limits their household and family time, women may find it more difficult to set aside their family tasks for a leisure activity (Hochschild 1989). As a result, we expect that women's work and family responsibilities may have a stronger negative impact on women's leisure participation compared with men's.

H3: Greater time spent in paid and unpaid work will have a stronger negative relationship with leisure for women compared with men.

Control Variables

We control for a number of different conditions in our multivariate analyses. First, we control for three family status variables: marital status, number of children, and the presence of preschool-aged children. Marital status, number of children, and presence of preschool children may capture time demands not picked up by the unpaid work variables. Certain demands may not be explicitly calculated into time estimates, such as planning and coordinating work and family activities and schedules, or worrying about one's spouse or children that may occur during any type of activity (Mattingly and Sayer 2006). Research has shown that the more children one has and the younger they are, the greater the childcare demands on parents, particularly for mothers (Bianchi 2000; Bittman and Wajcman 2000). Canadian time use data show that marriage increases paid and unpaid work for men and women, which may influence leisure time (Beaujot and Lui 2005).

Second, we control for two physical characteristics: health and age. We expect that healthier adults are more likely to participate in leisure activities, particularly active leisure (Bird and Fremont 1991). As people age, their obligatory time commitments associated with work and family generally lessen as the most intense periods of work-family demands are behind them (Gauthier 2002; Mattingly and Sayer 2006). We expect that older individuals will face greater time pressures and report less participation in leisure activities.

Third, we control for three work-related variables: where the respondent works, income, and work salience. Work setting is taken into account as the ebbs and flow of legal practice vary significantly across different places where lawyers may work. While law firms generally require longer work hours than corporate or government offices, they usually offer more flexibility in terms of when those hours are worked (Kordana 1995; MacEachen, Polzer, and Clarke 2008). Higher income may provide greater resources to outsource household labor and childcare and thereby reduce unpaid work demands (Mattingly and Sayer 2006). In addition, it may allow for participation in leisure activities that are more expensive in terms of membership, special equipment, or other accessories. Work salience captures the extent to which work is central to an individual's definition of self and may be related to working long hours as well as placing a lower priority on leisure activities.

DATA AND METHODS

Sample

The data are from the 2000 "Juggling It All Survey" that collected information on practicing lawyers' work and family experiences and attitudes. The survey was distributed to all practicing lawyers in the Province of Alberta. Of the 5,921 lawyers contacted, 1,829 completed the survey yielding a 31 percent response rate. A comparison of the sample data to the provincial figures from the Law Society of Alberta using chi-square tests (available from authors) indicates that similar proportions of lawyers are represented in the survey data by gender, work setting, and city. For the purposes of this paper, the sample is restricted to lawyers working full time, which includes respondents working 35 or more hours per week (N = 1,451).

The sample includes 907 (63 percent) men and 544 (37 percent) women. Of the 907 men, 87 percent are married or living common law and 63 percent have children. Of the 544 women, 73 percent are married or living common law and 45 percent have children. Approximately 59 percent of men and 51 percent of women work in law firms, while the remaining work in either solo, corporate, or government type positions. In terms of average weekly work hours, men report an average total of 53 hours, and women report an average of 51.

In regards to their spouse's work situation, 72 percent of the married and cohabiting male lawyers in our sample have wives who were employed at the time of the study and 15 percent of the employed wives were also lawyers. The male lawyers' wives earned CDN$53,405 annually, on average, and worked about 47 hours during the week, including time at the office and at home. On average, their working wives spend about three hours a day on childcare tasks and 2.5 hours a day on household tasks on days that they work. In contrast, 95 percent of the married and cohabitating female lawyers in our sample report that their husbands were employed at the time of the study and 28 percent were married to lawyers. The husbands of the female lawyers earned annual incomes that averaged CDN$91,536 and they work close to 50 hours per week including time at the office and at home. The female lawyers' husbands spend about two hours on childcare and 1.5 hours on household tasks during workdays.

Measures

The 14 leisure items included in the questionnaire were constructed from 120 lawyers' responses to an open-ended interview question from an earlier study that asked how they usually spend their leisure time (refer to Wallace 2002) for a detailed description of this study). Each participant identified, on average, three or four leisure activities, and in total they identified 56 different activities. The items constructed for the questionnaire were based on the most popular activities reported by the 120 interview participants. Passive leisure was measured by four items where respondents indicated how often they: watch television or videos; read a book, newspapers, or magazines; go to the movies; or work on hobbies at home. Active leisure was measured by five items where respondents reported how often they: work out or go to the gym; run or jog; walk for pleasure; play organized sports; or cycle for pleasure. Social leisure was measured by five items that indicated how often respondents: visit family or friends at their homes; talk with friends on the phone; go out for dinner with friends; attend club or community group meetings; or attend church. For all three leisure variables, the responses range from "less than once a year" (coded 1) to "almost daily" (coded 7) and the responses were summed to compute a total frequency score. While time diary measures of time spent in different daily activities can be very detailed regarding task specificity and time use, research using similar measures to the ones employed in this study, that are not based on time diaries, have demonstrated that such measures are appropriate for analyzing time spent in paid work and household and childcare tasks (e.g., Brines 1994; Coltrane 2000; Suitor, Mecom, and Feld 2001).

Work hours were measured in several ways in this study. We included self-report measures of respondents' average total hours worked including time spent working at the office and at home. Average weekly hours worked in the evenings and on weekends were also reported by respondents. Together, these three indicators of work hours provide a comprehensive representation of the hours worked by respondents in a given week. To measure weekly time spent in household and childcare activities, respondents were asked to report separately for weekdays and weekends, "about how much time do you spend on home chores, such as cooking, cleaning, repairs, shopping, yard work, banking?" and "about how much time do you spend with your children, taking care of then, playing with them, feeding them, etc.?" The weekday figures were multiplied by five and the weekend figures by two. These total figures were then summed to produce two weekly averages; one for weekly hours spent on household activities and one for weekly hours spent on childcare activities. Those who do not have any children were assigned a value of zero for the time spent on childcare activities.

Marital status was coded 1 for those married or cohabitating and 0 for all other responses. Number of children is the number of children under 18 that respondents reported were currently living at home. Preschool-aged children was coded 1 if respondents had children under six years of age and 0 if otherwise. Health was measured by a self-rated question that asked "Compared with other people your age, how would you describe your health?" The responses ranged from poor (coded 1) to excellent (coded 5). This measure of general health has been reported to be reliable and strongly correlated with more "objective" health measures, such as physicians' assessments (Bird and Fremont 1991). Age was coded by subtracting respondents' date of birth and from the year the survey was distributed. Work setting was coded 1 for those working in law firms and values of0 were assigned to those working in other settings (e.g., government, private corporations, or solo practice). To measure annual income, respondents were asked to report their total annual earnings from the practice of law in the year before the survey before taxes and other deductions were made. Finally, work salience was measured by a scale created from three items: "I am very absorbed in my work"; "My work is a very important part of who I am"; and "I am deeply committed to my work." Responses ranged from strongly disagree (coded 1) to strongly agree (coded 5). Responses were summed and divided by three to compute a mean score where higher scores correspond to greater work salience ([alpha] = .733)

Statistical Analyses

First, we compare women and men using mean difference tests (Table 1). This allows us to test Hypothesis 2; whether and to what extent women's and men's participation in leisure and paid and unpaid work differs. Next, Hypotheses 1 and 3 were tested using ordinary least squares (OLS) multiple regression. We used the pooled sample of women and men to test Hypothesis 3 by including 13 cross-product, gender-interaction terms (one for each independent variable) to determine whether the regression coefficients differ significantly for women and men. Thirteen additional models were estimated for each form of leisure. Each interaction term was entered, analyzed, and then removed from the main effects model before entering the subsequent term. At each stage, the overall fit of the model was compared with the main-effects model using the reported [R.sup.2] and t-statistics. Sixteen of the possible 39 gender interactions involving paid and unpaid work and leisure were found to be statistically significant. Finding that work, household, and childcare activities are associated with leisure differently for each gender, we present the regression results separately for women (Table 2) and men (Table 3). By doing so we can better interpret the similarities and differences in coefficients across the two genders.

RESULTS

Gender Mean Difference Results

Results from the gender mean difference tests are presented in Table 1. Overall, men participate in significantly more leisure than women, regardless of the type of activities involved. That is, men participate in significantly more active, passive, and social leisure activities compared with women, which is consistent with the patterns reported in recent Canadian data (Marshall 2006; Zukewich 2003). In addition, the results presented in Table 1 provide support for Hypothesis 2. As hypothesized, women report spending more time on household and childcare activities compared with their male counterparts, who report an average of three hours less per week in both of these activities. Also as predicted by Hypothesis 2, men report spending significantly greater weekly hours in paid work in total as well as on weekends compared with women. Men and women are similar in that they average working almost two hours per week in the evenings.

Turning next to the control variables, we see that the men in our study are generally older, more likely to be married and have more children than the women. The men are more likely to work in a law firm and earn significantly more than the women as well. Both genders report similar assessments regarding their health and their work salience.

OLS Regression Results for Men's and Women's Leisure

As indicated above, 16 of the possible 39 gender interactions involving paid and unpaid work and leisure were found to be statistically significant. We therefore present the results separately for men (Table 2) and women (Table 3).

Starting first with the results for paid work, we see that the more time men spend in paid work on weekends is the only work time variable that is negatively related to their participation in active, passive, and social leisure (Table 2), which offers some support for Hypothesis 1. The total number of hours they work per week at home and at the office, as well as the amount of time they spend working in the evenings are unrelated to their participation in any form of leisure. In contrast, the pattern of results is somewhat different for women (Table 3). Their total weekly work hours are negatively related to their participation in social leisure activities, and their opportunities for passive leisure are negatively related to additional hours they spend working in the evenings and weekends, supporting Hypothesis 1. Women's participation in active leisure is unrelated to the time they spend in paid work. The results also show that there are significantly stronger negative relationships for women than men between total weekly hours and evening hours and passive or social leisure, which supports our prediction in Hypothesis 3.

Turning next to the results for time spent in housework and childcare, we find several unexpected results. It was hypothesized (Hypothesis 1) that the more time spent in both paid and unpaid work would be negatively related to leisure participation. We see instead that the time men devote to housework is positively related to passive and social leisure and unrelated to active leisure (Table 2), whereas the time women devote to housework is unrelated to all three types of leisure (Table 3). The results for one's involvement in childcare are also not as predicted. For men, the amount of time spent in childcare is positively related to their participation in active leisure and unrelated to their participation in passive and social leisure (Table 2). For women, the time they spend in childcare is negatively related to engaging in active and passive leisure and unrelated to their social leisure participation (Table 3). In sum, the results show that hours spent in housework are positively related to passive and social leisure for men but unrelated for women, suggesting that men's housework time benefits, rather than restricts, their ability to participate in leisure. In addition, men's participation in childcare activities is also positively related to their participation in active leisure, but negatively related to women's active and passive leisure.

The results for the control variables also reveal several important patterns. The family-status control variables show that women who are married participate in less passive and social leisure than unmarried women, whereas married men participate less in social leisure but participate to the same degree in active or passive leisure as unmarried men. Women with preschool-aged children are less engaged in active or passive leisure than women without young children, whereas whether men have preschool-aged children is unrelated to their leisure activities. The results for the physical characteristics show that, for both women and men, health is positively related to participation in active and social leisure and age is negatively related to active leisure. The work-related control variables show that working in a law firm may be positively related to active and social leisure activities whereas income is unrelated to leisure. Work salience appears positively related to leisure, particularly social leisure, which may suggest that this form of leisure could be work related.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study set out to test three hypotheses that address the relationships between paid and unpaid work and leisure for professional women and men. Our mean difference tests show that, as hypothesized, men spend more time in paid work and leisure compared with women, whereas women spend more time in housework and childcare.

We also hypothesized that the more time spent in paid and unpaid work would be negatively related to participation in leisure activities, particularly for women. An interesting pattern in our findings reveals that even though men spend more time in paid work, only working on weekends seems relevant in limiting their leisure activities. The longer hours they work over the entire workweek or in the evenings are not significant in explaining the degree to which they participate in leisure. In contrast, for women, work time is negatively related to their leisure activities, particularly in terms of their total work hours and social leisure and working in the evenings and their passive leisure.

Another unexpected set of findings is that the time men spend in housework or childcare is either unrelated or positively related to their leisure participation, while the time women spend in housework is unrelated to their leisure participation. As predicted, the time women spend in childcare is negatively related to their active and passive leisure. These results suggest that men's greater overall opportunities for leisure compared with women's stem from unanticipated relationships between men's involvement in housework and childcare and their leisure activities.

In addition to the gendered relationships of paid and unpaid work time and leisure, we also found that marital status and the presence of preschool-aged children are differentially related to leisure for women and men. For women, being married or having preschool-aged children is negatively related to their leisure activities, but for men these family status variables are less relevant or unrelated to their leisure. This pattern of findings is consistent with the notion that family obligations, whether captured through time spent in housework or childcare or the control variables of being married or having young children, are more important in restricting women's participation in leisure than men's. We explore several possible explanations for these findings in greater detail below.

One explanation for the pattern of findings that unpaid obligations are either unrelated or positively related to men's leisure but negatively related to women's may be because men "earn" more leisure time when they help out around the house. Fathers may feel more entitled to rewards for their contributions for both their paid and unpaid work in the form of more time for themselves and their leisure pursuits, whereas mothers may have a greater sense of responsibility for taking care of the household and children that is not seen to deserve special recognition in the form of more free time (Deutsch 1999). At the same time, men's contributions to unpaid work are generally more highly valued than women's (Thompson 1991). That is, when husbands help out with housework or childcare, it is often viewed as a more significant and valued contribution than women's day-to-day performance of the same activities. As a result, husbands and wives may believe that men's contributions deserve more praise, appreciation, and rewards (Sanchez 1994; Thompson 1991). A time out from the demands of paid and unpaid work may be one of the ways that men are rewarded for their family contributions (Nomaguchi, Milkie, and Bianchi 2005). Future research might explore the extent to which women and men feel they earn or deserve free time for themselves.

In addition, explanations of the gendered interrelationships among family and work roles may help us to better understand the gendered links between family and leisure roles. Simon (1995) convincingly demonstrated that the work and family roles are more interconnected and compatible for men as they fulfill their familial role of breadwinner through their work role, whereas for women the roles are more independent and incompatible as they feel that performing their work role prevents them from adequately fulfilling the nurturing roles of mother and spouse. Along similar lines, we might argue that men's family and leisure roles may be more overlapping and compatible compared with women's. For example, mothers continue to do almost twice as much of the routine, custodial childcare activities (e.g., feeding and dressing them), while fathers devote significantly more of their childcare time to interactive types of activities (e.g., playing with them, talking, or reading to them) (Bianchi et al. 2006). Fathers might be simultaneously satisfying their need for leisure as well as their responsibility for childcare by primarily contributing to interactive childcare activities that may involve more enjoyable and play-oriented activities. In contrast, the custodial activities performed by mothers are typically more independent and less amenable to inclusion of leisure activities. Future research might examine the extent to which mothers' and fathers' parenting roles are differentially compatible with leisure activities as well whether these roles vary for children of different ages.

Last, the negative relationship between being married and participation in leisure was particularly striking, especially for women. Perhaps the combination of the negative relationships of marital status and preschool-aged children for women indicates that it is more difficult for married women and those with young children to leave their home responsibilities to engage in family-free leisure activities (Lee and Bhargava 2004). It is unclear though why married men report less leisure time compared with single men. However, household production and time allocation theories provide a generalized explanation for why both married men and women engage in less leisure compared with single individuals. Bryant's (1990) theory of household production and Becker's (1965) time allocation theory argue that married households spend less time on leisure because of the additional time necessary for household production in maintaining marital (and other) functions and relations. Previous studies report such findings (Lee and Bhargava 2004; Robinson and Godbey 1997), suggesting that married and single individuals have different resources, tastes, and time toward leisure activities, which accounts for the gap between these two groups.

In closing, there are several limitations of this study that should be noted. First, the data in this study are cross-sectional and as a result, we must be cautious in making causal claims. It is possible that, for some people, leisure is a priority that limits the time they spend in paid and unpaid work rather than the reverse (Nomaguchi and Bianchi 2004). Second, this paper focused on a single, high-status, professional occupation, namely lawyers. Some of the findings presented in this paper may be limited to this particular occupation under study or professionals more broadly. As well, lawyers generally earn relatively high salaries that allow them to purchase household and childcare services that other workers may not be able to afford. It is important to determine in future studies whether the results of this paper are generalizable to more occupationally diverse samples of workers who represent a broader range of income groups. Third, from the results of our study we do not know the extent to which respondents spend all or some of their different leisure activities by themselves or with other people, such as their children, spouse, colleagues, or people unrelated to their work or family. Parents may choose to engage in activities that involve their children and that their children will enjoy (Mattingly and Bianchi 2003). Professionals may combine work and leisure as a way of investing in their social capital with colleagues and/or clients by attending dinner meetings, receptions, or other social activities scheduled outside regular work hours (Coleman 1990; Kay and Hagan 1999). We proposed that the positive relationship between men's time in childcare and active leisure may reflect fathers' caring for their children by playing with them, but we need more detailed data about who else is involved in one's leisure activities to support this interpretation. Fourth, the measures used in this study may capture the amount of leisure that women and men participate in but it does not indicate the quality of their leisure activities in being able to provide opportunities for recovery, protection, and/or resiliency in response to the challenges of daily life (Mattingly and Bianchi 2003). The literature suggests that women may feel guilty in their free time or they may be more likely to multitask while engaging in leisure (Bianchi et al. 2006). For example, mothers may watch television while preparing dinner for the family and helping children with their homework. This suggests that not only do women experience less time engaged in leisure than men, women's leisure activities may not be as beneficial to their overall health and well-being.

The results of this study suggest that the relationships between the work, family, and leisure domains differ for women and men. While it was not surprising to find that men spend more time in paid work and leisure and women spend more time in housework and childcare, we did discover several unexpected results. The extent to which men's participation in housework and childcare enhances their participation in different forms of leisure points to several avenues for future research. One is to explore the meaning of work, family, and leisure roles in greater depth in order to examine whether men's and women's participation in paid and unpaid work contributes to a sense of earning or deserving leisure time and feeling guilty or guilt free in their leisure pursuits. Another is to examine the degree to which parents in particular involve their children or spouse in their leisure activities as a way of combating the time squeeze while still enjoying leisure and fulfilling family roles. By better understanding the gendered meanings of leisure and its interconnectedness to other work and family roles, perhaps we will be able to comprehend more fully the benefits of leisure for men's and women's health and well-being.

This study was funded by a research grant from the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). The opinions contained in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of LSAC.

References

Beaujot, R. and J. Lui. 2005. "Models of Time Use in Paid and Unpaid Work." Journal of Family Issues 26:924-47.

Becker, G.S. 1965. "A Theory of Time Allocation." Economic Journal 75:293-317.

Becker, P.E. and P. Moen. 1999. "Scaling-Back: Dual Career Couples' Work-Family Strategies." Journal of Marriage and the Family 61:995-1007.

Bianchi, S.M. 2000. "Maternal Employment and Time with Children Dramatic Change and Surprising Continuity?" Demography 37:401-14.

Bianchi, S.M., M.A. Milkie, L.C. Sayer and J.P. Robinson. 2000. "Is Anyone Doing the Housework? Trends in the Gender Division of Household Labor." Social Forces 79:191-228.

Bianchi, S.M., J.P. Robinson and M.A. Milkie. 2006. Changing Rhythms of American Life. New York: Russell Sage.

Bird, C.E. and A.M. Fremont. 1991. "Gender, Time Use and Health." Journal of Health and Social Behavior 32:114-29.

Bittman, M. and J. Wajcman. 2000. "The Rush Hour: The Character of Leisure Time and Gender Equity." Social Forces 79:165-89.

Blair-Loy, M. 2003. Competing Devotions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Brines, J. 1994. "Economic Dependency, Gender and the Division of Labor at Home." American Journal of Sociology 100:652-88.

Bryant, W.K. 1990. The Economic Organization of the Household. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Caldwell, L.L. 2005. "Leisure and Health: Why Is Leisure Therapeutic?" British Journal of Guidance and Counseling 33:7-26.

Caltabiano, M.L. 1994. "Measuring the Similarity among Leisure Activities Based on a Perceived Stress-Reduction Benefit." Leisure Studies 13:17-31.

Coleman, J.S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Coltrane, S. 2000. "Research on Household Labor: Modeling and Measuring the Social Embeddedness of Routine Family Work." Journal of Marriage and the Family 62:1208-33.

Connell, R.W. 2002. Gender. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Deutsch, F.M. 1999. Having it All: How Equally Shared Parenting Works. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Duxbury, L. and C. Higgins. 2001. Work-Life Balance in the New Millennium: Where Are We? Where Do We Need to Go ? Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.

Esteve, R., J. San Martin and A.E. Lopez. 1999. "Grasping the Meaning of Leisure: Developing a Self-Report Measurement Tool." Leisure Studies 18:79-91.

Ferree, M.M. 1991. "The Gender Division of Labor in Two-Earner Marriages: Dimensions of Variability and Change." Journal of Family Issues 12:158-80.

Frederick, Judith A. 1995. As Time Goes By ...: Time Use of Canadians: General Social Survey. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Fritz, C. and S. Sonnentag. 2006. "Recovery, Well-Being, and Performance-Related Outcomes: The Role of Workload and Vacation Experiences." Journal of Applied Psychology 91:936-45.

Gauthier, A. 2002. "Historical Trends in the Time Use Patterns of Canadian Youth." Paper presented at the meetings of the Canadian Population Society, Toronto, Canada.

Hagan, J. and F.M. Kay. 1995. Gender in Practice: A Study of Lawyers' Lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hays, S. 1996. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Henderson, K.A. and D. Bialeschki. 1991. "A Sense of Entitlement to Leisure as Constraint and Empowerment for Women." Leisure Sciences 13:51-65.

Hilbrecht, M., J. Zuzanek and R.C. Mannell. 2008. "Time Use, Time Pressure and Gendered Behavior in Early and Late Adolescence." Sex Roles 58:342-57.

Hill, C.R. and F.P. Stafford. 1980. "Parental Care of Children: Time Diary Estimates of Quantity, Predictability and Variety." Journal of Human Resources 15:202-39.

Hochschild, A.R. 1989. The Second Shift. New York: Avon Books.

Hochschild, A.R. 1997. The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work. New York: Holt.

Iwasaki, Y. 2003. "Examining Rival Models of Leisure Coping Mechanisms." Leisure Sciences 25:183-206.

Iwasaki, Y. 2006. "Counteracting Stress through Leisure Coping: A Prospective Health Study." Psychology, Health and Medicine 11:209-20.

Iwasaki, Y., J. Mactavish and K. MacKay. 2005. "Building on the Strengths and Resilience: Leisure as a Stress Survival Strategy." British Journal of Guidance and Counseling 33: 81-100.

Iwasaki, Y. and R.C. Mannell. 2000. "The Effects of Leisure Beliefs and Coping Strategies on Stress-Health Relationships: A Field Study." Leisure: The Journal of the Canadian Association for Leisure Studies 24:3-57.

Kay, F.M. and J. Hagan. 1999. "Cultivating Clients in the Competition for Partnership: Gender & the Organizational Restructuring of Law Firms in the 1990s." Law and Society Review 33:517-55.

Kordana, K.A. 1995. "Law Firms & Associate Careers: Tournament Theory versus the Production-Imperative Model." Yale Law Journal 104:1907-33.

Lee, Y. and B.P. McCormick. 2006. "Examining the Role of Self-Monitoring and Social Leisure in the Life Quality of Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury." Journal of Leisure Research 38:1-19.

Lee, Y.G. and V. Bhargava. 2004. "Leisure Time: Do Married and Single Individuals Spend It Differently?" Family and Consumer Science Research Journa1 32:254-74.

Leete, L. and J.B. Schor. 1994. "Assessing the Time-Squeeze Hypothesis: Hours Worked in the United States, 1969-89." Industrial Relations 33:25-43.

Lloyd, K.M. and C.J. Auld. 2002. "The Role of Leisure in Determining Quality of Life: Issues of Content and Measurement." Social Indicators Research 57:43-71.

MacEachen, E., J. Polzer and J. Clarke. 2008. "'You are Free to Set Your Own Hours': Governing Worker Productivity and Health through Flexibility and Resilience." Social Science and Medicine 66:1019-33.

Mannell, R.C. and D.A. Kleiber. 1997. A Social Psychology of Leisure. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

Marshall, K. 2006. "Converging Gender Roles." Perspectives on Labour and Income, July 7, Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 75-001-XIE.

Mattingly, M.J. and S.M. Bianchi. 2003. "Gender Differences in the Quantity and Quality of Free Time: The U.S. Experience." Social Forces 81:999-1030.

Mattingly, M.J. and L.C. Sayer. 2006. "Under Pressure: Gender Difference in the Relationship between Free Time and Feeling Rushed." Journal of Marriage and the Family 68:205-21.

Nomaguchi, K.M. and S.M. Bianchi. 2004. "Exercise Time: Gender Differences in the Effects of Marriage, Parenthood, and Employment." Journal of Marriage and Family 66:413-30.

Nomaguchi, K.M., M.A. Milkie and S.M. Bianchi. 2005. "Time Strains and Psychological Well-Being: Do Dual-Earner Mothers and Fathers Differ?" Journal of Family Issues 26:756-92.

Robinson, J.P. and G. Godbey. 1997. Time for Life: The Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

Sanchez, L. 1994. "Gender, Labor Allocations, and the Psychology of Entitlement within the Home." Social Forces 73:533-53.

Sayer, L.C. 2005. "Gender, Time and Inequality: Trends in Women's and Men's Paid Work, Unpaid Work and Free Time." Social Forces 84:285-303.

Schor, J.B. 1991. The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure. New York: Basic Books.

Simon, R.W. 1995. "Gender, Multiple Roles, Role Meaning, and Mental Health." Journal of Health and Social Behavior 36:182-94.

Sonnentag, S. 2003. "Recovery, Work Engagement, and Proactive Behavior: A New Look at the Interface between Nonwork and Work." Journal of Applied Psychology 88:518-28.

Spain, D. and S.M. Bianchi. 1996. Balancing Act: Motherhood, Marriage and Employment among American Women. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Suitor, J.J., D. Mecom and I.S. Feld. 2001. "Gender, Household Labor, and Scholarly Productivity among University Professors." Gender Issues 19:50-67.

Thompson, L. 1991. "Family Work: Women's Sense of Fairness." Journal of Family Issues 12:181-96.

Trenberth, L. and P. Dewe. 2002. "The Importance of Leisure as a Means of Coping with Work-Related Stress: an Exploratory Study." Counseling Psychology Quarterly 15:59-72.

Wallace, J.E. 2002. Juggling it All: Exploring Lawyers' Work, Home and Family Demands and Coping Strategies, Report of Stage One Findings. Research Report 00-02 prepared for the LSAC Research Report Series: a Publication of the Law School Admission Council.

Wallace, J.E. 2005. "Job Stress, Depression and Work-Family Conflict Amongst Lawyers: A Test of the Strain and Buffer Hypotheses." Industrial Relations. 60:510-37.

Zijlstra, F.R.H. and S. Sonnentag. 2006. "After Work Is Done: Psychological Perspectives on Recovery from Work." European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 15:129-38.

Zukewich, Nancy. 2003. Work, Parenthood and the Experience of Time Scarcity. Cat. No. 89-584-MIE-No. 1. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

JEAN E. WALLACE

University of Calgary

MARISA C. YOUNG

University of Toronto

Dr. Jean E. Wallace, Department of Sociology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, N.W., Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 1N4. E-mail: jwallace@ucalgary.ca Table 1 Mean Difference Tests for Men (N = 907) and Women (N = 544) Men Mean SD Leisure variables Active leisure 15.370 6.993 Passive leisure 18.381 3.190 Social leisure 16.039 4.492 Weekly hours in Paid work (total) 52.946 10.305 Paid work (evenings) 1.886 1.623 Paid work (weekends) 3.428 3.267 Housework 14.714 7.624 Childcare 12.384 13.648 Control variables Marital status (married = 1) .867 .340 Number of children 1.422 1.332 Preschool children (present = 1) .247 .431 Health 3.748 .945 Age 44.410 8.839 Work setting (law firm = 1) .594 .481 Annual income 136,420.80 102,433.60 Work salience 3.793 .705 Women Mean SD Leisure variables Active leisure 13.871 *** 6.882 Passive leisure 17.206 *** 3.466 Social leisure 15.767 * 4.414 Weekly hours in Paid work (total) 50.983 *** 10.416 Paid work (evenings) 1.856 1.644 Paid work (weekends) 2.992 ** 3.379 Housework 18.369 *** 9.048 Childcare 14.676 ** 19.137 Control variables Marital status (married = 1) .733 *** .443 Number of children .847 *** 1.069 Preschool children (present = 1) .189 .392 Health 3.746 .962 Age 40.059 *** 7.443 Work setting (law firm = 1) .511 *** .500 Annual income 92,648.38 *** 57,461.12 Work salience 3.862 .701 * p <.05. ** P<.01. ** p <.001 (one-tailed tests). Table 2 Results for Work Time and Family Obligations Regressed on Leisure Activities for Men (N = 882) Active b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total .003 (.031) Evenings .021 (.174) Weekends -.247 *** (.090) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework .039 (a) (.030) Childcare .042 *, (a) (.024) Control variables Marital status (married = 1) .297 (a) (.701) Number of children -.492 *** (.212) Preschool children (present = 1) -.743 (a) (.673) Health 2.716 *** (.232) Age -.096 *** (.029) Work setting (law firm = 1) .821 * (.464) Income .000 (.000)* Work salience .013 (.326) Constant 8.565 *** (2.392) [R.sup.2] .187 *** Passive b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total -.019 (.015) Evenings -.001, (.085) Weekends -.146 *** (.044) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework .031 **, (a) (.014) Childcare -.012 (a) (.012) Control variables Marital status (married = 1) .062 (a) (.342) Number of children -.258 *** (.103) Preschool children (present = 1) -.357 (a) (.329) Health .057 (.114) Age -.025 * (.014) Work setting (law firm = 1) .179 (.227) Income .000 (a) (.000) Work salience .011 (.159) Constant 20.684 *** (1.116) [R.sup.2] .06 *** Social b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total .001 (a) (.021) Evenings -.003 (a) (.120) Weekends -.159 *** (.063) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework .038 *, (a) (.021) Childcare .007 (a) (.017) Control variables Marital status (married = 1) -1.188 ***, (a) (.490) Number of children .024 (.147) Preschool children (present = 1) -.146 (a) (.468) Health .328 ** (.162) Age .010 (.020) Work setting (law firm = 1) .850 *** (.325) Income .000 (.000) Work salience .503 ** (.227) Constant 13.007 *** (1.662) [R.sup.2] .038 ** Note: Unstandardized regression coefficients are displayed. (a) A statistically significant different regression coefficient between men and women (p <.05). * p <.05. ** p<.01. *** p <.001 (one-tailed tests). Table 3 Results for Work Time and Family Obligations Regressed on Leisure Activities for Women (N = 535) Active b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total -.028 (.038) Evenings -.145 (.223) Weekends -.154 (.113) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework -.033 (a) (.032) Childcare -.053 *, (a) (.028) Control variables Marital status (married= 1) -.762 (a) (.639) Number of children .425 (.417) Preschool children(present = 1) -1.917 *, (a) 1.007) Health 2.575 *** (.285) Age -.112 *** (.044) Work setting (law firm = 1) .450 (.569) Income .000 (.000) Work salience .163 (.411) Constant 11.802 *** (3.076) [R.sup.2] .220 *** Passive b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total -.012 (.020) Evenings -.324 ***, (a) (.118) Weekends -.118 ** (.058) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework -.008 (a) (.017) Childcare -.030 **, (a) (.014) Control variables Marital status (married= 1) -.687 **, (a) (.338) Number of children .103 (.213) Preschool children(present = 1) -1.334 ***, (a) (.522) Health .098 (.149) Age -.033 (.023) Work setting (law firm = 1) -.234 (.298) Income .001 *, (a) (.001) Work salience .365 * (.217) Constant 20.214 *** (1.601) [R.sup.2] .163 *** Social b (SE) Weekly hours in paid work Total -.062 ***, (a) (.026) Evenings -.157 (a) (.151) Weekends -.092 (.075) Weekly hours in unpaid work Housework -.020 (a) (.022) Childcare .002 (a) (.019) Control variables Marital status (married= 1) -2.043 ***, (a) (.434) Number of children -.133 (.273) Preschool children(present = 1) -.698 (a) (.678) Health .588 *** (.194) Age -.007 (.030) Work setting (law firm = 1) .424 (.386) Income .000 (.000) Work salience .463 * (.280) Constant 17.411 *** (2.079) [R.sup.2] .122 *** Note: Unstandardized regression coefficients are displayed. (a) A statistically significant different regression coefficient between men and women (p <.05). * p <.05. ** p<.01. *** p<.001 (one-tailed tests).