1. DYADIC MODELS FOR THE SOCIOLOGY
OF LABOUR: STRENGTHS, LIMITS AND
EMPIRICAL FINDINGS
Wendy Olsen 2014
University of Manchester
Cathie Marsh Centre / Applied Social Research PhD
Pathway (NWDTC) [Social statistics discipline area]
1

2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 What is the best way to use dyadic models for
examining work patterns of men and women in the
UK 2004-2014?
 What empirical findings emerge from a socio-
economic model of this kind, and from related demi-
regularities observed in panel data?
2

3. METHODS
 Pluralist theory
 Regression Equations, 2 per household, Xf
variables for women and Xm variables for men, with
Z variables as shared household level
characteristics
 Descriptive statistics, change over time, line
graphs, averages, factor analysis of gender-related
division of labour attitudes, test of whether this
differs from men to women in the couples, this is a
controlled test and not generalizable to the UK as a
whole
 Linkage of labour sector with finance/debt 3

4. 4

5. SELECTION OF CASES AND DATA
 The British Household Panel Survey + Understanding Society
series 2004-2011/12
 Age limit was set in the starting year
 Couples living together were analysed (all but one were
heterosexual in that period) N 2327 for 2004/7
Variables Include:
 House value and whether it is mortgaged
 Rented house vs. owning the house
 Hours worked for pay, main job, combined with second job if
any, including self employed people
 Demographic variables
 Attitudes about gender and work (Brockmann, Crompton and
Lyonette) 1 factor using CFA 5

6. 6

7. PLURALITY OF THEORIES
 Socio-economic approach
 Theory of human capital has strengths &
weaknesses, reflects only 2-3 causal mechanisms
 Realist approach suggests we augment with a
series of other theoretical components
 Try to ensure not inconsistent or incoherent;
appreciate the tensions and dialectics.E.g.:
 Sickness  less paid work, but also causes the partner
either to earn more (work more) or to work less in order
to compensate on the household work front
7

8. PLURALITY OF THEORIES
 Additional theoretical and causal hypotheses
 Age-related choices about work-time- hours of paid
work decline in the aggregate over the years 50 onward,
and in personal ife this change is sudden but may take 2
steps:
 FT to PT then PT to 0 paid hours
 FT to 0 then 0 to PT paid hours (intensity, involvement)
 Life stage crucial to labour supply
 Number of children, * gender of worker
 Men work more with little kids at home (USA; EU)
 Others as well, e.g. control for region
 If we reflect labour DEMAND does that concede NCE?
8

9. RESULTS FOR 2004-7 BEFORE RECESSION
9

10. 10

11. RESULTS FOR 2007-2011 PERIOD DURING
RECESSION
 Introduction
 In this period the financialisation grew but the expected
future house prices fell, and the degree of house rental
rose considerably.
 We would expect work hours to decline due to lower
labour supply from these new renters
 Offsetting factors might arise from lack of debt
opportunities
 Here we see ‘debt opportunities’ as a capability.
 Actual debt stock is a burden and raises LS.
 Gendered and depends upon life stage.
 Debt opportunities are more unequal now due to shrinkage of
the supply of credit to consumers.
 Empirical Results
 A further control for decline in labour-hours demanded is
introduced using regional dummies
 Strongly regionalised recession in UK, strongest in NE
and outlying regions, less so in London
11

12. STRENGTHS OF DYADIC METHOD
 Non-individualistic
 Relates easily to multi-level modelling of all the
household members, and to social network analysis of
their interactions
 Supports interdisciplinary research which uses
falsification methods on mini-hypotheses
 Gives insights both expected and unexpected
 Supports retroduction: WHY these DATA patterns?
12

13. SPECIAL HYPOTHESIS TEST FOR PAIRS
 Is the best fit found for the symmetry model or
asymmetry?
 In asymmetry, is the direct correlation aproach
better than the indirect approach?
 In panel, do the results persist?
 2004-7 yes
 2007-2011 we retroduce from what we find
 2010-2015 the debt/asset context will change further

13

14. CONTRAST WITH ECONOMICS
 Economists are putting the wage in the woman’s
hours-equation.
 Her wage or education influences her work-time upward
---- human capital theory ---- verification of the
hypothesis – ignores the debt/asset mechanisms.
 The man’s wage (or education, as proxy) also goes into
a woman’s work-time regression. This one is found to
have a negative coefficient in USA (needs testing for
other countries)
 Growth in the stay-at-home Mother phenomenon is labelled in
a sexist way
 Avoiding unemployment and employment is called ‘inactivity’
and ‘dependency’ which are also dismissive : should be
‘domestic work’ or ‘householding’ (male&female)
14

15. WEAKNESSES OF DYADIC METHOD
 The ‘method’ does not do anything. It is a black
box, as are most regression methods.
 Don’t reify the results; they still have three biases:
 Omitted variable bias, no model is complete.
 Endogeneity bias, notably from gender and income
through other variables into pay which feeds into
working hours by encouraging people, and is correlated
with education
 =we admit collinearity
 =in panel I admit multicollinearity
 Overall tendency to verificationism of the big causal
model which is a sociologically-expanded RAM with
household-level Strategies. (RAM=Rational action
model) 15

16. CONCLUSIONS
 People depend on each other in mutual support
within households, and this is affected by gender
roles/expectations/norms and by the life-stage, age
and other demographics.
 Economic trends create underlying causes of
change, in this case, demand for labour fell and net
asset values fell, which in offsetting ways raised the
work hours of poor people but caused a decline and
a tendency to stay-at-home mothers among the
people with most assets & most human capital,
during the recession.
 Some renters however are relieved of overtime and
long hours, notably men, unlike UK home owners in
this decade. (cf Philps)
16