Who’s Doing the Housework and Childcare in America Now? Differential Convergence in Twenty-First-Century Gender Gaps in Home Tasks

Abstract

Gender scholars have debated whether the recent movement toward a more equal division of domestic labor is stalling. Using a differential convergence perspective, the authors argue that examining which domestic tasks undergo gender convergence, whose changes narrow the gap, and why changes happen is critical for understanding gender inequalities in unpaid labor time. Using data from the 2003–2023 American Time Use Survey, the authors examine trends in total housework (including core and occasional housework), shopping, and childcare time. Results for married individuals indicate that the historically large gender gap in total housework time narrowed further this century, from a women-to-men ratio of 1.8:1 in 2003–2005 to 1.6:1 in 2022–2023. This shrinking of the gender gap was concentrated in traditionally feminine core housework (decreasing by 40 percent, from 4.2:1 to 2.5:1), particularly housecleaning and laundry. The gender difference in shopping time also narrowed, nearing parity. For childcare time, the gender gap shrunk from 2:1 to 1.8:1, though this change was not statistically significant. Decomposition analyses indicate that women’s reduced housework time was explained mainly by population compositional shifts, whereas men’s increased core housework time likely reflected behavioral or normative changes. With men taking on more female-typed domestic activities, the gendered norms associated with different forms of unpaid labor may be becoming redefined.

Understanding changes in the gendered division of domestic labor, both housework and childcare, is critical, as it is central to shifts in the unequal labor division within couples, gender wage gaps in the labor market, and meanings of masculinity and femininity (England 2010; England, Levine, and Mishel 2020). In the United States, during the highly gender-specialized era of the 1960s, married women did 7 times more housework and 4 times more childcare than their husbands (Bianchi, Robinson, and Milkie 2006; Bianchi et al. 2000, 2012). As the economy changed in ways that increased demand for women’s paid labor, and the feminist movement inspired acceptance of women working outside the home, more women entered the labor force in the 1970s (Goldin 1992; Oppenheimer 1970). Gender dynamics at home also began to change. The large gender gap in married couples’ housework and childcare time in the 1960s decreased significantly until the mid-1990s but has stabilized since then, with women still doing roughly twice as much housework and childcare as men (Bianchi et al. 2012; Sayer 2016).

Many researchers claim that the gender revolution has “stalled” since the 1990s (Cotter, Hermsen, and Vanneman 2011; England 2010), whereas others argue that gender inequalities are still decreasing gradually (Goldscheider, Bernhardt, and Lappegård 2015; Sullivan, Gershuny, and Robinson 2018). Despite the debates, most agree with England (2010) that changes toward gender equality have occurred unevenly across different life domains and social locations. Recent research has investigated variations in gender convergence in the division of labor by social groups, such as birth cohorts and national contexts, and across three broader areas of work: paid work, housework, and childcare (Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Churchill, Kornrich, and Ruppanner 2023; Pailhé, Solaz, and Stanfors 2021). This body of research has shown that individual-level time-based, resource-based, or gender identity–based theories cannot fully explain the persistent gender inequality where women do more unpaid labor than men within different-gender married couples (Kolpashnikova and Kan 2021; Lachance-Grzela and Bouchard 2010).

To gain insight into gender inequalities in contemporary home life, we argue that focusing on differential convergence is a promising extension of current scholarship. A differential convergence perspective first identifies which types of housework tasks are progressing more quickly or slowly toward gender equality. Changes in “core” housework, such as daily cooking and house cleaning, may be more meaningful for gender equality than others because they have long been considered women’s work and remained stubbornly resistant to becoming more gender equal (Altintas and Sullivan 2016). Second, a differential convergence perspective also assesses which gender’s housework time changes and why. A decrease in women’s overall housework time may have a different implication for gender equality than men taking on more traditionally “feminine” tasks. Furthermore, changes in housework time for a given gender may be driven by shifts in population compositions (e.g., women’s increased participation in paid labor; a higher proportion of one ethnic group among the married population) or by changes in behaviors and social norms (e.g., men dedicating more time to housework).

In this study, we first investigate how domestic labor time has changed for married women and men in the United States from the early twenty-first century to the present, including the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic years. Using nationally representative time diary data from the 2003–2023 American Time Use Survey (ATUS), we examine the time married women and men spent on (1) total housework, including (a) core and traditionally “feminine” tasks such as cooking and cleaning and (b) occasional and traditionally “masculine” tasks such as repairs and yard work; and (2) shopping. For married parents, we also include another domain of domestic labor: (3) childcare. Second, by conducting decomposition analyses of housework time, we assess whether changes in men’s and women’s domestic task times can be attributed to population compositional shifts or behavioral and/or normative changes. Drawing on a differential convergence perspective, we extend prior research to reveal complex changes in the gendered division of domestic labor in the most recent era, and elaborate on the theoretical implications of these findings for understanding the gender revolution.

Background

A Stalled Gender Revolution? Changes in the Division of Housework and Childcare over Time

There are lively debates over whether the gender revolution in the division of labor has stalled. Some scholars argue that despite the rapid increase in women’s labor force participation and reduced time spent on housework since the 1960s, progress toward gender egalitarianism has stalled since the mid-1990s (England 2010; England et al. 2020). They highlight that the gender wage gap and occupational segregation have not changed much since the mid-1990s, alongside a rise in “egalitarian essentialism,” which emphasizes women’s skills in homemaking and special nurturing abilities, as evidenced by the diffusion of intensive mothering ideology (Cotter et al. 2011; England 2010). England et al. (2020) suggested that for progress toward gender equality to continue in both paid and unpaid work spheres, men must redefine their roles in the household, moving away from the essentialist idea that men and women should perform specific tasks at home.

Nevertheless, there are also scholars who maintain a positive outlook on the ongoing gender revolution. For example, Goldscheider et al. (2015) argued that although women’s entry into paid labor and their retreat from unpaid housework began in the 1960s, it is only recently that there have been pressures for gender norms to change in families, workplaces, and other institutions, and for men to take on more domestic work. Believing that these changes will take time, they are optimistic about the continuation of changes in the domestic sphere as women increasingly become equal bread-winners. Sullivan et al. (2018) further argued that the current literature has adopted a short-term view of change. Using “lagged generational change” as the theoretical framework, they contended that achieving gender equality in household labor may require sustained effort over multiple generations, as shifts in norms may not be immediately reflected in behavior. Analyzing more than 50 years of data from the United States and 12 other developed countries, they found little decisive evidence for a stall but rather a continuing, albeit uneven, long-term trend in the gender convergence of household labor division.

A few recent studies have examined changes in the gendered division of household labor. They generally conclude that gender convergence in time use continues, but the pace has slowed. Women still do significantly more household tasks than men, and domestic labor remains divided along traditional gender lines (Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Churchill et al. 2023; Kan et al. 2022; Pailhé et al. 2021). For example, using data from the 2003–2018 ATUS, Churchill et al. (2023) examined cohort differences in fathers’ and mothers’ time spent on paid work, core housework, and childcare, finding that fathers were increasing their contributions to childcare and housework across the three cohorts included in the data. However, fathers and mothers in the most recent cohort (born between 1981 and 2000) were not more egalitarian than previous cohorts. This suggests that the small but steady gender convergence was a period effect rather than occurring through cohort replacement. Examining time diary data from five developed countries, Pailhé et al. (2021) highlighted that gender convergence in housework from the mid-1980s to the 2010s was due largely to decreases in women’s time, whereas men’s housework time remained flat.

We argue that a differential convergence perspective, which builds upon the ideas of the aforementioned scholars, offers a productive approach for assessing the most recent changes in the gendered division of labor. By differential convergence, we mean two things: first, differentiating the types of work that are moving faster or slower toward equality over time and, second, distinguishing the changes in housework times and the reasons behind them for women versus men. Identifying gender convergence, or the lack of it, in specific tasks can provide insights into the “quality” of changes. Core or routine housework, such as cooking and house cleaning, have long been viewed as women’s work, and the gender division in these areas has remained resistant to change. Achieving gender equality in these routine and traditionally feminine housework tasks may imply shifts in the meanings and norms associated with these tasks, thus carrying broader implications for progress toward gender equality than convergence in gender-neutral and less onerous domestic tasks. Furthermore, changes in housework time for each gender matter, as do the reasons behind these changes. Gender gaps in housework time could converge simply because women do less or because housework is outsourced, which would have a different implication for greater equality than both genders shifting their time spent on housework or men taking on more traditionally-feminine tasks. Additionally, changes in housework time for a given gender may be driven by shifts in demographic characteristics, such as changes in the age and racial/ethnic composition of the population, which may have different meanings compared with changes in behaviors (e.g., men dedicating more time to housework, independent of demographic changes) and/or aligned gender norms.

Differentiating Unpaid Work into Meaningful Spheres: What is Changing?

Research on unpaid work has traditionally approached the topic in a generalized manner, both conceptually and methodologically. However, an increasing number of studies have emphasized the need to distinguish between different types of unpaid labor (Carlson, Miller, and Sassler 2018; Sayer 2016). Although generally referred to as unpaid work, important differences exist among core housework, occasional housework, shopping, and childcare. Understanding whether there has been differential gender convergence in these varied types of unpaid work can provide insights into the quality of changes. For example, convergence in tasks traditionally seen as more “feminine” or “masculine” may imply shifts in the meanings and norms associated with these tasks, thus having broader implications for progress toward gender equality.

We first make a distinction between housework and childcare. Although both tasks can be burdensome, they are quite different. Parents generally find their time with children to be happier and more meaningful than their time without them (Musick, Meier, and Flood 2016; Negraia and Augustine 2020) whereas some housework tasks are quite onerous. Furthermore, because of the rise of intensive parenting ideologies during the past few decades (Hays 1996; Ishizuka 2019), the social and moral repercussions of reducing childcare time would be more serious than neglecting housework and leaving the house untidy, particularly for women. Given these differences, the progress of gender convergence in the time dedicated to housework versus childcare may vary. Indeed, recent studies indicate that over time, men have increased their involvement more in childcare but less in routine housework (Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Bianchi et al. 2006; Pailhé et al. 2021). Mothers’ childcare time has also increased over the past few decades, despite their rising participation in paid work, while they have reduced time spent on housework (Bianchi et al. 2012; Sayer 2005), suggesting very different tracks for these two forms of unpaid labor among mothers.

In terms of housework, more attention has been paid to the time spent on the core and traditionally feminine everyday tasks (Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Churchill et al. 2023; Sullivan et al. 2018). Activities such as cooking, meal cleanup, housecleaning and laundry need to be done regularly and account for most of the time required to run a household. A few studies have documented uneven gender convergence across different types of core housework (Bianchi et al. 2000; Kolpashnikova and Kan 2021; Sayer 2016). For example, using data from the American Historical Time Use Study, Sayer (2016) found that the decline in the ratio of women’s versus men’s housework time between 1965 and 2012 varies for cooking (from 14.1 to 2.4), cleaning (from 9.9 to 2.8), and laundry (from 14.6 to 4.1).

Another form of housework is often termed occasional or masculine-typed housework. In comparison with core housework, occasional tasks, such as repairs, yard work, and financial management, tend to be more discretionary and can be scheduled with greater flexibility (Bianchi et al. 2006). The limited number of studies examining these occasional household tasks indicate differing patterns of gender convergence between core and occasional housework over time, underscoring the importance of distinguishing between the two. For instance, in the United States, the gender gap in core housework has gradually narrowed from married women doing 16.6 times the hours as married men in 1965 to a 3.4:1 ratio in the early 2010s. In contrast, the gender gap in occasional housework fell from 1.2 times in 1965 to 0.6 times in 1975 and remained stable at about 0.6 until the early 2010s (Bianchi et al. 2012).

Trends in married partners’ contributions to shopping labor, another form of unpaid work, have rarely been examined despite the significant amount of time spent on these tasks. In the supplementary analysis of their research, Pailhé et al. (2021) reported that U.S. men without minor children living in their households increased their time spent shopping between 1985 and 2010, whereas their female counterparts’ shopping time decreased over the same period. But the shopping time of fathers and mothers did not change significantly. Compared with housework and childcare, shopping tends to include a leisure component (Bianchi et al. 2000). Nevertheless, core shopping activities such as grocery shopping and purchasing gas need to be done regularly and are essential for running a household. Recent studies have shown that over time, the long-standing association between grocery shopping and women’s roles has weakened, transforming it into a more gender-neutral type of unpaid work (Craig, Powell, and Brown 2015; Kolpashnikova and Kan 2021). The gender division of shopping may have further changed because of technologies that facilitate online shopping, making it important to examine trends in women’s and men’s shopping time.

Differences in Time Spent by Women versus Men: Who Is Changing and Why?

In addition to distinguishing among various forms of unpaid work, a differential convergence perspective also examines whose time is changing—men’s, women’s, or both—across different types of unpaid work—and why (Nitsche and Grunow 2016). Convergence in the gender gap can occur if both genders modify their daily domestic activities or if only one gender does (Baxter 2002). Research has generally indicated that in the United States, the convergence in unpaid work time between the 1960s and the early twenty-first century is due largely to a significant reduction in women’s housework time, accompanied by a modest increase in men’s housework time and a more substantial rise in men’s childcare time (Bianchi et al. 2006; Cunningham 2007; Sandberg and Hofferth 2005; Sayer 2005; Sullivan et al. 2018). As mentioned earlier, scholars with optimistic views on the ongoing gender revolution argue that although women increased their paid work hours and decreased their unpaid work hours long ago, the pressure for their male partners to adjust their behaviors is relatively recent. Hence, changes in men’s behaviors will take time (Goldscheider et al. 2015; Sullivan et al. 2018). It is, therefore, important to investigate the degree to which the gender convergence in different types of unpaid work time can be attributed to men’s growing involvement in them.

Furthermore, changes in men’s and women’s unpaid work time can be attributed to compositional changes in the population and/or behavioral and normative changes. Using data from time diaries, Bianchi et al. (2000) found that the decrease in women’s housework hours between 1965 and 1995 could be attributed almost exclusively to population compositional shifts, including women’s increased education and employment and a decreased likelihood of having coresiding children. In contrast, little of the increase in men’s housework time could be attributed to compositional shifts, indicating the increase was presumably due to behavioral or normative changes (Bianchi et al. 2000). Given the increasing racial/ethnic diversity and aging of the U.S. population (Caplan 2023; Frey 2020), as well as the stability of women’s labor force participation rate in recent years (Machovec 2023), it is important to examine the extent to which changes in men’s and women’s unpaid work time across different dimensions can be explained by demographic changes versus behavioral and normative changes.

The Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in March 2020, brought dramatic changes to families’ daily lives that may have affected the gendered division of household labor. As daily activities—including working, schooling, shopping, and dining out—were disrupted by lockdowns, new opportunities may have emerged for both women and men to alter how they engage in domestic labor. Additionally, the sudden shutdown of the world promoted individuals to reflect on their established routines and values tied to them. For instance, as men spent more time at home, they had increasing opportunities to recognize needs related to housework and childcare, act on them, and develop new routines and habits (Milkie 2020; Shafer, Scheibling, and Milkie 2020). Nevertheless, at least in the early stage of the pandemic, women were more likely than men to drop out of the labor force because of increasing childcare and supervision demands (Landivar et al. 2020), making them more “available” for unpaid household labor.

Depending on national contexts, analytical samples, and pandemic periods, current studies across developed countries have revealed that changes in the gendered division of household labor during the pandemic were complex. Many studies observed an increase in gender equality in housework during this time, with both genders doing more work around the home, and men’s increases being disproportionately higher (Petts et al. 2023; Shafer et al. 2020). Conversely, some studies showed that despite the increases in fathers’ childcare and housework time, mothers also increased their time spent on these tasks; therefore, the gender gap did not change for most families in the United States (Dunatchik et al. 2021; Petts and Carlson 2024). Using data from the 2019–2020 ATUS, Augustine and Prickett (2022) found that during the pandemic, mothers primarily increased their time teaching children. In contrast, fathers increased their secondary time with children, such as screen time with children present, but did not increase their time spent teaching or engaging in other primary childcare activities.

Together, these findings suggest that investigating the domestic labor hours of both women and men during different years of the pandemic using nationally representative samples is essential not only for understanding how the gendered division of domestic labor has evolved during this crisis but also for examining how these changes might continue after the pandemic.

Summary and Research Questions

Scholars have debated whether the movement toward a more equal division of domestic labor is stalling. In this study, we examine how the housework time of U.S. married women and men has changed between 2003 and 2023 and, for married mothers and fathers, how their childcare time has also changed.¹ We extend scholarship by adopting a differential convergence perspective to assess what types of domestic tasks underwent gender convergence, whose changes were narrowing the gap, and why these changes occurred. Specifically, we address the following research questions:

1. How has the domestic labor time of married women and men, including the childcare time of married mothers and fathers, changed between 2003 and 2023?

2. How have gender gaps in domestic work narrowed over the 21st century? In what types of unpaid labor time – total housework, core housework, occasional housework, shopping, or childcare – are gender gaps narrowing? Whose unpaid labor time – women’s, men’s or both — is changing to narrow gender gaps?

3. To what extent can the changes in housework time for married women and men be attributed to explained compositional changes in the population versus unexplained factors that may point to behavioral or normative changes?

Data, Measures, and Analytic Strategies

Data

We draw on nationally representative data from the 2003–2023 ATUS (Flood et al. 2023, https://www.atusdata.org/atus/). The ATUS sampling frame included respondents 15 years and older who were in the outgoing rotation of the Current Population Survey. ATUS time diaries asked respondents to report all activities from 4 a.m. on the day prior to the ATUS interview until 4 a.m. on the day of the interview. Response rates for the ATUS ranged from 57.8 percent in 2003 to 35.8 in 2022 (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2024). The ATUS oversampled weekend days to facilitate analysis of time-use patterns by day, with 25 percent of the sample completing Saturday diaries, 25 percent Sunday diaries, and the remaining spreading equally over the five weekdays. For comparability with prior trend studies, we reported weekly estimates. Survey weights were used in all analyses to account for the complex design of the ATUS, the oversample of weekends, and nonresponse. Time diaries are thought to be the most appropriate methodological approach to minimize social desirability bias (Bianchi et al. 2006; Juster, Ono, and Stafford 2003).

The sample included married women and men aged 25 to 64 years. We excluded individuals younger than 25 and older than 64 because of significant life changes during these age brackets and to maintain comparability with studies (e.g., Bianchi et al. 2012) that use data from earlier periods. The sample sizes for each survey period are detailed in Table 1. The subsample of married parents included married mothers and fathers within the same age range (sample sizes are shown in Table 2).

Table 1.

Trends in Average Weekly Housework Hours by Gender, Married Women and Men Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
Married women
Total housework	18.5	17.8*	17.8*	17.8*	17.9+	17.2**	18.8	18.1	17.7+
Core housework	14.5	14.1+	14.2	14.1	14.2	13.6**	14.7	13.6*	13.8*
Cooking meals	4.9	4.9	5.2**	5.4***	5.6***	5.3**	5.9***	5.5**	5.5***
Meal cleanup	1.7	1.6*	1.6*	1.6*	1.7	1.6	1.7	1.7	1.7
Housecleaning	4.9	4.8	4.9	4.5*	4.4**	4.1***	4.6	3.9***	4.2***
Laundry and ironing	3.0	2.8	2.5***	2.7**	2.6***	2.6**	2.5*	2.3***	2.2***
Occasional housework	4.0	3.7+	3.6**	3.7+	3.7+	3.6+	4.1	4.5	3.9
Outdoor chores	.4	.3+	.3	.3	.3	.3	.3	.3	.3
Repairs	.7	.5+	.4**	.5*	.4***	.5*	.5	.4*	.5*
Garden and animal care	1.8	1.8	1.7	1.8	1.9	1.6	2.1*	2.3*	2.0+
Bills and management	1.2	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.2	1.2	1.6+	1.1
Shopping	6.0	6.0	5.3***	5.3***	5.2***	4.9***	4.5***	4.3***	4.4***
n	11,379	8,628	8,326	7,213	6,250	3,289	1,649	1,672	3,030
Married men
Total housework	10.1	9.9	10.1	9.8	10.1	10.2	11.6**	11.0+	11.2**
Core housework	3.5	3.9**	4.1***	4.4***	4.3***	4.6***	5.1***	5.5***	5.6***
Cooking meals	1.6	1.8**	2.0***	2.1***	2.2***	2.3***	2.7***	2.6***	2.5***
Meal cleanup	.4	.4	.4	.4	.5*	.4	.6***	.6***	.5**
Housecleaning	1.2	1.3	1.4+	1.5**	1.3	1.2	1.4	1.6*	1.9***
Laundry and ironing	.3	.4+	.4	.4**	.4+	.6***	.5+	.6*	.6***
Occasional housework	6.6	6.0**	6.0*	5.4***	5.7***	5.6**	6.4	5.6**	5.6**
Outdoor chores	1.7	1.2***	1.4+	1.2*	1.2***	1.1***	1.2**	1.0***	1.2*
Repairs	1.4	1.2	1.1*	.8***	.9**	.9**	1.3	.9*	.9**
Garden and animal care	2.7	2.7	2.8	2.6	2.8	2.7	3.2+	3.0	2.8
Bills and management	.9	.9	.8**	.8*	.9	.8	.8	.7**	.7*
Shopping	3.7	3.8	3.8	3.7	3.6	3.7	2.9***	3.7	3.6
n	9,995	7,435	7,307	6,423	5,595	3,047	1,527	1,525	2,730
Ratio of women’s time to men’s time
Total housework	1.8	1.8	1.8+	1.8	1.8	1.7*	1.6	1.6+	1.6***
Core housework	4.2	3.6**	3.4**	3.2***	3.3***	3.0***	2.9*	2.5***	2.5***
Cooking meals	3.1	2.8	2.6	2.6	2.5	2.3	2.2	2.1	2.2
Meal cleanup	4.3	3.8*	4.3	4.0*	3.8	3.7+	3.0	2.8+	3.2
Housecleaning	4.1	3.7	3.6	3.0***	3.5**	3.3***	3.3	2.4***	2.3***
Laundry and ironing	9.1	7.2*	7.1***	6.0***	6.6***	4.0***	5.5**	3.8***	3.4***
Occasional housework	.6	.6	.6	.7**	.6+	.6+	.6	.8**	.7*
Outdoor chores	.2	.2**	.2	.2*	.2**	.2**	.2*	.3**	.2+
Repairs	.5	.5	.4	.6*	.5	.5	.4	.4	.6+
Garden and animal care	.7	.6	.6	.7	.7	.6	.7	.8	.7
Bills and management	1.3	1.3	1.5	1.4	1.3	1.5	1.5	2.4**	1.5
Shopping	1.6	1.6	1.4***	1.4**	1.4***	1.3***	1.5*	1.2***	1.2***

Source: Authors’ calculations, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Notes: Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Table 2.

Trends in Average Weekly Housework Hours by Gender, Married Parents Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
Married mothers
Total housework	19.2	18.5+	18.3*	18.4+	18.7	18.1*	19.0	18.2	17.8*
Core housework	16.0	15.5	15.5+	15.8	16.0	15.4	15.8	15.1	14.9*
Cooking meals	5.3	5.4	5.6*	5.9***	6.3***	6.1***	6.5***	6.5***	6.4***
Meal cleanup	1.9	1.8	1.9	1.9	2.0	1.9	2.0	2.0	2.0
Housecleaning	5.3	5.2	5.2	5.0	4.9*	4.5**	5.1	4.3***	4.3***
Laundry and ironing	3.3	2.9**	2.6***	2.8**	2.6***	2.7**	2.2***	2.2***	2.2***
Occasional housework	3.2	3.1	2.9*	2.6***	2.7***	2.7*	3.1	3.1	2.8+
Outdoor chores	.3	.3	.3	.2***	.2+	.2+	.3	.4	.3
Repairs	.5	.5	.4	.4+	.3*	.4	.4	.4	.3
Garden and animal care	1.3	1.3	1.2+	1.1*	1.1*	1.1*	1.3	1.3	1.2
Bills and management	1.1	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.0
Shopping	6.3	5.9*	5.4***	5.5***	5.0***	5.1***	4.5***	4.0***	4.3***
Childcare	14.1	14.0	14.2	14.4	14.9*	15.0+	14.8	14.6	14.7
n	6,971	5,872	5,435	4,620	3,923	2,009	940	957	1,534
Married fathers
Total housework	9.3	9.3	9.4	8.9	9.3	9.0	10.8+	9.8	10.5*
Core housework	3.8	4.2*	4.5***	4.8***	4.6***	4.7***	5.6***	5.5***	5.8***
Cooking meals	1.6	1.9*	2.1***	2.2***	2.3***	2.3***	3.0***	2.7***	2.7***
Meal cleanup	.4	.5	.4	.5+	.5*	.5	.7**	.6*	.6**
Housecleaning	1.3	1.4	1.5	1.5+	1.3	1.3	1.5	1.7	1.9**
Laundry and ironing	.4	.5+	.5+	.5**	.4+	.6**	.4	.5	.6*
Occasional housework	5.6	5.1+	4.9**	4.2***	4.7***	4.2***	5.1	4.3***	4.7*
Outdoor chores	1.4	1.2	1.1*	.9***	1.0**	1.0**	.9**	.9**	1.1+
Repairs	1.2	1.1	.9*	.7***	.6***	.8**	1.5	.6***	.9
Garden and animal care	2.1	2.0	2.0	1.9	2.2	1.7+	2.1	2.2	2.0
Bills and management	.8	.7*	.8	.6***	.9	.8	.6	.6*	.8
Shopping	3.8	3.8	3.6	3.6	3.7	3.4+	2.9***	3.7	3.5
Childcare	6.9	7.0	7.3+	7.6**	7.6**	7.6*	7.8+	8.4**	8.3***
n	6,301	5,184	4,906	4,175	3,633	1,964	888	920	1,511
Ratio of women’s time to men’s time
Total housework	2.1	2.0	1.9*	2.1	2.0	2.0	1.8	1.8+	1.7***
Core housework	4.3	3.7*	3.4***	3.3**	3.5+	3.3**	2.8*	2.7***	2.6***
Cooking meals	3.3	2.9	2.6	2.8	2.8+	2.6	2.2	2.4	2.4
Meal cleanup	4.4	3.7*	4.5	3.7+	3.8	4.1	3.0	3.2	3.2
Housecleaning	4.0	3.8	3.5	3.3*	3.8+	3.6**	3.4	2.5***	2.3***
Laundry and ironing	9.1	6.4**	5.8***	5.3***	6.0***	4.4***	5.0***	4.7***	3.6***
Occasional housework	.6	.6	.6	.6**	.6	.6*	.6	.7**	.6
Outdoor chores	.2	.2	.2*	.2**	.2*	.2*	.3*	.4**	.2
Repairs	.4	.4	.4	.5*	.4**	.5*	.3	.6*	.4
Garden and animal care	.6	.6	.6	.6	.5+	.6	.6	.6	.6
Bills and management	1.3	1.5	1.3	1.6	1.2	1.4	1.8	1.9	1.4
Shopping	1.7	1.5	1.5**	1.5*	1.4***	1.5*	1.6+	1.1***	1.2***
Childcare	2.1	2.0	1.9	1.9	2.0	2.0	1.9	1.7	1.8

Source: Authors’ calculations, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Measures

The dependent variables were weekly hours (recoded from daily minutes) reported in total, core, and occasional housework activities on the diary day. Descriptive statistics also reported time in specific housework activities that make up core housework (cooking meals, meal cleanup, housecleaning, and laundry and ironing) and occasional housework (outdoor chores, repairs, garden and animal care, and household bills). Our approach to coding core and occasional housework was based on theoretical work and prior literature (Bianchi et al. 2006; Perry-Jenkins and Gerstel 2020). Table 3 shows how each ATUS activity category was coded as core or occasional housework. We included shopping as a separate category because although shopping for essentials like groceries and gas can be considered housework and take a substantial amount of time in people’s lives, it was not included in total housework estimates in earlier studies.

Table 3.

American Time Use Survey Housework and Childcare Activity Codes.

Total Housework is the sum of Core Housework and Occasional Housework

Core Housework

Cooking meals: food and drink preparation (020201); food presentation (020202); food and drink preparation, presentation, and cleanup, n.e.c. (020299)

Meal cleanup: kitchen and food cleanup (020203)

Housecleaning: interior cleaning (020101); storing interior household items, including food (020104); housework, n.e.c. (020199)

Laundry and ironing: laundry (020102); sewing, repairing, and maintaining textiles (020103)

Occasional Housework

Outdoor chores: exterior cleaning (020401); exterior repair, improvements, and decoration (020402); exterior maintenance, repair, and decoration, n.e.c. (020499); vehicle repair and maintenance (by self) (020701); vehicles, n.e.c. (020799)

Repairs: interior arrangement, decoration, and repairs (020301); building and repairing furniture (020302); heating and cooling (020303); interior maintenance, repair, and decoration, n.e.c. (020399); appliance, tool, and toy setup, repair, and maintenance (by self) (020801); appliances and tools, n.e.c. (020899)

Garden and animal care: lawn, garden, and houseplant care (020501); ponds, pools, and hot tubs (020502); lawn and garden, n.e.c. (020599); care for animals and pets (not veterinary care) (2003–2007) (020601); care for animals and pets (not veterinary care) (2008 and later) (020602); walking, exercising, playing with animals (2008 and later) (020603); pet and animal care, n.e.c. (020699); using veterinary services (080701); waiting associated with veterinary services (080702); using veterinary services, n.e.c. (080799); travel related to using veterinary services (180807)

Bills and management: financial management (020901); household and personal organization and planning (020902); home security (020905); household management, n.e.c. (020999); household activities, n.e.c. (029999)

Shopping

Grocery shopping (070101); Purchasing gas (070102); Purchasing food (not groceries) (70103); Shopping, except groceries, food, and gas (070104); Waiting associated with shopping (070105); Shopping, n.e.c. (070199); Comparison shopping (070201); Researching purchases, n.e.c. (070299); Security procedures related to consumer purchases (070301); Security procedures related to consumer purchases, n.e.c. (070399); Consumer purchases, n.e.c. (079999); Travel related to grocery shopping (180701); Travel related to other shopping, inclusive (2003, 2004) (180702); Travel related to purchasing food (not groceries) (2005+) (180704); Travel related to purchasing gas (2004+) (180705); Travel related to consumer purchases, n.e.c. (180799)

Childcare

Physical care for household children (030101); reading to or with household children (030102); playing with household children, not sports (030103); arts and crafts with household children (030104); playing sports with household children (030105); talking with or listening to household children (030106); organization and planning for household children (030108); looking after household children (as a primary activity) (030109); attending household children’s events (030110); waiting for or with household children (030111); picking up or dropping off household children (030112); caring for and helping household children, n.e.c. (030199); homework (household children) (030201); meetings and school conferences (household children) (030202); home schooling of household children (030203); waiting associated with household children’s education (030204); activities related to household child’s education, n.e.c. (030299); activities related to household children’s health (030300); providing medical care to household children (030301); obtaining medical care for household children (030302); waiting associated with household children’s health (030303); activities related to household child’s health, n.e.c. (030399); travel related to caring for and helping household children, inclusive (2003 and 2004) (180301); travel related to caring for and helping household children (2005 and later) (180302); travel related to household children’s education (2005 and later) (180303); travel related to household children’s health (2005 and later) (180304)

Note: n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified

For the married parent subsample, we also examined daily time reported for childcare, recoded into weekly hours of childcare. Childcare included all basic care of children, developmental activities (reading, playing, teaching), medical care for children, and managerial activities related to children. Specific activities nested within this broad category of childcare are shown in Table 3.

The focal independent variables were time periods and gender. We constructed a variable that reflects the survey period, coded categorically into these groups: 2003–2005, 2006–2008, 2009–2011, 2012–2014, 2015–2017, 2018–2019, separate indicators for 2020 and 2021 to better capture changes in housework and childcare time during the pandemic, and 2022–2023 for postpandemic housework and childcare time.² We stratified all models by gender to identify gender differences in each survey period and overall time trends. To account for other relevant factors that influence housework and childcare time, we included the following control variables: respondent age coded into four groups that loosely reflect life stage (25–34, 35–44, 45–54, and 55–64 years), race and ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian, with Native American and Pacific Islander individuals excluded because of small cell sizes and multiracial individuals coded in the ethnoracial category listed first), the presence of children in the household, education level (college degree and no college degree), average weekly paid work hours (the total number of hours the respondent usually works at all jobs), and weekly earnings (logged) (see Table A1 in the Appendix for descriptive statistics of control variables). We do not standarize earnings to 2003 dollars; however this does not affect the patterns shown. About 9.4 percent of respondents had missing values in weekly work hours and/or earnings. We used the multiple imputation method to impute missing data with 15 replicates of the dataset.

Analytic Strategies

The analysis was conducted in three parts. First, we calculated the average (mean) hours per week that married women and men spent on total housework, core housework, occasional housework, shopping, and the specific activities nested under these categories.³ For married mothers and fathers, we also estimated their average weekly hours spent on childcare. Second, we pooled data from different time periods and conducted ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to test factors that predict married women’s and married men’s total, core, and occasional housework time. Third, we assessed how much of the changes in total, core, and occasional housework time for married women and men between 2003 and 2023 could be explained by population compositional shifts versus remain unexplained, suggesting normative changes. This was done by conducting a Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analysis of the change in housework hours from 2003–2005 to 2022–2023, using Stata’s oaxaca command. The decomposition analysis separated the change in housework hours over time into two components: (1) the explained part that captures the portion of the change resulting from compositional shifts such as women’s increasing education levels or labor force participation (i.e., changes in the distribution of the independent variables) versus (2) the unexplained part that may capture the changed propensities to do housework given, for example, a particular education and employment status (i.e., changes in the magnitude of regression coefficients while holding the distribution of the independent variables constant) (Jann 2008).

Results

Trends in Housework Time: Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 shows weighted descriptive means of married women’s and married men’s weekly hours in total, core, and occasional housework, as well as the time allocated to specific tasks nested under core and occasional housework time. Table 1 also displays the total hours of shopping time. We first discuss the trend for married women’s and men’s housework time. Differences in housework time over time were tested by running OLS regression with the survey period as the independent variable (2003–2005 as the reference group). We then discuss how these trends have led to shifts in the gender gap in housework time from 2003 to 2023 on the basis of the ratio of women’s to men’s time. Differences in the gender gap over time were examined using OLS regression by interacting survey periods and gender. We also present trends in gender differences for total, core, and occasional housework time in Figure 1A and trends in the ratios of married women’s to men’s time in Figure 1B.

Figure 1.

(A) Trends in gender differences in weekly total, core, and occasional housework hours, married women and men aged 25 to 64 years. (B) Trend in ratios of women’s to men’s weekly housework hours in total, core, and occasional housework, married women and men aged 25 to 64 years.

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Gender difference = women’s time − men’s time. Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group.

⁺p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Considering married women first, total housework time decreased significantly from 18.5 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 17.2 hours per week in 2018–2019. It returned to the earlier level during the pandemic (2020 and 2021) but then decreased again to 17.7 hours per week in 2022–2023. This suggests that the overall trend for women to reduce housework time since the mid-1960s, as noted in previous research (Bianchi et al. 2012), has continued into the first two decades of the 2000s. Trends in core housework time aligned with those of total housework, as expected, because most housework time was spent on core housework. The decrease in core housework time was concentrated in housecleaning and laundry, traditionally considered feminine tasks. Housecleaning time dropped from 4.9 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 4.1 hours in 2018–2019. Despite the brief upward blip in 2020, when outsourcing housecleaning was less of an option and more housework was required because of more time in the home, housecleaning time returned to about 4.0 hours per week in 2021 and 2022–2023. Women’s laundry and ironing time declined steadily over the period, falling from 3.0 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 2.2 hours in 2022–2023. In contrast to housecleaning and laundry time, married women’s cooking time increased significantly, rising from 4.9 hours per week between 2003 and 2008 to a peak of 5.9 hours in 2020, and then settling at 5.5 hours in 2022–2023. Hence, among married women, core housework time declined overall and shifted from housecleaning and laundry to cooking. Regarding occasional housework tasks such as bill paying and household management, repairs, outdoor chores, and gardening and animal care, married women allocated 4.0 hours per week to these activities in 2003–2005. This duration remained relatively stable at about 3.7 hours between 2006 and 2019, with some reduced time spent on repairs. But following the pandemic outbreak, this time rebounded to the level seen in 2003–2005, as more time was dedicated to garden and animal care. The shopping time of married women decreased steadily from 6.0 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 4.9 hours in 2018–2019 and then to about 4.5 hours following the pandemic outbreak. This decline was driven primarily by reduced time spent shopping outside the home, which happened even before the pandemic-imposed restrictions on shopping in retail stores (Table A3).

Married men’s total housework time remained stable at about 10.0 hours per week between 2003 and 2019, but increased significantly to 11.6 hours in 2020, before falling to 11.0 hours in 2021 and 11.2 hours in 2022–2023. Of note, the stability in men’s total housework time masked two divergent trends. Married men’s core housework time increased steadily from 3.5 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 4.6 hours in 2018–2019, with further increases during and after the pandemic, peaking at 5.6 hours in 2022–2023. Unlike married women, married men increased their time in all core housework activities, particularly cooking. In contrast to core housework, married men’s occasional housework time decreased from 6.6 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 5.6 hours in 2018–2019, rising briefly to the 2003–2005 level in 2020, before falling back to 5.6 hours in 2021 and 2022–2023. Outdoor chores and repairs, rather than garden and animal care and household bills and management tasks, accounted for the decrease. Married men’s shopping time remained consistent at approximately 3.7 hours per week from 2003 to 2019. It declined to 2.9 hours in 2020 but then returned to prepandemic levels in 2021 and 2022–2023. However, upon closer examination, the time married men spent shopping for food, gas, and groceries outside the home decreased significantly between 2003 and 2017, while their time spent on other types of shopping, both at home and outside the home, increased substantially during the same period (Table A3).

The ratio of women’s to men’s time shows that married women continued to do more total housework, core housework, and shopping than married men, while men took on more occasional housework than women. Nevertheless, these gender gaps converged between 2003 and 2023. In 2022–2023, married women reported spending 1.6 times as many hours as married men on total housework, a significant decrease from the 1.8 times reported in 2003–2005. Reflecting differential convergence, the gender gap for core household chores narrowed more substantively, with women spending 4.2 times the hours as men in 2003–2005 compared with 2.5 times in 2022–2023, a 40 percent decline in the gap this century. Among core housework tasks, laundry and ironing exhibited the largest gender gap throughout the period but also saw the most significant reduction in the gap. The gender gap in shopping time also steadily declined, with women spending 1.6 times the hours as men in 2003–2005 to nearly gender parity in 2022–2023 at a 1.2:1 ratio. Regarding occasional housework tasks, the reduction in the gender gap was less pronounced but still notable, converging from women spending 0.6 times the hours as men in 2003–2005 to about 0.7 times as much in the early 2020s.

Narrowing the analysis to focus on parents, Table 2 reports trends in the average weekly housework hours of married mothers and fathers. Overall, the patterns mirror those of married women and men, but with some nuanced variations. Married mothers’ total housework time decreased from 19.2 hours in 2003–2005 to 18.1 hours in 2018–2019. Although the time increased to 19.0 hours in 2020—making it not significantly different from 2003–2005—it dropped by more than an hour between 2020 and 2022–2023. Mothers’ core housework time declined by about an hour between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023. Like married women, married mothers saw an increase in cooking time, from 5.3 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 6.4 hours in 2022–2023. In contrast, housecleaning time dropped significantly by about one hour, and laundry time decreased by more than one hour. Married mothers’ occasional housework time significantly decreased by about 0.5 hours before the pandemic but rose back to the 2003–2005 level after the pandemic outbreak. Their shopping time decreased from 6.3 hours in 2003–2005 to 4.3 hours in 2022–2023, primarily because of reduced time spent shopping outside the home (Table A4).

Trends among married fathers were also similar to those observed for all married men. Like married men, married fathers’ total housework time did not change much before the pandemic but increased significantly during and after the pandemic. Reflecting differential convergence, the core (feminine) versus occasional (masculine) housework patterns moved in opposite directions. Fathers’ core housework time rose from 3.8 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 4.7 hours in 2018–2019 and exceeded 5.5 hours between 2020 and 2022–2023. This rise reflects married fathers’ increased involvement in all types of core housework activities, particularly cooking. Occasional housework time decreased by approximately an hour, following a nonlinear trend. It fell from 5.6 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 4.2 hours in 2012–2014 and then fluctuated from a low of 4.2 hours to a high of 5.1 hours. Like all married men, married fathers’ shopping time remained relatively stable over the period, except for a temporary decrease in 2020 because of the pandemic.

Married parents’ gender gaps in housework time, particularly core housework time narrowed significantly over time. Married mothers spent 2.1 times the hours as married fathers on total housework in 2003–2005. This ratio remained mostly stable over the years until it declined to about 1.7 times following the pandemic outbreak. The gender gap in core housework time was larger than that for total housework time but also declined more substantially, from 4.3 times in 2003–2005 to 2.6 times in 2022–2023. The gender gaps in time spent on occasional housework and shopping among married parents were similar to those observed among all married women and men over the years.

Table 2 also presents married mothers’ and married fathers’ weekly childcare time between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023. Married mothers’ childcare time showed a tendency to increase before the pandemic (from 14.1 to 15.0 hours per week). Notably, despite the widespread upheaval of daily life during the pandemic, mothers’ childcare time did not change dramatically. Note, however, that the time reported for childcare activities represents only a limited subset of parental time investments in children. It does not account for time parents spend monitoring or supervising children without active engagement, nor does it include time spent with children in nonchildcare activities, such as leisure. Married fathers’ childcare time increased significantly from 6.9 hours per week in 2003–2005 to 7.6 hours in 2018–2019. It rose further during the pandemic to 8.4 hours in 2021 and remained at 8.3 hours in 2022–2023. Although both married mothers and fathers increased their childcare times, the gender gap in childcare time shrunk, albeit not significantly, from a 2.1 to 1.8:1 ratio.

Determinants of Housework Time: OLS Regression

Table 4 presents findings from OLS regression analyses that predict total, core, and occasional housework time among married women and men. The results generally aligned with the trends observed in the descriptive statistics, although some differences between years ceased to be statistically significant once control variables were accounted for.

Table 4.

Ordinary Least Squares Coefficient: Determinants of Weekly Housework Hours for Married Women and Men Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	Total Housework		Core Housework		Occasional Housework
	Women	Men	Women	Men	Women	Men
Years (reference: 2003–05)
2006–2008	−0.599*	−0.299	−0.372	0.397**	−0.227	−0.696**
	(0.287)	(0.275)	(0.244)	(0.146)	(0.155)	(0.236)
2009–2011	−0.741*	−0.247	−0.348	0.506***	−0.393**	−0.752**
	(0.295)	(0.276)	(0.253)	(0.135)	(0.152)	(0.239)
2012–2014	−0.910**	−0.417	−0.605*	0.855***	−0.305+	−1.272***
	(0.301)	(0.294)	(0.254)	(0.142)	(0.163)	(0.258)
2015–2017	−0.570+	0.066	−0.349	0.870***	−0.221	−0.804**
	(0.306)	(0.300)	(0.261)	(0.144)	(0.161)	(0.265)
2018–2019	−0.770*	0.228	−0.582+	1.127***	−0.188	−0.899**
	(0.387)	(0.357)	(0.323)	(0.174)	(0.196)	(0.315)
2020	0.534	1.756***	0.358	1.690***	0.176	0.066
	(0.520)	(0.532)	(0.445)	(0.326)	(0.248)	(0.411)
2021	0.092	1.030*	−0.684+	1.914***	0.776*	−0.883*
	(0.531)	(0.488)	(0.394)	(0.313)	(0.346)	(0.376)
2022–2023	−0.139	1.463***	−0.364	2.168***	0.224	−0.704*
	(0.388)	(0.388)	(0.336)	(0.223)	(0.196)	(0.317)
Age (reference: 25–34 years)
35–44 years	2.159***	0.983***	1.393***	−0.047	0.766***	1.030***
	(0.229)	(0.239)	(0.202)	(0.148)	(0.108)	(0.192)
45–54 years	3.411***	1.854***	2.188***	−0.310*	1.223***	2.164***
	(0.261)	(0.249)	(0.225)	(0.145)	(0.128)	(0.205)
55–64 years	3.301***	1.495***	2.005***	−0.985***	1.296***	2.480***
	(0.315)	(0.296)	(0.264)	(0.167)	(0.169)	(0.250)
Race (reference: White)
Black	−4.056***	−3.383***	−1.343***	−0.319	−2.713***	−3.063***
	(0.310)	(0.309)	(0.283)	(0.201)	(0.121)	(0.231)
Hispanic	3.582***	−2.128***	5.577***	−0.350*	−1.995***	−1.778***
	(0.293)	(0.247)	(0.269)	(0.157)	(0.117)	(0.194)
Asian	0.894*	−3.121***	3.054***	0.111	−2.160***	−3.232***
	(0.354)	(0.326)	(0.313)	(0.216)	(0.148)	(0.222)
Have household children younger than 18 years	1.654***	−0.344	3.003***	0.658***	−1.348***	−1.002***
	(0.231)	(0.216)	(0.197)	(0.116)	(0.121)	(0.185)
Have a college degree	−1.168***	−0.021	−1.587***	0.628***	0.419***	−0.648***
	(0.185)	(0.184)	(0.154)	(0.100)	(0.100)	(0.155)
Average weekly paid work hours	−0.141***	−0.091***	−0.111***	−0.050***	−0.030***	−0.041***
	(0.011)	(0.010)	(0.009)	(0.005)	(0.006)	(0.009)
Log weekly earning	−0.683***	−0.394***	−0.588***	−0.223***	−0.095*	−0.171*
	(0.075)	(0.077)	(0.062)	(0.040)	(0.038)	(0.067)
Constant	22.019***	15.894***	16.610***	6.664***	5.409***	9.230***
	(0.349)	(0.418)	(0.296)	(0.230)	(0.186)	(0.354)
n	51,436	45,584	51,436	45,584	51,436	45,584

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Coefficients are presented, with standard errors in parentheses. All analyses were weighted.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

The results also indicate gender differences in factors predicting the housework time of married individuals (the significance of these gender differences is outlined in Table A5). Among both married women and men, older age was linked to greater total housework time, with the association being significantly stronger among married women. Compared with younger men, older men devoted more time to occasional housework but less time to core housework. Conversely, older women engaged more in both core and occasional housework than their younger counterparts. Black married individuals, both women and men, reported less time spent on all types of housework compared with their White peers (although the difference in men’s core housework time was not statistically significant). Hispanic and Asian women allocated more time to total and core housework but less to occasional housework compared with White women. Hispanic and Asian men spent less time on total and occasional housework compared with White men.

The presence of household children was positively related to core housework time for both married women and men, though the association was significantly smaller among married men. Additionally, because residing with children was associated with a reduction in occasional housework time for men, married fathers’ total housework time was “not significantly different” than their peers without children.

In terms of socioeconomic status, higher weekly earnings were linked to less time spent on total, core, and occasional housework for married women and men, with the association being more pronounced among married women. Longer hours of paid work were also associated with less time spent on all types of housework, particularly among married women. The influence of education was more intricate. Overall, a college degree was negatively related to the total housework time of married women but had no significant impact on that of married men. However this masked important differences in the two different types of housework. Women with a college education allocated significantly less time to core housework, but more to occasional housework compared with those without a college degree. Among married men, the opposite was true: men with a college degree allocated significantly more time to core housework but less time to occasional housework than men without a degree.

Decomposing Changes in Housework Time

The OLS regression results demonstrate how various factors relate to the housework time of married women and men over the years. To further assess the mechanisms behind changes in total, core and occasional housework time, we conducted decomposition analyses (Tables 5A–5C, Figure 2), which divided the changes in housework time between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023 into (1) a component that could be explained by population compositional shifts such as increased education and paid work hours and aging of the population and (2) an unexplained component that could be attributed to factors such as behavioral and normative changes.

Table 5A.

Decomposition of Changes in Married Women’s and Married Men’s Average Weekly Hours of Total Housework between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023.

	Women		Men
Overall difference	−0.810*		1.108**
	(0.412)		(0.392)
	Explained	Unexplained	Explained	Unexplained
Total	−0.881***	0.071	−0.511***	1.619***
	(0.187)	(0.401)	(0.138)	(0.398)
Age (reference: 25–34 years)
35–44 years	−0.013	−1.026***	−0.001	−0.056
	(0.020)	(0.304)	(0.014)	(0.297)
45–54 years	−0.083*	−0.913**	−0.025	−0.220
	(0.040)	(0.305)	(0.024)	(0.317)
55–64 years	0.146***	−0.674*	0.072*	−0.181
	(0.043)	(0.291)	(0.035)	(0.307)
Race (reference: White)
Black	−0.055	0.071	−0.019	−0.001
	(0.035)	(0.113)	(0.030)	(0.130)
Hispanic	0.219***	0.068	−0.176***	0.309
	(0.056)	(0.199)	(0.046)	(0.189)
Asian	0.015	−0.067	−0.194***	0.086
	(0.039)	(0.082)	(0.037)	(0.057)
Have household children younger than 18 years	−0.013	−0.504	0.001	−0.409
	(0.020)	(0.498)	(0.004)	(0.513)
Have a college degree	−0.237***	0.119	0.020	0.335
	(0.068)	(0.347)	(0.040)	(0.330)
Average weekly paid work hours	−0.297***	−1.720	0.095*	−1.268
	(0.081)	(1.301)	(0.044)	(1.662)
Log weekly earning	−0.563***	0.923	−0.282**	0.572
	(0.119)	(1.470)	(0.086)	(2.103)
Constant		3.794**		2.452
		(1.344)		(1.859)
N	14,409		12,725

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Coefficients are presented, with standard errors in parentheses. All analyses were weighted.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Table 5C.

Decomposition of Changes in Married Women’s and Married Men’s Average Weekly Hours of Occasional Housework between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023.

	Women		Men
Overall difference	−0.072		−0.995**
	(0.198)		(0.318)
	Explained	Unexplained	Explained	Unexplained
Total	−0.317***	0.245	−0.413***	−0.582+
	(0.072)	(0.205)	(0.109)	(0.323)
Age (reference: 25–34 years)
35–44 years	−0.007	−0.009	−0.001	0.021
	(0.011)	(0.141)	(0.012)	(0.225)
45–54 years	−0.035*	−0.147	−0.030	−0.020
	(0.017)	(0.133)	(0.028)	(0.254)
55–64 years	0.071**	−0.028	0.130***	−0.055
	(0.022)	(0.151)	(0.038)	(0.245)
Race (reference: White)
Black	−0.035	−0.028	−0.019	0.068
	(0.022)	(0.042)	(0.029)	(0.083)
Hispanic	−0.140***	0.076	−0.125***	0.328*
	(0.028)	(0.083)	(0.036)	(0.155)
Asian	−0.109***	0.018	−0.181***	0.031
	(0.022)	(0.035)	(0.031)	(0.042)
Have household children younger than 18 years	0.011	−0.316	0.001	−0.240
	(0.017)	(0.262)	(0.010)	(0.416)
Have a college degree	0.088*	−0.186	−0.045	0.284
	(0.035)	(0.180)	(0.034)	(0.270)
Average weekly paid work hours	−0.045+	0.251	0.042+	0.309
	(0.026)	(0.653)	(0.024)	(1.368)
Log weekly earning	−0.115*	−0.483	−0.184**	−0.005
	(0.050)	(0.728)	(0.070)	(1.721)
Constant		1.098		−1.305
		(0.683)		(1.474)
N	14,409		12,725

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Coefficients are presented, with standard errors in parentheses. All analyses were weighted.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Figure 2.

Coefficients of change in total, core, and occasional housework time between 2003–2005 and 2022–23 explained and unexplained by compositional changes of the sample.

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Estimates are from the decomposition analyses presented in Tables 5A to 5C.

+p < .10. ***p < .001.

Table 5A and Figure 2 show that the decline in married women’s total housework time over the years was due entirely to compositional shifts (−0.881/−0.810×100=108.8 percent). For example, the rise in married women receiving college degrees accounted for about 29.3 percent (−0.237/−0.810×100) of the decrease in housework time, while increased weekly earnings contributed about 69.5 percent (−0.563/−0.810×100). Married women’s housework time might have declined even more over the period, were it not for the increased proportion of Hispanic women and women aged 55 to 64 years, which resulted in more, rather than less housework time. In contrast to married women, the increase in married men’s total housework time over the years was unexplained (1.169/1.108×100=146.1 percent), suggesting that the increase could be attributed to normative changes in behavior, or to other factors that not accounted for by the models. Compositional shifts, including the increase in the proportion of Hispanic and Asian men and the rise in weekly earnings led to a reduction in total housework time for married men. In other words, if the demographic composition and weekly earnings of married men had remained the same between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023, their total housework time would have increased even more.

Similar patterns were observed in core housework time (Table 5B, Figure 2). Approximately 76.4 percent (−0.564/−0.738×100) of the reduction in married women’s core housework time could be explained by compositional shifts, especially the rise in women’s college completion, paid work hours, and income. Conversely, the increase in married men’s core housework time was unexplained (2.201/2.103×100=104.7 percent). Compositional shifts—specifically increased weekly earnings, a higher share of the Hispanic population, and a larger proportion of men aged 55 to 64 years—reduced, rather than increased married men’s core housework time. In terms of occasional housework (Table 5C, Figure 2), the decrease in married men’s time could mainly be attributed to the increased proportion of Hispanic and Asian populations and rising weekly earnings. Although these compositional shifts also reduced married women’s occasional housework time over the years, their effects were offset by changes in unexplained factors. As a result, the time married women spent on occasional housework did not change significantly over time.

Table 5B.

Decomposition of Changes in Married Women’s and Married Men’s Average Weekly Hours of Core Housework between 2003–2005 and 2022–2023.

	Women		Men
Overall difference	−0.738*		2.103***
	(0.359)		(0.222)
	Explained	Unexplained	Explained	Unexplained
Total	−0.564***	−0.174	−0.098	2.201***
	(0.169)	(0.348)	(0.073)	(0.232)
Age (reference: 25–34 years)
35–44 years	−0.006	−1.016***	−0.001	−0.077
	(0.010)	(0.271)	(0.002)	(0.197)
45–54 years	−0.048+	−0.766**	0.005	−0.200
	(0.024)	(0.268)	(0.006)	(0.192)
55–64 years	0.075*	−0.646**	−0.058**	−0.126
	(0.031)	(0.242)	(0.022)	(0.187)
Race (reference: White)
Black	−0.020	0.100	−0.001	−0.069
	(0.015)	(0.105)	(0.003)	(0.087)
Hispanic	0.359***	−0.008	−0.050*	−0.020
	(0.067)	(0.183)	(0.021)	(0.112)
Asian	0.124***	−0.085	−0.013	0.055
	(0.037)	(0.073)	(0.019)	(0.038)
Have household children younger than 18 years	−0.023	−0.188	−0.001	−0.169
	(0.036)	(0.419)	(0.006)	(0.297)
Have a college degree	−0.326***	0.305	0.065**	0.051
	(0.060)	(0.294)	(0.023)	(0.184)
Average weekly paid work hours	−0.251***	−1.971+	0.053*	−1.578
	(0.068)	(1.069)	(0.024)	(0.964)
Log weekly earning	−0.447***	1.406	−0.098*	0.578
	(0.098)	(1.233)	(0.047)	(1.232)
Constant		2.696*		3.757**
		(1.175)		(1.174)
N	14,409		12,725

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Coefficients are presented, with standard errors in parentheses. All analyses were weighted.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

The decomposition analysis sheds light on the driving forces underlying the convergence in total and core housework time between married women and men between 2003 and 2023. This convergence was not driven solely by changes in one gender. Instead, women reduced their housework time, whereas men increased theirs. The reasons behind these changes, however, differed. For married women, the reduced housework time could be attributed almost entirely to compositional changes in the population, particularly increased education, paid work hours, and earnings. Although compositional changes also reduced married men’s housework time, changes in men’s behaviors and other factors more than countered this effect, leading to a significant increase in their total and core housework time.⁴ Although some compositional factors remain unmeasured and could contribute to the unexplained effect, it is likely that this component shows that men have adapted their behaviors in ways that reflect a new social norm of masculinity in the home and new expectations between partners.

Discussion

Over the past 60 years, there has been a movement toward gender equality in unpaid domestic labor. Between the 1960s and the 1990s, gender convergence in domestic work progressed rapidly, marked by a substantial decrease in women’s housework time, a moderate increase in men’s housework time, and a notable increase in men’s childcare time (Bianchi et al. 2006; Sandberg and Hofferth 2005; Sayer 2005; Sullivan et al. 2018). However, this convergence appears to have slowed since the 1990s, mirroring a similar slowdown in the increase of women’s labor force participation and the decrease in occupational sex segregation (England 2010). The limited changes in men’s behaviors and the deceleration of gender convergence in paid and unpaid work have led scholars to question whether the gender revolution has stalled (Cotter et al. 2011; England 2010; Goldscheider et al. 2015; Sullivan et al. 2018; Wade 2024).

Using the 2003–2023 ATUS data, we examine whether and how the gender gap in unpaid domestic labor time may have narrowed further in the early twenty-first century among married Americans, including married parents. Adopting a differential convergence perspective, we uncover unique aspects of gender convergence across four categories of unpaid work: core housework, occasional housework, shopping, and childcare. Additionally, we focus on whether changes in the gender gap stem from shifts in one gender’s time or both genders’ time, as well as to what extent these changes may be attributed to shifts in population composition versus possible behavioral or normative changes.

The study reveals that between 2003 and 2023, the total weekly housework time of all married women decreased significantly by approximately one hour, while that of married mothers fell significantly by about 1.5 hours, despite a temporary increase during the pandemic (2020 and 2021). In contrast, both married men’s and married fathers’ total housework time remained largely unchanged before the pandemic, only increasing significantly by about one hour following the pandemic outbreak. Given that the changes in men’s and women’s housework time were not drastic, and that the decrease in the gender gap was statistically significant but relatively small in magnitude, it could be argued that a gender convergence in housework time has stalled.

However, a differential convergence perspective asks scholars to step back to assess the qualities of the changes: in what spheres, by whom, and why did changes occur? First, we reflect on the spheres that changed and did not, and whose time use changed the most. When looking at core “feminine” housework such as cooking, cleaning, and laundry, the gender gap converged considerably over time among married individuals (from a women-to-men ratio of 4.2 in 2003–2005 to 2.5 in 2022–2023) and married parents (4.3 to 2.6). This relatively large reduction of 40 percent of the gap came about through women reducing their hours and men increasing theirs. The increase in men’s time (more than two hours) was of greater magnitude than the decrease in women’s time (around one hour). These findings indicate that among married individuals and married parents, gendered housework is converging in the very area that has long been thought resistant to change because of its symbolic association with femininity. Married men’s and married fathers’ increasing involvement in core housework was driven mainly by a rise in cooking time, along with a slight but significant uptick in meal cleanup, housecleaning, and laundry time, all of which had long been seen as “feminine” labor. Furthermore, the increase in married men’s core housework time has remained stable after controlling for age, race, the presence of children, and socioeconomic status. And this increase is linked to men’s greater propensity to engage in housework rather than to compositional shifts in the male population. It seems like men have increasingly integrated housework, especially core tasks, into their daily routines. And as they take on activities such as cleaning and laundry, the perception of these tasks may also evolve. What was historically viewed as “women’s work” in the home may increasingly be recognized as gender-neutral work.

In terms of occasional housework tasks that are traditionally considered more masculine, such as outdoor chores and bill management, married women and mothers maintained their limited time in this area and tended to decrease their involvement before the pandemic outbreak. Married men and fathers also reduced the time they dedicate to these tasks. This decline was largely due to shifts in the population composition, particularly the growing numbers of Hispanic and Asian men, who generally spend less time on occasional housework, and the rise in weekly income, which might have enabled more tasks like yard work to be outsourced. The reduction of men’s time in these more “masculine” tasks has been overshadowed by their great increase in more “feminine” core housework. As a result, the types of housework men perform have shifted over time; their embrace of a more traditionally feminine distribution of household tasks also likely means a more regular and potentially more onerous load of unpaid work in the home.

Despite substantial time demands in the regular work of shopping for a household, the gender gap in shopping time has been relatively unexplored in research on the gendered division of labor. We show that the gender gap in shopping time among married individuals and married parents also changed significantly between 2003 and 2023, moving toward parity between the genders. In terms of taking trips for grocery, gas or food shopping—which are core shopping tasks that need to be done routinely and have traditionally been viewed as feminine—women decreased their time, while men’s showed no consistent time trend over the century. The similar amount of time that married women and men spent on food, gas, and grocery shopping in the 2020s indicate a potential cultural movement toward gender neutrality associated with this traditionally-feminine task.

For married parents, another key aspect of unpaid work they engage in regularly is childcare. Between 2003 and 2023, married mothers slightly increased their childcare hours (though not significantly), while fathers’ childcare hours increased significantly from 6.9 to 8.3 hours per week. Although the change observed in the gender gap in childcare time over this period was not statistically significant, the gap is at its lowest point in 60 years (see Bianchi et al. 2012). The increase in U.S. fathers’ childcare time between the 1990s and the early 2000s is well documented (Bianchi et al. 2012), and past research has suggested that, over time, men have increased their involvement more in childcare but less in routine housework (Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Bianchi et al. 2006; Pailhé et al. 2021). This work extends earlier findings to show that between 2003 and 2023, married American men became more engaged in the traditionally feminine arenas of routine housework and childcare, and contributed relatively more so in a third domain, shopping.

The pandemic affected time use abruptly. Among married Americans, both men’s and women’s housework time ticked up in 2020. Although women’s total and core housework time showed a tendency to return to prepandemic levels in 2021 and 2022–2023, the time men devoted to total and core housework in 2021 and 2022–2023 remained largely unchanged from 2020. As a result, the gender convergence in core and total housework time that occurred during the pandemic persisted afterward. It seems as if men’s increasing participation in cooking and cleaning during the pandemic, may have become more habitual, potentially shaping the gender norms associated with these housework tasks. Not unexpectedly, both women and men reduced their time spent on food, gas, and grocery shopping outside the home in 2020. However, starting in 2021, women’s routine shopping time stabilized at the 2020 level, while men’s time increased compared with 2020. This reduced the gender shopping gap to a point of almost parity between the genders. The pandemic appears to have shifted the norms associated with routine grocery shopping, making it a more “gender-neutral” task. Surprisingly, married mothers’ childcare time did not increase during the pandemic. This may be because the increase in time spent teaching children, as noted in previous research (Augustine and Prickett 2022), was offset by, for example, a decrease in time spent driving children to school and extracurricular activities. It is also possible that mothers were only more involved in secondary childcare activities not captured in this study, such as having children nearby while doing paid work or housework. Although married fathers’ childcare time increased by almost an hour during the pandemic and remained at this higher level afterward, the gender gap in childcare time did not narrow significantly following the pandemic outbreak.

We also showed important differences in the “whys” of social change. As mentioned above, the increase in men’s housework time may be attributed to factors that cannot be explained by compositional shifts in the population measured in our models. In contrast, the decrease in women’s housework time was predominantly driven by compositional changes in the variables included in the analysis, particularly increased income. Although the patterns of gender convergence in housework time were different from what was observed between the 1960s and 1990s, the underlying reasons for the changes remained similar (Bianchi et al. 2000). In other words, women have changed because of important other changes in their lives such as those related to their resources. Men, on the other hand, are changing even faster and in a way that scholars could consider may be counter to a “stall” (see Wade 2024 for a reassessment of the term stall in gender scholarship). Indeed, married men seem to have gone against the grain in changing toward a more gender-neutral world of unpaid work, across multiple kinds of tasks.

There are limitations to this study. First, we do not measure certain aspects of unpaid work well, because of data limitations. For example, regarding cognitive labor, which tends to be shouldered more by wives than husbands (Daminger 2019), time diaries can capture some of it under categories like household management, organization, and planning. But the ways this kind of labor occurs in everyday life may not be adequately captured. Similarly, we only focus on hands-on childcare time, instead of parents’ total time in activities with children present, or supervisory time; some argue that this is where more gender disparity is evident (Augustine and Prickett 2022).

Second, while arguing married men’s decreased housework time over the years can be attributed to factors such as behavioral and normative changes, we acknowledge that the unexplained part of the decomposition analysis may include unmeasured factors beyond these changes. For example, marriage has become less common in the United States in recent decades, particularly among individuals with lower occupational prestige and wealth (Bloome and Ang 2020). The effects of such shifts on the gendered division of housework over time may not be fully captured by our analyses.

Third, because the ATUS does not collect data on couples, the married women and men in the analysis came from different households. Therefore, we cannot examine the distribution of domestic labor between couples or how this has changed over time.

Finally, although the trends portray a positive picture of change, it is important to remember that among groups not captured here, including single parents, those doing eldercare, and those employed in cleaning and care professions for (low) pay, it is predominantly women who carry heavy loads of these forms of oftentimes difficult and undervalued work.

Despite these limitations, this study offers conceptual clarity and a critical update on gender convergence in the domestic labor time of married Americans, as well as the childcare time of married parents. We argue that when examining changes in the gendered division of domestic labor, it is important to adopt a differential convergence perspective and assess which domestic tasks experience gender convergence, whose changes narrow the gap, and why these changes happen. The historically large gender gap in unpaid domestic labor time has narrowed further in the twenty-first century but at a slower pace than that observed between the 1960s and 1990s. However, the gender convergence in traditionally feminine core housework, particularly in housecleaning and laundry, as well as in shopping, has been substantial. Importantly, we can see that why men have changed cannot be easily explained by the changing population of married men. Rather, men appear to have an increased proclivity for doing more traditionally feminine work, reflecting new norms and expectations. In doing so, men also redefine what activities are acceptable for men to do and thus move social definitions away from unpaid labor as “women’s work.”

By adopting a differential convergence perspective, we reveal that among married individuals and married parents, although women still carry more domestic responsibilities than men and changes in gender differences have been relatively slow since the 2000s, the gender revolution in the division of domestic labor has not stalled. Men’s behaviors at home have changed in significant ways during this century. Future research could consider examining differential convergence in paid work hours and in different types of childcare. Understanding the nuances of which types of work are changing and by whose actions is crucial to a fulsome understanding of gender inequalities in this century.

Biographies

Melissa A. Milkie is a professor of sociology and chair of the graduate department at the University of Toronto, is professor emerita at the University of Maryland, and recently served as president of the Work and Family Researchers Network. She is the author of the award-winning Changing Rhythms of American Family Life. Her research centers on links among gender, work-family strains, and well-being. With a unique focus on gendered culture, she is currently analyzing social forces linked to (1) mothering and fathering across time and region; (2) paradoxes of parents’ time use; (3) trends and cross-cultural patterns of childcare, housework, paid work, and leisure time; and (4) complexities in how people experience and make meaning about time use in daily life. Her research has been supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council in Canada and the National Institutes of Health in the United States and is published in journals such as American Sociological Review, Social Forces, the Journal of Marriage and Family, and Society and Mental Health.

Liana C. Sayer is a professor of sociology, a faculty affiliate of the Maryland Population Research Center, and director of the Maryland Time Use Laboratory at the University of Maryland. From 2021 to 2024, she was the editor of the Journal of Marriage and Family. Her research on cross-national and historical determinants, patterns, and consequences of gendered time use documents how time use is a fundamental mechanism that reinforces and reconfigures gender, race and class inequality over time, place, and generation.

Kei Nomaguchi is a professor of sociology at Bowling Green State University. Her research interests focus on parenting, parent-child relationships, work-family linkages, and health and well-being. She primarily uses statistical analysis of national datasets to examine disparities in parental and child well-being across social statuses, such as socioeconomic status, gender, race/ethnicity, and family structure, and across life stages and cohorts. She has published extensively on social determinants of parental stress and mental health, work-family conflict, and maternal employment and child outcomes. She is currently investigating racial/ethnic differences in the ideology of motherhood, parental time with children, and children’s time use. Her work has been published in the Journal of Marriage and Family, the Journal of Family Issues, Family Relations, the Journal of Family and Economic Issues, the Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Society and Mental Health, Social Science Research, Social Science and Medicine, and Socius.

Hope Xu Yan is an assistant professor of sociology at Louisiana State University. Her research centers on how social inequalities in health and well-being are (re)produced within family and through workplace dynamics. She conducts research in various societies, including the United States, India, and China.

Appendix

Table A1.

Means and Standard Deviations of Independent Variables for Married Women and Married Men.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
Married women
Age
25–34 years	.23 (.42)	.22 (.42)	.21 (.41)	.21 (.41)	.21 (.41)	.22 (.41)	.21 (.41)	.23 (.42)	.21 (.41)
35–44 years	.29 (.46)	.29 (.45)	.27 (.45)	.26 (.44)	.27 (.44)	.27 (.44)	.28 (.45)	.27 (.44)	.28 (.45)
45–54 years	.28 (.45)	.28 (.45)	.29 (.45)	.28 (.45)	.27 (.44)	.25 (.44)	.25 (.44)	.25 (.43)	.26 (.44)
55–64 years	.19 (.40)	.20 (.40)	.23 (.42)	.25 (.43)	.25 (.44)	.26 (.44)	.26 (.44)	.25 (.44)	.25 (.43)
Race/ethnicity
White	.78 (.42)	.75 (.43)	.74 (.44)	.72 (.45)	.69 (.46)	.69 (.46)	.69 (.46)	.66 (.47)	.64 (.48)
Black	.07 (.26)	.07 (.25)	.07 (.25)	.07 (.25)	.07 (.26)	.08 (.26)	.09 (.28)	.08 (.27)	.08 (.28)
Hispanic	.12 (.32)	.13 (.34)	.14 (.34)	.15 (.36)	.16 (.37)	.17 (.38)	.16 (.37)	.19 (.39)	.19 (.39)
Asian	.03 (.18)	.05 (.21)	.05 (.22)	.06 (.24)	.07 (.25)	.06 (.25)	.06 (.24)	.07 (.26)	.08 (.28)
Have household children younger than 18 years	.54 (.50)	.54 (.50)	.53 (.50)	.53 (.50)	.52 (.50)	.52 (.50)	.53 (.50)	.52 (.50)	.53 (.50)
Have a college degree	.33 (.47)	.35 (.48)	.38 (.49)	.40 (.49)	.44 (.50)	.47 (.50)	.51 (.50)	.49 (.50)	.51 (.50)
Average weekly work hours	25.33 (19.99)	26.03 (19.94)	25.41 (20.05)	24.57 (19.84)	25.32 (20.07)	27.11 (19.46)	25.58 (20.40)	26.93 (19.91)	27.67 (19.74)
Weekly earning	440.48 (489.82)	509.32 (553.81)	530.54 (575.11)	557.94 (616.96)	605.25 (657.72)	710.89 (711.34)	739.05 (784.04)	800.49 (795.92)	857.80 (812.80)
Married men
Age
25–34 years	.21 (.41)	.20 (.40)	.19 (.39)	.19 (.39)	.19 (.39)	.19 (.39)	.20 (.40)	.18 (.39)	.17 (.38)
35–44 years	.29 (.45)	.28 (.45)	.27 (.44)	.26 (.44)	.26 (.44)	.26 (.44)	.28 (.45)	.28 (.45)	.29 (.45)
45–54 years	.29 (.45)	.29 (.45)	.29 (.46)	.29 (.45)	.27 (.45)	.28 (.45)	.25 (.43)	.26 (.44)	.28 (.45)
55–64 years	.21 (.41)	.23 (.42)	.25 (.43)	.26 (.44)	.27 (.45)	.27 (.45)	.27 (.44)	.27 (.44)	.27 (.44)
Race/ethnicity
White	.75 (.43)	.75 (.43)	.72 (.45)	.71 (.45)	.69 (.46)	.67 (.47)	.65 (.48)	.64 (.48)	.64 (.48)
Black	.08 (.27)	.08 (.26)	.08 (.27)	.08 (.26)	.09 (.29)	.09 (.28)	.09 (.28)	.09 (.29)	.08 (.28)
Hispanic	.14 (.34)	.14 (.35)	.15 (.36)	.16 (.37)	.17 (.38)	.18 (.38)	.19 (.39)	.21 (.41)	.20 (.40)
Asian	.03 (.18)	.03 (.18)	.04 (.20)	.05 (.22)	.05 (.22)	.06 (.23)	.08 (.27)	.06 (.25)	.08 (.27)
Have household children younger 18 years	.55 (.50)	.56 (.50)	.56 (.50)	.55 (.50)	.54 (.50)	.55 (.50)	.55 (.50)	.54 (.50)	.55 (.50)
Have a college degree	.34 (.48)	.35 (.48)	.36 (.48)	.37 (.48)	.41 (.49)	.43 (.50)	.43 (.50)	.47 (.50)	.45 (.50)
Average weekly work hours	40.62 (18.14)	40.44 (18.56)	38.19 (19.31)	38.83 (18.38)	39.87 (17.78)	39.58 (17.47)	39.51 (16.75)	38.40 (18.31)	39.51 (16.11)
Weekly earning	894.98 (656.87)	961.02 (696.42)	955.50 (728.52)	1,039.05 (770.16)	1,123.82 (795.81)	1,254.11 (836.11)	1,322.84 (860.51)	1,297.16 (897.31)	1,441.32 (859.91)

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Table A2.

Trends in Average Weekly Housework Hours by Gender, All Women and Men Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
All women
Total housework	16.7	16.1**	15.7***	15.8***	16.0**	15.3***	16.5	16.3	16.0*
Core housework	12.9	12.6	12.4*	12.5*	12.5+	12.0***	12.8	12.3+	12.2*
Cooking meals	4.2	4.2	4.5***	4.6***	4.8***	4.6***	5.1***	4.9***	4.9***
Meal cleanup	1.5	1.4**	1.3***	1.3***	1.4	1.4+	1.4	1.5	1.4
Housecleaning	4.4	4.4	4.3	4.1**	3.9***	3.7***	4.1	3.8***	3.8***
Laundry and ironing	2.7	2.5+	2.3***	2.3***	2.3***	2.3***	2.2***	2.1***	2.1***
Occasional housework	3.8	3.5**	3.3***	3.3***	3.4**	3.3**	3.7	4.1	3.7
Outdoor chores	.3	.3*	.3+	.3+	.2*	.2*	.2	.3	.3
Repairs	.6	.5*	.4***	.4**	.4***	.4***	.5	.4*	.4*
Garden and animal care	1.7	1.7	1.7	1.7	1.8	1.6*	1.9	2.2**	1.9*
Bills and management	1.1	1.1	1.0+	1.0**	1.1	1.2	1.1	1.2	1.1
Shopping	5.6	5.6	5.1***	5.0***	4.9***	4.7***	4.2***	4.0***	4.2***
n	18,919	14,871	15,183	13,368	11,598	6,071	2,921	3,021	5,209
All men
Total housework	9.6	9.6	9.5	9.4	9.6	9.3	11.2***	10.3*	10.3*
Core housework	3.7	4.1***	4.2***	4.5***	4.4***	4.6***	5.4***	5.2***	5.5***
Cooking meals	1.6	1.8***	2.0***	2.1***	2.2***	2.3***	2.6***	2.6***	2.5***
Meal cleanup	.4	.4	.4	.4	.4+	.4+	.5***	.5***	.5***
Housecleaning	1.3	1.4+	1.4*	1.5***	1.3	1.2	1.6*	1.6*	1.8***
Laundry and ironing	.4	.5*	.5	.6**	.5*	.7***	.6*	.6	.7***
Occasional housework	5.9	5.5*	5.2***	4.8***	5.1***	4.7***	5.8	5.1**	4.8***
Outdoor chores	1.5	1.1***	1.2*	1.1**	1.0***	.9***	1.1*	.9***	1.0***
Repairs	1.2	1.0	.9***	.7***	.8***	.7***	1.2	.8*	.7***
Garden and animal care	2.4	2.5	2.4	2.3	2.5	2.3	2.7	2.7	2.5
Bills and management	.9	.8	.7**	.7**	.8	.8	.8	.7+	.7+
Shopping	3.7	3.7	3.7	3.6	3.5+	3.4*	2.9***	3.2**	3.3*
n	14,887	11,811	12,160	11,023	9,697	5,284	2,627	2,636	4,667
Ratio of women’s time to men’s time
Total housework	1.7	1.7*	1.7*	1.7*	1.7*	1.6**	1.5**	1.6*	1.5***
Core housework	3.5	3.0**	2.9***	2.7***	2.8***	2.6***	2.4***	2.3***	2.2***
Cooking meals	2.7	2.4*	2.3	2.3	2.2	2.0**	1.9	1.9+	1.9+
Meal cleanup	4.0	3.5**	3.7**	3.6***	3.4*	3.3*	2.7**	2.7+	2.9*
Housecleaning	3.5	3.1	3.0*	2.7***	3.0***	3.0***	2.5**	2.4***	2.1***
Laundry and ironing	6.0	4.8**	4.9***	4.1***	4.3***	3.5***	3.5***	3.7***	3.1***
Occasional housework	.6	.6	.6	.7**	.7+	.7**	.6	.8**	.8***
Outdoor chores	.2	.2**	.2+	.2*	.2**	.3***	.2	.3***	.3**
Repairs	.5	.5	.4	.6***	.5*	.5*	.4	.5	.7**
Garden and animal care	.7	.7	.7	.7	.7	.7	.7	.8	.8
Bills and management	1.3	1.3	1.4	1.4	1.3	1.5	1.4	1.8+	1.5
Shopping	1.5	1.5	1.4**	1.4***	1.4***	1.4**	1.4*	1.3***	1.3***

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Table A3.

Trends in Average Weekly Shopping Hours by Shopping Types and Locations, Married Women and Men Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
Married women
Shopping	6.0	6.0	5.3***	5.3***	5.2***	4.9***	4.5***	4.3***	4.4***
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	.02	.02	.02	.02	.03	.03+	.05**	.06***	.05**
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	3.1	2.2***	2.2***	2.3***	2.4***	2.4***	2.1***	2.0***	2.1***
Other shopping at home	.06	.09	.07	.008	.09+	.11*	.13**	.12*	.10*
Other shopping outside home	2.8	3.7***	3.0	2.9	2.7	2.3***	2.1***	2.1***	2.1***
n	11,379	8,628	8,326	7,213	6,250	3,289	1,649	1,672	3,030
Married men
Shopping	3.7	3.8	3.8	3.7	3.6	3.7	2.9***	3.7	3.6
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	.02	.01	.02	.02	.02	.02	.04*	.04**	.05*
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	2.0	1.5***	1.6***	1.6***	1.7***	1.8	1.6**	2.0	1.8
Other shopping at home	.03	.07*	.06*	.06*	.05+	.09**	.08*	.08+	.09**
Other shopping outside home	1.7	2.2***	2.1***	1.9*	1.9*	1.7	1.2***	1.6	1.6
n	9,995	7,435	7,307	6,423	5,595	3,047	1,527	1,525	2,730
Ratio of women’s time to men’s time
Shopping	1.6	1.6	1.4***	1.4**	1.4***	1.3***	1.5*	1.2***	1.2***
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	1.1	1.4	1.1	.8	1.4	1.4	1.2	1.5	1.2
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	1.5	1.4***	1.4***	1.4***	1.4**	1.3**	1.3**	1.0***	1.1***
Other shopping at home	2.1	1.3	1.2	1.3	1.8	1.2	1.6	1.6	1.3
Other shopping outside home	1.7	1.7+	1.4	1.5	1.4**	1.3**	1.8	1.3**	1.3**

Source: Authors’ calculations, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023). These calculations took into account the location of shopping.

Note: Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group. Food refers to food that does not come from grocery stores (e.g., food ordered from a restaurant).

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Table A4.

Trends in Average Weekly Shopping Hours by Shopping Types and Locations, Married Mothers and Fathers Aged 25 to 64 Years.

	2003–2005	2006–2008	2009–2011	2012–2014	2015–2017	2018–2019	2020	2021	2022–2023
Married mothers
Total shopping	6.3	5.9*	5.4***	5.5***	5.0***	5.1***	4.5***	4.0***	4.3***
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	.02	.02	.03	.02	.03	.04	.08*	.07*	.05*
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	3.3	2.2***	2.3***	2.4***	2.5***	2.7**	2.1***	2.2***	2.1***
Other shopping at home	.1	.1	.1	.1	.1	.1+	.2**	.1	.1
Other shopping outside home	2.9	3.5***	3.0	3.0	2.4***	2.3***	2.1*	1.7***	2.0***
n	6,971	5,872	5,435	4,620	3,923	2,009	9,40	9,57	1,534
Married fathers
Total shopping	3.8	3.8	3.6	3.6	3.7	3.4+	2.9***	3.7	3.5
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	.02	.01	.02	.03	.02	.02	.05+	.05*	.03
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	2.1	1.4***	1.6***	1.7**	1.6***	1.8*	1.7	2.1	2.0
Other shopping at home	.0	.1+	.1	.1	.1	.1*	.0	.1	.1
Other shopping outside home	1.7	2.3***	1.9*	1.8	1.9+	1.5	1.0***	1.4	1.4
n	6,301	5,184	4,906	4,175	3,633	1,964	888	920	1,511
Ratio of women’s time to men’s time
Total shopping	1.7	1.5	1.5**	1.5*	1.4***	1.5*	1.6+	1.1***	1.2***
Food, gas, and grocery shopping at home	1.3	1.9	1.4	.7	1.3	2.4	1.4	1.4	1.8
Food, gas, and grocery shopping outside home	1.6	1.5**	1.5***	1.4**	1.5*	1.5	1.2**	1.0*	1.1***
Other shopping at home	2.1	1.3	1.3	1.5	1.2	1.2	4.8*	.9	1.4
Other shopping outside home	1.7	1.5	1.5	1.6	1.2***	1.5+	2.0	1.2**	1.4*

Source: Authors’ calculations, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023). These calculations took into account the location of shopping.

Note: Starred figures indicate significant differences by year, with 2003–2005 as the reference group. Food refers to food that does not come from grocery stores (e.g., food ordered from a restaurant).

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Table A5.

Gender differences in OLS coefficients for determinants of weekly housework hours for married women and men aged 25 to 64.

	Total Housework	Core Housework	Occasional Housework
Years (reference: 2003–05)
2006–2008	−0.299	0.397**	−0.696**
	(0.275)	(0.146)	(0.236)
2009–2011	−0.247	0.506***	−0.752**
	(0.276)	(0.135)	(0.239)
2012–2014	−0.417	0.855***	−1.272***
	(0.294)	(0.142)	(0.258)
2015–2017	0.066	0.870***	−0.804**
	(0.300)	(0.144)	(0.265)
2018–2019	0.228	1.127***	−0.899**
	(0.357)	(0.174)	(0.315)
2020	1.756***	1.690***	0.066
	(0.532)	(0.326)	(0.411)
2021	1.030*	1.914***	−0.883*
	(0.488)	(0.313)	(0.376)
2022–2023	1.463***	2.168***	−0.704*
	(0.388)	(0.223)	(0.317)
Female	6.125***	9.947***	−3.822***
	(0.545)	(0.375)	(0.400)
Years × Gender
2006–2008 × female	−0.300	−0.769**	0.469+
	(0.398)	(0.284)	(0.282)
2009–2011 × female	−0.495	−0.854**	0.359
	(0.404)	(0.287)	(0.283)
2012–2014 × female	−0.492	−1.460***	0.968**
	(0.421)	(0.291)	(0.305)
2015–2017 × female	−0.636	−1.219***	0.582+
	(0.428)	(0.298)	(0.310)
2018–2019 × female	−0.998+	−1.709***	0.711+
	(0.526)	(0.366)	(0.371)
2020 × female	−1.222	−1.332*	0.110
	(0.744)	(0.552)	(0.480)
2021 × female	−0.938	−2.598***	1.660**
	(0.721)	(0.503)	(0.510)
2022–2023 × female	−1.603**	−2.531***	0.928*
	(0.549)	(0.403)	(0.373)
Age (reference: 25–34 years)
35–44 years	0.983***	−0.047	1.030***
	(0.239)	(0.148)	(0.192)
45–54 years	1.854***	−0.310*	2.164***
	(0.249)	(0.145)	(0.205)
55–64 years	1.495***	−0.985***	2.480***
	(0.296)	(0.167)	(0.250)
Age × Gender
35–44 years × female	1.176***	1.440***	−0.264
	(0.331)	(0.250)	(0.220)
45–54 years × female	1.557***	2.498***	−0.941***
	(0.360)	(0.268)	(0.242)
55–64 years × female	1.806***	2.991***	−1.184***
	(0.433)	(0.313)	(0.302)
Race (reference: White)
Black	−3.383***	−0.319	−3.063***
	(0.309)	(0.201)	(0.231)
Hispanic	−2.128***	−0.350*	−1.778***
	(0.247)	(0.157)	(0.194)
Asian	−3.121***	0.111	−3.232***
	(0.326)	(0.216)	(0.222)
Race × Gender
Black × female	−0.674	−1.024**	0.350
	(0.438)	(0.347)	(0.261)
Hispanic × female	5.710***	5.927***	−0.217
	(0.383)	(0.311)	(0.226)
Asian × female	4.015***	2.943***	1.071***
	(0.481)	(0.380)	(0.267)
Have household children younger than 18 years	−0.344	0.658***	−1.002***
	(0.216)	(0.116)	(0.185)
Have household children younger than 18 × female	1.998***	2.345***	−0.346
	(0.316)	(0.228)	(0.221)
Have a college degree	−0.021	0.628***	−0.648***
	(0.184)	(0.100)	(0.155)
Have a college degree × female	−1.148***	−2.215***	1.067***
	(0.261)	(0.184)	(0.185)
Average weekly paid work hours	−0.091***	−0.050***	−0.041***
	(0.010)	(0.005)	(0.009)
Average weekly paid work hours × female	−0.050***	−0.061***	0.011
	(0.015)	(0.010)	(0.010)
Log weekly earning	−0.394***	−0.223***	−0.171*
	(0.077)	(0.040)	(0.067)
Log weekly earning × female	−0.289**	−0.365***	0.076
	(0.108)	(0.072)	(0.077)
Constant	15.894***	6.664***	9.230***
	(0.418)	(0.230)	(0.354)
N	97,020	97,020	97,020

Source: Authors’ calculation, American Time Use Survey (2003–2023).

Note: Coefficients are presented, with standard errors in parentheses. All analyses were weighted.

⁺p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.

Data Availability

The study draws on publicly available nationally representative data from the 2003–2023 ATUS from IPUMS Time Use; please see this link for further information and access to data: https://www.atusdata.org/atus/.