Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Pers Psychol. 2011 SUMMER;64(2):289–313. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01211.x

TABLE 1.

Meta-Analytic Results for Correlations General and Work–Family-Specific Workplace Support Variables and Work-to-Family Conflict

Relationship k N Effect-size variability
Effect-size centrality
SDr Q Mr 95% CI for Mr
WFC & POS 12 3,581 0.15 78.23* −0.22* −0.30, −0.13
WFC& WFOP 47 14,041 0.18 451.84* −0.36* −0.41, −0.31
WFC & SS 25 7,627 0.11 89.44* −0.15* −0.19, −0.10
WFC & WFSS 65 56,636 0.08 359.47* −0.25* −0.27, −0.22
Meta-analytic correlations need for path analyses
POS & WFOP 3 1,118 0.11 13.57* 0.35* 0.21, 0.49
POS & SS** 12 5,383 0.16 422.78* 0.51*
POS & WFSS 5 958 0.18 30.71* 0.50* 0.35, 0.62
FSOP & SS 3 609 0.18 19.94* 0.37* 0.12, 0.57
FSOP & WFSS 35 10,080 0.18 313.33* 0.32* 0.26, 0.37
SS & WFSS 4 691 0.27 49.05* 0.56* 0.31, 0.74

Note. k = number of independent samples; N = number of subjects; SDr = standard deviation of correlations; Q = heterogeneity statistic for correlations; Mr = average-weighted correlation.

*

Significant at p < 0.05;

**

effect-size information in this row came from Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002).