Skip to main content
. 2023 Jan 5;20(2):970. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20020970

Table 6.

Association with other variables.

WFC FWC
Association between WFC and FWC scores
WFC -
FWC 0.29 a -
(0.16, 0.41)
Association between WFC and FWC with external variables
WFC FWC
Gender −0.09 b 0.19 b, *
(IC 95%) (−0.26, 0.07) (0.03, 0.33)
Age −0.26 a, ** −0.20 a, **
(IC 95%) (−0.38, −0.15) (−0.33, −0.09)
Number of sons/daughters −0.03 a −0.02 a
(IC 95%) (−0.16, 0.10) (−0.14, 0.10)
Responsibility for the care of family members (IC 95%) 0.13 b 0.10 b
(−0.02, 0.29) (−0.05, 0.24)
Lab domest 0.00 c 0.01 c
(IC 95%) (0.00, 0.00) (0.00, 0.04)
Homework children −0.13 a −0.09 a
(IC 95%) (−0.26, 0.00) (−0.23, 0.02)
Years of teaching experience −0.20 a, ** −0.17 a, **
(IC 95%) (−0.31, −0.08) (−0.30, −0.04)
Job satisfaction −0.34 a, ** −0.23 a, **
(IC 95%) (−0.45, −0.21) (−0.36, −0.11)

Note: WFC is the work–family conflict score, FWC is the family–work conflict score. Maximum likelihood scores (sML) were used for CTF and CFT. a Spearman correlation. b Biserial rank correlation. c Epsilon squared effect size. CI 95%: 1000 simple bootstraps. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.