Search

The time allocated to household chores is substantial, with the burden falling disproportionately upon women. Social norms about how much housework men and women should do are likely to influence couples' housework allocation decisions and satisfaction. Using Australian data spanning 2001–14, this study employs a two-stage estimation procedure to examine how deviations from housework norms relate to couples' satisfaction. The study finds that satisfaction is negatively affected by predicted housework time and that women's satisfaction, but not men's, is robustly affected by their partners' residual housework time. When he exceeds housework norms, she is happier with housework allocations, but less happy in broader dimensions. The study suggests several reasons for the results, including that housework is more salient in women's lives than in men's, that housework generally is not a preferred activity, and that some degree of gender-norm conformity in regard to housework can positively affect women's life satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The standard household production model does not incorporate multitasking, although time-diary data reveal that individuals regularly multitask. We incorporate multitasking into a household production model in which time spent in childcare can be sole-tasked or multitasked with another household production activity and we present the results of an experiment designed to measure the productivity parameters of this model. Because utility and productivity are intertwined and difficult to disentangle in any household production model, we vary the utility pay-offs our experimental participants receive in order to determine how our estimated productivity parameters are affected by a change in the utility parameters. Our estimates of the relative multitasking productivities indicate that, while a minute of sole-tasked time produces more of a single commodity than a minute of multitasked time, total household output increases when two outputs are produced simultaneously, hence confirming the economic motivation for multitasking. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Researchers analysing time-use data often estimate limited dependent variable models because time spent must be nonnegative and cannot be more than the total amount of time in a given observation period. While the traditional empirical technique applied to such cases is maximum likelihood estimation of a Tobit (censored regression) model, recent debate has questioned whether linear models estimated via Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) are preferable. On the one hand, Tobit models are deemed necessary to address the significant censoring (i.e. large numbers of zeroes) typically found in time-use data, in the face of which OLS estimators would be biased and inconsistent. Yet, optimization occurs over a longer period than that covered by the typical time diary (often a day), and thus some argue that reported zeroes represent a measurement problem rather than true nonparticipation in the activity, in which case OLS would be preferred. We provide direct empirical evidence on this question using the Australian Time Use Surveys, which record time-use information for two consecutive diary days, by estimating censored and linear versions of a parental child care model for both 24-hour and 48-hour windows of observation in order to determine the empirical consequences of estimation technique and diary length. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Some beginning students of statistics and econometrics have difficulty with traditional algebraic approaches to explaining regression and related techniques. For these students, a simple and intuitive diagrammatic introduction as advocated by Kennedy (2008) may prove a useful framework to support further study. The author presents a series of diagrams following Kennedy (2008) that are designed for use in an introductory econometrics course as an intuitive aid when first introducing fundamental concepts of the field. These diagrams are easily used in the classroom as an enhancement to traditional teaching methods. Pedagogical suggestions and a few applied examples drawing on the diagrammatic framework are provided and discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract\nPoints of interestSociety is progressing to a paradigm where the valued contributions of people with intellectual disability are being recognised and supported. However, existing assessment tools fail to measure contribution as a key factor in achieving wellbeing and a valued life. To form the conceptual basis for assessment development, we elicited what constitutes contribution from the perspective of people with intellectual disability. Using photovoice and grounded theory, eleven artists with intellectual disability co-produced the Contribution Gallery. Activities associated with three workshops and the gallery opening night were videorecorded for analysis. Findings suggest people with intellectual disability make valued contributions to their family and friends, their community, our society and planet. Making these contributions give meaning and enhance wellbeing, but the value of the contributions to self and others are often unrecognised. This work challenges deficit-based paradigms and is pivotal in debates regarding assessment and support provision for people with disability.Society is changing. People with intellectual disability are getting more support. People with intellectual disability are being valued.People with intellectual disability make important contributions to society. No assessment tool has been made that measures these contributions.We used photovoice to understand what artists with intellectual disability think about contribution. Together we made the Contribution Gallery.We found that people with intellectual disability make valued contributions to their family and friends, their community, our society and planet. Making these contributions made people feel good.We have started making a contribution assessment tool. What artists with intellectual disability told us helps to design the assessment tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]