CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 124Psychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionHealth disparities and outcomesWork-Family Balance Challenges

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multiple Social Roles and Well-Being: A Longitudinal Test of the Role Stress Theory and the Role Expansion Theory

Nordenmark, Mikael·2004·Acta Sociologica
DOI 10.1177/0001699304043823
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In general, Western societies believe that people should engage in a multitude of social activities and develop multiple social roles. The assumption is that having multiple roles is beneficial to the individual. However, it also means that life is more complex and that people have to handle sometimes conflicting demands. Earlier research on the effects of multiple roles on individual well-being has not provided a clear picture, some results supporting the role stress theory and some the role expansion theory. This article tests empirically the relevance of the role stress theory and the role expansion theory by analysing whether having multiple social roles in general decreases or increases individual well-being. The results are based on a panel study of nearly 9000 randomly selected Swedes. The conclusion is that both number of social roles and any increase in social roles are negatively correlated with the risk of suffering from insomnia and a lingering illness, and the risk of being on regular medication for a lingering illness. These findings indicate that having multiple social roles increases individual well-being; the results therefore support the role expansion theory.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0001699304043823

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Nordenmark, M., Swedish Sociological Association Conference in Karlstad
  2. SOU, 1998, Ty makten är din... Myten of den rationella arbetslivet och det jä mställda Sverige
  3. Åberg, R., 2000, Arbetsmarknad, demografi och segregation

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 124

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Nordenmark, M.
Affiliations
Umeå University (SE)
Corresponding author
Nordenmark, Mikael
ORCID
Nordenmark, Mikael
Venue
Acta Sociologica
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2004-06
Volume
47
Issue
2
Pages
115-126
ISSN
  • 0001-6993 (ISSN-L)
  • 1502-3869
DOI
10.1177/0001699304043823
OpenAlex
W1972992823
Cited by
124
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Acta Sociologica (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
  • Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education
  • Center for Advanced Study, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
Keywords
well-being, role conflict, insomnia, chronic disease, medication use

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review