Why do women, even in workplaces with seemingly equal conditions, consistently report higher levels of job-related burnout than their male counterparts? For decades, the conventional answer has pointed to observable factors: longer total work hours (paid and unpaid), greater family responsibilities, or specific job characteristics. While these elements certainly play a role, a groundbreaking 2022 study by Benjamin Artz, Ilker Kaya, and Ozgur Kaya, published in the Review of Economics of the Household, uncovers a more profound and provocative driver: societal gender role ideology.
The research reveals that the persistent gender gap in burnout isn’t fully explained by what women do, but rather by what society—and often, they themselves—believe women should do. This article dissects the study’s compelling findings, exploring how deep-seated beliefs about gender roles create a significant and costly gap in workplace wellbeing and what this means for the future of organizational policy and social change.
The Persistent Gender Burnout Gap
The phenomenon of women experiencing higher rates of emotional and physical exhaustion from work is well-documented. A comprehensive 2010 meta-analysis by Purvanova and Muros, covering over 180 studies, confirmed that women are indeed more likely to report the exhaustion component of burnout. The prevailing theory has long been that this stems from the “second shift”—the unpaid domestic work and caregiving that disproportionately falls on women even when they also work for pay.
To investigate this, Artz, Kaya, and Kaya analyzed a rich, nationally representative U.S. dataset from the National Study of the Changing Workforce (NSCW). Pooling data from 2002 and 2008, their sample included nearly 4,200 employees across a wide range of industries and occupations. Their initial analysis confirmed the expected pattern: women were significantly more likely than men to report job-related burnout. This was measured using a composite index of four factors: feeling overwhelmed, work disrupting home life, work draining energy for family, and work causing a bad mood at home.
However, the researchers then controlled for a vast array of theoretically relevant variables—demographics, education, number of children, time spent on chores and childcare, spousal employment, job benefits like flexible hours, and weekly work hours. The result was startling: the gender gap remained. Even after accounting for these observable differences in work and family life, women still reported higher burnout. This persistent, unexplained gap signaled that a deeper, unmeasured factor was at play.
Beyond Workload: The Role of Beliefs and Expectations
This is where the study makes its most significant contribution. The authors hypothesized that the missing piece of the puzzle was not external circumstances, but internal beliefs—specifically, an individual’s perspective on gender roles. They used survey questions to classify workers’ ideologies as either “traditional” or “progressive.”
- “Traditional” women were those who tended to agree with statements like, “It is much better for everyone involved if the man earns the money and the woman takes care of the home and children.”
- “Progressive” women were those who strongly disagreed with such statements and/or strongly agreed with statements like, “A mother who works outside the home can have just as good a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work.”
The core hypothesis was that a woman holding a “traditional” view might experience a greater internal conflict or mismatch between her societal role expectations (preferring to be at home) and the realities of her paid job. This cognitive dissonance could manifest as a higher perception of stress and, consequently, higher reported burnout.
The findings were a stunning confirmation of this theory. When the researchers segmented the data by ideology, they found:
The gender burnout gap completely disappeared for “progressive” women. These women reported burnout at rates statistically indistinguishable from men.
The entire gender gap was driven by “traditional” women, who were far more likely to experience burnout than both men and progressive women. This suggests that the issue is not womanhood itself, but the friction between a woman’s reality and her (or society’s) ingrained beliefs about her proper role.
What the Data Reveal
The study’s statistical analysis provides robust evidence for this conclusion. The Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models showed that being female was a significant predictor of higher burnout—until the “progressive” ideology variable was introduced. For women, holding a progressive viewpoint had a significant negative correlation with burnout, meaning it was a strong protective factor.
To further solidify this finding, the researchers employed an Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition analysis. This method breaks down a gap between two groups (in this case, men and women) into two parts:
- The “Explained” Part: Differences in observable characteristics (e.g., women working different hours or having more children).
- The “Unexplained” Part: Differences in how those characteristics are “rewarded” or experienced, often pointing to unmeasured factors like discrimination or, in this case, ideology.
The decomposition revealed that for the overall sample, the “unexplained” portion was the primary driver of the gender gap in burnout. More strikingly, when looking only at the “non-progressive” (traditional) group, the gender gap was enormous, and the “explained” part was statistically insignificant. This means that among traditional workers, the burnout gap had almost nothing to do with differences in job hours, childcare duties, or other standard factors. It was almost entirely driven by the “unexplained” ideological component.
A visual representation of the study’s key finding would show nearly identical burnout levels for men and progressive women, with a significantly higher bar for traditional women.
Why Policy Needs to Evolve
These findings have profound implications for how we address workplace wellbeing. For years, the focus has been almost exclusively on organizational policies. Literature from respected researchers like Senécal et al. (2001) and Beauregard (2011) has long advocated for improved organizational support, such as flexible work schedules, paid time off, and better access to childcare, as the primary means to reduce work-family conflict and burnout for women.
Artz, Kaya, and Kaya’s research does not dismiss the importance of these policies; indeed, their own data showed that factors like “easy time off” and “flex time” were significantly correlated with lower burnout for both genders. However, their central finding implies that these organizational supports, while beneficial, are insufficient to close the gender burnout gap on their own.
If a significant portion of the gap is driven by an internal conflict between a woman’s paid work and her societal gender role ideology, then a flexible schedule alone cannot resolve it. The problem is not just the stress of the job, but the stress of a reality that conflicts with a deeply held worldview. This suggests that the most effective, long-term interventions must go beyond the workplace and target the root cause: the social perceptions and attitudes regarding women’s roles.
Takeaways for a Healthier Workforce
The study provides a clear, data-driven mandate to think more broadly about gender equality and workplace wellbeing. Here are the actionable takeaways:
- For Policymakers: The fight against gendered burnout begins in society, not in the office. Interventions must challenge entrenched, traditional gender norms. This includes promoting robust paternity leave policies that encourage men to be equal partners in caregiving, funding educational programs that showcase diverse family and work structures, and supporting media campaigns that portray women in strong professional roles.
- For Employers: Continue to provide and improve organizational support like flexible work and paid leave. However, supplement these efforts with internal initiatives that actively challenge traditional gender roles within the workplace. This includes robust unconscious bias training for managers, transparent processes for promoting women into leadership, and creating a culture where caregiving responsibilities are normalized for all genders without penalty.
- For Social Advocates: This research provides powerful evidence for what many have long argued: the invisible expectations placed on women have tangible, harmful consequences. Use this data to fuel conversations in communities, schools, and homes about the importance of evolving gender roles and supporting women’s ambitions in every sphere of life.
Ultimately, closing the gender burnout gap requires a dual approach. We must continue to build supportive, flexible workplaces. But more importantly, we must work to build a society where a woman’s success at work is not seen as being in conflict with her identity, but as a natural and celebrated part of it.
Link to Download
Full Research: https://docsend.com/view/hzdcm5wtj99hfhtw
Presentation: https://docsend.com/view/ssakwcus5cu9myzg
en 
