The current study aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of the Hungarian version of the brief Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire (Conflicto Trabajo – Familia, CCTF) using both homogeneous (social care workers, N = 206) and heterogeneous (N = 586) occupational samples. In order to examine construct validity, we explored both two-factor and bifactor models. Our findings provided greater support for the two-factor model (homogeneous sample: χ2 = 14.032, p = .379, df = 13; CFI = 0.999; NNFI = 0.998; RMSEA = 0.020 [0.000–0.051]; heterogeneous sample: χ2 = 40.213, p < .001 df = 13; CFI = 0.993; NNFI = 0.985; RMSEA = 0.060 [0.023–0.079]). Our results demonstrated good reliability (ω = 0.797–0.911) and predictive validity, which we tested by exploring the relation of the construct with burnout and psychosomatic symptoms. Our results suggest that the Hungarian version of the CCTF is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring both work-to-family and family-to-work conflict.
The topic of reconciling work and family lives dates back almost 40 years in the fields of social and behavioral science. As scientific interest in the topic grew, researchers gained an increasingly differentiated picture of the phenomenon. It has become apparent that the failure to balance work and family lives may result in many adverse effects on activities in both the work and family domains as well as on mental health. Given its importance in many domains of life, work-family conflict (WFC) has been extensively studied by several research groups and numerous theories have been developed to describe it (
The conceptual basis for conflict theories, which has emerged in the earlier waves of work-family research, is role theory. The basic assumption of role theory is that individuals have scarce resources and that different areas of life “compete” for resources. Thus, limited amounts of resources are available in a specific work or life domain, which limits an individual’s ability to execute tasks according to expectations. This can in turn create conflict between areas of life (
In recent decades conflict between the work and home domains has been approached from many different angles. Some researchers have focused strictly on the relationship between workplace and family (
To substantiate the theories of work-family conflict that unfolded over time, research teams developed measurement tools and established their psychometric properties. The most popular measure in the field of WFC research is
Although researchers have focused primarily on WIF, with women entering the labor market it has become increasingly clear that FIW is also of paramount importance (
In the present study, we set out to validate the original Spanish-language CCTF questionnaire in Hungarian samples and to:
examine the construct validity of the CCTF, by comparing the two-factor and bifactor models, and to
test its predictive validity, by investigating its relationship with psychosomatic symptoms and burnout.
In order to test the utility of the validated measure, we conducted additional analyses in homogeneous (social care workers) and heterogeneous occupational groups, respectively, and assessed the measure for its generalizability.
To test the applicability and generalizability of the Hungarian version of the CCTF questionnaire, we recruited two occupationally different samples for our research: a homogeneous and a heterogeneous one.
The occupationally homogeneous sample (
Homogeneous occupational sample ( |
Heterogeneous occupational sample ( |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Characteristic |
% |
Characteristic |
% |
||
Job Seniority | Profession | ||||
Employee | 64 | 31.07 | Managers (in various occupations) | 11 | 1.88 |
Middle manager | 84 | 40.77 | Professionals (in various occupations) | 197 | 33.62 |
Senior manager | 58 | 28.16 | Technicians and associate professionals | 85 | 14.51 |
Profession |
Office and management (customer services) occupations | 63 | 10.75 | ||
Social care worker | 2 | 0.97 | |||
Social pedagogue | 9 | 4.37 | Commercial and services occupations | 55 | 9.39 |
Social policy expert | 7 | 3.40 | Agricultural and forestry occupations | 6 | 1.02 |
Social services coordinator | 15 | 7.28 | Industry and construction industry occupations | 9 | 1.54 |
Social services manager | 98 | 47.57 | Machine operators, assembly workers, drivers of vehicles | 4 | 0.68 |
Teacher | 37 | 17.96 | (Elementary) occupations not requiring qualifications | 13 | 2.21 |
Theologian | 18 | 8.74 | Not working | 84 | 14.33 |
Other | 20 | 9.71 | Other | 59 | 10.07 |
Category | Homogeneous occupational sample |
Heterogeneous occupational sample |
Comparison of the two samples | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
% | % | ||||
Sex | χ |
||||
Women | 180 | 87.38 | 455 | 77.65 | |
Men | 26 | 12.62 | 131 | 22.35 | |
Relationship status | χ |
||||
Single, divorced, widow | 35 | 16.99 | 204 | 34.8 | |
In relationship, but not cohabiting | 19 | 9.22 | 7 | 1.2 | |
Married, in relationship, cohabiting | 152 | 73.79 | 375 | 64.0 | |
Number of children | χ |
||||
0 | 43 | 20.87 | 154 | 26.3 | |
1 | 39 | 18.93 | 86 | 14.7 | |
2 | 82 | 39.81 | 118 | 20.1 | |
3 | 33 | 16.02 | 119 | 20.3 | |
≥ 4 | 9 | 4.37 | 109 | 18.6 | |
Educational attainment | χ |
||||
Lower than high school education | 0 | 0 | 42 | 7.17 | |
Vocational high school or high school degree | 11 | 5.34 | 149 | 25.43 | |
Advanced vocational diploma | 22 | 10.68 | 45 | 7.67 | |
College degree and specialized training | 118 | 57.28 | 155 | 26.45 | |
University degree and specialized training | 55 | 26.70 | 195 | 33.28 |
The occupationally heterogeneous sample (
To compare the two occupational samples in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, we conducted
We measured WFC with the Hungarian version of the CCTF (Conflicto Trabajo – Familia, Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire) developed by
Predictive validity of the questionnaire was assessed using the Mini Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (MOLBI;
The Mini Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (MOLBI;
The Psychosomatic Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15;
Scale | Normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Z score) | Reliability |
||
---|---|---|---|---|
WIF | 14.111 (4-28) | 6.046 | 0.072*** | 0.881 |
FIW | 7.237 (4-22) | 3.732 | 0.193*** | 0.758 |
WFC | 21.350 (8-46) | 8.345 | 0.067** | 0.841 |
MOLBI exhaustion | 13.145 (5-20) | 2.828 | 0.104*** | 0.757 |
MOLBI disengagement | 14.742 (5-20) | 2.426 | 0.125*** | 0.669 |
MOLBI total score | 27.888 (12-37) | 4.585 | 0.088*** | 0.786 |
PHQ-15 | 27.830 (15-55) | 8.655 | 0.144*** | 0.854 |
**
The occupationally homogenous sample consisted of professionals who work in social services. They were recruited during social services management training at the Health Services Management Training Centre of the Semmelweis University and by systematic outreach by the social media group of Alumni. The data collection took place between February and December 2020.
Participants in the heterogeneous occupational sample were recruited between October and December 2018. We published the call for participation in the study on social media.
Participants in both occupational samples filled in the questionnaires using the Google Forms interface. Only individuals over the age of 18 who considered themselves to be healthy could participate in the study. All participants were informed about all aspects of this research and they provided their consent to participate on a voluntary and anonymous basis. The samples were independent and duplication of data was eliminated. The research and all procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary (352/2018/P/ET and 105/2019/P/ET).
We first conducted a factor analysis separately on both the homogeneous and heterogeneous occupational samples by using the FACTOR computer program (
We assessed the factor structure of the questionnaire on both the homogeneous and heterogeneous occupational samples. Since the items did not follow the normal distribution, robust factor analysis was chosen (
Homogenous occupational sample |
Heterogeneous occupational sample |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item | Skewness | Kurtosis | Item | Skewness | Kurtosis | ||
1 | 3.694 | -0.223 | -0.982 | 1 | 4.230 | -0.304 | -0.927 |
2 | 3.869 | -0.178 | -1.071 | 2 | 4.208 | -0.230 | -1.143 |
3 | 3.437 | 0.092 | -1.253 | 3 | 3.910 | -0.031 | -1.185 |
4 | 3.087 | 0.361 | -1.027 | 4 | 3.568 | 0.203 | -1.186 |
5 | 1.951 | 1.353 | 0.820 | 5 | 2.415 | 1.052 | 0.299 |
6 | 1.757 | 1.659 | 1.985 | 6 | 1.904 | 0.602 | 2.034 |
7 | 1.544 | 2.109 | 4.005 | 7 | 2.000 | 1.459 | 1.616 |
8 | 1.985 | 1.467 | 1.667 | 8 | 2.718 | 0.779 | -0.424 |
The results of Bartlett’s test of sphericity (homogeneous: 1116.0(28),
Factor loadings of the WIF and FIW items are presented in
Homogeneous occupational sample |
Heterogeneous occupational sample |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item | WIF | FIW | Item | WIF | FIW |
1 | 0.761*** | 1 | 0.617*** | ||
2 | 0.999*** | 2 | 0.940*** | ||
3 | 0.917*** | 3 | 0.961*** | ||
4 | 0.744*** | 4 | 0.794*** | ||
5 | 0.696*** | 5 | 0.738*** | ||
6 | 0.653*** | 6 | 0.529*** | ||
7 | 1.032*** | 7 | 1.024*** | ||
8 | 0.650*** | 8 | 0.614*** |
***
Although the first two factors explained a relatively large proportion of variance for both the homogeneous (59.11% and 23.10%) and heterogeneous (55.23% and 21.26%) occupational samples, a single factor solution was suggested by the FACTOR program. As a next step, we tested the one-factor model and the bifactor model proposed by
Fit indices of the tested models | χ2 | CMIN/ |
CFI | TLI | NNFI | SRMR | RMSEA |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
One-factor | ||||||||
Homogeneous sample | 120.917*** | 20 | 6.05 | 0.791 | 0.707 | — | 0.128 | 0.166 |
Heterogeneous sample | 460.139*** | 20 | 4.87 | 0.725 | 0.615 | — | 0.136 | 0.194 |
Two-factor | ||||||||
Homogeneous sample | 14.032 | 13 | 1.08 | 0.999 | — | 0.998 | — | 0.020 |
Heterogeneous sample | 40.213*** | 13 | 3.09 | 0.993 | — | 0.985 | — | 0.060 |
Bifactor | ||||||||
Homogeneous sample | 21.900+ | 13 | 1.68 | 0.983 | 0.963 | — | 0.068 | 0.058 |
Heterogeneous sample | 31.715*** | 13 | 2.44 | 0.988 | 0.975 | — | 0.036 | 0.050 |
+
According to the factor loading patterns presented in
Homogeneous occupational sample |
Heterogeneous occupational sample |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item | WFC | WIF | FIW | Item | WFC | WIF | FIW |
1 | 0.404*** | 0.587*** | 1 | 0.387*** | 0.532*** | ||
2 | 0.683*** | 0.624*** | 2 | 0.602*** | 0.685*** | ||
3 | 0.793*** | 0.419*** | 3 | 0.700*** | 0.582*** | ||
4 | 0.821*** | 0.197*** | 4 | 0.890*** | 0.242*** | ||
5 | 0.364*** | 0.682*** | 5 | 0.331*** | 0.636*** | ||
6 | 0.274*** | 0.512*** | 6 | 0.287*** | 0.421*** | ||
7 | 0.276*** | 0.828*** | 7 | 0.185*** | 0.846*** | ||
8 | 0.549*** | 0.464*** | 8 | 0.578*** | 0.473*** |
***
Variable | WFC | WIF | FIW |
---|---|---|---|
Homogeneous occupational sample | |||
Omega | 0.902 | 0.905 | 0.823 |
Omega Hierarchical | 0.583 | 0.284 | 0.611 |
Heterogeneous occupational sample | |||
Omega | 0.896 | 0.911 | 0.797 |
Omega hierarchical | 0.551 | 0.351 | 0.596 |
In line with our second objective, we also assessed the predictive validity of the CCTF. Correlation analyses showed that with the exception of disengagement, WIF is more strongly associated than FIW with both burnout and psychosomatic symptoms, which highlights the predictive significance of work-related pressure on mental health (
Variables | WIF | FIW |
---|---|---|
MOLBI exhaustion | -0.402*** | -0.146** |
MOLBI disengagement | -0.158** | -0.159*** |
MOLBI total score | -0.346*** | -0.182** |
PHQ-15 | 0.326*** | 0.175*** |
**
The aim of our study was to examine the structural and predictive validity of the Hungarian version of the CCTF scale. In addition, we investigated the utility and generalizability of the scale in occupationally heterogeneous and homogeneous samples. In line with the results of
We also confirmed that the factorial structure of the Hungarian version of the questionnaire is comparable to that obtained using the original Spanish version. Our results on the driving concepts/items for WIF and FIW in both occupational samples (i.e., workload and time constraints, respectively) suggest further research hypotheses for cross-cultural comparative studies. Indeed, these data raise the possibility that the questionnaire is interculturally stable, hence it might be a proper tool for further cross-cultural studies.
It is also important to note that items that characterize conflict due to lack of time are particularly emphasized in the questionnaire. Therefore, the questionnaire cannot be recommended for the assessment of certain types of WFC, such as time-, stress- and behavior-based conflict, as described by
Finally, our results provide support for the predictive validity of the questionnaire as our data demonstrate that WIF is more closely related to burnout (especially its emotional dimension) than is FIW. WIF and burnout are both anchored in work as opposed to FIW, which primarily focuses on the demands of the family. Interestingly, our results show that WIF is moderately correlated with psychosomatic symptoms, which underscores the importance of attenuating work-related stressors in order to prevent the development of psychosomatic symptoms.
In summary, our study results support the validity and reliability of FIW and WIF scales of the CCTF for assessing the directions of WFC. The psychometric properties of the measurement tool are good in both the homogeneous and heterogeneous occupational samples, which suggests that it can be used to measure WFC in a wide range of occupations. Furthermore, distinguishing between the two directions of WFC makes family and work-based overload measurable, which allows for the development of problem-centered preventive and interventional programs.
However, our study has limitations, as well. Sampling for both the homogeneous and heterogeneous occupational groups was convenience sampling, so we cannot necessarily generalize our findings to the entire Hungarian population. Furthermore, we obtained data using online questionnaires, which also affected the composition of the samples. The only people who could access our research were those with internet connections. In conclusion, we found that the psychometric characteristics of the questionnaire are excellent and that the measurement tool is easily interpretable, which promotes wide application in the future for both cross-cultural and applied research.
The preparation of the present study was supported by a research grant obtained from the Faculty of Humanities, Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church (Person- and Family-oriented Health Science Research Group, Grant No. 20643B800).
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
The authors have no additional (i.e., non-financial) support to report.
The research and all procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary (352/2018/P/ET and 105/2019/P/ET).