The Gendered Implications of Intensive Parenting Beliefs for Life Satisfaction: The Case of South Korea

Introduction

Whether the experience of parenthood positively or negatively affects parents’ well-being remains a fiercely debated subject. Despite the prevalent notion that parenthood brings joy and fulfillment to parents, many studies have presented conflicting evidence. Some researchers have found that, contrary to traditional beliefs, parents with children are more likely to report degradation of psychological well-being and higher levels of anxiety and depression (McLanahan & Adams, 1987; Evenson & Simon, 2005). Based on these findings, research has shifted gears toward exploring the specific causes of personal distress in relation to parenthood. While parenthood undoubtedly entails positive experiences such as stronger social integration (Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2003) and purpose of life (Emmons, 2003; Nelson, Kushlev, & Lyubomirsky, 2014), it is clear that negative stressors also exist. Acknowledging that parenthood has both “demands and rewards” (Nomaguchi, 2012), it is essential to understand how the notion and practice of parenthood maintain a multifaceted and complex relationship with an individual’s well-being (Nelson et al., 2014).

An important distinction is that the state of parenthood and parenting practices have different implications for an individual’s life satisfaction. Although the quality of the relationship between parenthood and well-being has been inconsistent in the literature, parenting responsibilities have a consistently negative impact on parents’ health. While a child may provide several different benefits such as broadening the parents’ social circle and feeling a sense of fulfillment, parenting the child implies costs such as financial burdens and sleep deprivation (Nelson et al., 2014) and time constraints (Pollmann-Schult, 2014). Especially when child-rearing is associated with the predominant culture of “intensive parenting” (Hays, 1996), parents struggle to meet the higher demands and cope with social pressure.

Intensive parenting has become a common phenomenon (Craig, Powell, & Smyth, 2014; Smyth & Craig, 2017; Ishizuka, 2019; Walper & Kreyenfeld, 2022) and an idealized norm of parenting (Faircloth, 2014). However, the impact of these expectations on life satisfaction remains relatively unexplored (Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2020). Studies have hinted at how intensive parenting expectations lead to lower mental health in mothers (Rizzo, Schiffrin, & Liss, 2013; Nomaguchi & Fettro, 2018), but not enough studies have confirmed this relationship. Recognizing this gap in the literature, this study focuses on the implications of intensive parenting attitudes for adults’ life satisfaction, with three specific contributions.

First, using an original survey, I discuss how intensive parenting can impact adult life satisfaction in the context of South Korea. Considering that South Korea has the world’s lowest fertility rate (CNN, 2022), it is important to evaluate whether intensive parenting plays a role in this social phenomenon. As intensive parenting differs from culture to culture (Loyal, Sutter Dallay, & Rascle, 2017; Gauthier et al., 2021), I examine how South Korea’s social background creates specific intensive parenting norms and influences married adults. Second, I add to the discourse on gendered parenting norms by evaluating which intensive parenting attitudes men and women internalize differently. While a more involved form of fatherhood (Dermott, 2003) reduces gendered parenthood norms and bridges the happiness gap between mothers and fathers over time (Preisner, Neuberger, Bertogg, & Schaub, 2020), clear gender differences remain in the practical implications of intensive parenting. Third, and most importantly, I examine the interaction between gender and intensive parenting attitudes to show how intensive parenting disproportionately affects men’s and women’s life satisfaction. These findings offer a unique contribution to the understanding of how societal and cultural backgrounds influence intensive parenting norms in different ways.

The Emergence of Intensive Parenting

The challenges that accompany parenting are multifaceted and parents face various financial, emotional, and social constraints. However, what has caused these challenges to escalate is the emergence of intensified parenting cultures that have become the notion of ideal parenting (Faircloth, 2014). Not only has intensive parenting become a common practice over time (Arendell, 2000; Craig et al., 2014; Walper & Kreyenfeld, 2022), it has also been adopted by parents regardless of their social class (Ishizuka, 2019).

Intensive parenting (hereafter IP), a term derived from the concept of “intensive mothering” coined by Hays (1996), encompasses a more child-centered and involved manner of parenting. According to Hays, intensive mothering ideologies require more time, financial resources, and emotional effort from mothers, as well as guidance from professional experts. Expanding on this concept, Liss, Schiffrin, Mackintosh, Miles-McLean, and Erchull (2013) also examined attitudinal compliance with intensive parenting attitudes (hereafter IPAs) using 25 different items grouped into five factors (essentialism, fulfillment, stimulation, challenging, and child-centered) utilizing the Intensive Parenting Attitudes Questionnaire (IPAQ). However, the practice and categorization of intensive parenting is not identical across countries. In a study conducted in Estonia, Great Britain, and Slovenia, Gauthier et al. (2021) found four different subscales (child-centered, stimulation, parental responsibility, and expert-guided) to be prevalent in all three countries. In France, Loyal et al. (2017) also found the IPAQ to be unsuitable, therefore they add an additional factor that demonstrates the need to “sacrifice” for children.

The attitudinal and behavioral measures and dimensions of intensive parenting norms vary and not all aspects of intensive parenting are shared. Lankes (2022) found that no group of mothers in the United States embodied all the measures of intensive mothering. Depending on class, age, or race, mothers adopted selective components of intensive mothering, strategizing the roles that they can fulfill. From this conclusion, it is evident that intensive parenting is a multidimensional concept (Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2020) that does not solely depend on one factor or standard of parenting. In South Korea, where fertility choices are highly correlated with social mobility and risk flows, it can be anticipated that intensified parenting looks different from Western countries. In Korea, intensive parenting is not just a desired ideal, but a necessity.

Data and Methods

Currently, no representative survey data in South Korea have explored IPAs and their implications for well-being. Acknowledging this data limitation, an original survey was conducted among 728 married Korean adults (age 27–65 years) to examine their gendered beliefs about intensive parenting. The survey was conducted by one of Korea’s largest online research companies, Micromill Embrain, which utilizes its own survey panel consisting of 1,623,938 (as of October 2022). The survey panels were constructed to represent the demographics of the Korean National Census.

Data were collected in April 2022 and originally included 1,236 respondents through panel sampling, with a final sample of 728 adults. As childbirth outside marriage rarely occurs in South Korea, only legally married Korean respondents were selected for this study.

The study sample reflects how the social pressure of IP impacts the life satisfaction of married individuals. Although the data do not distinguish between those with or without children, the respondents of this study are reasonable sample targets because they reflect the social expectations of parenthood and the costs associated with intensive child rearing. A total of 374 women and 354 men were surveyed to examine gender differences in IPAs, and respondents’ average age was 49.5 years. Table 1 presents the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics

The outcome variable, life satisfaction, was based on the question: “How satisfied are you with your life in general these days?” The survey participants were asked to respond on a scale of 1 = Not satisfied at all to 10 = Very satisfied. The average score for life satisfaction was 5.861 with a standard deviation of 1.805. The main predictor for this survey, IPAs, was categorized into four different factors that reflect intensified parenting norms in South Korea: (a) child-centered, (b) responsible, (c) sacrificing, and (d) resource-intensive. Although this study does not include behavioral indicators of IP, I focus on the important perceptions that make up IP and how individuals internalize these benefits differently. Similar to previous conceptualizations of intensive parenting, this study excludes the “fulfillment” and “essentialism” aspects of intensive parenting norms, as the two are relatively irrelevant to the “intensity” of parenting (Gauthier et al., 2021). The first factor, “child-centered,” was measured using the statement “Being a parent means never having time for oneself.” The questionnaire reflected Hays’s (1996) original concept of intensive mothering, in which children’s needs must be put first at the cost of parents’ time and needs. The second factor, “responsible,” examines the importance of parents taking full responsibility for a child’s development and success. Respondents were asked to evaluate the statement “My child’s success solely depends on me as a parent.” Reflecting on previous literature, it is likely that Korean parents are more likely to endorse the cultural expectation of “chek-im” which is in line with the second question (Cote, Kwak, Putnick, Chung, & Bornstein, 2015). Here, “chek-im” derives from the Confucianist emphasis on the reciprocal relationship between the parent and the child, in which the parent’s duty is to be fully responsible for their child, including their later success in life. The third factor emphasizes the prioritization of parents “sacrificing” their personal life for more time with children. The statement “As a parent, I should be willing to sacrifice my job and career for my children” examines whether the principle of sacrifice is a significant aspect of IP and explains whether the belief comes with gendered differences. Finally, the “resource-intensive” demands of IP are measured with the statement “I feel (or would feel) guilty when I can’t provide the economic support my child needs.” Not only is economic provisioning a part of the original conceptualization of intensive mothering, it also reflects the growing importance of economic investment in children’s various social and educational opportunities. The responses ranged from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree, with the “sacrifice” factor reporting the lowest average of 2.834 and the “resource-intensive” factor reporting the highest average of 3.690. The control variables used in this study were respondents’ age, education, employment status, household income, and residency.

I used t-tests and multivariate OLS regressions to test the study’s three hypotheses. Using an interaction effect, I examined the different associations between intensive parenting and life satisfaction depending on gender, and carried out separate analyses for male and female respondents.

Results

Gender Differences in Intensive Parenting Beliefs

To test the first hypothesis, I examined gender differences for each IP item that measured a distinct dimension of the concept. Table 2 shows the distribution of responses and the t-test results for all items. Child-centered parenting attitudes showed the greatest and most significant gender differences. While most married men were “neutral” about the idea, the majority of female respondents agreed with the statement, resulting in an average score of 3.318. As the average for male respondents was 3.059, t-test results indicated that women do in fact have stronger beliefs about sacrificing their own time for child-centered parenting styles. Another dimension of intensive parenting that reported significant gender differences was “resource-intensive” which points to the economic strain parents go through when raising a child. Contrary to traditional beliefs about gendered parenting norms, the results showed that women are more economically concerned when raising a child. However, it is also important to note that the mean difference for “resource-intensive” attitudes, even if statistically significant (p < 0.05), was less than 0.05.

Table 2

Gender Difference in Intensive Parenting Attitudes (T-test)

However, emphasis on parental responsibility did not show significant gender differences, though men had a slightly higher average score (3.088) than women (3.070). Married men were also more likely to endorse the belief that they were responsible actors for children’s development and success, which confirms the expectations of “check-im.” Finally, the component of “sacrificing” focused on whether parents should sacrifice their own careers for child-rearing. Responses here produced the lowest average scores for both genders, with 2.896 for women and 2.768 for men. The t-test results showed no significant gender differences, raising doubts about the notion that men and women share different levels of IPAs. However, considering the fact that 82% of the respondents were employed, it may be possible that most respondents shared a stronger need to keep their jobs to ensure financial support for their children. It can be concluded that while women and men show different IPA levels, the differences are minimal and inconsistent.

The Relationship between Intensive Parenting Beliefs and Life Satisfaction

Despite the similar acceptance of IPAs by both men and women, the findings cannot be interpreted as an egalitarian shift. Its effects on life satisfaction require further analysis to confirm that married men and women share the burdens of parenting expectation in the same ways. In other words, the mere acceptance of a belief does not indicate that the respondents will internalize these values or be affected by their pressures. Therefore, I further analyzed the specific dimensions of IP that negatively impact life satisfaction.

Table 3 presents the results of the multiple OLS regressions using life satisfaction as the dependent variable. Models 1, 2, and 3 specifically look at how “child-centered” IP beliefs impact life satisfaction and Models 4, 5, and 6 measure how highlighting the “responsible” chek-im notion influences individuals’ lives. Models 7, 8, and 9 measure the “sacrificing” aspect of IP while Models 10, 11, and 12 focus on “resource-intensive” expectations of child-rearing. To check the robustness of each model, the first model of each IP dimension included all respondents in the analysis, whereas the second and third models examined the effects separately for female and male respondents.

Table 3

Regression of Intensive Parenting Beliefs on Individual’s Life Satisfaction

According to Models 1, 4, 7, and 10, respondents with high IPAs expressed consistent and significant decreases in life satisfaction. Comparatively speaking, expectations of “sacrificing” one’s career for children had significantly lower substantial reductions in life satisfaction compared with others but remained significant. However, when the regression models were run separately for men and women, the negative associations were no longer universally valid. While “child-centrism” and “responsibility” negatively impacted women’s life satisfaction (Models 2 and 5), they were no longer present in the male subgroups. Interestingly, the “resource-intensive” measure was the only IPA that was consistently significant for both men and women, indicating that economic provisioning is the common stressful factor for married men and women with children.

In addition to IPAs, higher education and household income have also been reported as consistently increasing life satisfaction. These results confirm the previous discussion on South Korea’s social background, where socioeconomic resources and class play important roles in happiness and in marriage and fertility decisions. The regression analysis confirmed the mixed results for Hypotheses 1 and 2. While married adults with higher IPAs commonly reported lower life satisfaction, this was not consistent for all genders. For women, child-centered, responsible, and resource-intensive factors negatively affected life satisfaction, except for the sacrifice component. In other words, women were not significantly affected by societal demands to give up their careers for their children. Considering that 70% of married women were engaged in some form of employment, it is likely that the notion of sacrificing one’s job could be an easily rejected notion for the respondents. For men, only one IPA factor (economic provisioning) had a significantly negative impact on life satisfaction. Although men did not show significant differences in IP scores, the regression analysis confirmed that men did not internalize IPAs as much as women did. Men may accept and agree with parenting attitudes; however, with respect to actualizing these responsibilities, women bear the brunt of fulfilling their expectations.

Interaction Effect of Gender and Intensive Parenting Beliefs

Models 1, 4, 7, and 10 analyzed the interaction effects between gender and IPAs to visualize gender differences in life satisfaction. Model 1’s interaction effect contradicts that of previous models, in which the negative relationship between high IPAs and life satisfaction is buffered among male respondents. The results show that while men are significantly and substantially more likely to report lower life satisfaction rates than women, men with higher IPAs share a significantly more positive outlook on their life satisfaction than women do. The findings are illustrated in Figure 1 which depicts the interaction effect and its predictive margins for life satisfaction (90% confidence intervals). The first graph in Figure 1 demonstrates a continuous decline in life satisfaction among women for every unit increase in child-centered parenting beliefs, but not for male respondents. Rather, men showed an undisturbed continuation of their evaluations, despite the escalation of child-centered parenting attitudes. For Model 4, the analysis revealed an even more drastic disparity between men and women in terms of intensive parental responsibility attitudes. While men (b = -1.684, p < 0.001) and respondents with higher acceptance of intensive “responsibility” parenting (b = -0.455, p < 0.001) reported negative outcomes on life satisfaction, men with higher levels of parental responsibility were impacted not nearly as much as their female counterparts. The second graph in Figure 1 shows an upward increase among men, even with higher rates of intensive responsibility beliefs. In this sense, the findings fail to reject the third hypothesis, that IP has stronger negative implications for married women’s life satisfaction.

Figure 1.

Interaction Effect of Gender and Intensive Parenting Beliefs on Life Satisfaction

However, recalling the contributions of Lankes (2022), I found exceptions to IPAs that Korean adults internalize. Models 7 and 10 examined two components of intensive parenting: “parental sacrifice” and “resource-intensive” attitudes. Compared with the first two factors in Models 1 and 4, these two components did not show clear gender differences in life satisfaction rates. According to Model 7, while “sacrificing” attitudes are minimally associated with negative life satisfaction, the interaction effect between gender and intensive parenting is not statistically significant. Even in Figure 1, the graph indicates a high variability in responses for both men and women. Neither men nor women consider “sacrificing” attitudes to be important factors of IPAs. Finally, Model 10 illustrates the impact of “resource-intensive” parenting attitudes on life satisfaction. Not only do resource-intensive beliefs predict a significant negative evaluation of life satisfaction (b = -0.580, p < 0.001), but, according to Figure 1, the pattern is similar for both men and women. The conclusion is that although gendered burdens of IPAs still exist, women do not internalize all the factors of intensive parenting.

Discussion

The record-low fertility rates and marriage decline in South Korea cannot be understood as a mere shift in family values or an increase in individualistic ideals. Rather, marriage and childbirth have become strategic and privileged choices for families to ensure economic stability. The decision to have a child, therefore, becomes a risky commitment, but also entails heightened societal expectations of intensive parenting to ensure socioeconomic stability for the reproduction of one’s wealth and class.

The findings of this study indicate that married Korean adults share relatively similar IPAs regardless of gender. Although women were more likely to agree with parenting beliefs that prioritize child centrism and parental responsibility for their children’s success, the differences were minimal and inconsistent. However, when analyzing the effects of IPAs on individual life satisfaction, gender differences were apparent. The study confirmed the gendered effect of intensive parenting, where women’s life satisfaction significantly declined with higher internalization of intensive parenting norms. In other words, although men may agree with the pressures and expectations of IP, their beliefs do not necessarily affect their quality of life. This may be because men are less likely to practice those demanding roles in real life or because they are less likely to receive criticism when they fail to meet those expectations.

However, engaging with Lankes’s (2022) argument, I also find that not all IPA factors negatively impact women. The “child-centrism” and “responsibility” factors indicated clear gender differences in the deterioration of life satisfaction, while the “sacrificing” and “resource-intensive” factors presented contrasting implications. Not only did respondents have the lowest score for the “sacrificing” factor, the increase of sacrificing attitudes did not have statistically significant effects on the deterioration of life satisfaction. The results are in line with the theory of “risk flow” (Chang, 2010), where fulfilling the roles of financial and economic support is considered an important standard for being an eligible parent. Sacrificing one’s job or career is not an appreciated concept of intensive parenthood in South Korea, as it would indicate sacrificing a family’s socioeconomic resources. Similarly, the “resource-intensive” measure of IPAs did not report disproportionate gender effects. Both men and women considered economic provisioning to be the parents’ most important responsibility, placing equal pressure on both genders. Thus, IPAs in the context of South Korea are highly correlated with the theory of preventing “risk flows” from generation to generation. Women are generally more likely to experience deterioration in life satisfaction owing to parenting norms; however, men are equally under pressure from the demand for financial wealth reproduction for their children.

Despite its unique contributions to the existing literature, this study has some limitations. First, although the dataset is unique in the sense that it includes IPA questions, it does not distinguish between the responses of married adults with and without children. As respondents with children have more realistic experiences of intensive parenting expectations, the distinction between childless and child-rearing parents is of great importance. With the rising proportion of married couples unlikely to have children, further research is needed to explore how IPAs and their impact on life satisfaction affect those with and without children in different ways. In addition, the measures of IP norms are neither exhaustive nor diverse. As findings show that IPAs were prioritized and internalized differently compared with studies in Western contexts, further research is needed to examine Korea’s “resource-intensive” parenting phenomenon in a more representative context. Rather than focusing on the factors of parenthood itself, more research should be directed toward understanding the various parental pressures that individuals face and their impact on overall fertility intentions.

References

• Aldous, J. (1987). Family careers: Developmental changes in families. New York: Wiley.
• Arendell, T. (2000). Conceiving and investigating motherhood: The decade’s scholarship. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1192–1207. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01192.x]
• Bird, C. E. (1997). Gender differences in the social and economic burdens of parenting and psychological distress. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59(4), 809–823. [https://doi.org/10.2307/353784]
• Caldwell, J. C. (1982). Theory of fertility decline. London: Academic Press.
• Chang, K. (2010). Social reproduction in an era of ‘risk aversion’: From familial fertility to women’s fertility? Family and Culture, 23(3), 1–23. [https://doi.org/10.21478/family.23.3.201109.001]
• Chang, K., & Song, M. (2010). The stranded individualizer under compressed modernity: South Korean women in individualization without individualism. British Journal of Sociology, 61(3), 539–564. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2010.01325.x]
• Chesley, N. (2011). Stay-at-home fathers and breadwinning mothers: Gender, couple dynamics, and social change. Gender & Society, 25(5), 642–664. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211417433]
• Ciccia, R., & Bleijenbergh, I. (2014). After the male breadwinner model? Childcare services and the division of labor in European countries. Social Politics, 21(1), 50–79. [https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxu002]
• CNN. (2022). South Korea records world’s lowest fertility rate—again. CNN. Retrieved September 25, 2022, from https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/26/asia/south-korea-worlds-lowest-fertility-rate-intl-hnk/index.html
• Cote, L. R., Kwak, K., Putnick, D. L., Chung, H. J., & Bornstein, M. H. (2015). The acculturation of parenting cognitions: A comparison of South Korean, Korean immigrant, and European American mothers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(9), 1115–1130. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115600259]
• Craig, L., & Brown, J. E. (2017). Feeling rushed: Gendered time quality, work hours, nonstandard work schedules, and spousal crossover. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79(1), 225–242. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12320]
• Craig, L., Powell, A., & Smyth, C. (2014). Towards intensive parenting? Changes in the composition and determinants of mothers’ and fathers’ time with children 1992–2006. The British Journal of Sociology, 65(3), 555–579. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12035]
• Dermott, E. (2003). The ‘intimate father’: Defining paternal involvement. Sociological Research Online, 8(4), 28-38. [https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.859]
• Emmons, R. A. (2003). Personal goals, life meaning, and virtue: Wellsprings of a positive life. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 105–128). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. [https://doi.org/10.1037/10594-005]
• Evenson, R. J., & Simon, R. W. (2005). Clarifying the relationship between parenthood and depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46(4), 341–358. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650504600403]
• Faircloth, C. (2014). Intensive parenting and the expansion of parenting. In E. Lee, J. Bristow, C. Faircloth, & J. Macvarish (Eds.)., Parenting culture studies (pp. 25–50). London: Palgrave Macmillan. [https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137304612_2]
• Faircloth, C. (2021). When equal partners become unequal parents: Couple relationships and intensive parenting culture. Families, Relationships and Societies, 10(2), 231–248. [https://doi.org/10.1332/204674319X15761552010506]
• Gauthier, A. H., Bryson, C., Fadel, L., Haux, T., Koops, J., & Mynarska, M. (2021). Exploring the concept of intensive parenting in a three-country study. Demographic Research, 44(3), 333–348. [https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2021.44.13]
• Gove, W. R., & Geerken, M. R. (1977). The effect of children and employment on the mental health of married men and women. Social Forces, 56(1), 66–76. [https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/56.1.66]
• Gunderson, J., & Barrett, A. E. (2017). Emotional cost of emotional support? The association between intensive mothering and psychological well-being in midlife. Journal of Family Issues, 38(7), 992–1009. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15579502]
• Hansen, T., Slagsvold, B., & Moum, T. (2009). Childlessness and psychological well-being in midlife and old age: An examination of parental status effects across a range of outcomes. Social Indicators Research, 94, 343–362. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9426-1]
• Hays, S. (1996). The cultural contradictions of motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Hwang, J. (2016). Housewife, ‘gold miss,’ and equal: The evolution of educated women’s role in Asia and the U.S. Journal of Population Economics, 29(2), 529–570. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-015-0571-y]
• Ishizuka, P. (2019). Social class, gender, and contemporary parenting standards in the United States: Evidence from a national survey experiment. Social Forces, 98(1), 31–58. [https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy107]
• Kandel, D. B., Davies, M., & Raveis, V. H. (1985). The stressfulness of daily social roles for women: Marital, occupational, and household roles. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 26(1), 64–78. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2136727]
• Kim, E. H. W. (2017). Division of domestic labour and lowest-low fertility in South Korea. Demographic Research, 37, 743–768.. [https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2017.37.24]
• Kim, E. H. W., & Cheung, A. K. L. (2015). Women’s attitudes toward family formation and life stage transitions: A longitudinal study in Korea. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(5), 1074–1090.. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12222]
• Kim, H. K. (2013). Failure of the patrilineal stem family system? Familialism and individualization among the generation of economic crisis of Korea in 1998. Korean Journal of Sociology, 47(2), 101–141.
• Kim. S. (2022). A socio-psychological approach to low fertility: Who can’t, and why can’t they dream of marriage and childbearing? Survey Research, 23(2), 1–33. [https://doi.org/10.20997/SR.23.2.1]
• Lankes, J. (2022). Negotiating “impossible” ideals: Latent classes of intensive mothering in the United States. Gender & Society, 36(5), 677–703. [https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432221114873]
• Lewis, J. (2001). The decline of the male breadwinner model: Implications for work and care. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 8(2), 152–169. [https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/8.2.152]
• Liss, M., Schiffrin, H. H., Mackintosh, V. H., Miles-McLean, H., & Erchull, M. J. (2013). Development and validation of quantitative measure of intensive parenting attitudes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 22, 621–636. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-012-9616-y]
• Loyal, D., Sutter Dallay, A. L., & Rascle, N. (2017) Intensive mothering ideology in France: A pilot study. L’Encéphale, 43(6), 564–569.10.1016/j.encep.2017.08.002 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.encep.2017.08.002]
• McLanahan, S., & Adams, J. (1987). Parenthood and psychological well-being. Annual Review of Sociology, 13(1), 237–257. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.13.080187.001321]
• Musick, K., Meier, A., & Flood, S. (2016). How parents fare: Mothers’ and fathers’ subjective well-being in time with children. American Sociological Review, 81(5), 1069–1095. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416663917]
• Nelson, S. K., Kushlev, K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). The pains and pleasures of parenting: When, why, and how is parenthood associated with more or less well-being? Psychological Bulletin, 140(3), 846–895. [https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035444]
• Nomaguchi, K. M. (2012). Parenthood and psychological well-being: Clarifying the role of child age and parent–child relationship quality. Social Science Research, 41(2), 489–498. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.08.001]
• Nomaguchi, K. M., & Fettro, M. N. (2018). Cohort differences in mothers’ perceptions of neighborhood quality, child well‐being, and parental strain, 1976–2002. Family Relations, 67(4), 449–466. [https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12327]
• Nomaguchi, K. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2003). Costs and rewards of children: The effects of becoming a parent on adults’ lives. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(2), 356–374. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00356.x]
• Nomaguchi, K. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2020). Parenthood and well-being: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 198–223. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12646]
• OECD (2021). OECD Family Database. https://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm, (Accessed on May 22, 2023)
• OECD (2023). Fertility Rates (Indicator). (Accessed on May 22, 2023)
• Pollmann‐Schult, M. (2014). Parenthood and life satisfaction: Why don’t children make people happy? Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(2), 319–336. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12095]
• Preisner, K., Neuberger, F., Bertogg, A., & Schaub, J. M. (2020). Closing the happiness gap: The decline of gendered parenthood norms and the increase in parental life satisfaction. Gender & Society, 34(1), 31–55. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243219869365]
• Qian, Y., & Sayer, L. C. (2015). Division of labor, gender ideology, and marital satisfaction in East Asia. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(2), 383–400. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12274]
• Raymo, J. M., & Park, H. (2020). Marriage decline in Korea: Changing composition of the domestic marriage market and growth in international marriage. Demography, 57(1), 171–194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00844-9]
• Rizzo, K. M., Schiffrin, H. H., & Liss, M. (2013). Insight into the parenthood paradox: Mental health outcomes of intensive mothering. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 22, 614–620. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-012-9615-z]
• Ross, C. E., & Van Willigen, M. (1996). Gender, parenthood, and anger. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58(3), 572–584. [https://doi.org/10.2307/353718]
• Scheibling, C., & Milkie, M. A. (2023). Shifting toward intensive parenting culture? A comparative analysis of top mommy blogs and dad blogs. Family Relations, 72(2), 495–514. [https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12824]
• Shirani, F., Henwood, K., & Coltart, C. (2012). Meeting the challenges of intensive parenting culture: Gender, risk management and the moral parent. Sociology, 46(1), 25–40. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511416169]
• Smyth, C., & Craig, L. (2017). Conforming to intensive parenting ideals: Willingness, reluctance and social context. Families, Relationships and Societies, 6(1), 107–124. [https://doi.org/10.1332/204674315X14393034138937]
• Umberson, D., & Gove, W. R. (1989). Parenthood and psychological well-being: Theory, measurement, and stage in the family life course. Journal of Family Issues, 10(4), 440–462. [https://doi.org/10.1177/019251389010004002]
• Walper, S., & Kreyenfeld, M. (2022). The intensification of parenting in Germany: The role of socioeconomic background and family form. Social Sciences, 11(3), 134. [https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11030134]
• Yang, D., & Yoo, G. (2020). Effects of subjective socioeconomic status on marriage and fertility intention among college students: The mediating effect of subjective well-being. Journal of Life-span Studies, 10(1), 77–100. [https://doi.org/10.30528/jolss.2020.10.1.005]