Prehľadová štúdia: Zmeny v teóriách prelínania pracovného a rodinného prostredia
Literature review: Changes in the theories of work/family interface

Summary/Abstract: Work and family have traditionally been considered as two main domains of people’s lives. Research interest from different scientific fields, but mostly from the fields of psychology and sociology led to an extensive examination of work and family interactions. Taking into consideration the current state of theory, the aim of the present study was to provide a chronological overview focused on the changes of the perception of work/family interface in different theories. Moreover, we attempted to emphasize similarities and differences between these theories. In this study we focused on the most significant theories from both, non-interactional and interactional approach. Non-interactional approach to work/family interface was dominant approximately from the early 1920s until late 1960s and its main assumption was that work and family domain are strictly separated. In the present study, the non-interactional approach is represented by segmentation theory and structural functionalism. Since the myth of separation has been shattered, research has developed strong interactional orientation. The main assumption of the interactional approach to work/family interface is that work domain and family domain are closely intertwined. The interactional approach was further divided into two perspectives: negative and positive. The negative perspective of the interactional approach is represented by role conflict theory, compensation theory, supplemental compensation theory, reactive compensation theory, negative spillover theory, crossover theory, spillover-crossover theory, and finally, work-family conflict theory. The positive perspective of the interactional approach is represented by the following: role accumulation theory, enrichment theory, positive spillover theory, enhancement theory, and facilitation theory. In the closing part of the present study we discussed possibilities for future development. We proposed three potential alternatives, which are: creation, integration, and classification. We believe that classification seems to be the optimal direction for future research and it would bring much needed structure into current theories.

• Details
• Contents