【阅读】09/23起粤渡寂静整理（10/2更新，41篇原始，37篇考古）

wyksladyjs

感谢分享！               

Victoriae

感谢分享！               

杀G取卵92

大家感觉阅读鸡精有用吗？这么多 到考场上能记住吗？
多数题目也没有答案
如何正确使用呢

熙熙Camille

感谢！

熙熙Camille

感谢！

12blair

感谢

Vina_Fighting

月度君， 24应该是20，讲的是一篇文章

烤鸡翅的matt

楼主，27应该是19吧

AgustinaL

thx

billyisfragile!

JOURNAL ARTICLE
Labor-Force Reentry among U.S. Homemakers in Midlife: A Life-Course Analysis
Phyllis Moen, Geraldine Downey and Niall Bolger
Gender and Society
Vol. 4, No. 2 (Jun., 1990), pp. 230-243 (14 pages)
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/189614

还就是女性reenter工作那篇；注意有一道题我觉在global economy（像原文的home finacial sources） 和work typical（像对应原文service section）里犹豫，选了global economy。。。

Among the factors commonly associated with labor-force participation are human capital variables (age, education, work experience, health) and labor-market structure (local unemployment rate). In addition, family financial resources and domestic responsibilities have been linked to the reduced likelihood of women’s labor-force participation However, we do not know whether these predictors of participation operate similarly in the case of reentry. For example, marriage and the presence of children have been found to limit women’s employment in cross—sectional studies, but they may have little effect on homemakers in midlife.

Job opportunities also influence women’s labor-force decisions (Bowen and Finnegan 1969; Oppenheimer 1970). In the United States, women are heavily concentrated in service jobs, the fastest-growing segment of the occupational structure (Personick 1987). Shifts in the composition of the available pool of workers, in conjunction with the expanding service economy, created a favorable climate for the employment of women at all stages of the life course in the 1970s. But other structural factors, such as gender and age discrimination and gender-role prescriptions, also determine women’s opportunities in the labor market and, consequently, influence their employment decisions.

女性re-enter labor market, 1970-1974, 1975-1979, women of their forties 云云……分析各种原因;貌似在哪里出现过

This study used data from 11 waves of interviews over the 1970-80 period to trace the five-year employment histories and family transitions of women aged 40-59 during two adjacent but distinct time periods: 1970-74 (n = 281) and 1975-79 (n = 259). In each five-year period, the sample consisted of women who in the base year (1970 or 1975) were married, had spouses working full-time, and were out of the labor force.

DISCUSSION

Although it would be premature to dismiss these traditional factors without corroborating evidence, our results suggest that conventional models developed to explain women’s labor—force participation in general may be of limited utility in accounting for reentry decisions in midlife. Women do not constitute a monolithic population; rather, there are distinct subpopulations of women, including full—time homemakers at different stages of the life course, who have different dispositions and options regarding labor-market participation and who consequently require distinctive models of labor-force dynamics.

We found three factors that were related to reentry: education, marital dissolution, and age. Education appears to be important in propelling women at all stages of life into the work force. Marital dissolution also emerged as an influential transition experience, especially in the first half of the 1970s.

The finding that entry into the “empty-nest” phase of parenting, as well as spouse’s work—hour reduction, did not have significant effects runs counter to what would have been predicted by the life-course perspective’s theoretical emphasis on transitions (e.g. Elder 1985; Hogan 1981). There is growing evidence, however, that movement into the “empty-nest” phase is not as momentous as it was once portrayed (Lowenthal and Chiriboga 1972; Pearlin 1980). Alternatively, the most influential transition for US. homemakers in midlife may not be launching the last child from the home but rather the entry of the youngest child into high school, junior high school, or even elementary school.

70年代,妇女开始出来工作的越来越多了.sociologist认为是由于工作机会,婚姻状况,教育程度,等原因造成的.但是不是社会上对妇女出外工作的态度改变造成的.作者承认了70年代，妇女的工作机会,婚姻状况,教育程度确实发生了很多改变，比如说是over secondary school教育的妇女越来越多了。但这些改变还不足以完全解释妇女外出工作的比例为什么会大比例增加(好象是增长了3倍，不影响做题)。然后作者举了个例子来证明他的看法。有数据显示，75-80年，45岁左右的妇女比70-75年40岁左右的妇女更倾向于外出工作(这里我的理解是，前后其实是同一批人，变老了5岁嘛，这些人的教育程度，婚姻状况等因素应该是不变的，那唯一可以解释的变量就是社会因素了)。最后作者申明自己的观点，即社会接受度，包括家庭成员的接受，妇女自己的接受等才是重要因素。

The most important finding concerns age and how its effect is qualified by time period. U.S. homemakers in their early 40s in 1970 were three times less likely to reenter employment than those in their early 40s only five years later. By contrast, homemakers in their 50s were equally unlikely to move into employment, whether in the early or later part of the decade.

Were women in their 40s more likely to reenter the labor force in the last half of the 1970s because they had more education or fewer children than did their counterparts in the earlier part of the decade? Differences exist between the two age cohorts on a number of measures, which may reflect shifts in the composition of the group of midlife women who remained as homemakers (see Appendix). Fewer younger women were leaving their jobs in conjunction with family responsibilities and those who did increasingly returned to the labor force well before midlife. Consequently, women who remained as full-time homemakers in the latter half of the 1970s differed from those who were full—time homemakers in the first half of the decade. However, we accounted for this possibility by including in our model factors considered relevant to employment on which cohorts may differ—education, previous work experience, health, family income, number of children, the occurrence and timing of family transitions—and by using predicted probabilities of reentry for women who were typical across both time periods on all the model variables except age. Thus differences in reentry were not due to differences in the individual characteristics or structural-level variables included in the model.

Another explanation is that the period effect may reflect unmeasured influences, such as differential gender-role socialization. However, we found that 40-year-old homemakers in 1970 were more likely to become employed as 45-year-olds in 1975 than they had been in 1970, suggesting that it was not their upbringing or their own goals and values that accounted for the period differences we found. A more compelling explanation directs attention  to the social changes that occurred in the United States during the 1970s. Over the course of the decade, changes in public attitudes regarding women’s roles and the continued growth of the traditionally female service sector opened up new opportunities for women in midlife as well as for those in early adulthood. Women with greater education and those whose marriages had dissolved were the most likely to avail themselves of these opportunities.