Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 1 Date: 12 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
The study examined the mechanisms between work-family conflict and the fertility intentions
of Chinese women. Four hypotheses were tested: the negative association between work-family
conflict and fertility intentions, the mediating role of fertility attitudes, the moderating role of
income class, and the moderating role of child-rearing burden. The results appear to support
these hypotheses, and a range of policy recommendations were proposed.
This study made an admirable attempt to explore a contemporary issue on the challenges of
work-family conflict and fertility intentions. However, there are aspects of this study that could
benefit from some improvements in its content and presentation. I hope that the following will
help improve the manuscript:
1. The study uses a convenience sample recruited from social media platforms. It is likely that
the sample is not nationally representative, but it would be helpful for the authors to provide
information on how the target population was selected (e.g., what age range, whether they
already have children), the sampling frame, sampling methods, how data was collected, and how
the makeup of the sample differs from the actual population so that readers can assess the data
quality.
2. Can the authors also expand on the data collected from the sample (perhaps by providing a
descriptive table of summary statistics)? Currently, only information on the women’s job sector,
mean age, and education level is provided. However, other important information, such as the
women’s urban/rural or Hukou status, number of children, marital status, and employment status
etc. should also be included.
3. The manuscript lacks some essential details for readers to fully understand and evaluate its
analysis and findings. For example, to measure fertility intentions, the authors used 21 items
on five dimensions (fertility risk, disease control, social support, happiness, and fertility values)
instead of the conventional approach of asking respondents, “Do you intend to have a/another
child during the next three years?” The 21-item scale does not seem appropriate given that it
is specific to women with breast cancer (Zhu et al. 2023). Some of the questions, such as “I
am positive regarding my prognosis,” are confusing and probably inappropriate for measuring
fertility intentions among otherwise healthy women. They also seem to be measuring “feelings”
instead of “intentions,” as almost all the questions start with “I feel…”.
4. Similarly, other key measures including women’s income and child-rearing burden are very
obscure. Referring to the cited sources, the article by Trapeznikova (2019) is on measuring
income inequality, and the four-item scale for women’s child-rearing burden cannot be found in
the 2014 questionnaire of the Chinese Family Panel Studies. It is recommended that the authors
provide all the items used in the Appendix for reference so that readers will know what they
are actually measuring.
5. Can the authors provide clarifications on the control variables? It seems that the results
are highly significant because they are unadjusted models. Of particular concern is the
exclusion of key controls such as women’s age, marital status, number of children, sex of
children, employment status, and Hukou status. For example, married women who have already
completed childbearing and have their desired number of children will probably no longer intend
to have children compared to single childless women.
6. According to the theory of planned behavior, fertility intentions may be influenced by
an individual’s attitude but there are two other components (subjective norms and perceived
behavioral control) that are not included in the models. Given that the authors mentioned
several times explicitly and implicitly that traditional family values and culture are particularly
important in China, it would be useful for these factors to be considered in the models.
7. The manuscript can benefit from a discussion of missing values. While missing information
is common in responses, particularly relating to income, there is no mention of missing values
in this study. Can the authors provide a discussion of how missing values are handled?
8. In the discussion section, the authors argue that the study substantiates the impact of work-
family conflict on fertility intentions, the mediating role of fertility attitudes, and moderation
of income class and women’s child-rearing burden; however, these conclusions need to be
reevaluated after adjusting for controls. Most important is whether the women already have
children and the sex of those children, as these factors would affect whether they want another
child.
9. Another note about the concluding section is that the authors made four policy
recommendations, but it is important to caution that the study is based on a sample of 334 women
that may not be representative of the female population in China. Therefore, it may be better
to be more conversative in writing. For example, the recommendation on “raising awareness of
the importance of children within families and the transmission of family values is essential” (p.
10) – if women are experiencing work-family conflict, wouldn’t this place an additional burden
on them?