The article identifies various patterns of gender equality at the workplace and explains how these patterns are correlated with psychological distress. The authors describe how gender segregation plays a crucial role in exposing men and women to diverse work environments irrespective of the sector of occupation, thereby impacting their health status to a great extent (Elwer et al. 2013). The article considers gender equality as a multidimensional concept, which includes the division of labor, symbolic representation of men and women, emotions and decision making capabilities. Gender inequality occurs in various forms, such as discrimination with regards to opportunities, allocation of benefits and accessibility to services (Elwer et al. 2013). Through this research, the authors explore how similar workplace conditions are associated with similar health outcomes between men and women. For this reason, the authors have used a contextual approach, which defines various aspects of gender equality at the workplace.
The article presents valuable information about various aspects of gender inequality, which includes educational level, salary, ratio of men and women, dominance by men and women and many others. While the ratio of men and women suggest the potential, educational level and salary suggest the power of both the genders. Research suggests that women are prone to a greater risk of illnesses, both physical and mental, in workplaces where men are in the majority (Elwer et al. 2013). The educational level and salary are correlated with lower rate of mortality and morbidity as they lead to a healthy lifestyle, better work conditions, adequate economic resources and psychosocial sources. On the other hand, the authors suggest that patterns of parental leave between men and women indicate differences in gender with regards to familial responsibilities (Elwer et al. 2013). The article presumes workplace as a potential actor for acknowledging the division of childcare between men and women.
One of the interesting features of the article is that it mentions about a Swedish study, which analyzes various dimensions of gender gap in the workplace. According to this study, organizations with smaller gender gaps more gender-equal allocation of sick leaves. The two possible directions for gender inequality are discrimination against men and discrimination against women. The research has collected data from a total population of 715, which consists of 577 men and 506 women (Elwer et al. 2013). This data includes a questionnaire, which investigates the personal details of the participants concerning education, employment, social and economic conditions, health status and behavior. Another questionnaire includes workplace details of the participants, such as salary, parental leave, educational qualifications, age and temporary leave (Elwer et al. 2013). After the collection of data, the analysis indicates that earlier distress influences the selection of the workplace by an individual.
The article measures psychological distress on the basis of five parameters, such as restlessness, palpitation, nervousness, anxiety, issues related to concentration and nervous distress (Tsuboya et al. 2015). From the findings, the authors assert that healthy individuals choose gender-equal workplaces. Furthermore, the article concludes that women are more prone to psychological distress when compared to men. However, the conclusion is not appropriate because the research sample consists of more number of women when compared to men. On the positive note, the authors’ arguments assert how gender equality patterns fail adhering to a simple scale, which measures inequality and equality. The authors have put in great efforts to prove how women are disadvantageous in gender unequal circumstances and how men avail health benefits. The article successfully proves the convergence theory, which states that men and women produce similar health outcomes under similar workplace conditions (Elwer et al. 2013).
The best part of the article is that it offers a greater contextual understanding about diverse patterns of gender equality. Moreover, the article successfully correlates gender equality to psychological distress. Through the method of cluster analysis, the authors were able to conclude the direction of gender inequality, whether men or women score higher on the indicator. On the other hand, a major drawback of the article is that it considers an unequal sample, which increases the likelihood of uncertain results. Another significant disadvantage is that the article fails to obtain the socio-economic position of several participants in the workplace (Elwer et al. 2013). The authors also fail to consider several important aspects of gender equality, such as hierarchal position of employees, job grades, part time or full time employment and sexual harassment. Furthermore, since the study has been conducted in a Swedish setting, it is dominant of women rather than men due to higher labor participation of women (Elwer et al. 2013).
References
Elwer, S., Harryson, L., Bolin, M., & Hammarstrom, A. (2013). Patterns of Gender Equality at Workplaces and Psychological Distress. Plos One, 8(1),1-10.
Tsuboya, T., Tsutsumi, A., & Kawachi, I. (2015). Change in psychological distress following change in workplace social capital: results from the panel surveys of the J-HOPE study. Occupational and environmental medicine, 72(3), 188-194.
