title: Switching Dynamics and the Stress Process.
abstract: This paper shows how maintaining social relationships can be a daily hassle that has implications for the stress process, depending on how often individuals transition, or "switch," between their various social roles and social settings throughout the day. I use nationally representative time diary data on 7,662 respondents from the 2010 American Time Use Survey to measure individual rates of this switching behavior and to examine how this relates to perceived stress. Regression analysis shows that, net of how many social roles they play and settings they visit on a given day, individuals who switch more frequently between these elements report higher levels of stress. This finding holds for women but not men, suggesting that switching dynamics are disproportionately stressful for women. I close by discussing the implications of the findings for research on gender and health.
authors.affiliation: Department of Sociology, Cornell University.
authors.forename: Benjamin
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Cornwell
keywords: Microsociology; gender; health; social networks; sociology of time
references.citation: Ann Behav Med. 1999 Spring;21(1):83-97
references.pmid: 18425659
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2004 Jan;94(1):82-8
references.pmid: 14713703
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2006 Dec;47(4):309-23
references.pmid: 17240922
references.citation: Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 Mar;43(3):311-8
references.pmid: 15964005
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2011 Dec;52(4):404-29
references.pmid: 22144731
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1989 Sep;30(3):241-56
references.pmid: 2674272
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1983 Sep;24(3):208-29
references.pmid: 6630976
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1993 Mar;34(1):54-70
references.pmid: 8463635
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Mar;54(3):486-95
references.pmid: 3361420
references.citation: J Behav Med. 1981 Mar;4(1):1-39
references.pmid: 7288876
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2009 Mar;50(1):31-48
references.pmid: 19413133
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1979 Jun;20(2):100-8
references.pmid: 479523
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1998 Jan 15;338(3):171-9
references.pmid: 9428819
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Sep;75(3):670-80
references.pmid: 9781406
references.citation: Am Sociol Rev. 2011 Apr;76(2):265-290
references.pmid: 21580799
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2010;51 Suppl:S41-53
references.pmid: 20943582
references.citation: Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2008;4:1-32
references.pmid: 18509902
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2011 Jun;52(2):145-61
references.pmid: 21673143
references.citation: Am Sociol Rev. 1983 Apr;48(2):174-87
references.pmid: 6859677
references.citation: J Occup Health Psychol. 2005 Oct;10(4):491-503
references.pmid: 16248695
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2011 Mar;52(1):43-57
references.pmid: 21362611
references.citation: Soc Sci Res. 2012 Sep;41(5):1037-52
references.pmid: 23017916
references.citation: J Abnorm Psychol. 1989 Nov;98(4):460-7
references.pmid: 2592681
references.citation: Health Place. 2011 Jul;17(4):978-87
references.pmid: 21543249
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1981 Dec;22(4):337-56
references.pmid: 7320473
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2004 Mar;45(1):17-33
references.pmid: 15179905
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2003 Mar;44(1):18-33
references.pmid: 12751308