Women & Health

ISSN: 0363-0242 (Print) 1541-0331 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wwah20

Gender Differences in Causes of Depression

Marta Elliott PhD

To cite this article: Marta Elliott PhD (2001) Gender Differences in Causes of Depression, Women
& Health, 33:3-4, 183-198, DOI: 10.1300/J013v33n03_11

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1300/J013v33n03_11

Published online: 21 Oct 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1898

View related articles

Citing articles: 11 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wwah20
 Gender Differences
in Causes of Depression
Marta Elliott, PhD

ABSTRACT. This study adopts a stress process perspective to ana-

lyze gender differences in the causes of depression. The stress pro-
cess links psychological well-being to position in the social structure
via the mediating and moderating effects of stressors and resources.
The study examines stressors and resources as mediators of the
SES/depression relationship, and resources as moderators of the
stressor/depression relationship. Furthermore, it tests the hypothe-
ses that women are more exposed and more vulnerable to stressors
than are men, that women benefit more psychologically from so-
cially supportive relationships, and suffer more from conflict-ridden
relationships than men. The analysis utilizes survey data of urban
Nevadans age 45-74, collected in the Fall of 1997, and employs ordi-
nary least squares regression to test the stress process model. The re-
sults indicate that financial strain and perceptions of danger in one’s
neighborhood mediate the relationship between SES and depres-
sion, but resources do not moderate the effects of stressors on de-
pression. Women are more exposed to stressors than men, but are
not more vulnerable to them. Positive social relationships do have
more beneficial psychological effects for women than for men, but
the effects of marital conflict do not vary by gender. Implications for
social policy and treatment for depression are discussed. [Article
copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service:
1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: <getinfo@ haworthpressinc.com> Website:
<http://www.HaworthPress.com> Ó 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All
rights reserved.]

Marta Elliott is affiliated with the Department of Sociology/300, University of

Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV 89557 (E-mail: melliott@unr.edu).
This research was supported by grants from the University of Nevada, Reno
Graduate School, and the Graham and Jean Sanford Center on Aging at the Uni-
versity of Nevada, Reno. The author would like to thank Danya Peters for her re-
search assistance on this project, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments and suggestions.
184 WOMEN & HEALTH

KEYWORDS. Gender, depression, stress, social support

INTRODUCTION

Women remain at considerably higher risk for both mild and ma-
jor depression than men. In order to reduce the higher rate of de-
pression among women, and to understand better the causes of
depression for both women and men, we must continue to probe for
the sources of this gender difference. Research on the gender gap in
depression examines a variety of potential explanations, including
bias in the clinical and community survey-based diagnosis of de-
pression, sex-linked hormones (e.g., testosterone, estrogen), gender
differences in internal psychological processes (e.g., attributional
style), in styles of expressing distress, and in experiences of external
circumstances (e.g., parenthood) (Aneshensel 1992; Bebbington
1996; Sprock and Yoder 1997). Mirowsky and Ross (1995) con-
clude that although women do express their feelings more freely
than men, there is still a significant gender gap in depression that is
not explained by gendered patterns of emotional expressiveness.
Thus, the gender difference in distress is real, not artifact. The pur-
pose of this study is to combine sociological and psychological ap-
proaches to understanding depression to bring forth a more holistic
explanation of why more women tend to be more depressed than
men.
This study adopts the perspective of the stress process (Pearlin,
forthcoming; Pearlin et al. 1981) by examining differences between
men and women in their relative exposure and response to stressors
and resources. By virtue of its attention to both external factors and
internal processes, the stress process bridges the gap between the
sociological emphasis on external stressors, and the psychological
emphasis on individual reactivity to stressors, creating the potential
for a broader and more holistic explanation of gender differences in
depression.
According to differential exposure theory, women experience
more hardship in their work and family roles than men (Rieker and
Bird 2000). Women tend to earn less than men, and married women
tend to earn less than their husbands, leading to financial strain and
greater depression (Rosenfield 1989). Married women still do the
bulk of housework and child care, even when employed full-time
(Lennon and Rosenfield 1992), which can result in role overload
 Marta Elliott 185

and depression (Rosenfield 1992). Furthermore, women tend to ex-

perience more parenting and economic strains than men (Wu and
DeMaris 1996).
Differential vulnerability theory argues that exposure to equiva-
lent stressors has greater consequences for women’s, than for
men’s, mental health (Rieker and Bird 2000). For instance, women
are more vulnerable to the effects of events occurring to members
of their social networks (Kessler and McLeod 1984; Turner and
Avison 1989). Women may also react more strongly to work and
family strains because of the meanings these roles have for their
sense of self (Simon 1995).

Access and Reactivity to Resources by Gender

Men and women have differential access to resources with

known negative associations with depression. Social support is neg-
atively related to depression for women and men (House,
Umberson, and Landis 1988), and women report higher levels of
perceived social support than men (Pretorius 1996; Turner and Ma-
rino 1994; Umberson et al. 1996). In fact, the extra social support
that women enjoy keeps the gender gap in depression from being
even larger than it already is (Turner and Marino 1994; Umberson
et al., 1996).
Social support, however, has both positive and negative dimen-
sions. A single social relationship may simultaneously be a source of
comfort and of strain. Since women tend to be more involved in
emotionally intimate social relations than men (Belle 1987), they
may be more exposed to negative, conflict-ridden aspects of those
relationships. In fact, one study reported that not only are women
exposed to more negative social interactions than men, but that the
negative effect of such interactions on depression canceled out the
benefits of positive social support (Turner 1994).
Women’s social relationships tend to involve more intimacy, em-
pathy, and emotional disclosure than men’s (Belle 1987; Turner
1994), which may bring greater emotional benefits and higher psy-
chic costs of being in a relationship. Evidence on the differential ef-
fects of social support on depression by gender is mixed. Turner
(1994) found that women were no more vulnerable than men to the
effects on depression of negative social interactions, and Umberson
et al. (1996) found that women did not benefit more than men from
social support. Several studies, however, have shown that women
186 WOMEN & HEALTH

react more strongly to marital conflict than men (Crowther 1985;

Gottlib and Whiffen 1989; Pearlin and Lieberman 1979; Turner
1994).

CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND HYPOTHESES

This study tests a stress process model of depression in which

SES differentially exposes and makes people vulnerable to stress-
ors, which in turn predict depression. As such, the stress process
model posits that stressors and resources mediate the relationship
between SES and depression. In contrast, resources moderate, or
suppress the stress/depression relationship (Wheaton 1985). A sup-
pressor reduces the effect of a stressor on mental health when it is
invoked by the presence of the stressor, and directly reduces the
stress-induced distress. For example, job loss may lead one to seek
social support, which in turn, may reduce distress. The following
two hypotheses of the SES/depression relationship will be tested:

Hypothesis 1: Stressors and resources mediate the SES/depres-

sion relationship.

Hypothesis 2: Resources suppress the effect of stressors on de-

pression.

With respect to gender, this study will test the following hypothe-
ses:

Hypothesis 3: Women are more exposed to stressors than men.

Hypothesis 4: Stressors have a stronger effect on depression for

women than men.

Hypothesis 5: Positive social relationships have a stronger neg-

ative effect on depression for women than for men.

Hypothesis 6: Conflict-ridden social relationships have a stron-

ger positive effect on depression for women than for men.
 Marta Elliott 187

METHODS
This analysis uses telephone survey data collected in the Fall of
1997 in the Washoe and Clark counties of Nevada among 395 adults
age 45-75. Washoe and Clark counties are primarily urban and in-
clude Nevada’s two major cities, Reno and Las Vegas. The sample
is a sub-sample of individuals who were interviewed or enumerated
in a state-wide behavioral risk factors survey, and has a narrow age
range (Center for Applied Research 1997). The original sample of
4488 was selected via random-digit dialing from a list of Eng-
lish-speaking adults age 18 and above with working telephones in
the state of Nevada. The sub-sample had a response rate of 75 per-
cent. The sub-sample was quite similar to the original sample in
terms of gender, race, education, and income. It differed with re-
gard to age distribution because it was deliberately limited to adults
age 45 to 74.
The sub-sample data under-represent persons of Hispanic ori-
gin, in part because the interviews were conducted in English only.
Clark county data over-represents women by 5.5%, whereas the
Washoe county data under-represents women by 3.7%. Of the 395
adults in the sub-sample, 209 (52.9%) are female, 10.7% African
American, 1.5% Native American, 2% Asian, and only 4.5% His-
panic.
Socio-economic status: SES was measured by annual household
income, years of education, and occupational status of the respon-
dent’s current or most recent job over the past five years. Occupa-
tional status was measured with a scale developed by Hauser and
Warren (1997) matched to 1990 Census occupational codes. Of
those who were not currently employed, only six individuals had not
been employed over the past five years. The three variables were
standardized and then combined into an additive index of SES.
Stressors: Financial strain was measured with a 3-item additive in-
dex developed by Mirowsky and Ross (1996). The scale is designed
to tap the experiential dimension of economic hardship that may be
missed when simply considering respondents’ self-reported income.
Marital conflict, the concept used to test the effect of a conflict-rid-
den social relationship on depression, was measured with an addi-
tive index of two items (Pearlin and Schooler 1978).
A life events scale (House et al., 1992) was employed. Perceived
neighborhood safety was measured with an original item that asked
188 WOMEN & HEALTH

respondents if they felt safe walking in their neighborhoods during

the day, at night, or both.
Resources: Sense of control was measured with an eight-item
scale developed by Mirowsky and Ross (1991), split into two
four-item additive indices of fatalism and mastery. Social integra-
tion was measured by frequency of talking on the phone, going out
with or visiting friends in each other’s homes, and attendance at re-
ligious or non-religious meetings (House et al., 1992). Subjective
social support was measured by asking respondents if they agree
that “you have someone you can turn to for support and under-
standing when things get rough,” and “you have someone you really
like to talk to” (Mirowsky and Ross 1997).
Depression was measured with a ten-item short version of the
CES-D (Radloff 1977). Age was measured in years. Employment,
marital, and parenthood statuses were measured as dummy vari-
ables where one indicated paid employment, being married or liv-
ing with a partner, or the presence of children age 18 or below in the
home.

Missing Data

The percentage of cases missing for each variable ranged from zero
to four percent except for household income, which was missing for
ten percent of cases. Analyses were run with and without income in the
SES index and there were no substantive differences in the results, so
income was omitted from the final analysis. In the case of valid missing
data, e.g., no value for marital stress among the unmarried, the mean
value for marital status was imputed and marital status was controlled
(Cohen and Cohen 1983). Remaining missing data were imputed with
mean substitution.

Methods

Gender differences in exposure to stressors, access to resources,

and depression were tested with independent-sample t-tests compar-
ing means between women and men. Causal models of depression
were estimated with ordinary least squares regression (OLS).
Stressors and resources were analyzed as mediators of the
SES/depression relation. A mediator is a variable that explains, at
least in part, the relationship between two variables, one variable
causally antecedent to the mediator, and one resulting from it.
 Marta Elliott 189

TABLE 1. Descriptive Statistics for Men and Women

Men, N = 186 Women, N = 209

Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation
Depression .95* 1.11 1.29 1.57
SES .12* .89 2.36 .84
Financial strain 1.27* .58 1.44 .74
Marital conflict 1.74 .44 1.72 .37
Neighborhood danger 1.20* .51 1.41 .58
Life events 1.27 1.20 1.28 1.23
Fatalism 8.10 2.12 8.46 2.08
Mastery 12.32* 1.74 11.71 2.07
Social integration 3.01 .78 3.12 .86
Subjective support 3.27* .64 3.51 .56
Age 59 8.92 58 8.51
Employed .62* .49 .50 .50
Married/partnered .77* .42 .63 .48
Kids in the home .22 .22 .19 .39
* Mean difference between men and women is significant at the .05 level, two-tailed

Resources as suppressors (a particular type of moderator) of the

stressor/depression relation were tested with statistical interaction
terms between resources and stressors. A moderator is a variable
that affects the relationship between two other variables (Baron and
Kenny 1986). A suppressor variable is a moderator that decreases
the effect of one variable on another (Wheaton 1985). To test the
significance of resources as suppressors of the stressor/depression
relationship, each interaction term was entered into the main ef-
fects regression model one at a time. Gender as a moderator of the
effects of stressors and resources on depression was tested in a simi-
lar fashion with statistical interaction terms between gender and
both stressors and resources.

RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 presents means and standard deviations for all variables

by gender. Several means are significantly different for men and
women. Men, on average, are less depressed than women (t =
22.47, p = .014). Men tend to have higher levels of education,
household income, and occupational status than women (t = 5.50, p
= .000). Men report less financial strain than women (t = 22.45, p
 TABLE 2. Bivariate Correlations

190
Depression Female SES Financial Marital Neighbor Life Fatalism Mastery Social Support Age Employed Married/
strain conflict dangers events integration partnered
Depression
Female .108*
SES 2.191** 2.267**
Financial strain .352** .123* 2.248**
Marital conflict .298** 2.020 .024 .056
Neighborhood danger .249** .193** 2.220** .152** .144**
Life events .196** .003 2.044 .241** .126* .087
Fatalism .162** .085 2.247** .247** .000 .052 .028
Mastery 2.116* 2.158** .231** 2.006 .002 2.027 .168** 2.082
Social integration 2.178** .065 .127* 2.170** 2.189** 2.064 .042 2.161** 2.080
Subjective support 2.170** .197** .067 2.053 2.262** 2.030 2.028 2.135** .168** .270**
Age 2.114* 2.030 2.224** 2.187** 2.161** .091 2.003 .070 2.130* .109* 2.087
Employed 2.001 2.122* .277** .081 .075 2.075 .019 2.047 .177** 2.073 .032 2.536**
Married/partnered 2.217** 2.153** .196** 2.289** .002 2.177** 2.083 2.117* 2.005 2.002 .105* 2.036 2.009
Kids in the home .081 2.029 .144** .113* .130** 2.023 .066 2.001 .049 2.028 .009 2.408** .193** .102*
** Correlation is significant at the .01 level, two-tailed * Correlation is significant at the .05 level, two-tailed
 TABLE 3. Regression of Depression on Gender, Socioeconomic Status, Demographics, and Stressors

Equation 1 Equation 2 Equation 3 Equation 4 Equation 5 Equation 6 Equation 7 Equation 8

b b b b b b b b
Female .139* .108 .079 .061 .029 .022 .024 .018 .040 .031 2.008 2.006 .003 .025 .011 .009
SES 2.127*** 2.175 2.130*** 2.180 2.080* 2.111 2.126*** 2.174 2.108** 2.150 2.125*** 2.173 2.066 2.091
Age 2.012** 2.154 2.008 2.100 2.009 2.114 2.013** 2.171 2.012** 2.160 2.007 2.087
Married 2.271*** 2.192 2.177** 2.125 2.266*** 2.189 2.235*** 2.167 2.251*** 2.178 2.152* 2.108
Employed 2.060 2.046 2.069 2.053 2.055 2.042 2.065 2.050 2.067 2.051 2.071 2.054
Kids in the home .118 .074 .080 .050 .083 .051 .103 .064 .094 .058 .003 .020
Financial strain .257*** .266 .220*** .229
Marital conflict .448*** .282 .390*** .246
Neighborhood dangers .233*** .201 .156** .135
Life events .091*** .170 .045 .084
Constant .772 .787 1.694 1.063 .737 1.470 1.600 .120
Adjusted R2 .009 .035 .088 .144 .164 .123 .115 .238
S.E.E. .644 .636 .618 .599 .592 .606 .609 .565
* p # .05 ** p # .01 *** p # .001

191
192 WOMEN & HEALTH

= .015), and tend to feel safer in their neighborhoods (t = 23.90, p

= .000). Women are more likely to report having socially support-
ive relationships (t = 23.99, p = .000). Men are more likely than
women to be employed (t = 2.44, p = .015), and married (t = 3.06, p
= .002). There are no significant gender differences for life events,
marital conflict, sense of control, social integration, age, or parent-
hood status. The results are consistent with existing research in doc-
umenting the gender gap in depression, numerous social and
economic advantages enjoyed by men, greater exposure to stressors
among women, and more social support available to women than to
men.
Table 2 presents bivariate correlations between all variables. Seven
variables met the criteria of being related to both SES and depression:
financial strain and neighborhood dangers are related to SES and de-
pression, fatalism and social integration are related to financial strain
and depression, social integration and subjective social support are re-
lated to marital conflict and depression, and mastery is related to life
events and depression. Thus, these two stressors and five resources will
be tested as mediators.
Causal Models of Depression
Table 3 presents a series of regressions of depression. The root
mean square of depression was used in the analysis in order to nor-
malize its distribution. Equation 1 is a bivariate regression that re-
veals a negative association between being female and depression.
Equation 2 adds SES which is negatively associated with depression
and which results in gender becoming non-significant, suggesting
that women’s relatively low SES accounts for relatively high depres-
sion. Equation 3 regresses depression on the demographic vari-
ables, and indicates that age and being married are negatively
associated with depression. Equations 4 through 7 regress each of
the four stressor variables one at a time, and all are entered simulta-
neously in equation 8. All four stressors are significantly associated
with depression when entered alone and life events becomes
non-significant when all are entered together. Financial strain and
marital conflict are the strongest predictors of depression, followed
by perceptions of one’s neighborhood as dangerous. The associa-
tion between SES and depression becomes non-significant in equa-
tion 8, suggesting that the combined effects of financial strain,
 Marta Elliott 193

TABLE 4. Mediating Effects of Resources on the Stressor/Depression Rela-

tionship

Equation 1 Equation 2 Equation 3 Equation 4 Equation 5

b b b b b
Female .001 .007 `2.006 2.005 .024 .018 .039 .030 .017 .013
SES 2.056 2.078 2.050 2.069 2.057 2.079 2.060 2.084 2.032 2.044
Age 2.007 2.095 2.007 2.096 2.006 2.081 2.007 2.098 2.008 2.101
Married 2.149* 2.106 2.159** 2.113 2.158* 2.112 2.137* 2.097 2.156* 2.111
Employed 2.007 2.057 2.058 2.044 2.075 2.058 2.070 2.054 2.065 2.050
Kids in home .027 .017 .028 .017 .036 .023 .030 .019 .027 .017
Financial strain .205*** .213 .218*** .226 .208*** .216 .217*** .225 .193*** .200
Marital conflict .389*** .245 .382*** .240 .368*** .232 .349*** .220 .340*** .214
Neighborhood dangerous .159** .137 .161** .139 .153** .132 .158** .136 .161** .139
Life events .046 .087 .057* .106 .049* .093 .046 .095 .063* .117
Fatalism .022 .072 .017 .054
Mastery 2.040** 2.120 2.040* 2.119
Social integration 2.062 2.079 2.059 2.076
Subjective social support 2.097* 2.091 2.047 2.044
Constant 2.006 .645 .336 .543 .956
Adjusted R2 .241 .249 .242 .243 .256
S.E.E. .564 .561 .564 .563 .559
* p # .05 ** p # .01 *** p # .001

marital conflict, and neighborhood dangers mediate the SES/de-

pression relationship.
Table 4 explores the direct relationship between resources and
depression, and the potential that they mediate the relationship be-
tween stressors and depression. Mastery and having a socially sup-
portive relationship (equations 2 and 4) are negatively associated
with depression, but fatalism and social integration are unrelated to
depression (equations 1 and 3). Resources as mediators of the
stressor/depression relationship were tested by examining change in
the coefficients of stressors that were significantly related to both
depression and resources in the bivariate case. One resource ap-
pears to mediate the effect of a stressor on depression–the coeffi-
cient for marital conflict reduces by 11 percent from .390 to .349
when subjective social support is added, suggesting that the effect
of marital conflict on depression is smaller when there is someone
to turn to for social support.
Resources were tested as suppressors of the relationships be-
tween stressors and depression with statistical interactions between
stressors and resources. Each potential interaction was tested singly
but none was significant, indicating that the relationships between
194 WOMEN & HEALTH

stressors and depression are not changed by the relative presence

or absence of social-psychological resources.
Finally, the results presented in Tables 3 and 4 were tested to see
if they varied by gender. Table 3 indicated that financial strain and
sense of neighborhood danger partially explain the association be-
tween SES and depression. Tests of a similar series of equations
separately for women and men revealed no significant differences
in these mediation processes. Furthermore, the coefficients for SES
and other demographic characteristics were not significantly differ-
ent when tested as statistical interactions with gender. Finally, the
addition of stressors to the basic model reduced the direct associa-
tion between SES and depression in similar proportions for men
(52%) and for women (46%).
Whether or not women are more vulnerable than men to the im-
pact of stressors on depression, more protected than men by posi-
tive social relationships, and more vulnerable than men to conflict
was tested by examining statistical interaction terms between gen-
der and each stressor and resource. Results indicate a significant in-
teraction between gender and having a socially supportive
relationship–the presence of a confidant is negatively associated
with depression for women, whereas for men, the association be-
tween having a confidant and depression is non-significant. Among
women, each one-point increase in the 7-point confidant scale re-
duces the negative association between being female and depres-
sion by .323 (t = 3.439, p = .001). Women who report the least
access to a confidant are significantly more depressed than men by
1.12 points on the scale for the square root of depression, which var-
ies from zero to 2.65. In contrast, women who report the most ac-
cess to a confidant are actually less depressed than comparable men
by a factor of 1.141 points (1.12 2 [.323 3 7]). In sum, there is no evi-
dence that women are more vulnerable than men to the effects of
stressors on depression. However, women do appear to benefit
more than men from their close relationships.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study examined the gender gap in depression from a stress

process perspective by analyzing gender differences in exposure
and emotional response to stressors and resources. The stress pro-
cess approach to explaining depression applies well to an analysis of
 Marta Elliott 195

gender differences in depression, by taking into account exposure

and vulnerability to stressors and resources, and the embeddedness
of these processes in the social structure. The results suggest that
women are more exposed to financial strain and fear for their safety
in their neighborhoods, yet they have greater access to social sup-
port in the form of a confidant. Furthermore, women appear to
benefit more than men from having a person to confide in. Al-
though many expected results were not found, those that were are
consistent with the stress process paradigm. As noted below, data
limitations may have more to do with null results that the absence of
actual effects.
Two limitations of the current study should be considered in an
assessment of the results: the study cannot directly examine the tim-
ing of the relationship of stressors to depression, and the study does
not completely measure the entire range of possible stressors and
resources that may be related to depression.
The results of this study implicate women’s relatively low SES as
an important source of their greater tendency toward depression.
If, in fact, women tend toward depression because of their relatively
low SES, then reducing gender inequality in socio-economic status
should continue to be a national priority. As long as women remain
more likely to suffer the strains of economic hardship, the gender
gap in depression will persist.
Another implication of the study is that men may need help in
learning how to benefit from the positive aspects of social relation-
ships. Men typically confide only in their spouse or partner,
whereas women are likely to have a number of confidants (Belle
1987). When men’s problems affect the entire household, their
partners may not be their optimum source of support. Thus, men
who face social circumstances that threaten their mental health,
such as unemployment, need social support from people who can
be neutral to the family crisis. Optimally, such support would flow
naturally in the course of social relationships. However, community
service providers such as social workers should be readily available
to help men and women when family crises hit.
This study suggests that the mechanisms that produce depres-
sion, and which buffer the impact of stressors on depression, differ
for men and women, which implies that different therapeutic strat-
egies for dealing with depressed men and women are needed.
In conclusion, depression is a serious social problem for women
and men. In many instances, the causes of depression are similar for
196 WOMEN & HEALTH

both sexes. Nonetheless, two important determinants of depression

appear to affect men and women in different ways–gender inequali-
ties in economic standing clearly disadvantage women, whereas
gendered patterns of social relationships appear to disadvantage
men.

REFERENCES
Aneshensel, C.S. (1992). Social stress: Theory and research. Annual Review of So-
ciology, 18, 15-38.
Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction
in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consider-
ations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Bebbington, P. (1996). The origins of sex differences in depressive disorder:
Bridging the gap. International Review of Psychiatry, 8, 195-332.
Belle, D. (1987). Gender differences in the social moderators of stress. In Barnett,
R.C., Biener, L., & Baruch, G.K. (eds.). Gender and stress. London: The Free
Press, 257-277.
Center for Applied Research. (1997). Behavioral risk factor surveillance survey.
Reno, NV: Center for Applied Research.
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for
the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Crowther, J.H. (1985). The relationship between depression and marital malad-
justment. A descriptive study. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 173,
227-231.
Kessler, R.C. & McLeod, J. (1984). Sex differences in the vulnerability to undesir-
able life events. American Sociological Review, 49, 620-631.
Gottlib, I.H., & Whiffen, V.E. (1989). Depression and marital functioning: An ex-
amination of specificity and gender differences. Journal of Abnormal Psychol-
ogy, 98, 23-30.
Hauser, R. & Warren, J. (1997). Socioeconomic indexes for occupations: A re-
view, update, and critique. In Raferty, A. (ed.). Sociological methodology.
Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 177-298.
House, J., Kessler, R., Herzog, A., Mero, R., Kinney, A., & Breslow, M. (1992).
Social stratification, age, and health, In Schaie, K., Blazer, D., & House, J.
(eds.). Aging, health behaviors, and health outcomes. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, 1-32.
House, J.S., Umberson, D., & Landis, K. (1988). Structures and processes of so-
cial support. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 293-318.
Lennon, M.C. & Rosenfield, S. (1992). Women and mental health: The interac-
tion of work and family conditions. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33,
316-327.
Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C. (1997). Aging, status and sense of control Questionnaire
supported by NIA Grant No. R01-AG12393.
Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C. (1996). Fundamental analysis in research on well-being:
Depression and the sense of control. The Gerontologist, 36, 584-594.
 Marta Elliott 197

Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C. (1995). Sex differences in distress: Real or artifact? Amer-
ican Sociological Review, 60, 449-468.
Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C.E. (1991). Eliminating defense and agreement bias from
measures of sense of control: A 2 3 2 index. Social Psychology Quarterly 54,
127-45.
Pearlin, L. (Forthcoming). The stress process revisited: Reflections on concepts
and their interrelationships. In Aneschensel, C. & Phelan, J. (eds.). Handbook
of the sociology of mental health. New York: Plenum.
Pearlin, L. & Lieberman, M.A. (1979). Social sources of emotional distress. In
Simmons, R. (ed.). Research in community and mental health. Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press, 217-248.
Pearlin, L., Lieberman, M., Menaghan, E., & Mullan, J. (1981). The stress pro-
cess. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 337-356.
Pearlin, L. & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 19, 2-21.
Pretorius, T.B. (1996). Gender and the health-sustaining and stress-reducing
functions of social support: A South African study. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 11, 193-208.
198 WOMEN & HEALTH

Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research
in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401.
Rieker, P.P. & Bird, C.E. (2000). Sociological explanations of gender differences
in mental and physical health. In Bird, C.E., Conrad, P., & Fremont, A.M.
(eds.). Handbook of medical sociology, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall,
98-113.
Rosenfield, S. (1992). The costs of sharing: Wives’ employment and husbands’
mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33, 213-225.
Rosenfield, S. (1989). The effects of women’s employment: Personal control and
sex differences in mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30,
77-91.
Simon, R. (1995). Gender, multiple roles, role meanings, and mental health. Jour-
nal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 182-94.
Sprock, J. & Yoder, C.Y. (1997). Women and depression: An update on the re-
port of the APA task force. Sex Roles, 36, 269-303.
Turner, H. (1994). Gender and social support: Taking the bad with the good? Sex
Roles, 30, 521-541.
Turner, R.J. & Avison, V. (1989). Gender and depression: Assessing exposure
and vulnerability to life events in a chronically strained population. Journal of
Nervous and Mental Disease, 177, 443-455.
Turner, R.J. & Marino, F. (1994). Social support and social structure: A descrip-
tive epidemiology. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 235, 193-212.
Umberson, D., Meichu, D.C., House, J.S., Hopkins, K., & Slaten, E. (1996). The
effects of social relationships on psychological well-being: Are men and
women really so different? American Sociological Review, 61, 837-857.
Wheaton, B. (1985). Models for the stress-buffering functions of coping re-
sources. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 26, 352-364.
Wu, X. & DeMaris, A. (1996). Gender and marital status differences in depres-
sion: The effects of chronic strains. Sex Roles, 34, 299-319.