Next Article in Journal
Stock Market Development and Economic Growth Nexus: Evidence from the Fragile Five Countries
Next Article in Special Issue
Regional Labour Market Polarisation in Hungary
Previous Article in Journal
Macroeconomic Determinants of Renewable Energy Deployment: The Role of Inflation, Fiscal Policy, and Economic Volatility in MENA Countries (2000–2023)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparative Analysis of Labor Markets in Bulgaria, Italy, and the UK: Wage Dynamics, Labor Costs, and Digital Development
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Economies
Volume 14
Issue 2
10.3390/economies14020051
economies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Determinants of Preferences for Employment Patriarchy in Turkey

by
Tekin Kose
1,2,* and
Dogan Kaan Erdinc
2,3
1
School of Business and Law, University of Brighton, Brighton BN2 4AT, UK
2
Department of Economics, TED University, Ziya Gokalp Caddesi No. 48, 06420 Ankara, Turkey
3
Hull City Football Club, Hull HU3 6HU, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Economies 2026, 14(2), 51; https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14020051
Submission received: 19 December 2025 / Revised: 2 February 2026 / Accepted: 3 February 2026 / Published: 9 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Labour Market Dynamics in European Countries)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

Patriarchal attitudes persistently constrain women’s employment outcomes in Turkey. This study investigates individual-level determinants of preferences for employment patriarchy using the World Values Survey (WVS) Wave 7 data for the Turkish case. An ordered probit model is utilized to quantify associations of sociodemographic characteristics, religiosity, political views, and other patriarchal attitudes with preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. Findings reveal that higher religiosity, right-wing views, and other patriarchal attitudes (educational, managerial, and household) are positively associated with preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. Females are less likely to have preferences for employment patriarchy. The results imply that there are multidimensional pathways leading to preferences for employment patriarchy. Hence, policies to improve female labor market outcomes should develop multidimensional mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of religious, political and normative factors by moving beyond one-size-fits-all approaches.

1. Introduction

Gender differences in the labor force participation and economic outcomes of individuals are frequently observed in various countries. In many countries, especially in Turkey, the labor force participation rates for females are relatively lower than those of males. According to OECD (2025) statistics, the female employment to population ratio was equal to 32.5% for Turkey, and it was 53.7% in OECD countries during 2024. Female labor force participation rates were 56.9% and 36.8% in OECD countries and Turkey, respectively, during 2024. For men, employment-to-population ratios were 66.8% and 65.3% for Turkey and OECD countries in 2024, respectively. Labor force participation rates of men were 72% in Turkey and 69% in OECD members. Similarly, according to the World Development Indicators of The World Bank (2025), female labor force participation rates in Turkey have historically remained below the world average and the average female labor force participation rates of low- and middle-income countries. The Turkish female labor force participation rates have been between 30% and 36%, whereas the world average has remained above 45% in the last decade. Turkish women’s labor market outcomes lag far behind those of OECD members, the world averages, and Turkish men, which is significantly driven by patriarchal attitudes constraining women’s employment (Engin & Pals, 2018; Ozdemir-Sarigil & Sarigil, 2021).
It is crucial to investigate the underlying mechanisms of low female labor force participation rates in Turkey. Attitudes towards the employment of women in societies can affect both their participation and performance in the labor market within a country. In addition, gender roles in society may influence attitudes toward women’s employment. Di (2020) states that women who live in less gender-egalitarian countries have more traditional ideologies towards women and work. Turkey ranked 59th out of 172 countries in the gender equality index in 2023, making it one of the lowest-ranked OECD countries (UNDP, 2025). Researchers reveal that Turkish females face many obstacles in their participation in economic life, such as lack of education, lack of support from their families, time allocation problems due to unpaid household work and childbearing activities, and social disapproval due to religious beliefs and patriarchal attitudes (Boratav et al., 2014; Dildar, 2015; Moghadam, 2003; Ones et al., 2013; Sanli, 2016, Savas & Cakir, 2024).
This study relates to the branch of literature that focuses on factors associated with preferences for patriarchy. Researchers show that gender, education level, religious values, political preferences, income level, and identity measures are associated with the patriarchal attitudes of Turkish individuals (Engin & Pals, 2018; Ozdemir-Sarigil & Sarigil, 2021). The objective of this study is to contribute to the literature by conducting an empirical analysis of a recent data set to investigate the determinants of preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. Which sociodemographic, religious, and political factors predict preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey? While previous studies have investigated patriarchal attitudes broadly, this study specifically isolates preferences associated with employment and offers a focused analysis. Moreover, by using an individual-level data set from the most recent WVS Wave 7 for Turkey, this study provides an up-to-date and timely analysis of employment-specific patriarchal preferences. Ordered probit regression is used for the estimation of empirical models, and results from ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation are provided for a robustness check. The main findings of this study are consistent with the previous literature in that preferences for employment patriarchy are related to types of patriarchal norms, economic conditions, political preferences, and religious values of Turkish individuals.
The next section of this study expands the analysis of related literature. Section 3 describes the data and the methodology. Section 4 presents the empirical findings. Finally, a summary of the analysis is presented in the conclusion section.

2. Related Literature

There is extensive research in economics focusing on various aspects of gender differences in economic outcomes. The labor market outcomes of individuals display significant gender gaps, with impacts on macroeconomic outcomes, in different countries (Antecol, 2000; Erosa et al., 2022; Shurchkov & Eckel, 2018, Teignier & Cuberes, 2024). As an emerging market economy, Turkey experiences significant gender differences in the labor market and the human capital formation activities of individuals (Baslevent & Onaran, 2004; Caner et al., 2016; Ilkkaracan, 2012, Savas & Cakir, 2024). Researchers reveal that females display lower rates of labor market participation in Turkey (Ilkkaracan, 2012; Gevrek & Gevrek, 2022; Moghadam, 2003). It is also confirmed that women’s labor force participation in Turkey remains significantly below OECD levels and is shaped by structural and normative constraints (The World Bank, 2018). Similarly, country-level assessments report persistent gender gaps in employment and economic activities in Turkey (The World Bank, 2018; Muftuler-Bac, 2012).
Researchers have investigated the relationships between female labor market outcomes and various social norms, attitudes, and religious values in various parts of the world (Algan & Cahuc, 2006; S. N. Davis & Greenstein, 2009; Fortin, 2005, Peng & Feng, 2025). A branch of the literature analyzes associations between gender-related social norms and female labor force participation in Turkey (Atasoy, 2017; Dildar, 2015; Gevrek & Gevrek, 2022; Goksel, 2013; Gunduz-Hosgor & Smits, 2008). They conclude that Turkish women’s low labor-force participation rates are significantly associated with patriarchal and traditional social and cultural norms. In addition to these quantitative studies, recent research on women’s NGOs in Turkey demonstrates that patriarchal beliefs persist even inside civil society groups, limiting efforts to achieve gender equality (Savas & Cakir, 2024).
This study aims to explore the determinants of patriarchal attitudes toward women’s employment. In this regard, this section briefly reviews the research on the determinants of patriarchal preferences for the distribution of jobs. After the discussion of studies focusing on the Turkish case, cross-country or single-country research on other regions of the world is presented.
Engin and Pals (2018) employed earlier waves of the WVS to explore the covariates of patriarchal values in Turkey. The authors used ordered logistic regressions and observed that the patriarchal attitudes of Turkish individuals significantly increased between 1990 and 2011. Additionally, this study found that the religiosity and conservatism levels of individuals are positively correlated with reporting patriarchal attitudes. Higher education, a higher income level, a higher age, and being female are negatively associated with the likelihood of having patriarchal views. Finally, individuals living with more children are more likely to report patriarchal preferences.
Ozdemir-Sarigil and Sarigil (2021) examined the correlates of patriarchy in Turkey using individual-level survey data. The authors utilized ordered logistic models for empirical analysis and found that higher religiosity levels, Sunni religious identity, Kurdish ethnic identity, right-wing political views, and lower socioeconomic status in terms of education and income are positively associated with patriarchal attitudes. This study also revealed that women have lower patriarchal orientations, whereas older individuals display higher levels of patriarchal attitudes. Being married and unemployed are positively correlated with reporting higher levels of patriarchal values.
Using six waves of the WVS, L. S. Davis and Williamson (2019) explored the relationships between the characteristics of individuals and their attitudes towards gender equality across various countries, with particular attention to the role of individualism in shaping attitudes toward gender equality. According to the findings of this study, being female, having a higher income level, having a higher education level, and having a higher level of individualism are associated with less patriarchal attitudes toward job distribution. Furthermore, religiosity levels have a positive relationship with patriarchal values. In a similar fashion, Dutta et al. (2022) utilized a probit regression framework with data from six waves of the WVS and studied the associations of different social measures with patriarchal values. The authors found that patriarchal attitudes rise with age. Females, more educated individuals, and employed individuals are less likely to reveal patriarchal preferences. Kiser (2015) considered wave 6 of the WVS and employed sample comparison tests to study gender differences in attitudes and perceptions of work in the United States. This study reported that women are less likely to have patriarchal preferences for employment and in other dimensions of life compared to men.
Price (2015) utilized data from the fourth wave of the WVS and hierarchical ordinal logistic models to examine the determinants of attitudes toward women’s right to employment with a special focus on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. The author found that, on average, individuals in MENA have significantly more patriarchal attitudes toward women’s employment compared to other countries included in the sample. Individuals with higher religiosity, Muslims, the self-employed, and homemakers are more likely to report patriarchal attitudes. Females, more educated individuals, and non-Muslims display higher support for women’s right to employment. Glas et al. (2018) investigated the associations of religious values with patriarchal attitudes in Arab countries in the MENA region using six waves of the WVS. The authors employed multilevel empirical models and found that higher levels of religious measures are associated with higher levels of patriarchal attitudes. Moreover, females, non-Muslims, and the educated are more likely to reveal preferences for gender equality. More broadly, Moghadam (2020) demonstrates how patriarchal contracts continue to create gender regimes in MENA, limiting women’s labor market inclusion, which is congruent with the patriarchal sentiments reported in WVS-based research. Analyzing a sample of Lebanese students, Abouchedid (2007) reported that religiosity is positively associated with patriarchal preferences. Females and Christians, on the other hand, are less likely to hold patriarchal attitudes. These trends are supported by recent research in similar patriarchal settings, which shows persistent resistance to women’s employment motivated by religion (Roche, 2024). These results, which emphasize religion as a prominent motivator in conservative Muslim-majority environments, are consistent with Turkey’s characteristics.
Overall, researchers examine the determinants of attitudes toward women’s employment in a variety of ways. However, there is a dearth of research focusing on individual-level correlates of attitudes towards female employment in Turkey. Although recent work has examined patriarchal attitudes within specific groups such as women’s NGOs (Savas & Cakir, 2024), systematic quantitative analyses of individual-level attitudes toward women’s employment in Turkey using the latest WVS wave remain scarce. This study aims to contribute to this specific line of literature by investigating the determinants of patriarchal attitudes toward the employment of women compared to men in the Turkish case. For this purpose, this study utilizes individual-level data from the latest wave 7 of the WVS and constructs an empirical analysis based on an ordered probit framework.

3. Data and Methodology

3.1. Data

This study makes use of an individual-level data set obtained from the WVS Wave 7 for Turkey. The WVS’s seventh wave spans the years 2017–2020. The main aim of the survey is to measure the political, economic, social, cultural, and religious values of individuals across different regions of the world. The survey is conducted in approximately 100 countries, which cover around 90% of the world’s population. The data collection method used for the WVS is a face-to-face interview at the residence of the respondent. The WVS considers the adult population aged 18 and older, and it includes at least 1200 participants from each country. However, sample sizes vary across countries based on population. The 7th wave of the survey for Turkey was conducted in 2018, and the Turkish sample covered 2415 participants.

3.1.1. Dependent Variable

This study constructs a measure of individual-level preferences for employment patriarchy. It derives the dependent variable from attitudes toward female versus male employment in cases of job scarcity. The dependent variable of this study is labeled “preferences for employment patriarchy,” and it is derived from the level of agreement of the individual with the following statement (Q33 in WVS Wave 7): “When jobs are scarce, men should have more right to a job than women.” The survey question has discrete answer options on a 1–5 Likert scale: 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Agree strongly. Hence, higher levels of the dependent variable reveal a higher level of patriarchal preferences for employment at the individual level.

3.1.2. Independent Variables

This study uses a variety of independent variables to explore the determinants of preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. The independent variables of the study are derived from the WVS questions. The survey covers information on demographics, socioeconomic conditions, religiosity level, political preferences, and other types of patriarchal preferences for participants.
Attitudes towards women’s employment are affected by multiple sets of societal norms and institutions. Hence, this study hypothesizes specific relationships between these norms and employment patriarchy. Personal religiosity level is measured by the respondent’s self-rated categorization as being a religious person or not. In theory, higher levels of personal religiosity are related to more traditional values, and it is expected that more religious individuals will report stronger preferences for employment patriarchy. A left-and-right-wing scale is used to assess political preferences. Right-wing ideologies are frequently associated with traditional social norms, and theory implies that individuals with right-wing political views will be more likely to have patriarchal attitudes towards the employment of women.
Political patriarchy, education patriarchy, management patriarchy, and household patriarchy are derived from WVS questions related to individuals’ views on the inclusion of women in different aspects of social, political, and economic life. These variables help with testing the consistency of patriarchal preferences across different domains. For instance, it is hypothesized that individuals who believe that men are better political leaders (political patriarchy) or that a university-level education is more important for a boy (education patriarchy) will be more likely to believe that men should have more right to a job than a woman. In a similar fashion, having traditional attitudes on gender roles within the household (household patriarchy) and the workplace (management patriarchy) is hypothesized to be strongly associated with employment patriarchy.
Demographics and socioeconomic conditions cover age, gender, education level, marital status, household income, number of children, and type of residential region for individuals. The descriptions of all variables for this study are provided in Table 1.

3.2. Estimation Methodology

This study employs an ordered probit regression model to quantify the determinants of preferences for employment patriarchy. The dependent variable of this study, preferences for employment patriarchy, is an ordered response, and it takes values from the following set: 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Agree strongly. Due to the ordered and discrete nature of the dependent variable, ordered choice models are appropriate for econometric estimation. We adopt the estimation framework of an ordered probit model provided by Wooldridge (2002). As an alternative specification, the ordered logit model could be employed with the assumption of a logistic distribution of error terms. While both specifications of logit and probit models would provide similar quantitative results, the ordered probit is a standard and widely accepted choice. For a robustness check, OLS estimation results are also reported in this study. Although OLS is theoretically not appropriate for an ordered dependent variable since it treats the categories as having equal spacing, it is usually included in empirical analyses for comparison purposes. For the purposes of this study, OLS will ensure that the directions and significances of the estimated coefficients are not only a result of the non-linear framework of the ordered probit specification. If the results from both ordered probit and OLS models are similar, this will support the stability and reliability of the empirical analysis. Statistical software STATA 17 is utilized for the estimation of both ordered probit and OLS regression models in this study (StataCorp., 2021).

4. Empirical Findings

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics for the variables of interest are presented in Figure 1 and Table 2. Figure 1 reports the distribution of preferences for employment patriarchy. A total of 21.1% of males report highly patriarchal preferences for employment, whereas 14.6% of females display high levels of preferences for employment patriarchy. On average, 34.3% of participants have patriarchal preferences for employment in Turkey. A total of 36.7% of males reveal that they would agree with the idea that men should take jobs instead of women, whereas 32% of females would do so. A total of 21.8% of Turkish participants state that they would be indifferent between men and women being employed when a scarcity of jobs prevails. A total of 21.4% of females do not agree with the idea that men take jobs instead of women, whereas this ratio for the male sample is 14.1%. Finally, 6.5% of males report highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment, whereas 10.1% of females display high levels of non-patriarchal preferences for employment.
Summary statistics from Table 2 show that, on average, Turkish participants have patriarchal preferences for employment and education opportunities, political leaders, business managers, and household work allocation. Average patriarchy measures fall above the middle value of their ranges. For instance, preferences for employment patriarchy have an average of 3.35 out of 5 (67%). Similarly, household patriarchy has an average of 2.75 out of 4 (69%). Furthermore, 72% of the sample identified as religious. On average, Turkish participants are more inclined to report right-wing political preferences. The average of the right-wing political view variable is 6.2 out of 10, which falls to the right of the middle value. According to Table 2, 50% of participants are female. The average age of the sample is 38.8 years, with a minimum age of 18 and a maximum age of 95. A total of 11.5% of participants do not hold an official diploma; 36.4% of the sample have primary education, whereas 34.9% have completed secondary education; 17.1% of the Turkish sample obtained a higher-education diploma. A total of 62.3% of participants are married or cohabiting as married; 32.4% of the sample are single, whereas widowed, separated, or divorced individuals account for 5.2% of participants. The unemployment rate of the sample is 6.7%, whereas 56.1% of participants are employed. Housewives correspond to 25.4% of the sample, and 4.7% are students. A total of 6.8% of participants are retired or pensioned. The average household income level (5.3) falls in the middle-income group. The average number of children in a household is 1.3, with a maximum of 9 children, and 73% of households are in urban areas.

4.2. Estimation Results

Estimation results for empirical models of preferences for employment patriarchy are presented in Table 3 and Table 4. Table 3 reports coefficients and robust standard errors for the ordered probit and OLS regression models. Table 4 reports the average marginal effects from the ordered probit regression. Both the OLS and ordered probit models are overall significant at the 1% level. Variance Inflation Factors range from 1.05 to 4.64 with an average of 1.86. Hence, the independent variables do not have significant multicollinearity issues. Each model uses n = 1827 observations due to missing data in the survey for the variables of interest. The list-wise deletion method is utilized for missing data. OLS and ordered probit model estimations lead to highly similar findings for the associations of preferences for employment patriarchy with the explanatory variables. As a result, the findings of this study are similar across different estimation methods.
Empirical results indicate that preferences for employment patriarchy are positively associated with other types of patriarchal preferences. According to Table 3, individuals with stronger preferences for political patriarchy are more likely to report higher levels of preferences for employment patriarchy (δ1 = 0.238, p < 0.01). Table 4 implies that individuals with higher levels of political patriarchy are more likely to be patriarchal or highly patriarchal in their preferences for the distribution of jobs. Moreover, individuals with stronger preferences for political patriarchy are less likely to have neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment.
There is a positive correlation between the preferences of Turkish individuals for employment patriarchy and education patriarchy. Table 3 indicates that individuals who report preferences for primarily educating boys rather than girls are more likely to report higher levels of employment patriarchy (δ2 = 0.222, p < 0.01). Marginal effects from Table 4 suggest that higher levels of educational patriarchy are negatively associated with the probabilities of reporting neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment. Additionally, the probabilities of reporting patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment are positively related to higher levels of education patriarchy.
Preferences for patriarchy in management are positively related to the probability of reporting employment patriarchy for Turkish individuals. The ordered probit estimation results of Table 3 reveal that individuals who report higher levels of management patriarchy are more likely to state that they possess higher levels of employment patriarchy (δ3 = 0.327, p < 0.01). According to Table 4, the probabilities of reporting patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment are directly associated with levels of patriarchal preferences in management. Furthermore, higher levels of management patriarchy are negatively associated with the probabilities of reporting neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment.
There are positive associations between preferences for employment patriarchy and household patriarchy. According to Table 3, individuals who have stronger preferences for patriarchy in household work allocation are more likely to have stronger preferences for patriarchy in employment (δ4 = 0.282, p < 0.01). Results from Table 4 show that individuals with higher levels of household patriarchy are more likely to be patriarchal or highly patriarchal in their preferences for the distribution of jobs. Moreover, individuals with higher levels of preferences for household patriarchy are less likely to reveal neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment.
Empirical findings indicate that individual religiosity and political preferences are associated with preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. The coefficients from Table 3 imply that religious individuals are more likely to report higher levels of patriarchal preferences for employment compared to non-religious Turkish individuals (δ5 = 0.283, p < 0.01). Additionally, individuals with higher levels of right-wing political views are more likely to agree with patriarchy in employment (δ6 = 0.0325, p < 0.01). Table 4 indicates that religious individuals are more likely to be patriarchal or highly patriarchal and less likely to be neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal in their preferences for the distribution of jobs. Moreover, individuals with higher levels of preferences for rightist political actions are less likely to reveal neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment. Participants with stronger support for right-wing politics are more likely to have patriarchal or highly patriarchal employment preferences.
The estimation results (in Table 3 and Table 4) display mixed findings on the associations of demographic characteristics and socioeconomic conditions of individuals with preferences for employment patriarchy. First, gender is significantly correlated with preferences for employment patriarchy. Females are less likely to have patriarchal preferences for the distribution of jobs in Turkey (δ7 = −0.154, p < 0.05). Marginal effect estimations in Table 4 suggest that females are more likely to have neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment, and they are less likely to reveal patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment in Turkey. Divorced, separated, or widowed individuals are less likely to report preferences for employment patriarchy compared to single individuals in Turkey (δ13 = −0.343, p < 0.05). According to Table 4, the probabilities of reporting neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment are higher for the divorced, separated, and widowed individuals. Similarly, the divorced, separated, and widowed are less likely to state patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment. There are no significant differences in preferences for employment patriarchy between married and single participants. Furthermore, preferences for employment patriarchy do not show any significant relationships with Turkish individuals’ age, education level, or employment status. The lack of significance for education and age contrasts with some earlier studies. This finding may suggest that employment patriarchy in Turkey may be more deeply rooted in normative and ideological factors. Hence, employment patriarchy may not be primarily driven by human capital variations or generational shifts alone in the Turkish case.
According to the findings of this study, household characteristics are significantly related to individual preferences for employment patriarchy. According to Table 3, the level of household income has a significant negative relationship with individual preferences for employment patriarchy (δ18 = −0.097, p < 0.01). In addition, the number of children in the household (δ20 = 0.059, p < 0.05) and living in an urban household (δ21 = 0.224, p < 0.01) display positive correlations with preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. According to Table 4, Turkish individuals who reside in households with relatively higher levels of income are more likely to have neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences for employment, and they are less likely to report patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment. Moreover, participants who live with more children in the household are more likely to be patriarchal or highly patriarchal in their employment preferences and less likely to be neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal in their preferences for the distribution of jobs in Turkey. Finally, individuals who live in an urban household are more likely to have patriarchal or highly patriarchal preferences for employment, and they are less likely to report neutral, non-patriarchal, or highly non-patriarchal preferences. This finding that urban residence is related to stronger employment patriarchy may be counter-intuitive since urbanization is often linked to modernization. However, this could be a result of the highly competitive job markets in Turkey’s urban centers for skilled and unskilled workers. In a competitive environment, the belief that men should be given jobs may be enhanced since the economic pressure may dominate the liberalizing impacts of urban life. Furthermore, given that Turkey experiences mass internal and external migration from rural to urban centers, traditional attitudes may move to urban places and be persistent for a foreseeable period.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Researchers reveal that gender gaps in economic, social, and political outcomes are associated with gender norms and patriarchal attitudes in society. As a developing country, Turkey significantly struggles with achieving gender equality and equity in many aspects of daily and economic life. Patriarchal norms have a central role in the persistence of gender inequalities in Turkish society.
This study provides an empirical analysis to identify the determinants of patriarchal attitudes for the distribution of jobs in Turkey. An individual-level data set is obtained from wave 7 of the WVS, and the ordered probit regression method is employed for the quantification of relations between the variables of interest. This study’s findings show that patriarchal preferences for employment have a variety of determinants. Consistent with earlier studies, patriarchal attitudes towards the employment of women are associated with other types of patriarchal norms, economic conditions, political views, and religious values in Turkey. Being female, being less religious, having leftist political views, having higher income and living with fewer children in the household are negatively associated with the patriarchal preferences of Turkish individuals for employment, while holding higher levels of patriarchal attitudes in other dimensions of life is positively associated with them.
The current study has its own limitations, and further research may contribute by addressing them. First, the analysis of this study only provides conclusions based on correlational findings. Further studies may focus on the identification of causal mechanisms for the relationships between patriarchal preferences and their determinants, specifically for the employment of women. Second, this study is based on a cross-sectional data set and does not include time dimensions. Additional studies are needed for dynamic models and panel data analysis of the subject matter. Furthermore, we handled the missing data with list-wise deletion, which may introduce some bias if the missing observations are not random. This method also reduces our sample size and may limit the generalizability of our findings, highlighting that future work should consider alternative approaches, such as multiple imputations. Finally, survey data is prone to reporting biases, and the construction of data sets with more objective measures would significantly contribute to related research.
Overall, this study reveals that there are significant areas for further research to understand the dynamics of patriarchy in Turkish society. Furthermore, policymakers should design plans to deal with gender inequalities by developing multidimensional and more structural mechanisms compared to one-size-fits-all approaches. Specifically, the results imply that simply encouraging education may not be sufficient to change employment-related patriarchal norms. Instead, the ideological and normative elements identified by this study should be the focus of policy designs. For instance, public awareness campaigns may challenge the idea that men are the sole breadwinner and have a greater right to work. Given the strong relationship between household patriarchy and employment patriarchy, policies to encourage shared household responsibilities may have positive spillover effects on attitudes toward women in the labor market and the workplace. Finally, addressing this complex issue will require a combination of both short-term and long-term solutions with contributions from different components of society.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.K. and D.K.E.; methodology, T.K. and D.K.E.; software, T.K. and D.K.E.; validation, T.K. and D.K.E.; formal analysis, T.K. and D.K.E.; investigation, T.K. and D.K.E.; resources, T.K. and D.K.E.; data curation, T.K. and D.K.E.; writing—original draft preparation, T.K. and D.K.E.; writing—review and editing, T.K. and D.K.E.; visualization, T.K.; supervision, T.K.; project administration, T.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical review and approval were not required for this study due to the use of publicly available, anonymous, secondary data from the World Values Survey.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was not required for this study due to the use of publicly available, anonymous, secondary data from the World Values Survey.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are publicly available for public use through World Values Survey website, https://doi.org/10.14281/18241.24 (accessed on 2 February 2026).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Dogan Kaan Erdinc’s affiliation with Hull City Football Club as a Finance Assistant had no conflicting role in the conduct of related to research activities and production of this article.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
MENAMiddle East and North Africa
NGONon-Governmental Organization
OECDOrganization for Economic Co-operation and Development
OLSOrdinary Least Squares
UNDPUnited Nations Development Program
WVSWorld Values Survey

References

  1. Abouchedid, K. E. (2007). Correlates of religious affiliation, religiosity and gender role attitudes among Lebanese Christian and Muslim college students. Equal Opportunities International, 26(3), 193–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Algan, Y., & Cahuc, P. (2006). Job protection: The macho hypothesis. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(3), 390–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Antecol, H. (2000). An examination of cross-country differences in the gender gap in labor force participation rates. Labour Economics, 7(4), 409–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Atasoy, B. S. (2017). Female labour force participation in Turkey: The role of traditionalism. The European Journal of Development Research, 29(4), 675–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Baslevent, C., & Onaran, O. (2004). The effect of export-oriented growth on female labor market outcomes in Turkey. World Development, 32(8), 1375–1393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Boratav, H. B., Fisek, G. O., & Ziya, H. E. (2014). Unpacking masculinities in the context of social change: Internal complexities of the identities of married men in Turkey. Men and Masculinities, 17(3), 299–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Caner, A., Guven, C., Okten, C., & Sakalli, S. O. (2016). Gender roles and the education gender gap in Turkey. Social Indicators Research, 129, 1231–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Davis, L. S., & Williamson, C. R. (2019). Does individualism promote gender equality? World Development, 123, 104627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Di, D. (2020). Are religious women more traditionalist? A cross-national examination of gender and religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 59(4), 606–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dildar, Y. (2015). Patriarchal norms, religion, and female labor supply: Evidence from Turkey. World Development, 76, 40–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dutta, N., Giddings, L., & Sobel, R. S. (2022). Does trust always help gender role attitudes? The role of individualism and collectivism. Social Indicators Research, 159(1), 379–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Engin, C., & Pals, H. (2018). Patriarchal attitudes in Turkey 1990–2011: The influence of religion and political conservatism. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 25(3), 383–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Erosa, A., Fuster, L., Kambourov, G., & Rogerson, R. (2022). Hours, occupations, and gender differences in labor market outcomes. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 14(3), 543–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fortin, N. M. (2005). Gender role attitudes and the labour-market outcomes of women across OECD countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3), 416–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gevrek, Z. E., & Gevrek, D. (2022). Social norms and the gender gap in labor force participation: Evidence from Turkey. Applied Economics Letters, 30, 2102–2107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Glas, S., Spierings, N., & Scheepers, P. (2018). Re-understanding religion and support for gender equality in Arab countries. Gender & Society, 32(5), 686–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Goksel, İ. (2013). Female labor force participation in Turkey: The role of conservatism. Women’s Studies International Forum, 41, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gunduz-Hosgor, A., & Smits, J. (2008). Variation in labor market participation of married women in Turkey. Women’s Studies International Forum, 31(2), 104–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ilkkaracan, I. (2012). Why so few women in the labor market in Turkey? Feminist Economics, 18(1), 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kiser, A. I. (2015). Workplace and leadership perceptions between men and women. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 30(8), 598–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Moghadam, V. M. (2003). Modernizing women: Gender and social change in the middle East. Lynne Rienner Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  23. Moghadam, V. M. (2020). Gender regimes in the middle east and north Africa: The power of feminist movements. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 27(3), 467–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Muftuler-Bac, M. (2012). Gender equality in Turkey [European Parliament in-depth analysis]. European Parliament. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201202/20120207ATT37506/20120207ATT37506EN.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2022).
  25. OECD. (2025). Employment and unemployment by five-year age group and sex—Indicators. Available online: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=lfs_sexage_i_r (accessed on 18 December 2025).
  26. Ones, U., Memis, E., & Kizilirmak, B. (2013). Poverty and intra-household distribution of work time in Turkey: Analysis and some policy implications. Women’s Studies International Forum, 41, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ozdemir-Sarigil, B., & Sarigil, Z. (2021). Who is patriarchal? The correlates of patriarchy in Turkey. South European Society and Politics, 26(1), 27–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Peng, S., & Feng, X. (2025). The impact of digital literacy on rural women’s non-agricultural employment—Evidence from China. Economies, 13(11), 309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Price, A. (2015). How national structures shape attitudes toward women’s right to employment in the middle East. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 56(6), 408–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Roche, M. (2024). Gender attitudes and trends in MENA: The effects of working women. Arab Barometer. Available online: https://www.arabbarometer.org/wp-content/uploads/AB8-Gender-Report-EN.pdf (accessed on 18 December 2025).
  31. Sanli, S. (2016). Women and cultural citizenship in Turkey. I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  32. Savas, G., & Cakir, D. (2024). Breaking the chains: Exploring gender inequality in Türkiye through the eyes of women NGO members. Frontiers in Sociology, 9, 1491058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shurchkov, O., & Eckel, C. C. (2018). Gender differences in behavioral traits and labor market outcomes. In S. L. Averett, L. M. Argys, & S. D. Hoffman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of women and the economy (pp. 480–512). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  34. StataCorp. (2021). Stata statistical software: Release 17. StataCorp. LLC. [Google Scholar]
  35. Teignier, M., & Cuberes, D. (2024). How important are labor-market gender gaps in the South Caucasus? Economies, 12(12), 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. The World Bank. (2018). Turkey country gender assessment 2017. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10986/35974 (accessed on 15 March 2022).
  37. The World Bank. (2025). World development indicators 2025. Available online: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators (accessed on 18 December 2025).
  38. UNDP. (2025). Human development reports: Gender Inequality Index (GII). Available online: https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/thematic-composite-indices/gender-inequality-index#/indicies/GII (accessed on 18 December 2025).
  39. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
Economies 14 00051 g001
Figure 1. Distribution of preferences for employment patriarchy (% of participants). Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Figure 1. Distribution of preferences for employment patriarchy (% of participants). Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Economies 14 00051 g001
Table 1. Description of variables. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Table 1. Description of variables. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
VariableDescription
Preferences for Employment PatriarchyIt is calculated based on the individual’s level of agreement with the following statement (Q33 in WVS Wave 7): “When jobs are scarce men should have more right to a job than women.” 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Agree strongly. (1 = Highly Non-patriarchal; 2 = Non-patriarchal; 3 = Neutral; 4 = Patriarchal; 5 = Highly Patriarchal).
Political PatriarchyIt is derived from the agreement level of the individual with the following statement (Q29 in WVS Wave 7): “On the whole, men make better political leaders than women do.” 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Agree; 4 = Agree strongly.
Education PatriarchyIt is derived from the agreement level of the individual with the following statement (Q30 in WVS Wave 7): “A university education is more important for a boy than for a girl.” 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Agree; 4 = Agree strongly.
Management PatriarchyIt is derived from the agreement level of the individual with the following statement (Q31 in WVS Wave 7): “On the whole, men make better business executives than women do.” 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Agree; 4 = Agree strongly.
Household PatriarchyIt is derived from the agreement level of the individual with the following statement (Q32 in WVS Wave 7): “Being a housewife is just as fulfilling as working for pay.” 1 = Disagree strongly; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Agree; 4 = Agree strongly.
Religious Person1 = A religious person 0 = Not a religious person or an atheist; (Q173 in WVS Wave 7).
Right-Wing Political ViewIt ranges from 1 = The far left to 10 = The far right (Q240 in WVS Wave 7).
Female1 = Female; 0 = Male (Q260 in WVS Wave 7).
AgeReported age by adult respondents (Q262 in WVS Wave 7).
Education Level0 = No diploma; 1 = Primary education; 2 = Secondary education; 3 = Bachelor’s degree or higher (Q275 in WVS Wave 7).
Marital Status1 = Married/Living together as married; 2 = Single; 3 = Divorced/Separated/Widowed (Q273 in WVS Wave 7).
Employment Status1 = Employed; 2 = Unemployed; 3 = Housewife; 4 = Student; 5 = Retired/Pensioned/Other (Q279 in WVS Wave 7).
Household Income LevelReported household income group of respondents. It ranges from 1 = The lowest income group to 10 = The highest income group (Q288 in WVS Wave 7).
Number of ChildrenReported number of children living in the household (Q274 in WVS Wave 7).
Urban Household1 = The respondent lives in an urban region (city or town); 0 = The respondent lives in a rural region (village) (H1 in WVS Wave 7).
Table 2. Descriptive statistics. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Table 2. Descriptive statistics. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
VariableNMean or %Standard DeviationMinMax
Preferences for Employment Patriarchy23683.351.1915
Political Patriarchy23362.560.8614
Education Patriarchy23652.120.8914
Management Patriarchy23072.470.8514
Household Patriarchy23192.750.8314
Religious Person22080.720.4401
Right-Wing Political View21516.292.57110
Female24150.500.5001
Age241438.8312.671895
Education Level24061.570.9003
No diploma27711.51%---
Primary education87636.41%---
Secondary education84134.95%---
Bachelor’s degree or higher41217.12%---
Marital Status-----
Married/Living together as married150362.31%---
Single78332.46%---
Divorced/Separated/Widowed1265.22%---
Employment Status-----
Employed134956.18%---
Unemployed1616.71%---
Housewife61225.49%---
Student1144.75%---
Retired/Pensioned/Other1656.87%---
Household Income Level23295.341.72110
Number of Children24151.371.4709
Urban Household24150.730.4401
Table 3. Estimation results of preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Table 3. Estimation results of preferences for employment patriarchy in Turkey. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Ordered Probit RegressionOLS Regression
CoefficientsStandard ErrorsCoefficientsStandard Errors
Political Patriarchy0.238 ***(0.0444)0.212 ***(0.0388)
Education Patriarchy0.222 ***(0.0378)0.213 ***(0.0322)
Management Patriarchy0.327 ***(0.0490)0.278 ***(0.0432)
Household Patriarchy0.282 ***(0.0391)0.241 ***(0.0343)
Religious Person0.283 ***(0.0582)0.269 ***(0.0528)
Right-Wing Political View0.0325 ***(0.0119)0.0267 ***(0.0102)
Female−0.154 **(0.0639)−0.155 ***(0.0585)
Age−0.00092(0.0028)−0.0010(0.0025)
Education Level
No diploma0.0582(0.0998)0.0463(0.0881)
Primary education0.0623(0.0629)0.0527(0.0558)
(Base) Secondary education----
Bachelor’s degree or higher0.0249(0.0729)0.00787(0.0663)
Marital Status
Married/Living together as married0.00042(0.0779)0.0185(0.0700)
(Base) Single----
Divorced/Separated/Widowed−0.343 **(0.141)−0.313 **(0.126)
Employment Status
Employed0.0347(0.105)0.0476(0.0933)
(Base) Unemployed----
Housewife0.130(0.122)0.149(0.109)
Student−0.043(0.173)−0.0594(0.156)
Retired/Pensioned/Other−0.064(0.146)−0.0554(0.128)
Household Income Level−0.0979 ***(0.0161)−0.0861 ***(0.0143)
Number of Children0.0599 **(0.0264)0.0432 *(0.0229)
Urban Household0.224 ***(0.0571)0.205 ***(0.0509)
Wald: χ2 (20)/F (20, 1806)682.65 ***68.53 ***
Pseudo R2/R20.1550.377
Observations18271827
Robust standard errors in parentheses. *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.
Table 4. Marginal effects from ordered probit model of preferences for employment patriarchy. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
Table 4. Marginal effects from ordered probit model of preferences for employment patriarchy. Source: WVS Wave 7 (2022).
VariablesHighly Non-Patriarchal Non-Patriarchal Neutral Patriarchal Highly Patriarchal
Political Patriarchy−0.0289 ***−0.0294 ***−0.0139 ***0.0240 ***0.0483 ***
Education Patriarchy−0.0270 ***−0.0275 ***−0.0130 ***0.0225 ***0.0452 ***
Management Patriarchy−0.0398 ***−0.0405 ***−0.0192 ***0.0331 ***0.0665 ***
Household Patriarchy−0.0344 ***−0.0350 ***−0.0166 ***0.0286 ***0.0575 ***
Religious Person−0.0345 ***−0.0351 ***−0.0166 ***0.0286 ***0.0576 ***
Right-Wing Political View−0.0039 ***−0.0040 ***−0.0019 ***0.0032 ***0.0066 ***
Female0.0187 **0.0190 **0.0090 **−0.0156 **−0.0313 **
Age0.00010.00010.0001−0.0001−0.0001
Education Level
No diploma−0.0071−0.0072−0.00340.00590.0117
Primary education−0.0075−0.0077−0.00360.00630.0126
(Base) Secondary education-----
Bachelor’s degree or higher−0.0030−0.0031−0.00140.00260.0049
Marital Status
Married/Living together as married−0.0001−0.0001−0.000020.000040.00008
(Base) Single-----
Divorced/Separated/Widowed0.0484 **0.0420 **0.0143 ***−0.0429 **−0.0619 ***
Employment Status
Employed−0.0043−0.0043−0.00190.00360.0068
(Base) Unemployed-----
Housewife−0.0155−0.0162−0.00780.01280.0268
Student0.00560.00530.0022−0.0048−0.0083
Retired/Pensioned/Other0.00840.00790.0032−0.0073−0.0123
Household Income Level0.0119 ***0.0121 ***0.0057 ***−0.0099 ***−0.0199 ***
Number of Children−0.0073 **−0.0074 **−0.0035 **0.0060 **0.0121 **
Urban Household−0.0273 ***−0.0277 ***−0.0131 ***0.0226 ***0.0455 ***
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kose, T.; Erdinc, D.K. Determinants of Preferences for Employment Patriarchy in Turkey. Economies 2026, 14, 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14020051

AMA Style

Kose T, Erdinc DK. Determinants of Preferences for Employment Patriarchy in Turkey. Economies. 2026; 14(2):51. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14020051

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kose, Tekin, and Dogan Kaan Erdinc. 2026. "Determinants of Preferences for Employment Patriarchy in Turkey" Economies 14, no. 2: 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14020051

APA Style

Kose, T., & Erdinc, D. K. (2026). Determinants of Preferences for Employment Patriarchy in Turkey. Economies, 14(2), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14020051

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop