Anna Nordnes Helgøy

• Helgøy, Anna Nordnes & Weeks, Ana (2025). Crowded Out: The Influence of Mental Load Priming on Intentions to Participate in Public Life. British Journal of Political Science. ISSN 0007-1234. 55. doi: 10.1017/S0007123424000826. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  How does cognitive household labour – the ‘mental load’ involved in anticipating, fulfilling, and monitoring household needs – influence decisions about whether and how to participate in public life? Studies suggest women take on the vast majority of this load, yet the impact of these private sector inequalities on participation in public life is underexplored. To make progress on these questions, we contribute new causal evidence about the effect of prompting respondents to think about their own mental loads in a survey experiment fielded to employed British parents. Our main argument is that priming the mental load will crowd out interest in political and labour market participation. In line with expectations, our survey experiment finds a strong negative effect of mental load priming on intentions to engage in politics and at work. Our results offer new insights about the continuing relevance of household-based inequalities to gender equality in public life.

• Helgøy, Anna (2024). What sustains feminized part-time work at the gender equality frontier? Evidence from a vignette experiment. Journal of European Social Policy. ISSN 0958-9287. 34(5), p. 542–555. doi: 10.1177/09589287241290751. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Feminized part-time work has been deemed a family policy conundrum yet to be solved by any welfare regime. To identify ways forward, this article examines structural drivers of part-time work decisions through a vignette experiment fielded in the gender-egalitarian context of Norway (N = 3500). Six theory-grounded factors are tested in this multidimensional, causal framework: partner income level, physical and cognitive household labour burdens, the presence of a part-time culture at the workplace, and consequences of part-time work for career advancement and future pensions. Results show that overall, factors that regulate individuals’ material self-interest (partner income, career and pension consequences) have the largest impact on working-time decisions. Additionally, a priming treatment is given with a split sample concerning the factor of cognitive household labour – the organizational dimension of household work. Results from sub-group analyses show that non-primed respondents prefer significantly higher working hours when their cognitive labour burden is lower. Respondents who received experimental priming, however, portray the opposite behaviour (lower working-hour preference when cognitive labour burden is low). The pattern is driven by women, whereas men are left largely unaffected by both the priming and vignette treatment of cognitive labour. Thus, robust findings imply that gender inequality in material circumstances sustains feminized part-time work patterns. Suggestive evidence further indicates that gender inequality in cognitive labour loads may also contribute to sustaining feminized part-time work.

• Helgøy, Anna Nordnes (2024). Rethinking Part-Time Outsiders' Risks and Welfare Attitudes. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society. ISSN 1072-4745. 31(2), p. 347–375. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxae001. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The growth of atypical work has created a divide between insiders, with safe jobs, and outsiders, in fixed-term, part-time, and/or precarious work situations. Due to higher economic risk, outsiders support compensating social policies more than insiders. However, the same consistency has not been found in the attitudes of part-time outsiders. Consequently, this article suggests an expansion from the work-nexus to the care-nexus of welfare when examining these outsiders’ political behavior. Findings from a structural equation framework using Norwegian data (N = 2,254) from 2022 show that part-time outsiders experience higher risk of partner dependency, making them more likely to support optional familialism in family policy. As part-time work is strongly feminized, these findings have important implications for gender equality in the private and public spheres. Additionally, the results call for future research on insider/outsider dynamics to take both the work-nexus and care-nexus of the welfare state into account.

• Hootegem, Arno Van; Helgøy, Anna & Nemcok, Miroslav (2024). Formative personal experiences: How benefit recipiency and income changes shape perceptions of system abuse. European Journal of Political Research. ISSN 0304-4130. 64(1), p. 72–93. doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12685. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Abstract Perceptions that others will contribute their fair share are fundamental to the legitimacy of the political system. To better understand how these perceptions take shape beyond the influence of political narratives and socializations, this paper investigates the role of the formative personal experiences of benefit recipiency and income changes in explaining views on welfare abuse as well as tax evasion. Theoretically, both increasing identification or ‘othering’ could occur when these experiences lead to new group adherence. To test this empirically, three‐wave Norwegian panel data (2014–2017) are analysed. Within‐ as well as between‐group analyses show that becoming dependent on benefits leads to lower perceptions of welfare abuse, while positive income changes prompt higher perceptions of tax evasion, albeit mostly among those with lower income levels. Overall, this article shows that formative personal experiences affect views that are fundamental to the perceived fairness, legitimacy and sustainability of the social and political system.

• Helgøy, Anna & Hootegem, Arno Van (2024). The formation of family policy attitudes: the role of justice perceptions in the division of household labour. Journal of Social Policy. ISSN 0047-2794. doi: 10.1017/S0047279424000345. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Welfare state attitudes make up an interactive feedback loop of defining popular legitimacy and future policy trajectories. Understanding attitudinal drivers is thus essential political knowledge. However, as existing research is mainly based on the work-nexus of welfare, this article expands the literature to the welfare state’s care-nexus, examining drivers of family policy attitudes. We argue that conventional attitude predictors of self-interest and ideology are insufficient to explain the attitudinal cleavage in family policy. Instead, justice perceptions in the division of physical and cognitive household labour represent an important normative battleground. We test this with Norwegian survey data (N = 3500), using a unique vignette experiment to operationalise justice perceptions. Findings show that individuals who do not perceive a disproportional household labour division as unfair prefer optional familialism within family policy. Individuals who do perceive unfairness in a disproportional household labour division prefer de-familialism, which facilitates gender equality in public and private spheres. This is consistently found for the physical division of labour, while the cognitive dimension seems less politicised. We conclude that the battleground for different family policy approaches is fundamentally normative and linked to justice considerations on gender roles.

View all works in NVA