In a Chicago Tribune op-ed column last week, republished in the Newark Star-Ledger this morning, Rex Huppke summarizes a recent article in Administrative Science Quarterly on attitudes of male married bosses toward women in the workplace, as related to (among other things) whether the wife works full-time, works part-time, or stays at home.
The following requires a fee, and I couldn't find a free link through the Star-Ledger or ASQ (which puts only past years on line).
http://www.chicagotribune.com/...
Men married to women who are not employed tend to: (a) view the presence of women in the workplace unfavorably, (b) perceive that organizations with higher numbers of female employees are operating less smoothly, (c) perceive organizations with female leaders as relatively unattractive, and(d) deny qualified female employees opportunities for promotions more frequently.
Two other conclusions: First, men whose wives work part-time have attitudes in between those with full-time working spouses and those with stay-at-home wives, Second, the same correlation holds for the statement "The male partner should alone be responsible for providing household income." (But about 30% agreed even for those whose wives work full-time.
The column also describes the reaction of one of the researchers, an India-born female, who said she was surprised to see these attitudes still so powerful in the US.
As far as I can tell from the column, the paper did not address attitudes of unmarried male bosses, nor cross-correlate using age or region.
Caveat: It is not completely clear from the column whether the surveyed population was married male employees or married male employees with supervisory responsibilities, or even some subset of supervisors.