Cited by 8Occupational Health and BurnoutStress and Burnout ResearchTeacher Professional Development and Motivation

Exploring occupational well-being profiles, outcomes, and predictors among Chinese teachers: a mixed-methods approach using latent profile and decision tree analysis

Open access
Gao, Xin, Zhou, Xiaolu, Leong, Frederick T. L.·2025·Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being

Abstract

Understanding the varied profiles of occupational well‐being, their outcomes, and predictors is key to formulating effective strategies for enhancing teachers' occupational health and well‐being. This study employed latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify distinct occupational well‐being profiles and their outcomes among 366 Chinese teachers, and decision tree analysis to explore the factors predicting each profile. The results showed three occupational well‐being profiles: burnout, engaged, and burnout‐engaged. The “engaged” group exhibited normal ranges for depression and stress, along with mild anxiety. The “burnout” group demonstrated moderate depression and stress, coupled with severe anxiety. The “burnout‐engaged” group was near the threshold of mild depression and moderate anxiety. The result of the decision tree model revealed that marital status, teaching experience, income, role as a class teacher, school type, and working hours significantly influenced these occupational well‐being profiles. Specific combinations of variables were associated with each occupational well‐being profile, offering a nuanced understanding of the risky and protective factors for teacher occupational well‐being. By identifying distinct occupational well‐being profiles among Chinese teachers and their outcomes, and elucidating the key predictors and their interrelations, this study provides insights into how to quickly screen for teachers in need of help at work, and how to design targeted interventions for different teachers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aphw.12640

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Gao, X., Zhou, X., & Leong, F. T. L.
Affiliations
  • Shanghai Normal University (CN)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Zhou, Xiaolu
Venue
Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-12-16
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
e12640-e12640
ISSN
  • 1758-0846 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-0854
OpenAlex
W4405478052
Cited by
8
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5
FWCI
6.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Psychology Health and Well-Being (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Professional Development and Motivation
Keywords
burnout, teacher engagement, depression, anxiety, stress, marital status, teaching experience, teacher income, class teacher role, school type, working hours, Chinese teachers, occupational health screening
MeSH terms
School Teachers, Occupational Stress, Work Engagement, Adult, Anxiety, Burnout, Professional, China, Decision Trees, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Health, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review