Acta Psychologica Sinica ©2021 Chinese Psychological Society

2022, Vol. 54, No. 4, 371384 https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00371

A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary

school teachers: Evidence from structural equation model and
cross-lagged panel network model
XIE Min1, LI Feng2, LUO Yuhan1, KE Li3, WANG Xia4, WANG Yun1
(1 State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)
(2 Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment for Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University at Zhuhai, Zhuhai 519087, China)
(3 Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment for Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)
(4 Beijing Institute of Education Science, Haidian District, Beijing 100080, China)

Abstract
Emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment of teacher burnout are relatively independent but
also have mutual influences. Research into their developmental relationship is helpful in understanding the developmental process
and identifying the early symptoms of job burnout. A total of 3837 primary school teachers took part in this two-wave longitudinal
study with intervals of three years. The structural equation model and cross-lagged network model were used for analysis. The results
showed that the optimal development model of teacher burnout was “emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment at
T1 predict emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment at T2, respectively, and depersonalization at T1 predicts de-
personalization and reduced personal accomplishment at T2”. There was no gender difference or teaching experience difference in
the optional development model. The results emphasize the important role of depersonalization in the development of teacher burn-
out and have certain theoretical and practical significance for identifying the early symptoms of teacher burnout and for taking cor-
responding measures to effectively prevent further teacher burnout.
Key words primary school teachers, job burnout, structural equation model, cross-lagged panel network model, development model

1 Introduction
Burnout refers to a psychological syndrome of individuals
under long-term intense work pressure, including emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accom-
plishment symptoms (Maslach, 2003). Among them, emotional
exhaustion refers to feelings of overextending and draining
emotional resources, depersonalization refers to negative, cal-
lous, or unfeeling responses to the job, and reduced personal
accomplishment refers to feelings of incompetency and reduc-
tion in productivity. Maslach and Schaufeli (1993) believe that
the three dimensions of burnout do not arise and develop si-
multaneously but have potential causality. There have been
many studies on the sequential development of burnout dimen-
sions and five representative dimension development models
have been created (Figure 1). Among them, Leiter and
Maslach’s (1988) model, Lee and Ashforth’s (1993) model and
Taris et al.’s (2005) model assert that emotional exhaustion
signals the beginning of burnout and will affect depersonaliza-
tion. The difference between the three models lies in whether
depersonalization affects reduced personal accomplishment and
emotional exhaustion. Golembiewski’s (1983) model holds that
depersonalization is the initial symptom of burnout, while emo-
tional exhaustion is the final symptom. van Dierendonck’s
(2001) model holds that reduced personal accomplishment is
the starting point of burnout, which eventually leads to emo-
tional exhaustion.
These five models describe the longitudinal relationship
among the three dimensions of burnout, but so far, none of
them displays an obvious competitive advantage. For example,
some studies believe that the Leiter and Maslach models fit
their data relatively better (Toppinen-Tanner et al., 2002; Zang
Weiwei, 2007; Nguyen et al., 2018), and some researchers
support the Taris model (Diestel & Schmidt, 2010; Paker &
Salmela, 2011). The Golembiewski model is considered to be
less ideal in many studies; however, some researchers have
studied the phenomena among IT practitioners and found that
this model fits the data better (Gan & Gan, 2014). Burnout is
the result of long-term stress (Maslach, 2003), emotional ex-
haustion is an emotional response, depersonalization is a cop-
ing style, and reduced personal accomplishment can be consid-
ered to be a cognitive evaluation. The focus of debate on these
models mainly includes the following: (1) Is emotional exhaus-
tion the initial or final symptom of burnout? (2) What is the
role of depersonalization in the development of burnout? (3) Is
reduced personal accomplishment the final symptom of burnout
or will it continue to cause emotional burnout?
According to Lazarus’s stress theory (1966), individuals
faced with stress will have negative emotional reactions if they
believe that coping cannot relieve their feeling of stress. If they
think coping can relieve this feeling, then they will take cop-
ing measures, such as positive problem solving or negative

Received Date: May 17, 2021

This work was supported by the Major project of National Social Science Foundation of China (20&ZD153).
Corresponding author: WANG Yun, E-mail: wangyun@bnu.edu.cn
The original article is in Chinese, translated by Eastrans and proofread by the author. The Chinese version shall always prevail in case of any discrepancy
or inconsistency between the Chinese version and its English translation.
 Acta Psychologica Sinica
Figure 1. Five representative theoretical models.
withdrawal behavior. If coping is ineffective, then they will
have negative emotional reactions or re-evaluate the current
situation. Therefore, emotional exhaustion may occur in an
early stage simultaneously with coping or after ineffective
coping. Among the above five models, emotional exhaustion
serves as the beginning of burnout in three of the models and
the end of burnout in two of the models. Depersonalization is a
psychological withdrawal method used to relieve stress. For
example, Leiter and Maslach (1988) believe that depersonaliza-
tion is a way to “try to deal with demanding customers and the
resulting fatigue”, but researchers believe that this is a dysfunc-
tional coping style (Baker et al., 2000; Taris et al., 2005). Ac-
cording to stress theory, depersonalization may stimulate seri-
ous emotional reactions or lower cognitive evaluation, particu-
larly in the sense that depersonalization affects reduced per-
sonal accomplishment, and consistency across time has been
confirmed in some studies (Huang et al., 2015). Among the
above five models, depersonalization affects reduced personal
accomplishment in three of the models and affects emotional
exhaustion in two of the models. Especially in the teacher
group of Taris et al. (2005), these two longitudinal relationship
paths have been verified simultaneously. In many studies, the
simultaneous correlation between emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization is relatively high, while the correlation be-
tween these two and reduced personal accomplishment is much
lower. For example, some studies have found that the develop-
ment process of reduced personal accomplishment is relatively
independent (Wang, 2006; de Vos et al., 2016), and emotional
exhaustion affects depersonalization (Wang Fang, 2006; Bren-
ner, 2020), but other studies have found that reduced personal
accomplishment is longitudinally associated with emotional
exhaustion (McManut et al., 2002; Gan & Gan, 2014), and that
the longitudinal relationship between emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization is not high (Lee & Ashforth, 1993). There-
fore, in theory, emotional exhaustion may be the beginning of
burnout, the end of burnout, or both. Depersonalization may be
caused by stress itself, or by fatigue, and may lead to a reduc-
tion in personal accomplishment that may in turn lead to further
emotional exhaustion; reduced personal accomplishment is the
product of depersonalization, which may also cause emotional
exhaustion over time.
In addition, from the perspective of research methods,
structural equation model was used to compare different de-
velopment models of burnout in cross sectional or longitudinal
data in most previous studies. Recently, some researchers have
also tried to use item response theory to study the sequential
development of burnout (de Vos et al., 2016; Brenner, 2020).
Unfortunately, these research results are obtained through
cross-sectional data, which have some defects in causal infer-
ence. In recent years, as an alternative to the model represent-
ing the latent variables of mental constructs, the network model
(NM) of mental constructs has been increasingly used by re-
searchers (Cramer et al., 2012; Borsboom & Cramer, 2013;
Cramer et al., 2016; Fried et al., 2016; Fried et al., 2017). In the
network analysis model, causality is assumed to occur at the
item level, not at the latent variable level. Combining the net-
work analysis model with the cross-lagged panel model
(CLPM), that is, the cross-lagged panel network model (CLPN),
can reveal the longitudinal process within and between psy-
chological constructs over time (Rhemtulla et al., 2019).
Teachers are one of the high incidence groups of job burnout
(Wu et al., 2019). Teacher burnout will not only affect teachers'
own work and life (Huyghebaert et al., 2018) but also has ad-
verse effects on schools (Bi & Huang, 2005) and students
(Herman et al., 2018). It is important for the effective interven-
tion and maintenance of teacher mental health and quality to
explore the developmental characteristics of teacher burnout
and to determine the early symptoms. There are few longitudi-
nal studies on the development of teacher burnout dimensions
in China, or even in foreign countries (Taris et al., 2005). In this
study, the burnout of 3837 primary school teachers was meas-
ured by a longitudinal design. On the one hand, a structural
equation model is constructed to compare the fitting of the
above five representative development models to the data; on
 XIE Min et al.: A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary school teachers: Evidence from structural equation...
the other hand, a cross-lagged network model is established to
explore the development relationship among the three dimen-
sions. The two methods are used to explore and verify each
other to obtain the optimal development model. The gender and
teaching experience consistency of the optimal development
model among different groups is also investigated.
2 Methods
2.1 Participants
The two-wave data were collected from 52 primary schools
in Beijing with permission from the local education department.
A total of 5279 teachers took the first test in the middle-autumn
term in 2014, 5184 teachers took the second test in the mid-
dle-autumn term in 2017, and 3837 teachers took both tests
(701 male and 3136 female). In the first test, the proportions of
teachers with less than 10 years, 10~20 years and more than 20
years of teaching experience were 22.5%, 35.9% and 41.6%,
respectively. The proportion of teachers in charge of the class
was about 54%; and the proportions of married, unmarried, and
divorced/widowed teachers were about 87.1%, 9.8% and 3.1%,
respectively.
This study examines the measurement equivalence of two
groups of teachers who participated in the second test and did
not participate in the second test in the first test from four as-
pects: measurement equivalence, dimension score distribution,
dimension score variance analysis, and item score variance
analysis. The results showed that the two groups had high
equivalence in measurement; that is, the missing mechanism
had nothing to do with the burnout level.
2.2 Measurements
This study adopted the Burnout Scale for primary and sec-
ondary school teachers which was revised by the research
group. On the basis of the MBI scale, the three-dimensional
scale for primary and secondary school teacher burnout devel-
oped by Wu et al. (2003) and the four-dimensional scale for
primary and secondary school teacher burnout developed by
Wang and Xu (2004), combined with interviews with front-line
teachers, the Burnout Scale for primary and secondary school
teachers was revised. The revised burnout scale includes three
dimensions, emotional exhaustion (9 items), depersonalization
(6 items) and reduced personal accomplishment (4 items, re-
versed scoring). Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). For each of the three
dimensions, the higher the score, the more obvious the symp-
tom. This scale has been tested in many programs. Among pri-
mary school teachers, α ranged from 0.90 to 0.93, CFI ranged
from 0.91 to 0.93, TLI ranged from 0.90 to 0.92, and RMSEA
ranged from 0.07 to 0.08.
In the first test of this study, α = 0.91, CFI = 0.93, TLI =
0.92, RMSEA = 0.07, and SRMR = 0.05, and in the second test,
α = 0.93, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.07, and SRMR =
0.05, indicating good and robust reliability and validity. Be-
sides, the fact that the revised burnout scale had strong longitu-
dinal invariance in the two tests was verified.
In addition, through the basic information questionnaire of
teachers, information such as gender, teaching experience, mar-
ital status, and whether they are teachers in charge of the class
were collected. The test showed that this scale had a strong
equivalence between male teachers and female teachers, as well
as between different teaching experiences (0~10 years, 10~20
years and more than 20 years).
2.3 Data collection and analysis
(1) Questionnaire test. Both tests were electronic. The eval-
uation system was opened for one week and was conducted
anonymously. Teachers who voluntarily participated in the tests
could log into the system through computers or mobile phones
at a convenient time.
(2) Data analysis. SPSS 17.0 statistical software was used
for data management and descriptive statistical analysis, Mplus
8 was used for structural equation model analysis, and R 4.0.3
was used for cross-lagged network model analysis.
Structural equation model analysis. In addition to the above
five representative models, the comparative model also in-
cluded the basic model (i.e., T1 emotional exhaustion, deper-
sonalization and reduced personal accomplishment affected T2
emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal
accomplishment respectively) and the full model (i.e., each of
the three dimensions at T1 affected all three dimensions at T2).
The comparison indices included chi-square, RMSEA, SRMR,
CFI, TLI, AIC and aBIC. Chi-square, RMSEA and SRMR are
all absolute fitting indices. The smaller the chi-square value,
the better the model fits. An RMSEA value of less than 0.05
indicates that the model fits well, while an RMSEA value of
less than 0.08 is also acceptable. An SRMR value of less than
0.08 indicates that the model fits well. CFI and TLI are both
relative fitting indices, and values greater than 0.9 indicate that
the model fits well. AIC stands for Akaike information criterion.
The smaller the AIC is, the better the model is. aBIC represents
the BIC value calibrated by sample size. BIC stands for the
Bayesian information criterion, and the smaller the aBIC value,
the better. The penalty of BIC is larger than AIC for consider-
ing the number of samples, especially when there are a large
number of samples, can effectively prevent the model complex-
ity caused by high model accuracy (Hou et al., 2004).
Cross-lagged network model analysis. The glmnet (Fried-
man et al., 2010), qgraph (Epskamp et al., 2012) and lavaan
(Rosseel, 2012) function packets were used. Taking each vari-
able in the first test as the prediction variable and each variable
in the second test as the result variable, cyclic regularization
regression was conducted (adding constraint terms to prevent
overfitting). Lasso regression was adopted in this study; that is,
the constraint term was the sum of the absolute values of all
parameters. The centrality of variables was measured by ex-
cluding all autoregressive paths in the same dimension from
two aspects: cross-construct “predictability” and “influence”.
Predictability refers to the degree to which each variable is
predicted by other structural variables in the network; simply
put, it is the proportion of the difference of a variable at T2
explained by all variables of other structures at T1, with the
value ranging from 0 to 1. Influence refers to the degree to
which each variable predicts other structural variables in the
network. It is obtained by calculating the sum of squares of the
standardized regression coefficients of a variable at T1 to all
variables of the other structures at T2. Since the standardized
regression coefficients are not bounded at 1, there is no high
boundary for this measurement (Rhemtulla et al., 2019).
3 Results
3.1 Descriptive statistical analysis
The mean, standard deviation, and Pearson correlation coef-
ficient of the three dimensions of teacher burnout in the two
tests are shown in Table 1. In total, the emotional exhaustion
 Acta Psychologica Sinica

Table 1
Mean, standard deviation and correlation coefficient of three dimensions in two tests
Dimension M SD 2 3 4 5 6
** * ** **
1 Emotional exhaustion T1 2.67 0.98 0.62 0.04 0.47 0.29 0.09**
** ** **
2 Depersonalization T1 1.79 0.66 0.16 0.31 0.40 0.20**
* **
3 Reduced personal accomplishment T1 2.50 0.99 0.04 0.12 0.25**
**
4 Emotional exhaustion T2 2.47 0.93 0.67 0.14**
5 Depersonalization T2 1.78 0.72 0.31**
6 Reduced personal accomplishment T2 2.22 0.84
* ** ***
Note. p < 0.05, p < 0.01, p < 0.001

levels of teachers in the two tests were relatively high, the re-
duced personal accomplishment levels were relatively low, and
especially the depersonalization levels were very low, which
was consistent with previous studies (Wu et al., 2019). The
correlation between emotional exhaustion and depersonaliza-
tion was relatively high, but longitudinally, the correlations
between T1 emotional exhaustion and T2 depersonalization and
those between T1 depersonalization and T2 emotional exhaus-
tion were significantly lower.
3.2 Structural equation model analysis
The fitting indices of the seven compared models with di-
mensions as observed variables are shown in Table 2. Among
them, the basic model only contains the autoregressive path of
three dimensions, and the adjusted Model 1 is the model delet-
ing two insignificant paths in t test of “T1 depersonaliza-
tion→T2 emotional exhaustion” and “T1 emotional exhaus-
tion→T2 reduced personal accomplishment” from the full
model. Based on the RMSEA, SRMR, CFI and TLI values, the
Golembiewski model, Leiter & Maslach model, Taris model
and adjusted Model 1 all met the statistical requirements, but
the chi-square test of adjusted Model 1 was not significant. In
terms of the amount of information, the AIC value and the
aBIC value of the adjusted model were the smallest, slightly
lower than those of the Leiter & Maslach model, the Taris
model and the Golembiewski model.
Due to the large sample size of this study, the t test would
amplify the significance of the regression coefficient. Therefore,
the standardized regression coefficient β was used as the effect
size (Nieminen et al., 2013) and the r value obtained from its
transformation (Peterson & Brown, 2005) was used to deter-
mine the size of the effect. According to Cohen (1988, p.83), if
the r value is greater than 0.1, then it can be considered to have
a significant effect. The regression coefficient effects of the
above four models with relatively good fitting are shown in
Table 3. The results showed that the effect sizes of the three
autoregressive paths and the “T1 depersonalization→T2 re-
duced personal accomplishment” path in the four models were
significantly greater than 0.1. The effect sizes of all paths in the
Leiter and Maslach models were greater than 0.1, indicating
that this model fit the data ideally at the level of explicit vari-
ables, but that the r value of the “T1 emotional exhaustion→T2
depersonalization” path in this model was only slightly greater
than 0.1; the same was true of the effect size of this path in the
Taris model. In the Golembiewski model and Taris model, the r
value of the “T1 reduced personal accomplishment→T2 emo-
tional exhaustion” path was less than 0.1, but in adjusted
Model 1, the r value of this path was slightly greater than 0.1.
Because the effect size of the “T1 depersonalization→T2
reduced personal accomplishment” path was significantly
greater than that of the “T1 emotional exhaustion→T2 de-
personalization” path except for the three autoregressive paths,
the adjusted Model 2 was constructed (Figure 2, the path of
“T1 depersonalization→T2 reduced personal accomplish-
ment” was added to the basic model). The results showed that
the r values of the four paths in this model were obviously
greater than 0.1 and also fit the data well based on the fitting
indices. In the comparison of the seven development models
with dimensions as observed variables, it could be considered
that the Leiter and Maslach model and adjusted Model 2 were
ideal for data fitting.
Structural equation model can include both measurement
model and structural model, making a great use of observation
information, allowing measurement errors of independent
variables and dependent variables, and dealing with latent
variables more accurately. The fitting index of the above mod-
els with dimensions as latent variables is shown in Table 4. The
results showed that the Golembiewski model, Leiter and
Maslach model, Taris model and full model fit the data better.
The chi-square value, AIC value and aBIC value of the Lee and
Ashforth model and van Dierendonck model were obviously
larger than those of the other models, and the data fitting was
relatively poor.

Table 2
Fitting index of each comparison model when dimension is taken as observed variable
Model χ2 df RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI AIC aBIC
Basic model 160.63 6 0.08 0.05 0.96 0.93 24076.50 24113.40
Golembiewski (1983) model 49.45 4 0.05 0.03 0.99 0.97 23969.32 24012.36
Leiter & Maslach (1988) model 25.35 4 0.04 0.02 0.99 0.98 23945.22 23988.27
Lee & Ashforth (1993) model 99.28 4 0.08 0.03 0.98 0.93 24019.15 24062.19
van Dierendonck (2001) model 145.37 4 0.09 0.05 0.97 0.90 24065.24 24108.29
Taris et al. (2005) Model 22.97 3 0.04 0.02 0.99 0.98 23944.83 23990.96
Adjusted Model 1 0.61 2 0.00 0.00 1 1 23924.48 23973.68
Adjusted Model 2 51.24 5 0.05 0.03 0.99 0.97 23969.11 24009.08
 XIE Min et al.: A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary school teachers: Evidence from structural equation...

Table 3 Similarly, the effect size r was used to determine the effect
Regression coefficients and effect sizes of five models with dimen- magnitude of the regression coefficient (see Table 5). The re-
sions as observed variables
sults showed that the optimal development model was adjusted
Model Path b SE t β r Model 2. The effect sizes of the “T1 emotional exhaustion→T2
Golembiewski ee1→ee2 0.40 0.01 36.82 0.44 0.49 depersonalization” path in the Leiter-Maslach model and the
(1983) model Taris model were less than 0.1. The Golembiewski model was a
pa1→ee2 0.01 0.01 1.40 0.01 0.06
dp1→dp2 0.41 0.01 29.00 0.38 0.43 potential better development model. The r value of the “T1
dp1→pa2 0.21 0.02 10.45 0.16 0.21
reduced personal accomplishment→T2 emotional exhaustion”
path of this model was slightly less than 0.1, and it was slightly
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.01 13.77 0.21 0.26
higher than 0.1 in the full model. In Table 4, the fitting indices
Leiter & Maslach ee1→ee2 0.44 0.01 34.00 0.44 0.49
(1988) model of the Golembiewski model and those of adjusted Model 2
ee1→dp2 0.06 0.01 5.17 0.06 0.11 were relatively close.
dp1→dp2 0.36 0.0 24.33 0.36 0.41 In summary, the results of the model comparison using a
dp1→pa2 0.21 0.02 10.65 0.21 0.26 structural equation model showed that the optimal development
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.01 13.61 0.18 0.23 model of burnout among primary school teachers was adjusted
Taris et al. (2005) ee1→ee2 0.42 0.02 25.00 0.45 0.50 Model 2; that is, “emotional exhaustion and reduced personal
Mode l
dp1→ee2 0.04 0.03 1.50 0.03 0.08 accomplishment at T1 predict emotional exhaustion and re-
duced personal accomplishment at T2, respectively, and deper-
ee1→dp2 0.05 0.01 4.15 0.07 0.12
sonalization at T1 predicts depersonalization and reduced per-
dp1→dp2 0.38 0.02 19.25 0.35 0.40
sonal accomplishment at T2”.
dp1→pa2 0.21 0.02 10.75 0.17 0.22
3.3 Cross-lagged network model analysis
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.01 13.69 0.21 0.26 In the cross-lagged network path of all items, the autore-
Adjusted Model 1 ee1→ee2 0.44 0.01 34.08 0.47 0.52 gressive coefficient is generally larger than the cross-lagged
pa1→ee2 0.05 0.01 3.92 0.05 0.10 path coefficient. As the thickness of arrows corresponds to the
ee1→dp2 0.07 0.01 5.75 0.09 0.14 strength of the relationship, the autoregressive paths were
dp1→dp2 0.35 0.02 22.06 0.33 0.38 omitted in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 to make the paths of the cross-
pa1→dp2 0.05 0.01 4.82 0.07 0.12
lagged relationship clearer.
As shown in Figure 3, there were obvious mutual influences
dp1→pa2 0.21 0.02 10.55 0.16 0.21
between Item 2 (EE2, “Feeling burnout and don't want to do
pa1→pa2 0.19 0.01 14.77 0.22 0.28
anything else by the end of the day”) and Item 7 (EE7, “Work
Adjusted Model 2 ee1→ee2 0.40 0.01 36.73 0.43 0.48 is exhausting me physically and mentally”) of the emotional
dp1→dp2 0.40 0.01 31.08 0.38 0.43 exhaustion dimension, between Item1 (DP1, “Some students
dp1→pa2 0.21 0.02 10.45 0.16 0.21 seem to me hopeless”) and Item 4 (DP4, “I don't care what's
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.01 13.85 0.21 0.26 going on with the students”) of depersonalization dimension,
and between Item 3 (PA3, “I think I make a positive impact on
others through my work”) and Item 4 (PA4, “I've done a lot of
good in this job”) of reduced personal accomplishment dimen-
sion. To reduce the redundancy of the network, we created
three sum scores of two variables for each group to reduce the
total set of items from 19 to 16 (Rhemtulla et al., 2019). The
new variables were named “Exhausted physically and men-
tally” (new EE2), “Some students are hopeless and don't care
what's wrong with them” (new DP1), and “Experiencing posi-
tive influence and value at work” (new PA3) (see Figure 4).
The strongest relationship paths were the direct influence of
“I don't care what my students think of me” (DP4) on “Experi-
Figure 2. Adjusted model 2. encing positive influence and value at work” (PA3) and the

Table 4
Fitting index of each comparison model when dimension is taken as latent variable
Model χ2 df RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI AIC aBIC
Basic model 7528.05 656 0.05 0.05 0.92 0.91 361321.05 361699.27
Golembiewski (1983) model 7430.24 654 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361227.25 361611.61
Leiter & Maslach (1988) model 7437.23 654 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361234.24 361618.60
Lee & Ashforth (1993) model 7485.55 654 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361282.55 361666.92
van Dierendonck (2001) model 7527.66 654 0.05 0.05 0.92 0.91 361324.66 361709.03
Taris et al. (2005) Model 7436.94 653 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361235.95 361623.39
Full model 7417.33 650 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361222.33 361619.00
Adjusted Model 2 7437.25 655 0.05 0.04 0.92 0.91 361232.30 361613.50
 Acta Psychologica Sinica

Table 5
Regression coefficients and effect sizes of five models with dimension as latent variable
模型 Model 路径 Path b SE t β r 模型 Model 路径 Path b SE t β r
Golembiewski ee1→ee2 0.44 0.01 31.29 0.50 0.55 Full model ee1→ee2 0.45 0.03 17.39 0.51 0.56
(1983) model pa1→ee2 0.03 0.01 2.70 0.03 0.08 dp1→ee2 –0.04 0.05 –0.87 –0.03 0.02
dp1→dp2 0.54 0.02 23.65 0.48 0.53 pa1→ee2 0.05 0.02 3.33 0.06 0.11
dp1→pa2 0.25 0.03 9.37 0.18 0.23 ee1→dp2 0.00 0.02 –0.10 0.00 0.05
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.02 12.00 0.23 0.28 dp1→dp2 0.53 0.04 12.95 0.47 0.52
Leiter & Maslach ee1→ee2 0.43 0.02 28.93 0.49 0.54 pa1→dp2 0.02 0.01 1.85 0.04 0.09
(1988) model ee1→dp2 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.05 ee1→pa2 –0.08 0.03 –2.78 –0.09 –0.04
dp1→dp2 0.53 0.03 18.35 0.47 0.52 dp1→pa2 0.36 0.05 7.26 0.26 0.31
dp1→pa2 0.25 0.03 9.26 0.18 0.23 pa1→pa2 0.17 0.02 10.06 0.22 0.27
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.02 12.27 0.23 0.28 Adjusted Model 2 ee1→ee2 0.43 0.01 31.00 0.49 0.54
Taris et al. (2005) ee1→ee2 0.42 0.02 17.67 0.48 0.53 dp1→dp2 0.53 0.02 23.22 0.47 0.52
Mode l dp1→ee2 0.02 0.04 0.55 0.02 0.07 dp1→pa2 0.25 0.03 9.26 0.18 0.23
ee1→dp2 0.00 0.02 –0.16 –0.01 0.05 pa1→pa2 0.18 0.02 12.27 0.24 0.29
dp1→dp2 0.54 0.04 15.11 0.48 0.53
dp1→pa2 0.25 0.03 9.30 0.18 0.23
pa1→pa2 0.18 0.02 12.27 0.24 0.29

Figure 3. Estimated CLPN of 3 dimensions of teacher burnout (19 items) with autoregressive paths omitted.
Note. a. EE1 represents the first item in the dimension of emotional exhaustion, DP1 represents the first item in the dimension of depersonalization,
and PA1 represents the first item in the dimension of reduced personal achievement; b. Thicker arrows indicate a stronger relationship; c. Green ar-
rows indicate positive effects and red arrows indicate negative effects; d. Figure 4, same note

direct influence of “Work often causes me insomnia and head-
aches” (EE8) on “Exhausted physically and mentally” (EE2).
The former belonged to the longitudinal process between psy-
chological constructs, while the latter belonged to the longitu-
dinal process within psychological constructs.
The centrality of the cross-lagged network model was esti-
mated (see Figure 5). The results showed that “Experiencing
positive influence and value at work” (PA3, reverse scoring)
and “I don't care what my students think of me” (DP4) were the
centres of the network. The former was an item of reduced
personal accomplishment, which was an important outcome,
while the latter was an item of depersonalization, which was an
important predictor.
It can be seen in combination with the network paths of
Figure 4, “I don't care what my students think of me” (DP4)
directly affects “Experiencing positive influence and value at
work” (PA3, reverse scoring) and “When students make pro-
gress, I think all the effort is worth it” (PA1, reverse scoring)
with large influence intensity. Although “Experiencing positive
influence and value at work” (PA3, reverse scoring) directly
affects “It's easy for work to get me down” (EE7), “When stu-
dents make progress, I think all the effort is worth it” (PA1,
 XIE Min et al.: A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary school teachers: Evidence from structural equation...

Figure 4. Estimated CLPN of 3 dimensions of teacher burnout (16 items) with autoregressive paths omitted.

Figure 5. Cross-construct predictability and influence of variables in the estimated CLPN.

reverse scoring) directly affects “Under pressure to do this job (DP1), and “Becoming more irritable than before since taking
because of facing people all the time” (EE4), “Feeling tired this job” (EE6) directly affects “I'm afraid this job will make
when get up in the morning” (EE3) directly affects “Some stu- me emotionless” (DP3), the influence intensity was obviously
dents are hopeless and don't care what's wrong with them” relatively small. The path relationship and intensity between
 Acta Psychologica Sinica
these constructs confirmed that depersonalization had an im-
portant impact on reduced personal accomplishment, while the
impact of reduced personal accomplishment on emotional ex-
haustion and the impact of emotional exhaustion on deperson-
alization were relatively small at present.
In summary, the model fitting indices (Table 2 and Table 4)
of the structural equation model and the effect size (r value) of
each relationship path (Table 3 and Table 5) showed that ad-
justed Model 2 (Figure 2) was the optimal development model
at the observation and latent variable levels. The cross-lagged
network model found that there was an obvious longitudinal
relationship between depersonalization and reduced personal
accomplishment at the item level, while there was an obvious
longitudinal relationship within the emotional exhaustion con-
struct (Figure 4 and Figure 5). Therefore, this study finally
suggested that adjusted Model 2 could better describe the de-
velopment process of burnout among primary school teachers;
that is, if exposed to pressure for a long time, emotional ex-
haustion and depersonalization were the beginning of burnout,
emotional exhaustion would affect emotional exhaustion after-
wards, and when depersonalization cannot well relieve the
feeling of pressure, teachers would have obviously reduced
personal accomplishment.
3.4 Consistency of the optimal development model in
terms of gender and teaching experience
The obtained optimal development model was compared
across groups between different genders. The development
model of burnout in male teachers and female teachers is
Figure 6. Development model of burnout in male and female teachers (male/female).
shown in Figure 6. The Wald test values of the four paths were
0.001~1.761 and were not significant; that is, the optimal de-
velopment model had gender consistency.
The obtained optimal development model was compared
across groups with different teaching experiences. The devel-
opment model of burnout with teaching experience of 0~10
years, 10~20 years and more than 20 years is shown in Figure 7.
The Wald test values were 0.613~3.391 in the 4 paths for
teachers with teaching experience of 0~10 years and 10~20
years, were 0.002~3.198 for teachers with teaching experience
of 0~10 years and more than 20 years and were 0.063~1.549
for teachers with teaching experience of 10~20 years and more
than 20 years. They were not significant; that is, the optimal
development model had consistency among teachers with dif-
ferent teaching experiences.
4 Discussion
4.1 The optimal development model of burnout among
primary school teachers
The optimal development model obtained in this study is
“emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment at
T1 predict emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accom-
plishment at T2 respectively, and depersonalization at T1 pre-
dicts depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment
at T2”. That is, the burnout of primary school teachers begins
with emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, and emotional
exhaustion affects further emotional exhaustion while deper-
sonalization directly affect reduced personal accomplishment
 XIE Min et al.: A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary school teachers: Evidence from structural equation...
Figure 7. Development model of burnout in teachers with different teaching experience (0~10 years/10~20 years/more than 20 years).
over time. This optimal development model has consistency
between different genders and different teaching experiences in
this sample.
First, in the longitudinal relationship among the three di-
mensions of burnout among primary school teachers, this study
supports the significant prediction of depersonalization on re-
duced personal accomplishment at the observed variable, latent
variable and item level. This longitudinal path is supported by
three of the five representative development models of burnout
(Golembiewski et al., 1983; Leiter & Maslach, 1988; Taris et
al., 2005), and this effect has been proven to be stable over time
(Huang et al., 2015). As a coping mechanism of psychological
withdrawal (Taris et al., 2005), depersonalization can make
individuals stay away from stress/stressors in the short term,
give individuals time to recover, and thus temporarily obtain
better job performance (Golembiewski et al., 1983) or addi-
tional resources (Maslach & Leiter, 2017). However, in the
long term, it will have many adverse effects on individuals,
such as the deterioration of interpersonal relationships and the
formation of negative self-evaluation (Huang et al., 2010),
further aggravating the development of burnout. The primary
school teachers are special in that they need to face the same
students in one semester, one year, or even several years, re-
quiring more emotional labor. The value of teaching itself is
related to the development of students. When teachers deal with
pressure in a depersonalized way, it is easy to widen the dis-
tance between teachers and students, causing additional contra-
dictions and conflicts. Students are even more reluctant to co-
operate with teachers' requirements, which makes it easier for
teachers to feel negative about the value of their work and to
minimize or lose their sense of accomplishment. Taris et al.
(2005) found that this longitudinal path is significant among
teachers, but not among cancer nursing workers.
Second, the results of this study show that compared to the
high simultaneous correlation between emotional exhaustion
and depersonalization, the delayed correlation is significantly
lower, which is consistent with previous studies (Lee & Ash-
forth, 1993). This study does not find an obvious longitudinal
relationship between these two dimensions, including the lon-
gitudinal effect of emotional exhaustion on depersonalization
and the longitudinal effect of depersonalization on emotional
exhaustion, which is inconsistent with previous studies (Taris
et al., 2005). In this study, although the longitudinal effect of
emotional exhaustion on depersonalization is significant when
we compared structural equation models with dimensions as
observed variables (such as Leiter & Maslach model), its effect
is obviously smaller than that of other paths, and the longitudi-
nal relationship between these two dimensions is not obvious in
the comparison of structural equation models with dimensions
as latent variables or in cross-lagged networks. Therefore, in
this study, the relationship between emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization is closer to a “parallel” relationship; that is,
when faced with stress, the two may occur simultaneously, but
there is no obvious interaction.
Third, this study does not find a significant longitudinal
prediction of emotional exhaustion by reduced personal ac-
 Acta Psychologica Sinica
complishment. Although this longitudinal path is not involved
in four of the five representative models, some studies have
revealed this path (McManut et al., 2002; Gan & Gan, 2014). In
this study, although the correlation between reduced personal
accomplishment and emotional exhaustion is obviously lower,
it can be seen from the cross-lagged network that there are still
additional connections between the items of these two dimen-
sions, and in the comparison of latent variable structural equa-
tion models, the effect size (r value) of this path (only in the
Golembiewski model and the full model) fluctuates around 0.1.
It should be noted that the Leiter & Maslach model and the
Golembiewski model are considered potentially better devel-
opment models when the dimensions are used as observed
variables and latent variables for structural equation model
comparison. Moreover, in the cross-lagged network, the influ-
ence of reduced personal accomplishment items on emotional
exhaustion items and the influence of emotional exhaustion
items on depersonalization items both existed, although the
intensity was relatively lower than that of the influence of de-
personalization on reduced personal accomplishment. Accord-
ing to the Leiter & Maslach model, under long-term stress in-
dividuals first produce emotional exhaustion reactions, then
deal with emotional exhaustion through depersonalization, and
finally produce negative evaluations regarding their job per-
formance. The Golembiewski model holds that, under
long-term stress, individuals first respond in a depersonalized
way, and that depersonalization will lead to a short-term and
limited sense of accomplishment. When the emphasis on peo-
ple conflicts with performance standards, emotional exhaustion
will occur. Both models use the influence of depersonalization
on reduced personal accomplishment, and the difference be-
tween the two models and the optimal development model
obtained in this study lies in whether emotional exhaustion or
psychological withdrawal coping occurs first, or whether the
two symptoms occur simultaneously under pressure. According
to the stress theory of Lazarus (1966), when teachers face stress
for a long time, they may have strong negative emotional reac-
tions, such as emotional exhaustion, or they may cope nega-
tively, such as through depersonalization. In this study, burnout
among primary school teachers starts with emotional exhaus-
tion symptoms and depersonalization symptoms occurring at
the same time, and depersonalization will significantly and
directly affect reduced personal accomplishment. Additional
longitudinal studies are needed to verify whether reduced per-
sonal accomplishment significantly affects emotional exhaus-
tion. The influence of emotional exhaustion on depersonaliza-
tion has been suggested to maintain low stability over time in
enterprise employees. Whether this influence path is significant
and stable across time for teachers also needs verification
through additional longitudinal studies.
In summary, this study uses a longitudinal design and uses
structural equation model for model comparison and
cross-lagged network model for verification. The obvious lon-
gitudinal relationship between depersonalization and reduced
personal accomplishment among primary school teachers and
the obvious longitudinal relationship among the internal items
of emotional exhaustion are clarified at the item level, latent
variable, and observed variable level. This confirms the impor-
tant role of depersonalization in the development of burnout
among primary school teachers. However, whether there is a
longitudinal relationship of emotional exhaustion with deper-
sonalization or reduced personal accomplishment remains to be
further verified. However, the Lee & Ashforth model and van
Dierendonck model are not suitable for describing the devel-
opment process of burnout among primary school teachers.
According to the results of this study, it is suggested that add-
ing an assessment of the relationship between teachers and
students, colleagues and leaders in teacher evaluation would
help to determine the symptoms of depersonalization and emo-
tional exhaustion in time and to take effective measures to im-
prove teachers' sense of work accomplishment to prevent fur-
ther development of teacher burnout.
4.2 Limitations and prospects
First, in this study, compared with the very strong relation-
ship of “T1 depersonalization→T2 reduction of personal ac-
complishment”, the influence of reduced personal accomplish-
ment on emotional exhaustion and the influence of emotional
exhaustion on depersonalization were both weaker. If there are
3~4 wave tests, it may be better to determine whether these
relationships remain stable, are strengthened, or are weakened
over time, which would more accurately determine the sequen-
tial development of teacher burnout.
Second, the cross-lagged network model in this study de-
scribes the development relationship of teacher burnout with a
3-year interval, which may not be applicable to the estimation
of some effects (DeBoeck & Preacher, 2016). For example, if it
takes up to 1~2 years or even less for teachers to obviously
affect emotional exhaustion from reduced personal accom-
plishment, then the 3-year time interval may suggest that the
influence has weakened. However, if it takes more than 3 years,
then the 3-year time interval may not have obvious influence,
or some interventions in the middle may lead to obvious
weakening or enhancement of this influence. Therefore, to
solve the problem of the rationality of the time interval, it may
be necessary to model through continuous time series (Voelkle
et al., 2012), which would not only require an expansion of the
cross-lagged network model to meet the data requirements
(Rhemtulla et al., 2019), but also have some difficulties in
practice (Savicki & Cooley, 1994).
Third, in this study, the number of teachers who took both
tests accounted for approximately 72.7% of the number of
teachers who took the first test, and the retest rate was not very
high. During the 3-year interval, teachers left their jobs, trans-
ferred to other schools, or were still in sample schools but did
not participate in the second test for various reasons. The test
results from the four aspects—measurement equivalence, di-
mension distribution, dimension score variance, and item score
variance—indicated that the two groups from the first test
(those who participated in the second test and those who did
not participate in the second test) have high equivalence in
measurement and the missing mechanism has nothing to do
with the burnout level. However, the development of burnout
symptoms in these teachers and the reasons why they did not
take the second test are also worth exploring. In further related
research, we would not only analyse longitudinal participants
but also pay attention to teachers who have not completed lon-
gitudinal tests and design investigations or case interviews to
better answer such questions as the impact of burnout on
teachers.
In addition, the participants of previous research on the se-
quential development of burnout included medical workers,
social service workers, enterprise employees, and teachers, but
 XIE Min et al.: A developmental model of job burnout dimensions among primary school teachers: Evidence from structural equation...
so far, few studies have used the same research tools and
methods to compare the sequential development of burnout in
different groups. Taris et al. (2005) collected data from teachers
and tumour caregivers for analysis. Using the same method, it
was found that the higher the depersonalization, the higher the
emotional exhaustion and the lower the personal accomplish-
ment among the teachers, but this result was not found among
the tumour caregivers. Is it possible that the development of
burnout is different in different occupational groups? This
question should be answered by more future related studies. In
the process of further verification, network methods can play a
greater role. Some researchers have suggested that some
well-defined latent variables that are easy for the public to un-
derstand can be used as observed variables to analyse the lon-
gitudinal development relationship among dimensions (Schmi-
ttmann et al., 2013) and the network development relationship
among many psychological constructs (Letina et al., 2019)
through the time series network model after multiple measure-
ments. This method can analyse the interaction between differ-
ent nodes (observation variables, typical behaviours, and
symptoms) as well as different levels of dimensions (latent
variables), and its developmental process over time, which is
more helpful in assisting researchers to formulate more targeted
solutions.
5 Conclusions
Structural equation model comparison and cross-lagged
network model mutually verified that the adjusted Model 2
obtained in this study is the optimal development model of
burnout among primary school teachers. The model holds that
burnout among primary school teachers begins with emotional
exhaustion and depersonalization, and emotional exhaustion
affects further emotional exhaustion while depersonalization
affects reduced personal accomplishment over time. There is
gender consistency in this model, and it is also consistent
among teachers with different teaching experiences.
References
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Sixma, H. J., Bosveld, W., & Van Di-
erendonck, D. (2000). Patient demands, lack of reciprocity, and
burnout: A five-year longitudinal study among general practitioners.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(4), 425–441.
Bi, Z. Z., & Huang, X. T. (2005). The role of burnout in the relationship
between achievement motivation and turnover intention. Journal of
Psychological Science, 28(1), 28–31.
Borsboom, D., & Cramer, A. O. J. (2013). Network analysis: An inte-
grative approach to the structure of psychopathology. Annual Re-
view of Clinical Psychology, 9(1), 91–121.
Brenner, J. (2020). Examining the stage progression of employee
burnout (Order No. 28148693). Available from ProQuest Disserta-
tions & Theses Global; Publicly Available Content Database.
(2451849425).
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cramer, A. O. J., van Borkulo, C., D., Giltay, E. J., van der Maas, H. L.
J., Kendler, K. S., Scheffer, M., & Borsboom, D. (2016). Major de-
pression as a complex dynamic system. PLoS One, 11(12), 1–20.
Cramer, A. O. J., van der Sluis, S., Noordhof, A., Wichers, M., Gesch-
wind, N., Aggen, S. H., … Borsboom, D. (2012). Dimensions of
normal personality as networks in search of equilibrium: You can’t
like parties if you don’t like people. European Journal of Personal-
ity, 26(4), 414–431.
Deboeck, P. R., & Preacher K. J. (2016). No need to be discrete: A
method for continuous time mediation analysis. Structural Equation
Modeling, 23(1), 61–75.
de Vos, J. A., Brouwers, A., Schoot, T., Pat-El, R., Verboon, P., &
Näring, G. (2016). Early career burnout among Dutch nurses: A
process captured in a Rasch model. Burnout Research, 3(3), 55–62.
Diestel, S., & Schmidt, K.-H. (2010). Direct and interaction effects
among the dimensions of the Maslach Burnout Inventory: Results
from two German longitudinal samples. International Journal of
Stress Management, 17(2), 159–180.
Epskamp, S., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Schmittmann, V. D., &
Borsboom, D. (2012). qgraph: Network visualizations of relation-
ships in psychometric data. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(4),
1–18.
Fried, E. I., Epskamp, S., Nesse, R. M, Tuerlinckx, F., & Borsboom, D.
(2016). What are “good” depression symptoms? Comparing the
centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms of depression in a net-
work analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 189, 314–320.
Fried, E. I., van Borkulo, C. D., Cramer, A. O. J., Boschloo, L., Scho-
evers, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2017). Mental disorders as networks
of problems: A review of recent insights. Social Psychiatry and
Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(1), 1–10.
Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2010). Regularization paths
for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. Journal of
Statistical Software, 33, 1–22.
Gan, T., & Gan, Y. (2014). Sequential development among dimensions
of job burnout and engagement among IT employees. Stress and
Health, 30(2), 122–133.
Golembiewski, R. T., Munzenrider, R., & Carter, D. (1983). Phases of
progressive burnout and their work site covariants: Critical issues in
OD research and praxis. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,
19(4), 461–481.
Herman, K. C., Hickmon-Rosa, J., & Reinke, W. M. (2018). Empiri-
cally derived profiles of teacher stress, burnout, self-Efficacy, and
coping and associated student outcomes. Journal of Positive Be-
havior Interventions, 20(2), 90–100.
Hou, K. T., Wen, Z. L., & Cheng, Z. J. (2004). Structural equation
model and its applications. Beijing: Educational Science Publishing
House.
Huang, J., Bao, X. H., You, X. Q., & Zhou, L. M. (2010). The media-
tion effects of personal resources on relationship between the job
demand-resource model and job burnout. Journal of Psychological
Science, 33(4), 963–965.
Huang, J., You, X.Q., Wang, Y. S., & Bao, X. H. (2015). A Longitudinal
Analysis of the Developmental Process of Job Burnout. Journal of
Psychological Science, 38(4), 911–915.
Huyghebaert, T., Fouquereau, E., Gillet, N., Beltou, N., & Tellier, F.
(2018). Effects of workload on teachers’ functioning: A moderated
mediation model including sleeping problems and overcommitment.
Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the In-
vestigation of Stress, 34(5), 601–611.
Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1993). A longitudinal study of burnout
among supervisors and managers: Comparisons between the Leiter
and Maslach (1988) and Golembiewski et al. (1986) Models. Or-
ganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54(3),
369–398.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal envi-
ronment on burnout and organizational commitment. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 9(4), 297–308.
Letina, S., Blanken, T. F., Deserno, M. K., & Borsboom, D. (2019).
Expanding network analysis tools in psychological networks:
Minimal spanning trees, participation coefficients, and motif analy-
sis applied to a network of 26 psychological attributes. Complexity
 Acta Psychologica Sinica
(New York, N.Y.), 2019, 1–27.
Maslach, C. (2003). Job burnout: New directions in research and inter-
vention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(5),
189–192.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2017). Understanding burnout: New
models. In C. L. Cooper, & J. C. Quick (Eds.), The handbook of
stress and health: A guide to research and practice (pp. 36−56,
Chapter xxii). Wiley Blackwell.
Maslach, C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1993). Historical and conceptual
development of burnout. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T.
Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory
and research (pp. 1–16). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
McManus, I. C., Winder, B. C., & Gordon, D. (2002). The causal links
between stress and burnout in a longitudinal study of UK doctors.
The Lancet, 359, 2089–2090.
Nguyen, H. T. T., Kitaoka, K., Sukigara, M., & Thai, A. L. (2018).
Burnout Study of clinical nurses in Vietnam: Development of job
burnout model based on Leiter and Maslach's theory. Asian Nursing
Research, 12(1), 42–49.
Nieminen, P., Lehtiniemi, H., Vhkangas, K., Huusko, A., & Rautio, A.
(2013). Standardised regression coefficient as an effect size index in
summarising findings in epidemiological studies. Epidemiology Bi-
ostatistics & Public Health, 10(4), 1–15.
Peterson, R. A., & Brown, S. P. (2005). On the use of beta coefficients
in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 175–181.
Rhemtulla, M., van Bork, R., & Cramer, A. O. J. (2019).
Cross-laggedged network models. Multivariate Behavioral Re-
search. Retrived from https://osf.io/r24q6/
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation mod-
eling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
Savicki, V., & Cooley, E. J. (1994). Burnout in child protective service
workers: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
15(7), 655–666.
Schmittmann, V. D., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Epskamp, S.,
Kievit, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2013). Deconstructing the construct:
A network perspective on psychological phenomena. New Ideas in
Psychology, 31(1), 43–53.
Taris, T. W., Le Blanc, P. M., Schaufeli, W. B., & Schreurs, P. J. (2005).
Are there causal relationships between the dimensions of the
Maslach Burnout Inventory? A review and two longitudinal tests.
Work and Stress, 19(3), 238–255.
Toppinen-Tanner, S., Kalimo, R., & Mutanen, P. (2002). The process of
burnout in white-collar and blue-collar jobs: Eight-year prospective
study of exhaustion. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(5),
555–570.
van Dierendonck, D., Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2001). Toward
a process model of burnout: Results from a secondary analysis. Eu-
ropean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(1),
41–52
Voelkle, M. C., Oud, J. H. L., Davidov, E., & Schmidt, P. (2012). An
SEM approach to continuous time modeling of panel data: Relating
authoritarianism and anomia. Psychological Methods, 17(2),
176–192.
Wang, F. (2006). Job burnout in university teachers: The causes and
the internal relationship of the three dimensions (Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation). Beijing Normal University.
Wang, F., & Xu, Y. (2004). Job burnout in elementary and high school
teachers: Characteristics and relationship with social support. Acta
Psychologica Sinica, 36(5), 568–574.
Wu, X. C., Qi, Y. J., & Zang, W. W. (2019). Overall features and influ-
encing factors of primary and secondary school teachers’ job burn-
out in China. Journal of South China Normal University (Social
Science Edition), (1), 37–42.
Wu, X. C., Zeng, L. J., Qin, X. G., & Zheng, Q. (2003). The current
situation and related factors of Chinese teacher’s burnout. Studies of
Psychology and Behavior, 1(4), 262–267.
Zang, W. W. (2007). The research on the relationship among occupa-
tional stress, job burnout and coping style of elementary and high
school teachers (Unpublished master’s thesis). Beijing Normal
University.