







































4040

Teaching with Purpose: How Calling Buffers 
Burnout’s Impact on Teacher Behaviors

Alexsis H. Davis, Catrina Notari, & Jessica J. Sim
Department of Psychology, Elmhurst University

Research consistently demonstrates that burnout is related to more counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) and 
fewer organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). Nonetheless, there is limited research on the relationship be-
tween calling orientation (a sense of purpose and passion for one’s work) and the behavioral outcomes of burnout, 
particularly within the context of teachers in the United States. The current cross-sectional study seeks to address this 
gap by investigating whether teachers’ sense of calling moderates the relationship between burnout and both CWBs 
and OCBs. A total of 108 Kindergarten to 12th grade (K-12) teachers were recruited via Prolific to participate in an 
online survey. Participants answered questions about their calling orientation, burnout levels, CWBs, and OCBs. 
We hypothesized that burnout would be positively associated with CWBs and negatively associated with OCBs, and 
that a strong calling orientation would buffer these relationships. The survey results supported the prediction that 
teachers experiencing high levels of overall burnout were more likely to engage in CWBs. Importantly, teachers with a 
strong sense of calling were less likely to engage in CWBs, even when experiencing reduced personal accomplishment. 
Contrary to expectations, overall burnout was not associated with OCBs, nor did it interact with calling orientation 
to predict OCBs. The findings suggest that fostering a sense of calling could help minimize CWBs and enhance 
teachers’ commitment to their work. Future research should explore how teacher recognition, professional devel-
opment opportunities, and interventions that promote purpose or meaning can further support teacher well-being 
and reduce CWBs.
 Keywords: burnout, calling orientation, counterproductive work behaviors, organizational citizenship 
behaviors, teaching

 Burnout is a pervasive issue in the workplace and 
a key topic in Industrial-Organizational Psychology 
(Maslach et al., 2001). Burnout is detrimental to in-
dividual well-being and costly for businesses, with 
organizations losing $120 to $190 billion USD an-
nually due to burnout and employee stress (Weiss, 
2020). To address this issue, the present research ex-
plores whether a calling orientation—a sense of pur-
pose and passion for one’s work (Wrzesniewski et al., 
1997)—buffers the effects of high levels of burnout 
prevalent among teachers (Marken & Agrawal, 2022). 
Despite extensive research on burnout, a notable gap 
remains in the literature regarding the moderating 
role of calling orientation in the relationship between 
burnout and engagement in counterproductive work 
behaviors (CWBs) and organizational citizenship be-
haviors (OCBs)— actions that harm and benefit an 
organization, respectively (Schnake, 1991; Spector et 
al., 2006). By understanding this relationship, organi-
zations, and educational institutions can better tailor 
interventions to mitigate the consequences of burn-
out and foster more resilient and engaged workers.
Burnout and its Consequences
 Burnout is a multidimensional concept com-
prised of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, 
and reduced personal accomplishment (Maslach et al., 
2001). Emotional exhaustion refers to feelings of be-
ing overextended and drained of one’s emotional and 

physical resources. The second dimension of burnout 
is depersonalization, which refers to negative, cal-
lous, and detached behaviors. The last dimension of 
burnout is reduced personal accomplishment, which 
is a sense of reduced self-efficacy or accomplishment. 
All three dimensions are responses to prolonged ex-
posure to job stressors (Maslach & Leiter, 2008).
 Employees who are burned out are more likely to 
engage in counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) 
and less likely to engage in organizational citizenship 
behaviors (OCBs; Turek, 2020). CWBs are a set of 
actions or conscious decisions intended to harm the 
organization and/or the organization’s stakeholders 
(Spector et al., 2006). These include abuse, production 
deviance, sabotage, theft, and withdrawal. In the con-
text of teaching, examples of teacher CWBs could in-
clude absenteeism, misusing resources, plagiarism, and 
overall lack of caring for their students. CWBs are cost-
ly to organizations and hurt morale. Given that CWBs 
and burnout are strongly linked (Liang & Hsieh, 
2007), it is crucial for organizations to prevent burn-
out among their employees as this may not only reduce 
CWBs but may also increase OCBs (Turek, 2020).
 OCBs and CWBs are often viewed as opposites, 
as CWBs hurt the organization while OCBs benefit it 
(Dalal, 2005). Therefore, it is advantageous for organi-
zations to encourage OCBs, as these behaviors benefit 
the organization without incurring additional costs. 

Graduate Student Journal of Psychology
Spring 2025 - Vol. 24

Copyright 2025 by the Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology
Teachers College, Columbia University



41

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM

OCBs are defined as behaviors that are not formal-
ly required by a particular job but are desired by the 
organization, such as punctuality, helping others on 
work-related issues, and volunteering (Schnake, 1991). 
These behaviors can be directed toward the organiza-
tion or coworkers (Spector et al., 2010). In the context 
of teaching, OCBs are vital not only to the educational 
institution but also to its students. Examples of teacher 
OCBs include volunteering for extracurricular activi-
ties or paying for their own school supplies. Despite 
not being part of the job description, these behaviors 
are typically expected from those in the teaching profes-
sion (Litvinov, 2023). However, research indicates that 
burnout reduces engagement in OCBs (Turek, 2020).
Combating Teacher Burnout
 Teachers are burning out at an increased rate 
(Pressley, 2021). Widely used to understand teacher 
burnout, the job demands-resources model argues that 
burnout occurs when the demands of the job outweigh 
the available resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2014; 
Van Droogenbroeck et al., 2021). Common sources of 
stress include teaching unmotivated students, main-
taining classroom discipline, confronting time pres-
sures and workload demands, exposure to significant 
changes, evaluations by others, difficult relationships 
with colleagues, administration or management, and 
poor working conditions (Kyriacou, 2001). Reports 
suggest that teachers in the United States experience 
reduced autonomy in the classroom, along with declin-
ing levels of support from administrators and school 
districts (Walker, 2016). The growing emphasis on 
standardized testing, coupled with recent political scru-
tiny of curricula, has further limited teachers’ ability to 
make decisions about classroom management and in-
structional strategies (Heubeck, 2023; Stanford, 2023).
 Research suggests that teachers can combat burn-
out by reducing job demands and increasing job re-
sources. One way to do this is through job crafting 
(Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001), which allows teach-
ers to customize their work environment to align with 
their skills, preferences, and values. This proactive 
approach helps buffer against burnout by promoting 
autonomy, fostering resilience, and enabling teachers 
to navigate challenges while preserving their sense of 
meaning and purpose (Van Wingerden & Poell, 2019).
 Another approach is through perceived orga-
nizational support (Eisenberger et al., 1986). The 
negative effects of burnout are mitigated when em-

ployees perceive that their organization values their 
contributions and prioritizes their well-being (Turek, 
2020). This support can come from various sources, 
such as the school district or administration, through 
measures such as open communication channels and 
formal recognition programs (e.g., Hsieh et al., 2022).
Teacher Calling Orientation
 Given the documented decrease in autono-
my and organizational support, we examine the 
role of personal resources in alleviating the neg-
ative effects of burnout. Specifically, the current 
research investigates teachers’ sense of calling as 
a potential protective factor against burnout. 
 Teaching is one of the top three professions at 
high risk for burnout alongside human services and 
health care (Maslach & Goldberg, 1998). Notably, 
the common thread among these jobs is that they are 
socially valuable and fueled by workers’ fulfillment. 
Socially valuable and fulfilling jobs are the two most 
important requirements for a calling orientation (Wrz-
esniewski et al., 1997). A calling is work that people 
feel true passion for and that brings a sense of fulfill-
ment. Calling orientation refers to someone who feels 
called to do the work they do. In contrast to a call-
ing, individuals can view their work as a job or career 
(Wrzesniewski et al., 1997). A job provides financial 
support and is based on necessity rather than passion. 
As such, it is not considered a major part of their life. 
Although a career could involve some passion for one’s 
work, the main goal is to advance within the field.
 Teaching is often thought of as a calling position 
due to its social value and potential to bring a deep 
sense of fulfillment. However, a calling orientation 
can be a double-edged sword. People who are driven 
by a passion for their work often encounter occu-
pational hazards. For teachers, these occupational 
hazards may be physical or psychological, including 
workplace violence, disease transmission, and false 
accusations (Berlanda et al., 2019). Furthermore, 
teachers are often not well-compensated. Never-
theless, teachers commonly enter the profession be-
cause they feel a calling to inspire and shape young 
minds rather than being motivated by the expected 
payout (National Society of High School Scholars, 
2020). Due to these conditions, passion can lead to 
increased rates of burnout (Vallerand et al., 2003).
 Since teaching is an occupation at high risk 
for burnout— leading to more CWBs and fewer 



42

CALLING ON BURNOUT, CWB, AND OCB

 OCBs— it is critical to explore these relationships. 
One key objective of education is to develop knowl-
edgeable individuals who can contribute to society. 
Faced with rising teacher shortages (Schmitt & de-
Courcy, 2022) and high turnover (Carver-Thom-
as & Darling-Hammond, 2017), schools may hire 
unqualified teachers, increase class sizes, or cut pro-
grams, harming student learning. Therefore, school 
administrators should nurture and recognize teachers’ 
sense of calling, as this ultimately benefits the work-
place. Even when burned out, teachers with a strong 
sense of calling are less likely to engage in CWBs.
Present Research
 Interestingly, much of the work on the behavior-
al outcomes of teacher burnout has been conduct-
ed outside of the United States (e.g., Kassandrinou 
et al., 2023). For example, a study conducted with 
both private and public school teachers in Pakistan 
found correlations between the different dimensions 
of burnout and CWBs (Makhdoom et al, 2019). 
However, the applicability of these findings may be 
limited, as teachers in the United States work longer 
hours than teachers in other countries, are paid less 
than their college-educated counterparts, and have 
experienced a steady and steep decline in wages over 
the past three decades (Schmitt & deCourcy, 2022).
 Furthermore, there is little existing literature on 
the impact of teacher’s calling orientation. Two sep-
arate studies conducted in China suggest that calling 
orientation may be a protective factor against burn-
out for university teachers (Lian et al., 2021) as well as 
for kindergarten, primary, secondary, and high school 
teachers (Zhao et al., 2022). However, neither of these 
studies directly examined CWBs or OCBs. The present 
research aims to bridge this research gap by examining 
the impact of calling orientation on the behavioral out-
comes of burnout among teachers in the United States.
 Teachers are subjected to numerous stressors in 
their jobs, which contribute to their high burnout rate 
(Maslach et al., 2001). As described above, employees 
who experience burnout are more likely to engage 
in CWBs and less likely to engage in OCBs (Turek, 
2020). To address this issue, the current study explores 
whether teachers’ level of calling orientation moder-
ates the impact of burnout (Duffy et al., 2016). Spe-
cifically, we hypothesize that calling orientation helps 
buffer educators from the negative effects of burnout.
 In the current study, we surveyed teachers across 

the United States to assess their calling orientation, 
burnout, and engagement in CWBs and OCBs, us-
ing a self-report survey with a cross-sectional design. 
Consistent with past research, we predict that teach-
er burnout will be associated with more CWBs and 
fewer OCBs, particularly among teachers with a 
low calling orientation. In contrast, we predict that 
teachers with a high calling orientation will be pro-
tected from the negative effects of burnout, which 
will result in fewer CWBs and more OCBs. In sum-
mary, we expect higher levels of burnout to be pos-
itively associated with counterproductive work 
behaviors (CWBs) and negatively associated with 
organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). Addi-
tionally, we propose that calling orientation will inter-
act with burnout to predict both CWBs and OCBs.

Method
Participants
 Participants were recruited from Prolific, an on-
line research platform known for providing high-
er-quality data and more diverse participant samples 
compared to other common recruitment methods, 
such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (Tang et al., 
2022). Prolific participants typically outperform those 
on other platforms in terms of comprehension, at-
tention, and honesty (Peer et al., 2017). Prolific’s 
pre-screeners ensured that participants were kindergar-
ten to 12th grade (K-12) teachers in the United States.
 The final sample consisted of 108 teachers (38% 
male, 58.3% female, and 3.7% non-binary). Participants 
ranged in age from 23 to 78 years old (M = 38.38, SD 
= 11.64). The sample consisted of 83.3% White or Eu-
ropean-American, 5.6% Hispanic, Latinx, or Spanish 
Origin, 3.7% Black or African-American, 3.7% Asian 
or Asian-American, 0.9% Native American or Alaska 
Native, 0.9% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 
and 1.9% Other. Participants’ length of tenure ranged 
from 1 year to 37 years (M = 10.04 years, SD = 6.76).
Procedure
 After providing informed consent, partici-
pants completed four measures through a Qual-
trics survey: calling orientation, burnout, coun-
terproductive work behaviors, and organizational 
citizenship behaviors, followed by demographic 
questions on age, gender, race/ethnicity, and ten-
ure. The measures were presented in a fixed order, 
with items randomized within each scale. Partic-



43

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM

ipants were compensated two dollars for their time.
Measures
Calling Orientation
 To determine each teacher’s level of calling, partici-
pants completed Dik et al.’s (2012) Brief Calling Scale. This 
scale consists of four questions that ask participants if they 
have found their calling or if they are searching for their 
calling. Since we were interested in the general presence or 
search for a calling, we chose the Brief Calling Scale, which 
also helped minimize participant fatigue (Dik et al., 2012). 
Sample items include, “I have a calling to a particular kind 
of work,” and “I am trying to figure out my calling in my 
career (reverse coded).” Participants rated their agreement 
with each statement on a 1 (Not at all true of me) to 5 (To-
tally true of me) Likert scale. The four items were averaged 
to determine participants’ overall level of calling (α =.79).
Burnout
 To measure burnout, participants completed the 
Maslach Burnout Inventory-Educator Survey. The 
Maslach Burnout Inventory has been validated and shown 
to be reliable across a wide range of settings and popula-
tions (Maslach et al., 1997). The 22-item inventory mea-
sures the three dimensions of burnout. Sample items 
include, “I feel emotionally drained by my work” and “I 
feel very energetic (reverse coded).” Participants respond-
ed to each statement using a 0 (Never) to 6 (Every day) 
Likert scale. The 22 items were averaged to determine 
participants’ overall level of burnout (α = .93). We also 
calculated the scores for the three dimensions of burnout.
 Emotional Exhaustion. We computed the average 
score across the nine corresponding items to determine 
participants’ level of emotional exhaustion (α = .95).
 Depersonalization. We computed the average score 
across the five corresponding items to determine partici-
pants’ level of depersonalization (α = .76).
 Reduced Personal Accomplishment. We computed 
the average score across the eight corresponding items to 
determine participants’ level of reduced personal accom-
plishment (α= .86).
Counterproductive Work Behaviors
 To measure engagement in CWBs, participants com-
pleted the 10-item Counterproductive Work Behaviors 
Checklist, which includes an equal number of organiza-
tion- and person-focused items (Spector et al., 2010). The 
short form was selected to reduce time and response bur-
den, while also aligning with the OCB measure. Sample 
items include, “Ignored someone at work” and “Came to 
work late without permission.” Participants responded to 

each statement using a 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day) 
Likert scale. The 10 items were averaged to determine 
participants’ level of engagement in CWBs (α = .79).
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors 
 To measure engagement in OCBs, partici-
pants completed the 10-item Organizational Citi-
zenship Behaviors Checklist (Spector et al., 2010). 
The short form is parallel in structure to the CWB 
measure and was also chosen to minimize partici-
pant fatigue. Sample items include, “Volunteered 
for extra work assignments” and “Lent a compas-
sionate ear when someone at work had a work 
problem.” Participants responded to each state-
ment using a 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day) Likert 
scale. The 10 items were averaged to determine par-
ticipants’ level of engagement in OCBs (α = .88).
Demographics
 Participants provided demographic informa-
tion at the end of the survey, including age, gender, 
race/ethnicity, and tenure in their current teaching 
position. Age was reported in years using a free-re-
sponse field. Gender was reported in response to 
the question, “What is your gender?” with four 
options: Male, Female, Non-binary, and Other 
(with a request to specify). Race/ethnicity was re-
ported in response to the question, “What is your 
race/ethnicity?” with the following options: White 
or European-American, Black or African-Ameri-
can, Asian or Asian-American, Hispanic, Latinx or 
Spanish Origin, Native American or Alaska Native, 
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and Oth-
er (with a request to specify). Tenure was reported 
in response to the question, “How many years have 
you worked in this role?” with a free-response field.
Analytical Approach 
 Responses were analyzed using separate multiple 
linear regressions for CWBs and OCBs. Multiple lin-
ear regression analyses were conducted to assess the 
strength and direction of continuous predictor vari-
ables (American Psychological Association, 2018). 
Specifically, calling was examined as a moderator of 
the relationship between burnout and both CWBs 
and OCBs. Each set of behaviors was predicted from 
mean-centered burnout, mean-centered calling, and 
their interaction, with significant interactions fol-
lowed up with simple slopes analyses at high and 
low levels of calling. Additionally, exploratory anal-
yses were performed to examine the role of each of 



44

CALLING ON BURNOUT, CWB, AND OCB

the three dimensions of burnout on CWBs and OCBs 
(Bernhard, 2006; Van Droogenbroeck et al., 2021).

Results
 Descriptive statistics and the interrelations 
among all the study variables are presented in Table 1.
Counterproductive Work Behavior
Overall Burnout
 The variables accounted for 17% of the variance 
in CWBs (R2 = .17, F(3,104) = 6.98, p < .001). As 
predicted, burnout was associated with more CWBs 
(b = .12, t(104) = 2.60, p = .01). However, calling was 
not associated with CWBs (b = -.07, t(104) = -1.38, p 
= .17). Additionally, the interaction between burnout 
and calling was not significant (b = -.06, t(104) = -1.46, 
p = .15), which might suggest that calling orientation 
does not moderate the effect of burnout on CWBs. 
For exploratory purposes, we repeated the same anal-
ysis with each of the three dimensions of burnout.
 Emotional Exhaustion. The variables ac-
counted for 12% of the variance in CWBs (R2 = .12, 
F(3,104) = 4.21, p < .01). Emotional exhaustion was 
not associated with CWBs (b = .04, t(104) = 1.41, p 
= .16). However, calling was associated with fewer 
CWBs (b = -.12, t(104) = -2.40 p = .02). The inter-
action between emotional exhaustion and calling 
was not significant (b = .001, t(104) = .05, p = .96), 
which indicates that the effect of calling on CWBs 
is not dependent on levels of emotional exhaustion.
 Depersonalization. The variables accounted 
for 19% of the variance in CWBs (R2 = .19, F(3,104) 
= 8.34, p < .001). Depersonalization was associat-
ed with more CWBs (b = .10, t(104) = 2.95, p < 
.01). Additionally, calling was associated with fewer 
CWBs (b = -.10, t(104) = -2.20, p = .03). However, 
the interaction between depersonalization and call-
ing was not significant (b = -.05, t(104) = -1.56, p = 
.12), which suggests that calling orientation does not 
moderate the effect of depersonalization on CWBs.
 Reduced Personal Accomplishment. The vari-
ables accounted for 17% of the variance in CWBs (R2 
= .17, F(3,104) = 6.94, p < .001). Reduced person-
al accomplishment was not associated with CWBs 
(b = .07, t(104) = 1.27, p = .21). However, calling 
was associated with fewer CWBs (b = -.11, t(104) 
= -2.16, p = .03). Additionally, the interaction be-
tween reduced personal accomplishment and call-
ing was significant (b = -.11, t(104) = -2.27, p = .03). 

 Simple slopes for the relationship between re-
duced personal accomplishment and CWBs were test-
ed at low (one standard deviation below the mean) and 
high (one standard deviation above the mean) levels of 
calling. At low levels of calling, there was a positive re-
lationship between reduced personal accomplishment 
and CWBs (b = .17, t(104) = 2.67, p = .009). How-
ever, at high levels of calling the relationship was no 
longer significant (b = -.04, t(104) = -.54, p = .59). The 
results demonstrate that high levels of calling may 
buffer against the negative effects of reduced levels of 
personal accomplishment on CWBs (see Figure 1).
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors 
Overall Burnout
 The model did not account for significant vari-
ance in OCBs (R2 = .04, F(3,104) = 1.54, p = .21). 
Contrary to predictions, the results indicated that 
burnout was not associated with OCBs (b = .01, 
t(104) = .13, p = .90). Similarly, the relationship be-
tween calling and OCBs did not reach conventional 
levels of statistical significance (b = .16, t(104) = 1.83, 
p = .07). The interaction between burnout and call-
ing was also not significant (b = -.03, t(104) = -.43, p 
= .67), which might suggest that calling orientation 
does not moderate the effect of burnout on OCBs. 
For exploratory purposes, we repeated the same anal-
ysis with each of the three dimensions of burnout.
 Emotional Exhaustion. The model did not 
account for significant variance in OCBs (R2 = .06, 
F(3,104) = 2.05, p = .12). Emotional exhaustion was 
not associated with OCBs (b = .07, t(104) = 1.28, p 
= .21). However, calling was associated with more 
OCBs (b = .21, t(104) = 2.48, p = .02). The inter-
action between emotional exhaustion and calling 
was not significant (b = -.02, t(104) = -.37, p = .71), 
which indicates that the effect of calling on OCBs is 
not dependent on the level of emotional exhaustion.
 Depersonalization. The variables accounted for 
8% of the variance in OCBs (R2 = .08, F(3,104) = 2.97, 
p = .04). Depersonalization was not associated with 
OCBs (b = .06, t(104) = 1.11, p = .27). However, call-
ing was associated with more OCBs (b = .20, t(104) 
= 2.60, p = .01). The interaction between deperson-
alization and calling did not reach conventional lev-
els of significance (b = -.10, t(104) = -1.71, p = .09), 
which indicates that the effect of calling on OCBs 
is not dependent on the level of depersonalization.
 Reduced Personal Accomplishment. The vari-



45

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM

ables accounted for 14% of the variance in OCBs (R2= 
.14, F(3,104) = 5.61, p < .01). Reduced personal ac-
complishment was associated with fewer OCBs (b = 
-.28, t(104) = -3.41, p < .001). However, calling was 
not associated with OCBs (b = -.003, t(104) = -.04, p 
= .97). Additionally, the interaction between reduced 
personal accomplishment and calling was not signifi-
cant (b = .002, t(104) = .03, p = .98), which suggests 
that calling orientation does not moderate the ef-
fect of reduced personal accomplishment on OCBs.

Discussion
 While there is extensive research on burnout, 
CWBs, OCBs, and calling orientation separately, there 
is little research that integrates the four concepts, es-
pecially in samples of American teachers. The current 
study investigated the relationship between calling, 
burnout, CWBs, and OCBs among K-12 teachers. 
Consistent with predictions, teachers who experience 
greater overall burnout engaged in more CWBs. This 
effect may be explained by levels of depersonalization, 
as teachers who felt more depersonalized engaged in 
more CWBs. Contrary to predictions, overall burnout 
was not associated with OCBs, although exploratory 
analyses revealed a significant relationship between re-
duced personal accomplishment and OCBs. Although 
not explicitly hypothesized, exploratory analyses also 
revealed that calling was associated with more OCBs 
when the dimensions of emotional exhaustion or deper-
sonalization were analyzed in place of overall burnout.
 Although we did not find strong evidence for 
the moderating effect of calling on the relationship 
between overall burnout and CWBs and OCBs, ex-
ploratory analyses of the three burnout dimensions 
provided partial support for this moderating relation-
ship, particularly between reduced personal accom-
plishment and CWBs. At low levels of calling, reduced 
personal accomplishment was associated with more 
CWBs. However, at high levels of calling, the rela-
tionship was no longer significant. The results suggest 
that even when faced with feelings of incompetence 
or a lack of achievement and productivity, having a 
calling orientation can act as a buffer against the neg-
ative effects on CWBs. Stated simply, individuals who 
are deeply committed to their profession are less like-
ly to exhibit behaviors that harm their organization 
and its stakeholders even during times of self-doubt 
or feelings of inadequacy. These findings highlight 

the potential protective role of calling orientation in 
mitigating the adverse effects of reduced personal ac-
complishment, ultimately fostering a more positive 
and productive work environment among educators.
Limitations and Future Directions
 We did not find strong support for our predic-
tions, which may be due to several limitations that 
future research could address. First, some of the es-
tablished measures used were short versions, and 
both the OCB and CWB scales were domain-gen-
eral, rather than specifically designed for educa-
tors (e.g., many items assessed behaviors towards 
coworkers rather than students). Future research 
could develop more domain-specific scales to better 
capture counterproductive and extra-role behaviors 
in teaching, directed at both students as well as co-
workers. Additionally, using the full-length versions 
of these scales may provide more nuanced insights.
 Second, we combined different types of educators 
to achieve an adequate sample size. As a result, the 
findings may have masked challenges that are unique 
to specific contexts (e.g., school districts, grade levels, 
teacher education levels). Future research could in-
clude interviews with teachers to gather more quali-
tative insights into their work environments, offering 
richer data beyond what a survey alone can provide.
 Third, our sample size was limited by the con-
straints of the Prolific platform, which had a small 
pool of active K-12 teachers. Future research could 
employ snowball sampling to recruit a larger and 
more representative sample of teachers. This ap-
proach could also improve generalizability, as finan-
cially stable educators may be less likely to partici-
pate in online crowdsourcing platforms offering low 
monetary incentives. Additionally, the sample may 
have excluded teachers who left the profession due 
to extreme burnout, potentially introducing bias 
by omitting the perspectives of those most affected.
 Finally, the current study used a cross-section-
al design, limiting the ability to draw causal con-
clusions. Additionally, all our measures relied on 
self-report, which could introduce common meth-
od bias and may have been influenced by social de-
sirability. Future research could address this lim-
itation by incorporating ratings from supervisors 
or peers alongside self-report data. A longitudinal 
approach would also be valuable to examine how 
burnout and a sense of calling evolve over time, and 



46

CALLING ON BURNOUT, CWB, AND OCB

to assess their long-term effects on OCBs and CWBs.
Theoretical Implications
 In the current research, we focus on calling ori-
entation, particularly among educators. The find-
ings have the potential to inform multiple areas 
of research, with several opportunities for future 
studies on this topic, given the gap in the literature. 
Teaching is often intertwined with a sense of calling, 
which is associated with deep passion and internal 
motivation. While some research exists on the pos-
itive effects of calling orientation for teachers, most 
of these studies have been conducted outside the 
United States (Lian et al., 2021; Zhao et al., 2022).
 The present study highlights the relationship 
between reduced personal accomplishment, calling, 
and CWBs. Specifically, teachers who experience 
a strong sense of calling may be less likely to engage 
in CWBs, even when faced with a sense of reduced 
personal accomplishment. At the same time, past re-
search suggests that such passion can be exploited by 
organizations or supervisors, potentially leading to 
increased workloads and higher burnout (Kim et al., 
2020). Therefore, we encourage researchers to exam-
ine both the beneficial and detrimental effects of a 
calling orientation (e.g., Cardador & Caza, 2012). 
Future research could explore similar relationships 
in other calling-oriented professions and further in-
vestigate the interplay between calling orientation, 
burnout, and engagement in CWBs and OCBs.
Practical Implications 
 Teachers regularly report being underpaid, over-
worked, and underappreciated. Educational insti-
tutions may attempt to address teacher burnout by 
identifying the stressors or reducing the strains of 
teaching (e.g., stress management workshops or fitness 
programs). As mentioned earlier, the job demands-re-
sources model can be used to explain teacher burnout. 
To reduce CWBs and promote OCBs, organizations 
may attempt to balance the job demands and/or job 
resources. However, the demands and resources may 
not always be amenable to change. For instance, the 
COVID-19 pandemic presented a formidable chal-
lenge for educators, and teacher pay in the United States 
continues to remain low (Marken & Agrawal, 2022).
 The current study introduces an alternative way 
for organizations to minimize the negative effects of 
burnout on the workplace by focusing on personal 
resources. To foster a calling orientation, adminis-

trators could invest in teacher recognition or profes-
sional development opportunities to actively engage 
teachers in their profession, or they could introduce 
interventions that focus on developing a teacher’s 
sense of purpose and meaning (e.g., Hackman & 
Oldham, 1976). Our results suggest that educators 
with a strong sense of calling are less likely to engage 
in CWBs, even when experiencing feelings of reduced 
personal accomplishment. Therefore, it is crucial to 
foster educators’ sense of calling to minimize engage-
ment in CWBs and promote sustained engagement 
and commitment to their work. Together, these strat-
egies would help teachers reconnect with their sense 
of purpose in the profession, while also supporting 
their physical, mental, and emotional well-being.
Building on these findings, fostering a sense of call-
ing in educators could strengthen their resilience 
and long-term commitment to the teaching pro-
fession. Connecting teachers to their sense of pur-
pose may also improve the overall school climate 
and culture. Even in the face of burnout, teach-
ers with a strong sense of calling are more likely to 
maintain professionalism and avoid behaviors that 
could disrupt students and staff. More practically, 
reigniting this passion could help reduce teacher at-
trition and further boost workplace engagement.
Conclusion
Research indicates that teachers face numerous stress-
ors and are increasingly experiencing burnout (Press-
ley, 2021). This study found that teachers’ sense of 
calling appeared to act as a buffer, mitigating the 
negative effects of reduced personal accomplishment 
on CWBs. These results suggest that a calling orien-
tation may serve as a protective mechanism against 
burnout, emphasizing the importance of nurtur-
ing teachers’ sense of purpose. These insights not 
only benefit student outcomes but also contribute 
to the overall well-being of educational institutions.

References
American Psychological Association. (2018). Multiple 

regression. APA Dictionary of Psychology. https://
dictionary.apa.org/multiple-regression

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2014). Job demands-re-
sources theory. In P. Y. Chen & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), 
Work and wellbeing (pp. 37-64). Wiley Blackwell. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118539415.wb-
well019



47

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM

Berlanda, S., Fraizzoli, M., de Cordova, F., & Pedrazza, 
M. (2019). Psychosocial risks and violence against 
teachers. Is it possible to promote well-being at 
work? International Journal of Environmental 
Research and Public Health, 16(22), 1-13. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224439

Bernhard, H. C., II. (2006). A survey of burnout 
among elementary and secondary school music 
teachers. Research Perspectives in Music Educa-
tion, 10(1), 7-13.

Cardador, M. T., & Caza, B. B. (2012). Relation-
al and identity perspectives on healthy versus 
unhealthy pursuit of callings. Journal of Ca-
reer Assessment, 20(3), 338-353. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1069072711436162

Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). 
Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what we 
can do about it. Learning Policy Institute. https://
learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teach-
er-turnover-report 

Dalal, R. S. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relation-
ship between organizational citizenship behavior 
and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of 
Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1241-1255. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1241 

Dik, B. J., Eldridge, B. M., Steger, M. F., & Duffy, 
R. D. (2012). Development and validation of 
the calling and vocation questionnaire (CVQ) 
and brief calling scale (BCS). Journal of Ca-
reer Assessment, 20(3), 242-263. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1069072711434410 

Duffy, R. D., Douglass, R. P., Autin, K. L., England, J., 
& Dik, B. J. (2016). Does the dark side of a calling 
exist? Examining potential negative effects. Jour-
nal of Positive Psychology, 11(6), 634-646. https://
doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1137626 

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & 
Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational sup-
port. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation 
through the design of work: Test of a theory. Orga-
nizational Behavior and Human Decision Process-
es, 16(2), 250-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-
5073(76)90016-7

Heubeck, E. (2023, September 20). Teacher autono-
my isn’t dead. Here’s how to achieve it. Education 
Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/teach-

er-autonomy-isnt-dead-heres-how-to-achieve-
it/2023/09

Hsieh, C. C., Chien, W. C., Yen, H. C., & Li, H. C. 
(2022). “Same same” but different? Exploring 
the impact of perceived organizational support 
at the school and teacher levels on teachers’ job 
engagement and organizational citizenship behav-
ior. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-13. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1067054

Kassandrinou, M., Lainidi, O., Mouratidis, C., & 
Montgomery, A. (2023). Employee silence, job 
burnout and job engagement among teachers: the 
mediational role of psychological safety. Health 
Psychology and Behavioral Medicine, 11(1), 1-17, 
Article 2213302. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642
850.2023.2213302

Kim, J. Y., Campbell, T. H., Shepherd, S., & Kay, A. 
C. (2020). Understanding contemporary forms 
of exploitation: Attributions of passion serve to 
legitimize the poor treatment of workers. Journal 
of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(1), 121-
148. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000190 

Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Directions for fu-
ture research. Educational Review, 53(1), 27-35. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910120033628

Lian, L., Guo, S., Wang, Q., Hu, L., Yang, X., & Li, 
X. (2021). Calling, character strengths, career 
identity, and job burnout in young Chinese 
university teachers: A chain-mediating mod-
el. Children and Youth Services Review, 120, 
1-7, Article 105776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
childyouth.2020.105776

Liang, S. C., & Hsieh, A. T. (2007). Burnout and 
workplace deviance among flight attendants in 
Taiwan. Psychological Reports, 101(2), 457-468. 
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.101.2.457-468

Litvinov, A. (2023, August 31). Why are educators still 
buying their own school supplies? NEA Today. 
https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/
why-are-educators-still-buying-their-own-school-
supplies 

Makhdoom, I. F., Atta, M., & Malik, N. I. (2019). 
Counterproductive work behaviors as an out-
come of job burnout among high school teachers. 
Bulletin of Education and Research, 41(2), 79-92.

Marken, S., & Agrawal, S. (2022, June 8). K-12 workers 
have highest burnout rate in U.S. Gallup. https://
news.gallup.com/poll/393500/workers-high-



48

CALLING ON BURNOUT, CWB, AND OCB

est-burnout-rate.aspx 
Maslach, C., & Goldberg, J. (1998). Prevention of 

burnout: New perspectives. Applied and Pre-
ventive Psychology, 7(1), 63-74. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0962-1849(98)80022-X

Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). 
Maslach Burnout Inventory: Third edition. In 
C. P. Zalaquett & R. J. Wood (Eds.), Evaluating 
stress: A book of resources (pp. 191-218). Scarecrow 
Education.

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predic-
tors of job burnout and engagement. Journal of 
Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498-512. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.498

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). 
Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 
397-422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.
psych.52.1.397

National Society of High School Scholars. (2020, June 
30). 5 ways educators can grow and sustain a pas-
sion for teaching. NSHSS. https://www.nshss.
org/resources/blog/blog-posts/5-ways-educators-
can-grow-and-sustain-a-passion-for-teaching/

Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. 
(2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms 
for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal 
of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153-163. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006

Pressley, T. (2021). Factors contributing to teach-
er burnout during COVID-19. Education-
al Researcher, 50(5), 325-327. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0013189X211004138

Schmitt, J., & deCourcy, K. (2022). The pandemic has 
exacerbated a long-standing national shortage of 
teachers. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.
epi.org/publication/shortage-of-teachers/

Schnake, M. (1991). Organizational citizenship: A 
review, proposed model, and research agenda. 
Human Relations, 44(7), 735-759. https://doi.
org/10.1177/001872679104400706

Spector, P. E., Bauer, J. A., & Fox, S. (2010). Measure-
ment artifacts in the assessment of counterpro-
ductive work behavior and organizational citi-
zenship behavior: Do we know what we think we 
know? Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(4), 781-
790. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019477

Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., 
Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality 

of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive 
behaviors created equal? Journal of Vocational Be-
havior, 68(3), 446-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvb.2005.10.005

Stanford, L. (2023, September 1). Educators feel 
growing pressure for students to perform well on 
standardized tests. Education Week. https://www.
edweek.org/teaching-learning/educators-feel-
growing-pressure-for-students-to-perform-well-
on-standardized-tests/2023/09

Tang, J., Birrell, E., & Lerner, A. (2022, August 8–9). 
Replication: How well do my results general-
ize now? The external validity of online privacy 
and security surveys. In Proceedings of the Eigh-
teenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Securi-
ty (SOUPS 2022) (pp. 293–308). USENIX As-
sociation.https://www.usenix.org/conference/
soups2022/presentation/tang

Turek, D. (2020). When does job burnout not hurt 
employee behaviours? Journal of Organizational 
Effectiveness: People and Performance, 8(1), 59-79. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-04-2020-0055

Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., Koest-
ner, R., Ratelle, C., Léonard, M., Gagné, M., & 
Marsolais, J. (2003). Les passions de l’ame: on 
obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of 
Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 756-767. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756

Van Droogenbroeck, F., Spruyt, B., Quittre, V., & 
Lafontaine, D. (2021). Does the school context 
“really” matter for teacher burnout? Review 
of existing multilevel teacher burnout research 
and results from the Teaching and Learning 
International Survey 2018 in the Flemish- and 
French-speaking communities of Belgium. Edu-
cational Researcher, 50(5), 290-305. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0013189X21992361

Van Wingerden, J., & Poell, R. F. (2019). Meaningful 
work and resilience among teachers: The medi-
ating role of work engagement and job crafting. 
PLoS ONE, 14(9), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0222518 

Walker, T. (2016). Teacher autonomy declined over 
past decade, new data shows. NEA Today. https://
www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/teacher-
autonomy-declined-over-past-decade-new-data-
shows

Weiss, L. (2020, October 20). Burnout from an orga-



49

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM

nizational perspective. Stanford Social Innovation 
Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/burnout_
from_an_organizational_perspective 

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting 
a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters 
of their work. Academy of Management Re-
view, 26(2), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.5465/
amr.2001.4378011

Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & 
Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: 
People’s relations to their work. Journal of Re-
search in Personality, 31(1), 21-33. https://doi.
org/10.1006/jrpe.1997.2162

Zhao, X., Wu, K., Sun, B., & Li, W. (2022). Teacher 
career calling reduces burnout: The mediation ef-
fects of work engagement and psychological cap-
ital. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-8. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.988467



50

Note. *p < .05. **p < .01.

CALLING ON BURNOUT, CWB, AND OCB

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for Study Variables



51

Figure 1 

Moderating Effect of Calling on the Relationship Between Reduced Personal Accomplishment and Counterproduc-

tive Work Behaviors

DAVIS, NOTARI, & SIM


