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