Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study aims to offer a review of research on the impact of leadership on shaping teachers’ subjective well-being, utilizing metadata from the Web of Science. The study utilized bibliometric analysis techniques to showcase the prominent researchers and countries, along with their collaborative networks and the field's scientific foundations. Narrative reviews of the main themes across the entire corpus and h-classics publications provided further insights into the topic. The findings indicate a consistent growth in research activity within this field over the last decade. The foundations of research in this field have been primarily rooted in educational research, psychology, management, environmental health, and health sciences. The literature consistently emphasizes the pivotal role of leadership in influencing teachers’ well-being, recognizing effective school leadership as crucial for shaping their professional experiences. Supportive leadership is particularly highlighted for fostering a positive work environment and enhancing teachers’ subjective well-being, with various leadership styles influencing overall life and job satisfaction, motivation, and mental health.

Keywords

Educational leadership school principals teachers subjective well-being bibliometric review

Introduction

The literature underscores the multifaceted importance of teachers’ well-being, not only for the educators themselves but also for the broader educational ecosystem (Viac and Fraser, 2020). Addressing teacher well-being is essential for promoting positive educational outcomes and creating a nurturing environment supporting teachers and students (Hascher and Waber, 2021). Positive teacher well-being is linked to effective teaching practices, higher student engagement, and improved academic performance (Jennings and Greenberg, 2009). Teachers with high levels of well-being are likelier to foster positive connections with their students (Pianta et al., 2012). High levels of stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout are associated with decreased job satisfaction, lower performance, and a higher likelihood of leaving the profession (Madigan and Kim, 2021; Skaalvik, 2020).

Educational leadership and the organizational context of schools significantly influence teachers’ well-being. Supportive leadership and a leader's efforts to create a positive school culture and a collaborative work environment contribute to lower stress and burnout rates and higher levels of job satisfaction (Collie, 2021; Dor-Haim, 2023; Morris et al., 2020). Leadership that empowers teachers by providing autonomy and decision-making opportunities positively impacts teacher well-being (Liu et al., 2021; Malinen and Savolainen, 2016). Leaders who prioritize and model a healthy balance between professional and personal life reduce teacher stress and burnout (Creagh et al., 2023; De Carlo et al., 2019; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009). School leaders who are emotionally competent, exhibit resilience, and provide resources for coping strategies contribute to more resilient teaching staff, positively impacting their well-being (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017; Gómez-Leal et al., 2022; Tian and Guo, 2022). Research has found that effective leadership can significantly impact teachers’ working conditions, influencing their job satisfaction, motivation, and overall well-being. A particular leadership style, such as transformational leadership, may create a supportive and motivating work environment, fostering a sense of purpose and professional development among teachers, which has been positively associated with teacher well-being (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017; Leithwood et al., 1996; Niessen et al., 2017).

This study focuses on educational leaders’ roles in improving/sustaining the subjective well-being of teachers. In this sense, teacher subjective well-being refers to the individual teacher's own assessment and perception of their overall life satisfaction, happiness, and positive and negative affectivity within the context of their professional and personal life (Diener and Ryan, 2009). It encompasses teachers’ subjective experiences, emotions, and cognitive evaluations about their work, relationships, and life in general.

Teachers’ subjective well-being encompasses their emotional and cognitive states in the workplace, comprising “positive affect,” which reflects happiness and satisfaction, and “emotional wellness,” indicating mental health and resilience (Hascher and Waber, 2021). Conversely, “negative affect” encompasses feelings of distress and dissatisfaction (Diener and Ryan, 2009). “Stress” and “anxiety” represent responses to challenging situations, while “burnout” denotes emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment due to prolonged stressors (Wang et al., 2015). “Life satisfaction” refers to overall contentment with life circumstances (Diener and Ryan, 2009). In our search, we employed these terms collectively to gain an understanding of teachers’ emotional and cognitive states, thereby presenting a holistic perspective on their subjective well-being.

This article reviews the research on the relationship between educational leadership and the subjective well-being of teachers through a bibliometric approach. Bibliometric reviews provide a systematic and unbiased method to analyze and evaluate the scientific outputs about a specific area to advance the field by revealing trends, scientific origins, and gaps (Hajar and Karakus, 2022). It is essential to scientifically map the literature on this topic to further explore and develop the field, uncovering challenges and contributions. A scientific mapping integrated with a focused review is necessary due to certain limitations and concerns identified in previous reviews:

First, the previous reviews focused on the overall well-being of teachers, reporting its antecedents and consequences from a general perspective (Acton and Glasgow, 2015; Cumming, 2017; Gray et al., 2017; Hall-Kenyon et al., 2014; Hascher and Waber, 2021; Zhang et al., 2024). While most reviews have discussed various factors associated with teacher well-being and the interventions that support it, including individual skill development and contextual influences, none have specifically delved into leadership-related factors. In examining the correlation between leadership and teacher well-being, only a few reviews targeted a specific type of leadership and adopted a highly restricted scope, thereby overlooking other leadership roles, practices, and long-term trends (e.g., transformational leadership by Meidelina et al., 2023; servant leadership by Turner, 2022). However, as scholarly contributions have amassed in this area, there arises a necessity to hone in on this particular aspect. As detailed in the methodology section, a wide array of pertinent keywords was incorporated to thoroughly encompass content associated with educational leadership and teacher well-being.

Second, despite a notable surge in publications concerning teacher well-being in recent years, Zhang et al. (2024) encompassed publications up to 2021 in the most recent review. As the Campbell Collaboration Steering Group (2014) recommended, systematic reviews should be conducted every three to four years to ensure vital updates are provided. This indicates a necessity for an updated review in this domain.

Third, prior reviews either provided a narrative depiction of the content (e.g. Cumming, 2017; Gray et al., 2017; Hascher and Waber, 2021) or a quantitative trace of the evolution of the research (e.g. Zhang et al., 2024). However, none of them combined an assessment of the overall outputs and trends with a synthesis of the thematic focuses within the corpus, along with an analysis of the most influential outputs, as we provided in the current study.

Thus, the current study makes an original contribution by providing focused narrative reviews of the h-classics publications (based on citation analysis) and the emerging themes (based on the cooccurrence of author keywords). It further presents an updated (1985–2023) quantitative description of the outputs concerning the influence of educational leaders’ roles and practices on teachers’ subjective well-being on a global scale, while also delineating potential future directions in this domain.

This study is the first to employ bibliometric analyses combined with focused reviews, providing an extensive overview of the evolution of research on this particular topic. This approach offers a more efficient and comprehensive way for the researchers to analyze and assess a higher number of publications over a more extended period with less investment of resources and time compared to scoping or systematic reviews. It also enables the researchers to evaluate the impact and quality of academic publications and research, providing a general view of this discipline's development. It covers the evolution of this research area, its thematic areas, scientific roots, gaps, and achievements. The review explores the trending topics, citation patterns, and scientific networks of prominent authors and countries that have contributed to its development.

The main objectives of this study are as follows:

To present this area's most prominent authors, countries, and sources.

To identify the patterns of collaboration among authors and countries.

To highlight and discuss the overall topical focuses of the publications in the corpus.

To shed light on prevalent research topics and impactful contributions by delineating this field's most frequently cited works.

The present study

Methods and materials

The authors obtained the metadata from the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection, which includes the Social Sciences Citation Index, the Arts and Humanities Citation Index, the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-Expanded), the Emerging SCI (ESCI), and the Book Citation Index. The researchers chose to utilize the WoS due to its data reliability and credibility, comprehensive coverage of scholarly literature across diverse disciplines, access to top-tier, peer-reviewed publications, support for citation analysis, and provision of advanced search capabilities and filtering options (Johnson and Lee, 2018; Ivanović and Ho, 2019; Mongeon and Paul-Hus, 2016). Nonetheless, the WoS does have notable limitations, including its tendency to exhibit subject coverage bias by favoring particular disciplines like engineering and natural sciences, as well as regions such as western countries, potentially impacting the comprehensiveness of bibliometric analyses (Wang and Jones, 2015). Another limitation of WoS is the underrepresentation of non-English language publications, potentially leading to language bias in bibliometric studies (Chen and Liu, 2018). Many other databases, such as SCOPUS, also exhibit similar limitations, yet despite this, WoS continues to provide valuable insights into the highest-quality publications within a specific discipline (Chavarro et al., 2018).

Search strategy

In the online database search, we searched the keywords related to leadership and teacher well-being in the “topic” field of WoS, which includes abstracts, titles, keywords plus, and author keywords. The chosen keywords aimed to comprehensively capture content related to school leadership and teacher well-being. By including variations such as “school leader,” “educational administrator,” “headteacher,” and “school principal,” we ensure a broad coverage of relevant literature. Additionally, terms like “principal leader,” “instructional leader,” “transformational leader,” “ethical leader,” “moral leader,” “servant leader,” “distributed leader,” and “shared leader” help target specific aspects and approaches to leadership. The inclusion of synonyms and related terms such as “supervisor” and “superintendent” further enhances the inclusivity of the search, ensuring a comprehensive exploration of the literature on school leadership. By including terms like “teacher,” “educator,” and “tutor,” we ensure a broad scope. Additionally, we included variations and synonyms regarding positive and negative dimensions, as well as emotional and cognitive factors, to ensure a thorough exploration of the literature on the subjective well-being of teachers. Terms like “negative affect,” “stress,” “anxiety,” and “burnout” target negative emotional aspects of well-being, whereas “positive affect” and “emotional wellness” encompass positive emotional states. The terms “well-being” and “life satisfaction” encompass broader constructs involving emotional and cognitive evaluations. To focus on K-12 schoolteachers, we excluded the publications focusing on college and university levels using the keywords of university, “higher education,” “tertiary education,” college, faculty, undergrad*, and “student teacher*.”

The following criteria guided the selection of the relevant publications: (1) Exclusion of meeting abstracts, notes, letters, news items, and proceedings to uphold the reliability and academic rigor of the sources. (2) Elimination of non-English publications due to difficulties in evaluating their relevance. (3) Inclusion of publications specifically addressing the correlation between educational leadership and teacher well-being. (4) Exclusion of those primarily focusing on peripheral aspects unrelated to the direct association between educational leadership and teacher well-being.

We completed the online search on October 3rd, 2023. The initial search yielded 534 items, but after eliminating irrelevant ones, 345 documents were concluded. Based on document types, the search produced 329 articles (including 35 early access articles and 13 review articles), 13 book chapters, and three editorial materials.

The publication count for each year is displayed in brackets: 1985 (2), 1992 (1), 1993 (1), 1994 (2), 1995 (2), 1996 (4), 1997 (1), 1998 (1), 1999 (1), 2002 (2), 2004 (1), 2006 (2), 2007 (1), 2008 (3), 2009 (6), 2010 (2), 2011 (3), 2012 (5), 2013 (4), 2014 (3), 2015 (5), 2016 (6), 2017 (12), 2018 (16), 2019 (40), 2020 (40), 2021 (66), 2022 (68), and 2023 (45). The distribution above shows that the first publications in the corpus appeared in 1985. A small number of items were published each year until 2017, after which the number of publications started to increase. Publication numbers have seen a significant increase over the past five years.

The WoS categories present the scientific foundations of publications in this field. The following is the distribution of items for each category with the number of publications: Education: Educational Research (213), Psychology: Multidisciplinary (37), Educational Psychology (31), Management (28), Public Environmental Occupational Health (27), Applied Psychology (13), Environmental Sciences (11), Social Sciences Interdisciplinary (10), Psychiatry (8), Social Psychology (5), Neurosciences (4), Psychology (1), and Urban Studies (1). Educational sciences, psychology, management, environmental health, and health sciences have been the major sources of research in this area.

Data analysis procedures

The researchers analyzed and visualized the metadata through bibliometric approaches to scientifically map the retrieved literature. VOSviewer software was employed to analyze and visualize the bibliographic data (Eck et al., 2017). We used evaluative methods and conducted in-depth analyses to assess and interpret the results (Karakus et al., 2021). Bibliographic coupling analyses presented the leading figures among authors and countries (Objective 1). The coauthorship analysis identified the patterns of collaboration among authors and countries (Objective 2). A narrative review of each cluster, extracted by bibliographic coupling of the author's keywords, was provided to highlight the main focuses of the publications in the corpus (Objective 3).

Among the evaluative methods used in the current study, bibliographic coupling contributes to understanding the data in several ways. First, it helps identify related or similar units (e.g. authors, countries, and keywords) based on their citation patterns. Units with a high degree of bibliographic coupling are assumed to be semantically related or address similar topics. This allows us to identify closely related clusters or communities within this specific field. Additionally, coauthorship analyses provide further insights into this aspect concerning the leading authors and countries. Second, bibliographic coupling is used to assess the influence and importance of the most prominent authors and countries, and the most frequently occurred keywords within this domain. Units that serve as common references for multiple other units in this analysis are considered central or influential in the field (Eck et al., 2017). Analyzing the bibliographic coupling network helps us identify the leading figures and emerging topics that have had a significant impact on the literature.

Researchers can use flexible threshold levels to visualize prominent figures and avoid presenting all items in figures that could compromise clarity (Linnenluecke et al., 2020). Therefore, the threshold levels used to visualize each figure's minimum number of units varied in the current study.

The study compared the impact of publications by countries, authors, and sources using the average number of citations, in addition to overall document numbers and citation counts. While the overall citation count is a commonly used measure to evaluate the impact of publications, the average number of citations is a more concise way to do so. This can be calculated by dividing the overall citation count by the number of publications, which provides a more accurate evaluation of impact (Eck and Waltman, 2019). The overall number of publications and citations were interpreted together with the average number of citations to provide a comprehensive view of the impact of units.

A narrative review of the h-classics was also included to outline the most cited works in this area (Objective 4). H-classics are the most cited publications that received h or more citations and are assumed to have the highest impact in a specific field (Cobo et al., 2014; Martinez et al., 2015). The h-index was 28 in the current corpus, indicating that the h-classics comprised 28 papers that received 28 or more citations. Reviewing h-classics in bibliometric studies contributes to a deeper understanding of the scholarly landscape, helps identify influential works and contributors, and informs future research directions.

Results

Leading authors and collaborative networks

The prominent researchers in this area are displayed in Figures 1 and 2. Of 1013 authors, 16 had at least five publications and 100 citations (threshold values). Among the leading authors are five from Canada, three from Hong Kong, two from Israel and Norway, and one from England, the United States, Italy, and Australia.

Figure 1.

Bibliographic coupling of authors.

Figure 2.

Information about prominent researchers (based on bibliographic coupling analysis).

Among the leading researchers, Berkovich, I. and Eyal, O. have the highest number of publications (8) and total link strength (1416), Skaalvik, E.M. and Skaalvik, S. have the highest citation count (914) and second-highest total link strength (526), Burke, R.J. has the second-highest number of publications (5) and citations (407), and Greenglass, E.R. has the third-highest number of publications (4) and citations (326).

The scores are weighted by authors’ average citation counts and the nodes are weighted by the overall citations in Figure 2. Yellow nodes illustrate the highest averages, while larger nodes show higher overall citations. Among the prominent authors, Skaalvik, E.M. (228.5), Skaalvik, S. (228.5), Fernet, C. (143.0), Greenglass, E.R. (81.5), Burke, R.J. (81.4), and Konarski, R. (68.5) have the highest average citation counts, showing that the items they published have been more frequently cited than the others.

In Figure 3, the coauthorship analysis of authors shows the collaborative networks between the most prominent researchers in this area. In the network visualization, different colors indicate the clusters of collaborating authors, and the lines’ thickness represents the frequency of their coauthorship. The first group comprises researchers from York University (Canada): Burke, R.J., Greenglass, E.R., and Konarski, R., who have five publications with high citation counts in the corpus. The second group is from Israel: Berkovich, I. and Eyal, O., who are also the most prolific authors with eight publications in the current corpus. In the third group, there are two authors from Hong Kong: Cheuk, W.H. and Wong, K.S., who have three publications in the corpus. The fourth group comprises authors from Norway: Skaalvik, E.M. and Skaalvik, S., who have four publications with the highest total citation count in the corpus.

Figure 3.

Coauthorship analysis of the authors.

Leading countries and the networks of collaboration

In Figures 4 and 5, the bibliographic coupling of countries illustrates that the United States, the People's Republic of China (PRC), England, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Canada have been the most prominent countries in the corpus. According to the results, the United States has the highest number of publications (79) and total link strength (7100). The PRC has the second-highest number of publications (44) and total link strength (5245). England and Australia follow them regarding the same criteria. Concerning the citation count, the Netherlands comes first (1103), Finland comes second (1033), and Norway comes third (950), although they have a relatively lower number of publications. The average citation values corroborate this finding as those three countries have the highest averages (Finland [147.57], Norway [95.0], the Netherlands [91.92]). In Figure 4, these three countries appear as yellowish nodes because different colors illustrate varying average citation values.

Figure 4.

Bibliographic coupling of countries.

Figure 5.

Information about leading countries (based on bibliographic coupling analysis).

The coauthorship analysis in Figure 6 illustrates the leading countries’ networks of collaboration, which is weighted by countries’ total link strengths. Different colors indicate average citations, while bigger nodes represent higher total link strengths. More frequent scientific collaborations are displayed with thicker lines. Corroborating the results of bibliographic coupling analysis, the results show that the United States (25), Germany (17), England (13), PRC (12), Switzerland (12), Australia (12), Spain (11), and the Netherlands (10) have the highest coauthorship numbers, implying their central position in the scientific collaboration networks in this field.

Figure 6.

The results of the coauthorship analysis of countries.

Topical foci

The topical foci of research in this field are displayed in Figure 7 through the cooccurrence of author keywords. Color-coded clusters in the bibliographic coupling of author keywords serve to visually represent the thematic relationships and associations between different sets of keywords. Each cluster, represented by a distinct color, indicates a group of keywords that are closely related based on their cooccurrence patterns in the literature. This visualization technique helps to reveal the underlying structure of the research landscape, highlighting common themes, emerging trends, and areas of interdisciplinary collaboration. It provides valuable insights into the distribution of research topics and facilitates a deeper understanding of the relationships between different research areas within this specific discipline.

Figure 7.

Topical focuses.

In the corpus, the most frequent keywords were teachers (43), burnout (38), stress (26), job satisfaction (26), COVID-19 (20), leadership (20), self-efficacy (16), social support (15), well-being (14), school leadership (13), transformational leadership (12), and teacher burnout (12). Burnout appears to be the most frequently studied indicator of well-being, followed by stress and job satisfaction. Studies have primarily focused on self-efficacy and social support as precursors to teacher well-being. Researchers have shown the most interest in transformational leaders among all types of leadership. In addition, many publications appeared in recent years focusing on the consequences of COVID-19 in this field.

The red cluster of recent publications delves into the impact of educational leadership on teacher well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing that teachers encountered various stressors, such as adjusting to emergency teaching conditions and grappling with workload issues exacerbated by pedagogical and technical challenges and social distancing protocols (Dor-Haim, 2023; Hascher et al., 2021). Notably, the pandemic underscored the heightened significance of educational leaders’ attentiveness, support, and responsiveness to the psychological, social, and emotional needs of both teachers and students in maintaining the well-being of the school community (Schechter et al., 2022). Furthermore, studies highlighted the pivotal role of supportive relationships between school principals and teachers in mitigating stress and burnout during the crisis, contrasting with strained relationships that resulted in reduced work expectations and burnout, thus emphasizing the critical influence of leadership on teacher well-being (Dor-Haim, 2023). Collie's (2021) research elucidated that autonomy-supportive leadership alleviated teachers’ stress and exhaustion while enhancing workplace buoyancy, whereas autonomy-restrictive leadership increased emotional exhaustion. These findings emphasize the significance of prioritizing supportive practices and avoiding autonomy-thwarting behaviors to effectively support teachers during future disruptions to schooling. Additionally, insights from Duong et al. (2023) highlighted the crucial role of school leaders’ support mechanisms, including workload management, resource provision, and technical and instructional training for distance learning, all contributing to enhancing teachers’ overall well-being amid the crisis.

Possible regional and cultural variations in these findings include differences in the availability of resources and support systems for teachers (Duong et al., 2023; Hascher et al., 2021), varying levels of government response and policies related to education during the pandemic (Collie, 2021), and cultural norms regarding autonomy, leadership styles, and the effectiveness of communication channels between educational leaders and teachers in different cultural contexts (Dor-Haim, 2023; Schechter et al., 2022). Additionally, the impact of social distancing measures and the adaptation to emergency teaching conditions may differ based on the technological infrastructure and access to digital resources in different regions or countries (OECD, 2020).

The green cluster encompasses the research on the role of educational leaders in establishing a positive culture at school, decreasing occupational stress, and improving teachers’ and students’ well-being. Morris et al. (2020) found that school leaders’ efforts to create a positive school culture characterized by supportive leadership, appraisal and recognition, participative decision-making, and professional growth improved teachers’ morale and well-being. Other research findings indicate that leaders’ efforts in creating a supportive and caring school culture in which the members of school society feel respected and positively connected improve the well-being of teachers and students (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017; Cheuk et al., 1994; 2000; Cheuk and Wong, 1995; Louis et al., 2016; Louis and Murphy, 2017; Ryu et al., 2022; Smylie et al., 2016).

The blue cluster includes studies on the influence of job demands and resources on teachers’ well-being and motivation. Teacher well-being, engagement, and motivation to stay in the teaching profession were related to teachers’ perceptions of job demands and resources at school (Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2018). Leaders' supportive behaviors, as an essential job resource, enable teachers to better deal with job demands (e.g., workload, time pressure, pupil misbehavior), decrease their stress, burnout, and disengagement, and enhance their adaptability, work engagement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment (Bakker et al., 2007; Burke et al., 1996; Collie and Martin, 2017; Collie et al., 2018; Greenglass et al., 1996, 1997, 1998; Simbula, 2010; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2018). Research evidence suggests the crucial roles of teacher self-efficacy (Dicke et al., 2018; Vera et al., 2012) and adaptability (Collie and Martin, 2017; Collie et al., 2018) as personal resources to help them manage demanding situations, in the relationship between “job demands-resources” and “teacher well-being and job outcomes.”

The yellow cluster comprises publications on the effect of school principals’ transformational leadership on teachers’ well-being and job outcomes. Research suggests that transformational leadership alleviates teachers’ burnout (Bass et al., 2016; Castillo et al., 2017; Leithwood et al., 1996; Tian and Guo, 2022; Tsang et al., 2022) and promotes their positive affect (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017), thriving (when their emotional exhaustion levels are low) (Niessen et al., 2017), work engagement (Bass et al., 2016), perceived safety and job satisfaction (Promchart and Potipiroon, 2020), and decrease their turnover intentions (Promchart and Potipiroon, 2020). The negative effect of transformational leadership on burnout is explained by the mediating effects of self-efficacy (Tian and Guo, 2022) and psychological empowerment (Tsang et al., 2022) and the moderating effect of emotional intelligence (Tian and Guo, 2022).

The purple cluster includes the research on the influence of educational leaders’ and teachers’ emotional intelligence on school climate and teachers’ self-efficacy, well-being, and job satisfaction. Findings indicate that emotions are contagious, and teachers’ emotional skills are impacted by the emotional skills of their leaders (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017). Both leaders’ and teachers’ emotional intelligence improves leadership effectiveness and promotes teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction (Gómez-Leal et al., 2022; Tian and Guo, 2022). Transformational leadership improves teacher burnout levels for those with high self-efficacy and emotional intelligence (Wong et al., 2010). School principals’ emotional intelligence is essential for effectively managing change and promoting teacher well-being during change (Tai and Kareem, 2018). Another finding shows that school principals’ emotional intelligence is crucial in creating a positive school climate (Al Shehhi et al., 2021).

The turquoise cluster presents studies on the relationship between instructional leadership and teachers’ emotions, self-efficacy, and job satisfaction. Research suggests that instructional leadership increases teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction through the mediation effects of teacher collaboration and supportive school culture (Chang et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2021). Empirical evidence shows that instructional leadership fosters a school climate characterized by mutual respect and collaborative teacher relationships, leading to enhanced self-efficacy and job satisfaction (Bellibaş and Liu, 2017, 2018)

The orange cluster shows the publications about the associations between school leadership, work intensification, and teacher well-being. The findings highlight the growing need for school leaders to provide support that addresses teacher workload and work intensification, which are detrimental to their health and well-being (Creagh et al., 2023; Swapp, 2020). Providing stronger social support (Lawrence et al., 2019; Maas et al., 2021), developing more family-supportive policies, and empowering teachers (De Carlo et al., 2019) were among the suggested remedies based on empirical research.

The brown cluster includes studies on the relationships between school leadership, working environment, teachers’ emotions, and job satisfaction. According to those studies, administrative leadership fosters a positive work environment at school and reduces teachers’ negative emotions through the mediation effect of self-efficacy (Blömeke and Klein, 2013; Jentsch et al., 2023). Other studies showed that school leaders’ empowering leadership roles positively affected teachers’ job satisfaction by creating a positive working environment and increasing their levels of self-efficacy, vigor, and affective commitment (Liu et al., 2021; Malinen and Savolainen, 2016).

Review of the h-classics publications

A citation analysis was conducted on a corpus of 347 publications. By 9 October 2023, these publications had received 4662 citations (4515 without self-citations) from WoS-indexed publications, with an average citation count of 16.23 per item. The h-index was 28, indicating that 28 papers in the corpus received a citation count of 28 or more. The authors of this article reviewed 28 h-classics publications to illuminate popular research themes and influential outputs in the field. The details of the 28 h-classics publications are listed in Table 1, including the number of citations, methodologies, samples, countries of origin, and relevant results (see Appendices A and B).

Out of the 28 h-classics papers, 24 were quantitative, three were qualitative, and 1 was a literature review. Three of the quantitative studies used a longitudinal approach. Data collection involved both educational leaders and teachers in only five studies, while the remaining studies exclusively surveyed teachers. According to the countries of origin, the papers were from Canada (6), United States (4), China (3), Norway (2), United Kingdom (2), Australia (2), Israel (2), Finland (1), Belgium (1), Hong Kong (1), Spain (1), Germany (1), Turkey (1), Norway (1), and Slovenia (1).

The relevant findings of the h-classics were classified and summarized below according to their main focuses. Support from school leaders, empowering teachers, relationship-oriented behaviors, and transformational leadership behaviors were the main focuses of the h-classics publications.

Support from school leaders

Support from school leaders is an essential job resource that helps teachers manage various job demands and is a protective factor for their work-related well-being, health, and resilience. Some researchers found that teacher efficacy is an essential mediator between leader support and teacher well-being. School principals’ autonomy-supportive and competency-supportive leadership behaviors decrease teachers’ burnout by boosting their self-efficacy (Fernet et al., 2012). Principal's support improved beginning teachers’ self-efficacy and resilience and decreased their intentions to leave the profession (Hong, 2012). Leaders’ emotional support fostered teachers’ self-esteem and feelings of accomplishment and reduced their burnout (Greenglass et al., 1998). If school leaders fail to offer adequate support in situations with high demand and low skill discretion, teachers experience low professional efficacy, cynicism, and emotional exhaustion (Wang et al., 2015). In another context, school principal's administration and collegial support were found to enhance teachers’ computer self-efficacy, leading to a reduction in technostress (Dong et al., 2020).

In some studies, certain types of leadership support, including instrumental, practical, cognitive, social, emotional, and informational, were found to mitigate teacher stress and improve their well-being. As part of principal leadership behaviors, school leaders’ social, informational, and practical support increases teachers’ efficacy and decreases their occupational stress and job burnout (Zheng et al., 2017). Leader's instrumental and emotional support reduces teachers’ stress (Kosir et al., 2022). Leaders’ informational and practical support help alleviate the adverse effects of stressors and reduce teachers’ burnout (Greenglass et al., 1996). Leaders’ cognitive and emotional support reduces teacher burnout by decreasing time pressure and increasing autonomy and positive expectations for parent interactions (Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009). Leaders’ support was invaluable in helping teachers manage demanding student interactions (Bakker et al., 2007). Similarly, Fox and Stallworth (2010) found that satisfaction with the leader's handling of violent acts moderated the association between violent acts and stress. More broadly, they found that leaders’ instrumental support positively affects teachers’ job-related affective well-being and negatively affects psychosomatic symptoms and burnout (Fox and Stallworth, 2010).

Research suggests that leader support improves teachers’ work attitudes (job satisfaction, work engagement, sense of belonging, and lower intention to leave) by alleviating their negative affect, burnout, and depression. Lack of support from school principals exacerbates teacher burnout, resulting in poor well-being, such as heart symptoms and depression (Burke et al., 1996). School leaders’ support reduces teachers’ intentions to leave by alleviating their emotional exhaustion (Leung and Lee, 2006). School leaders’ social support is a crucial job resource that reduces teacher burnout and boosts work engagement (Bermejo-Toro et al., 2016). School leader's support reduces teachers’ emotional exhaustion, depression, and negative mood while increasing their job satisfaction (Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2018). Support from school leaders increases teacher's sense of belonging and reduces emotional exhaustion, resulting in higher job satisfaction and lower motivation to leave (Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2018).

Empowering teachers

Leaders’ managerialist (bureaucratic, hierarchical, formal) approach undermines teacher autonomy, leading to reduced commitment, professional identity, self-confidence, and increased vulnerability to stress, anxiety, and depression (Skinner et al., 2021). Similarly, the management/structure of the school (including lack of participation in decision-making, bad relationships with the school leaders, and lack of head teacher support) predicts teachers’ mental ill-health, job dissatisfaction, and intentions to leave (Travers and Cooper, 1993). However, autonomy-supportive leadership was linked to stronger buoyancy and, in turn, lower somatic burden, stress related to change, and emotional exhaustion, while autonomy-thwarting leadership exacerbated emotional exhaustion (Collie, 2021). Increasing teachers’ autonomy and involvement in school policy decisions allows them to better align school tasks with their own perspectives (Van Droogenbroeck et al., 2014).

Leaders who create an enabling and trusting work environment at school affect collective teacher burnout and organizational commitment only to the extent that they build collective teacher efficacy (Ford et al., 2019). Changes in school principals’ leadership behaviors (from supportive to controlling) reduce teachers’ self-efficacy, exacerbating their emotional exhaustion (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015).

Teachers’ morale and emotional climate were closely associated with the extent to which principals took into account their input (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015). School leaders’ bureaucratic interference, which means the actions and red tape that do not care about teachers’ day-to-day problems, increase teachers’ emotional exhaustion and psychosomatic complaints (Greenglass et al., 1997).

Relationship-oriented behaviors

School principal's good relationships with teachers are a critical factor in improving the quality of school life and teachers’ life satisfaction (Cenkseven-Onder and Sari, 2009). Positive relationships between school leaders and teachers help both sides identify and mitigate the demands and pressures at work and reduce teacher burnout (Van Droogenbroeck et al., 2014). Due to school leaders’ high level of relationship-oriented behaviors, teachers’ emotional well-being increased as they were supported and their needs and welfare were promoted (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015). Experiencing mistreatment from school leaders worsens teachers’ stress, anxiety, and aggression as they struggle to manage negative emotions (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015). Teachers’ poor relationships with school leaders and colleagues lead to exclusion and loneliness among teachers, eventually resulting in burnout (Wang et al., 2015). During organizational changes, principals’ low relationship-oriented behaviors led to emotional alienation among teachers, who felt their affective needs were neglected (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015).

When school leaders prioritize teachers’ welfare, adopt a humanistic approach emphasizing self-esteem and professional development, and foster trusting, helpful, and cooperative relationships, it enhances their resilience and personal and professional well-being (Peters and Pearce, 2012). Supporting teachers’ psychological needs and promoting healthy teacher–principal interactions are crucial for preventing burnout, increasing affective commitment, and reducing their intentions to leave school (Ford et al., 2019).

Transformational leadership

School principals with emotion recognition abilities are more inclined to adopt a supportive approach toward their teachers and display transformational leadership behaviors that promote positive affect in teachers (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017). Transformational leadership mitigates burnout through a range of individual (personal goals, capacity beliefs, context beliefs, and emotional arousal processes) and organizational (job demand, social support, and organizational support) factors in school restructuring (Leithwood et al., 1996). Niessen et al. (2017) found that school leaders’ transformational leadership behaviors were linked to a decrease in thriving when teachers’ emotional exhaustion levels were moderate, while transformational leadership boosts thriving when emotional exhaustion levels were very low. In other terms, transformational leadership can induce a positive, activated affect if teachers have enough psychological resources left (Niessen et al., 2017). Teachers experience higher burnout and lower work engagement due to student violence; however, school leaders’ transformational leadership behaviors act as a job resource, alleviating the harmful effects of victimization (Bass et al., 2016).

Discussion and implications

This comprehensive overview of research on leadership and teacher well-being utilizes scientific mapping and reviews the main themes across the entire corpus and h-classics publications, incorporating metadata extracted from the WoS database. Bibliographic coupling analyses and coauthorship analyses unveiled the prominent researchers and countries as well as the patterns of scientific collaboration and the evolution of research in this area. Besides, reviews of h-classics publications and the clusters derived from the cooccurrence of author keywords analysis were conducted to investigate the key emphases of the most influential outputs in this field.

The results show that leadership and teacher well-being research has significantly grown over the past five years. It's noteworthy that the increase in the number of publications coincides with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, indicating heightened attention to this research domain during recent times.

The United States, the PRC, England, Australia, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Spain, and Israel have been the most prominent countries regarding the number of publications, citations, and strength of their collaboration networks. The leading authors were mainly from Canada, Israel, Hong Kong, and Norway and formed the most productive collaborative networks in this area. Their contributions also influenced the key thematic areas identified in the bibliographic coupling of keywords. Burke, R.J., Greenglass, E.R., and Konarski, R. (from Canada) primarily focused on the relationships between leader support, job stressors, teacher burnout, and coping responses (Burke et al., 1996; Greenglass et al., 1996, 1997, 1998). Their impactful studies underscore the significance of leader support as a job resource in boosting teachers’ self-esteem while mitigating stress and burnout, as reflected in the blue cluster. Berkovich, I. and Eyal, O. (from Israel) focused on the associations between effective leadership practices, leader–teacher relations, and teacher emotions and well-being (Berkovich and Eyal, 2015, 2017, 2018a, 2018b, 2021). Their influential publications concerning the impact of caring school culture (green cluster), transformational leadership (yellow cluster), and emotional skills (purple cluster) on teacher well-being contributed to multiple thematic areas. Cheuk, W.H. and Wong, K.S. (from Hong Kong), whose research delved into the effects of leader support and leader–teacher relationships on teacher stress and burnout, contributed to shaping the green cluster (Cheuk et al., 1994, 2000; Cheuk and Wong, 1995). Skaalvik, E.M. and Skaalvik, S. (from Norway) focused on the effect of leader support on teacher well-being, motivation, and job satisfaction (Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009; 2011, 2018, 2021). Their research influenced the blue cluster, focusing on how job demands and resources impact teachers’ well-being and motivation.

The prominence of the aforementioned countries (e.g. the United States, the PRC, England, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Spain, and Israel) and the authors within them depend on several factors. Firstly, these countries often have well-established education systems with a significant emphasis on research and development in educational leadership and teacher well-being. They have robust academic institutions and research infrastructure that facilitate extensive studies in this field. Secondly, societal changes such as increased awareness of mental health issues among educators, growing emphasis on work–life balance, and the recognition of the pivotal role of educational leaders in shaping school culture and teacher experiences have propelled research interest in this area (Tian and Huber, 2021). As societies evolve and place greater importance on holistic approaches to education and workforce well-being, the demand for studies examining the impact of educational leadership on teacher well-being has increased. Thirdly, these countries often serve as models or benchmarks for educational practices globally, leading to a greater focus on their experiences and outcomes in the literature. Researchers and policymakers from other countries may look to these nations for insights, strategies, and best practices in addressing teacher well-being through effective leadership initiatives. Overall, the prominence of these countries in the literature reflects both their contributions to research in educational leadership and teacher well-being and the evolving societal trends that shape educational priorities and policies worldwide.

The cooccurrence of author keywords featured the main topical focuses of the research in this area. The red cluster indicates that during the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers faced heightened stressors, necessitating crucial support from educational leaders; the green cluster highlights the positive impact of school leaders fostering supportive cultures, the blue cluster connects teachers’ well-being to leaders’ supportive behaviors and teachers’ personal resources, the yellow cluster associates transformational leadership with reduced burnout and improved outcomes, the purple cluster underscores the positive influence of emotional intelligence on leadership effectiveness, and the turquoise and brown clusters emphasize the role of instructional and administrative leadership in enhancing teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction.

The review of the h-classics publications provided further insights into our understanding of educational leaders’ roles in improving teachers’ well-being. These most frequently cited publications’ focuses were classified into four main categories: support from school leaders, empowering teachers, relationship-oriented behaviors, and transformational leadership behaviors. The literature shows that supportive leadership, particularly autonomy-supportive and competency-supportive behaviors, positively impacts teachers’ well-being, job satisfaction, and resilience, mitigating burnout and reducing intentions to leave. Empowering leadership enhances buoyancy and work environment alignment with teachers’ perspectives, but a managerial approach diminishes autonomy and increases vulnerability to stress. Positive relationships between school leaders and teachers are crucial for reducing burnout and improving overall well-being, while transformational leadership positively influences teachers’ affect, thriving, and engagement, depending on their psychological resources.

Overall, support from school leaders is an essential job resource that helps teachers manage various job demands and is a protective factor for their work-related well-being, health, and resilience. Research suggests that leader support improves teachers’ work attitudes (job satisfaction, work engagement, sense of belonging, and lower intention to leave) by alleviating their negative affect, burnout, and depression. In some studies, certain types of leadership support, including instrumental, practical, cognitive, social, emotional, and informational, were found to mitigate teacher stress and improve their well-being.

The prevalence of studies focusing on burnout as the primary indicator of teacher well-being, followed by stress and job satisfaction, underscores the recognition of leadership's crucial role in shaping the work experiences and quality of life of educators. Given the demanding nature of the teaching profession, burnout is a critical concern that educational leaders must address to maintain a healthy and productive workforce. High levels of teacher stress can lead to burnout if not managed effectively, highlighting the interconnectedness of workplace stressors and the need for comprehensive support systems within educational institutions. Job satisfaction is another important indicator of teacher well-being, and educational leaders play a pivotal role in creating conducive work environments, providing resources and support, and implementing policies that promote teachers’ job satisfaction. Effective leadership practices, such as providing support, fostering positive relationships, and promoting autonomy, can mitigate burnout, reduce stress, and enhance job satisfaction among teachers, ultimately contributing to a healthier and more productive educational ecosystem.

Many researchers emphasized the pivotal roles of self-efficacy and social support as mechanisms through which leadership behaviors influence teachers’ well-being outcomes. Research has consistently demonstrated that supportive leadership practices, such as providing constructive feedback, fostering a positive work environment, and facilitating professional development opportunities, can enhance teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and perceptions of social support (e.g. Bellibaş and Liu, 2017, 2018; Chang et al., 2022; Dong et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021). Consequently, teachers who feel efficacious and supported are more likely to experience lower levels of stress and burnout, and higher levels of job satisfaction, commitment, and resilience (e.g. Fernet et al., 2012; Gómez-Leal et al., 2022; Jentsch et al., 2023; Tian and Guo, 2022). By understanding the associations between those variables, educational leaders can tailor their approaches to better support teachers’ psychological and emotional needs, ultimately fostering a healthier and more productive work environment. Hence, studies in this area serve not only to illuminate the complex interplay between leadership, self-efficacy, social support, and teacher well-being but also to inform evidence-based practices aimed at enhancing teacher resilience and job satisfaction.

Conclusion and limitations

The methodology employed in this study has certain limitations. The current dataset consists exclusively of publications indexed in WoS, excluding proceedings, theses, and gray literature. The items in the corpus might have received citations from other publications not encompassed within WoS. Researchers can employ various publication types and explore additional online databases to comprehensively understand the topic. An additional constraint lies in the scope of WoS, predominantly indexing journals from English-speaking and Western countries. A limited number of items in the existing corpus were published in languages other than English and were consequently excluded from this study. A comprehensive review of publications in different languages, utilizing alternative databases, can yield more country-specific information on the subject. Despite its limitations, this study offers valuable insights that contribute to our understanding of leadership and teacher well-being research.

In conclusion, the literature consistently highlights leadership's influential role in shaping teachers’ well-being. Effective school leadership is widely recognized as a crucial factor in shaping teachers’ professional experiences and well-being. Numerous studies highlight the importance of supportive leadership in fostering a positive work environment and improving teachers’ subjective well-being. Different leadership styles and practices can either contribute to or detract from teachers’ overall life and job satisfaction, motivation, and mental health. Transformational, distributed, instructional, administrative, supportive, empowering, and relationship-oriented leadership styles contribute to positive organizational cultures, empower teachers, and enhance their ability to cope with challenges. Understanding and promoting positive leadership practices are essential for creating an environment that supports the well-being of educators, ultimately benefiting the entire school community.

Future directions

In the literature on leadership and teacher well-being, many regions, such as South America, Africa, and much of Asia, are notably absent. This absence limits our ability to characterize a universal intellectual framework and address future challenges in advancing both knowledge and research capacity, as our understanding remains largely confined to specific regions. To address this challenge, one potential approach is to establish collaborative research efforts across different societies, allowing scholars from underrepresented regions to benefit from collaborative projects and thus fostering a more balanced and comprehensive understanding of leadership and teacher well-being. However, it's important to note that while this review provides a broad overview, further investigation into the specific factors contributing to these observations is warranted in future studies.

Researchers are advised to delve deeper into understanding the underlying trends and causes driving the growth of research in recent years. There is a need to ascertain whether the surge in research activity is a temporary response to the COVID-19 pandemic or indicative of a broader recognition of the importance of educational leadership in promoting teacher well-being. Therefore, ongoing periodic evaluations are essential for understanding the evolving landscape of research in this area.

The majority of studies among the h-classics publications primarily solicited perspectives from teachers through quantitative surveys. Only a small subset of studies incorporated data collection from multiple sources, including both educational leaders and teachers, and utilized mixed-method or longitudinal designs. It is recommended that researchers employ more diverse research methodologies such as mixed-method, experimental, ethnographic, and longitudinal approaches, or employ triangulation of methods (e.g., longitudinal, observational, ethnographic) to comprehensively explore and expand upon existing evidence. Additionally, the vignette method (mixed-scenario design) (Berkovich and Eyal, 2018a) shows promise as an alternative design in situations where ethnographic and longitudinal approaches are impractical.

For practitioners, particularly educational leaders, the findings highlight the critical role they play in supporting teacher well-being. Leadership behaviors that prioritize teacher support, empowerment, and positive relationships are instrumental in mitigating burnout, improving job satisfaction, and enhancing overall well-being. Therefore, educational leaders should focus on cultivating supportive school cultures, fostering positive relationships with teachers, and adopting transformational leadership practices that inspire and empower educators.

Lastly, policymakers and educational stakeholders should consider the implications of these findings for shaping educational policies and reforms. Investments in leadership development programs, initiatives to promote positive school climates, and strategies to enhance teacher support and empowerment can have far-reaching effects on improving teacher well-being and, by extension, student outcomes. Therefore, policymakers should prioritize initiatives that prioritize leadership capacity-building and support structures that promote teacher well-being within educational institutions.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Mehmet Karakus

Mustafa Toprak

Junjun Chen

Author biographies

Mehmet Karakus currently works as an assistant professor at the Research Centre for Global Learning, Coventry University, Coventry, UK. His main research interests include emotions in educational leadership, teacher psychology, equity and equality in education, quantitative methodology, multivariate analyses, and structural equation modeling in educational research. Mehmet Karakus is the corresponding author and can be contacted at mehmet.karakus@coventry.ac.uk.

Mustafa Toprak currently works as an associate professor of educational administration at the Sharjah Education Academy in the United Arab Emirates. His current research interests include the management of emotions and behavior at schools, teachers’ roles in education reform, policymaking in centralized educational systems, and migrant education. Also, he currently serves as the regional editor for Bloomsbury Education and Childhood Studies.

Junjun Chen is an associate professor of educational administration in the Department of Education Policy and Leadership at the Education University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include teacher well-being and development, school leader well-being and development, systematic literature review, and psychometric measurement.

References

Acton

Glasgow

(2015) Teacher wellbeing in neoliberal contexts: A review of the literature. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online) 40(8): 99–114. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.441680081120104

Al Shehhi

Alzouebi

Ankit

(2021) An examination of the emotional intelligence of school principals and the impact on school climate in public schools in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 13(5): 1269–1289.

Bakker

Hakanen

Demerouti

, et al. (2007) Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology 99(2): 274–284.

Bermejo-Toro

Prieto-Ursúa

Hernández

(2016) Towards a model of teacher well-being: Personal and job resources involved in teacher burnout and engagement. Educational Psychology 36(3): 481–501.

Bass

Cigularov

Chen

Henry

Tomazic

(2016) The effects of student violence against school employees on employee burnout and work engagement: The roles of perceived school unsafety and transformational leadership. International Journal of Stress Management 23(3): 318–336.

Bellibas

Liu

(2017) Multilevel analysis of the relationship between principals’ perceived practices of instructional leadership and teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration 55(1): 49–69.

Bellibas

Liu

(2018) The effects of principals’ perceived instructional and distributed leadership practices on their perceptions of school climate. International Journal of Leadership in Education 21(2): 226–244.

Berkovich

Eyal

(2015) Educational leaders and emotions: An international review of empirical evidence 1992–2012. Review of Educational Research 85(1): 129–167.

Berkovich

Eyal

(2017) The mediating role of principals’ transformational leadership behaviors in promoting teachers’ emotional wellness at work: A study in Israeli primary schools. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 45(2): 316–335.

10.

Berkovich

Eyal

(2018a) The effects of principals’ communication practices on teachers’ emotional distress. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 46(4): 642–658.

11.

Berkovich

Eyal

(2018b) Help me if you can: Psychological distance and help-seeking intentions in employee–supervisor relations. Stress and Health 34(3): 425–434.

12.

Berkovich

Eyal

(2021) A Model of Emotional Leadership in Schools: Effective Leadership to Support Teachers’ Emotional Wellness. United States: Routledge.

13.

Blömeke

Klein

(2013) When is a school environment perceived as supportive by beginning mathematics teachers? Effects of leadership, trust, autonomy and appraisal on teaching quality. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 11: 1029–1048.

14.

Burke

Greenglass

Schwarzer

(1996) Predicting teacher burnout over time: Effects of work stress, social support, and self-doubts on burnout and its consequences. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 9(3): 261–275.

15.

Campbell Collaboration Steering Group (2014) Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: Policies and guidelines. The Campbell Collaboration.

16.

Castillo

Álvarez

Esteva

, et al. (2017) Passion for teaching, transformational leadership and burnout among physical education teachers. Revista de Psicología del Deporte 26(3): 57–61.

17.

Cenkseven-Onder

Sari

(2009) The quality of school life and burnout as predictors of subjective well-being among teachers. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 9(3): 1223–1235.

18.

Chang

Yao-Ting

Chiou

(2022) Exploring the multilevel mediation effects of teacher collaboration on the correlation between principal instructional leadership and teacher self-efficacy: Education level as a moderator. Journal of Research in Education Sciences 67(4): 35–72.

19.

Chavarro

Ràfols

Tang

(2018) To what extent is inclusion in the web of science an indicator of journal ‘quality’? Research Evaluation 27(2): 106–118.

20.

Chen

Liu

(2018) Language bias in web of science database: An investigation into Chinese research output. Journal of Data and Information Science 3(2): 16–27.

21.

Cheuk

Wong

(1995) Stress, social support, and teacher burnout in Macau. Current Psychology 14: 42–46.

22.

Cheuk

Wong

Rosen

(1994) The effects of spurning and social support on teacher burnout. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 9(4): 657.

23.

Cheuk

Wong

Rosen

(2000) Short report further efforts in validating a spurning scale for teachers. Educational Research 42(2): 219–225.

24.

Cobo

Martínez

Gutiérrez-Salcedo

, et al. (2014) Identifying citation classics in fuzzy decision making field using the concept of h-classics. Procedia Computer Science 31: 567–576.

25.

Collie

(2021) COVID-19 and teachers’ somatic burden, stress, and emotional exhaustion: Examining the role of principal leadership and workplace buoyancy. Aera Open 7: 986187.

26.

Collie

Granziera

Martin

(2018) Teachers’ perceived autonomy support and adaptability: An investigation employing the job demands-resources model as relevant to workplace exhaustion, disengagement, and commitment. Teaching and Teacher Education 74: 125–136.

27.

Collie

Martin

(2017) Teachers’ sense of adaptability: Examining links with perceived autonomy support, teachers’ psychological functioning, and students’ numeracy achievement. Learning and Individual Differences 55(Supplement C): 29–39. 2017.03.003.

28.

Creagh

Thompson

Mockler

, et al. (2023) Workload, work intensification and time poverty for teachers and school leaders: A systematic research synthesis. Educational Review: 1–20.

29.

Cumming

(2017) Early childhood educators’ well-being: An updated review of the literature. Early Childhood Education Journal 45: 583–593.

30.

De Carlo

Girardi

Falco

, et al. (2019) When does work interfere with teachers’ private life? An application of the job demands-resources model. Frontiers in Psychology 10(MAY): Article 1121.

31.

Diener

Ryan

(2009) Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology 39(4): 391–406.

32.

Dicke

Stebner

Linninger

, et al. (2018) A longitudinal study of teachers’ occupational well-being: Applying the job demands-resources model. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 23(2): 262–277.

33.

Dor-Haim

(2023) Teachers’ emotional consequences of COVID-19 pandemic in the context of their relationship with the school principal. Journal of Educational Administration and History 55(4): 481–498.

34.

Dong

Chai

Zhai

(2020) Exploring the structural relationship among teachers’ technostress, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), computer self-efficacy and school support. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 29: 147–157. 10.1007/s40299-019-00461-5

35.

Duong

Nguyen

Tran

, et al. (2023) An investigation into teachers’ occupational well-being and education leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Education 8: 1112577.

36.

Eck

Waltman

(2019) VOSviewer Manual. Universitat Leiden.

37.

Eck

Waltman

Glänzel

(2017) Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics 111(2): 1053–1070.

38.

Fernet

Guay

Senécal

Austin

(2012) Predicting intraindividual changes in teacher burnout: The role of perceived school environment and motivational factors. Teaching and Teacher Education 28(4): 514–525.

39.

Ford

Olsen

Khojasteh

Ware

Urick

(2019) The effects of leader support for teacher psychological needs on teacher burnout, commitment, and intent to leave. Journal of Educational Administration 57(6): 615–634.

40.

Fox

Stallworth

(2010) The battered apple: An application of stressoremotion-control/support theory to teachers’ experience of violence and bullying. Human Relations 63(7): 927–954.

41.

Gray

Wilcox

Nordstokke

(2017) Teacher mental health, school climate, inclusive education and student learning: A review. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne 58(3): 203–210. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/cap0000117

42.

Greenglass

Burke

Konarski

(1997) The impact of social support on the development of burnout in teachers: Examination of a model. Work and Stress 11(3): 267–278.

43.

Greenglass

Burke

Konarski

(1998) Components of burnout, resources, and gender-related differences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28(12): 1088–1106.

44.

Greenglass

Fiksenbaum

Burke

(1996) Components of social support, buffering effects and burnout: Implications for psychological functioning. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 9(3): 185–197.

45.

Gómez-Leal

Holzer

Bradley

, et al. (2022) The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership in school leaders: A systematic review. Cambridge Journal of Education 52(1): 1–21.

46.

Hall-Kenyon

Bullough

MacKay

, et al. (2014) Preschool teacher well-being: A review of the literature. Early Childhood Education Journal 42(3): 153–162.

47.

Hajar

Karakus

(2022) A bibliometric mapping of shadow education research: Achievements, limitations, and the future. Asia Pacific Education Review 23: 341–359.

48.

Hascher

Beltman

Mansfield

(2021) Swiss primary teachers’ professional well-being during school closure due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology 12: 687512.

49.

Hascher

Waber

(2021) Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000–2019. Educational Research Review 34: 100411.

50.

Hong

(2012) Why do some beginning teachers leave the school, and others stay? Understanding teacher resilience through psychological lenses. Teachers and Teaching 18(4): 417–440. 10.1080/13540602.2012.696044

51.

Ivanović

(2019) Highly cited articles in the education and educational research category in the social science citation index: A bibliometric analysis. Educational Review 71(3): 277–286.

52.

Jennings

Greenberg

(2009) The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research 79(1): 491–525.

53.

Jentsch

Hoferichter

Blömeke

, et al. (2023) Investigating teachers’ job satisfaction, stress and working environment: The roles of self-efficacy and school leadership. Psychology in the Schools 60(3): 679–690.

54.

Johnson

Lee

(2018) Evaluating the reliability of web of science data for bibliometric analysis: A comparative study with Google Scholar. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 69(11): 1437–1449.

55.

Karakus

Usak

Ersozlu

(2021) Emotions in Learning, Teaching, and Leadership: A Bibliometric Review of Asian Literature (1990–2018). Sage Open 11(1).

56.

Košir

Dugonik

Huskić

Gračner

Kokol

and Krajnc Ž (2022) Predictors of perceived teachers’ and school counsellors’ work stress in the transition period of online education in schools during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Studies 48(6): 844–848. 10.1080/03055698.2020.1833840

57.

Lawrence

Loi

Gudex

(2019) Understanding the relationship between work intensification and burnout in secondary teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 25(2): 189–199.

58.

Leithwood

Menzies

Jantzi

Leithwood

(1996) School restructuring, transformational leadership and the amelioration of teacher burnout. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 9(3): 199–215.

59.

Leung

Lee

(2006) Predicting intention to quit among Chinese teachers: Differential predictability of the components of burnout. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 19(2): 129–141. 10.1080/10615800600565476

60.

Linnenluecke

Marrone

Singh

(2020) Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management 45(2): 175–194.

61.

Liu

Yang

Huang

(2021a) How do empowered leaders influence the job satisfaction of kindergarten teachers in China? Evidence from mediation analysis. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 586943.

62.

Liu

Bellibaş

MŞ

Gümüş

(2021b) The effect of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Mediating roles of supportive school culture and teacher collaboration. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 49(3): 430–453.

63.

Louis

Murphy

(2017) Trust, caring and organizational learning: The leader’s role. Journal of Educational Administration 55(1): 103–126.

64.

Louis

Murphy

Smylie

(2016) Caring leadership in schools: Findings from exploratory analyses. Educational Administration Quarterly 52(2): 310–348.

65.

Maas

Schoch

Scholz

, et al. (2021) Teachers’ perceived time pressure, emotional exhaustion and the role of social support from the school principal. Social Psychology of Education 24(2): 441–464.

66.

Madigan

Kim

(2021) Towards an understanding of teacher attrition: A meta-analysis of burnout, job satisfaction, and teachers’ intentions to quit. Teaching and Teacher Education 105: 103425.

67.

Malinen

Savolainen

(2016) The effect of perceived school climate and teacher efficacy in behavior management on job satisfaction and burnout: A longitudinal study. Teaching and Teacher Education 60: 144–152.

68.

Martinez

Herrera

Contreras

, et al. (2015) Characterizing highly cited papers in social work through h-classics. Scientometrics 102(2): 1713–1729.

69.

Meidelina

Saleh

Cathlin

, et al. (2023) Transformational leadership and teacher well-being: A systematic review. Journal of Education and Learning 17(3): 417–424.

70.

Mongeon

Paul-Hus

(2016) The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106(1): 213–228. 1007/s11192-015-1765-5.

71.

Morris

Lummis

Lock

, et al. (2020) The role of leadership in establishing a positive staff culture in a secondary school. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 48(5): 802–820.

72.

Niessen C, Mäder I, Stride C and Jimmieson NL (2017) Thriving when exhausted: The role of perceived transformational leadership. Journal of Vocational Behavior 103: 41–51. 10.1016/j.jvb.2017.07.012

73.

OECD (2020) Education in the Time of COVID-19. OECD Publishing.

74.

Pianta

Hamre

Allen

(2012) Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In Christenson

Reschly

Wylie

(eds) Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Boston: Springer, pp. 365–386.

75.

Promchart

Potipiroon

(2020) Transformational leadership and turnover intentions among school teachers in the deep south of Thailand. The Journal of Behavioral Science 15(2): 16–37.

76.

Peters

Pearce

(2012) Relationships and early career teacher resilience: A role for school principals. Teachers and Teaching 18(2): 249–262.

77.

Ryu

Walls

Seashore Louis

(2022) Caring leadership: The role of principals in producing caring school cultures. Leadership and Policy in Schools 21(3): 585–602.

78.

Schechter

Da’as

Qadach

(2022) Crisis leadership: Leading schools in a global pandemic. Management in Education. Epub ahead of print

79.

Simbula

(2010) Daily fluctuations in teachers’ well-being: A diary study using the job demands resources model. Anxiety Stress and Coping 23(5): 563–584.

80.

Skaalvik

(2020) Self-efficacy for instructional leadership: Relations with perceived job demands and job resources, emotional exhaustion, job satisfaction, and motivation to quit. Social Psychology of Education 23(5): 1343–1366.

81.

Skaalvik

(2009) Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education 25(3): 518–524.

82.

Skaalvik

(2018) Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Social Psychology of Education 21(5): 1251–1275.

83.

Skinner

Leavey

Rothi

(2021) Managerialism and teacher professional identity: Impact on well-being among teachers in the UK. Educational Review 73(1): 1–16.

84.

Smylie

Murphy

Louis

(2016) Caring school leadership: A multidisciplinary, cross-occupational model. American Journal of Education 123(1): 1–35.

85.

Swapp

(2020) Principal leadership and prioritizing equity in an era of work intensification: Must wellbeing be sacrificed? Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy 192: 52–59.

86.

Tai

Kareem

(2018) The relationship between emotional intelligence of school principals in managing change and teacher attitudes towards change. International Journal of Leadership in Education 22(4): 469–485.

87.

Tian

Guo

(2022) How does transformational leadership relieve teacher burnout: The role of self-efficacy and emotional intelligence. Psychological Reports. 127(2): 936–956.

88.

Tian

Huber

(2021) Mapping the international knowledge base of educational leadership, administration and management: A topographical perspective. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 51(1): 4–23.

89.

Tsang

Teng

(2022) Transformational leadership, teacher burnout, and psychological empowerment: A mediation analysis. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 50(1): 1–11.

90.

Travers

Cooper

(1993) Mental health, job satisfaction and occupational stress among UK teachers. Work and Stress 7(3): 203–219.

91.

Turner

(2022) Servant leadership to support wellbeing in higher education teaching. Journal of Further and Higher Education 46(7): 947–958.

92.

Van Droogenbroeck F, Spruyt B and Vanroelen C (2014) Burnout among senior teachers: Investigating the role of workload and interpersonal relationships at work. Teaching and Teacher Education 43: 99–109.

93.

Vera

Salanova

Lorente

(2012) The predicting role of self-efficacy in the job demands-resources model: A longitudinal study. Estudios de Psicología 33(2): 167–178.

94.

Viac

Fraser

(2020) Teachers’ well-being: A framework for data collection and analysis. OECD Education Working Papers, Report no. 213.

95.

Wang

Jones

(2015) Investigating subject coverage bias in web of science: A case study of multidisciplinary databases. Journal of Information Science 41(6): 765–778.

96.

Wang

Ramos

Liu

Yang

Wang

(2015) Relationship between occupational stress and burnout among Chinese teachers: A cross-sectional survey in Liaoning, China. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 88: 589–597.

97.

Wong

Peng

(2010) Effect of middle-level leader and teacher emotional intelligence on school teachers’ job satisfaction: The case of Hong Kong. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 38(1): 59–70.

98.

Zhang

Chen

, et al. (2024) A scope review of the teacher well-being research between 1968 and 2021. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 33: 171–186.

99.

Zheng

Chen

Loeb

(2017) What aspects of principal leadership are most highly correlated with school outcomes in China? Educational Administration Quarterly 53(3): 409–447. 10.1177/0013161X17706152

Demystifying the impact of educational leadership on teachers’ subjective well-being: A bibliometric analysis and literature review

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

The present study

Methods and materials

Search strategy

Data analysis procedures

Results

Leading authors and collaborative networks

Leading countries and the networks of collaboration

Topical foci

Review of the h-classics publications

Support from school leaders

Empowering teachers

Relationship-oriented behaviors

Transformational leadership

Discussion and implications

Conclusion and limitations

Future directions

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Author biographies

References