Next Article in Journal
Classroom-Situated Willingness to Communicate: Student Teachers of EFL in Spain
Next Article in Special Issue
Antecedents Predicting Students’ Active Use of Learning Strategies in Schools of Low SES Context within the Framework of Self-Determination Theory
Previous Article in Journal
Psychological Distress Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Protective Role of Hope
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Volunteer Satisfaction Survey (VSS): Adaptation and Psychometric Properties among Portuguese Volunteers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
EJIHPE
Volume 13
Issue 1
10.3390/ejihpe13010006
ejihpe-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Teachers’ Stress during Pandemic Remote Working: A Moderated Mediation Model

by
Calogero Iacolino
1,
Brenda Cervellione
1,
Rachele Isgrò
1,
Ester Maria Concetta Lombardo
1,
Giuseppina Ferracane
1,
Massimiliano Barattucci
2,* and
Tiziana Ramaci
1
1
Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Kore University of Enna, 94100 Enna, Italy
2
Department of Human and Social Sciences, University of Bergamo, 24129 Bergamo, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13(1), 81-95; https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13010006
Submission received: 8 November 2022 / Revised: 9 December 2022 / Accepted: 18 December 2022 / Published: 3 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in the Study of Coping, Emotional Regulation, Prosocial Behavior, and Other Indicators of Psychological Well-Being)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
During the COVID-19 pandemic, in adapting to social and work changes and new technological methods for remote teaching, teachers were subjected to increased work pressure, which affected their well-being and led to increased negative stress and burnout. This study was designed to test whether dysfunctional outcomes resulting from adapting to new ways of teaching via technological tools can be mitigated by the protective factors of emotional intelligence and metacognition. The study involved 604 teachers in Sicily filling out a questionnaire consisting of four different scales: (1) the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SREIT); (2) the Metacognitive Functions Screening Scale (MFSS-30); (3) the Link Burnout Questionnaire (LBQ); and (4) the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale STSS-I. The results show that emotional intelligence mediates the relationship between certain remote work risk factors, as well as stress and burnout. In addition, metacognition was found to be a significant moderating factor in the relationship between risk factors and emotional intelligence. With regard to the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 Goals, our results emphasize the importance of teachers’ emotional and metacognitive skills in promoting quality of life and psychological well-being.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated psychological distress in a variety of working environments, including education. The literature [1,2] has shown that teachers accumulated various symptoms of negative stress and burnout [3] attributable to the introduction of governmental lockdown measures in Italy. Great concern emerged regarding the effects of the unprecedented online teaching situation [4], with remote work seen as a determining factor in the increase of psychological and clinical symptoms [5,6,7]. Indeed, being forced to quickly adapt to new ways of working, including hybrid and remote teaching [8,9,10], has been associated by teachers with increased levels of stress [11]. Such new stressors, which may lead to burnout, have only added to the fear generated by COVID-19, affecting almost all people in society [12,13].
According to the current psycho–physiological definition, stress is a notable, persistent condition in which an organism is exposed to risk factors that tend to alter its self-regulating balance, or homeostasis, which thus affects both individual and group healthy behaviors [14]. The consequences of stress and psychophysical exhaustion are various, and, in the teaching profession, may include significant professional setbacks, work absences, and reduced efficiency in class control and class work [15,16,17] and may even lead to abandoning the profession entirely [18,19,20]. Thus, stress represents a significant risk factor in the job satisfaction of teachers [21]. However, certain protective factors, such as emotional intelligence and metacognition, may help mitigate the effects of stress on teachers.
According to the theoretical model of Salovey and Mayer [22], emotional intelligence (EI) in teachers is: (1) the ability to be self-aware of one’s emotions and to be able to identify them; (2) the ability to distinguish among various types of emotions; (3) the ability to comprehend and analyze one’s emotions; and (4) the ability to regulate emotions in oneself and in others. Such abilities are thought to constitute a protective factor in the management of educational activities, occupational stress, and personal exhaustion [23,24,25,26,27]. It has been shown [28] that teachers with high levels of emotional intelligence are more able to adapt to different personal life contexts, whether social or professional. On the other hand, low levels of emotional intelligence are correlated with psychopathological consequences such as stress, distress, and burnout [29]. It is therefore fundamental to complete everything possible to help teachers learn to regulate their emotions, particularly at the teacher training stage [28], in order to boost their cognitive, emotional, and social skills.
Another important protective factor in the work of teachers is metacognition (MC). This is defined as an aspect of the elaboration of information that controls, interprets, evaluates, and regulates content, all cognitive processes, and their organization [30]. It is an awareness that allows one to control one’s own cognitive processes, favoring the ability to learn, remember, identify, and solve problems [31]. This ability allows one to give meaning to one’s experience through a mental procedure and to understand oneself and others in terms of mental states, such as feelings, convictions, intentions, and desires, and to reflect on one’s own behaviors and those of others [30].
Since many empirical and theoretical contributions concur that such protective factors can have a positive effect on work performance, productivity, and relationships, it is important to further understand their practical relevance in terms of healthy behavioral outcomes and occupational health and well-being [32]. It is thus with the aim of investigating the effects of EI and MC as protective factors on remote working stressors in particular and on health outcomes that this correlational research involving teachers was designed.

2. Literature Background

From March 2020, Italian teachers had to face many changes to their work activities, potentially leading to an increase in the perception of work stressors and the intensity teachers attribute to such stressors, making them even more prone to risks of maladjustment. Klapproth et al. [33] found that, on average, German teachers experienced moderately high levels of stress due to a lack of adequate technological equipment and internet connectivity, an excessive workload, and student demotivation, as both internal and external obstacles made remote teaching work difficult. In Argentina, Vargas Rubilar and Oros [34] described, among pandemic remote teaching occupational risks, there were five main stressors: (1) the work environment and work overload; (2) relationships with students; (3) conflict and role ambiguity; (4) organizational aspects of the educational institution; and (5) the use of new technologies. Concerning the latter stressor, the Confederation of Educational Workers of the Argentinean Republic [35] found that a high percentage of teachers reported not having adequate technological resources, nor a comfortable, isolated place to work from at home. Another consequence of remote working in the educational sector is the increased time devoted to online teaching [36]. Finally, other significant difficulties experienced by teachers are a lack of support among colleagues, poor coordination, and difficulties in teamwork [34].
Based on the empirical literature, the main remote working risk factors for teachers identified for this study were (1) a lack of adequate IT tools of exclusive use for online teaching; (2) a lack of computer skills in the use of online educational platforms; (3) a lack of an adequate place of exclusive use for online teaching; (4) a lack of IT skills and time for adapting to online teaching methods; (5) difficulties in managing the class during online teaching; and (6) difficulties in terms of coordination and support among colleagues. In view of such risk factors concerning remote working, the aim of this research was, therefore, to study two factors that play a protective role against burnout risk in teachers [3,13,25,27,30,37], namely emotional intelligence and metacognition.

The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Relation to Teacher Stress and Burnout

The stressful experience of teachers having to work remotely is a widespread phenomenon of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, recent reports on teachers’ emotions have reported a range of associated unsatisfactory social relationships with adults, including colleagues, headmasters, parents, and inspectors, arousing hostile emotions in teachers and constituting a source of stress in teaching [38]. Furthermore, teacher stress has been seen as a response to negative organizational factors and teaching aspects being perceived as a threat to physical and psychological well-being [39].
The experience of a stressful teaching work environment also has clinical implications for burnout syndrome. Burnout has been defined as “a psychological syndrome emerging as a prolonged response to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job” [40] (p. 103) and, therefore, as an occupational psychological syndrome [41,42,43], often affecting medical professionals, teachers, police officers, army soldiers, and many other professionals [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53]. Certain studies have detected relationships between burnout and EI [54,55], as an important personal resource that can facilitate effective emotion regulation [56] and play a crucial role in teachers’ occupational well-being models [57]. Indeed, the literature seems to confirm that EI is a protective factor, since low levels of EI tend to be correlated with burnout [58] and psychological distress [59]. Furthermore, some authors argue that teachers’ perceptions of their own abilities to manage stress and influence effective emotional regulation [60]. Recently, studies have also shown that EI correlates with greater job satisfaction [61], and with greater satisfaction in teaching in particular [62]. According to some moderation models [54,63], teachers with high EI can better manage anger and frustration, while those with low EI levels experience increased tension in the student–teacher relationship [64]. Similarly, one study [59] has shown that teachers with low EI feel they are unable to cope with perceived stress in the workplace and, therefore, report professional ineffectiveness.
EI has been shown to have a statistically significant negative correlation with teacher burnout, with variables such as gender and age not appearing to have a moderating role in this correlation [65]. However, other studies [1] have identified sex differences in the experience of burnout, with female teachers in particular experiencing significantly greater emotional exhaustion and lower job fulfillment than men, who tend instead to experience depersonalization. Some research [29] shows that younger female teachers are more at risk of developing burnout than older teachers, while another study points out that younger teachers are more motivated and enthusiastic about their work than older teachers [28]. In any case, there is clear supportive evidence of a relationship between EI, perceived stress, and teacher burnout [66], with more effective emotional regulation acting as a moderating factor in managing perceived stress and preventing burnout.
MC, on the other hand, has been shown by a large body of literature to relate to symptoms of stress, anxiety, or depression [31], with one study, [30], showing that dysfunctional metacognition and metacognitive strategies negatively influence emotions and can predict traumatic stress symptoms. Dysfunctional beliefs and convictions about one’s own mental processes can have an impact on behavioral and cognitive responses by influencing perceived stress and emotions [67]. Individuals who believe that their thoughts influence reality in both positive and negative ways are more likely to use metacognitive strategies for regulating emotions and thinking in relation to perceived stress. Indeed, teachers with good metacognitive and emotional skills have been observed to respond more productively during particularly stressful situations by showing greater resilience to stressors [68,69]. The construct of MC can be a particularly important factor in school contexts, as a greater perceived awareness of one’s own metacognitive processes can produce significant effects in preventing clinical symptoms such as burnout and promote the cognitive, physical, and psychological well-being of the teacher [70,71]. Notwithstanding, the results of one study, [72], investigating gender differences found no statistically significant differences between the metacognitive awareness of male and female teacher trainees.
High levels of EI and MC thus help ensure teachers can interact effectively with both their colleagues and students [1]. Accordingly, a society that fails to adequately prepare teachers to adopt such self-care strategies not only risks sacrificing teachers’ well-being and increasing burnout, but also inhibits the development of a positive class climate, good class management, and healthy interpersonal relationships [72].

3. Study Aims and Hypotheses

In response to the above-described literature, this study aims to verify whether the dysfunctional outcomes deriving from the need to adapt to new teaching methods that make use of technological instruments can be mitigated by EI and MI as protective factors. Thus, the following hypotheses were proposed.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Remote work teaching risk factors are positively related to the negative outcomes of burnout and stress.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Emotional intelligence mediates the relationship between remote work teaching risk factors and negative outcomes of burnout and stress.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Metacognition moderates the relationship between remote work teaching risk factors and emotional intelligence.
The conceptual model of these hypotheses is depicted in Figure 1.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Sample and Procedure

An online questionnaire was administered between April 2020 and December 2020 to 604 Sicilian teachers, who were mostly women (N = 458; 75.8%), were mostly married (N = 377; 62.4%), had an average age of 47.38 years (SD = 9.57), were working in primary (N = 401; 66.4%) and elementary schools (N = 203; 33.6%), and had been doing so for an average of 16.36 (SD = 10.48) years.
All participants gave written informed consent before completing the questionnaire, and all procedures in the present study were performed in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration, as amended, and/or comparable ethical standards. Furthermore, the Internal Review Board (IRB) of the Faculty of Human and Social Sciences of Kore University of Enna approved the research under protocol number UKE-IRBPSY-04.20.ADD1.

4.2. Measures

This study was conducted by incorporating the following scales into the questionnaire:
(1)
Remote work teaching risk factors were measured using an ad-hoc scale of six pandemic-time remote work teaching risk factors identified in the literature [33,34,35,36], with each factor measured via a 4-point Likert scale from 0 (no risk) to 3 (high risk). These risk factors were (1) a lack of adequate IT tools of exclusive use for online teaching; (2) a lack of computer skills in the use of online educational platforms; (3) a lack of an adequate place of exclusive use for online teaching; (4) a lack of IT skills and time for adapting to online teaching methods; (5) difficulties in managing the class during online teaching; and (6) difficulties in terms of coordination and support among colleagues. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was calculated as = 0.90.
(2)
The Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SREIT) [73,74] is a self-report instrument designed to measure the emotional skills according to Salovey and Mayer’s Emotional Intelligence (EI) model [75]. The SREIT examines 33 self-report items (e.g., “Emotions are one of the things that make my life worth living” and “Some of the major events of my life have led me to re-evaluate what is important and not important”) using a 5-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was calculated as = 0.89.
(3)
The Metacognitive Functions Screening Scale (MFSS-30) [76] consists of 30 items measuring four skills: (1) the ability to recognize one’s own emotional states and those of others (ARE) (e.g., “I often don’t know which adjective to use to describe an emotion of mine” and “There are times when I feel weird, but I don’t understand the kind of feeling I’m having”); (2) the ability to recognize causal relationships (ARC) (e.g., “I had conflicts with people close to me, because they did not feel understood by me” and “The others judge me an impulsive person who does not care about the consequences of my own actions on others, though I do not realize”); (3) the ability to decenter, that is, to distance oneself from aspects of a situation (AD) (e.g., “I often find myself unable to ‘tune in’ with the emotions felt by the people I come into contact with” and “I usually understand very well what a person wants to tell me and his true intentions, regardless of appearances or what he says”); and (4) the ability to ponder situations and problems (AP) (e.g., “When something important happens to me, I usually go over every detail in my mind in order to understand the reasons that behind it” and “When dealing with important or delicate situations, I always try to value previous experiences in order to avoid negative consequences”). The response-scale range has 4 points, from 0 (absolutely false) to 3 (absolutely true). The original coefficient alpha for the scale was 0.79 for ARE, 0.71 for ARC, 0.78 for AD, and 0.70 for AP. The coefficient alpha for the scale used in this study was 0.84 for ARE, 0.86 for ARC, 0.90 for AD, and 0.88 for AP, with a total coefficient alpha value of 0.82.
(4)
The Link Burnout Questionnaire (LBQ) [77] measures professional burnout in teachers and others professionals of the helping professions via four sub-scales (with six items each): (1) psychophysical exhaustion (e.g., “I feel physically exhausted from my work” and “During work I feel under pressure”); (2) deterioration of relations with users (e.g., “Compared to other facilities I seem to work with difficult users” and “Users seem ungrateful to me”); (3) job ineffectiveness (e.g., “I feel inadequate in dealing with the problems of my users” and “I feel that my skills are not enough to deal with the unexpected”); and (4) disappointment (e.g., “I think that, if I could start over, I would choose another profession” and “I doubt what I do has any value”). The response scale is a 6-point Likert, from 1 (never) to 6 (every day). The original coefficient alpha was 0.77 for psychophysical exhaustion, 0.69 for deterioration of relations with users, 0.68 for job ineffectiveness, and 0.85 for disappointment. The coefficient alpha for the scale used in this study was 0.90 for psychophysical exhaustion, 0.90 for deterioration of relations with users, 0.90 for job ineffectiveness, and 0.91 for disappointment, with a total coefficient alpha value of 0.96.
(5)
The Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale STSS-I [78,79] investigates indirect reactions to traumatic experiences using a 15-item Likert scale, from 1 (never) to 5 (every often). The original version consists of 17 items. In the Italian version, items 12 and 13 have been removed because they were not normally distributed. STSS-I has two sub-scales: (1) arousal (AR) (e.g., “I felt emotionally numb” and “I felt easily irritable”); and (2) intrusion (IN) (e.g., “My heart beat faster when I thought of my work with the victims” and “I felt like I was reliving the traumas experienced by the victims”). The original coefficient alpha was 0.87 for AR and 0.81 for IN. In this study, the coefficient alpha was 0.91 for AR and 0.63 for IN, with a total coefficient alpha value of 0.59.
(6)
An ad hoc Socio-Demographic Questionnaire was used, via which participants were asked to provide additional information on socio-demographic characteristics, such as age, gender, marital status, seniority, and teaching subject.

4.3. Data Analysis

The difference between groups in terms of the outcome levels for each of the remote work risk factors were tested via t-tests, while the effect of socio-demographic variables was analyzed via independent sample t-tests, ANOVA, and correlational analysis, using IBM SPSS 22.0.
Two moderated mediation model analyses were conducted to test whether the effect of remote work risk factors (as independent variables) on outcomes (the dependent variables of burnout and secondary traumatic stress) was mediated by emotional intelligence with meta-cognition acting as a moderator between the risk factors and emotional intelligence (PROCESS Model Number 7, with 5000 re-samplings) [80].
Using a single questionnaire for all variables with numerous single-item measures, the common method variance was considerably limited, as per the literature on common method biases in behavioral research [81]. In addition, the different scales were randomly inserted into the questionnaire and were graphically separated from each other. Finally, different scale endpoints and formats for the measures were used in order to further mitigate method biases attributable to commonalities in scale endpoints and anchoring effects.

5. Results

Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure there was no violation of the assumption of normality, linearity, and multicollinearity. Multivariate outliers were identified using the Mahalanobis distance, and the sample was reduced to 604 subjects.
No correlations between age or seniority and any of the other sociodemographic variables with any of the measured variables were found. Furthermore, no gender differences were found for any of the measured variables.
Independent sample t-tests revealed significant differences in the negative outcomes (burnout and stress) between individuals belonging to the group with an absence of the risk (risk level = 0) or presence of the risk (risk level = 2–3) regarding each remote teaching risk factor (see Table 1).
The correlations among the measured variables and descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2.
In order to test the research hypotheses (i.e., whether the effect of remote work risk factors on outcomes is mediated by emotional intelligence, with metacognition acting as a moderator), two moderated mediation model analyses (PROCESS Model Number 7, Figure 1) were calculated.
With burnout as the dependent variable, the overall equation was significant, R2 = 0.71, F (3, 600) = 713.9, p < 0.001, while the direct effect of the remote work risk factors on burnout was slightly significant, and the indirect effect on burnout through emotional intelligence was significant and moderated by metacognition (R2 change = 0.01, F (1, 600) = 21.58, p < 0.000) (Figure 2). The mediation effect of the relationship between risk factors and burnout was significant for low levels of metacognition (t = −5.28, p < 0.000; LL = −0.459; UL = −2.10), significant for medium levels (t = −2.34; p < 0.019; LL = −1.42; UL = −0.12), and not significant for high levels of metacognition (t = 1.24; n.s.; LL = −0.32; UL = 1.43).
With stress as the dependent variable, the overall equation was significant, R2 = 0.23, F (3, 600) = 89.42, p < 0.001, while the direct effect of remote work risk factors on stress was slightly significant, and the indirect effect on stress through emotional intelligence was significantly moderated by metacognition (R2 change = 0.01; F (1, 600) = 21.58; p < 0.000) (Figure 3). The mediation effect of the relationship between the risk factors and stress was significant for low levels of metacognition (t = −5.28; p < 0.000; LL = −0.459; UL = −2.10), significant for medium levels (t = −2.34; p < 0.019; LL = −1.42; UL = −0.12), and not significant for high levels of metacognition (t = 1.24; n.s.; LL = −0.32; UL = 1.43). Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the conditional effect of the remote work risk factors on the different outcomes mediated by metacognition and moderated by emotional intelligence.

6. Discussion

The aim of the present study was to analyze whether the dysfunctional outcomes of burnout and stress due to the need to adapt to new teaching methods via remote work technological instruments can be mitigated by emotional intelligence and metacognition as protective factors.
The literature [21,28,29,30] suggests that certain risk factors associated with remote teaching (lack of a dedicated and exclusive PC, unfamiliarity with IT platforms, lack of an exclusive place for remote teaching, the need to adapt to new online teaching methods, difficulties in class management, difficulties in coordination with colleagues) may correlate with emotional intelligence, metacognition, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress.
In this study, correlation analyses confirmed a statistically significant positive correlation (p < 0.001) between the considered risk factors and burnout, along with a further statically significant positive correlation (p < 0.01) with secondary traumatic stress. This indicates that, in the presence of the risk factors considered in this study, teachers are more likely to experience burnout and stress. Conversely, the risk factors showed a statistically significant negative correlation (p < 0.001) with emotional intelligence and metacognition; although the presence of the risk factors decreased the effect of the protective factors of emotional intelligence and metacognition, as suggested by the literature [17,43,66,72].
Based on these results, two moderated mediation analysis models were hypothesized: one model with burnout as an outcome and one model with stress as outcome. In the first model, the direct relationship between the effects of risk factors on burnout was found to be mediated by emotional intelligence. Moreover, metacognition was found to moderate the relationship between the effect of risk factors on emotional intelligence. This suggests that if a teacher possesses high levels of emotional intelligence and has hypothesized the risk factors, their emotional intelligence decreases the likelihood of burnout [29,43,54,55]. In our model, the mediation effect of the relationship between risk factors and burnout was statistically significant for low levels of metacognition, significant for medium levels, and not significant for high levels. This relationship was tested again in the second model, but with the outcome of secondary stress. The mediation effect of the relationship between risk factors and stress was thus found to be statistically significant for low levels of metacognition, significant for medium levels, and not significant for high levels. Our models are, therefore, in agreement with studies investigating the relationship between burnout and emotional intelligence [54,55]. Indeed, EI is believed to play a crucial role in teachers’ occupational health models [57], and its mediating role has been confirmed by other studies [58,59] that suggest that the protective factors of emotional intelligence and metacognition help prevent the emergence of clinical symptoms.
The literature [54,63] regarding the teaching profession is in accordance with our moderation–mediation models, which confirm that high EI levels mediate the relationship between risk factors, burnout, and stress [64,82]. Several studies [31,68,69] that explore the relationship of metacognition with stress report its moderating function, while others suggest that metacognitive strategies can predict traumatic stress symptoms and burnout syndrome [52,53], and these two aspects are confirmed by our study.
With regard to Target 4.7 of the United Nation’s Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development 4.7 Goals, these results highlight the need to re-think educational models for adequate teacher training, with repercussions for the quality of education, psychological well-being, and the future development of teachers’ professional careers [32,39,57,70,83].

Limitations and Future Directions

The current study has certain limitations that should be considered in future research. First, the study is limited in terms of sample characteristics. A larger sample would have provided a more complete picture of the causes of stress, the role of teachers’ stress protective factors in remote working, and possible interventions. Even if the sample is completely in line with the average age and seniority of the population, problems of external validity should be considered in light of the differences between Italian teachers and those in other geographical contexts, where the average age and seniority are generally lower. There is little doubt that these factors could play a role in some of the measured variables. Second, future research should include a more detailed analysis of contextual factors, such as the school leader’s leadership role and the collaborative climate among colleagues [84,85], in order to better understand how teachers’ evaluations of internal support may depend on the quality of the work environment. Third, longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether internal and external support available to teachers determines and/or influences their emotional intelligence. The results of this study should, therefore, be considered to be a preliminary assessment for a larger intervention study to evaluate potential prevention programs that can be implemented for stressed teachers [21,29,40,67,86].

7. Conclusions

Theoretical perspectives on EI suggest pathways to enhance teachers’ personal resources and thus their ability to cope with stressful events [87]. Stress in the educational environment not only affects teachers, but also has negative effects on the educational institution, and now, more than ever, stressors are believed to be important in predicting burnout outcomes [12,13].
Our results confirm the idea that emotional intelligence and metacognition play a significant role in helping teachers manage the stress associated with remote working and thus can mitigate burnout and other dysfunctional symptoms that result from difficulties in adapting to new ways of teaching through remote work technological tools [88]. The findings are particularly relevant for lockdown scenarios, where maintaining contact with young students through remote teaching can be an emotionally stressful context that can compromise well-being outcomes and cause negative impacts on teachers’ well-being and job performance [13].
Many empirical and theoretical contributions [30,37] assert that healthy behavior outcomes have an important effect on work performance, productivity, and relationships, and such contributions help us better understand the practical relevance of teachers’ health statuses, which in turn can also affect students and learning outcomes.
Our results led us to consider implications for the professional development of teachers, such as the need to identify dimensions of stress related to remote teaching, and to further explore variables, including protective factors for managing stress in remote work teaching situations or organizational factors, such as leadership or climate [89], that should be included in future studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.I., B.C., R.I., E.M.C.L. and G.F.; methodology, T.R. and M.B.; formal analysis, M.B.; investigation, B.C., E.M.C.L. and G.F.; data curation, G.F., E.M.C.L. and M.B.; writing—original draft preparation, T.R., B.C. and M.B.; writing—review and editing M.B., B.C., R.I. and T.R.; writing–results section, M.B. and T.R., writing–discussion section, B.C. and R.I.; supervision, T.R., C.I. and M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The Internal Review Board (IRB) of the Faculty of Human and Social Sciences of Kore University of Enna approved the research under protocol number UKE-IRBPSY-04.20.ADD1.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Iacolino, C.; Ferracane, G.; Isgrò, R.; Lombardo, E.M.C.; Cervellione, B. Le abilità resilienti e gli effetti disfunzionali dello stress negli insegnanti: Una rassegna sistematica. Ric. Psicol. 2020, 43, 941–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Pellerone, M.; Rapisarda, V.; Trischitta, M.C.A.; Vitale, E.; Ramaci, T. Burnout and Self-Perceived Instructional Competence: An Exploratory Study of a Group of Italian Female Elementary School Teachers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Linos, E.; Ruffini, K.; Wilcoxen, S. Reducing burnout and resignations among frontline workers: A field experiment. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 2021, 1, 356–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ozamiz-Etxebarria, N.; Idoiaga Mondragon, N.; Bueno-Notivol, J.; Pérez-Moreno, M.; Santabárbara, J. Prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress among teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review with meta-analysis. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mari, E.; Lausi, G.; Fraschetti, A.; Pizzo, A.; Baldi, M.; Quaglieri, A.; Burrai, J.; Barchielli, B.; Avallone, F.; Giannini, A.M. Teaching during the Pandemic: A Comparison in Psychological Wellbeing among Smart Working Professions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pressley, T. Factors Contributing to Teacher Burnout During COVID-19. Educ. Res. 2021, 50, 325–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wong, K.Y.; Sulaimana, T.; Ibrahim, A.; Mohd, A.G.K.; Hassan @ Hussin, O.; Wan Jaafar, W.M. Secondary school teachers psychological status and competencies in e-teaching during COVID-19. Heliyon 2021, 7, e08238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rǎducu, C.-M.; Stǎnculescu, E. Adaptability to Online Teaching during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multiple Mediation Analysis Based on Kolb’s Theory. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Peimani, N.; Kamalipour, H. Online Education and the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Case Study of Online Teaching during Lockdown. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Adov, L.; Mäeots, M. What CanWe Learn about Science Teachers’ Technology Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic? Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. TMGH-Global COVID-19 Collaborative. Perceived Stress of Quarantine and Isolation During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Survey. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 656664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. MacIntyre, P.D.; Gregersen, T.; Mercer, S. Language teachers’ coping strategies during the Covid-19 conversion to online teaching: Correlations with stress, wellbeing and negative emotions. System 2020, 94, 102352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rǎducu, C.M.; Stǎnculescu, E. Teachers’ Burnout Risk During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Relationships With Socio-Contextual Stress—A Latent Profile Analysis. Front. Psychiatry 2022, 13, 870098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ramaci, T.; Rapisarda, V.; Bellini, D.; Mucci, N.; De Giorgio, A.; Barattucci, M. Mindfulness as a Protective Factor for Dissatisfaction in HCWs: The Moderating Role of Mindful Attention between Climate Stress and Job Satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Castillo-Gualda, R.; Herrero, M.; Rodríguez-Carvajal, R.; Brackett, M.A.; Fernández-Berrocal, P. The role of emotional regulation ability, personality, and burnout among Spanish teachers. Int. J. Stress Manag. 2019, 26, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pellerone, M. Self-Perceived Instructional Competence, Self-Efficacy and Burnout during the COVID 19 Pandemic: A Study of a Group of Italian School Teachers. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2021, 11, 496–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. García-Martínez, I.; Pérez-Navío, E.; Pérez-Ferra, M.; Quijano-López, R. Relationship between Emotional Intelligence, Educational Achievement and Academic Stress of Pre-Service Teachers. Behav. Sci. 2021, 11, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zamarro, G.; Camp, A.; Fuchsman, D.; McGee, J. Understanding How COVID-19 Has Changed Teachers’ Chances of Remaining in the Classroom. Sinquefield Cent. Appl. Econ. Res. Work. Pap. No. Forthcom. 2022, 1, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tarasov, A.N.; Kataev, D.V. Trends in the Development of Labor Migration in the Educational Space of the Russian School in the Context of COVID-19. Int. J. Early Child. Spec. Educ. 2022, 14, 309–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Moser, K.; Wei, T. COVID-19 and the pre-existing language teacher supply crisis. Lang. Teach. Res. 2021, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Truzoli, R.; Pirola, V.; Conte, S. The impact of risk and protective factors on online teaching experience in high school Italian teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2021, 37, 940–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Mayer, J.D.; Salovey, P. What is emotional intelligence? In Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications; Salovey, P., Sluyter, D.J., Eds.; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 1997; pp. 3–31. [Google Scholar]
  23. Llorent, V.J.; Zych, I.; y Varo-Millán, J.C. Competencias socioemocionales autopercibidas en el profesorado universitario en España. Educ. XX1 2020, 23, 297–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mérida López, S.; Extremera, N.; Quintana Orts, C.; Rey, L. Sentir ilusión por el trabajo docente: Inteligencia emocional y el papel del afrontamiento resiliente en un estudio con profesorado de secundaria. Rev. Psicol. Educ. 2020, 15, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sánchez-Pujalte, L.; Mateu, D.N.; Etchezahar, E.; Gómez Yepes, T. Teachers’ Burnout during COVID-19 Pandemic in Spain: Trait Emotional Intelligence and Socioemotional Competencies. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Valenti, G.D.; Faraci, P.; Magnano, P. Emotional Intelligence and Social Support: Two Key Factors in Preventing Occupational Stress during COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 6918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kant, R.; Shanker, A. Relationship between emotional intelligence and burnout: An empirical investigation of teacher educators. Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ. 2021, 10, 966–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Martínez-Monteagudo, M.C.; Inglés, C.J.; Granados, L.; Aparisi, D.; García-Fernández, J.M. Trait emotional intelligence profiles, burnout, anxiety, depression, and stress in secondary education teachers. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 142, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Schoeps, K.; Tamarit, A.; Peris-Hernández, M.; Montoya-Castilla, I. Impact of emotional intelligence on burnout among Spanish teachers: A mediation study. Psicol. Educ. 2021, 27, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yeoh, S.W.; Hutagalung, F.D.; Chew, F.P. Correlation between Metacognition And Emotion Regulation Among Pre-Service Teachers. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. Couns. 2022, 7, 343–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Capobianco, L.; Heal, C.; Bright, M.; Wells, A. What comes first metacognition or negative emotion? A test of temporal precedence. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 02507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Robertson, I.; Cooper, C. Psychological Well-Being. In Well-Being; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2011; pp. 41–50. [Google Scholar]
  33. Klapproth, F.; Federkeil, L.; Heinschke, F.; Jungmann, T. Teachers’ Experiences of Stress and Their Coping Strategies during COVID-19 Induced Distance Teaching. J. Pedagog. Res. 2020, 4, 444–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Vargas Rubilar, N.; Oros, L.B. Stress and burnout in teachers during times of pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 756007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Confederación de Trabajadores de la Educación de la República Argentina. Informe de la Encuesta Nacional de CTERA “Salud y Condiciones de Trabajo Docente en Tiempos de Emergencia Sanitaria COVID-19” [Report of the CTERA National Survey “Health and Conditions of Teaching Work in Times of Health Emergency COVID-19”]. Available online: https://www.ctera.org.ar/index.php/salud-laboral/publicaciones/item/3611-informe-de-la-encuesta-ncional-de-ctera-salud-y-condiciones-de-trabajodocente-en-tiempos-de-emergencia-sanitaria-COVID-19 (accessed on 3 December 2020).
  36. Sindicato Unificado de Trabajadores de la Educación de Buenos Aires. Encuesta Provincial de Trabajo Docente en Contexto de Aislamiento [Provincial Survey of Teacher Work in a Context of Isolation]. 2020. Available online: https://www.suteba.org.ar/download/encuesta-provincial-de-trabajo-docente-encontexto-de-aislamiento-se-presentaron-los-resultados-84841.pdf (accessed on 3 December 2020).
  37. Kamboj, K.P.; Garg, P. Teachers’ psychological well-being role of emotional intelligence and resilient character traits in determining the psychological well-being of Indian school teachers. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2021, 35, 768–788, ISSN 0951-354X. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Singh, S.; Ryhal, P.C. The Influence of Teachers’ Emotional Intelligence on Academic Performance with Mediating Effect of Job Satisfaction. J. Educ. 2021, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gobena, G.A. Teaching stress on in-service teachers’ motivation: Its implication for quality-education in Ethiopian secondary schools. Anatol. J. Educ. 2022, 7, 143–156, ISSN 2547-9652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Maslach, C.; Leiter, M.P. Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry 2016, 15, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Montero-Marín, J.; García-Campayo, J.; Mera, D.M.; Del Hoyo, Y.L. A new definition of burnout syndrome based on Farber's proposal. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2009, 4, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Njim, T.; Makebe, H.; Toukam, L.; Kika, B.; Fonkou, S.; Fondungallah, J.; Fondong, A. Burnout syndrome amongst medical students in Cameroon: A cross-sectional analysis of the determinants in preclinical and clinical students. Psychiatry J. 2019, 2019, 4157574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Raymaker, D.M.; Teo, A.R.; Steckler, N.A.; Lentz, B.; Scharer, M.; Delos Santos, A.; Kapp, S.K.; Hunter, M.; Joyce, A.; Nicolaidis, C. “Having all of your internal resources exhausted beyond measure and being left with no clean-up crew”: Defining autistic burnout. Autism Adulthood 2020, 2, 132–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Burki, T. COVID-19 in latin america. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 547–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ndongo, J.M.; Lélé, C.B.; Manga, L.O.; Ngalagou, P.M.; Ayina, C.A.; Tanga, M.L.; Guessogo, W.R.; Barth, N.; Bongue, B.; Mandengue, S.H.; et al. Epidemiology of burnout syndrome in four occupational sectors in Cameroon-impact of the practice of physical activities and sport. AIMS Public Health 2020, 7, 319–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Goldstein, J.Z.; Alesbury, H.S. Self-reported levels of occupational stress and wellness in forensic practitioners: Implications for the education and training of the forensic workforce. J. Forensic Sci. 2021, 66, 1307–1315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Grupe, D.W.; McGehee, C.; Smith, C. Mindfulness Training Reduces PTSD Symptoms and Improves Stress-Related Health Outcomes in Police Officers. J. Police Crim. Psychol. 2021, 36, 72–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Llorca-Pellicer, M.; Soto-Rubio, A.; Gil-Monte, P.R. Development of burnout syndrome in non-university teachers: Influence of demand and resource variables. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 644025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Mak, K.; Kapus, K.; Toth, G.; Hesszenberger, D.; Pohl, M.; Pusch, G.; Fejes, E.; Feher, G.; Tibold, A. Lombalgia neuropatica e burnout tra i lavoratori ungheresi. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Losada-Baltar, A.; Jiménez-Gonzalo, L.; Gallego-Alberto, L.; Pedroso-Chaparro, M.D.S.; Fernandes-Pires, J.; Márquez-González, M. “We are staying at home.” Association of self-perceptions of aging, personal and family resources, and loneliness with psychological distress during the lock-down period of COVID-19. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2021, 76, e10–e16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Ribeiro, N.; Semedo, A.S.; Gomes, D.; Bernardino, R.; Singh, S. The effect of workplace bullying on burnout: The mediating role of affective well-being. Manag. Res. Rev. 2022, 45, 824–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Righi, M.P.; De Godoi, A.P.T.; Venezian, G.C.; Degan, V.V.; de Menezes, C.C. Temporomandibular disorder symptoms, sleep quality, and burnout syndrome in teachers. Cranio 2021, 2021, 1966585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wirkus, Ł.; Babicka-Wirkus, A.; Opora, R.; Stasiak, K. Burnout among probation officers in Poland and the role of preferred styles of coping with stress. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mérida-López, S.; Bakker, A.B.; Extremera, N. How does emotional intelligence help teachers to stay engaged? Cross-validation of a moderated mediation model. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 151, 109393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pishghadam, R.; Yousofi, N.; Amini, A.; Tabatabayeeyan, M.S. Interplay of psychological reactance, burnout, and spiritual intelligence: A case of Iranian EFL teachers. Rev. Psicodidáct. 2022, 27, 76–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Mayer, J.D.; Caruso, D.R.; Salovey, P. The Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence: Principles and Updates. Emot. Rev. 2016, 8, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Taris, T.W.; Leisink, P.L.; Schaufeli, W.B. Applying occupational health theories to educator stress: Contribution of the job demands-resources model. In Educator Stress; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 237–259. ISBN 978-3-319-53051-2. [Google Scholar]
  58. Mérida-López, S.; Extremera, N.; Rey, L. Contributions of work-related stress and emotional intelligence to teacher engagement: Additive and interactive effects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Mérida-López, S.; Extremera, N.; Rey, L. Emotion-regulation ability, role stress and teachers’ mental health. Occup. Med. 2017, 67, 540–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Mansfield, C.F.; Beltman, S.; Broadley, T.; Weatherby-Fell, N. Building resilience in teacher education: An evidenced informed framework. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2016, 54, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Butakor, P.K.; Guo, Q.; Adebanji, A.O. Using structural equation modeling to examine the relationship between Ghanaian teachers' emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, professional identity, and work engagement. Psychol. Sch. 2021, 58, 534–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Yin, H.B.; Lee, J.C.K.; Zhang, Z.H. Exploring the relationship among teachers' emotional intelligence, emotional labor strategies and teaching satisfaction. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2013, 35, 137–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Côté, S. Emotional intelligence in organizations. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2014, 1, 459–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Pirrone, C.; Sabrina, C.; Ballarino, V.; Zuppardo, L.; Serrano, F.; Rodríguez-Fuentes, A.; Sefarino, B. Emotional intelligence, age and origin: The mediation role of self-efficacy in the regulation of affectivity in future disability support teachers. Life Span Disabil. 2022, 25, 151–174. [Google Scholar]
  65. Ju, C.; Lan, J.; Li, Y.; Feng, W.; You, X. The mediating role of workplace social support on the relationship between trait emotional intelligence and teacher burnout. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2015, 51, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lievens, F.; Chan, D. Practical intelligence, emotional intelligence, and social intelligence. In Handbook of Employee Selection; Routledge: London, UK, 2017; pp. 342–364. ISBN 9781315690193. [Google Scholar]
  67. Capobianco, L.; Morrison, A.P.; Wells, A. The effect of thought importance on stress responses: A test of the metacognitive model. Stress 2018, 21, 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Schussler, D.L.; Greenberg, M.; DeWeese, A.; Rasheed, D.; DeMauro, A.; Jennings, P.A.; Brown, J. Stress and release: Case studies of teacher resilience following a mindfulness-based intervention. Am. J. Educ. 2018, 125, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Sharp, J.E.; Jennings, P.A. Strengthening teacher presence through mindfulness: What educators say about the cultivating awareness and resilience in education (CARE) program. Mindfulness 2016, 7, 209–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rojo Romeo, A.; Fontana, L.; Pelissier, C. Psycho-organizational and medical factors in burnout in French medical and surgery residents. Psychol. Health Med. 2022, 27, 1715–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Kallio, H.; Virta, K.; Kallio, M. Modelling the components of metacognitive awareness. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. 2018, 7, 94–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Chen, J.; Jiang, H.; Justice, L.M.; Lin, T.J.; Purtell, K.M.; Ansari, A. Influences of teacher–child relationships and classroom social management on child-perceived peer social experiences during early school years. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 586991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Schutte, N.S.; Malouff, J.M.; Hall, L.E.; Haggerty, D.J.; Cooper, J.T.; Golden, C.J. Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personal. Individ. Differ. 1998, 25, 167–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Craparo, G.; Magnano, P.; Faraci, P. Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the self-report emotional intelligence test (SREIT). TPM: Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 2014, 21, 121–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Salovey, P.; Mayer, J.D. Emotional intelligence. Imagin. Cogn. Personal. 1990, 9, 185–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Alaimo, S.M.; Schimmenti, A. Metacognitive functions screening scale-30 items (MFSS-30): Un nuovo strumento per lo screening del funzionamento metacognitivo. Psichiatr. Psicoter. 2013, 32, 145–162. [Google Scholar]
  77. Santinello, M. LBQ Link Burnout Questionnaire, 2nd ed.; Giunti, O.S.: Firenze, IT, USA, 2007; ISBN 9788809402850. [Google Scholar]
  78. Figley, C.R. Treating Compassion Fatigue; Brunner-Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Setti, I.; Argentero, P. Vicarious trauma: A contribution to the Italian adaptation of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale. Boll. Psicol. Appl. 2012, 264, 58–64. [Google Scholar]
  80. Hayes, A.F.; Preacher, K.J. Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 2014, 67, 451–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Podsakoff, N.P.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Cafagna, D.; Barattucci, M. Risk perception and personality: A study in the transportation sector. G. Ital. Med. Lav. Ergon. 2019, 41, 211–220. [Google Scholar]
  83. Lucas-Mangas, S.; Valdivieso-León, L.; Espinoza-Díaz, I.M.; Tous-Pallarés, J. Emotional Intelligence, Psychological Well-Being and Burnout of Active and In-Training Teachers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. McCarthy, J.R.; Edwards, R.; Gillies, V. Making Families: Moral Tales of Parenting and Step Parenting; Routledge-Cavendish: Abingdon, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Jønsson, T.F.; Bahat, E.; Barattucci, M. How are empowering leadership, self-efficacy and innovative behavior related to nurses' agency in distributed leadership in Denmark, Italy and Israel? J. Nurs. Manag. 2021, 29, 1517–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Schonert-Reichl, K.A.; Kitil, M.J.; Hanson-Peterson, J. To Reach the Students, Teach the Teachers: A National Scan of Teacher Preparation and Social & Emotional Learning. A Report Prepared for CASEL. In Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning; ERIC: Chicago, IL, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  87. Valente, S.; Lourenço, A.A. Conflict in the classroom: How teachers’ emotional intelligence influences conflict management. Front. Educ. 2020, 5, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Iacolino, C.; Lombardo, E.M.; Cervellione, B.; Mannino, G.; Micieli, S. Internet addiction disorder: Internet gaming disorder in a nonclinical sample of Moba and Mmorpg videoplayers. World Futures 2019, 75, 543–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Barattucci, M.; Teresi, M.; Pietroni, D.; Iacobucci, S.; Lo Presti, A.; Pagliaro, S. Ethical Climate(s), Distributed Leadership, and Work Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Organizational Identification. Front. Psychol. 2021, 11, 564112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ejihpe 13 00006 g001 550
Figure 1. Tested theoretical model.
Figure 1. Tested theoretical model.
Ejihpe 13 00006 g001
Ejihpe 13 00006 g002 550
Figure 2. Moderated mediation analysis with burnout as the outcome.
Figure 2. Moderated mediation analysis with burnout as the outcome.
Ejihpe 13 00006 g002
Ejihpe 13 00006 g003 550
Figure 3. Moderated mediation analysis with burnout as outcome.
Figure 3. Moderated mediation analysis with burnout as outcome.
Ejihpe 13 00006 g003
Ejihpe 13 00006 g004 550
Figure 4. Conditional effect of the remote work risk factors on burnout mediated by metacognition and moderated by emotional intelligence.
Figure 4. Conditional effect of the remote work risk factors on burnout mediated by metacognition and moderated by emotional intelligence.
Ejihpe 13 00006 g004
Ejihpe 13 00006 g005 550
Figure 5. Conditional effect of the remote work risk factors on stress mediated by metacognition and moderated by emotional intelligence.
Figure 5. Conditional effect of the remote work risk factors on stress mediated by metacognition and moderated by emotional intelligence.
Ejihpe 13 00006 g005
Table
Table 1. Difference in negative outcomes between groups with the absence or presence of remote work teaching risks.
Table 1. Difference in negative outcomes between groups with the absence or presence of remote work teaching risks.
BurnoutStress
Risk Factor AbsentPresentAbsentPresent
Lack of a dedicated and exclusive PC 12.7 (4.74)20.8 *** (9.01)2.4 (0.58)2.9 *** (0.61)
Unfamiliarity with IT platforms 12.4 (4.1)21.9 *** (8.9)2.4 (0.58)2.9 *** (0.53)
Lack of an exclusive place for remote teaching12.9 (4.95) 19.6 *** (9.1)2.4 (0.59)2.7 *** (0.67)
Need to adapt to online teaching methods 15.4 (7.58)12.9 *** (4.7)2.6 (0.63)2.4 *** (0.61)
Difficulties in class management13.4 (5.94)17.5 *** (8.45)2.5 (0.59)2.6 * (0.68)
Difficulties in coordination with colleagues18.9 (8.89)12.5 *** (4.38)2.8 (0.66)2.4 *** (0.57)
* p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlations among the measured variables.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlations among the measured variables.
Mean (SD)12345
1. Risk factors1.48 (0.75)-
2. Burnout14.89 (7.1)0.339 ***-
3. Secondary traumatic stress2.53 (0.63)0.310 **0.644 ***-
4. Emotional intelligence121.34 (22.15)−0.395 ***−0.838 ***−0.479 ***-
5. Metacognition59.25 (17.68)−0.288 ***−0.781 ***−0.486 ***0.842 ***-
** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Iacolino, C.; Cervellione, B.; Isgrò, R.; Lombardo, E.M.C.; Ferracane, G.; Barattucci, M.; Ramaci, T. The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Teachers’ Stress during Pandemic Remote Working: A Moderated Mediation Model. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13, 81-95. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13010006

AMA Style

Iacolino C, Cervellione B, Isgrò R, Lombardo EMC, Ferracane G, Barattucci M, Ramaci T. The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Teachers’ Stress during Pandemic Remote Working: A Moderated Mediation Model. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 2023; 13(1):81-95. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13010006

Chicago/Turabian Style

Iacolino, Calogero, Brenda Cervellione, Rachele Isgrò, Ester Maria Concetta Lombardo, Giuseppina Ferracane, Massimiliano Barattucci, and Tiziana Ramaci. 2023. "The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Teachers’ Stress during Pandemic Remote Working: A Moderated Mediation Model" European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 13, no. 1: 81-95. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13010006

APA Style

Iacolino, C., Cervellione, B., Isgrò, R., Lombardo, E. M. C., Ferracane, G., Barattucci, M., & Ramaci, T. (2023). The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Metacognition in Teachers’ Stress during Pandemic Remote Working: A Moderated Mediation Model. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 13(1), 81-95. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13010006

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop