The role of emotional labor in explaining teachers' enthusiasm and students' outcomes: A multilevel mediational analysis

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Learning and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif

The role of emotional labor in explaining teachers' enthusiasm and students' outcomes: A multilevel mediational analysis☆

T

Irena Burić Department of Psychology, University of Zadar, Obala kralja Petra Krešimira IV. br. 2, 23000 Zadar, Croatia

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Teachers' emotional labor Teachers' enthusiasm Students' outcomes Multilevel analysis

The aim of the present study was to explore the role of teachers' emotional labor in explaining their enthusiasm, as perceived by their students, and the students' outcomes. Data on emotional labor from 90 high-school teachers and data on perceived teacher enthusiasm, intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy from their students (N = 2019) were obtained. In order to account for the nested structure of the data and to examine the relationships between study constructs, a multilevel structural-equation modelling technique (ML-SEM) was implemented. The results at the class level showed that teacher enthusiasm fully mediated the relationship between the emotional-labor strategy of hiding feelings and student outcomes, and partially mediated the relationship between the emotional-labor strategy of faking emotions and students' positive affect. Also, faking emotions has direct and positive contribution in explaining class positive affect and intrinsic motivation.

1. Introduction Teachers' emotions are recognized as inevitable part of teaching with a great potential to impact students and their academic outcomes (Becker, Goetz, Morger, & Ranellucci, 2014; Day, 2004). However, experience and expression of teachers' affective experiences in the classroom are oftentimes guided by certain emotional-display rules, that is, distinctive implicit or explicit norms regarding the nature and intensity of emotions, and their appropriate expression or suppression (Brotheridge, 2006). It is generally believed that teachers should show positive emotions and avoid negative ones, as well as to keep them at moderate levels of intensity (Taxer & Frenzel, 2015; Winograd, 2003; Yin & Lee, 2012). In order to align their inner feelings and/or external emotional expressions with emotions that are seen as desirable in a given situation, teachers have to perform emotional labor. In other words, they have to suppress or hide their true feelings and express emotions that are fake but desirable or prescribed (i.e. surface acting), and/or try to actually feel the emotions that are expected to be expressed (i.e. deep acting) (Brotheridge, 2006; Brotheridge & Lee, 2003). Teacher enthusiasm, defined as the “conjoined occurrence of positive affective experiences, that is, teaching-related enjoyment, and the behavioral expression of these experiences, that is, (mostly nonverbal) behaviors of expressiveness” (Keller, Goetz, Woolfolk Hoy, & Frenzel, 2016), was recognized as one of the key attributes of effective highquality teaching (Brophy & Good, 1986) with positive effects on

☆

students' motivational, affective, and behavioral outcomes, as well as on their academic achievement (e.g., Frenzel, Goetz, Lüdtke, Pekrun, & Sutton, 2009; Kunter et al., 2013; Kunter, Frenzel, Nagy, Baumert, & Pekrun, 2011; Patrick, Hisley, & Kempler, 2000). Therefore, the expression of teacher enthusiasm can be viewed as desirable and welcomed in the classroom. However, teachers' internal affective experience of enthusiasm does not always have to match to its behavioral expression (Keller et al., 2016) implying that teacher displayed enthusiasm in the classroom may be a result of emotional labor. To date, the relationships between strategies teachers implement to manage or regulate emotional experiences and expressions (i.e. emotional labor), their observed behavior in the classroom, and students' motivational, cognitive, behavioral, and affective outcomes, are still a largely unexplored area of investigation. Thus, the aim of this study was to more thoroughly explore the nature of the relationships between teacher emotional labor, student-perceived teacher enthusiasm and students' outcomes (i.e. deep learning strategy, intrinsic motivation, and positive affect) by using data from both teachers and their students. 1.1. Teacher-expressed enthusiasm and student outcomes: The importance of value induction and emotional contagion A large number of studies have examined the effects of teacher enthusiasm on student outcomes. These studies demonstrate that teacher enthusiasm is positively related to student interest and intrinsic

This research was supported by the Croatian Science Foundation (grant number 5065). E-mail address: [email protected].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.01.002 Received 8 October 2017; Received in revised form 2 January 2019; Accepted 4 January 2019 1041-6080/ © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

refers to the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active, and alert, or a state of high energy, full concentration, and pleasurable engagement (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Lastly, deep learning strategy refers to the critical analysis of new ideas, and linking them to already-known concepts and principles, which leads to better understanding and retention of concepts (Nelson Laird, Shoup, Kuh, & Schwarz, 2008). When engaging in deep learning, students use higherorder thinking skills and personally commit to learning the material (Biggs, 1987; Ramsden, 2003). All the three constructs represent positive and desirable students' outcomes which may also be affected by positive and desirable teacher characteristics, such as enthusiasm. However, while emotional contagion and value induction processes can be straightforwardly used to explain the effects of teacher enthusiasm on students' positive affect and intrinsic motivation, the mechanism that underlies the link between teacher enthusiasm and student learning strategies (i.e. deep learning strategy) is less evident. Considering the positive association between teacher enthusiasm and instructional quality (e.g. Kunter et al., 2013), it can be assumed that teacher enthusiasm may exert positive effect on students' deep learning strategy via higher levels of instructional quality. In particular, it was proposed that cognitive activation and classroom management could promote students' higher level thinking skills, while supportive learning environment in general facilitate students' conceptual understanding (Klieme & Rakoczy, 2008; Schlessinger & Jentsch, 2016). Still, the empirical evidence regarding the direct association between teacher enthusiasm and students' learning strategies is largely lacking. In spite of that, based on the outlined theoretical considerations and existing empirical evidence, it can be expected that perceived teacher enthusiasm would be a positive predictor of all the three student-related outcomes, i.e. intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy.

motivation (Frenzel, Pekrun, & Goetz, 2010; Keller, Goetz, Becker, Morger, & Hensley, 2014; Kim & Schallert, 2014), emotional experiences such as enjoyment (Frenzel et al., 2009; Kunter et al., 2013), attention (Bettencourt, Gillett, Gall, & Hull, 1983), and academic achievement (Brigham, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 1992; Kunter et al., 2011; McKinney, Robertson, Gilmore, Ford, & Larkins, 1984). As already noted, along with understanding teacher enthusiasm as a personal affective characteristic (Kunter et al., 2008), it can also be conceptualized as visible and perceivable behavior that is lively and engaging, and conveys energy and excitement (Murray, 2007; Patrick et al., 2000). Moreover, when it comes to the influence of teachers' enthusiasm on students' outcomes, it is proposed that the observable, expressive component is the one that really matters (Kim & Schallert, 2014). In other words, teachers need to display their enthusiasm in such a way that it is clearly observable by their students in order to impact learning. Teachers may express their enthusiasm through specific gestures, vocal delivery, or facial, and bodily expressions (e.g., using humour, speaking expressively, smiling etc.) which can be directly observable by students. It has been proposed that these visible aspects of teacher enthusiasm impact student affective and motivational outcomes via emotional contagion and value-induction processes (Frenzel et al., 2009; Kunter et al., 2008). Emotional contagion is defined as a process of transmission of emotions from a sender to a receiver via emotional display (Schoenewolf, 1990). It has been acknowledged that people generally have a “tendency to automatically mimic and synchronize facial expressions, vocalizations, postures, and movements with those of another person and, consequently, to converge emotionally” (Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1994, p. 5). With respect to teacher enthusiasm, students should observe and automatically replicate the teacher's expressive behavior, which, through physiological processes, causes them to experience for themselves a corresponding emotion (Barsade, 2002). It should be emphasized that an emotional-contagion phenomenon cannot occur without emotional displays or signals conveyed by a sender (here, the teacher) to a receiver (here, a student) (Dezecache, Jacob, & Grèzes, 2015). In other words, teacher enthusiasm cannot evoke positive affective experiences in students if it is not expressed. Next, according to the control-value theory of achievement emotions, by displaying enthusiasm and showing enjoyment in relation to a topic or a learning task, teachers are likely to facilitate students' absorption of values of academic engagement and achievement (Pekrun, 2006; Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002; Pekrun, 2006). More precisely, teachers can enhance students' value appraisals, that is, students' judgments regarding the importance and utility of learning and achievement in a certain domain, by teaching in enthusiastic manner (Becker et al., 2014). Therefore, teachers who behave enthusiastically serve as role models to their students, who are likely to internalize the teachers' attitudes in terms of enjoyment, likings, and values which lead to higher levels of learning and more positive feelings towards learning (Frenzel et al., 2009; Keller et al., 2016). Finally, teacher enthusiasm is found to be closely related to overall quality of instruction (Feldman, 2007; Kunter et al., 2013) which is typically defined through cognitive activation, a supportive learning environment, and efficient classroom management (Klieme, Schümer, & Knoll, 2001; Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008), and which is found to be predictive of student emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement (Patrick, Ryan, & Kaplan, 2007; Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Virtanen, Lerkkanen, Poikkeus, & Kuorelahti, 2015). In the current study, students' outcomes were operationalized through three distinct but related constructs: intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy. Intrinsic motivation can in general be defined as performing an activity for itself, in order to experience pleasure and satisfaction inherent in the activity (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Intrinsically motivated individuals experience interest, enjoyment, and curiosity (Deci, 1992) when engaging in an activity. In an academic context, students who are intrinsically motivated engage in learning because they find it interesting and enjoy it. Positive affect

1.2. Teacher emotional labor, perceived teacher enthusiasm and students' outcomes As already emphasized, teachers perform emotional labor in order to feel or display emotions that are seen as desirable or prescribed within the teaching context. Teachers often have to hide emotions (e.g., disliking of a student), pretend ones that they actually do not experience (e.g., a thrill because a student has succeeded), or invest effort in trying to feel an emotion they are expected to feel (e.g., love and caring for students in spite of their rude behaviour). Obviously, engaging in emotional-labor strategies is a constituent part of the teaching job. In addition, oftentimes the main aim of teacher emotional labor is to achieve positive learning outcomes in students: teachers suppress, hide, and fake their emotions not just to align with the prescribed emotionaldisplay rules, but also because they choose to in order to promote students' learning (e.g., teachers may suppress anger towards defiant students because they believe that nurturing positive relationships with such students will reduce their disruptive behavior in a long term, which will enhance the learning process) (Oplatka, 2007; Sutton, 2004; Sutton, Mudrey-Camino, & Knight, 2009). Even though teacher emotional labor seems to be an important factor in explaining students' outcomes, to date, this area of inquiry has remained largely unexplored beyond a qualitative level of analysis. When teachers perform deep acting, they may engage in thoughts and activities that are congruent with the desired emotion and that will evoke or amplify the corresponding emotion in themselves. In contrast, when teachers perform surface acting, they may hide or fake observable expression of an emotion without modifying their underlying feelings (Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002) indicating that surface acting consists of both hiding feelings and faking emotions. In accordance with the emotional-display rules of the teaching profession, teachers mostly likely hide negative emotions and fake positive ones. Therefore, it seems justifiable to treat hiding feelings and faking emotions as two separable but related dimensions of surface acting. Indeed, previous 13

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

as well as their 2019 students, participated in the study. Both samples were convenient and consisted of only those subjects (teachers and their students) who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study and who fulfilled the criteria of inclusion that are described later in this section. Data collection and matching the responses of teachers with the responses of their students were achieved with an assistance of school psychologists. Questionnaires for teachers and students were administered after the approval of the university's Research Ethics Board and once the informed consent of the school principal, teachers, and students was obtained. In addition, ethical guidelines for research on human subjects prescribed by the Code of Ethics of Croatian Psychological Association were strictly followed. The teachers provided self-reports on their emotional-labor strategies, while the students gave reports on teachers' enthusiastic behavior observed in the classroom and self-reports on their intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategies. It is important to note that students gave self-reports of these outcome variables in relation to the subject taught by the target teacher whose enthusiasm was evaluated. Also, the responses of students within one class could be linked to the responses of only one teacher. Or, in other words, reports from a single teacher could be matched to the corresponding data of only one class of students. In addition, all teachers who participated in this study had been teaching the same subject and their corresponding class of students through at least one (past) school year. This was important in order to increase the validity and reliability of students' ratings of teacher enthusiasm. On average, a class consisted of 22 students. In total, 86% of teachers were females, which approximately reflects the gender ratio within the teaching profession in Croatia. The teachers taught a whole range of subjects (language – Croatian, English, German, and Latin, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, IT, history, geography, art, music, ethics, religion, health, and physical culture etc.) and were on average 42.12 years old (SD = 9.07) with 15.68 years (SD = 9.31) of teaching experience. The student sample consisted of 2019 high-school students (57% female) of mean age 16.81 years (SD = 0.91) who were mostly enrolled in a grammar-school programme (82%). At the time of data collection, students were either in the second, third, or fourth grade, while students in the first grade were excluded from the study since one of the prerequisite for enrolment was that a particular teacher teaches their students at least one school year. It should be noted that in Croatian educational system a majority of subjects within particular high-school programme are mandatory to enrol in (with the exception of religion/ethics and second/third language) and that all students have highly similar requirements regarding their course obligations and mastering the content of a particular subject.

studies show that positive emotions are mainly related to faking emotions, and negative emotions to hiding feelings (Grandey, 2000; Lee & Brotheridge, 2011). Nonetheless, it should be stressed that teachers do not always try to hide or suppress negative emotions and to fake positive ones (Sutton et al., 2009; Taxer & Frenzel, 2015). Instead, there are situations in which teachers have to fake negative emotions (e.g., pretend anger in order to discipline students) or even to hide positive emotions (e.g., hide the liking of a certain student) in order to ensure that the teaching process unfolds effectively. Since perceived teacher enthusiasm can be seen as a behavioral aspect of emotion of enjoyment that teachers experience while teaching (Frenzel et al., 2009; Keller et al., 2016), its relationships with emotional labor strategies may be expected. Obviously, teacher enthusiasm is a desirable emotional state which, when expressed, is of key importance for effective teaching (Kunter et al., 2011; Patrick, Turner, Meyer, & Midgley, 2003). Therefore, it can be said that feeling and showing enthusiasm are part of the emotional-display rules of the teaching profession. In order to align with this rule, teachers may engage in deep acting to boost their inner feelings of enthusiasm (e.g., by reminding themselves of the importance and relevance of specific learning material), which would consequently also be reflected in their observable behavior. In contrast, teachers may not feel enthusiastic at all, but are motivated to pretend enthusiastic behavior in order to comply with emotional-display rules, motivate their students, and achieve positive learning goals. So it can be expected that both deep acting and faking emotions could positively predict perceived teacher enthusiasm. In contrast, since in the essence of hiding feelings as an emotional-labor strategy is the suppression of observable signs of mostly negative emotions, its relationship with perceived teacher enthusiasm, which is in its essence constituted of positive emotional state, i.e. enjoyment, should not be expected. To sum up, deep acting and faking emotions used by teachers are expected to play an important role in explaining perceived teacher enthusiasm, which in turn is likely to contribute to students' learning outcomes. 1.3. The present study The aim of this study was to examine the relationships between teacher emotional labor, perceived teacher enthusiasm, and student outcomes, i.e. intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy. Data in this study are drawn from two sources: teachers, who gave self-reports on emotional labor, and their students, who gave reports on observable teacher enthusiasm and self-reports on intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy. In such designs, data are hierarchically structured, i.e. students located at Level 1 (L1) are nested within teachers/classes located at Level 2 (L2), creating the possibility of examining relationships between study variables at both levels of analysis. By taking into account the multilevel structure of the data set and based on the theoretical and empirical considerations outlined above, several research hypotheses were formulated: H1: Teachers who more frequently engage in deep acting and who more frequently fake their emotions, would be in most cases rated by their students as more enthusiastic. Hiding feelings would be unrelated to perceived enthusiasm. H2: Teachers who are rated as being more enthusiastic will have classes of students who are more likely to be intrinsically motivated, experience positive affect, and engage in deep learning strategy. H3: Teacher-perceived enthusiasm would mediate the relationship between teacher emotional labor strategies of deep acting and faking emotions, and student outcomes.

2.2. Instruments Teachers' emotional labor was assessed by a revised version of the Emotional Labor Scale (ELS; Lee & Brotheridge, 2011). Teachers rated how often, on an average working day in a classroom, they perform specified acts on a 5-point rating scale: 1 – never, 2 – rarely, 3 – sometimes, 4 – often, and 5 – always. The ELS captures three strategies of emotional labor, each measured by three items: deep acting (“really try to feel the emotions I have to show as part of my job”), hiding feelings (“resist expressing my true feelings”), and faking emotions (e.g., “pretend to have emotions that I don't really have”). Perceived teacher enthusiasm was measured by 5 items. Three of them were modified and adapted from the scale developed by Kunter and colleagues that assesses (self-reported) enthusiasm experienced by teachers (Kunter et al., 2008; Kunter et al., 2011), and the other two were created especially for the purposes of this study. All items were formulated in such a way that they measure aspects of enthusiastic teacher behavior that can be observed by students. Students rated their teachers' behavior on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). The complete list of items is shown in the Appendix.

2. Method 2.1. Samples In total, 90 teachers employed in eight Croatian state high schools, 14

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

strategy). Next, perceived teacher enthusiasm is considered to be a climate variable (Arens, Morin, & Watermann, 2015; Marsh et al., 2012) in which the referent is a teacher and each student in the class rates the same feature of the teacher (namely enthusiastic behavior) implying that the main goal of these ratings is to assess the L2 construct (i.e. teacher enthusiasm) and not the individual student characteristic. Bearing that in mind, as well as the fact that teacher emotional labor is the true L1 variable, only the results of the analysis at level 2 will be subjected to the interpretation. In order to analyse the data, several steps were taken. First, Pearson correlations between variables assessed at the same level were calculated. Second, to investigate the extent to which students in the same class shared similar perceptions of their teacher's enthusiastic behavior, intraclass correlations ICC1 and ICC2 were computed. ICC1 is defined as the average agreement between pairs of students within the same class (i.e., the proportion of the total variance occurring at the class level), while ICC2 can be seen as an indicator of the reliability of the group average, i.e., the degree of agreement between students (Lüdtke, Marsh, Robitzsch, & Trautwein, 2011; Marsh et al., 2009). It is recommended that ICC1 values should be close to or higher than 0.10 (Lüdtke et al., 2011), while ICC2 values should pass a 0.70 or 0.80 threshold (Marsh et al., 2012). Third, to test the proposed mediating mechanism of perceived teacher enthusiasm in explaining the relationship between teachers' emotional labor strategies of deep acting and faking emotions, and students' outcomes at class level, two models were tested and compared: 1) a full-mediation model, in which classaverage intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy were regressed on class-average ratings of teacher enthusiasm, which was in turn regressed on teacher emotional labor strategies; and 2) a partial-mediation model, which is the same as the full-mediation model with the addition of direct paths from teacher emotional labor to classaverage intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy. Fourth, all indirect effects were calculated and tested for their statistical significance. Finally, because of the relatively small teacher sample size, to keep the models parsimonious and to avoid unstable parameter estimates and solutions that cannot converge, the analysis was done on manifest variables as opposed to latent variables (which would also enable the control for measurement error) (Marsh et al., 2009). All analyses were conducted with Mplus 6.1 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012) and were based on the robust maximum-likelihood estimator (MLR; Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012). Full-information maximum-likelihood estimation (FIML; Enders, 2010) was used to handle the missing data. Since both models were based on manifest variables, which, in the case of the partial-mediation model, resulted in zero degrees of freedom, the evaluation of goodness of model fit, as well as model comparison, could not be achieved through standard indexes (e.g., χ2, CFI, TLI, RMSEA etc.). Thus, the final decision on which model (partial vs. full mediation) better describes the data was based on the size, direction, and statistical significance of the regression weights of

Students' positive affect was measured by the Positive Affect scale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988). The Positive Affect scale consists of 10 items that describe positive affective states (sample items: “interested, enthusiastic, and active”). Students were asked to rate, on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely), the extent they typically feel in the way described while in the class of that particular teacher. Students' intrinsic motivation was assessed by the Intrinsic Motivation subscale of the Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS; Guay, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2000). This subscale consists of 4 items that were slightly modified to describe intrinsic reasons for learning the subject taught by the target teacher. Students were asked to rate the reasons why they study that particular subject on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (corresponds not at all) to 7 (corresponds exactly). Sample item: “Because I think that learning this subject is interesting”. Finally, students' deep learning strategy was measured by the corresponding subscale from the Components of Self-Regulated Learning questionnaire (CSRL, Niemivirta, 1996, 1998). The subscale consists of 5 items that measure strategies of elaboration, goal planning, and selfobservation of one's own comprehension (sample item: “When I study, I often ask myself questions to see if I am understanding”). Students rated each item on a 5-point scale ranging from totally disagree (1) to totally agree (5). Descriptive statistics and Cronbach alphas of all scales can be found in Table 1. 3. Analysis To test the study hypotheses, multi-level structural-equation modelling (ML-SEM) (Marsh et al., 2009) was implemented. A ML-SEM model with manifest variables enables controlling for sampling error, which is achieved through the aggregation of responses of individual students to represent teacher/class-level constructs. In other words, MLSEM models incorporate L1 ratings of different students in the same class as multiple indicators of latent L2 constructs, which corrects for sampling error (Morin, Marsh, Nagengast, & Scalas, 2014). In addition, ML-SEM is considered to be a useful tool for investigating multilevel mediation (Preacher, Zyphur, & Zhang, 2010). In multilevel modelling, L1 constructs are based on responses of individual students, while L2 constructs can be based on either true L2 measures or aggregates of responses by students within the class (Marsh et al., 2012). In this study, teacher emotional labor was a true L2 measure that exists only at the higher level of analysis (L2 or teacher level or class level). However, constructs of perceived teacher enthusiasm, intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy can be modelled at both levels. At level 2, these constructs are based on aggregates of responses by students within the class (i.e. classaverage ratings of teacher enthusiasm, class-average intrinsic motivation, class-average positive affect, and class-average deep learning

Table 1 Descriptive statistics, Cronbach alphas and correlations among analysed variables (Nteachers = 90; Nstudents = 2018).

Deep acting Hiding feelings Faking emotions Perceived teacher enthusiasm Intrinsic motivation Positive affect Deep learning strategy M SD α ICC1 ICC2 ⁎

Deep acting

Hiding feelings

Faking emotions

Perceived teacher enthusiasm

Intrinsic motivation

Positive affect

Deep learning strategy

–

0.04 –

0.09 0.61⁎⁎ –

– – – –

– – – 0.31⁎⁎ –

– – – 0.43⁎⁎ 0.70⁎⁎ –

3.35 0.98 0.88 – –

2.32 0.66 0.79 – –

1.87 0.79 0.76 – –

4.01 0.84 0.89 0.35 0.89

4.17 1.58 0.90 0.19 0.81

3.21 0.87 0.92 0.17 0.79

– – – 0.24⁎⁎ 0.37⁎⁎ 0.41⁎⁎ – 3.45 0.84 0.77 0.11 0.71

p < .01. 15

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

tend to have students who are more intrinsically motivated (β = 0.357, p < .01) and who experience positive affect to a greater extent (β = 0.290, p < .01). Based on the statistical significance of these direct effects, the partial-mediation model was chosen as the one which better explains the complex relations between teacher emotional labor, perceived enthusiasm, and students' outcomes. This model was depicted in Fig. 1. At the student level (L1), ratings of perceived teacher enthusiasm, i.e. the residual inter-individual differences that occur at Level 1 once shared class perceptions of teacher enthusiasm have been controlled (Morin et al., 2014), were positive predictors of students' intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy.

direct effects. 4. Results Correlations between the variables analysed are presented in Table 1. With regard to student-reported variables, it can be seen that perceived teacher enthusiasm positively correlated to positive students' outcomes: students who perceive their teacher as more enthusiastic also report being more intrinsically motivated, experiencing positive affective experiences to a greater extent, and using deep learning strategy more often. Also, all three variables of students' outcomes were moderately positively correlated. When considering the correlations between teacher-reported variables, i.e. emotional-labor strategies, the only statistically significant correlation was the one between hiding feelings and faking emotions: teachers who frequently hide their feelings also frequently try to fake them. This correlation is expected, since both hiding feelings and faking emotions are two variants of the same construct, namely surface acting. In addition, as shown in Table 1, ICC1 values were beyond 0.10, which means that there is a substantial amount of variability at teacher level. In addition, all ICC2 values were greater than 0.70 and, more importantly, the ICC2 value for perceived teacher enthusiasm was the highest, indicating a good agreement between different students within the same class, i.e. different students saw their teacher similarly with respect to enthusiastic behavior. Quite unexpectedly, the test of the proposed mediating mechanisms revealed that class-average ratings of perceived teacher enthusiasm fully mediated the relationships between hiding feelings and classaverage intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy. In contrast, class-perceived teacher enthusiasm seemed to partially mediate the relationships between faking emotions and class-average intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and deep learning strategy, while the third strategy of emotional labor, namely deep acting, showed to be unrelated to other constructs under study. To investigate which of these indirect effects were actually statistically significant, t-tests and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and are presented in Table 2. It can be seen that the indirect effects of teachers' faking emotions on class-level deep learning strategy and class-level intrinsic motivation via class-perceived enthusiasm failed to reach statistical significance. These results indicate that perceived teacher enthusiasm fully mediated the relationship between teachers' hiding feelings and positive students' outcomes at class level. In contrast, perceived teacher enthusiasm only partially mediated the relationship between teachers' faking emotions and students' positive affect at class level. The analysis showed that teachers who less frequently hide their feelings while in class, but also more frequently engage in faking their emotions, are rated as more enthusiastic by their students (β = .-0.331, p < .01 and β = 0.224, p < .05, respectively). In addition, students in the classes of teachers who are perceived as more enthusiastic tend to be more intrinsically motivated (β = 0.297, p < .01), more frequently experience positive affect (β = 0.441, p < .1), and more often use deep learning strategy (β = 0.382, p < .01). However, intrinsic motivation and positive affect at the class level could be directly predicted by the faking of emotions: teachers who more frequently fake their emotions

5. Discussion The purpose of the present study was to examine the relations between teacher emotional labor strategies, student-perceived teacher enthusiasm, and students' outcomes. More precisely, it was hypothesized that teachers' emotional labor strategies of deep acting and faking emotions are important factors in understanding teacher-displayed enthusiastic behavior, and consequently in determining student outcomes. This study included reports from both teachers and their students and employed an ML-SEM analytical framework as a useful tool to analyse these complex relations by taking into account the multilevel structure of the data. It was proposed that, in order to better understand the phenomenology of teachers' observable emotional expressions, such as studentperceived enthusiasm, teacher emotional-labor strategies should be taken into account. Teachers perform emotional labor in order to adjust their inner feelings and outward emotional expressions in such a way that they are congruent with the rules of emotional display in the teaching profession. Since enthusiasm is seen as a desirable teacher characteristic, there is a reason to believe that teachers would be motivated to experience and express enthusiastic behavior while teaching, which may be achieved through deep acting and faking emotions. Thus, it was hypothesized that amplifying the inner subjective experience of enthusiasm, i.e. deep acting (which should also be observable by students), as well as attempts to fake enthusiastic teacher behavior, would positively predict teacher enthusiasm perceived by students. In contrast, since teachers mostly try to hide their negative emotions (Taxer & Frenzel, 2015; Winograd, 2003; Yin & Lee, 2012), but not a positive and desirable experience such as enthusiasm, it was assumed that this form of emotional-labor strategy would not be related to perceived enthusiasm. These assumptions were only partly supported. Teachers who report more frequently faking their emotions are perceived as more enthusiastic by their students. Even though faking emotions, as a facet of surface acting, is generally considered as an emotion-regulation strategy that may have adverse effects on teacher well-being (e.g., Isenbarger & Zembylas, 2006; Näring, Briët, & Brouwers, 2006; Näring, Vlerick, & Van de Ven, 2012; Yin, 2012; Yin, Lee, Zhang, & Jin, 2013; Zhang & Zhu, 2008), this study shows that, when it comes to teaching and students, faking emotions may enhance teaching performance which reflects in higher levels of displayed enthusiasm and more

Table 2 Indirect effects from ML-SEM. Indirect effect Hiding Hiding Hiding Faking Faking Faking ⁎

feelings → perceived enthusiasm → intrinsic motivation feelings → perceived enthusiasm → positive affect feelings → perceived enthusiasm → deep learning emotions → perceived enthusiasm → intrinsic motivation emotions → perceived enthusiasm → positive affect emotions → perceived enthusiasm → deep learning

b

SE

t

95% C.I.

−0.141 −0.267 −0.091 0.088 0.166 0.057

0.149 0.114 0.044 0.061 0.084 0.036

−1.97⁎ −2.34⁎ −2.04⁎ 1.43 1.98⁎ 1.58

−0.281, −0.001 −0.490, −0.044 −0.178, −0.004 −0.032, 0.208 0.001, 0.331 −0.014, 0.127

p < .05. 16

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

.290**(.106) .357**(.114) Faking emotions

Hiding feelings

.297**(.114)

Class intrinsic motivation

.224*(.119) -.331**(.120)

Class-perceived teacher enthusiasm

.441**(.096)

Deep acting .382**(.094)

Class positive affect

Class deep learning strategy

Teacher level – L2

Student level – L1

Residual L1 ratings of teacher enthusiasm

.317**(.024)

Intrinsic motivation

.224**(.029)

Positive affect

.427**(.022)

Deep learning strategy

Fig. 1. Multilevel SEM model. Note: *p < .05, **p < .01; Standard errors are shown in parentheses and only significant paths are shown.

expectation. In deep acting, the emphasis is more on the effort to really experience an emotion that is desired (like enthusiasm) (Lee & Brotheridge, 2011), and less on expression of emotional experience that may be observable from outside. Indeed, it has already been pointed out that, although affective experiences and behavioral expression of teacher enthusiasm are related to each other, they do not always co-occur in the individual (Keller et al., 2016). Contrary to the expectations, hiding feelings was found to be a negative predictor of perceived teacher enthusiasm: teachers who more frequently hide their feelings while in the classroom are perceived as being less enthusiastic by their students. Since teachers mostly try to hide or suppress negative emotions, teachers who reported to frequently hide their feelings could be those who often experience negative emotions in relation to their job and who are consequently less enthusiastic in the classroom. Indeed, there is empirical evidence showing that suppression can have adverse affective, cognitive, and motivational consequences (Gross, 2002). More specifically, suppression decreases the experience of not only negative emotions, but positive emotions (like enthusiasm) as well. In addition, it consumes cognitive resources making it more difficult to express enthusiastic behavior in the classroom. Lastly, individuals who are prone to suppression are less likely to share emotions of any kind with others (Gross, 2002). Furthermore, it was proposed that perceived teacher enthusiasm would be a positive predictor of students' outcomes. The results confirmed this hypothesis: teachers who are perceived as more enthusiastic have classes of students who are more intrinsically motivated, experience positive affect to a greater extent, and also more often implement deep learning strategy. These results can be explained through emotional-contagion and value-induction mechanisms (Hatfield et al., 1994; Pekrun, 2006). Students who observe their teacher as being enthusiastic and showing positive emotions begin to feel in a similar way themselves, hence the positive relationship between perceived

favorable students' outcomes. Since teacher enthusiasm is seen as a key characteristic of effective teaching (Brophy & Good, 1986), it is understandable that faking emotions may positively impact their performance in the classroom when perceived by their students. Moreover, faking emotions had direct contributions to both classlevel positive affect and class-level intrinsic motivation. Teachers who more frequently fake their emotions have classes of students who are more intrinsically motivated and who experience more positive affect. These results indicate that teachers may fake other positive emotions in the classroom as well (e.g. pride) which can directly impact their students' affective experiences and motivation to learn via proposed emotional-contagion and value-induction processes (Hatfield et al., 1994; Pekrun, 2006). More specifically, by observing the expressed signs of positive emotions of their teachers (e.g., smiling, widening eyes, higher speaking speed, etc.), teachers' shown emotions can be transmitted to their students by evoking similar affective states through physiological mechanisms as part of the emotional-contagion phenomenon. Additionally, such expressive teacher behavior can facilitate absorption of positive values regarding the importance and utility of a certain topic or a learning activity (e.g., value appraisals) which in turn enhances their intrinsic motivation. In other words, teachers who show positive emotions while teaching (regardless their authenticity) stimulate students to internalize positive attitudes in terms of enjoyment, likings, and values which results in positive students' affective experiences and higher levels of intrinsic motivation (Frenzel et al., 2009; Keller, Chang, Becker, Goetz, & Frenzel, 2014; Keller, Goetz, et al., 2014). Despite these positive relations of faking emotions with perceived teacher enthusiasm and student outcomes, it should be once again stressed that faking emotions as a form of surface acting can also have adverse consequences for teacher wellbeing (e.g., Keller, Chang, et al., 2014). Even though it was hypothesized that deep acting will positively predict perceived teacher enthusiasm, the results did not support this 17

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

Nonetheless, this study has several strengths. First, the analysis is based on data obtained from different sources, namely teachers and their students. Second, the proposed relationships between teacher emotional labor, perceived teacher enthusiasm, and students' outcomes were tested at class level. Since perceived teacher enthusiasm is clearly a class-level variable, the measurement and the analysis of its relations with other constructs should also be done at the class level (Seidman, Weisner, & Tseng, 2006). Unfortunately, in many studies class-level constructs are based on the aggregation of student-level variables, which results in failure to consider the appropriate level of analysis and inability to control for sampling error (Morin et al., 2014). Next, due to the differential pattern of relationships of hiding feelings and faking emotions to other constructs under examination, this study emphasized the importance of treating these two facets of the same construct (surface acting) separately in order to fully understand the meaning of emotional labor in the teaching profession. Finally, the findings obtained contribute to a relatively scarce base of knowledge on the role of teachers' emotional labor and displayed emotions in predicting their students' outcomes.

enthusiasm and positive affect at class level. Also, when teachers behave enthusiastically they induce positive values of learning that specific subject in their students, enhancing their intrinsic motivation and stimulating them to engage in more demanding, but more effective, deep learning strategy. The positive effects of perceived teacher enthusiasm on students' outcomes found in this study are in line with the results of previous research (e.g., Frenzel et al., 2009; Frenzel et al., 2010; Keller, Chang, et al., 2014; Keller, Goetz, et al., 2014; Kim & Schallert, 2014; Kunter et al., 2011; Kunter et al., 2013). In addition, these effects support the claim that perceived teacher enthusiasm is considered as a key component of high instructional quality (Feldman, 2007), which has been proven to be predictive of various positive student outcomes (e.g., Patrick et al., 2007; Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Virtanen et al., 2015). This study has several limitations that should be mentioned. First, this is a cross-sectional, correlational study that does not allow the drawing of any causal inferences regarding the relationships among the variables analysed. Also, the samples were convenient, since they included only a small number of teachers (and their students) from each school who were willing to participate. Indeed, the teachers in this study were, on average, rated as highly enthusiastic by their students (Table 1), which speaks in favour of positive selection bias. Moreover, residual L1 ratings of teacher enthusiasm also turned out to be significant predictors of students' outcomes at student level, and it is believed that such effects may reflect positive response bias (Marsh et al., 2009), i.e., students tended to give more favorable responses while evaluating their teachers' enthusiasm. Besides the fact that such a convenient sample limits the possibility of the generalization of findings, it also leads to range restriction and consequently to lower estimates that have less chance to reach the statistical significance threshold. Furthermore, relatively small sample of teachers probably reduced the statistical power of the research. Therefore, future studies on larger and more representative samples of teachers are mandatory since they could provide more trustworthy conclusions regarding the role of teacher emotional labor in predicting their behavior in classroom as well as students' outcomes. Also, a greater number of teachers would make it possible to include latent variables in the model as well, which would correct for measurement error (Marsh et al., 2009), as well as to investigate the relationships between examined constructs while taking different teaching domains into account. For example, relations between perceived teacher enthusiasm and diverse students' outcomes could differ across different school subjects (e.g., mathematics, science, language, arts, etc.). Finally, in spite of the fact that a majority of the hypotheses were confirmed, the obtained relationships between teacher emotional labor and examined outcome variables probably do not cover the whole picture of the display rules in teaching profession. More specifically, even though, according to the display rules of teaching profession, teachers in most cases try to experience and express positive emotions, and to hide or suppress negative emotions (e.g., Taxer & Frenzel, 2015; Winograd, 2003), there are situations in which teachers may actually act in the opposite way. For example, teachers may display anger in order to discipline misbehaved students even though they are not genuinely angry. Alternatively, teachers may wish to suppress their pride and thrill over students' achievement in order to keep calmness in a class atmosphere. At last, in many situations, teachers would freely express their genuine emotions (Yin, 2012, 2016) since teaching profession is considered to be a caring one, and genuine expression of positive emotions like joy, caring, and love for students is recognized as a voluntary, rewarding, and helpful in fulfilling teachers' professional goals (Yin, 2016). Therefore, in future studies it would be important to take into account which particular teacher emotion is being faked, hidden, or genuinely expressed in order to get true insight into the ways emotional display rules of teaching profession actually operates through emotional labor and in relation to teacher behavior in classroom and student outcomes.

6. Conclusions In conclusion, this study emphasized the central role of perceived teacher enthusiasm in explaining the relationship between teachers' surface acting and students' positive outcomes at class level: teacher enthusiasm fully mediated the relationship between the emotionallabor strategy of hiding feelings and student outcomes, and partially mediated the relationship between the emotional-labor strategy of faking emotions and students' positive affect. In addition, teacher faking emotions directly explained their students' intrinsic motivation and positive affect. Findings of this study may be relevant from both theoretical and practical point of view. For instance, this research pointed out the importance of investigating teachers' emotions and emotionregulation processes in the attempt to explain teacher behavior in classroom as perceived by their students as well as in predicting students' outcomes. Obviously, the ways in which teachers choose to regulate their emotions in order to align their inner experience and outward expression to those prescribed by emotional rules of teaching profession may impact the way they are perceived by their students in classroom. Moreover, their emotion regulation directly explains students' outcomes such as intrinsic motivation and positive affective experiences. Therefore, raising awareness among teachers regarding the costs and benefits of implementing different strategies in order to regulate their feelings and emotional display in classroom, may have positive outcomes on their performance and students' learning. However, it is important to emphasize once again that some forms of emotional labor (i.e., faking emotions) may be advantageous for students, but also harmful for teachers and their occupational well-being. On the other note, hiding feelings or suppression in most cases seem to be maleficent both in terms of their well-being and performance (Hülsheger & Schewe, 2011) and therefore should be avoided and replaced with more beneficial emotion regulation strategies such as reappraisal (e.g. teachers may remind themselves that students are “just kids”), active modification strategy (e.g. teachers may seek for professional assistance with a problematic student), or different behavioral strategies that would reduce emotional tension (e.g. deep breathing) (Burić et al., 2017; Sutton, 2004). Appendix A. Appendix Perceived Teacher Enthusiasm Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 18

Our Our Our Our

teacher teacher teacher teacher

teaches with great enthusiasm. always enjoys teaching us new things. is enthusiastic about the subject. gives the impression that he/she enjoys teaching.

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

5. It can be seen that our teacher loves the subject he/she teaches.

Kim, T., & Schallert, D. L. (2014). Mediating effects of teacher enthusiasm and peer enthusiasm on students' interest in the college classroom. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.03.002. Klieme, R., & Rakoczy, K. (2008). Empirische Unterrichtsforschung und Fachdidaktik. Outocme-orientere Messung und Prozess-qualität des Unterrichts. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 54, 222–237. Klieme, E., Schümer, G., & Knoll, S. (2001). Mathematikunterricht in der Sekundarstufe I: Aufgabenkultur und Unterrichtsgestaltung [Mathematics instruction at secondary level. Task culture and instructional design]. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung BMBF (Ed.), TIMSS e Impulse fur Schule und Unterricht. Forschungsbefunde, Reforminitiativen, Praxisberichte und Video-Dokumente (pp. 43–57). Munich, Germany: Medienhaus Biering. Kunter, M., Tsai, Y.-M., Klusmann, U., Brunner, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2008). Students' and mathematics teachers' perceptions of teacher enthusiasm and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. learninstruc.2008.06.008. Kunter, M., Frenzel, A., Nagy, G., Baumert, J., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Teacher enthusiasm: Dimensionality and context specificity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.07.001. Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820. https://doi.org/10. 1037/a0032583. Lee, R. T., & Brotheridge, C. M. (2011). Words from the heart speak to the heart - a study of deep acting, faking, and hiding among child care workers. Career Development International, 16(4), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111158805. Lüdtke, O., Marsh, H. W., Robitzsch, A., & Trautwein, U. (2011). A 2 × 2 taxonomy of multilevel latent contextual models: Accuracy-bias trade-offs in full and partial errorcorrection models. Psychological Methods, 16, 444–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/ a0024376. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B. O., & Nagengast, B. (2009). Doubly-latent models of school contextual effects: Integrating multilevel and structural equation approaches to control measurement and sampling error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 764–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00273170903333665. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Nagengast, B., Trautwein, U., Morin, A. J. S., Abduljabbar, A. S., & Köller, O. (2012). Classroom climate effects: Methodological issues in the evaluation of group-level effects. Educational psychologist? Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.670488. McKinney, C. W., Robertson, C. W., Gilmore, A. C., Ford, M. J., & Larkins, A. G. (1984). Some effects of three levels of teacher enthusiasm on student achievement and evaluation of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 11, 119–124. Morin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., & Scalas, L. F. (2014). Doubly latent multilevel analyses of classroom climate: An illustration. Journal of Experimental Education, 82(2), 143–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2013.769412. Murray, J. (2007). Countering insularity in teacher education. Academic work on preservice courses in nursing, social work and teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(3), 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607470701450270. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus User's Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Näring, G., Briët, M., & Brouwers, A. (2006). Beyond demand-control: Emotional labour and symptoms of burnout in teachers. Work and Stress, 20, 303–315. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/02678370601065182. Näring, G., Vlerick, P., & Van de Ven, B. (2012). Emotion work and emotional exhaustion in teachers: The job and individual perspective. Educational Studies, 38(1), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2011.567026. Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 469–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9088-5. Niemivirta, M. (1996). Motivational-cognitive components in self-regulated learning. Paper presented at 5th International Conference on Motivation. Germany: Landau. Niemivirta, M. (1998). Individual differences in motivational and cognitive factors affecting self-regulated learning: A pattern-oriented approach. In P. Nenninger, R. S. Jäger, A. Frey, & M. Woznitza (Eds.). Advances in motivation (pp. 23–42). Landau: Verlad Empirische Pädagogik. Oplatka, I. (2007). Managing emotions in teaching: Toward an understanding of emotion displays and caring as nonprescribed role elements. Teachers College Record, 109(6), 1374–1400. Patrick, B. C., Hisley, J., & Kempler, T. (2000). “What's everybody so excited about?”: The effects of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality. The Journal of Experimental Education, 68(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00220970009600093. Patrick, H., Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., & Midgley, C. (2003). How teachers establish psychological environments during the first days of school: Associations with avoidance in mathematics. Teachers College Record, 105, 1521–1558. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1467-9620.00299. Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents' perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83. Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' selfregulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1207/ S15326985EP3702_4.

References Arens, A. K., Morin, A. J. S., & Watermann, R. (2015). Relations between classroom disciplinary problems and student motivation: Achievement as a potential mediator? Learning and Instruction, 39, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015. 07.001. Burić, I., Penezić, Z., & Sorić, I. (2017). Regulating emotions in the teacher’s workplace: Development and initial validation of the Teacher Emotion-Regulation Scale. International Journal of Stress Management, 24(3), 217–246. Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 644–675. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3094912. Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., Morger, V., & Ranellucci, J. (2014). The importance of teachers' emotions and instructional behavior for their students' emotions—An experience sampling analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 15–26. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.tate.2014.05.002. Bettencourt, E. M., Gillett, M. H., Gall, M. D., & Hull, R. E. (1983). Effects of teacher enthusiasm training on student on-task behavior and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 20(3), 435–450. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 00028312020003435. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn. Victoria: Australian Council for Education Research. Brigham, F. J., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Teacher enthusiasm in learning disabilities classrooms: Effects on learning and behavior. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 7, 68–73. Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. Wittrock (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 328–375). New York: MacMillan. Brotheridge, C. M. (2006). A review of emotional labour and its nomological network: Practical and research implications. Ergonomia, 28(4), 295–309 IJE&HF. Brotheridge, C. M., & Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of people work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 17–39. https:// doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1815. Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (2003). Development and validation of the Emotional Labour Scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647229. Day, C. (2004). A passion for teaching. London: Routledge Falmer. Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behavior: A self-determination theory perspective. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.). The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 43–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Dezecache, G., Jacob, P., & Grèzes, J. (2015). Emotional contagion: Its scope and limits. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(6), 297–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.03. 011. Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York: The Guilford Press. Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry, & J. C. Smart (Eds.). Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 368–395). New York: Agathon Press. Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: Exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 705–716. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/a0014695. Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., & Goetz, T. (2010). Achievement Emotions Questionnaire for Teachers (AEQ-Teacher)—user's manual. Munich: Department of Psychology, University of Munich. Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 95–110. https://doi. org/10.1037//1076-8998.5.1.95. Gross, J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39, 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1017//S0048577201393198. Guay, F., Vallerand, R. J., & Blanchard, C. (2000). On the assessment of state intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and Emotion, 24, 175–213. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005614228250. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hülsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: A meta-analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(3), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022876. Isenbarger, L., & Zembylas, M. (2006). The emotional labour of caring in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(1), 120–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate. 2005.07.002. Keller, M. M., Chang, M.-L., Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2014). Teachers' emotional experiences and exhaustion as predictors of emotional labor in the classroom: An experience sampling study. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(1442), https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01442. Keller, M. M., Goetz, T., Becker, E. S., Morger, V., & Hensley, L. (2014). Feeling and showing: A new conceptualization of dispositional teacher enthusiasm and its relation to students' interest. Learning and Instruction, 33, 29–38. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.learninstruc. Keller, M. M., Goetz, T., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Frenzel, A. C. (2016). Teacher enthusiasm: Reviewing and redefining a complex construct. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9354-y.

19

Learning and Individual Differences 70 (2019) 12–20

I. Burić

Virtanen, T. E., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus, A.-M., & Kuorelahti, M. (2015). The relationship between classroom quality and students' engagement in secondary school. Educational Psychology, 35(8), 963–983. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013. 822961. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063. Winograd, K. (2003). The functions of teacher emotions: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1641–1673. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9620. 2003.00304.x. Yin, H. (2012). Adaptation and validation of the teacher emotional labour strategy scale in China. Educational Psychology, 32(4), 451–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01443410.2012.674488. Yin, H. (2016). Knife-like mouth and tofu-like heart: emotion regulation by Chinese teachers in classroom teaching. Social Psychology of Education, 19(1), 1–22. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11218-015-9319-5. Yin, H. B., & Lee, J. C. K. (2012). Be passionate, but be rational as well: Emotional rules for Chinese teachers' work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 56–65. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.08.005. Yin, H., Lee, J. C. K., Zhang, Z., & Jin, Y. (2013). Exploring the relationship among teachers' emotional intelligence, emotional labor strategies and teaching satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013. 06.006. Zhang, Q., & Zhu, W. (2008). Exploring emotion in teaching: Emotional labor, burnout, and satisfaction in Chinese higher education. Communication Education, 57(1), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520701586310.

Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). The classroom assessment scoring system. Manual, pre-K. Baltimore: Brookes. Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0020141. Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge Falmer. Schlessinger, L., & Jentsch, A. (2016). Theoretical and methodological challenges in measuring instructional quality in mathematics education using classroom observations. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48, 29–40. Schoenewolf, G. (1990). Emotional contagion: Behavioral induction in individuals and groups. Modern Psychoanalysis, 15, 49–61. Seidman, E., Weisner, T. S., Tseng, V., & T., W. (2006). Social setting theory and measurement. Grant Foundation: Report and resources guide 2005–2006 (pp. 12–15). New York: William T. Grant Foundation. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4. 571. Sutton, R. E. (2004). Emotional regulation goals and strategies of teachers. Social Psychology of Education, 7, 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-004-4229-y. Sutton, R. E., Mudrey-Camino, R., & Knight, C. C. (2009). Teachers' emotion regulation and classroom management. Theory Into Practice, 48(2), https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00405840902776418. Taxer, J., & Frenzel, A. C. (2015). Facets of teachers' emotional lives: A quantitative investigation of teachers' genuine, faked, and hidden emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 49, 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.03.003.

20