A Cluster-Analytic Approach to Preschool Teachers’ Psychological and Behavioral Profiles: Irrational Beliefs, Burnout, and Innovative Work Behavior

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General Assessment: The manuscript addresses a highly relevant topic in educational and organizational psychology, investigating how irrational beliefs (IB) and burnout dimensions influence early childhood teachers’ innovative work behavior (IWB). Employing both variable-centered (regression) and person-centered (hierarchical cluster) approaches, the study captures both linear relationships and heterogeneous response patterns, providing nuanced insights into the interplay of psychological traits and professional behavior. The integration of cognitive and occupational frameworks with practical implications for educational settings represents a notable strength.

Strengths:

• Relevance and Novelty: The study examines the relatively underexplored intersection of irrational beliefs, burnout, and IWB, offering fresh insights into teacher innovation.
• Theoretical Grounding: Anchoring burnout in the Job Demands–Resources framework and irrational beliefs within cognitive/educational psychology provides a solid conceptual basis. The discussion effectively links personal, cognitive, and occupational factors to behavioral outcomes.
• Methodological Rigor: Combining multiple regression and hierarchical cluster analyses is appropriate and allows the identification of both direct effects and complex teacher profiles. The sample size (N = 337) is adequate, and validated scales enhance reliability.
• Interpretive Depth: The discussion offers sophisticated interpretations of counterintuitive findings, such as the positive association between IB and IWB, framing them in terms of motivational tension, cognitive dissonance, and adaptive problem-solving.
• Practical Implications: The identification of five distinct teacher profiles (Disengaged-Low Innovators, Resilient-Balanced, Adaptive Innovators, Strained but Innovative, and Belief-Driven Innovators) provides actionable guidance for targeted interventions and school management strategies. The discussion emphasizes engagement, resilience, and cognitive flexibility in fostering innovation, which has high applied relevance.
• Holistic Perspective: The manuscript adopts both variable- and person-centered approaches, highlighting nonlinear and context-dependent effects, which advances understanding beyond conventional linear models.

Areas for Improvement:

• Clarification of Hypotheses and Theoretical Framing:
  
  
  • Hypotheses could be more explicitly articulated in the introduction or methods section. A structured H1, H2 format would help readers understand the expected relationships.
  • The discussion of IB as a motivational catalyst could be better anticipated and theoretically grounded in the hypothesis section.

• Depth of Mechanistic Discussion:
  
  
  • While the discussion interprets disengagement, exhaustion, and IB, elaboration on underlying mechanisms (e.g., cognitive dissonance, resilience, coping strategies) would strengthen the theoretical contribution.
  • Consider addressing potential mediators or moderators not included in the current analysis, such as leadership style, peer support, or school climate.

• Integration with Prior Research:
  
  
  • Although previous studies are cited, the manuscript could more explicitly compare its findings with earlier research, particularly regarding unexpected positive effects of IB and the differential impacts of exhaustion vs. disengagement.
  • Discussing similarities or differences with prior teacher profile typologies could enhance contextualization.

• Practical Implications :
  
  
  • The practical recommendations could be more concrete and tailored to each of the five teacher profiles.
  • Suggestions for specific interventions, professional development programs, or reflective practices for teachers with high IB or high disengagement would increase applicability.

• Limitations and Future Research:
  
  
  • Explicitly note the constraints of the cross-sectional design for causal interpretation.
  • Encourage future longitudinal, experimental, or intervention studies to test the causal role of IB as a potential driver for innovation.
  • Suggest inclusion of objective behavioral measures and broader teacher populations to enhance reliability and generalizability.
  • Discuss cross-cultural applicability, given the current sample is largely female early childhood educators in Greece.

• Clarity and Readability:
  • Some sentences in the discussion are long and densely packed, which may impede readability. Breaking them into shorter statements and using clear transitions would improve flow.
  • Causal interpretations should be avoided due to the cross-sectional design.

Overall, the manuscript makes a substantial contribution to understanding the complex interplay of cognitive, motivational, and occupational factors in shaping teacher innovation. With minor revisions addressing hypothesis clarity, deeper mechanistic discussion, explicit comparison with prior research, and enhanced practical recommendations, the manuscript would be suitable for publication in its target journal.

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for your valuable comments. Below, you can find detailed responses regarding your concerns and the corresponding revisions highlighted in the resubmitted file.

• Hypotheses could be more explicitly articulated in the introduction or methods section. A structured H1, H2 format would help readers understand the expected relationships.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 280-284).

• The discussion of IB as a motivational catalyst could be better anticipated and theoretically grounded in the hypothesis section.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 524-525).

• While the discussion interprets disengagement, exhaustion, and IB, elaboration on underlying mechanisms (e.g., cognitive dissonance, resilience, coping strategies) would strengthen the theoretical contribution.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 538-542).

• Consider addressing potential mediators or moderators not included in the current analysis, such as leadership style, peer support, or school climate.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. We will think about these variables in future research.

• Although previous studies are cited, the manuscript could more explicitly compare its findings with earlier research, particularly regarding unexpected positive effects of IB and the differential impacts of exhaustion vs. disengagement.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 546-551)

• Discussing similarities or differences with prior teacher profile typologies could enhance contextualization.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. We have already discussed the teachers’ profiles with previous research and typologies.

• The practical recommendations could be more concrete and tailored to each of the five teacher profiles.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 628-640).

• Suggestions for specific interventions, professional development programs, or reflective practices for teachers with high IB or high disengagement would increase applicability.

Answer: Text added in red (see lines 628-640).

• Explicitly note the constraints of the cross-sectional design for causal interpretation.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 644-645.

• Encourage future longitudinal, experimental, or intervention studies to test the causal role of IB as a potential driver for innovation.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 659-661.

• Suggest inclusion of objective behavioral measures and broader teacher populations to enhance reliability and generalizability.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 661-662.

• Discuss cross-cultural applicability, given the current sample is largely female early childhood educators in Greece.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 663-665.

• Some sentences in the discussion are long and densely packed, which may impede readability. Breaking them into shorter statements and using clear transitions would improve flow.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion.

Reviewer 2 Report

Title and Abstract

• The abstract could benefit from more specific information about the five profiles identified, rather than just mentioning them without elaboration. 
• Consider standardizing terminology throughout the abstract - terms like "inhibitors" are used without prior context or definition. 

Introduction

• The introduction would benefit from a more explicit statement of the research gap being addressed by this study. 
• Consider strengthening the rationale for why these specific variables (IB, burnout, and IWB) were selected among many possible psychological factors affecting teachers. 
• The transition between paragraphs could be improved to enhance the logical flow of ideas. 

Theoretical Framework

Innovative Work Behavior

• Consider elaborating on how IWB specifically manifests in educational contexts versus other organizational settings. 
• The section would benefit from a clearer explanation of how IWB relates to educational outcomes. 

Irrational Beliefs

• Consider providing more concrete examples of how these beliefs manifest in teaching practices. 
• The relationship between IB and other psychological constructs could be more explicitly linked to the study's objectives. 

Burnout

• Consider elaborating on how burnout specifically impacts teaching effectiveness and student outcomes. 
• The section would benefit from more discussion of the potential interaction effects between burnout dimensions and other study variables.

Tables and Figures

• Consider adding a visual representation of the five clusters to enhance interpretation. 
• Consider including a path diagram to visualize the relationships between variables. 

Limitations

• Consider discussing potential statistical limitations related to the cluster analysis approach.

Variable Operationalization:

• Provide more explicit definitions of how each dimension of IWB manifests in educational settings
• Clarify the operationalization of "high," "medium," and "low" levels in cluster profiles
• Ensure consistent measurement descriptions across methods and results sections

Decision: Revise (Minor)

Title and Abstract

• The abstract could benefit from more specific information about the five profiles identified, rather than just mentioning them without elaboration. 
• Consider standardizing terminology throughout the abstract - terms like "inhibitors" are used without prior context or definition. 

Introduction

• The introduction would benefit from a more explicit statement of the research gap being addressed by this study. 
• Consider strengthening the rationale for why these specific variables (IB, burnout, and IWB) were selected among many possible psychological factors affecting teachers. 
• The transition between paragraphs could be improved to enhance the logical flow of ideas. 

Theoretical Framework

Innovative Work Behavior

• Consider elaborating on how IWB specifically manifests in educational contexts versus other organizational settings. 
• The section would benefit from a clearer explanation of how IWB relates to educational outcomes. 

Irrational Beliefs

• Consider providing more concrete examples of how these beliefs manifest in teaching practices. 
• The relationship between IB and other psychological constructs could be more explicitly linked to the study's objectives. 

Burnout

• Consider elaborating on how burnout specifically impacts teaching effectiveness and student outcomes. 
• The section would benefit from more discussion of the potential interaction effects between burnout dimensions and other study variables.

Tables and Figures

• Consider adding a visual representation of the five clusters to enhance interpretation. 
• Consider including a path diagram to visualize the relationships between variables. 

Limitations

• Consider discussing potential statistical limitations related to the cluster analysis approach.

Variable Operationalization:

• Provide more explicit definitions of how each dimension of IWB manifests in educational settings
• Clarify the operationalization of "high," "medium," and "low" levels in cluster profiles
• Ensure consistent measurement descriptions across methods and results sections

Decision: Revise (Minor)

Author Response

• The abstract could benefit from more specific information about the five profiles identified, rather than just mentioning them without elaboration.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. We are of the opinion that only the number and the descriptive label of the clusters should be mentioned in Abstract in order to encourage readers to continue to the next sections.

• Consider standardizing terminology throughout the abstract - terms like "inhibitors" are used without prior context or definition.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. Text changed (line 7).

• The introduction would benefit from a more explicit statement of the research gap being addressed by this study.

Answer: Text added (see lines 86-89).

• Consider strengthening the rationale for why these specific variables (IB, burnout, and IWB) were selected among many possible psychological factors affecting teachers.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 255-262.

• The transition between paragraphs could be improved to enhance the logical flow of ideas.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion.

• Consider elaborating on how IWB specifically manifests in educational contexts versus other organizational settings.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed on lines 113-133.

• The section would benefit from a clearer explanation of how IWB relates to educational outcomes.

Answer: Text added (see lines 132-133).

• Consider providing more concrete examples of how these beliefs manifest in teaching practices.

Answer: Text added (see lines 178-187).

• The relationship between IB and other psychological constructs could be more explicitly linked to the study's objectives.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed in lines 188-199.

• The section would benefit from more discussion of the potential interaction effects between burnout dimensions and other study variables.

Answer: Text added (see lines 243-248).

• Consider adding a visual representation of the five clusters to enhance interpretation.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. Figure added (See Figure X).

• Consider including a path diagram to visualize the relationships between variables.

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. Table 2 has already detailed information about the relationship between variables.

• Consider discussing potential statistical limitations related to the cluster analysis approach.

Answer: Text added (see lines 652-654).

• Provide more explicit definitions of how each dimension of IWB manifests in educational settings.

Answer: Text added (see lines 106-110).

• Clarify the operationalization of "high," "medium," and "low" levels in cluster profiles.

Answer: Thank you for your comment. This is already addressed in footnote of Table 3.

• Ensure consistent measurement descriptions across methods and results sections

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. Measurements descriptions are checked.