"Weary but Not Leaving": A Study on the Influencing Mechanism of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens

"Weary but Not Leaving": A Study on the Influencing Mechanism of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article "Weary but Not Leaving": A Study on the Influencing Mechanism of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens Li Cheng, Yuehan Sun This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 18 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Research on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens is a key factor influencing the quality of early childhood education in rural China, holding significant importance for promoting educational equity. This study employed a combination of stratified sampling and cluster sampling, selecting 334 teachers from 54 rural inclusive private kindergartens in Hubei Province, China, to investigate their retention intention and its influencing factors. The results indicate that teachers' retention intention is generally at a relatively high level. Marital status, parental status, age, teaching experience, income perception, and kindergarten rating significantly influence retention intention. Job burnout (β = -0.370, p < 0.01) and occupational commitment (β = 0.497, p < 0.01) have significant negative and positive predictive effects on retention intention, respectively. Furthermore, occupational commitment plays a partial mediating role between job burnout and retention intention, with a mediation effect of 46.5%. Compared to objective income level, subjective income perception has a significant moderating effect on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention (β = -0.369, p < 0.001). This study provides an in-depth analysis of the complex interaction mechanisms among various factors influencing retention intention, offering scientific empirical evidence and decision-making references for stabilizing the kindergarten teacher workforce and constructing long-term guarantee mechanisms. Social science/Education Biological sciences/Psychology Social science/Psychology rural teachers inclusive private kindergartens retention intention job burnout occupational commitment Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Introduction Rural inclusive kindergartens are an important component of China's public service system for early childhood education. The stability of their teaching staff is directly related to the improvement of educational quality. Currently, the coverage rate of inclusive kindergartens in rural China has reached 90.6%(Wang et al., 2024 ). However, the uneven distribution of early childhood education resources remains prominent. Referring to educational statistical yearbooks from some provinces and municipalities, the coverage rate of public kindergartens in developed rural areas is relatively high, exceeding 50%, while in economically underdeveloped central and western regions, it falls below 30%. Therefore, inclusive private kindergartens in rural China undertake a substantial portion of early childhood education tasks. Nonetheless, the severe shortage and high turnover of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens have become prominent issues, constraining the provision of "quality" early childhood education services. Thus, a thorough investigation into the current status of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive kindergartens, analyzing the key influencing factors and their mechanisms, holds significant practical importance for ensuring the quality of rural early childhood education, narrowing the urban-rural education gap, and promoting educational equity. Retention intention refers to an individual's emotional tendency or willingness to continue working in their current organization, and it is considered the best predictor of employee retention behavior(Yang et al., 2025 ). Employee retention is not only related to personal career choices but also reflects an organization's capacity to retain core talent to achieve sustainable profitability, competitiveness, and productivity(Chen et al., 2016 ). Research indicates that the retention of early childhood teachers is closely associated with high-quality early childhood education programs(Issa et al., 2019 ), which positively impacts children's academic and behavioral development, such as enhancing language and early math skills, fostering positive self-concept, improving teacher-child relationships, and promoting social behavior development(McKenzie & Allensworth, 2025 ). Furthermore, the retention rate of early childhood teachers is positively correlated with occupational commitment(Lewis et al., 2023 ), which helps provide children with better emotional and cognitive support. Therefore, retaining early childhood teachers is of great significance for promoting children's holistic development(Wells, 2015 ). However, retention issues can lead to negative outcomes, such as burnout, job dissatisfaction, and turnover intention(Ning & Hyejin, 2025 ). For example, nurse shortages and low retention rates can lead to a decline in care quality, consequently increasing risks such as patient falls, pressure ulcers, and mortality(Placido & Yansaneh, 2025 ). It also increases organizational costs, including heightened recruitment needs and productivity losses(Backhaus et al., 2017 ; Ciftci et al., 2025 ). Many factors influence employee retention intention, including personal traits(Munoz et al., 2025 ), work environment, leadership characteristics(Boyle et al., 1999 ), job satisfaction(Mrayyan, 2007 ), organizational identification(Carrega & Rouse, 2025 ), among which job burnout and organizational commitment are considered the most influential factors(Harwood et al., 2010 ; Hennig-Thurau, 2004 ). Domestic and international research has laid a solid theoretical foundation for this study. However, existing studies mostly focus on groups such as doctors, nurses, and corporate employees. Research specifically targeting teachers, especially kindergarten teachers, is relatively scarce. Empirical studies focusing on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens in China and analyzing its influencing mechanisms are even rarer. Based on field survey data, this study systematically examines the current status of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens. It employs analysis of variance (ANOVA) to identify key factors influencing kindergarten teachers' retention intention. Furthermore, it uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to reveal the mediating role of occupational commitment between job burnout and retention intention. Simultaneously, it utilizes the Process macro to explore the moderating effect of income level, delving into the complex interaction mechanisms among various factors influencing retention intention. The aim is to provide scientific empirical evidence and decision-making references for stabilizing the kindergarten teacher workforce and constructing long-term guarantee mechanisms. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses (1) Job Burnout and Retention Intention Job burnout is a syndrome composed of three dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. Its essence is a workplace-induced issue rather than a personal trait. Among these, emotional exhaustion, as the core indicator of burnout, manifests as the depletion of emotional and physical resources due to prolonged exposure to excessive work stress(Bargain-Villeger, 2014 ). The causes of job burnout are complex and varied, but its negative impacts are often severe. Studies on nurses indicate that job burnout significantly reduces productivity, service quality, impairs nurses' physical and mental health, and increases medical costs(Ji et al., 2025 ). Nurses reporting burnout are three times more likely to leave their jobs. Research on general practitioners found that employment type(Flynn et al., 2009 ), workload, emotional exhaustion, and low sense of accomplishment are main factors influencing their retention intention. Additionally, studies on teachers in private universities show that job burnout is significantly negatively correlated with retention intention(Pei et al., 2024 ); higher burnout levels correspond to lower retention intention. Reducing teacher burnout is conducive to enhancing teachers' work enthusiasm. Currently, research on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens is relatively limited(Pei et al., 2024 ). However, survey results on doctors, nurses, and university teachers consistently indicate that job burnout has a negative predictive effect on retention intention. Therefore, this study proposes Hypothesis H1: Job burnout has a negative impact on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens. (2) The Mediating Role of Occupational Commitment Occupational commitment, as an important construct in organizational behavior, holds significant theoretical value and practical meaning in employee retention research. Based on social exchange theory, the reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization is a key factor influencing organizational commitment (Blau, 1964). As an important dimension of organizational commitment, occupational commitment reflects an employee's emotional attachment, moral responsibility, and willingness for continuous investment in their profession. Research shows that occupational commitment encompasses three core dimensions: affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment, which collectively influence employees' work attitudes and behavioral intentions(Robert & Vandenberghe, 2021 ). According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, occupational commitment influences behavioral intentions by affecting psychological mechanisms such as attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control(Somers, 2009 ). Among teacher populations, the level of occupational commitment is significantly positively correlated with retention intention(Jahanzeb & Bouckenooghe, 2024 ). Studies show that teachers with high occupational commitment often exhibit stronger professional development motivation and lower turnover tendency. This finding aligns with the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, which posits that occupational commitment, as an important psychological resource, can enhance an individual's ability to cope with work stress, thereby reducing turnover intention(Perko et al., 2016 ). However, job burnout, as a significant antecedent variable of occupational commitment, can significantly weaken teachers' level of occupational commitment. According to the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, all three dimensions of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced accomplishment) negatively affect occupational commitment. Empirical studies show that emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment have significant predictive effects on occupational commitment(Li et al., 2022 ). This negative impact ultimately leads to a decrease in employees' retention intention(Jung & Kim, 2012 ; Spence et al., 2009 ). Based on the above theoretical analysis, this study proposes the following hypotheses: H2: Occupational commitment has a positive impact on kindergarten teachers' retention intention. H3: Job burnout has a negative impact on kindergarten teachers' occupational commitment. H4: Occupational commitment plays a mediating role between job burnout and kindergarten teachers' retention intention. (3) The Moderating Role of Income Level and Income Perception Level Based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the satisfaction of individual needs follows a progression from lower-level to higher-level needs, among which physiological and safety needs are the most basic survival needs. Income, as a core element for satisfying individual survival needs, not only directly affects an individual's material standard of living but also influences their psychological state and behavioral intentions through the subjective cognitive variable of income perception(Pincus, 2023 ). Research indicates that income level plays a significant moderating role in alleviating job burnout and enhancing occupational commitment. According to Equity Theory, an individual's perception of income depends not only on the absolute income level but is also influenced by social comparison processes(Peng et al., 2018 ). When individuals perceive a mismatch between their income and their input, even if the actual income is relatively high, they may develop a sense of unfairness, thereby affecting their work attitudes and behaviors(Betancourt-Salamanca et al., 2024 ). Furthermore, the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory suggests that income, as an important external resource, can enhance an individual's ability to cope with job burnout, thereby maintaining a higher level of occupational commitment. Research shows that income perception has a significant moderating effect on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention(Perko et al., 2016 ), with high income perception buffering the negative impact of burnout on retention intention(Shimazu & de Jonge, 2009 ). Further research finds that both income level and income perception play important roles in the mediating effect of occupational commitment. Existing studies show that income level not only directly affects the relationship between job burnout and retention intention but also indirectly influences retention intention by moderating the mediating effect of occupational commitment(Ng et al., 2024 ). High income level and high income perception can strengthen the positive impact of occupational commitment on retention intention, thereby partially offsetting the negative impact of job burnout(Shah et al., 2023 ). Based on the above theoretical analysis, this study proposes the following hypotheses(Fig. 1 ): H5a: Income level plays a moderating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention; H5b: Income level plays a moderating role in the mediating effect of occupational commitment on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention; H5c: Income perception level plays a moderating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention; H5d: Income perception level plays a moderating role in the mediating effect of occupational commitment on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention. Research Methods Participants This study employed a combination of stratified sampling and cluster sampling. Seventeen prefectures (or prefecture-level cities) in Hubei Province, China, were categorized into high, medium, and low economic development levels. Three regions were randomly selected from each development level, and then two counties were selected from each sampled region, totaling 18 counties. In each county, three non-county seat towns were selected, and one inclusive private kindergarten was selected from each town. All teachers from the selected kindergartens were included in the survey, covering 54 inclusive private kindergartens. A total of 360 questionnaires were collected, with 334 valid responses, resulting in a validity rate of 92.7%. The specific distribution of the sample is shown in Table 1 . Table 1 Sample Distribution Table Category Dimension Frequency Percentage Category Dimension Frequency Percentage Gender Male 9 2.7% Marital Status Unmarried 22 6.6% Female 325 97.3% Married 312 93.4% Age Under 25 24 7.2% Education Level Junior high or below 36 10.8% 25–35 153 45.8% High School / Vocational School 136 40.7% 35–45 123 36.8% Associate Degree 128 38.3% Above 45 34 10.2% Bachelor's Degree 34 10.2% Kindergarten Type Demonstration Kindergarten 44 13.2% Professional Title Unrated 293 87.7% Level 1 Kindergarten 124 37.1% Level 3 4 1.2% Level 2 Kindergarten 51 15.3% Level 2 17 5.1% Level 3 Kindergarten 38 11.4% Level 1 11 3.3% Unrated 77 23.1% Senior Level 9 2.7% Teaching Certificate Yes 82 24.6% Having Children No 22 6.6% No 252 75.4% Yes 312 93.4% Income Below 2000 RMB 222 66.5% Daily Working Hours 8 hours or less 107 32.0% 2000–3000 RMB 94 28.1% 9–10 hours 194 58.1% Above 3000 RMB 18 5.4% 11 hours or more 33 9.9% Social Insurance Purchased 161 48.2% Residence Location vs. Workplace Same town (township) 182 54.5% Not Purchased 173 51.8% Same county (county/district) 75 22.5% Housing Provident Fund Purchased 12 3.6% Same city (prefecture-level city) 60 18.0% Not Purchased 322 96.4% Other 17 5.1% Received Rural Subsidy No 260 77.8% Income Perception Low Income Perception 206 61.6% Not Clear 45 13.5% High Income Perception 128 38.3% Yes 29 8.7% Research Instruments Retention Intention Scale Based on Farh's turnover intention scale(Osta, 2025 ), it was revised according to the actual situation of teachers in inclusive private kindergartens. The revised kindergarten teacher retention intention scale demonstrated good content validity, with a Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.792. This scale is unidimensional, consisting of 6 items (e.g., "I have never considered leaving the teaching profession"). It uses a five-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". Higher total scores indicate stronger retention intention. Job Burnout Scale The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) developed by Maslach and Jackson was used. This scale includes three dimensions: emotional exhaustion (representing the stress dimension of burnout), depersonalization (representing the interpersonal context dimension), and reduced personal accomplishment (representing the self-evaluation dimension), totaling 15 items. A six-point scoring method is used, with higher scores indicating higher levels of job burnout. In this study, the scale demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity, with an internal consistency coefficient of 0.85. Occupational Commitment Scale The occupational commitment scale designed by Meyer & Allen (1991) and validated by Wasti (2000) was used. This scale consists of 9 items, including three sub-dimensions: Affective Commitment, Continuance Commitment, and Normative Commitment, with three items each. The questionnaire uses a five-point Likert scale from 1-"strongly disagree" to 5-"strongly agree". Higher scores indicate higher occupational commitment among kindergarten teachers. The overall internal consistency coefficient of the scale was 0.87. Data Analysis SPSS 24.0, the PROCESS macro, and AMOS were used for data coding, management, and analysis. Analytical techniques included reliability and validity tests, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), one-way ANOVA, independent samples t-tests, correlation analysis, and mediation and moderation effect model testing. Results Overall Status of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens In this study, the average score for retention intention among teachers in inclusive private kindergartens was 3.82 (Min = 1, Max = 5, SD = 0.90). By converting the total retention intention score into a standard score and dividing participants into high, medium, and low groups based on one standard deviation above and below the mean, the results showed: 74 individuals in the high group (22.2%), 231 in the medium group (69.2%), and 29 in the low group (8.7%). The proportion of medium and high groups was significantly higher than the low group, indicating that the retention intention of teachers in inclusive private kindergartens is generally at a relatively high level. Analysis of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens One-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD tests and independent samples t-tests were used to examine differences in scores for retention intention, occupational commitment, and job burnout among teachers with different marital status, age, teaching experience, education level, major, teaching certificate, professional title, kindergarten rating, income, income perception, distance from home to workplace, daily working hours, class type, number of teachers per class, class size, work role, and whether they had received rural teacher subsidies. The results showed significant differences in the variables among teachers with different marital status, age, teaching experience, kindergarten rating, income perception, and daily working hours. Specific results are as follows: Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Marital Status Independent samples t-tests compared differences between unmarried and married teachers. As shown in Table 2 , teachers with different marital status showed significant differences in retention intention and job burnout (p 0.05). Married teachers had significantly higher retention intention than unmarried teachers (p < 0.01), while unmarried teachers had significantly higher job burnout than married teachers (p < 0.05). Table 2 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Marital Status (M ± SD) Variable Marital Status Mean SD t-value df p-value Mean Diff 95% CI Job Burnout Unmarried 2.60 0.76 2.065 332 0.040 0.32 [0.02, 0.63] Married 2.28 0.71 Occupational Commitment Unmarried 3.97 0.85 -0.459 332 0.647 -0.07 [-0.37, 0.23] Married 4.04 0.68 Retention Intention Unmarried 3.27 0.94 -2.963 332 0.003 -0.58 [-0.97, -0.20] Married 3.86 0.89 *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Age One-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined significant differences in scores by age. As shown in Table 3 , teachers of different ages showed significant differences in job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention (p < 0.01). LSD tests revealed that teachers aged 25 and below had the highest level of job burnout, significantly higher than those aged 26–35 and 46 and above (p < 0.01). Teachers below 46 had significantly lower occupational commitment and retention intention than those 46 and above (p < 0.01), and retention intention increased progressively with age. Table 3 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Age Dimension Job Burnout (M ± SD) Occupational Commitment (M ± SD) Retention Intention (M ± SD) ① ≤25 years 2.57 ± 0.74 3.97 ± 0.80 3.50 ± 0.89 ② 26–35 years 2.28 ± 0.69 4.01 ± 0.66 3.75 ± 0.92 ③ 36–45 years 2.38 ± 0.71 3.95 ± 0.66 3.80 ± 0.84 ④ ≥46 years 1.90 ± 0.68 4.46 ± 0.77 4.38 ± 0.82 F-value 5.595** 5.284** 6.230*** Post-hoc (LSD) ① > ② > ④; ③ > ④ ①②③ < ④ ①②③ < ④ *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Teaching Experience LSD post-hoc tests showed that teachers with 5 years or less of teaching experience had the highest job burnout, significantly higher than those with 6–10 years of experience (p < 0.01). Teachers with 16 years or more of experience had the highest levels of occupational commitment and retention intention. Their occupational commitment was significantly higher than that of teachers with 10 years or less of experience (p < 0.05), and their retention intention was significantly higher than that of teachers with less than 16 years of experience (p < 0.05). Details are shown in Table 4 . Table 4 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Teaching Experience Dimension Job Burnout (M ± SD) Occupational Commitment (M ± SD) Retention Intention (M ± SD) ① ≤5 years 2.41 ± 0.71 3.99 ± 0.64 3.72 ± 0.89 ② 6–10 years 2.19 ± 0.70 3.94 ± 0.77 3.80 ± 0.83 ③ 11–15 years 2.26 ± 0.72 4.14 ± 0.64 3.66 ± 1.08 ④ ≥16 years 2.20 ± 0.75 4.30 ± 0.66 4.16 ± 0.87 F-value 2.203** 3.452* 3.677* Post-hoc (LSD) ① > ② ①② < ④ ①②③ < ④ *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Income Perception Independent samples t-tests compared differences between the low-income perception group and the high-income perception group. As shown in Table 5 , teachers in the high-income perception group had significantly higher retention intention and occupational commitment than those in the low-income perception group (p < 0.01). Teachers in the low-income perception group had significantly higher job burnout than those in the high-income perception group (p < 0.001). Table 5 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Income Perception Variable Income Perception Mean SD t-value df p-value Mean Diff 95% CI Retention Intention Low Perception 3.71 0.88 -2.708 332 0.007 -0.27 [-0.44, -0.07] High Perception 3.98 0.90 Occupational Commitment Low Perception 3.92 0.72 -4.061 332 0.000 -0.31 [-0.46, -0.16] High Perception 4.23 0.59 Job Burnout Low Perception 2.41 0.70 3.544 332 0.000 0.28 [0.12, 0.44] High Perception 2.13 0.70 Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Kindergarten Rating One-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined differences by kindergarten rating. As shown in Table 6 , teachers from different rated kindergartens showed no significant differences in job burnout and occupational commitment (p > 0.05). Regarding retention intention, teachers from Level 1 and Level 3 kindergartens had significantly higher scores than those from Demonstration and Level 2 kindergartens (p < 0.05). Table 6 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Kindergarten Rating Dimension Job Burnout (M ± SD) Occupational Commitment (M ± SD) Retention Intention (M ± SD) ① Demonstration 2.32 ± 0.72 4.10 ± 0.67 3.61 ± 0.92 ② Level 1 2.27 ± 0.71 4.12 ± 0.72 3.94 ± 0.82 ③ Level 2 2.46 ± 0.71 3.90 ± 0.65 3.57 ± 1.01 ④ Level 3 2.14 ± 0.83 4.07 ± 0.73 4.05 ± 0.87 ⑤ Unrated 2.32 ± 0.65 3.95 ± 0.66 3.79 ± 0.89 F-value 1.181 1.331 2.815* Post-hoc (LSD) --- --- ①③ < ②④ *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Daily Working Hours One-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined differences by daily working hours. As shown in Table 7 , regarding job burnout, teachers working 8 hours or less had significantly lower burnout than those working 11 hours or more (p < 0.05). Regarding occupational commitment, teachers working 8 hours or less had significantly higher commitment than those working 9 hours or more. Regarding retention intention, there was no significant difference among teachers with different working hours (p > 0.05). Table 7 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Daily Working Hours Dimension Job Burnout (M ± SD) Occupational Commitment (M ± SD) Retention Intention (M ± SD) ① ≤8 hours 2.18 ± 0.75 4.22 ± 0.58 3.86 ± 0.89 ② 9–10 hours 2.33 ± 0.69 3.96 ± 0.70 3.85 ± 0.87 ③ ≥11 hours 2.48 ± 0.66 3.87 ± 0.87 3.52 ± 1.03 F-value 2.888* 6.057** 2.102 Post-hoc (LSD) ① ②③ --- *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Comparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Parental Status Independent samples t-tests compared differences between teachers with and without children. As shown in Table 8 , teachers with different parental status showed no significant differences in job burnout and occupational commitment (p > 0.05), but showed significant differences in retention intention (p < 0.01). Teachers who were raising children had significantly higher retention intention than those without children. Table 8 Analysis of Differences in Variables by Parental Status Variable Having Children Mean SD t-value df p-value Mean Diff 95% CI Job Burnout No 2.57 0.78 1.812 332 0.071 0.28 [-0.16, 0.02] Yes 2.28 0.71 Occupational Commitment No 4.00 0.84 -0.252 332 0.801 -0.04 [-0.15, 0.34] Yes 4.03 0.68 Retention Intention No 3.32 0.95 -2.727 332 0.007 -0.53 [-0.92, -0.15] Yes 3.85 0.88 Correlation Analysis among Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention The correlation matrix for the total mean scores of job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention is shown in Table 9 . The results show that occupational commitment and its dimensions are significantly positively correlated with retention intention, and significantly negatively correlated with job burnout and its dimensions. Job burnout and its dimensions are significantly negatively correlated with retention intention. Retention intention and job burnout showed the highest correlation coefficient with normative commitment. Table 9 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix for Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention Variable M ± SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Occupational Comm. 4.04 ± 0.69 1 2 Affective Comm. 4.35 ± 0.67 .807** 1 3 Normative Comm. 3.98 ± 0.87 .924** .634** 1 4 Continuance Comm. 3.51 ± 1.06 .712** .315** .557** 1 5 Job Burnout 2.30 ± 0.71 − .476** − .425** − .482** − .218** 1 6 Emotional Exhaust. 2.71 ± 1.05 − .365** − .371** − .370** − .110* .614** 1 7 Depersonalization 1.75 ± 0.85 − .410** − .394** − .421** − .142** .530** .474** 1 8 Reduced Accompl. 2.13 ± 1.02 − .352** − .293** − .369** − .167** .828** .176** .218** 1 9 Retention Intention 3.82 ± 0.90 .497** .409** .504** .271** − .370** − .296** − .326** − .269** 1 *Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Testing the Mediating Effect of Occupational Commitment on the Influence of Job Burnout on Retention Intention The above findings indicate significant correlations among job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention among rural inclusive private kindergarten teachers, meeting the preconditions for testing mediation effects. To further explore how occupational commitment influences the relationship between job burnout and retention intention, this study employed structural equation modeling (SEM). Model fit was estimated using the maximum likelihood method. The results showed that all model fit indices met the SEM fit standards, as detailed in Table 10. Table 10 Model Fit Indices Category NFI GFI AGFI IFI TLI CFI CMIN/DF RMSEA Threshold >.90 >.90 >.90 >.90 >.90 >.90 .10 bad Mediated Model .929 .960 .906 .947 .906 .946 3.835 0.082 Figure 2 and Table 11 show the regression weights and path relationships among variables. All factor loadings were significant at p < 0.001 (loading range 0.40 ~ 0.968), indicating good model-data fit. After controlling for factors such as marital status, age, teaching experience, and income perception, as shown in Fig. 2 , occupational commitment directly influenced teachers' retention intention, while job burnout had both direct and indirect effects on retention intention. After introducing the occupational commitment variable, the negative predictive effect of job burnout on retention intention decreased but remained significant (β = -0.27, P < 0.001). Table 11 SEM Path Relationship Test Results Path Relationship Estimate S.E. C.R. P Occupational Commitment <--- Job Burnout -0.672 .189 -5.275 *** Retention Intention <--- Occupational Commitment 0.347 .139 3.715 *** Retention Intention <--- Job Burnout -0.267 .228 -2.579 .010 After controlling for factors such as teacher age and teaching experience, the Bootstrap method was used for mediation effect testing with 5000 samples. The statistical data (Table 12 ) show that the Bias-Corrected 95% confidence intervals for both the direct effect and indirect effect of job burnout did not include zero. This indicates that kindergarten teachers' occupational commitment plays a partial mediating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention. The size of the mediation effect is 46.5% (-0.67*0.35 / (-0.67*0.35 − 0.27)). Table 12 Mediation Test Results Variable Point Estimate Product of Coefficients Bootstrapping (Bias-Corrected 95% CI) (Percentile 95% CI) SE Z Lower Upper Lower Upper Job Burnout → Ret. Intention -0.500 0.235 -2.128 -0.627 -0.378 -0.626 -0.376 Job Burnout → Ret. Intention -0.233 0.097 -2.402 -0.470 -0.071 -0.426 -0.062 Job Burnout → Ret. Intention -0.267 0.129 -2.070 -0.514 -0.018 -0.514 -0.019 Testing the Moderating Effects of Income Level and Income Perception Level The SPSS macro PROCESS (Model 8) was used to test the moderating effects of income level and income perception level separately, after dummy coding these variables. The results showed that when income level was the moderator, the interaction term between job burnout and income level was not significant (p > 0.05), indicating that income level had no moderating effect on either the direct or indirect influence of job burnout on retention intention. When income perception level was the moderator, with occupational commitment as the dependent variable, the interaction term between job burnout and income level was also not significant (p > 0.05). However, with retention intention as the dependent variable, the interaction term was significant (β = -0.257, p < 0.05), indicating that income perception significantly moderated the effect of job burnout on retention intention. Therefore, hypotheses H5a, H5b, and H5d were not supported, while H5c was supported. To clarify the moderating effect of income perception, teacher samples were divided into high and low income perception groups based on one standard deviation above and below the mean. The results showed that the direct effect of job burnout on retention intention differed at different levels of income perception. When income perception was low, the effect of job burnout on retention intention was not significant (β = -0.112, p > 0.1). When income perception was high, the effect was significant (β = -0.369, p < 0.001). This indicates that for teachers with high income perception, job burnout has a significant negative impact on retention intention; higher burnout leads to lower retention intention. Figure 3 illustrates this moderating effect. Discussion and Conclusion Overall Status of Retention Intention among Rural Inclusive Private Kindergarten Teachers The results of this study suggest that the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens in China tends to be relatively high. This finding aligns with Guo Liping’s conclusion that kindergarten teachers generally report high retention intention, as well as Shang Weiwei’s observation that turnover intention among kindergarten teachers is relatively low. This pattern may reflect, in part, the increasing emphasis placed on rural early childhood education by national and local governments within the context of rural revitalization. In recent years, China has undertaken measures to improve the overall environment for rural early childhood education, including strengthening the public service system. For example, the "Key Points of the Ministry of Education's Work in 2020" proposed optimizing the professional and humanistic environment for rural educators through initiatives such as staffing management, coordinated urban–rural allocation channels, and career growth pathways, as well as enhancing teachers’ status and treatment. Similarly, the "Hubei Province Preschool Education Development and Enhancement Action Plan (2022–2025)" emphasizes strengthening the preschool education teaching workforce and providing additional training opportunities for early childhood teachers in rural areas. These policies may have contributed to safeguarding and improving the rights and professional environment of rural kindergarten teachers, potentially supporting higher levels of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens. Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Demographic Characteristics The survey results suggest that married teachers tend to report higher retention intention compared to unmarried teachers, whereas unmarried teachers tend to exhibit higher levels of job burnout. This pattern may potentially reflect the family responsibilities of married teachers. Married teachers often need to balance work and family obligations, and the relatively fixed working hours, regular holidays, opportunities related to their own children's kindergarten enrollment, and stable income characteristic of the kindergarten teaching profession may better support their family needs, potentially enhancing retention intention. Additionally, teachers with parenting experience appear to have relatively higher retention intention, which may reflect greater adaptability to childcare work in kindergarten settings, stronger professional resilience, and a higher likelihood of experiencing a sense of accomplishment. Significant differences in job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention were also observed across age and teaching experience groups. Regarding job burnout, teachers aged 25 and below exhibited the highest levels, significantly higher than the 26–35 and 46-and-above age groups, which may partially reflect their limited work experience. Rural inclusive private kindergartens often face challenges such as high workload intensity due to teacher shortages, weak social support networks, and limited professional development opportunities, which may further contribute to higher burnout(Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004 ).Regarding occupational commitment and retention intention, teachers aged 46 and above reported higher scores than younger teachers, with retention intention generally increasing with age. This pattern may reflect greater career stability and stronger professional identity among older teachers. Similarly, teachers with 16 or more years of experience tended to report higher occupational commitment and retention intention compared to those with shorter tenures, which may indicate that accumulated experience supports stronger professional identity and a sense of belonging, potentially contributing to higher retention intention. Objective income level was not significantly associated with job burnout, occupational commitment, or retention intention. However, teachers’ subjective perception of their income was significantly related to professional psychology and behavior. Teachers perceiving high income tended to report stronger occupational commitment and higher retention intention (p < 0.01), whereas those perceiving low income reported higher job burnout (p < 0.001). This finding aligns with social cognitive theory, which suggests that cognitive evaluations influence emotions and behaviors, rather than objective conditions alone(Pinheiro & Palma-Moreira, 2025 ),and with Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, where resource perception (e.g., income fairness) affects the allocation of psychological resources and can influence work behavior and retention intention via emotional experiences(Perko et al., 2016 ). Teachers perceiving higher income may experience a better alignment between professional value and reward, which may support professional identity and retention intention(Chaudhry & Espinosa, 2024 ; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004 ),, whereas those perceiving low income may experience a perceived imbalance in their psychological contract, potentially intensifying burnout(Montes, 2006 ).Subjective income satisfaction, including relative comparisons with others, may better predict career decisions and stability than objective income(Betancourt-Salamanca et al., 2024 ) ,highlighting the role of psychological perception in retention(Alabod, 2024 ). Retention intention was found to be relatively lower among teachers in Demonstration and Level 2 kindergartens compared to Level 1 and Level 3 kindergartens. This pattern may be associated with the distinct professional ecological characteristics of these two types of kindergartens. Teachers in Demonstration kindergartens often undertake frequent observation activities and administrative inspections, potentially increasing workload and psychological pressure, which may influence retention intention. Level 2 kindergartens occupy an intermediate tier, with limited access to high-quality resources and professional development support compared to Level 1 kindergartens, while bearing greater teaching standards and administrative responsibilities than Level 3 kindergartens. This mismatch may contribute to higher burnout and lower retention intention. Daily working hours were significantly related to job burnout and occupational commitment. Teachers working 8 hours or less per day reported lower burnout than those working 11 hours or more (p < 0.05) and higher occupational commitment than those working 9 hours or more. This finding aligns with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, which suggests that overload may deplete psychological resources, potentially weakening occupational commitment and exacerbating burnout. However, retention intention was not significantly affected by working hours, possibly due to limited employment alternatives in rural areas or buffering effects from professional identity and social support. These results suggest that reducing working hours may help alleviate burnout, but promoting retention intention likely requires simultaneous improvement in the professional ecology, such as strengthening social support and optimizing work autonomy(Perko et al., 2016 ). The Mediating Role of Occupational Commitment between Job Burnout and Retention Intention This study finds significant negative correlations between job burnout and both retention intention and occupational commitment, while occupational commitment is positively correlated with retention intention. These results support hypotheses H1, H2, and H3 and are broadly consistent with previous research. Specifically, teachers reporting higher levels of job burnout tend to report lower retention intention and occupational commitment. This pattern may reflect the tendency of burnout to reduce enthusiasm and engagement at work, potentially diminishing professional identity and belonging, and thereby lowering willingness to remain in the position long-term. Conversely, occupational commitment, as an intrinsic motivational factor, may strengthen teachers’ loyalty and stability within their profession(He et al., 2025 ). Accordingly, higher occupational commitment is associated with stronger retention intention. These findings are consistent with work engagement theory, which suggests that occupational commitment can enhance identification with work, while job burnout can undermine this process. It is important to note that job burnout should not be interpreted as a personal psychological deficit, but rather as a state of emotional and physical exhaustion arising from work environment and professional ecological factors under high job demands. This highlights the potential importance of improving the professional ecological environment of kindergarten teachers to support their retention intention. Structural equation modeling analysis indicates that occupational commitment partially mediates the relationship between job burnout and retention intention, with a mediation effect of 46.5%, supporting hypothesis H4. Overall, job burnout is associated not only with lower retention intention directly but also indirectly by weakening occupational commitment. Individuals experiencing higher burnout may become emotionally detached from work, exhibit lower organizational commitment, and experience reduced job stability. Conversely, teachers with higher occupational commitment may demonstrate stronger professional identity, responsibility, and accountability, which can facilitate proactive coping strategies, potentially mitigating emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment and thereby supporting retention. These results suggest that, in fostering teacher professional development, attention to both the professional ecological environment and the cultivation of occupational commitment may help teachers better manage work-related stress, enhance their professional identification, and maintain willingness to remain in their roles. The Moderating Effect of Income Perception Level Moderation analysis indicates that income perception level does not moderate the direct or indirect effect of job burnout on retention intention for hypotheses H5a and H5b, which were not supported. However, income perception level significantly moderates the direct effect of job burnout on retention intention, supporting H5c but not H5d. Specifically, the association between job burnout and retention intention varies across different levels of income perception. Among teachers with low income perception, job burnout is not significantly associated with retention intention, whereas among teachers with high income perception, higher job burnout is associated with lower retention intention. One possible explanation is the limited occupational mobility for teachers in rural areas, particularly for those with low income perception, who often have fewer external employment opportunities. Economic pressures may constrain their career choices, meaning that even when experiencing job burnout, they may remain in their positions due to practical survival needs(Nguyen et al., 2024 ).Additionally, close-knit rural social networks may provide both economic and emotional support, potentially mitigating the negative association between burnout and retention intention. In contrast, teachers with high income perception often possess stronger professional capabilities and greater market competitiveness, making external employment opportunities more accessible. Consequently, when experiencing job burnout, they may be more likely to consider alternative work environments. Rural inclusive private kindergartens typically face challenges such as resource scarcity, low wages, limited social security, heavy workloads, and constrained professional development opportunities. Teachers with low income perception may have relatively lower expectations regarding salary and career advancement(Yang & Rao, 2021 ), which may partially explain why burnout does not strongly affect their retention intention. In contrast, teachers with high income perception generally have higher expectations for their professional environment and remuneration. When there is a substantial gap between expectations and reality, this may exacerbate the negative association between job burnout and retention intention. Furthermore, the lack of comprehensive career advancement mechanisms and professional development support in rural private kindergartens may increase the likelihood that teachers with high income perception experiencing burnout consider leaving for positions with greater growth potential(Wang & Wang, 2024 ). Limitations of the Study Despite offering empirical insights into the mechanisms shaping retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens, several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, the sample was drawn exclusively from Hubei Province. As socio-economic and cultural conditions may vary across regions, caution is warranted when generalising the findings beyond the study context. In addition, the focus on rural inclusive private kindergartens means that the conclusions may not be directly applicable to teachers working in public kindergartens or urban private settings. Expanding the geographical scope and including a wider range of kindergarten types would help to enhance the generalisability of future research. Second, the cross-sectional design constrains causal inference. Although this study effectively examines associations among job burnout, occupational commitment and retention intention, as well as the proposed moderated mediation model, it does not allow for conclusions regarding causal direction or temporal dynamics. Longitudinal or intervention-based research designs would be better suited to capturing developmental processes and establishing more robust causal relationships. Finally, the exclusive reliance on self-reported questionnaire data may introduce common method variance and social desirability bias. Future studies could strengthen the robustness of the findings by incorporating multiple data sources, such as evaluations from principals, organisational records or objective turnover indicators, thereby providing a more comprehensive understanding of teacher retention. Declarations Disclosure statement The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability We confirm that the dataset analyzed in this study will be made publicly available upon publication of the paper. Currently, these materials have been uploaded as supplementary materials along with this submission for peer review. Upon acceptance of the paper, they will be archived with a permanent access link provided. Ethical approval and informed consent statements Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of XX University. All procedures involving human participants were carried out in accordance with the ethical standards of the approving IRB and with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical guidelines applicable at the time of the research. The scope of the approval covered the study design, participant recruitment, questionnaire-based data collection, and data management procedures. Ethical approval was obtained prior to the commencement of the study (Case No. 001574; approved on 20 August 2022). Informed consent Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their participation in this study. For the survey component, informed consent was obtained from kindergarten teachers through a digital informed consent notice presented on the first page of the online questionnaire. The notice clearly informed participants of the purpose of the study-namely, to examine retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens-the research procedures, the voluntary nature of participation, assurance of anonymity and confidentiality, the intended use of the data for academic and policy-related research purposes only, and the absence of any foreseeable risks associated with participation. Participants were informed that their participation was entirely voluntary, that they could discontinue participation at any point without any negative consequences, and that no personally identifiable information would be collected. Completion and submission of the questionnaire were taken as an indication of informed consent. All consent procedures were administered by the corresponding author in October 2022. The scope of consent covered participation in the study, including the research design, data collection, and data analysis phases, as well as the use of anonymised data for research dissemination and publication. References Alabod F (2024) The Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Job Satisfaction: Evidence From Türkiye Using Life Satisfaction Survey . ://PQDT:123181754 Backhaus R, van Rossum E, Verbeek H, Halfens RJG, Tan FES, Capezuti E, Hamers JPH (2017) Relationship between the presence of baccalaureate-educated RNs and quality of care: a cross-sectional study in Dutch long-term care facilities [Article]. BMC Health Services Research , 17 , Article 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1947-8 Bargain-Villeger A (2014) The Scarecrow on the Other Side of the Pond: The Paris Commune of 1871 in the Canadian Press [Article]. Labour-Le Travail (74), 179–198. ://WOS:000345486700009 Betancourt-Salamanca S, Avila-Nivia N, Mena-Borrero ND, Sanchez-Ruales N, Ruiz-Castillo CT, Varela-Jaramillo M, Munevar FR (2024) Relationship between Gratitude, Life Satisfaction, and Resilience in Colombian Adults: A Comparison by Gender and Income [Article]. Acta Colombiana De Psicologia 27(1):155–168. https://doi.org/10.14718/acp.2024.27.1.8 Boyle DK, Bott MJ, Hansen HE, Woods CQ, Taunton RL, Support R (1999) U.S. Gov't, P.H.S]. Am J Crit care: official publication Am Association Critical-Care Nurses, 8(6), 361–371. ://MEDLINE:10553177 Carrega J, Rouse M (2025) Impact of a Self-Care Intervention Program on Clinician Health and Well-Being [Article]. Nurse Lead 23(2):209–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mnl.2024.08.005 Chaudhry IS, Espinosa A (2024) A nexus of affective events theory and viable system model to comprehend affective work environment holistically - an empirical investigation [Article]. J Organizational Effectiveness-People Perform 11(4):1043–1065. https://doi.org/10.1108/joepp-09-2023-0385 Chen M-F, Ho C-H, Lin C-F, Chung M-H, Chao W-C, Chou H-L, Li C-K (2016) Organisation-based self-esteem mediates the effects of social support and job satisfaction on intention to stay in nurses [Article]. J Nurs Adm Manag 24(1):88–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12276 Ciftci H, Korkut S, Mart M, Ozcelik Z (2025) The relationship between operating room nurses' comfort and burnout levels: A cross-sectional study [Article]. Perioperative Care Operating Room Manage 40:100548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcorm.2025.100548 Flynn L, Thomas-Hawkins C, Clarke SP (2009) Organizational Traits, Care Processes, and Burnout Among Chronic Hemodialysis Nurses [Article]. West J Nurs Res 31(5):569–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945909331430 Harwood L, Ridley J, Wilson B, Laschinger HK (2010) Occupational burnout, retention and health outcomes in nephrology nurses. CANNT journal = Journal ACITN , 20 (4), 18–23. ://MEDLINE:21319579 He S, Liu L, Lu Y (2025) The effect of teachers' work engagement on burnout - an analysis of the mediation effect of professional identity [Article]. Acta Psychol 261:105782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105782 Hennig-Thurau T (2004) Customer orientation of service employees - Its impact on customer satisfaction, commitment, and retention [Article]. Int J Serv Ind Manag 15(5):460–478. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230410564939 Issa L, Alkhatib M, Al-Badarneh A, Qusef A, Ieee (2019) 2019 Jun 11–13 (2019) Employee Retention in Agile Project Management. International Conference on Information and Communication Systems [ 10th international conference on information and communication systems (icics)]. 10th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS), Jordan Univ Sci & Technol, Irbid, JORDAN Jahanzeb S, Bouckenooghe D (2024) Perceived Supervisor Remorse and Turnover Intentions: The Role of Organization Based Self-Esteem and Affective Commitment [Article]. J Appl Behav Sci 60(3):429–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863231181131 Ji X, Dougherty M, Lee Y, Poghosyan L, Lelutiu-Weinberger C (2025) Organizational Interventions to Address Primary Care Provider Burnout: A Systematic Review [Review; Early Access]. Med Care Res Rev. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775587251391520 Jung J, Kim Y (2012) Causes of newspaper firm employee burnout in Korea and its impact on organizational commitment and turnover intention [Article]. Int J Hum Resource Manage 23(17):3636–3651. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.654806 Lewis HR, Lipscomb ST, Hatfield BE, Weber R, Green B, Patterson L (2023) Family-Teacher Relationships and Child Engagement in Early Care and Education [Article]. Societies 13(3). Article 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13030067 Li N, Zhang L, Li X, Lu Q (2022) Moderated Role of Social Support in the Relationship between Job Strain, Burnout, and Organizational Commitment among Operating Room Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study [Article]. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(17) Article 10813. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710813 McKenzie R, Allensworth E (2025) Variability in the Grades Teachers Give: Teacher Grade Value-Add, Mismatch, and Long-Term Effects [Article]. Am Educ Res J 62(4):763–797. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312251345094 Montes SD (2006) Psychological contracts: Assessing underlying assumptions and expanding understanding . ://PQDT:62873641 Mrayyan MT (2007) Jordanian nurses' job satisfaction and intent to stay: Comparing teaching and non-teaching hospitals [Article]. J Prof Nurs 23(3):125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2006.12.006 Munoz PM, Cardinal-Fernandez P, Morales Rodriguez A, Ruiz-Zaldibar C, de la Lopez C, A (2025) The Impact of an Onboarding Plan for Newly Hired Nurses and Nursing Assistants: Results of a Quasi-Experimental Study [Article]. Nurs Rep 15(11) Article 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15110398 Ng CKJ, Kwan LYJ, Chan W (2024) A Note on Evaluating the Moderated Mediation Effect [Article]. Struct Equation Modeling-a Multidisciplinary J 31(2):340–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2023.2201396 Nguyen TD, Lam CB, Bruno P (2024) What Do We Know About the Extent of Teacher Shortages Nationwide? A Systematic Examination of Reports of US Teacher Shortages [Article]. Aera Open , 10 , Article 23328584241276512. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241276512 Ning J, Hyejin J (2025) Pathways to Quality: Teacher Efficacy Mediates Professional Perceptions' Impact on Teacher-Child Interactions [Article; Early Access]. Early Childhood Educ J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-025-02043-1 Osta AM (2025) The impact of employee engagement on intention to leave in SMEs in Lebanon: the moderating role of normative commitment [Article]. Cogent Bus Manage 12(1). Article 2501208. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2501208 Pei S, Wang S, Jiang R, Guo J, Ni J (2024) How work stress influence turnover intention among Chinese local undergraduate university teachers: the mediating effect of job burnout and the moderating effect of self-efficacy [Article]. Frontiers in Public Health , 12 , Article 1308486. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1308486 Peng C, Nelissen RMA, Zeelenberg M (2018) Reconsidering the roles of gratitude and indebtedness in social exchange [Article]. Cognition Emot 32(4):760–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1353484 Perko K, Kinnunen U, Tolvanen A, Feldt T (2016) Investigating occupational well-being and leadership from a person-centred longitudinal approach: congruence of well-being and perceived leadership [Article]. Eur J Work Organizational Psychol 25(1):105–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2015.1011136 Pincus JD (2023) The structure of human motivation [Article]. Bmc Psychol 11(1) Article 308. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01346-5 Pinheiro A, Palma-Moreira A (2025) Job Satisfaction, Perceived Performance and Work Regime: What Is the Relationship Between These Variables? [Article]. Administrative Sci 15(5):175. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15050175 Placido G, Yansaneh AA (2025) Nursing staff levels, years of service and nationality diversity as predictors of patient satisfaction with nursing care: a retrospective analysis [Article; Early Access]. J Res Nurs. https://doi.org/10.1177/17449871251384056 Robert V, Vandenberghe C (2021) COMMITMENT TO CHANGE AND TURNOVER: A TEST OF THE THREE-COMPONENT MODEL [Article]. Travail Humain , 84 (1), 35–61. ://WOS:000643821600002 Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB (2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study [Article]. J Organizational Behav 25(3):293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 Shah TA, Parray ZA, ul Islam S (2023) The empirical relationship between transformational leadership and job attitudes: mediating role of psychological capital - a study of healthcare in India [Article]. Int J Public Leadersh 19(1):45–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpl-07-2022-0042 Shimazu A, de Jonge J (2009) Reciprocal relations between effort-reward imbalance at work and adverse health: A three-wave panel survey [Article]. Soc Sci Med 68(1):60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.055 Somers MJ (2009) The combined influence of affective, continuance and normative commitment on employee withdrawal [Article]. J Vocat Behav 74(1):75–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.006 Spence HK, Leiter M, Day A, Gilin D (2009) Workplace empowerment, incivility, and burnout: impact on staff nurse recruitment and retention outcomes [Article]. J Nurs Adm Manag 17(3):302–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2009.00999.x Wang F, Wang Z (2024) Work-family conflict influences the turnover intention of Chinese rural preschool teachers: A moderated mediation model [Article]. Social Behav Personality 52(2) Article e12885. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.12885 Wang L, Jiang D, Pang J, Yang C, Zhang S, Rozelle S (2024) Preschool quality and developmental outcomes of preschool children in rural China: Evidence from longitudinal and subgroup analyses [Article]. Child Youth Serv Rev 166:107956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107956 Wells MB (2015) Predicting preschool teacher retention and turnover in newly hired Head Start teachers across the first half of the school year [Article]. Early Child Res Q 30:152–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.10.003 Yang C, Wu D, Yang H, Yin H, Wang S (2025) Psychological distress and turnover intention among Chinese nurses: a moderated mediation model of job satisfaction and social support [Article]. BMC Nurs 24(1). Article 743. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03445-7 Yang Y, Rao N (2021) Teacher professional development among preschool teachers in rural China [Article]. J Early Child Teacher Educ 42(3):219–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2020.1726844 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 23 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 25 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 24 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 17 Mar, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 04 Feb, 2026 Editor invited by journal 28 Jan, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 23 Jan, 2026 First submitted to journal 23 Jan, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8349836","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":607959055,"identity":"1428dac2-dc9f-4e39-9c92-4517dda42a1d","order_by":0,"name":"Li Cheng","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Education","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Li","middleName":"","lastName":"Cheng","suffix":""},{"id":607959056,"identity":"6effffb0-21c0-41b6-8022-39e8c7543cd4","order_by":1,"name":"Yuehan Sun","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Education","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yuehan","middleName":"","lastName":"Sun","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-12-13 03:38:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":104904132,"identity":"d3d2e064-ee75-485d-a35d-fbc28fadcffc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-18 13:43:22","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":82100,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eHypothesized Model of Moderated Mediation\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8349836/v1/1660d975ba06415128276913.png"},{"id":104904131,"identity":"3e5d4ff6-acdb-4035-8596-999e8f417fda","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-18 13:43:22","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":164406,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMediation Effect Diagram\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8349836/v1/6d295a5e37ae743d1a6df6b4.png"},{"id":104904134,"identity":"f776f95a-4350-409d-bff0-be68f7acddfa","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-18 13:43:23","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":111609,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eModerating Effect of Income Perception Level on the Relationship between Job Burnout and Retention Intention\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8349836/v1/5ba02993b247ccad93854f3c.png"},{"id":105034713,"identity":"7bbbb999-b5d4-41e7-8cae-b3708effe79f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-20 07:23:54","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2384546,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8349836/v1/a8d21324-e62c-469e-968b-17960f59b834.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"\"Weary but Not Leaving\": A Study on the Influencing Mechanism of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eRural inclusive kindergartens are an important component of China's public service system for early childhood education. The stability of their teaching staff is directly related to the improvement of educational quality. Currently, the coverage rate of inclusive kindergartens in rural China has reached 90.6%(Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, the uneven distribution of early childhood education resources remains prominent. Referring to educational statistical yearbooks from some provinces and municipalities, the coverage rate of public kindergartens in developed rural areas is relatively high, exceeding 50%, while in economically underdeveloped central and western regions, it falls below 30%. Therefore, inclusive private kindergartens in rural China undertake a substantial portion of early childhood education tasks. Nonetheless, the severe shortage and high turnover of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens have become prominent issues, constraining the provision of \"quality\" early childhood education services. Thus, a thorough investigation into the current status of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive kindergartens, analyzing the key influencing factors and their mechanisms, holds significant practical importance for ensuring the quality of rural early childhood education, narrowing the urban-rural education gap, and promoting educational equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention intention refers to an individual's emotional tendency or willingness to continue working in their current organization, and it is considered the best predictor of employee retention behavior(Yang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Employee retention is not only related to personal career choices but also reflects an organization's capacity to retain core talent to achieve sustainable profitability, competitiveness, and productivity(Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Research indicates that the retention of early childhood teachers is closely associated with high-quality early childhood education programs(Issa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), which positively impacts children's academic and behavioral development, such as enhancing language and early math skills, fostering positive self-concept, improving teacher-child relationships, and promoting social behavior development(McKenzie \u0026amp; Allensworth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the retention rate of early childhood teachers is positively correlated with occupational commitment(Lewis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), which helps provide children with better emotional and cognitive support. Therefore, retaining early childhood teachers is of great significance for promoting children's holistic development(Wells, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). However, retention issues can lead to negative outcomes, such as burnout, job dissatisfaction, and turnover intention(Ning \u0026amp; Hyejin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). For example, nurse shortages and low retention rates can lead to a decline in care quality, consequently increasing risks such as patient falls, pressure ulcers, and mortality(Placido \u0026amp; Yansaneh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). It also increases organizational costs, including heightened recruitment needs and productivity losses(Backhaus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Ciftci et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Many factors influence employee retention intention, including personal traits(Munoz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), work environment, leadership characteristics(Boyle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e), job satisfaction(Mrayyan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), organizational identification(Carrega \u0026amp; Rouse, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), among which job burnout and organizational commitment are considered the most influential factors(Harwood et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Hennig-Thurau, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDomestic and international research has laid a solid theoretical foundation for this study. However, existing studies mostly focus on groups such as doctors, nurses, and corporate employees. Research specifically targeting teachers, especially kindergarten teachers, is relatively scarce. Empirical studies focusing on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens in China and analyzing its influencing mechanisms are even rarer. Based on field survey data, this study systematically examines the current status of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens. It employs analysis of variance (ANOVA) to identify key factors influencing kindergarten teachers' retention intention. Furthermore, it uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to reveal the mediating role of occupational commitment between job burnout and retention intention. Simultaneously, it utilizes the Process macro to explore the moderating effect of income level, delving into the complex interaction mechanisms among various factors influencing retention intention. The aim is to provide scientific empirical evidence and decision-making references for stabilizing the kindergarten teacher workforce and constructing long-term guarantee mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTheoretical Framework and Hypotheses\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e(1) Job Burnout and Retention Intention\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob burnout is a syndrome composed of three dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. Its essence is a workplace-induced issue rather than a personal trait. Among these, emotional exhaustion, as the core indicator of burnout, manifests as the depletion of emotional and physical resources due to prolonged exposure to excessive work stress(Bargain-Villeger, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The causes of job burnout are complex and varied, but its negative impacts are often severe. Studies on nurses indicate that job burnout significantly reduces productivity, service quality, impairs nurses' physical and mental health, and increases medical costs(Ji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Nurses reporting burnout are three times more likely to leave their jobs. Research on general practitioners found that employment type(Flynn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), workload, emotional exhaustion, and low sense of accomplishment are main factors influencing their retention intention. Additionally, studies on teachers in private universities show that job burnout is significantly negatively correlated with retention intention(Pei et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); higher burnout levels correspond to lower retention intention. Reducing teacher burnout is conducive to enhancing teachers' work enthusiasm. Currently, research on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens is relatively limited(Pei et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, survey results on doctors, nurses, and university teachers consistently indicate that job burnout has a negative predictive effect on retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, this study proposes Hypothesis H1: Job burnout has a negative impact on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e(2) The Mediating Role of Occupational Commitment\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOccupational commitment, as an important construct in organizational behavior, holds significant theoretical value and practical meaning in employee retention research. Based on social exchange theory, the reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization is a key factor influencing organizational commitment (Blau, 1964). As an important dimension of organizational commitment, occupational commitment reflects an employee's emotional attachment, moral responsibility, and willingness for continuous investment in their profession. Research shows that occupational commitment encompasses three core dimensions: affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment, which collectively influence employees' work attitudes and behavioral intentions(Robert \u0026amp; Vandenberghe, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, occupational commitment influences behavioral intentions by affecting psychological mechanisms such as attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control(Somers, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Among teacher populations, the level of occupational commitment is significantly positively correlated with retention intention(Jahanzeb \u0026amp; Bouckenooghe, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Studies show that teachers with high occupational commitment often exhibit stronger professional development motivation and lower turnover tendency. This finding aligns with the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, which posits that occupational commitment, as an important psychological resource, can enhance an individual's ability to cope with work stress, thereby reducing turnover intention(Perko et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, job burnout, as a significant antecedent variable of occupational commitment, can significantly weaken teachers' level of occupational commitment. According to the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, all three dimensions of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced accomplishment) negatively affect occupational commitment. Empirical studies show that emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment have significant predictive effects on occupational commitment(Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This negative impact ultimately leads to a decrease in employees' retention intention(Jung \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Spence et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the above theoretical analysis, this study proposes the following hypotheses:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH2: Occupational commitment has a positive impact on kindergarten teachers' retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH3: Job burnout has a negative impact on kindergarten teachers' occupational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH4: Occupational commitment plays a mediating role between job burnout and kindergarten teachers' retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e(3) The Moderating Role of Income Level and Income Perception Level\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the satisfaction of individual needs follows a progression from lower-level to higher-level needs, among which physiological and safety needs are the most basic survival needs. Income, as a core element for satisfying individual survival needs, not only directly affects an individual's material standard of living but also influences their psychological state and behavioral intentions through the subjective cognitive variable of income perception(Pincus, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Research indicates that income level plays a significant moderating role in alleviating job burnout and enhancing occupational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to Equity Theory, an individual's perception of income depends not only on the absolute income level but is also influenced by social comparison processes(Peng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). When individuals perceive a mismatch between their income and their input, even if the actual income is relatively high, they may develop a sense of unfairness, thereby affecting their work attitudes and behaviors(Betancourt-Salamanca et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory suggests that income, as an important external resource, can enhance an individual's ability to cope with job burnout, thereby maintaining a higher level of occupational commitment. Research shows that income perception has a significant moderating effect on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention(Perko et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), with high income perception buffering the negative impact of burnout on retention intention(Shimazu \u0026amp; de Jonge, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurther research finds that both income level and income perception play important roles in the mediating effect of occupational commitment. Existing studies show that income level not only directly affects the relationship between job burnout and retention intention but also indirectly influences retention intention by moderating the mediating effect of occupational commitment(Ng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). High income level and high income perception can strengthen the positive impact of occupational commitment on retention intention, thereby partially offsetting the negative impact of job burnout(Shah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the above theoretical analysis, this study proposes the following hypotheses(Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5a: Income level plays a moderating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5b: Income level plays a moderating role in the mediating effect of occupational commitment on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5c: Income perception level plays a moderating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5d: Income perception level plays a moderating role in the mediating effect of occupational commitment on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employed a combination of stratified sampling and cluster sampling. Seventeen prefectures (or prefecture-level cities) in Hubei Province, China, were categorized into high, medium, and low economic development levels. Three regions were randomly selected from each development level, and then two counties were selected from each sampled region, totaling 18 counties. In each county, three non-county seat towns were selected, and one inclusive private kindergarten was selected from each town. All teachers from the selected kindergartens were included in the survey, covering 54 inclusive private kindergartens. A total of 360 questionnaires were collected, with 334 valid responses, resulting in a validity rate of 92.7%. The specific distribution of the sample is shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample Distribution Table\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGender\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.7%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMarital Status\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.6%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e325\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97.3%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e93.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAge\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnder 25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEducation Level\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJunior high or below\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.8%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u0026ndash;35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e153\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45.8%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh School / Vocational School\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e136\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.7%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35\u0026ndash;45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e123\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.8%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociate Degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e128\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.3%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbove 45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBachelor's Degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eKindergarten Type\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDemonstration Kindergarten\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eProfessional Title\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnrated\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e293\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87.7%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 1 Kindergarten\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e124\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 2 Kindergarten\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.3%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 3 Kindergarten\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.3%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnrated\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSenior Level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.7%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTeaching Certificate\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.6%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHaving Children\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.6%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e252\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e93.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIncome\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBelow 2000 RMB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e222\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDaily Working Hours\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 hours or less\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e107\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2000\u0026ndash;3000 RMB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u0026ndash;10 hours\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e194\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbove 3000 RMB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11 hours or more\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.9%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocial Insurance\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePurchased\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e161\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.2%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eResidence Location vs. Workplace\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSame town (township)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e182\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot Purchased\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e173\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.8%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSame county (county/district)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHousing Provident Fund\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePurchased\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.6%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSame city (prefecture-level city)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot Purchased\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e322\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e96.4%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.1%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReceived Rural Subsidy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e260\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77.8%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIncome Perception\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow Income Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e206\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61.6%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot Clear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.5%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh Income Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e128\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.3%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.7%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Instruments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRetention Intention Scale\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on Farh's turnover intention scale(Osta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), it was revised according to the actual situation of teachers in inclusive private kindergartens. The revised kindergarten teacher retention intention scale demonstrated good content validity, with a Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.792. This scale is unidimensional, consisting of 6 items (e.g., \"I have never considered leaving the teaching profession\"). It uses a five-point Likert scale ranging from \"strongly disagree\" to \"strongly agree\". Higher total scores indicate stronger retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eJob Burnout Scale\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) developed by Maslach and Jackson was used. This scale includes three dimensions: emotional exhaustion (representing the stress dimension of burnout), depersonalization (representing the interpersonal context dimension), and reduced personal accomplishment (representing the self-evaluation dimension), totaling 15 items. A six-point scoring method is used, with higher scores indicating higher levels of job burnout. In this study, the scale demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity, with an internal consistency coefficient of 0.85.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eOccupational Commitment Scale\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe occupational commitment scale designed by Meyer \u0026amp; Allen (1991) and validated by Wasti (2000) was used. This scale consists of 9 items, including three sub-dimensions: Affective Commitment, Continuance Commitment, and Normative Commitment, with three items each. The questionnaire uses a five-point Likert scale from 1-\"strongly disagree\" to 5-\"strongly agree\". Higher scores indicate higher occupational commitment among kindergarten teachers. The overall internal consistency coefficient of the scale was 0.87.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSPSS 24.0, the PROCESS macro, and AMOS were used for data coding, management, and analysis. Analytical techniques included reliability and validity tests, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), one-way ANOVA, independent samples t-tests, correlation analysis, and mediation and moderation effect model testing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eOverall Status of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study, the average score for retention intention among teachers in inclusive private kindergartens was 3.82 (Min = 1, Max = 5, SD = 0.90). By converting the total retention intention score into a standard score and dividing participants into high, medium, and low groups based on one standard deviation above and below the mean, the results showed: 74 individuals in the high group (22.2%), 231 in the medium group (69.2%), and 29 in the low group (8.7%). The proportion of medium and high groups was significantly higher than the low group, indicating that the retention intention of teachers in inclusive private kindergartens is generally at a relatively high level.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD tests and independent samples t-tests were used to examine differences in scores for retention intention, occupational commitment, and job burnout among teachers with different marital status, age, teaching experience, education level, major, teaching certificate, professional title, kindergarten rating, income, income perception, distance from home to workplace, daily working hours, class type, number of teachers per class, class size, work role, and whether they had received rural teacher subsidies. The results showed significant differences in the variables among teachers with different marital status, age, teaching experience, kindergarten rating, income perception, and daily working hours. Specific results are as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Marital Status\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndependent samples t-tests compared differences between unmarried and married teachers. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, teachers with different marital status showed significant differences in retention intention and job burnout (p \u0026lt; 0.05), but no significant difference in occupational commitment (p \u0026gt; 0.05). Married teachers had significantly higher retention intention than unmarried teachers (p \u0026lt; 0.01), while unmarried teachers had significantly higher job burnout than married teachers (p \u0026lt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Marital Status (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarital Status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003et-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Diff\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.065\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.040\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.02, 0.63]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.459\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.647\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.37, 0.23]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.963\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.97, -0.20]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Age\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined significant differences in scores by age. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, teachers of different ages showed significant differences in job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention (p \u0026lt; 0.01). LSD tests revealed that teachers aged 25 and below had the highest level of job burnout, significantly higher than those aged 26–35 and 46 and above (p \u0026lt; 0.01). Teachers below 46 had significantly lower occupational commitment and retention intention than those 46 and above (p \u0026lt; 0.01), and retention intention increased progressively with age.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Age\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① ≤25 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.57 ± 0.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.97 ± 0.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.50 ± 0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e② 26–35 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.28 ± 0.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.01 ± 0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.75 ± 0.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e③ 36–45 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.38 ± 0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.95 ± 0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.80 ± 0.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e④ ≥46 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.90 ± 0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.46 ± 0.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.38 ± 0.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.595**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.284**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.230***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc (LSD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① \u0026gt; ② \u0026gt; ④; ③ \u0026gt; ④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e①②③ \u0026lt; ④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e①②③ \u0026lt; ④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Teaching Experience\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD post-hoc tests showed that teachers with 5 years or less of teaching experience had the highest job burnout, significantly higher than those with 6–10 years of experience (p \u0026lt; 0.01). Teachers with 16 years or more of experience had the highest levels of occupational commitment and retention intention. Their occupational commitment was significantly higher than that of teachers with 10 years or less of experience (p \u0026lt; 0.05), and their retention intention was significantly higher than that of teachers with less than 16 years of experience (p \u0026lt; 0.05). Details are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Teaching Experience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① ≤5 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.41 ± 0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.99 ± 0.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.72 ± 0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e② 6–10 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.19 ± 0.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.94 ± 0.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.80 ± 0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e③ 11–15 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.26 ± 0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.14 ± 0.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.66 ± 1.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e④ ≥16 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.20 ± 0.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.30 ± 0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.16 ± 0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.203**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.452*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.677*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc (LSD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① \u0026gt; ②\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e①② \u0026lt; ④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e①②③ \u0026lt; ④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Income Perception\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndependent samples t-tests compared differences between the low-income perception group and the high-income perception group. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, teachers in the high-income perception group had significantly higher retention intention and occupational commitment than those in the low-income perception group (p \u0026lt; 0.01). Teachers in the low-income perception group had significantly higher job burnout than those in the high-income perception group (p \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Income Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncome Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003et-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Diff\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.708\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.44, -0.07]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.061\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.46, -0.16]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.544\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.12, 0.44]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh Perception\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Kindergarten Rating\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined differences by kindergarten rating. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, teachers from different rated kindergartens showed no significant differences in job burnout and occupational commitment (p \u0026gt; 0.05). Regarding retention intention, teachers from Level 1 and Level 3 kindergartens had significantly higher scores than those from Demonstration and Level 2 kindergartens (p \u0026lt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Kindergarten Rating\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① Demonstration\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.32 ± 0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.10 ± 0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.61 ± 0.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e② Level 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.27 ± 0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.12 ± 0.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.94 ± 0.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e③ Level 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.46 ± 0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.90 ± 0.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.57 ± 1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e④ Level 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.14 ± 0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.07 ± 0.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.05 ± 0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e⑤ Unrated\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.32 ± 0.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.95 ± 0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.79 ± 0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.181\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.331\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.815*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc (LSD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e---\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e---\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e①③ \u0026lt; ②④\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Daily Working Hours\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA with LSD post-hoc tests examined differences by daily working hours. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, regarding job burnout, teachers working 8 hours or less had significantly lower burnout than those working 11 hours or more (p \u0026lt; 0.05). Regarding occupational commitment, teachers working 8 hours or less had significantly higher commitment than those working 9 hours or more. Regarding retention intention, there was no significant difference among teachers with different working hours (p \u0026gt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Daily Working Hours\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention (M ± SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① ≤8 hours\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.18 ± 0.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.22 ± 0.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.86 ± 0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e② 9–10 hours\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33 ± 0.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.96 ± 0.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.85 ± 0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e③ ≥11 hours\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.48 ± 0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.87 ± 0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.52 ± 1.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.888*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.057**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.102\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc (LSD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① \u0026lt; ③\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e① \u0026gt; ②③\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e---\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of Differences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Parental Status\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndependent samples t-tests compared differences between teachers with and without children. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, teachers with different parental status showed no significant differences in job burnout and occupational commitment (p \u0026gt; 0.05), but showed significant differences in retention intention (p \u0026lt; 0.01). Teachers who were raising children had significantly higher retention intention than those without children.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of Differences in Variables by Parental Status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHaving Children\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003et-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Diff\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.812\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.071\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.16, 0.02]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.252\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.801\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.15, 0.34]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.727\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.92, -0.15]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCorrelation Analysis among Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe correlation matrix for the total mean scores of job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention is shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e. The results show that occupational commitment and its dimensions are significantly positively correlated with retention intention, and significantly negatively correlated with job burnout and its dimensions. Job burnout and its dimensions are significantly negatively correlated with retention intention. Retention intention and job burnout showed the highest correlation coefficient with normative commitment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab9\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 9\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix for Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM ± SD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 Occupational Comm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.04 ± 0.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 Affective Comm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.35 ± 0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.807**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 Normative Comm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.98 ± 0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.924**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.634**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 Continuance Comm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.51 ± 1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.712**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.315**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.557**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 Job Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.30 ± 0.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .476**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .425**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .482**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .218**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6 Emotional Exhaust.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.71 ± 1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .365**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .371**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .370**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .110*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.614**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 Depersonalization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.75 ± 0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .410**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .394**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .421**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .142**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.530**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.474**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 Reduced Accompl.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.13 ± 1.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .352**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .293**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .369**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .167**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.828**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.176**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.218**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 Retention Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.82 ± 0.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.497**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.409**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.504**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.271**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .370**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .296**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .326**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e− .269**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*Note: *p \u0026lt; 0.05, **p \u0026lt; 0.01, ***p \u0026lt; 0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eTesting the Mediating Effect of Occupational Commitment on the Influence of Job Burnout on Retention Intention\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe above findings indicate significant correlations among job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention among rural inclusive private kindergarten teachers, meeting the preconditions for testing mediation effects. To further explore how occupational commitment influences the relationship between job burnout and retention intention, this study employed structural equation modeling (SEM). Model fit was estimated using the maximum likelihood method. The results showed that all model fit indices met the SEM fit standards, as detailed in Table\u0026nbsp;10.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"9\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 10 Model Fit Indices\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategory\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNFI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGFI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAGFI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIFI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTLI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCFI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCMIN/DF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRMSEA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThreshold\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.05 good; .05-.10 moderate; \u0026gt;.10 bad\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMediated Model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.929\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.960\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.947\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.946\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.835\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e show the regression weights and path relationships among variables. All factor loadings were significant at p \u0026lt; 0.001 (loading range 0.40 ~ 0.968), indicating good model-data fit. After controlling for factors such as marital status, age, teaching experience, and income perception, as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, occupational commitment directly influenced teachers' retention intention, while job burnout had both direct and indirect effects on retention intention. After introducing the occupational commitment variable, the negative predictive effect of job burnout on retention intention decreased but remained significant (β = -0.27, P \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab10\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 11\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSEM Path Relationship Test Results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePath Relationship\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstimate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eS.E.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC.R.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational Commitment \u0026lt;--- Job Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.672\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.189\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-5.275\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention \u0026lt;--- Occupational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.347\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.139\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.715\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetention Intention \u0026lt;--- Job Burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.267\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.228\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.579\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter controlling for factors such as teacher age and teaching experience, the Bootstrap method was used for mediation effect testing with 5000 samples. The statistical data (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) show that the Bias-Corrected 95% confidence intervals for both the direct effect and indirect effect of job burnout did not include zero. This indicates that kindergarten teachers' occupational commitment plays a partial mediating role in the effect of job burnout on retention intention. The size of the mediation effect is 46.5% (-0.67*0.35 / (-0.67*0.35 − 0.27)).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Tab11\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 12\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation Test Results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePoint Estimate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduct of Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootstrapping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Bias-Corrected 95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Percentile 95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eZ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout → Ret. Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.500\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.235\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.128\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.627\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.378\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.626\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.376\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout → Ret. Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.233\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.097\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.402\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.470\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.071\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.426\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.062\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob Burnout → Ret. Intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.267\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.129\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.514\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.018\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.514\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.019\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTesting the Moderating Effects of Income Level and Income Perception Level\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe SPSS macro PROCESS (Model 8) was used to test the moderating effects of income level and income perception level separately, after dummy coding these variables. The results showed that when income level was the moderator, the interaction term between job burnout and income level was not significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05), indicating that income level had no moderating effect on either the direct or indirect influence of job burnout on retention intention. When income perception level was the moderator, with occupational commitment as the dependent variable, the interaction term between job burnout and income level was also not significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05). However, with retention intention as the dependent variable, the interaction term was significant (β = -0.257, p \u0026lt; 0.05), indicating that income perception significantly moderated the effect of job burnout on retention intention. Therefore, hypotheses H5a, H5b, and H5d were not supported, while H5c was supported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo clarify the moderating effect of income perception, teacher samples were divided into high and low income perception groups based on one standard deviation above and below the mean. The results showed that the direct effect of job burnout on retention intention differed at different levels of income perception. When income perception was low, the effect of job burnout on retention intention was not significant (β = -0.112, p \u0026gt; 0.1). When income perception was high, the effect was significant (β = -0.369, p \u0026lt; 0.001). This indicates that for teachers with high income perception, job burnout has a significant negative impact on retention intention; higher burnout leads to lower retention intention. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e illustrates this moderating effect.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Discussion and Conclusion","content":"\u003ch2\u003eOverall Status of Retention Intention among Rural Inclusive Private Kindergarten Teachers\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results of this study suggest that the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens in China tends to be relatively high. This finding aligns with Guo Liping’s conclusion that kindergarten teachers generally report high retention intention, as well as Shang Weiwei’s observation that turnover intention among kindergarten teachers is relatively low.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis pattern may reflect, in part, the increasing emphasis placed on rural early childhood education by national and local governments within the context of rural revitalization. In recent years, China has undertaken measures to improve the overall environment for rural early childhood education, including strengthening the public service system. For example, the \"Key Points of the Ministry of Education's Work in 2020\" proposed optimizing the professional and humanistic environment for rural educators through initiatives such as staffing management, coordinated urban–rural allocation channels, and career growth pathways, as well as enhancing teachers’ status and treatment. Similarly, the \"Hubei Province Preschool Education Development and Enhancement Action Plan (2022–2025)\" emphasizes strengthening the preschool education teaching workforce and providing additional training opportunities for early childhood teachers in rural areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese policies may have contributed to safeguarding and improving the rights and professional environment of rural kindergarten teachers, potentially supporting higher levels of retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eDifferences in Job Burnout, Occupational Commitment, and Retention Intention by Demographic Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe survey results suggest that married teachers tend to report higher retention intention compared to unmarried teachers, whereas unmarried teachers tend to exhibit higher levels of job burnout. This pattern may potentially reflect the family responsibilities of married teachers. Married teachers often need to balance work and family obligations, and the relatively fixed working hours, regular holidays, opportunities related to their own children's kindergarten enrollment, and stable income characteristic of the kindergarten teaching profession may better support their family needs, potentially enhancing retention intention. Additionally, teachers with parenting experience appear to have relatively higher retention intention, which may reflect greater adaptability to childcare work in kindergarten settings, stronger professional resilience, and a higher likelihood of experiencing a sense of accomplishment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSignificant differences in job burnout, occupational commitment, and retention intention were also observed across age and teaching experience groups. Regarding job burnout, teachers aged 25 and below exhibited the highest levels, significantly higher than the 26–35 and 46-and-above age groups, which may partially reflect their limited work experience. Rural inclusive private kindergartens often face challenges such as high workload intensity due to teacher shortages, weak social support networks, and limited professional development opportunities, which may further contribute to higher burnout(Schaufeli \u0026amp; Bakker, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).Regarding occupational commitment and retention intention, teachers aged 46 and above reported higher scores than younger teachers, with retention intention generally increasing with age. This pattern may reflect greater career stability and stronger professional identity among older teachers. Similarly, teachers with 16 or more years of experience tended to report higher occupational commitment and retention intention compared to those with shorter tenures, which may indicate that accumulated experience supports stronger professional identity and a sense of belonging, potentially contributing to higher retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eObjective income level was not significantly associated with job burnout, occupational commitment, or retention intention. However, teachers’ subjective perception of their income was significantly related to professional psychology and behavior. Teachers perceiving high income tended to report stronger occupational commitment and higher retention intention (p \u0026lt; 0.01), whereas those perceiving low income reported higher job burnout (p \u0026lt; 0.001). This finding aligns with social cognitive theory, which suggests that cognitive evaluations influence emotions and behaviors, rather than objective conditions alone(Pinheiro \u0026amp; Palma-Moreira, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e),and with Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, where resource perception (e.g., income fairness) affects the allocation of psychological resources and can influence work behavior and retention intention via emotional experiences(Perko et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers perceiving higher income may experience a better alignment between professional value and reward, which may support professional identity and retention intention(Chaudhry \u0026amp; Espinosa, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Schaufeli \u0026amp; Bakker, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e),, whereas those perceiving low income may experience a perceived imbalance in their psychological contract, potentially intensifying burnout(Montes, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).Subjective income satisfaction, including relative comparisons with others, may better predict career decisions and stability than objective income(Betancourt-Salamanca et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) ,highlighting the role of psychological perception in retention(Alabod, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRetention intention was found to be relatively lower among teachers in Demonstration and Level 2 kindergartens compared to Level 1 and Level 3 kindergartens. This pattern may be associated with the distinct professional ecological characteristics of these two types of kindergartens. Teachers in Demonstration kindergartens often undertake frequent observation activities and administrative inspections, potentially increasing workload and psychological pressure, which may influence retention intention. Level 2 kindergartens occupy an intermediate tier, with limited access to high-quality resources and professional development support compared to Level 1 kindergartens, while bearing greater teaching standards and administrative responsibilities than Level 3 kindergartens. This mismatch may contribute to higher burnout and lower retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDaily working hours were significantly related to job burnout and occupational commitment. Teachers working 8 hours or less per day reported lower burnout than those working 11 hours or more (p \u0026lt; 0.05) and higher occupational commitment than those working 9 hours or more. This finding aligns with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, which suggests that overload may deplete psychological resources, potentially weakening occupational commitment and exacerbating burnout. However, retention intention was not significantly affected by working hours, possibly due to limited employment alternatives in rural areas or buffering effects from professional identity and social support. These results suggest that reducing working hours may help alleviate burnout, but promoting retention intention likely requires simultaneous improvement in the professional ecology, such as strengthening social support and optimizing work autonomy(Perko et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Mediating Role of Occupational Commitment between Job Burnout and Retention Intention\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study finds significant negative correlations between job burnout and both retention intention and occupational commitment, while occupational commitment is positively correlated with retention intention. These results support hypotheses H1, H2, and H3 and are broadly consistent with previous research. Specifically, teachers reporting higher levels of job burnout tend to report lower retention intention and occupational commitment. This pattern may reflect the tendency of burnout to reduce enthusiasm and engagement at work, potentially diminishing professional identity and belonging, and thereby lowering willingness to remain in the position long-term. Conversely, occupational commitment, as an intrinsic motivational factor, may strengthen teachers’ loyalty and stability within their profession(He et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, higher occupational commitment is associated with stronger retention intention. These findings are consistent with work engagement theory, which suggests that occupational commitment can enhance identification with work, while job burnout can undermine this process. It is important to note that job burnout should not be interpreted as a personal psychological deficit, but rather as a state of emotional and physical exhaustion arising from work environment and professional ecological factors under high job demands. This highlights the potential importance of improving the professional ecological environment of kindergarten teachers to support their retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStructural equation modeling analysis indicates that occupational commitment partially mediates the relationship between job burnout and retention intention, with a mediation effect of 46.5%, supporting hypothesis H4. Overall, job burnout is associated not only with lower retention intention directly but also indirectly by weakening occupational commitment. Individuals experiencing higher burnout may become emotionally detached from work, exhibit lower organizational commitment, and experience reduced job stability. Conversely, teachers with higher occupational commitment may demonstrate stronger professional identity, responsibility, and accountability, which can facilitate proactive coping strategies, potentially mitigating emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment and thereby supporting retention. These results suggest that, in fostering teacher professional development, attention to both the professional ecological environment and the cultivation of occupational commitment may help teachers better manage work-related stress, enhance their professional identification, and maintain willingness to remain in their roles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Moderating Effect of Income Perception Level\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eModeration analysis indicates that income perception level does not moderate the direct or indirect effect of job burnout on retention intention for hypotheses H5a and H5b, which were not supported. However, income perception level significantly moderates the direct effect of job burnout on retention intention, supporting H5c but not H5d. Specifically, the association between job burnout and retention intention varies across different levels of income perception. Among teachers with low income perception, job burnout is not significantly associated with retention intention, whereas among teachers with high income perception, higher job burnout is associated with lower retention intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne possible explanation is the limited occupational mobility for teachers in rural areas, particularly for those with low income perception, who often have fewer external employment opportunities. Economic pressures may constrain their career choices, meaning that even when experiencing job burnout, they may remain in their positions due to practical survival needs(Nguyen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).Additionally, close-knit rural social networks may provide both economic and emotional support, potentially mitigating the negative association between burnout and retention intention. In contrast, teachers with high income perception often possess stronger professional capabilities and greater market competitiveness, making external employment opportunities more accessible. Consequently, when experiencing job burnout, they may be more likely to consider alternative work environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRural inclusive private kindergartens typically face challenges such as resource scarcity, low wages, limited social security, heavy workloads, and constrained professional development opportunities. Teachers with low income perception may have relatively lower expectations regarding salary and career advancement(Yang \u0026amp; Rao, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), which may partially explain why burnout does not strongly affect their retention intention. In contrast, teachers with high income perception generally have higher expectations for their professional environment and remuneration. When there is a substantial gap between expectations and reality, this may exacerbate the negative association between job burnout and retention intention. Furthermore, the lack of comprehensive career advancement mechanisms and professional development support in rural private kindergartens may increase the likelihood that teachers with high income perception experiencing burnout consider leaving for positions with greater growth potential(Wang \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eLimitations of the Study\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite offering empirical insights into the mechanisms shaping retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens, several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, the sample was drawn exclusively from Hubei Province. As socio-economic and cultural conditions may vary across regions, caution is warranted when generalising the findings beyond the study context. In addition, the focus on rural inclusive private kindergartens means that the conclusions may not be directly applicable to teachers working in public kindergartens or urban private settings. Expanding the geographical scope and including a wider range of kindergarten types would help to enhance the generalisability of future research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond, the cross-sectional design constrains causal inference. Although this study effectively examines associations among job burnout, occupational commitment and retention intention, as well as the proposed moderated mediation model, it does not allow for conclusions regarding causal direction or temporal dynamics. Longitudinal or intervention-based research designs would be better suited to capturing developmental processes and establishing more robust causal relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, the exclusive reliance on self-reported questionnaire data may introduce common method variance and social desirability bias. Future studies could strengthen the robustness of the findings by incorporating multiple data sources, such as evaluations from principals, organisational records or objective turnover indicators, thereby providing a more comprehensive understanding of teacher retention.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDisclosure statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe confirm that the dataset analyzed in this study will be made publicly available upon publication of the paper. Currently, these materials have been uploaded as supplementary materials along with this submission for peer review. Upon acceptance of the paper, they will be archived with a permanent access link provided.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval and informed consent statements\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval for this study was granted by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of XX University. All procedures involving human participants were carried out in accordance with the ethical standards of the approving IRB and with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical guidelines applicable at the time of the research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe scope of the approval covered the study design, participant recruitment, questionnaire-based data collection, and data management procedures. Ethical approval was obtained prior to the commencement of the study (Case No. 001574; approved on 20 August 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their participation in this study. For the survey component, informed consent was obtained from kindergarten teachers through a digital informed consent notice presented on the first page of the online questionnaire. The notice clearly informed participants of the purpose of the study-namely, to examine retention intention among teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens-the research procedures, the voluntary nature of participation, assurance of anonymity and confidentiality, the intended use of the data for academic and policy-related research purposes only, and the absence of any foreseeable risks associated with participation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were informed that their participation was entirely voluntary, that they could discontinue participation at any point without any negative consequences, and that no personally identifiable information would be collected. Completion and submission of the questionnaire were taken as an indication of informed consent. All consent procedures were administered by the corresponding author in October 2022. The scope of consent covered participation in the study, including the research design, data collection, and data analysis phases, as well as the use of anonymised data for research dissemination and publication.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlabod F (2024) \u003cem\u003eThe Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Job Satisfaction: Evidence From T\u0026uuml;rkiye Using Life Satisfaction Survey\u003c/em\u003e. ://PQDT:123181754\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBackhaus R, van Rossum E, Verbeek H, Halfens RJG, Tan FES, Capezuti E, Hamers JPH (2017) Relationship between the presence of baccalaureate-educated RNs and quality of care: a cross-sectional study in Dutch long-term care facilities [Article]. \u003cem\u003eBMC Health Services Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e, Article 53. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1947-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12913-016-1947-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBargain-Villeger A (2014) The Scarecrow on the Other Side of the Pond: The Paris Commune of 1871 in the Canadian Press [Article]. \u003cem\u003eLabour-Le Travail\u003c/em\u003e(74), 179\u0026ndash;198. ://WOS:000345486700009\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBetancourt-Salamanca S, Avila-Nivia N, Mena-Borrero ND, Sanchez-Ruales N, Ruiz-Castillo CT, Varela-Jaramillo M, Munevar FR (2024) Relationship between Gratitude, Life Satisfaction, and Resilience in Colombian Adults: A Comparison by Gender and Income [Article]. Acta Colombiana De Psicologia 27(1):155\u0026ndash;168. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14718/acp.2024.27.1.8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14718/acp.2024.27.1.8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBoyle DK, Bott MJ, Hansen HE, Woods CQ, Taunton RL, Support R (1999) U.S. Gov't, P.H.S]. Am J Crit care: official publication Am Association Critical-Care Nurses, 8(6), 361\u0026ndash;371. \u0026lt;go isi=\"to=\"\u0026gt;://MEDLINE:10553177\u0026lt;/go\u0026gt;\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarrega J, Rouse M (2025) Impact of a Self-Care Intervention Program on Clinician Health and Well-Being [Article]. Nurse Lead 23(2):209\u0026ndash;212. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.mnl.2024.08.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.mnl.2024.08.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChaudhry IS, Espinosa A (2024) A nexus of affective events theory and viable system model to comprehend affective work environment holistically - an empirical investigation [Article]. J Organizational Effectiveness-People Perform 11(4):1043\u0026ndash;1065. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/joepp-09-2023-0385\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/joepp-09-2023-0385\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen M-F, Ho C-H, Lin C-F, Chung M-H, Chao W-C, Chou H-L, Li C-K (2016) Organisation-based self-esteem mediates the effects of social support and job satisfaction on intention to stay in nurses [Article]. J Nurs Adm Manag 24(1):88\u0026ndash;96. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12276\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/jonm.12276\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCiftci H, Korkut S, Mart M, Ozcelik Z (2025) The relationship between operating room nurses' comfort and burnout levels: A cross-sectional study [Article]. Perioperative Care Operating Room Manage 40:100548. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcorm.2025.100548\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.pcorm.2025.100548\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlynn L, Thomas-Hawkins C, Clarke SP (2009) Organizational Traits, Care Processes, and Burnout Among Chronic Hemodialysis Nurses [Article]. West J Nurs Res 31(5):569\u0026ndash;582. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0193945909331430\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0193945909331430\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarwood L, Ridley J, Wilson B, Laschinger HK (2010) Occupational burnout, retention and health outcomes in nephrology nurses. \u003cem\u003eCANNT journal\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Journal ACITN\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(4), 18\u0026ndash;23. ://MEDLINE:21319579\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHe S, Liu L, Lu Y (2025) The effect of teachers' work engagement on burnout - an analysis of the mediation effect of professional identity [Article]. Acta Psychol 261:105782. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105782\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105782\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHennig-Thurau T (2004) Customer orientation of service employees - Its impact on customer satisfaction, commitment, and retention [Article]. Int J Serv Ind Manag 15(5):460\u0026ndash;478. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/09564230410564939\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/09564230410564939\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIssa L, Alkhatib M, Al-Badarneh A, Qusef A, Ieee (2019) 2019\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJun 11\u0026ndash;13 (2019) Employee Retention in Agile Project Management.\u003cem\u003eInternational Conference on Information and Communication Systems\u003c/em\u003e [ 10th international conference on information and communication systems (icics)]. 10th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS), Jordan Univ Sci \u0026amp; Technol, Irbid, JORDAN\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJahanzeb S, Bouckenooghe D (2024) Perceived Supervisor Remorse and Turnover Intentions: The Role of Organization Based Self-Esteem and Affective Commitment [Article]. J Appl Behav Sci 60(3):429\u0026ndash;448. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/00218863231181131\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/00218863231181131\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJi X, Dougherty M, Lee Y, Poghosyan L, Lelutiu-Weinberger C (2025) Organizational Interventions to Address Primary Care Provider Burnout: A Systematic Review [Review; Early Access]. Med Care Res Rev. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/10775587251391520\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/10775587251391520\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJung J, Kim Y (2012) Causes of newspaper firm employee burnout in Korea and its impact on organizational commitment and turnover intention [Article]. Int J Hum Resource Manage 23(17):3636\u0026ndash;3651. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.654806\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09585192.2012.654806\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLewis HR, Lipscomb ST, Hatfield BE, Weber R, Green B, Patterson L (2023) Family-Teacher Relationships and Child Engagement in Early Care and Education [Article]. Societies 13(3). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13030067\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 67. 10.3390/soc13030067\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi N, Zhang L, Li X, Lu Q (2022) Moderated Role of Social Support in the Relationship between Job Strain, Burnout, and Organizational Commitment among Operating Room Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study [Article]. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(17) Article 10813. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710813\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph191710813\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcKenzie R, Allensworth E (2025) Variability in the Grades Teachers Give: Teacher Grade Value-Add, Mismatch, and Long-Term Effects [Article]. Am Educ Res J 62(4):763\u0026ndash;797. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3102/00028312251345094\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3102/00028312251345094\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMontes SD (2006) \u003cem\u003ePsychological contracts: Assessing underlying assumptions and expanding understanding\u003c/em\u003e. ://PQDT:62873641\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMrayyan MT (2007) Jordanian nurses' job satisfaction and intent to stay: Comparing teaching and non-teaching hospitals [Article]. J Prof Nurs 23(3):125\u0026ndash;136. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2006.12.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.profnurs.2006.12.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMunoz PM, Cardinal-Fernandez P, Morales Rodriguez A, Ruiz-Zaldibar C, de la Lopez C, A (2025) The Impact of an Onboarding Plan for Newly Hired Nurses and Nursing Assistants: Results of a Quasi-Experimental Study [Article]. Nurs Rep 15(11) Article 398. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15110398\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/nursrep15110398\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNg CKJ, Kwan LYJ, Chan W (2024) A Note on Evaluating the Moderated Mediation Effect [Article]. Struct Equation Modeling-a Multidisciplinary J 31(2):340\u0026ndash;356. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2023.2201396\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10705511.2023.2201396\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyen TD, Lam CB, Bruno P (2024) What Do We Know About the Extent of Teacher Shortages Nationwide? A Systematic Examination of Reports of US Teacher Shortages [Article]. \u003cem\u003eAera Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e, Article 23328584241276512. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241276512\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/23328584241276512\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNing J, Hyejin J (2025) Pathways to Quality: Teacher Efficacy Mediates Professional Perceptions' Impact on Teacher-Child Interactions [Article; Early Access]. Early Childhood Educ J. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-025-02043-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10643-025-02043-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOsta AM (2025) The impact of employee engagement on intention to leave in SMEs in Lebanon: the moderating role of normative commitment [Article]. Cogent Bus Manage 12(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 2501208. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2501208\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 2501208. 10.1080/23311975.2025.2501208\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePei S, Wang S, Jiang R, Guo J, Ni J (2024) How work stress influence turnover intention among Chinese local undergraduate university teachers: the mediating effect of job burnout and the moderating effect of self-efficacy [Article]. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e, Article 1308486. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1308486\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpubh.2024.1308486\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeng C, Nelissen RMA, Zeelenberg M (2018) Reconsidering the roles of gratitude and indebtedness in social exchange [Article]. Cognition Emot 32(4):760\u0026ndash;772. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1353484\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02699931.2017.1353484\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerko K, Kinnunen U, Tolvanen A, Feldt T (2016) Investigating occupational well-being and leadership from a person-centred longitudinal approach: congruence of well-being and perceived leadership [Article]. Eur J Work Organizational Psychol 25(1):105\u0026ndash;119. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2015.1011136\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1359432x.2015.1011136\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePincus JD (2023) The structure of human motivation [Article]. Bmc Psychol 11(1) Article 308. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01346-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s40359-023-01346-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePinheiro A, Palma-Moreira A (2025) Job Satisfaction, Perceived Performance and Work Regime: What Is the Relationship Between These Variables? [Article]. Administrative Sci 15(5):175. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15050175\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/admsci15050175\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePlacido G, Yansaneh AA (2025) Nursing staff levels, years of service and nationality diversity as predictors of patient satisfaction with nursing care: a retrospective analysis [Article; Early Access]. J Res Nurs. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/17449871251384056\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/17449871251384056\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobert V, Vandenberghe C (2021) COMMITMENT TO CHANGE AND TURNOVER: A TEST OF THE THREE-COMPONENT MODEL [Article]. \u003cem\u003eTravail Humain\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e84\u003c/em\u003e(1), 35\u0026ndash;61. ://WOS:000643821600002\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB, Bakker AB (2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study [Article]. J Organizational Behav 25(3):293\u0026ndash;315. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.248\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.248\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShah TA, Parray ZA, ul Islam S (2023) The empirical relationship between transformational leadership and job attitudes: mediating role of psychological capital - a study of healthcare in India [Article]. Int J Public Leadersh 19(1):45\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/ijpl-07-2022-0042\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/ijpl-07-2022-0042\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShimazu A, de Jonge J (2009) Reciprocal relations between effort-reward imbalance at work and adverse health: A three-wave panel survey [Article]. Soc Sci Med 68(1):60\u0026ndash;68. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.055\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.055\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSomers MJ (2009) The combined influence of affective, continuance and normative commitment on employee withdrawal [Article]. J Vocat Behav 74(1):75\u0026ndash;81. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpence HK, Leiter M, Day A, Gilin D (2009) Workplace empowerment, incivility, and burnout: impact on staff nurse recruitment and retention outcomes [Article]. J Nurs Adm Manag 17(3):302\u0026ndash;311. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2009.00999.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1365-2834.2009.00999.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang F, Wang Z (2024) Work-family conflict influences the turnover intention of Chinese rural preschool teachers: A moderated mediation model [Article]. Social Behav Personality 52(2) Article e12885. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.12885\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2224/sbp.12885\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang L, Jiang D, Pang J, Yang C, Zhang S, Rozelle S (2024) Preschool quality and developmental outcomes of preschool children in rural China: Evidence from longitudinal and subgroup analyses [Article]. Child Youth Serv Rev 166:107956. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107956\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107956\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWells MB (2015) Predicting preschool teacher retention and turnover in newly hired Head Start teachers across the first half of the school year [Article]. Early Child Res Q 30:152\u0026ndash;159. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.10.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.10.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang C, Wu D, Yang H, Yin H, Wang S (2025) Psychological distress and turnover intention among Chinese nurses: a moderated mediation model of job satisfaction and social support [Article]. BMC Nurs 24(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 743. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03445-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 743. 10.1186/s12912-025-03445-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang Y, Rao N (2021) Teacher professional development among preschool teachers in rural China [Article]. J Early Child Teacher Educ 42(3):219\u0026ndash;244. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2020.1726844\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10901027.2020.1726844\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"rural teachers, inclusive private kindergartens, retention intention, job burnout, occupational commitment","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eResearch on the retention intention of teachers in rural inclusive private kindergartens is a key factor influencing the quality of early childhood education in rural China, holding significant importance for promoting educational equity. This study employed a combination of stratified sampling and cluster sampling, selecting 334 teachers from 54 rural inclusive private kindergartens in Hubei Province, China, to investigate their retention intention and its influencing factors. The results indicate that teachers' retention intention is generally at a relatively high level. Marital status, parental status, age, teaching experience, income perception, and kindergarten rating significantly influence retention intention. Job burnout (β = -0.370, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) and occupational commitment (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.497, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) have significant negative and positive predictive effects on retention intention, respectively. Furthermore, occupational commitment plays a partial mediating role between job burnout and retention intention, with a mediation effect of 46.5%. Compared to objective income level, subjective income perception has a significant moderating effect on the relationship between job burnout and retention intention (β = -0.369, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). This study provides an in-depth analysis of the complex interaction mechanisms among various factors influencing retention intention, offering scientific empirical evidence and decision-making references for stabilizing the kindergarten teacher workforce and constructing long-term guarantee mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"\"Weary but Not Leaving\": A Study on the Influencing Mechanism of Retention Intention among Teachers in Rural Inclusive Private Kindergartens","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-03-18 13:43:11","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8349836/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-04-23T07:33:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-26T08:03:55+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-25T14:26:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-24T12:28:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-18T03:45:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-17T13:41:34+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"19761921876627557326441266748997517366","date":"2026-03-17T12:28:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"270026331098431059491921462300434227150","date":"2026-03-17T11:41:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-17T08:19:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"338026482880259680580644377479818846487","date":"2026-03-17T06:24:23+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"163146431092988317481295283919988192153","date":"2026-03-17T06:08:14+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"228697570810825798717094944398700025043","date":"2026-03-17T06:08:07+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"80151458744301516707403679027360957088","date":"2026-03-17T06:07:46+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-17T06:06:21+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-02-04T05:15:52+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-01-28T07:26:18+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-01-23T07:56:55+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","date":"2026-01-23T07:39:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d69172bc-34c3-4933-9e8f-6e646185ba8a","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 18th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[{"id":64690459,"name":"Social science/Education"},{"id":64690460,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":64690461,"name":"Social science/Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-15T18:38:18+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-03-18 13:43:11","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8349836","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8349836","identity":"rs-8349836","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}