Organizational support and faculty well-being: unlocking the dual mediating pathways of work-family conflict and organizational identification

Organizational support and faculty well-being: unlocking the dual mediating pathways of work-family conflict and organizational identification | 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 Organizational support and faculty well-being: unlocking the dual mediating pathways of work-family conflict and organizational identification Xiaomei Ye, Yujun Xu, Jiangyu Zhu, Shiping Xiao This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Given the prominent issue of work-related stress among university teachers, enhancing their professional well-being has drawn significant attention. This study investigates the mechanisms by which organizational support, encompassing both resource-based and emotional dimensions, improves faculty’s professional well-being. Drawing on survey data from Chinese university faculty, regression and mediation analyses reveal that high levels of organizational support are significantly associated with improved overall well-being, including higher levels of job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and psychological health. Notably, emotional support exhibits a more pronounced effect than resource support. Further analyses indicate that organizational support enhances well-being primarily by reducing work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification. These findings offer important theoretical insights and practical implications for faculty development and higher education management. Social science/Education Biological sciences/Psychology Social science/Psychology Faculty Professional Well-being Organizational support Work-Family Conflict Organizational identification Resource and Emotional Support Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Professional well-being refers to the sense of happiness and fulfillment that university faculty experience in their academic careers (Zheng et al., 2015 ). It plays a crucial role in maintaining psychological health (Gregersen et al., 2023 ), enhancing teaching effectiveness (Hascher & Waber, 2021 ), fostering research innovation (Kumar, 2022 ), and promoting career development (Song et al., 2020 ). However, structural imbalances in the academic labor market, characterized by an oversupply of candidates, have intensified pressures on faculty members. The widespread adoption of the "up-or-out" tenure-track system, the increasing length of working hours, and mounting workplace stress have led to a marked decline in faculty well-being (Zábrodská et al., 2018 ). University faculty members are facing significant mental health challenges across the globe. A 2020 National Governance report surveying over 3,000 early-career faculty in China revealed that more than half work under a "996" schedule (working from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. six days a week) (Xu, 2021 ). Additionally, the first global survey on faculty stress, published by Times Higher Education in 2017, ranked Chinese university faculty as experiencing the highest levels of stress worldwide, scoring at level five on a stress index (Grove, 2017 ). Excessive work-related stress has been linked to heightened levels of anxiety and depression among faculty members (Tian & Lu, 2017 ), with well-being levels significantly lower than those of professionals in other fields (Grenville-Cleave & Boniwell, 2012 ). Against this backdrop, the question of how to enhance faculty professional well-being has become a critical issue in higher education worldwide. Existing research has investigated factors influencing faculty well-being from two primary perspectives: individual characteristics and work environment. At the individual level, studies have shown that emotional intelligence is positively correlated with well-being, yet remains difficult to modify. In contrast, workplace factors, such as leadership style (Cann et al., 2021 ), institutional climate (Qu, 2024 ), and organizational identification (Vo et al., 2024 ), have a significant influence on faculty well-being. Organizational support theory posits that improving work environments can enhance employee well-being, making it a key approach within education management. Organizational support reflects an institution’s recognition and concern for its employees, fulfilling their emotional needs (Eisenberger et al., 2001 ). It strengthens organizational identification, serving as both a form of social capital and psychological capital that can foster higher levels of faculty’s professional well-being (Li, 2018 ). Additionally, the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model posits that job resources—organizational support mechanisms facilitating professional growth, such as performance feedback and participation in decision-making—fulfill employees' work-related needs (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004 ), thereby enhancing job satisfaction (Grover et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, as work-family conflict increasingly undermines faculty well-being, organizational support—including childcare provisions, flexible scheduling, and workload adjustments—proves critical in mitigating such tensions (Kurtessis et al., 2017 ;Kim et al., 2023 ). However, critical questions remain, including: (1) What types of organizational support contribute to enhancing faculty professional well-being? and (2) Does organizational support improve faculty well-being by reducing work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification? Empirical evidence addressing these questions remains scarce. To address this gap, this study utilizes survey data collected from faculty members at Chinese universities to empirically examine the impact of organizational support on professional well-being and its underlying mechanisms. In the context of Chinese higher education, organizational support is profoundly shaped by governance structures and evolving leadership practices that differ markedly from Western institutions. Operating within a centralized, policy-driven system (e.g., 'Double First-Class' initiatives, 'up-or-out' tenure mechanisms), Chinese institutions exhibit stronger state control over resource allocation and performance expectations than Western counterparts characterized by greater institutional autonomy (Liu et al., 2024 ; Kwong et al., 2010 ). Chinese universities predominantly employ a dual leadership arrangement, where both the university president and the Communist Party secretary play critical roles in institutional governance. This model, unique to China, reflects broader political imperatives and historical evolution and stands in contrast to the typical separation between academic and administrative leadership in Western institutions (Cunningham et al., 2022 ; Ruan et al., 2024 ). While Western universities often emphasize faculty participation in governance and maintain clearer lines between management and academics, Chinese top-level leaders tend to assume managerial and administrative rather than purely academic or symbolic roles, limiting faculty input into major institutional policies (Ruan et al., 2024 ). Besides, China's organizational support manifests through administratively embedded welfare (e.g., state-subsidized childcare) and guanxi-mediated workload adjustments, distinct from Western individual entitlement models (Li et al., 2013 ). While danwei provisions enhance well-being, market-driven 'up-or-out' reforms concurrently intensify performance anxiety, rendering observed well-being gains precarious (Chen et al., 2020). Simultaneously, deep-rooted collectivist values and Confucian familial obligations exacerbate strain: 'work primacy' norms coupled with intergenerational care burdens under the '4-2-1' family structure (single-child couples supporting four parents plus children) create globally unparalleled occupational pressures(Liu et al., 2024 ; Tan, 2015 ; Huang, 2018 ). Consequently, organizational support's efficacy in fostering faculty well-being—currently challenged by excessive workloads, publication demands, and underdeveloped work-family policies—operates through culturally distinct pathways. This background necessitates context-specific investigations to design effective interventions and advance cross-cultural theoretical discourse. This study makes four significant contributions to the literature. First, it introduces a comprehensive framework for measuring faculty professional well-being, extending beyond overall well-being to include its three distinct dimensions—life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being (Zheng et al., 2015 ). This multidimensional approach advances prior research, which predominantly focused on aggregate well-being measures (Song et al., 2020 ). Second, the study provides a nuanced analysis of organizational support by differentiating between resource-based support and emotional support, comparing their unique impacts on faculty well-being. Third, it investigates the mediating mechanisms of work-family conflict reduction and organizational identification enhancement, shedding light on how organizational support influences faculty well-being. Fourth, despite growing recognition of organizational support’s importance, most existing research is concentrated in Western higher education or among K-12 educators. This leaves a gap in understanding how unique governance features, work conditions, and support structures in Chinese universities shape faculty well-being. Thus, the current study addresses this gap by examining both the direct and mediating effects of organizational support among Chinese university faculty. By expanding the understanding of organizational support theory and its application to faculty well-being within the unique context of China's rapidly evolving higher education system, the findings offer practical implications for higher education administrators aiming to design evidence-based policies that foster a supportive academic environment, but also provide valuable insights for understanding faculty well-being challenges in diverse higher education contexts globally. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review Professional well-being reflects an individual’s holistic satisfaction and psychological fulfillment in both professional and personal spheres (Zheng et al., 2015 ), comprising the three dimensions of life well-being (work-life harmony), workplace well-being (job satisfaction), and psychological well-being (emotional stability). Increasing workloads and pervasive work-family conflict have increasingly diminished faculty well-being (Tian & Lu, 2017 ;Pu et al., 2017 ). Grounded in organizational support theory (Eisenberger et al., 2001 ), this study posits that institutions can enhance faculty well-being by addressing socio-emotional needs through material and psychological support, thereby reducing burnout and mitigating work-family tensions. Prior research on organizational support and faculty well-being has centered on three key themes: Organizational Support and Faculty’s Professional Well-being Since the 1980s, organizational support has emerged as a cornerstone of management strategy to enhance employee efficiency and satisfaction (Eisenberger et al., 2001 ). Extensive research has confirmed the correlation between organizational support and employee well-being (Kurtessis et al., 2017 ; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002 ). Organizational support theory posits that employees’ perception of support influences their belief in their legitimacy as organizational members (Ashforth et al., 2008 ). When employees feel legitimate, they develop stronger psychological and emotional attachments, exhibit higher organizational identification, and demonstrate greater workplace motivation (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002 ). Simultaneously, organizational support helps mitigate work stress and burnout, enhancing overall well-being (Gillman et al., 2024 ). In educational management, organizational support is recognized as critical for boosting teacher well-being (Bogler & Nir, 2012 ). For example, studies involving 102 university lecturers from United Kingdom identified organizational support as a significant predictor of well-being (Holliman et al., 2022 ). Organizational support is categorized into resource support, such as work-related resources, and emotional support, such as leadership encouragement, and peer camaraderie. School leaders often employ strategies like respect, rewards, and improved compensation to address teachers’ personal and professional needs, thereby enhancing their well-being (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2018 ). The survey involving 516 questionnaires from universities in Bangladesh holds that favorable working conditions which contain work-related resources and emotional support, constitute a crucial factor in reducing employees' turnover intentions. Essentially, such support represents the organization's response to employees' needs, which is conducive to enhancing employees' psychological sense of security and satisfaction, and is related to well-being (Ashraf, 2019 ). Scholars have explored the differential impacts of resource versus emotional support (Johnson et al., 2012 ). The Massachusetts Teachers and Leaders Survey (Mass TeLLS) revealed that collegial support, principal leadership, and trust and respect cultures nearly doubled the impact on teacher job satisfaction compared to material resources (Johnson et al., 2012 ). Studies even suggest limited efficacy of material incentives, on faculty well-being, like wages and benefits (Goodman & Turner, 2013 ). While existing research has shed light on the differences between emotional support and resource support in influencing teachers' well-being and pointed out the limitations of material incentives, the specific mechanisms through which organizational support operates on teachers' well-being in the context of higher education remain to be further clarified. To address this gap, we propose: Hypothesis 1 Organizational support significantly increases faculty professional well-being in higher education. Hypothesis 2 Emotional support has a stronger positive effect on enhancing faculty well-being than resource support in higher education. Organizational Support, Organizational Identification, and Well-being Organizational support theory emphasizes the critical role of organizational identification among employees (Ashforth et al., 2008 ). As a psychological bond between individuals and their organization, organizational identification reflects the alignment of personal values with institutional goals and a sense of emotional belonging, while also serving as a prerequisite for job satisfaction (Edwards & Peccei, 2010 ). Positive organizational support enables employees to feel recognized and respected, fulfilling their socio-emotional needs and thereby strengthening their organizational identification. Empirical evidence confirms that resource-based support and emotional support from school administrators significantly enhance teachers’ organizational identification (Vo et al., 2024 ). Strong organizational identification enables teachers to align closely with their institutions, embracing institutional values and culture. Conversely, inadequate organizational support exacerbates turnover risks. For instance, U.S. data reveal that insufficient support and weak organizational identification drive many teachers to leave high-poverty, minority-dominated schools for wealthier, predominantly white institutions (Johnson et al., 2012 ). Social identity theory explains the relationship between organizational identification and faculty well-being, arguing that individuals construct their self-concept through social categorization, social comparison, and positive distinctiveness (Turner et al., 1979 ). Stronger social identification correlates with higher levels of well-being (Ellemers & Haslam, 2012 ). Through social categorization, teachers perceive themselves as integral members of their school, fostering deep identification and belonging that provide psychological stability, reduce negative emotions, and enhance well-being (Steffens et al., 2017 ). Furthermore, social comparison motivates teachers to improve teaching quality and take pride in their institution, boosting job satisfaction. Positive distinctiveness encourages teachers to internalize the school’s positive image as a source of self-esteem, guided by self-actualization, which ultimately elevates individual well-being. Research also demonstrates a significant positive relationship between organizational identification and teacher job satisfaction (Fan et al., 2024 ). Employees with stronger organizational identification exhibit lower burnout and turnover rates and higher job satisfaction (Avanzi et al., 2018 müş et al., 2012). Studies in Italian higher education confirm that organizational identification enhances faculty job satisfaction (Signore et al., 2024 ), while an analysis of 238 Turkish teachers reveals that organizational identification positively influences job satisfaction (Gümüş et al., 2012 ). However, whether organizational support improves university faculty’s professional well-being by strengthening organizational identification remains under-explored. Thus, this study proposes: Hypothesis 3 Organizational support enhances faculty’s professional well-being by bolstering their organizational identification. Organizational Support, Work-Family Conflict, and Well-being Since the 1970s, work-family conflict has gained growing attention in the fields of organizational behavior and human resource management (Beigi et al., 2017 ). Work-family conflict is defined as “a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect,” (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985 : 77). As work and family demands compete across temporal and spatial boundaries, conflicts arising from role pressures, time constraints, and energy depletion can significantly impair workplace performance, leading to job dissatisfaction, diminished life satisfaction, and psychological strain (Spector et al., 2004 ). Empirical evidence from studies of 357 university faculty in China’s Henan Province, confirms a positive correlation between work-family conflict and burnout (Pu et al., 2017 ). Furthermore, research on 280 academic people who work at private universities in Malaysia highlights work-family conflict’s significant negative impact on job satisfaction (Rahman et al., 2020 ). Consequently, schools prioritize organizational support to mitigate work-family conflict, often combining emotional and resource-based strategies to help teachers navigate these challenges (Zhou et al., 2020 ). Organizational support theory argues that robust organizational support acts as both social and psychological capital, enabling individuals to balance professional and personal demands and reduce work-family conflict (Kurtessis et al., 2017 ). Aligned with the Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989), instrumental support (e.g., flexible scheduling, childcare services) and affective support (e.g., supervisory caring, colleague understanding) replenish teachers' psychological and temporal resources, attenuating resource depletion induced by role demand conflicts. Such support directly diminishes bidirectional interference—work interfering with family and family interfering with work—reducing role stress and emotional exhaustion. Complementing this, the Job Demands-Resources Theory (Bakker et al., 2004 ) conceptualizes organizational support (e.g., flexible work arrangements, participative decision-making) as pivotal job resources that not only replenish psychological capital and temporal reserves but also fulfill work-family balance needs, substantially curbing work-family conflict. Empirical evidence from 197 professionals in higher education found that organizational support effectively alleviated faculty’s work-family conflict (Shreffler et al., 2019 ),. However, a study involving 94 participants from a Malaysian Open Distance Learning (ODL) university yielded contrasting empirical results, demonstrating that organizational support did not significantly moderate the relationship between work-life balance and well-being (Rahim et al., 2020 ). Therefore, further investigation is required to determine whether organizational support can enhance teachers' well-being by moderating work-family conflict. Critically, work-family conflict exhibits a significant negative correlation with personal well-being (Zábrodská et al., 2018 ). The reduction of work-family conflict enhances sustainable occupational well-being not only by restoring personal resource reservoirs to augment work meaningfulness (Pu et al., 2017 ), but also by attenuating psychological resource depletion and fostering positive affective experiences (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004 ). Nevertheless, whether organizational support bolsters university teachers’ occupational well-being through mitigating work-family conflict remains insufficiently explored, particularly within higher education contexts. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 4 Organizational support promotes faculty’s professional well-being by reducing work-family conflict. Research Methods This study employs a quantitative research design to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being in higher education. The analysis is based on survey data collected from university faculty members in China, utilizing validated measurement scales to assess key variables. Regression analysis and mediation models are applied to explore the direct and indirect effects of organizational support on faculty well-being, with a particular focus on the role of work-family conflict and organizational identification. Data Collection This study’s data is derived from the “University Faculty Career Development Survey Database.” The survey was administered in May 2024 via Wenjuanxing, an online questionnaire platform, following principles of anonymity and voluntary participation. This study received ethical approval from the X University Ethics Review Committee, and informed consent was explicitly incorporated into the questionnaire design to ensure participants' voluntary and informed participation. Faculty members from “Double First-Class” universities[1] in Beijing were invited to complete the questionnaire, which collected demographic information, well-being metrics, and organizational support levels, providing robust data for analysis. A total of 1000 questionnaires were distributed, after three months of data collection, with small cash rewards and gifts as incentives, 615 questionnaires were successfully recovered, resulting in a recovery rate of 61.5%. Their average age is 45.2 years old., including 283 male respondents (46.02%) and 332 female respondents (53.98%). The dependent variable, faculty professional well-being, is measured using the Employee Well-being Scale (Zheng et al., 2015 ), which assesses life well-being (LWB), workplace well-being (WWB), and psychological well-being (PWB) across 18 items. The scale captures faculty satisfaction with work and life, as well as psychological experiences in professional and personal contexts. Items (e.g., “My life is very interesting” for LWB; “My work is very interesting” for WWB; “I handle daily life well” for PWB) are rated on a 1–7 Likert scale (from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”). The scale demonstrates strong reliability (KMO = 0.966; Cronbach’s α = 0.970). Four indicators—overall well-being, LWB, WWB, and PWB—are computed using the sum-to-average method. The independent variable, organizational support, includes two dimensions. The first dimension, emotional support is measured via the Perceived Organizational Support Scale (Shen & Benson, 2016 ), comprising eight items (e.g., “My institution cares about my opinion”) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (KMO = 0.902; Cronbach’s α = 0.919). The second dimension, resource support, is assessed with the Attainment of Resources Scale, which includes five items (e.g., access to professional development funding) rated on a 4-point difficulty scale (1 = “difficult” to 4 = “easy”; KMO = 0.867; Cronbach’s α = 0.885). Both dimensions are calculated using the sum-to-average method. The mediating variables are work-family conflict and organizational identification. Work-family conflict is measured using the Scale of Work-Family Conflict ( Zhao et al., 2011 ), featuring six items (e.g., “My work leaves no family time” and “I am too exhausted to do housework after work.”) on a 7-point Likert scale (KMO = 0.905; Cronbach’s α = 0.952). Organizational identification is evaluated via the Organizational Identification Scale (Mael & Ashforth, 1992 ), with six items (e.g., “I am interested in how others view our institution”, “The institution’s success is my success”) on a 5-point Likert scale (KMO = 0.903; Cronbach’s α = 0.897). Both variables are computed using the sum-to-average method.The specific questions of the measurement are as shown in the Appendix. Control variables, Gender (male = 0, female = 1), Age, Teaching years in this school, Academic Rank (Position Type, 1 = lecturer, 2 = associate professor, 3 = professor), Average Annual Income, Marital Status (YES = 1, NO = 0), and Number of Children (0 = none, 1 = one child, 2 = two or more) all have significant impacts on faculty well-being (Chen & Deng, 2009 ; Zhang & Jin, 2013 ; Sabagh et al., 2018 ; Uristemova et al., 2024 ). In addition, Institutional Affiliation (YES = 1, NO = 0), as a formal status in public institutions, comes with stability and welfare guarantees. Studies have indicated that individuals without institutional affiliation have lower sense of security and are more prone to burnout (Sabagh et al., 2018 ; Zhang & Jin, 2013 ). Meanwhile, One-way Commute Time indirectly affects well-being by influencing time allocation and stress levels. Therefore, all the aforementioned factors are included as control variables. Data Analysis This study employs regression analysis to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. To ensure estimation accuracy, we control for faculty members’ personal characteristics and family background variables. The baseline regression model is specified as: $$\:\text{Y}={{\beta\:}}_{0}+{{\beta\:}}_{1}\text{O}\text{S}+{{\beta\:}}_{2}\text{X}+{\mu\:}$$ 1 In Eq. ( 1 ), “Y” represents faculty‘s professional well-being, encompassing both overall well-being and its three sub-dimensions: life well-being (LWB), workplace well-being (WWB), and psychological well-being (PWB). “OS” denotes organizational support, operationalized as two dimensions: resource support (RS) and emotional support (ES). “X” represents control variables, including Gender, Age, Teaching years in this school, Position Type, Academic Rank, Institutional Affiliation, Average Annual Income, One-way Commute Time, Complete Marriage, and Number of Children. “ \(\:{\mu\:}\) ” is the error term. To compare the differential effects of resource support and emotional support, we introduce Eq. ( 2 ): $$\:\text{Y}={{\gamma\:}}_{0}+{{\gamma\:}}_{1}\text{O}\text{R}\text{S}+{{\gamma\:}}_{2}\text{O}\text{M}\text{S}+{{\gamma\:}}_{3}\text{X}+{\rho\:}$$ 2 Here, “ORS” (organizational resource support) and “OMS” (organizational emotional support) replace the composite “OS”. All other variables align with Eq. ( 1 ). By comparing coefficients \(\:{{\gamma\:}}_{1}\) and \(\:{{\gamma\:}}_{2}\) , we assess the relative efficacy of resource versus emotional support in enhancing faculty well-being. To investigate mediating mechanisms, we adopt a mediation analysis framework. Drawing on organizational support theory, we hypothesize that organizational support strengthens organizational identification and reduces work-family conflict, both critical pathways influencing faculty well-being. The following mediation models are tested: $$\:\text{M}={{\beta\:}}_{01}+{{\beta\:}}_{11}\text{O}\text{S}+{{\beta\:}}_{21}\text{X}+{\epsilon\:}$$ 3 $$\:\text{Y}={{\beta\:}}_{02}+{{\beta\:}}_{12}\text{O}\text{S}+{{\beta\:}}_{22}\text{M}+{{\beta\:}}_{3}\text{X}+{\theta\:}$$ 4 In these models, “M” represents the mediating variables (organizational identification or work-family conflict). The coefficients \(\:{{\beta\:}}_{11}\) (effect of organizational support on mediators) and \(\:{{\beta\:}}_{22}\) (effect of mediators on well-being) jointly determine the presence of mediation. Results By employing correlation analysis, regression modeling, and mediation pathways, this study investigates the multifaceted relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. The findings reveal robust positive associations for both resource-based and emotional support, with emotional support demonstrating a notably stronger impact. Correlation Analysis of Core Variables Table 1 presents the correlation coefficients for core variables, revealing a significant positive correlation between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. Specifically, organizational resource support correlates positively with overall well-being (r = 0.318, p < 0.01), life well-being (r = 0.295, p < 0.01), workplace well-being (r = 0.328, p < 0.01), and psychological well-being (r = 0.253, p < 0.01). Organizational emotional support shows stronger positive correlations with overall well-being (r = 0.501, p < 0.01) life well-being (r = 0.459, p < 0.01), workplace well-being (r = 0.503, p < 0.01), and psychological well-being (r = 0.421, p < 0.01). Furthermore, work-family conflict exhibits a significant negative correlation with faculty well-being, while organizational identification demonstrates a significant positive correlation. Organizational support is negatively associated with work-family conflict and positively linked to organizational identification. Table 1 Correlation Analysis of Core Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Well-being 1.000*** 2. Life well-being 0.911*** 3. Workplace well-being 0.944*** 0.784*** 4. Psychological well-being 0.912*** 0.712*** 0.833*** 5. Organizational resource support 0.318*** 0.295*** 0.328*** 0.253*** 6. Organizational emotional support 0.501*** 0.459*** 0.503*** 0.421*** 0.520*** 7. Work-Family Conflict -0.226*** -0.239*** -0.188*** -0.194*** -0.210*** -0.183*** 8. Organizational Identification 0.518*** 0.421*** 0.545*** 0.471*** 0.474*** 0.294*** -0.078* Comparative Effects of Resource Support and Emotional Support After controlling for faculty members’ personal characteristics and family background information, the impact of organizational support on professional well-being was estimated. Results in Table 1 demonstrate that both resource support and emotional support significantly enhance faculty professional well-being. Specifically, in Table 2 , Model (1) shows that resource support has a coefficient of 0.419 (p < 0.01) on overall professional well-being, and Model (5) indicates that emotional support has a coefficient of 0.688 (p < 0.01) on overall professional well-being. Further analysis across the three dimensions, life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, confirms the positive predictive role of organizational support. Models (2), (3), and (4) reveal that resource support significantly impacts life well-being (β = 0.484, p < 0.01), workplace well-being (β = 0.451, p < 0.01), and psychological well-being (β = 0.323, p < 0.01). Models (6), (7), and (8) show that emotional support significantly influences life well-being (β = 0.767, p < 0.01), workplace well-being (β = 0.729, p < 0.01), and psychological well-being (β = 0.568, p < 0.01). Table 2 Regression of Organizational Support on Faculty Professional Well-being Well-being Life well-being Workplace well-being Psychological well-being Model (1) Model (2) Model (3) Model (4) Panel A Organizational resource support 0.419*** 0.484*** 0.451*** 0.323*** (0.061) (0.072) (0.064) (0.062) Control variables YES YES YES YES Observations 615 615 615 615 R-squared 0.133 0.111 0.142 0.101 Panel B Model (5) Model (6) Model (7) Model (8) Organizational emotional support 0.688*** 0.767*** 0.729*** 0.568*** (0.057) (0.067) (0.065) (0.058) Control variables YES YES YES YES Observations 615 615 615 615 R-squared 0.273 0.231 0.276 0.204 Notes: *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10; standard errors in parentheses. To compare the relative importance of resource support and emotional support, both variables were included in the regression model. The results in Table 3 indicate that emotional support exerts a stronger effect on teachers’ professional well-being. Specifically, for overall professional well-being, the coefficient for emotional support is 0.633 (p < 0.01), while that for resource support is 0.115 (p < 0.1). In terms of life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, the coefficients for emotional support are 0.695 (p < 0.01), 0.667 (p < 0.01), and 0.538 (p < 0.01), respectively, whereas those for resource support are 0.150 (p < 0.05), 0.130 (p < 0.05), and 0.064 (non-significant). Table 3 Comparison of Two Types of Organizational Support on Faculty Professional Well-being Well-being Life well-being Workplace well-being Psychological well-being Model (1) Model (2) Model (3) Model (4) Organizational emotional support 0.633*** 0.695*** 0.667*** 0.538*** (0.062) (0.076) (0.070) (0.063) Organizational resource support 0.115* 0.150** 0.130** 0.064 (0.059) (0.072) (0.061) (0.062) Control variables YES YES YES YES Observations 615 615 615 615 R-squared 0.277 0.236 0.281 0.205 Notes: *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10; standard errors in parentheses. Mechanism Analysis: Reducing Work-Family Conflict and Enhancing Organizational Identification Using Equations ( 3 ) and ( 4 ), this study examines the mechanisms through which organizational support influences faculty well-being. Figure 1 illustrates that work-family conflict significantly diminishes faculty members’ overall professional well-being, including their life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being. Conversely, organizational emotional support effectively mitigates work-family conflict. Meanwhile, organizational identification substantially enhances faculty professional well-being across all three dimensions, while emotional support from the institution strengthens this identification. These results demonstrate that organizational emotional support fosters faculty well-being through two mediating pathways: (1) alleviating work-family conflict and (2) reinforcing organizational identification, thereby cultivating faculty’s stronger psychological attachment to the institution and improving their holistic well-being. Figure 2 delineates the mechanism through which organizational resource support enhances faculty professional well-being. The results demonstrate that resource support significantly reduces work-family conflict (β = -0.395, p < 0.01) and strengthens organizational identification (β = 0.269, p < 0.01). Work-family conflict, in turn, exerts a detrimental effect on faculty well-being, negatively impacting life, workplace, and psychological well-being. Conversely, organizational identification positively influences all three sub-dimensions of well-being. These findings underscore that organizational resource support improves faculty professional well-being via dual mediating pathways: (1) mitigating work-family conflicts and (2) fostering a stronger sense of organizational identification, thereby creating a more supportive environment for faculty’s holistic professional well-being. To validate results, we apply the Bootstrap method with 1000 resamples to estimate confidence intervals for indirect effects, examining the mediating effects of organizational support on faculty professional well-being. As presented in Table 4 , the mediation path of organizational emotional support → work-family conflict → well-being demonstrated a significant effect size of 0.043 (p < 0.01), with the 95% confidence interval [0.012, 0.074] excluding zero, indicating that work-family conflict significantly mediates the relationship between organizational emotional support and faculty well-being. Similarly, work-family conflict was found to mediate the association between organizational resource support and teacher well-being, with an effect size of 0.055 (p < 0.10) and a 95% confidence interval of [0.018, 0.092]. Notably, work-family conflict exhibited significant mediating effects across all three sub-dimensions of faculty well-being, including life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, in both organizational emotional support and resource support models. Additionally, organizational identification emerged as a significant mediator between organizational emotional support and faculty well-being (effect size = 0.228, p < 0.10; 95% CI [0.159, 0.296]) as well as between organizational resource support and well-being (effect size = 0.186, p < 0.10; 95% CI [0.119, 0.254]). The mediating role of organizational identification remained statistically significant across all three sub-dimensions of teacher well-being in both organizational support models. Table 4 Bootstrap mediation effect test Y Coefficient Std.err 95% conf. interval Organizational emotional support→Work-family conflict→Y Well-being 0.043*** (0.016) [0.012 0.074] Life Well-being 0.061*** (0.022) [0.018 0.105] Workplace Well-being 0.031* (0.017) [-0.002 0.064] Psychological Well-being 0.037** (0.017) [0.004 0.070] Organizational resource support→Work-family conflict→Y Well-being 0.055*** (0.019) [0.018 0.092] Life Well-being 0.072*** (0.024) [0.025 0.119] Workplace Well-being 0.045** (0.018) [0.009 0.081] Psychological Well-being 0.048*** (0.018) [0.014 0.082] Organizational emotional support→Organizational identification→Y Well-being 0.228*** (0.035) [0.159 0.296] Life Well-being 0.199*** (0.037) [0.127 0.271] Workplace Well-being 0.264*** (0.040) [0.186 0.341] Psychological Well-being 0.220*** (0.036) [0.150 0.291] Organizational resource support→Organizational identification→Y Well-being 0.186*** (0.034) [0.119 0.254] Life Well-being 0.176*** (0.035) [0.107 0.245] Workplace Well-being 0.208*** (0.038) [0.134 0.283] Psychological Well-being 0.174*** (0.033) [0.108 0.240] Notes: *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10; standard errors in parentheses. To sum up, regression analyses confirm that both support types enhance well-being across its sub-dimensions, life, workplace, and psychological, although emotional support consistently surpasses resource support in magnitude and significance. Mediation analyses further identify two critical mechanisms by which organizational support bolsters well-being: mitigating work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification, with emotional support again exhibiting a more pronounced influence. Collectively, these results highlight the dual pathways through which organizational support fosters faculty well-being and offer both theoretical and practical insights for academic institutions. Discussion Amid growing concerns over work-related stress among university faculty, enhancing their professional well-being has become a pressing issue in both academic research and educational practice. This study explores the mechanisms through which organizational support contributes to faculty well-being, utilizing survey data from university faculty in China. Grounded in an organizational support perspective, the research seeks to offer theoretical insights and practical recommendations for improving faculty work environments and promoting greater professional well-being. This results of this study reveal the critical role of organizational support, resource and emotional support, in enhancing faculty well-being through strengthening organizational identification, and mitigating work-family conflict. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of organizational support theory and offer practical recommendations for university administrators seeking to improve faculty well-being. Firstly, organizational support is strongly linked to faculty well-being. Faculty members who receive greater organizational resource support report significantly higher levels of life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being. Similarly, higher levels of emotional support from the organization are strongly associated with enhanced faculty well-being. Drawing on the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, resources are essential for helping individuals manage job demands, while resource depletion can lead to burnout (Bakker et al., 2004 ). The more resources individuals have, the better they can cope with stress, underscoring the importance of adequate organizational resource support as a key strategy for improving faculty well-being (Zheng et al., 2015 ). Chinese university faculty benefit from a government-led support system that encompass financial security, healthcare and pension benefits, as well as structured career progression pathways. This system provides a sense of occupational security and clear professional development expectations, distinguishing it from Western models(Kwong et al., 2010 ;Li et al., 2013 ). Meanwhile, university administrators can enhance faculty well-being by providing robust support for teaching and research development, ensuring faculty have the resources needed to advance their academic careers. Additionally, given the nature of faculty work, which requires them to spend a significant portion of their time within the university campus, emotional support from the organization plays an equally critical role. Previous research has emphasized the importance of a positive institutional climate and humane management practices in fostering faculty well-being (Cann et al., 2021 ). Universities can further promote faculty’s well-being by cultivating a culture of care, actively listening to faculty concerns, and recognizing their contributions. These measures not only improve individual well-being but also contribute to a more supportive and productive academic environment. Secondly, emotional support exerts a stronger influence on faculty well-being compared to resource support. While resource support enables faculty to fulfill their teaching and research responsibilities, material resources alone are insufficient to fully unlock their potential (Li, 2018 ). In contrast, emotional support plays a more pivotal role in fostering faculty well-being. This support manifests not only in institutional respect and care from leadership but, more importantly, in faculty members' sense of recognition and appreciation. According to Social Exchange Theory, when faculty perceive that their institution values and respects them, they experience heightened job satisfaction and greater engagement in their teaching and research activities (Eisenberger et al., 2001 ). Research also indicates that trust and respect within an institution’s culture can have nearly twice the impact on faculty well-being as material resources alone (Johnson et al., 2012 ). Rooted in Confucian cultural traditions, Chinese faculty receive substantial organizational emotional support. This manifests as high levels of social respect, professional honor, a strong sense of professional responsibility, and mission (Tan, 2015 ; Huang, 2018 ). Concurrently, the collectivist orientation prevalent in the school environment fosters a strong sense of belonging and emotional fulfillment among faculty (Kwong et al., 2010 ; Tan, 2015 ). Therefore, in addition to providing adequate material resources, university administrators are recommended to prioritize human-centered management strategies that enhance emotional support, thereby fostering faculty professional well-being. Thirdly, organizational support enhances faculty well-being by strengthening organizational identification. Social Exchange Theory posits that when faculty receive both material and emotional support from their institution, they develop a stronger sense of organizational identification (Eisenberger et al., 2001 ). This identification fosters greater commitment to their work, aligns personal and institutional goals, and cultivates a stronger sense of achievement and fulfillment, ultimately improving professional well-being (Vo et al., 2024 ). Given the rapid transformations in academia, faculty face increasing challenges in teaching, research, and interpersonal relationships, often leading to uncertainty and stress. Universities should proactively address faculty career development concerns by offering tangible resources and emotional support. When faculty feel valued and cared for by their institution, they gain a stronger sense of belonging and psychological security, reinforcing their organizational identification and encouraging deeper engagement in their academic roles. Last but not least, organizational support improves faculty well-being by reducing work-family conflict. The study reveals that although work-family conflict significantly undermines faculty well-being, organizational support can effectively mitigate this conflict. Under the current "up-or-out" tenure-track system, faculty face immense pressure from teaching and research responsibilities. Such burden is particularly pronounced for faculty with care-giving responsibilities, as excessive workloads exacerbate work-family conflict (Meng & Wang, 2018 ). Since the 1970s, the detrimental effects of work-family conflict have been widely recognized (Beigi et al., 2017 ) and are now established as a key factor in diminishing faculty well-being. Organizational support theory suggests that universities can serve as both social and psychological capital by providing faculty with resource and emotional support, helping them alleviate work-family conflict (Bragger et al., 2005 ). This finding highlights the importance of fostering a supportive work-family culture within universities. Institutional leaders should acknowledge the adverse effects of work-family conflict and offer proactive organizational support, such as establishing specialized counseling services to help faculty manage the psychological pressures of balancing work and family responsibilities. Additionally, universities should provide targeted support for faculty with care-giving obligations, such as adjusting workloads for pregnant and nursing faculty members, thereby enhancing their professional well-being. These governance characteristics have significant implications for support structures and faculty work conditions. Chinese universities remain highly centralized in decision-making, with human resource and support policies tending toward standardization and formalization, heavily influenced by government policies and performance metrics (Mok & Han, 2017 ). Faculty members often face substantial administrative workloads, frequent evaluations, and strong performance pressures, with top-down approaches prevailing in human resource management (Sha & Chang, 2025 ). Although reforms have introduced elements of decentralization and responsiveness, the reach of state and bureaucratic mechanisms remains substantial. In this environment, organizational support is frequently oriented toward meeting institutional goals rather than accommodating diverse, individualized faculty needs as seen more often in Western contexts. Notably, recent research highlights that such pressures and administrative dominance can be linked to faculty burnout and reduced occupational health, calling for the critical importance of context-sensitive, health-promoting leadership in fostering well-being in Chinese universities (Sha & Chang, 2025 ; Zheng et al., 2024 ). Implications This study offers an in-depth exploration of the intrinsic relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being, investigating the mediating roles of work-family conflict and organizational identification, providing both theoretical insights and practical implications. From a theoretical perspective, this study adopts a comprehensive framework for assessing professional well-being, encompassing three dimensions: life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being. By moving beyond the traditional single-dimensional approach to faculty well-being (Song et al., 2020 ), this research enriches the academic discourse on faculty professional well-being. Additionally, it examines strategies to enhance well-being through the lens of organizational support, distinguishing between the effects of resource-based support and emotional support. The findings reveal that emotional support has a stronger impact on faculty well-being, highlighting the critical role of psychological capital in organizational management (Li, 2018 ). Compared to traditional resource-based incentives (Zhao et al., 2024 ), emotional support (Kumar, 2022 ) plays a more significant role in improving employee job satisfaction. This insight advances the application of organizational support theory in faculty management. Furthermore, by investigating the mechanisms through which organizational support influences well-being, specifically by reducing work-family conflict and enhancing organizational identification, this study deepens our understanding of the factors shaping faculty well-being and enriches organizational support theory. From a practical standpoint, this study highlights the substantial role of both resource-based and emotional support in enhancing faculty well-being, offering valuable evidence for policies aimed at promoting faculty well-being. In 2021, China’s Ministry of Education, in collaboration with five other government agencies, issued the Guidelines on Strengthening the Reform of University Faculty Development in the New Era, emphasizing the need to prioritize faculty physical and psychological well-being and advocating for diverse measures to improve faculty treatment and care. University administrators should fully recognize the pivotal role of organizational support in fostering faculty well-being by ensuring adequate working conditions and career development opportunities (Cann et al., 2021 ). Previous research has established that organizational support is a key determinant of faculty well-being (Bogler & Nir, 2012 ). This study further reveals that, compared to resource-based support, emotional support has a more profound effect on faculty professional well-being. Thus, in addition to providing teaching and research resources, universities should focus on strengthening emotional support systems, fostering a positive, harmonious, and inclusive campus culture (Qu, 2024 ). Chinese universities have developed diverse practices in improving emotional support systems and fostering a positive campus culture, covering multiple dimensions such as mental health services, cultural education, academic community building, and family-friendly policies. For instance, they have launched 24-hour psychological hotlines, incorporated mental health assessments into annual physical examinations, and some universities have implemented policies that allow female faculty and staff to extend their maternity leave if it coincides with winter or summer vacations. Additionally, full-day care and temporary care services for the children of faculty and staff are provided. To sum up, more can be achieved by institutionalizing faculty representation mechanisms, such as establishing regular faculty assemblies to solicit feedback, prioritizing faculty mental health, and developing multi-channel strategies to alleviate professional stress. Meanwhile, universities should provide robust academic career development support, including the establishment of academic communities (Zábrodská et al., 2018 ) and family-friendly policies, such as parental support programs. By helping faculty achieve a better work-life balance (Jiang et al., 2017 ), universities can effectively empower faculty to release burdens and create an academic environment conducive to sustainable professional growth. In conclusion, this study not only advances theoretical understanding of organizational support and faculty well-being but also provides actionable recommendations for university administrators. By integrating resource-based and emotional support, institutions can foster a more supportive and productive academic environment, ultimately enhancing faculty well-being and institutional performance. Conclusion Drawing on survey data from Chinese university faculty, this study demonstrates a significant positive correlation between high levels of organizational support and faculty professional well-being. Both resource-based and emotional support enhance well-being across dimensions, improving work-related satisfaction, life contentment, and psychological health. Though emotional support exerts a notably stronger influence. Furthermore, organizational support bolsters well-being by mitigating work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification. These findings hold critical implications for faculty career development and institutional decision-making, offering actionable strategies for universities to cultivate supportive environments. By highlighting the differential impacts of resource and emotional support, the study also provides a framework for cross-national research on faculty well-being, advancing theoretical understanding and practical applications in higher education management. This study offers valuable directions for future research while acknowledging several limitations. First, as the analysis relies on cross-sectional data to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty well-being, causal inferences between variables cannot be definitively established. Future studies could employ longitudinal designs to better capture the dynamic interplay among organizational support, work-family conflict, organizational identification, and professional well-being over time. Second, due to funding constraints, the sample is limited to faculty from China’s “Double First-Class” universities, potentially restricting the generalizability of the findings. To enhance external validity, subsequent research could expand the scope to include faculty from diverse institutional types (e.g., regional universities, vocational colleges) and international contexts, enabling cross-cultural comparisons. In an era where faculty well-being is increasingly strained by escalating academic demands, this study highlights organizational support as a cornerstone for building resilient, equitable, and thriving academic communities. By demonstrating how targeted support systems mitigate work-family conflict and cultivate organizational identification, which are key drivers of professional fulfillment, our findings call for a paradigm shift in higher education policy. Institutions must transcend transactional resource allocation and prioritize emotionally intelligent frameworks that empower faculty holistically. This approach is not merely beneficial but imperative: sustainable educational excellence hinges on recognizing faculty well-being as both a moral imperative and a strategic investment in institutional resilience. Declarations Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Data availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available from ** but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under licence for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of **. Ethical approval : This study was performed in line with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards.The research protocol ensured anonymity and confidentiality of responses. Participation was voluntary, and participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without consequence. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Central University of Finance and Economics’s Research Ethics Committee (Approval ID: IRB20250311004, Date: 11/03/2025). Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained in writing from all participants on 10 April 2025. Each participant was provided with a written consent form that clearly outlined the study’s objectives, the types of personal data to be collected in Beijing,China. All participants were fully informed about the study’s research objectives, data collection methods, potential risks, and the use of data for publication purposes. Funding Statement : This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 7240042236). Authors Contributions: YXM: Conceptualization (lead), Methodology (lead), Writing - review & editing (lead), Funding acquisition (lead). XYJ: Writing - review & editing (supporting), Validation (equal). ZJY(Corresponding author Correspondence to:: [email protected] ): Writing - original draft(lead), Project administration (lead). XSP : Writing - original draft(supporting). References Addimando L (2019) The Effect of Positive Working Conditions on Work Engagement and Teaching Classroom Practices: A Large Cross-Sectional Study in Switzerland. Front Psychol 10:2129. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02129 Ashforth BE, Harrison SH, Corley KG (2008) Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions. J Manag 34(3):325–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316059 Ashraf MA (2019) Influences of working condition and faculty retention on quality education in private universities in Bangladesh: An analysis using SEM. Int J Educational Manage 33(1):149–165. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2018-0121 Avanzi L, Fraccaroli F, Castelli L, Marcionetti J, Crescentini A, Balducci C, Van Dick R (2018) How to mobilize social support against workload and burnout: The role of organizational identification. Teach Teacher Educ 69:154–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.001 Bakker AB, Demerouti E, Verbeke W (2004) Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Hum Resour Manag 43(1):83–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20004 Beigi M, Wang J, Arthur MB (2017) Work–family interface in the context of career success: A qualitative inquiry. Hum Relat 70(9):1091–1114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717691339 Bogler R, Nir AE (2012) The importance of teachers’ perceived organizational support to job satisfaction: What’s empowerment got to do with it? J Educational Adm 50(3):287–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211223310 Bragger JD, Rodriguez-Srednicki O, Kutcher EJ, Indovino L, Rosner E (2005) Work-family Conflict, Work-family Culture, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Among Teachers. J Bus Psychol 20(2):303–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-005-8266-0 Cann RF, Riedel-Prabhakar R, Powell D (2021) A Model of Positive School Leadership to Improve Teacher Wellbeing. Int J Appl Posit Psychol 6(2):195–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-020-00045-5 Chen XJ, Deng YH (2009) A review of recent research on teachers’ happiness in China. Educ Rev, 25–28.(in Chinese) Chen XZ (2020) The discourse evolution of faculty research in the social transformation of new China. High Educ Res 41(4):67–75 Cunningham C, Zhang W, Striepe M, Rhodes D (2022) Dual leadership in Chinese schools challenges executive principalships as best fit for 21st century educational development. Int J Educational Dev 89:102531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102531 De Carlo A, Girardi D, Falco A, Dal Corso L, Di Sipio A (2019) When Does Work Interfere With Teachers’ Private Life? An Application of the Job Demands-Resources Model. Front Psychol 10:1121. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01121 Edinger SK, Edinger MJ (2018) Improving Teacher Job Satisfaction: The Roles of Social Capital, Teacher Efficacy, and Support. J Psychol 152(8):573–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2018.1489364 Edwards MR, Peccei R (2010) Perceived Organizational Support, Organizational Identification, and Employee Outcomes: Testing a Simultaneous Multifoci Model. J Personnel Psychol 9(1):17–26. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000007 Eisenberger R, Armeli S, Rexwinkel B, Lynch PD, Rhoades L (2001) Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. J Appl Psychol 86(1):42–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42 Ellemers N, Haslam SA (2012) Social identity theory. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, vol 2. Sage Publications Ltd, pp 379–398. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n45 Fan Y, Du M, Wang J (2024) Unpacking the effect of principal empowerment on teacher job satisfaction: The Mediation of organizational learning and teacher organizational identification in China. Int J Educational Res 128:102489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102489 Gillman JC, Turner MJ, Slater MJ (2024) The role of social support and social identification in challenge and threat, perceived stress, and life satisfaction. Soc Pers Psychol Compass 18(7):e12982. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12982 Goodman SF, Turner LJ (2013) The Design of Teacher Incentive Pay and Educational Outcomes: Evidence from the New York City Bonus Program. J Labor Econ 31(2):409–420. https://doi.org/10.1086/668676 Greenhaus JH, Beutell NJ (1985) Sources of Conflict between Work and Family Roles. Acad Manage Rev 10(1):76. https://doi.org/10.2307/258214 Gregersen T, Mercer S, MacIntyre P, Talbot K, Banga CA (2023) Understanding language teacher wellbeing: An ESM study of daily stressors and uplifts. Lang Teach Res 27(4):862–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820965897 Grenville-Cleave B, Boniwell I (2012) Surviving or thriving? Do teachers have lower perceived control and well-being than other professions? Manage Educ 26(1):3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020611429252 Grove J (2017) UK and Australian universities more stressful than Uganda. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/uk-and-australian-universities-more-stressful-than-uganda Grover SL, Teo ST, Pick D, Roche M, Newton CJ (2018) Psychological capital as a personal resource in the JD-R model. Personnel Rev 47(4):968–984. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213 Gümüş M, Hamarat B, Çolak E, Duran E (2012) Organizational and occupational identification: Relations to teacher satisfaction and intention to early retirement. Career Dev Int 17(4):300–313. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431211255806 Hascher T, Waber J (2021) Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000–2019. Educational Res Rev 34:100411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411 Holliman AJ, Revill-Keen A, Waldeck D (2022) University lecturers’ adaptability: examining links with perceived autonomy support, organisational commitment, and psychological wellbeing. Teach Educ 33(1):42–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2020.1803822 Huang Y (2018) Revisiting the research–teaching nexus in a managerial context: exploring the complexity of multi-layered factors. High Educ Res Dev 37(4):758–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446418 Jiang X-R, Du J-J, Dong R-Y (2017) Coping Style, Job Burnout and Mental Health of University Teachers of the Millennial Generation. EURASIA J Math Sci Technol Educ 13(7). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00734a Johnson SM, Kraft MA, Papay JP (2012) How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers Coll Record 114(10):1–39 Kim MS, Ma E, Wang L (2023) Work-family supportive benefits, programs, and policies and employee well-being: implications for the hospitality industry. Int J Hospitality Manage, 108 Kumar DSP (2022) Influence of University teachers’ job satisfaction on subjective well-being and job performance. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations , 35 (Special Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v35is1/22023 Kurtessis JN, Eisenberger R, Ford MT, Buffardi LC, Stewart KA, Adis CS (2017) Perceived Organizational Support: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of Organizational Support Theory. J Manag 43(6):1854–1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554 Kwong J, Wang H, Clifton RA (2010) Rethinking Our Assumptions about Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in China and the West. Australian J Educ 54(2):115–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494411005400202 Li Y (2018) Building well-being among university teachers: The roles of psychological capital and meaning in life. Eur J Work Organizational Psychol 27(5):594–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1496909 Li LL, Lai MH, Lo NK (2013) Academic work within a mode of mixed governance: perspectives of University Professors in the Research Context of Western China. Asia Pac Educ Rev 15(3):307–314 Liu S, Huang Q, Lv M (2024) From vocation to profession: multiple identities of chinese management academics. Palgrave Commun, 10(1) Mael F, Ashforth BE (1992) Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J Organizational Behav 13(2):103–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202 Meng Q, Wang G (2018) A research on sources of university faculty occupational stress: A Chinese case study. Psychol Res Behav Manage 11:597–605. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S187295 Mok KH, Han X (2017) Higher education governance and policy in China: Managing decentralization and transnationalism. Policy Soc 36(1):34–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1288964 Pu J, Hou H, Ma R, Sang J (2017) The effect of psychological capital between work-family conflict and job burnout in Chinese university teachers: Testing for mediation and moderation. J Health Psychol 22(14):1799–1807. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316636950 Qu G (2024) Perceived school climate, collective teacher efficacy, self-compassion, and subjective well-being in Chinese university teachers: A mediation analysis. Humanit Social Sci Commun 11(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04074-2 Rahman MM, Ali NA, Jantan AH, Mansor ZD, Rahaman MS (2020) Work to family, family to work conflicts and work family balance as predictors of job satisfaction of Malaysian academic community. J Enterprising Communities: People Places Global Econ 14(4):621–642. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-05-2020-0098 Rahim NB, Osman I, Arumugam PV (2020) Linking work-life balance and employee well-being: Do supervisor support and family support moderate the relationship. Int J Bus Soc 21(2):588–606. https://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.3273.2020 Rhoades L, Eisenberger R (2002) Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. J Appl Psychol 87(4):698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698 Ruan J, Cai Y, Stensaker B (2024) University managers or institutional leaders? An exploration of top-level leadership in Chinese universities. High Educ 87(3):703–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01031-x Sabagh Z, Hall NC, Saroyan A (2018) Antecedents, correlates and consequences of faculty burnout. Educational Res 60(2):131–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2018.1461573 Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB (2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. J Organizational Behavior: Int J Industrial Occupational Organizational Psychol Behavior 25(3):293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 Sha X, Chang Y (2025) Occupational Health and Performance Among Chinese University Teachers: A COR Theory Model of Health-Promoting Leadership and Burnout. Eur J Invest Health Psychology Education 15(7):134. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe15070134 Shen J, Benson J (2016) When CSR Is a Social Norm: How Socially Responsible Human Resource Management Affects Employee Work Behavior. J Manag 42(6):1723–1746. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314522300 Shreffler MB, Shreffler JR, Murfree JR (2019) Barriers to advancement of female faculty in higher education: an examination of student evaluations of teaching, work-family conflict and perceived organizational support. J High Educ Theory Pract 19(8):72–85 Signore F, Esposito C, Di Napoli I, Agueli B, Ingusci E, Mannarini T, Toto GA, Arcidiacono C, Fantinelli S (2024) Social dimensions as resources in promoting academic well-being: The case study of the University of Foggia. Front Psychol 15:1347532. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1347532 Skaalvik EM, Skaalvik S (2018) Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Soc Psychol Educ 21(5):1251–1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9464-8 Song H, Gu Q, Zhang Z (2020) An exploratory study of teachers’ subjective wellbeing: Understanding the links between teachers’ income satisfaction, altruism, self-efficacy and work satisfaction. Teachers Teach 26(1):3–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2020.1719059 Spector P, Cooper C, Poelmans S, Allen T, O’Driscoll M, Sanchez J, Siu O, Dewe P, Hart P, Lu L, Moraes LFRD, Ostrognay G, Sparks K, Wong P, Yu S (2004) Working Hours, and Well-Being: China and Latin American vs. the Anglo World. Pers Psychol 57(1):119–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02486.x . A Cross-National Comparative Study of Work-Family Stressors Steffens NK, Haslam SA, Schuh SC, Jetten J, Van Dick R (2017) A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Identification and Health in Organizational Contexts. Personality Social Psychol Rev 21(4):303–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316656701 Tan C (2015) Education policy borrowing and cultural scripts for teaching in China. Comp Educ 51(2):196–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2014.966485 Tian M, Lu G (2017) What price the building of world-class universities? Academic pressure faced by young lecturers at a research-centered University in China. Teach High Educ 22(8):957–974. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1319814 Turner JC, Brown RJ, Tajfel H (1979) Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. Eur J Social Psychol 9(2):187–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420090207 Uristemova A, Myssayev A, Meirmanov S, Migina L (2024) Predictors of Job Satisfaction and Association with Psychological Distress Among Academic Medicine Faculty in Kazakhstan. La Medicina del Lavoro 115(1):e2024002. https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v115i1.15010 Vo DT, Allen K-A, Reupert A (2024) Australian teachers’ conceptualisations of wellbeing at work: A prototype analysis. Teach Teacher Educ 147:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104653 Wang Y, Xia Q, Yue H, Teng W (2024) Chinese Rural Kindergarten Teachers’ Work-Family Conflict and Their Turnover Intention: The Role of Emotional Exhaustion and Professional Identity. Behav Sci (Basel Switzerland) 14(7):597. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070597 Wang Y, Xia Q, Yue H, Yu R, Zhang W, Li J, Chen D, Xu P (2023) The relationship between work-family conflict and job satisfaction for preschool teachers in rural China: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Public Health , 11 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1236713 Wu Q, Zhou N (2023) Work Stress and Personal and Relational Well-Being Among Chinese College Teachers: The Indirect Roles of Sense of Control and Work-Related Rumination. Psychol Res Behav Manage 16:2819–2828. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S418077 Xiao W, Luo JL (2016) A comparative study on the influencing mechanism of the sense of career success of male and female college teachers. Collection Women's Studies 136(4):111–119 (in Chinese) Xu J (2021) The confusion of Qing Jiao: The performance dilemma of college teachers (in Chinese). https://www.lifeweek.com.cn/article/123043 Zábrodská K, Mudrák J, Šolcová I, Květon P, Blatný M, Machovcová K (2018) Burnout among university faculty: The central role of work-family conflict. Educational Psychol 38(6):800–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1340590 Zhang YZ, Jin SH (2013) Investigation of university teachers’ occupational well-being and analysis of influencing factors. Educ Sci 29(5):51–57 (in Chinese) Zhao P, Yuan J, Hu Y (2024) Work Hours, Job Resources and Subjective Well-Being of Chinese Faculty: An Empirical Analysis Based on a Sequential Mediation Model. Res High Educt 65(5):965–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-023-09770-7 Zhao X (Roy), Qu H, Ghiselli R (eds) (2011) Examining the relationship of work-family conflict to job and life satisfaction: A case of hotel sales managers. International Journal of Hospitality Management , 30 (1), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.04.010 Zheng X, Huang H, Yu Q (2024) The associations among gratitude, job crafting, teacher-student relationships, and teacher psychological well-being. Front Psychol 15:1329782. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1329782 Zheng X, Zhu W, Zhao H, Zhang C (2015) Employee well-being in organizations: Theoretical model, scale development, and cross‐cultural validation. J Organizational Behav 36(5):621–644. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1990 Zhou S, Li X, Gao B (2020) Family/friends support, work-family conflict, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in young preschool teachers in China: A serial mediation model. Child Youth Serv Rev 113:104997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104997 Footnotes “Double First-Class” universities refer to top-tier Chinese institutions selected for their academic excellence, research output, and high-quality disciplines, often characterized by strong global rankings, cutting-edge innovation, and leadership in prioritized fields such as STEM, social sciences, or humanities Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Supplementarymaterials.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 24 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 13 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 09 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Apr, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 09 Apr, 2026 Editor invited by journal 24 Mar, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 26 Nov, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 11 Nov, 2025 First submitted to journal 11 Nov, 2025 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-7920451","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":622293368,"identity":"d5085ea1-13d4-406f-bd1a-0282c86e63d2","order_by":0,"name":"Xiaomei Ye","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central University of Finance and Economics","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xiaomei","middleName":"","lastName":"Ye","suffix":""},{"id":622293371,"identity":"31a3f284-2e83-4bed-ba9a-6f1203d338c3","order_by":1,"name":"Yujun Xu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yujun","middleName":"","lastName":"Xu","suffix":""},{"id":622293373,"identity":"83ecdadf-f592-4363-961e-1805879ee335","order_by":2,"name":"Jiangyu Zhu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central University of Finance and Economics","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jiangyu","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhu","suffix":""},{"id":622293376,"identity":"778881d4-3d6f-4ce7-baaa-42f9224b6cfe","order_by":3,"name":"Shiping Xiao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central University of Finance and Economics","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shiping","middleName":"","lastName":"Xiao","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-10-22 08:41:57","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":107481044,"identity":"f05fe0af-6b79-4cea-9cb6-55f5e84d2e44","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-22 02:15:32","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44479,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMechanism of Emotional Support’s Impact on Faculty Well-being\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7920451/v1/b7b9c18c4aed7c17005db47a.png"},{"id":107480898,"identity":"564949f6-4d93-400b-bfa4-cb4fc89d0731","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-22 02:14:16","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":45616,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMechanism of Resource Support’s Impact on Faculty Well-being\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7920451/v1/d260652f99f66759213bb65c.png"},{"id":107483409,"identity":"d47b1abf-8176-4d54-be63-5ce038732c34","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-22 02:27:37","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":701846,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7920451/v1/ac2e68e9-f58c-4c69-b2af-7d2d760404b5.pdf"},{"id":107097708,"identity":"02f9004f-e628-440c-a5b5-40a6acc6a592","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-16 17:52:24","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":93584,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterials.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7920451/v1/66be366f9fec1d29ebc9ad8b.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Organizational support and faculty well-being: unlocking the dual mediating pathways of work-family conflict and organizational identification","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eProfessional well-being refers to the sense of happiness and fulfillment that university faculty experience in their academic careers (Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). It plays a crucial role in maintaining psychological health (Gregersen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), enhancing teaching effectiveness (Hascher \u0026amp; Waber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), fostering research innovation (Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), and promoting career development (Song et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, structural imbalances in the academic labor market, characterized by an oversupply of candidates, have intensified pressures on faculty members. The widespread adoption of the \"up-or-out\" tenure-track system, the increasing length of working hours, and mounting workplace stress have led to a marked decline in faculty well-being (Z\u0026aacute;brodsk\u0026aacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). University faculty members are facing significant mental health challenges across the globe. A 2020 National Governance report surveying over 3,000 early-career faculty in China revealed that more than half work under a \"996\" schedule (working from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. six days a week) (Xu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the first global survey on faculty stress, published by Times Higher Education in 2017, ranked Chinese university faculty as experiencing the highest levels of stress worldwide, scoring at level five on a stress index (Grove, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Excessive work-related stress has been linked to heightened levels of anxiety and depression among faculty members (Tian \u0026amp; Lu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), with well-being levels significantly lower than those of professionals in other fields (Grenville-Cleave \u0026amp; Boniwell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Against this backdrop, the question of how to enhance faculty professional well-being has become a critical issue in higher education worldwide.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExisting research has investigated factors influencing faculty well-being from two primary perspectives: individual characteristics and work environment. At the individual level, studies have shown that emotional intelligence is positively correlated with well-being, yet remains difficult to modify. In contrast, workplace factors, such as leadership style (Cann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), institutional climate (Qu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), and organizational identification (Vo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), have a significant influence on faculty well-being. Organizational support theory posits that improving work environments can enhance employee well-being, making it a key approach within education management. Organizational support reflects an institution\u0026rsquo;s recognition and concern for its employees, fulfilling their emotional needs (Eisenberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). It strengthens organizational identification, serving as both a form of social capital and psychological capital that can foster higher levels of faculty\u0026rsquo;s professional well-being (Li, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model posits that job resources\u0026mdash;organizational support mechanisms facilitating professional growth, such as performance feedback and participation in decision-making\u0026mdash;fulfill employees' work-related needs (Schaufeli \u0026amp; Bakker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e), thereby enhancing job satisfaction (Grover et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, as work-family conflict increasingly undermines faculty well-being, organizational support\u0026mdash;including childcare provisions, flexible scheduling, and workload adjustments\u0026mdash;proves critical in mitigating such tensions (Kurtessis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e;Kim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, critical questions remain, including: (1) What types of organizational support contribute to enhancing faculty professional well-being? and (2) Does organizational support improve faculty well-being by reducing work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification? Empirical evidence addressing these questions remains scarce. To address this gap, this study utilizes survey data collected from faculty members at Chinese universities to empirically examine the impact of organizational support on professional well-being and its underlying mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the context of Chinese higher education, organizational support is profoundly shaped by governance structures and evolving leadership practices that differ markedly from Western institutions. Operating within a centralized, policy-driven system (e.g., 'Double First-Class' initiatives, 'up-or-out' tenure mechanisms), Chinese institutions exhibit stronger state control over resource allocation and performance expectations than Western counterparts characterized by greater institutional autonomy (Liu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Kwong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Chinese universities predominantly employ a dual leadership arrangement, where both the university president and the Communist Party secretary play critical roles in institutional governance. This model, unique to China, reflects broader political imperatives and historical evolution and stands in contrast to the typical separation between academic and administrative leadership in Western institutions (Cunningham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Ruan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). While Western universities often emphasize faculty participation in governance and maintain clearer lines between management and academics, Chinese top-level leaders tend to assume managerial and administrative rather than purely academic or symbolic roles, limiting faculty input into major institutional policies (Ruan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Besides, China's organizational support manifests through administratively embedded welfare (e.g., state-subsidized childcare) and guanxi-mediated workload adjustments, distinct from Western individual entitlement models (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). While danwei provisions enhance well-being, market-driven 'up-or-out' reforms concurrently intensify performance anxiety, rendering observed well-being gains precarious (Chen et al., 2020). Simultaneously, deep-rooted collectivist values and Confucian familial obligations exacerbate strain: 'work primacy' norms coupled with intergenerational care burdens under the '4-2-1' family structure (single-child couples supporting four parents plus children) create globally unparalleled occupational pressures(Liu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Tan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Huang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, organizational support's efficacy in fostering faculty well-being\u0026mdash;currently challenged by excessive workloads, publication demands, and underdeveloped work-family policies\u0026mdash;operates through culturally distinct pathways. This background necessitates context-specific investigations to design effective interventions and advance cross-cultural theoretical discourse.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study makes four significant contributions to the literature. First, it introduces a comprehensive framework for measuring faculty professional well-being, extending beyond overall well-being to include its three distinct dimensions\u0026mdash;life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being (Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This multidimensional approach advances prior research, which predominantly focused on aggregate well-being measures (Song et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Second, the study provides a nuanced analysis of organizational support by differentiating between resource-based support and emotional support, comparing their unique impacts on faculty well-being. Third, it investigates the mediating mechanisms of work-family conflict reduction and organizational identification enhancement, shedding light on how organizational support influences faculty well-being. Fourth, despite growing recognition of organizational support\u0026rsquo;s importance, most existing research is concentrated in Western higher education or among K-12 educators. This leaves a gap in understanding how unique governance features, work conditions, and support structures in Chinese universities shape faculty well-being. Thus, the current study addresses this gap by examining both the direct and mediating effects of organizational support among Chinese university faculty. By expanding the understanding of organizational support theory and its application to faculty well-being within the unique context of China's rapidly evolving higher education system, the findings offer practical implications for higher education administrators aiming to design evidence-based policies that foster a supportive academic environment, but also provide valuable insights for understanding faculty well-being challenges in diverse higher education contexts globally.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Theoretical Framework and Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003eProfessional well-being reflects an individual\u0026rsquo;s holistic satisfaction and psychological fulfillment in both professional and personal spheres (Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), comprising the three dimensions of life well-being (work-life harmony), workplace well-being (job satisfaction), and psychological well-being (emotional stability). Increasing workloads and pervasive work-family conflict have increasingly diminished faculty well-being (Tian \u0026amp; Lu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e;Pu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Grounded in organizational support theory (Eisenberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e), this study posits that institutions can enhance faculty well-being by addressing socio-emotional needs through material and psychological support, thereby reducing burnout and mitigating work-family tensions. Prior research on organizational support and faculty well-being has centered on three key themes:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eOrganizational Support and Faculty\u0026rsquo;s Professional Well-being\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince the 1980s, organizational support has emerged as a cornerstone of management strategy to enhance employee efficiency and satisfaction (Eisenberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). Extensive research has confirmed the correlation between organizational support and employee well-being (Kurtessis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Rhoades \u0026amp; Eisenberger, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Organizational support theory posits that employees\u0026rsquo; perception of support influences their belief in their legitimacy as organizational members (Ashforth et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). When employees feel legitimate, they develop stronger psychological and emotional attachments, exhibit higher organizational identification, and demonstrate greater workplace motivation (Rhoades \u0026amp; Eisenberger, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Simultaneously, organizational support helps mitigate work stress and burnout, enhancing overall well-being (Gillman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In educational management, organizational support is recognized as critical for boosting teacher well-being (Bogler \u0026amp; Nir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). For example, studies involving 102 university lecturers from United Kingdom identified organizational support as a significant predictor of well-being (Holliman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational support is categorized into resource support, such as work-related resources, and emotional support, such as leadership encouragement, and peer camaraderie. School leaders often employ strategies like respect, rewards, and improved compensation to address teachers\u0026rsquo; personal and professional needs, thereby enhancing their well-being (Skaalvik \u0026amp; Skaalvik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The survey involving 516 questionnaires from universities in Bangladesh holds that favorable working conditions which contain work-related resources and emotional support, constitute a crucial factor in reducing employees' turnover intentions. Essentially, such support represents the organization's response to employees' needs, which is conducive to enhancing employees' psychological sense of security and satisfaction, and is related to well-being (Ashraf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eScholars have explored the differential impacts of resource versus emotional support (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The Massachusetts Teachers and Leaders Survey (Mass TeLLS) revealed that collegial support, principal leadership, and trust and respect cultures nearly doubled the impact on teacher job satisfaction compared to material resources (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Studies even suggest limited efficacy of material incentives, on faculty well-being, like wages and benefits (Goodman \u0026amp; Turner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). While existing research has shed light on the differences between emotional support and resource support in influencing teachers' well-being and pointed out the limitations of material incentives, the specific mechanisms through which organizational support operates on teachers' well-being in the context of higher education remain to be further clarified. To address this gap, we propose:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational support significantly increases faculty professional well-being in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 2\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotional support has a stronger positive effect on enhancing faculty well-being than resource support in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eOrganizational Support, Organizational Identification, and Well-being\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOrganizational support theory emphasizes the critical role of organizational identification among employees (Ashforth et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). As a psychological bond between individuals and their organization, organizational identification reflects the alignment of personal values with institutional goals and a sense of emotional belonging, while also serving as a prerequisite for job satisfaction (Edwards \u0026amp; Peccei, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Positive organizational support enables employees to feel recognized and respected, fulfilling their socio-emotional needs and thereby strengthening their organizational identification. Empirical evidence confirms that resource-based support and emotional support from school administrators significantly enhance teachers\u0026rsquo; organizational identification (Vo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Strong organizational identification enables teachers to align closely with their institutions, embracing institutional values and culture. Conversely, inadequate organizational support exacerbates turnover risks. For instance, U.S. data reveal that insufficient support and weak organizational identification drive many teachers to leave high-poverty, minority-dominated schools for wealthier, predominantly white institutions (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial identity theory explains the relationship between organizational identification and faculty well-being, arguing that individuals construct their self-concept through social categorization, social comparison, and positive distinctiveness (Turner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1979\u003c/span\u003e). Stronger social identification correlates with higher levels of well-being (Ellemers \u0026amp; Haslam, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Through social categorization, teachers perceive themselves as integral members of their school, fostering deep identification and belonging that provide psychological stability, reduce negative emotions, and enhance well-being (Steffens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, social comparison motivates teachers to improve teaching quality and take pride in their institution, boosting job satisfaction. Positive distinctiveness encourages teachers to internalize the school\u0026rsquo;s positive image as a source of self-esteem, guided by self-actualization, which ultimately elevates individual well-being. Research also demonstrates a significant positive relationship between organizational identification and teacher job satisfaction (Fan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Employees with stronger organizational identification exhibit lower burnout and turnover rates and higher job satisfaction (Avanzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003em\u0026uuml;ş et al., 2012). Studies in Italian higher education confirm that organizational identification enhances faculty job satisfaction (Signore et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), while an analysis of 238 Turkish teachers reveals that organizational identification positively influences job satisfaction (G\u0026uuml;m\u0026uuml;ş et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). However, whether organizational support improves university faculty\u0026rsquo;s professional well-being by strengthening organizational identification remains under-explored. Thus, this study proposes:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 3\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational support enhances faculty\u0026rsquo;s professional well-being by bolstering their organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eOrganizational Support, Work-Family Conflict, and Well-being\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince the 1970s, work-family conflict has gained growing attention in the fields of organizational behavior and human resource management (Beigi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Work-family conflict is defined as \u0026ldquo;a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect,\u0026rdquo; (Greenhaus \u0026amp; Beutell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e: 77). As work and family demands compete across temporal and spatial boundaries, conflicts arising from role pressures, time constraints, and energy depletion can significantly impair workplace performance, leading to job dissatisfaction, diminished life satisfaction, and psychological strain (Spector et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Empirical evidence from studies of 357 university faculty in China\u0026rsquo;s Henan Province, confirms a positive correlation between work-family conflict and burnout (Pu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, research on 280 academic people who work at private universities in Malaysia highlights work-family conflict\u0026rsquo;s significant negative impact on job satisfaction (Rahman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, schools prioritize organizational support to mitigate work-family conflict, often combining emotional and resource-based strategies to help teachers navigate these challenges (Zhou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational support theory argues that robust organizational support acts as both social and psychological capital, enabling individuals to balance professional and personal demands and reduce work-family conflict (Kurtessis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Aligned with the Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989), instrumental support (e.g., flexible scheduling, childcare services) and affective support (e.g., supervisory caring, colleague understanding) replenish teachers' psychological and temporal resources, attenuating resource depletion induced by role demand conflicts. Such support directly diminishes bidirectional interference\u0026mdash;work interfering with family and family interfering with work\u0026mdash;reducing role stress and emotional exhaustion. Complementing this, the Job Demands-Resources Theory (Bakker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) conceptualizes organizational support (e.g., flexible work arrangements, participative decision-making) as pivotal job resources that not only replenish psychological capital and temporal reserves but also fulfill work-family balance needs, substantially curbing work-family conflict. Empirical evidence from 197 professionals in higher education found that organizational support effectively alleviated faculty\u0026rsquo;s work-family conflict (Shreffler et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e),. However, a study involving 94 participants from a Malaysian Open Distance Learning (ODL) university yielded contrasting empirical results, demonstrating that organizational support did not significantly moderate the relationship between work-life balance and well-being (Rahim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, further investigation is required to determine whether organizational support can enhance teachers' well-being by moderating work-family conflict. Critically, work-family conflict exhibits a significant negative correlation with personal well-being (Z\u0026aacute;brodsk\u0026aacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The reduction of work-family conflict enhances sustainable occupational well-being not only by restoring personal resource reservoirs to augment work meaningfulness (Pu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), but also by attenuating psychological resource depletion and fostering positive affective experiences (Schaufeli \u0026amp; Bakker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, whether organizational support bolsters university teachers\u0026rsquo; occupational well-being through mitigating work-family conflict remains insufficiently explored, particularly within higher education contexts. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 4\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational support promotes faculty\u0026rsquo;s professional well-being by reducing work-family conflict.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study employs a quantitative research design to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being in higher education. The analysis is based on survey data collected from university faculty members in China, utilizing validated measurement scales to assess key variables. Regression analysis and mediation models are applied to explore the direct and indirect effects of organizational support on faculty well-being, with a particular focus on the role of work-family conflict and organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData Collection\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study\u0026rsquo;s data is derived from the \u0026ldquo;University Faculty Career Development Survey Database.\u0026rdquo; The survey was administered in May 2024 via Wenjuanxing, an online questionnaire platform, following principles of anonymity and voluntary participation. This study received ethical approval from the X University Ethics Review Committee, and informed consent was explicitly incorporated into the questionnaire design to ensure participants' voluntary and informed participation. Faculty members from \u0026ldquo;Double First-Class\u0026rdquo; universities[1]\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn1\" id=\"#FNLinkFn1\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e in Beijing were invited to complete the questionnaire, which collected demographic information, well-being metrics, and organizational support levels, providing robust data for analysis. A total of 1000 questionnaires were distributed, after three months of data collection, with small cash rewards and gifts as incentives, 615 questionnaires were successfully recovered, resulting in a recovery rate of 61.5%. Their average age is 45.2 years old., including 283 male respondents (46.02%) and 332 female respondents (53.98%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe dependent variable, faculty professional well-being, is measured using the Employee Well-being Scale (Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), which assesses life well-being (LWB), workplace well-being (WWB), and psychological well-being (PWB) across 18 items. The scale captures faculty satisfaction with work and life, as well as psychological experiences in professional and personal contexts. Items (e.g., \u0026ldquo;My life is very interesting\u0026rdquo; for LWB; \u0026ldquo;My work is very interesting\u0026rdquo; for WWB; \u0026ldquo;I handle daily life well\u0026rdquo; for PWB) are rated on a 1\u0026ndash;7 Likert scale (from \u0026ldquo;strongly disagree\u0026rdquo; to \u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo;). The scale demonstrates strong reliability (KMO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.966; Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.970). Four indicators\u0026mdash;overall well-being, LWB, WWB, and PWB\u0026mdash;are computed using the sum-to-average method.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe independent variable, organizational support, includes two dimensions. The first dimension, emotional support is measured via the Perceived Organizational Support Scale (Shen \u0026amp; Benson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), comprising eight items (e.g., \u0026ldquo;My institution cares about my opinion\u0026rdquo;) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (KMO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.902; Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.919). The second dimension, resource support, is assessed with the Attainment of Resources Scale, which includes five items (e.g., access to professional development funding) rated on a 4-point difficulty scale (1 = \u0026ldquo;difficult\u0026rdquo; to 4 = \u0026ldquo;easy\u0026rdquo;; KMO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.867; Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.885). Both dimensions are calculated using the sum-to-average method.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe mediating variables are work-family conflict and organizational identification. Work-family conflict is measured using the Scale of Work-Family Conflict ( Zhao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), featuring six items (e.g., \u0026ldquo;My work leaves no family time\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I am too exhausted to do housework after work.\u0026rdquo;) on a 7-point Likert scale (KMO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.905; Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.952). Organizational identification is evaluated via the Organizational Identification Scale (Mael \u0026amp; Ashforth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e), with six items (e.g., \u0026ldquo;I am interested in how others view our institution\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;The institution\u0026rsquo;s success is my success\u0026rdquo;) on a 5-point Likert scale (KMO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.903; Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.897). Both variables are computed using the sum-to-average method.The specific questions of the measurement are as shown in the Appendix.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl variables, Gender (male\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0, female\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1), Age, Teaching years in this school, Academic Rank (Position Type, 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;lecturer, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;associate professor, 3\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;professor), Average Annual Income, Marital Status (YES\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1, NO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0), and Number of Children (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;none, 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;one child, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;two or more) all have significant impacts on faculty well-being (Chen \u0026amp; Deng, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang \u0026amp; Jin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Sabagh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Uristemova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, Institutional Affiliation (YES\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1, NO\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0), as a formal status in public institutions, comes with stability and welfare guarantees. Studies have indicated that individuals without institutional affiliation have lower sense of security and are more prone to burnout (Sabagh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang \u0026amp; Jin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Meanwhile, One-way Commute Time indirectly affects well-being by influencing time allocation and stress levels. Therefore, all the aforementioned factors are included as control variables.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employs regression analysis to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. To ensure estimation accuracy, we control for faculty members\u0026rsquo; personal characteristics and family background variables. The baseline regression model is specified as:\u003cdiv id=\"Equ1\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\u003cdiv format=\"TEX\" class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ1\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e\n$$\\:\\text{Y}={{\\beta\\:}}_{0}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{1}\\text{O}\\text{S}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{2}\\text{X}+{\\mu\\:}$$\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e1\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Eq.\u0026nbsp;(\u003cspan refid=\"Equ1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), \u0026ldquo;Y\u0026rdquo; represents faculty\u0026lsquo;s professional well-being, encompassing both overall well-being and its three sub-dimensions: life well-being (LWB), workplace well-being (WWB), and psychological well-being (PWB). \u0026ldquo;OS\u0026rdquo; denotes organizational support, operationalized as two dimensions: resource support (RS) and emotional support (ES). \u0026ldquo;X\u0026rdquo; represents control variables, including Gender, Age, Teaching years in this school, Position Type, Academic Rank, Institutional Affiliation, Average Annual Income, One-way Commute Time, Complete Marriage, and Number of Children. \u0026ldquo;\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\mu\\:}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u0026rdquo; is the error term.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo compare the differential effects of resource support and emotional support, we introduce Eq.\u0026nbsp;(\u003cspan refid=\"Equ2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e):\u003cdiv id=\"Equ2\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\u003cdiv format=\"TEX\" class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ2\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e\n$$\\:\\text{Y}={{\\gamma\\:}}_{0}+{{\\gamma\\:}}_{1}\\text{O}\\text{R}\\text{S}+{{\\gamma\\:}}_{2}\\text{O}\\text{M}\\text{S}+{{\\gamma\\:}}_{3}\\text{X}+{\\rho\\:}$$\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e2\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, \u0026ldquo;ORS\u0026rdquo; (organizational resource support) and \u0026ldquo;OMS\u0026rdquo; (organizational emotional support) replace the composite \u0026ldquo;OS\u0026rdquo;. All other variables align with Eq.\u0026nbsp;(\u003cspan refid=\"Equ1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). By comparing coefficients \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{{\\gamma\\:}}_{1}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{{\\gamma\\:}}_{2}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, we assess the relative efficacy of resource versus emotional support in enhancing faculty well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo investigate mediating mechanisms, we adopt a mediation analysis framework. Drawing on organizational support theory, we hypothesize that organizational support strengthens organizational identification and reduces work-family conflict, both critical pathways influencing faculty well-being. The following mediation models are tested:\u003cdiv id=\"Equ3\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\u003cdiv format=\"TEX\" class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ3\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e\n$$\\:\\text{M}={{\\beta\\:}}_{01}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{11}\\text{O}\\text{S}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{21}\\text{X}+{\\epsilon\\:}$$\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e3\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Equ4\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\u003cdiv format=\"TEX\" class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ4\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e\n$$\\:\\text{Y}={{\\beta\\:}}_{02}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{12}\\text{O}\\text{S}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{22}\\text{M}+{{\\beta\\:}}_{3}\\text{X}+{\\theta\\:}$$\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e4\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn these models, \u0026ldquo;M\u0026rdquo; represents the mediating variables (organizational identification or work-family conflict). The coefficients \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{{\\beta\\:}}_{11}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (effect of organizational support on mediators) and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{{\\beta\\:}}_{22}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (effect of mediators on well-being) jointly determine the presence of mediation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eBy employing correlation analysis, regression modeling, and mediation pathways, this study investigates the multifaceted relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. The findings reveal robust positive associations for both resource-based and emotional support, with emotional support demonstrating a notably stronger impact.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCorrelation Analysis of Core Variables\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents the correlation coefficients for core variables, revealing a significant positive correlation between organizational support and faculty professional well-being. Specifically, organizational resource support correlates positively with overall well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.318, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), life well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.295, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), workplace well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.328, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and psychological well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.253, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). Organizational emotional support shows stronger positive correlations with overall well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.501, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) life well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.459, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), workplace well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.503, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and psychological well-being (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.421, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). Furthermore, work-family conflict exhibits a significant negative correlation with faculty well-being, while organizational identification demonstrates a significant positive correlation. Organizational support is negatively associated with work-family conflict and positively linked to organizational identification.\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\u003eCorrelation Analysis of Core Variables\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=\"char\" char=\".\" 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=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" 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\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.000***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Life well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.911***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Workplace well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.944***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.784***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Psychological well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.912***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.712***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.833***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. Organizational resource support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.318***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.295***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.328***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.253***\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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6. Organizational emotional support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.501***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.459***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.503***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.421***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.520***\u003c/p\u003e \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 \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7. Work-Family Conflict\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.226***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.239***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.188***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.194***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.210***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.183***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8. Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.518***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.421***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.545***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.471***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.474***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.294***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.078*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparative Effects of Resource Support and Emotional Support\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter controlling for faculty members\u0026rsquo; personal characteristics and family background information, the impact of organizational support on professional well-being was estimated. Results in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e demonstrate that both resource support and emotional support significantly enhance faculty professional well-being. Specifically, in Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, Model (1) shows that resource support has a coefficient of 0.419 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) on overall professional well-being, and Model (5) indicates that emotional support has a coefficient of 0.688 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) on overall professional well-being. Further analysis across the three dimensions, life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, confirms the positive predictive role of organizational support. Models (2), (3), and (4) reveal that resource support significantly impacts life well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.484, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), workplace well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.451, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and psychological well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.323, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). Models (6), (7), and (8) show that emotional support significantly influences life well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.767, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), workplace well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.729, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and psychological well-being (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.568, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression of Organizational Support on Faculty Professional Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\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=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePanel A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational resource support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.419***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.484***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.451***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.323***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.061)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.072)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.064)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.062)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR-squared\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.133\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.111\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.142\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.101\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePanel B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational emotional support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.688***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.767***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.729***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.568***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.057)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.067)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.065)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.058)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR-squared\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.273\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.276\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.204\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNotes: *** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, ** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, * p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10; standard errors in parentheses.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo compare the relative importance of resource support and emotional support, both variables were included in the regression model. The results in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e indicate that emotional support exerts a stronger effect on teachers\u0026rsquo; professional well-being. Specifically, for overall professional well-being, the coefficient for emotional support is 0.633 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), while that for resource support is 0.115 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1). In terms of life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, the coefficients for emotional support are 0.695 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), 0.667 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and 0.538 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), respectively, whereas those for resource support are 0.150 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), 0.130 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), and 0.064 (non-significant).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComparison of Two Types of Organizational Support on Faculty Professional Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\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=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel (4)\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\u003eOrganizational emotional support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.633***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.695***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.667***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.538***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.062)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.076)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.070)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.063)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational resource support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.115*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.150**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.130**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.059)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.072)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.061)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.062)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e615\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR-squared\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.277\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.236\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.281\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.205\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNotes: *** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, ** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, * p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10; standard errors in parentheses.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMechanism Analysis: Reducing Work-Family Conflict and Enhancing Organizational Identification\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing Equations (\u003cspan refid=\"Equ3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) and (\u003cspan refid=\"Equ4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), this study examines the mechanisms through which organizational support influences faculty well-being. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e illustrates that work-family conflict significantly diminishes faculty members\u0026rsquo; overall professional well-being, including their life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being. Conversely, organizational emotional support effectively mitigates work-family conflict. Meanwhile, organizational identification substantially enhances faculty professional well-being across all three dimensions, while emotional support from the institution strengthens this identification. These results demonstrate that organizational emotional support fosters faculty well-being through two mediating pathways: (1) alleviating work-family conflict and (2) reinforcing organizational identification, thereby cultivating faculty\u0026rsquo;s stronger psychological attachment to the institution and improving their holistic well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e delineates the mechanism through which organizational resource support enhances faculty professional well-being. The results demonstrate that resource support significantly reduces work-family conflict (β = -0.395, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) and strengthens organizational identification (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.269, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). Work-family conflict, in turn, exerts a detrimental effect on faculty well-being, negatively impacting life, workplace, and psychological well-being. Conversely, organizational identification positively influences all three sub-dimensions of well-being. These findings underscore that organizational resource support improves faculty professional well-being via dual mediating pathways: (1) mitigating work-family conflicts and (2) fostering a stronger sense of organizational identification, thereby creating a more supportive environment for faculty\u0026rsquo;s holistic professional well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo validate results, we apply the Bootstrap method with 1000 resamples to estimate confidence intervals for indirect effects, examining the mediating effects of organizational support on faculty professional well-being. As presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the mediation path of organizational emotional support \u0026rarr; work-family conflict \u0026rarr; well-being demonstrated a significant effect size of 0.043 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), with the 95% confidence interval [0.012, 0.074] excluding zero, indicating that work-family conflict significantly mediates the relationship between organizational emotional support and faculty well-being. Similarly, work-family conflict was found to mediate the association between organizational resource support and teacher well-being, with an effect size of 0.055 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10) and a 95% confidence interval of [0.018, 0.092]. Notably, work-family conflict exhibited significant mediating effects across all three sub-dimensions of faculty well-being, including life well-being, workplace well-being, and psychological well-being, in both organizational emotional support and resource support models. Additionally, organizational identification emerged as a significant mediator between organizational emotional support and faculty well-being (effect size\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.228, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10; 95% CI [0.159, 0.296]) as well as between organizational resource support and well-being (effect size\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.186, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10; 95% CI [0.119, 0.254]). The mediating role of organizational identification remained statistically significant across all three sub-dimensions of teacher well-being in both organizational support models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootstrap mediation effect test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\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=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCoefficient\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd.err\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% conf. interval\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational emotional support\u0026rarr;Work-family conflict\u0026rarr;Y\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.043***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.016)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.012 0.074]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.061***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.018 0.105]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.031*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.017)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.002 0.064]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.037**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.017)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.004 0.070]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational resource support\u0026rarr;Work-family conflict\u0026rarr;Y\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.055***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.019)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.018 0.092]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.072***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.024)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.025 0.119]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.045**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.018)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.009 0.081]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.048***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.018)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.014 0.082]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational emotional support\u0026rarr;Organizational identification\u0026rarr;Y\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.228***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.035)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.159 0.296]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.199***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.037)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.127 0.271]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.264***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.040)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.186 0.341]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.220***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.036)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.150 0.291]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational resource support\u0026rarr;Organizational identification\u0026rarr;Y\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWell-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.186***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.034)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.119 0.254]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.176***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.035)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.107 0.245]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorkplace Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.208***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.038)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.134 0.283]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Well-being\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.174***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.033)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.108 0.240]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNotes: *** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, ** p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, * p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10; standard errors in parentheses.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo sum up, regression analyses confirm that both support types enhance well-being across its sub-dimensions, life, workplace, and psychological, although emotional support consistently surpasses resource support in magnitude and significance. Mediation analyses further identify two critical mechanisms by which organizational support bolsters well-being: mitigating work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification, with emotional support again exhibiting a more pronounced influence. Collectively, these results highlight the dual pathways through which organizational support fosters faculty well-being and offer both theoretical and practical insights for academic institutions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAmid growing concerns over work-related stress among university faculty, enhancing their professional well-being has become a pressing issue in both academic research and educational practice. This study explores the mechanisms through which organizational support contributes to faculty well-being, utilizing survey data from university faculty in China. Grounded in an organizational support perspective, the research seeks to offer theoretical insights and practical recommendations for improving faculty work environments and promoting greater professional well-being. This results of this study reveal the critical role of organizational support, resource and emotional support, in enhancing faculty well-being through strengthening organizational identification, and mitigating work-family conflict. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of organizational support theory and offer practical recommendations for university administrators seeking to improve faculty well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirstly, organizational support is strongly linked to faculty well-being. Faculty members who receive greater organizational resource support report significantly higher levels of life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being. Similarly, higher levels of emotional support from the organization are strongly associated with enhanced faculty well-being. Drawing on the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, resources are essential for helping individuals manage job demands, while resource depletion can lead to burnout (Bakker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The more resources individuals have, the better they can cope with stress, underscoring the importance of adequate organizational resource support as a key strategy for improving faculty well-being (Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Chinese university faculty benefit from a government-led support system that encompass financial security, healthcare and pension benefits, as well as structured career progression pathways. This system provides a sense of occupational security and clear professional development expectations, distinguishing it from Western models(Kwong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e;Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Meanwhile, university administrators can enhance faculty well-being by providing robust support for teaching and research development, ensuring faculty have the resources needed to advance their academic careers. Additionally, given the nature of faculty work, which requires them to spend a significant portion of their time within the university campus, emotional support from the organization plays an equally critical role. Previous research has emphasized the importance of a positive institutional climate and humane management practices in fostering faculty well-being (Cann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Universities can further promote faculty\u0026rsquo;s well-being by cultivating a culture of care, actively listening to faculty concerns, and recognizing their contributions. These measures not only improve individual well-being but also contribute to a more supportive and productive academic environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondly, emotional support exerts a stronger influence on faculty well-being compared to resource support. While resource support enables faculty to fulfill their teaching and research responsibilities, material resources alone are insufficient to fully unlock their potential (Li, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, emotional support plays a more pivotal role in fostering faculty well-being. This support manifests not only in institutional respect and care from leadership but, more importantly, in faculty members' sense of recognition and appreciation. According to Social Exchange Theory, when faculty perceive that their institution values and respects them, they experience heightened job satisfaction and greater engagement in their teaching and research activities (Eisenberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). Research also indicates that trust and respect within an institution\u0026rsquo;s culture can have nearly twice the impact on faculty well-being as material resources alone (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Rooted in Confucian cultural traditions, Chinese faculty receive substantial organizational emotional support. This manifests as high levels of social respect, professional honor, a strong sense of professional responsibility, and mission (Tan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Huang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Concurrently, the collectivist orientation prevalent in the school environment fosters a strong sense of belonging and emotional fulfillment among faculty (Kwong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Tan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, in addition to providing adequate material resources, university administrators are recommended to prioritize human-centered management strategies that enhance emotional support, thereby fostering faculty professional well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThirdly, organizational support enhances faculty well-being by strengthening organizational identification. Social Exchange Theory posits that when faculty receive both material and emotional support from their institution, they develop a stronger sense of organizational identification (Eisenberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). This identification fosters greater commitment to their work, aligns personal and institutional goals, and cultivates a stronger sense of achievement and fulfillment, ultimately improving professional well-being (Vo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Given the rapid transformations in academia, faculty face increasing challenges in teaching, research, and interpersonal relationships, often leading to uncertainty and stress. Universities should proactively address faculty career development concerns by offering tangible resources and emotional support. When faculty feel valued and cared for by their institution, they gain a stronger sense of belonging and psychological security, reinforcing their organizational identification and encouraging deeper engagement in their academic roles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLast but not least, organizational support improves faculty well-being by reducing work-family conflict. The study reveals that although work-family conflict significantly undermines faculty well-being, organizational support can effectively mitigate this conflict. Under the current \"up-or-out\" tenure-track system, faculty face immense pressure from teaching and research responsibilities. Such burden is particularly pronounced for faculty with care-giving responsibilities, as excessive workloads exacerbate work-family conflict (Meng \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Since the 1970s, the detrimental effects of work-family conflict have been widely recognized (Beigi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and are now established as a key factor in diminishing faculty well-being. Organizational support theory suggests that universities can serve as both social and psychological capital by providing faculty with resource and emotional support, helping them alleviate work-family conflict (Bragger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). This finding highlights the importance of fostering a supportive work-family culture within universities. Institutional leaders should acknowledge the adverse effects of work-family conflict and offer proactive organizational support, such as establishing specialized counseling services to help faculty manage the psychological pressures of balancing work and family responsibilities. Additionally, universities should provide targeted support for faculty with care-giving obligations, such as adjusting workloads for pregnant and nursing faculty members, thereby enhancing their professional well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese governance characteristics have significant implications for support structures and faculty work conditions. Chinese universities remain highly centralized in decision-making, with human resource and support policies tending toward standardization and formalization, heavily influenced by government policies and performance metrics (Mok \u0026amp; Han, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Faculty members often face substantial administrative workloads, frequent evaluations, and strong performance pressures, with top-down approaches prevailing in human resource management (Sha \u0026amp; Chang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Although reforms have introduced elements of decentralization and responsiveness, the reach of state and bureaucratic mechanisms remains substantial. In this environment, organizational support is frequently oriented toward meeting institutional goals rather than accommodating diverse, individualized faculty needs as seen more often in Western contexts. Notably, recent research highlights that such pressures and administrative dominance can be linked to faculty burnout and reduced occupational health, calling for the critical importance of context-sensitive, health-promoting leadership in fostering well-being in Chinese universities (Sha \u0026amp; Chang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eImplications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study offers an in-depth exploration of the intrinsic relationship between organizational support and faculty professional well-being, investigating the mediating roles of work-family conflict and organizational identification, providing both theoretical insights and practical implications.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a theoretical perspective, this study adopts a comprehensive framework for assessing professional well-being, encompassing three dimensions: life well-being, work well-being, and psychological well-being. By moving beyond the traditional single-dimensional approach to faculty well-being (Song et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), this research enriches the academic discourse on faculty professional well-being. Additionally, it examines strategies to enhance well-being through the lens of organizational support, distinguishing between the effects of resource-based support and emotional support. The findings reveal that emotional support has a stronger impact on faculty well-being, highlighting the critical role of psychological capital in organizational management (Li, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Compared to traditional resource-based incentives (Zhao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), emotional support (Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) plays a more significant role in improving employee job satisfaction. This insight advances the application of organizational support theory in faculty management. Furthermore, by investigating the mechanisms through which organizational support influences well-being, specifically by reducing work-family conflict and enhancing organizational identification, this study deepens our understanding of the factors shaping faculty well-being and enriches organizational support theory.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a practical standpoint, this study highlights the substantial role of both resource-based and emotional support in enhancing faculty well-being, offering valuable evidence for policies aimed at promoting faculty well-being. In 2021, China\u0026rsquo;s Ministry of Education, in collaboration with five other government agencies, issued the Guidelines on Strengthening the Reform of University Faculty Development in the New Era, emphasizing the need to prioritize faculty physical and psychological well-being and advocating for diverse measures to improve faculty treatment and care. University administrators should fully recognize the pivotal role of organizational support in fostering faculty well-being by ensuring adequate working conditions and career development opportunities (Cann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Previous research has established that organizational support is a key determinant of faculty well-being (Bogler \u0026amp; Nir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). This study further reveals that, compared to resource-based support, emotional support has a more profound effect on faculty professional well-being. Thus, in addition to providing teaching and research resources, universities should focus on strengthening emotional support systems, fostering a positive, harmonious, and inclusive campus culture (Qu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Chinese universities have developed diverse practices in improving emotional support systems and fostering a positive campus culture, covering multiple dimensions such as mental health services, cultural education, academic community building, and family-friendly policies. For instance, they have launched 24-hour psychological hotlines, incorporated mental health assessments into annual physical examinations, and some universities have implemented policies that allow female faculty and staff to extend their maternity leave if it coincides with winter or summer vacations. Additionally, full-day care and temporary care services for the children of faculty and staff are provided. To sum up, more can be achieved by institutionalizing faculty representation mechanisms, such as establishing regular faculty assemblies to solicit feedback, prioritizing faculty mental health, and developing multi-channel strategies to alleviate professional stress. Meanwhile, universities should provide robust academic career development support, including the establishment of academic communities (Z\u0026aacute;brodsk\u0026aacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) and family-friendly policies, such as parental support programs. By helping faculty achieve a better work-life balance (Jiang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), universities can effectively empower faculty to release burdens and create an academic environment conducive to sustainable professional growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study not only advances theoretical understanding of organizational support and faculty well-being but also provides actionable recommendations for university administrators. By integrating resource-based and emotional support, institutions can foster a more supportive and productive academic environment, ultimately enhancing faculty well-being and institutional performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eDrawing on survey data from Chinese university faculty, this study demonstrates a significant positive correlation between high levels of organizational support and faculty professional well-being. Both resource-based and emotional support enhance well-being across dimensions, improving work-related satisfaction, life contentment, and psychological health. Though emotional support exerts a notably stronger influence. Furthermore, organizational support bolsters well-being by mitigating work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification. These findings hold critical implications for faculty career development and institutional decision-making, offering actionable strategies for universities to cultivate supportive environments. By highlighting the differential impacts of resource and emotional support, the study also provides a framework for cross-national research on faculty well-being, advancing theoretical understanding and practical applications in higher education management.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study offers valuable directions for future research while acknowledging several limitations. First, as the analysis relies on cross-sectional data to examine the relationship between organizational support and faculty well-being, causal inferences between variables cannot be definitively established. Future studies could employ longitudinal designs to better capture the dynamic interplay among organizational support, work-family conflict, organizational identification, and professional well-being over time. Second, due to funding constraints, the sample is limited to faculty from China\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Double First-Class\u0026rdquo; universities, potentially restricting the generalizability of the findings. To enhance external validity, subsequent research could expand the scope to include faculty from diverse institutional types (e.g., regional universities, vocational colleges) and international contexts, enabling cross-cultural comparisons.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn an era where faculty well-being is increasingly strained by escalating academic demands, this study highlights organizational support as a cornerstone for building resilient, equitable, and thriving academic communities. By demonstrating how targeted support systems mitigate work-family conflict and cultivate organizational identification, which are key drivers of professional fulfillment, our findings call for a paradigm shift in higher education policy. Institutions must transcend transactional resource allocation and prioritize emotionally intelligent frameworks that empower faculty holistically. This approach is not merely beneficial but imperative: sustainable educational excellence hinges on recognizing faculty well-being as both a moral imperative and a strategic investment in institutional resilience.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;The authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are available from ** but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under licence for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of **.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval\u0026nbsp;:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was performed in line with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards.The research protocol ensured anonymity and confidentiality of responses. Participation was voluntary, and participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without consequence. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Central University of Finance and Economics\u0026rsquo;s Research Ethics Committee (Approval ID: IRB20250311004, Date: 11/03/2025).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained in writing from all participants on 10 April 2025. Each participant was provided with a written consent form that clearly outlined the study\u0026rsquo;s objectives, the types of personal data to be collected in Beijing,China. All participants were fully informed about the study\u0026rsquo;s research objectives, data collection methods, potential risks, and the use of data for publication purposes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Funding Statement :\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 7240042236).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors Contributions:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eYXM:\u003c/strong\u003e Conceptualization (lead), Methodology (lead), Writing - review \u0026amp; editing (lead), Funding acquisition (lead).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eXYJ:\u003c/strong\u003e Writing - review \u0026amp; editing (supporting), Validation (equal).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZJY(Corresponding author\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eCorrespondence to::[email protected]): Writing - original draft(lead), Project administration (lead).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eXSP\u003c/strong\u003e: Writing - original draft(supporting).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAddimando L (2019) The Effect of Positive Working Conditions on Work Engagement and Teaching Classroom Practices: A Large Cross-Sectional Study in Switzerland. Front Psychol 10:2129. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02129\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02129\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshforth BE, Harrison SH, Corley KG (2008) Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions. J Manag 34(3):325\u0026ndash;374. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316059\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0149206308316059\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshraf MA (2019) Influences of working condition and faculty retention on quality education in private universities in Bangladesh: An analysis using SEM. Int J Educational Manage 33(1):149\u0026ndash;165. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2018-0121\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJEM-03-2018-0121\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAvanzi L, Fraccaroli F, Castelli L, Marcionetti J, Crescentini A, Balducci C, Van Dick R (2018) How to mobilize social support against workload and burnout: The role of organizational identification. Teach Teacher Educ 69:154\u0026ndash;167. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBakker AB, Demerouti E, Verbeke W (2004) Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Hum Resour Manag 43(1):83\u0026ndash;104. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/hrm.20004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeigi M, Wang J, Arthur MB (2017) Work\u0026ndash;family interface in the context of career success: A qualitative inquiry. Hum Relat 70(9):1091\u0026ndash;1114. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717691339\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0018726717691339\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBogler R, Nir AE (2012) The importance of teachers\u0026rsquo; perceived organizational support to job satisfaction: What\u0026rsquo;s empowerment got to do with it? J Educational Adm 50(3):287\u0026ndash;306. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211223310\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/09578231211223310\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBragger JD, Rodriguez-Srednicki O, Kutcher EJ, Indovino L, Rosner E (2005) Work-family Conflict, Work-family Culture, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Among Teachers. J Bus Psychol 20(2):303\u0026ndash;324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-005-8266-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10869-005-8266-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCann RF, Riedel-Prabhakar R, Powell D (2021) A Model of Positive School Leadership to Improve Teacher Wellbeing. Int J Appl Posit Psychol 6(2):195\u0026ndash;218. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-020-00045-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s41042-020-00045-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen XJ, Deng YH (2009) A review of recent research on teachers\u0026rsquo; happiness in China. Educ Rev, 25\u0026ndash;28.(in Chinese)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen XZ (2020) The discourse evolution of faculty research in the social transformation of new China. High Educ Res 41(4):67\u0026ndash;75\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCunningham C, Zhang W, Striepe M, Rhodes D (2022) Dual leadership in Chinese schools challenges executive principalships as best fit for 21st century educational development. Int J Educational Dev 89:102531. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102531\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102531\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Carlo A, Girardi D, Falco A, Dal Corso L, Di Sipio A (2019) When Does Work Interfere With Teachers\u0026rsquo; Private Life? An Application of the Job Demands-Resources Model. Front Psychol 10:1121. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01121\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01121\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEdinger SK, Edinger MJ (2018) Improving Teacher Job Satisfaction: The Roles of Social Capital, Teacher Efficacy, and Support. J Psychol 152(8):573\u0026ndash;593. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2018.1489364\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00223980.2018.1489364\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEdwards MR, Peccei R (2010) Perceived Organizational Support, Organizational Identification, and Employee Outcomes: Testing a Simultaneous Multifoci Model. J Personnel Psychol 9(1):17\u0026ndash;26. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1027/1866-5888/a000007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEisenberger R, Armeli S, Rexwinkel B, Lynch PD, Rhoades L (2001) Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. J Appl Psychol 86(1):42\u0026ndash;51. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEllemers N, Haslam SA (2012) Social identity theory. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, vol 2. Sage Publications Ltd, pp 379\u0026ndash;398. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n45\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4135/9781446249222.n45\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFan Y, Du M, Wang J (2024) Unpacking the effect of principal empowerment on teacher job satisfaction: The Mediation of organizational learning and teacher organizational identification in China. Int J Educational Res 128:102489. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102489\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102489\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGillman JC, Turner MJ, Slater MJ (2024) The role of social support and social identification in challenge and threat, perceived stress, and life satisfaction. Soc Pers Psychol Compass 18(7):e12982. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12982\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/spc3.12982\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoodman SF, Turner LJ (2013) The Design of Teacher Incentive Pay and Educational Outcomes: Evidence from the New York City Bonus Program. J Labor Econ 31(2):409\u0026ndash;420. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1086/668676\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1086/668676\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGreenhaus JH, Beutell NJ (1985) Sources of Conflict between Work and Family Roles. Acad Manage Rev 10(1):76. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/258214\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/258214\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGregersen T, Mercer S, MacIntyre P, Talbot K, Banga CA (2023) Understanding language teacher wellbeing: An ESM study of daily stressors and uplifts. Lang Teach Res 27(4):862\u0026ndash;883. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820965897\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1362168820965897\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrenville-Cleave B, Boniwell I (2012) Surviving or thriving? Do teachers have lower perceived control and well-being than other professions? Manage Educ 26(1):3\u0026ndash;5. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0892020611429252\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0892020611429252\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrove J (2017) UK and Australian universities more stressful than Uganda. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/uk-and-australian-universities-more-stressful-than-uganda\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/uk-and-australian-universities-more-stressful-than-uganda\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrover SL, Teo ST, Pick D, Roche M, Newton CJ (2018) Psychological capital as a personal resource in the JD-R model. Personnel Rev 47(4):968\u0026ndash;984. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eG\u0026uuml;m\u0026uuml;ş M, Hamarat B, \u0026Ccedil;olak E, Duran E (2012) Organizational and occupational identification: Relations to teacher satisfaction and intention to early retirement. Career Dev Int 17(4):300\u0026ndash;313. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/13620431211255806\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/13620431211255806\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHascher T, Waber J (2021) Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000\u0026ndash;2019. Educational Res Rev 34:100411. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolliman AJ, Revill-Keen A, Waldeck D (2022) University lecturers\u0026rsquo; adaptability: examining links with perceived autonomy support, organisational commitment, and psychological wellbeing. Teach Educ 33(1):42\u0026ndash;55. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2020.1803822\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10476210.2020.1803822\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang Y (2018) Revisiting the research\u0026ndash;teaching nexus in a managerial context: exploring the complexity of multi-layered factors. High Educ Res Dev 37(4):758\u0026ndash;772. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446418\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/07294360.2018.1446418\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJiang X-R, Du J-J, Dong R-Y (2017) Coping Style, Job Burnout and Mental Health of University Teachers of the Millennial Generation. EURASIA J Math Sci Technol Educ 13(7). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00734a\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.12973/eurasia.2017.00734a\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnson SM, Kraft MA, Papay JP (2012) How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers\u0026rsquo; working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students\u0026rsquo; achievement. Teachers Coll Record 114(10):1\u0026ndash;39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim MS, Ma E, Wang L (2023) Work-family supportive benefits, programs, and policies and employee well-being: implications for the hospitality industry. Int J Hospitality Manage, \u003cem\u003e108\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar DSP (2022) Influence of University teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction on subjective well-being and job performance. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Engineering Education Transformations\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(Special Issue 1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v35is1/22023\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.16920/jeet/2022/v35is1/22023\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKurtessis JN, Eisenberger R, Ford MT, Buffardi LC, Stewart KA, Adis CS (2017) Perceived Organizational Support: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of Organizational Support Theory. J Manag 43(6):1854\u0026ndash;1884. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0149206315575554\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKwong J, Wang H, Clifton RA (2010) Rethinking Our Assumptions about Teachers\u0026rsquo; Job Satisfaction in China and the West. Australian J Educ 54(2):115\u0026ndash;132. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/000494411005400202\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/000494411005400202\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi Y (2018) Building well-being among university teachers: The roles of psychological capital and meaning in life. Eur J Work Organizational Psychol 27(5):594\u0026ndash;602. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1496909\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1359432X.2018.1496909\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi LL, Lai MH, Lo NK (2013) Academic work within a mode of mixed governance: perspectives of University Professors in the Research Context of Western China. Asia Pac Educ Rev 15(3):307\u0026ndash;314\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu S, Huang Q, Lv M (2024) From vocation to profession: multiple identities of chinese management academics. Palgrave Commun, 10(1)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMael F, Ashforth BE (1992) Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J Organizational Behav 13(2):103\u0026ndash;123. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.4030130202\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeng Q, Wang G (2018) A research on sources of university faculty occupational stress: A Chinese case study. Psychol Res Behav Manage 11:597\u0026ndash;605. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S187295\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2147/PRBM.S187295\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMok KH, Han X (2017) Higher education governance and policy in China: Managing decentralization and transnationalism. Policy Soc 36(1):34\u0026ndash;48. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1288964\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14494035.2017.1288964\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePu J, Hou H, Ma R, Sang J (2017) The effect of psychological capital between work-family conflict and job burnout in Chinese university teachers: Testing for mediation and moderation. J Health Psychol 22(14):1799\u0026ndash;1807. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316636950\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1359105316636950\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQu G (2024) Perceived school climate, collective teacher efficacy, self-compassion, and subjective well-being in Chinese university teachers: A mediation analysis. Humanit Social Sci Commun 11(1):1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04074-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1057/s41599-024-04074-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRahman MM, Ali NA, Jantan AH, Mansor ZD, Rahaman MS (2020) Work to family, family to work conflicts and work family balance as predictors of job satisfaction of Malaysian academic community. J Enterprising Communities: People Places Global Econ 14(4):621\u0026ndash;642. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-05-2020-0098\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/JEC-05-2020-0098\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRahim NB, Osman I, Arumugam PV (2020) Linking work-life balance and employee well-being: Do supervisor support and family support moderate the relationship. Int J Bus Soc 21(2):588\u0026ndash;606. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.3273.2020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.33736/ijbs.3273.2020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRhoades L, Eisenberger R (2002) Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. J Appl Psychol 87(4):698\u0026ndash;714. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuan J, Cai Y, Stensaker B (2024) University managers or institutional leaders? An exploration of top-level leadership in Chinese universities. High Educ 87(3):703\u0026ndash;719. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01031-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10734-023-01031-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSabagh Z, Hall NC, Saroyan A (2018) Antecedents, correlates and consequences of faculty burnout. Educational Res 60(2):131\u0026ndash;156. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2018.1461573\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00131881.2018.1461573\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\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. J Organizational Behavior: Int J Industrial Occupational Organizational Psychol Behavior 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\u003eSha X, Chang Y (2025) Occupational Health and Performance Among Chinese University Teachers: A COR Theory Model of Health-Promoting Leadership and Burnout. Eur J Invest Health Psychology Education 15(7):134. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe15070134\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ejihpe15070134\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShen J, Benson J (2016) When CSR Is a Social Norm: How Socially Responsible Human Resource Management Affects Employee Work Behavior. J Manag 42(6):1723\u0026ndash;1746. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314522300\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0149206314522300\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShreffler MB, Shreffler JR, Murfree JR (2019) Barriers to advancement of female faculty in higher education: an examination of student evaluations of teaching, work-family conflict and perceived organizational support. J High Educ Theory Pract 19(8):72\u0026ndash;85\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSignore F, Esposito C, Di Napoli I, Agueli B, Ingusci E, Mannarini T, Toto GA, Arcidiacono C, Fantinelli S (2024) Social dimensions as resources in promoting academic well-being: The case study of the University of Foggia. Front Psychol 15:1347532. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1347532\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1347532\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSkaalvik EM, Skaalvik S (2018) Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Soc Psychol Educ 21(5):1251\u0026ndash;1275. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9464-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11218-018-9464-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSong H, Gu Q, Zhang Z (2020) An exploratory study of teachers\u0026rsquo; subjective wellbeing: Understanding the links between teachers\u0026rsquo; income satisfaction, altruism, self-efficacy and work satisfaction. Teachers Teach 26(1):3\u0026ndash;31. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2020.1719059\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13540602.2020.1719059\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpector P, Cooper C, Poelmans S, Allen T, O\u0026rsquo;Driscoll M, Sanchez J, Siu O, Dewe P, Hart P, Lu L, Moraes LFRD, Ostrognay G, Sparks K, Wong P, Yu S (2004) Working Hours, and Well-Being: China and Latin American vs. the Anglo World. Pers Psychol 57(1):119\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02486.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02486.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. A Cross-National Comparative Study of Work-Family Stressors\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteffens NK, Haslam SA, Schuh SC, Jetten J, Van Dick R (2017) A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Identification and Health in Organizational Contexts. Personality Social Psychol Rev 21(4):303\u0026ndash;335. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316656701\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1088868316656701\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTan C (2015) Education policy borrowing and cultural scripts for teaching in China. Comp Educ 51(2):196\u0026ndash;211. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2014.966485\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03050068.2014.966485\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTian M, Lu G (2017) What price the building of world-class universities? Academic pressure faced by young lecturers at a research-centered University in China. Teach High Educ 22(8):957\u0026ndash;974. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1319814\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13562517.2017.1319814\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTurner JC, Brown RJ, Tajfel H (1979) Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. Eur J Social Psychol 9(2):187\u0026ndash;204. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420090207\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ejsp.2420090207\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUristemova A, Myssayev A, Meirmanov S, Migina L (2024) Predictors of Job Satisfaction and Association with Psychological Distress Among Academic Medicine Faculty in Kazakhstan. La Medicina del Lavoro 115(1):e2024002. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v115i1.15010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.23749/mdl.v115i1.15010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVo DT, Allen K-A, Reupert A (2024) Australian teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptualisations of wellbeing at work: A prototype analysis. Teach Teacher Educ 147:1\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104653\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tate.2024.104653\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Y, Xia Q, Yue H, Teng W (2024) Chinese Rural Kindergarten Teachers\u0026rsquo; Work-Family Conflict and Their Turnover Intention: The Role of Emotional Exhaustion and Professional Identity. Behav Sci (Basel Switzerland) 14(7):597. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070597\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/bs14070597\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Y, Xia Q, Yue H, Yu R, Zhang W, Li J, Chen D, Xu P (2023) The relationship between work-family conflict and job satisfaction for preschool teachers in rural China: A moderated mediation model. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1236713\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpubh.2023.1236713\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu Q, Zhou N (2023) Work Stress and Personal and Relational Well-Being Among Chinese College Teachers: The Indirect Roles of Sense of Control and Work-Related Rumination. Psychol Res Behav Manage 16:2819\u0026ndash;2828. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S418077\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2147/PRBM.S418077\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXiao W, Luo JL (2016) A comparative study on the influencing mechanism of the sense of career success of male and female college teachers. Collection Women's Studies 136(4):111\u0026ndash;119 (in Chinese)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXu J (2021) The confusion of Qing Jiao: The performance dilemma of college teachers (in Chinese). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.lifeweek.com.cn/article/123043\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.lifeweek.com.cn/article/123043\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZ\u0026aacute;brodsk\u0026aacute; K, Mudr\u0026aacute;k J, Šolcov\u0026aacute; I, Květon P, Blatn\u0026yacute; M, Machovcov\u0026aacute; K (2018) Burnout among university faculty: The central role of work-family conflict. Educational Psychol 38(6):800\u0026ndash;819. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1340590\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/01443410.2017.1340590\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang YZ, Jin SH (2013) Investigation of university teachers\u0026rsquo; occupational well-being and analysis of influencing factors. Educ Sci 29(5):51\u0026ndash;57 (in Chinese)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao P, Yuan J, Hu Y (2024) Work Hours, Job Resources and Subjective Well-Being of Chinese Faculty: An Empirical Analysis Based on a Sequential Mediation Model. Res High Educt 65(5):965\u0026ndash;988. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-023-09770-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11162-023-09770-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao X (Roy), Qu H, Ghiselli R (eds) (2011) Examining the relationship of work-family conflict to job and life satisfaction: A case of hotel sales managers. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Hospitality Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(1), 46\u0026ndash;54. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.04.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.04.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZheng X, Huang H, Yu Q (2024) The associations among gratitude, job crafting, teacher-student relationships, and teacher psychological well-being. Front Psychol 15:1329782. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1329782\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1329782\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZheng X, Zhu W, Zhao H, Zhang C (2015) Employee well-being in organizations: Theoretical model, scale development, and cross‐cultural validation. J Organizational Behav 36(5):621\u0026ndash;644. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.1990\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.1990\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhou S, Li X, Gao B (2020) Family/friends support, work-family conflict, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in young preschool teachers in China: A serial mediation model. Child Youth Serv Rev 113:104997. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104997\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104997\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e \u0026ldquo;Double First-Class\u0026rdquo; universities refer to top-tier Chinese institutions selected for their academic excellence, research output, and high-quality disciplines, often characterized by strong global rankings, cutting-edge innovation, and leadership in prioritized fields such as STEM, social sciences, or humanities\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":"Faculty Professional Well-being, Organizational support, Work-Family Conflict, Organizational identification, Resource and Emotional Support","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eGiven the prominent issue of work-related stress among university teachers, enhancing their professional well-being has drawn significant attention. This study investigates the mechanisms by which organizational support, encompassing both resource-based and emotional dimensions, improves faculty\u0026rsquo;s professional well-being. Drawing on survey data from Chinese university faculty, regression and mediation analyses reveal that high levels of organizational support are significantly associated with improved overall well-being, including higher levels of job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and psychological health. Notably, emotional support exhibits a more pronounced effect than resource support. Further analyses indicate that organizational support enhances well-being primarily by reducing work-family conflict and strengthening organizational identification. These findings offer important theoretical insights and practical implications for faculty development and higher education management.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Organizational support and faculty well-being: unlocking the dual mediating pathways of work-family conflict and organizational identification","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-16 17:52:17","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7920451/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-04-24T23:41:15+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-13T12:49:14+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-09T13:11:20+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"276990490685539449186971882220725867878","date":"2026-04-09T10:48:44+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"76471002518633974144500200815814337836","date":"2026-04-09T05:56:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-04-09T05:49:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-24T19:14:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-11-26T17:26:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-11-11T08:18:10+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","date":"2025-11-11T08:04:06+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":"f6581eb5-2868-464e-b639-270ce994b482","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 16th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[{"id":66221504,"name":"Social science/Education"},{"id":66221505,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":66221507,"name":"Social science/Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-08T16:44:06+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-16 17:52:17","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7920451","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7920451","identity":"rs-7920451","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}