Teachers' well-being and mental health in Indonesia: Does work-related stress mediate the relationship?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quality of learning in the educational process is determined by the quality of teachers, which is characterized by their psychological well-being. In fact, there is still very little research on teachers' psychological well-being and work stress in Indonesia. This study aims to determine the effect of well-being on mental health, mediated by work stress, among teachers in Indonesia. This study is a cross-sectional study. The study involved 201 teachers of all levels in Indonesia using quota sampling. The data collection techniques for well-being, stress, and mental health, using non-test methods, involved valid and reliable instruments. The research data were analyzed using descriptive quantitative analysis, path analysis, and Sobel's test. The path analysis results show that teacher welfare has a direct effect on teacher stress levels. Furthermore, teacher stress levels have a direct impact on teacher mental health, while the stress scale acts as a mediator in the relationship between welfare and teacher mental health. The findings of this study are expected to form the basis for the development of policies and programs for teachers in Indonesia that are more appropriate for improving the welfare and mental health of teachers and educational standards in Indonesia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".