Front. Psychol. Frontiers in Psychology Front. Psychol. 1664-1078 Frontiers Media S.A. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774703 Psychology Brief Research Report School Burnout Inventory: Factorial Validity, Reliability, and Measurement Invariance in a Chilean Sample of High School Students Carmona-Halty Marcos * Mena-Chamorro Patricio Sepúlveda-Páez Geraldy Ferrer-Urbina Rodrigo Escuela de Psicología y Filosofía, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, Chile

Edited by: Victor Zaia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Brazil

Reviewed by: Katja Upadyaya, University of Helsinki, Finland; İsmail Seçer, Atatürk University, Turkey

 *Correspondence: Marcos Carmona-Halty, mcarmonah@academicos.uta.cl

This article was submitted to Quantitative Psychology and Measurement, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

 04 01 2022 2021 12 774703 12 09 2021 22 11 2021 Copyright © 2022 Carmona-Halty, Mena-Chamorro, Sepúlveda-Páez and Ferrer-Urbina. 2022 Carmona-Halty, Mena-Chamorro, Sepúlveda-Páez and Ferrer-Urbina

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

This brief report assessed the psychometric validity and gender invariance of the School Burnout Inventory (SBI) –a measure of students’ exhaustion, cynicism, and inadequacy– in a convenience sample of 972 high school Chilean students ranging between 12 and 18 years old. The results showed that: (1) the SBI produces adequate scores in terms of reliability; (2) two models (one solution of three related factors and one of second-order and three first-order factors) fitted adequately fit to our sample and was invariant across gender; and (3) the SBI scores were significantly related to other related constructs (i.e., study-related emotions, academic psychological capital, and academic engagement). Overall, the SBI was found to be a reliable and valid inventory to assess school burnout in Chilean high school students.

 school burnout psychometric analyses high school students Chilean students gender invariance Introduction

The term burnout was first used in the late 70s to describe a state of exhaustion associated with human services professionals (Maslach and Jackson, 1981; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Sakakibara et al., 2020). However, in the following years, this construct has become a social and scientific topic of great attention due to its extension to other domains, including students, and its impact on mental and physical health, achievement, and subsequent academic career (Fiorilli et al., 2014; Walburg, 2014; Walburg et al., 2016; Gabola et al., 2021). In this line, school burnout describes those students’ who experience emotional exhaustion –characterized by feelings of strain and chronic fatigue resulting from overtaxing schoolwork, cynicism –characterized by an indifferent or a distal attitude toward schoolwork in general, a loss of interest in one’s academic work, and not seeing it as meaningful, and sense of inadequacy –diminished feelings of competence and less achievement, and lack of accomplishment both in one’s schoolwork and in school as a whole (Kiuru et al., 2008; Salmela-Aro et al., 2008, 2009b; Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2014; Salmela-Aro, 2016; Salmela-Aro and Read, 2017).

Currently, we know that school burnout is directly related to school dropout (Bask and Salmela-Aro, 2013), boredom and neuroticism (Sulea et al., 2015), academic anxiety (Fiorilli et al., 2020), depressive symptoms (Moyano and Riaño-Hernández, 2013; Ponkosonsirilert et al., 2020), and suicidal ideas (Walburg et al., 2016). Conversely, it is inversely related to schoolwork engagement (Bresó et al., 2011; Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2012), basic psychological needs (Sulea et al., 2015), well-being (Raiziene et al., 2013), and achievement (May et al., 2015; Gungor, 2019). Also, it has been found, based on the demands-resources model (Demerouti et al., 2001; Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004; Bakker and Demerouti, 2007), that study demands (e.g., schoolwork overload), and study resources (e.g., hope, efficacy, resilience, optimism) promote and prevent their appearance, respectively (Salanova et al., 2010; Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2014; Gungor, 2019; Romano et al., 2021).

Research on the field has mostly been carried out using the School Burnout Inventory (SBI) developed by Salmela-Aro et al. (2009a). The SBI was initially validated in a Finnish context, demonstrating that school burnout can be explained both as a solution of three correlated factors (i.e., exhaustion, cynicism, and inadequacy) and by a second-order structure (i.e., school burnout) and three first-order factors (i.e., exhaustion, cynicism, and inadequacy). In the following years, the SBI has been validated in a few European and North American contexts (Spain–Moyano and Riaño-Hernández, 2013; Turkey–Secer et al., 2013; Italy–Fiorilli et al., 2014; France–Meylan et al., 2015; Switzerland–Gabola et al., 2021; Mexico–Osorio et al., 2019; and United States–May et al., 2020). Although the research mentioned above has led to significant advances in the study of school burnout, more research is warranted to assess the cross-cultural applicability of the SBI, especially in South American countries in which, to the best of our knowledge, no psychometric analyses have been conducted.

The current study aims to examine the psychometric properties of the SBI in a convenience sample of high school Chilean students. For this, we will follow a within-network and between-network construct validity. The first refers to assessing reliability, factor structure, and gender invariance, while the second refers to assessing the extent to which school burnout is associated with theoretically related constructs. In this line, we have selected three constructs that have been shown to play an important role in predicting school burnout. First, study-related emotions (e.g., Burr and Dallaghan, 2019; De la Fuente et al., 2020) are defined as those emotions that emerge in the educational environment and which relate to learning, achievement, and instructional processes that take place in the school (Pekrun et al., 2002). Second, academic psychological capital (e.g., Lupşa and Vîrgã, 2020; Vîrgã et al., 2020), defined as an individual’s positive psychological state of development, characterized by hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism (Luthans et al., 2015). Third, academic engagement (e.g., Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2012; Sulea et al., 2015), defined as a positive, fulfilling, study-related state of mind characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002).

Based on the arguments presented, we hypothesize the following: The SBI will demonstrate acceptable psychometric properties in a Chilean sample of high school students. Also, we expect SBI scores to be direct and significantly related to study-related negative emotions, and inversely and significantly related to study-related positive emotions, academic psychological capital, and academic engagement. Together, the three constructs predict a significant percentage of the variance of school burnout.

 Materials and Methods Participants

Nine hundred and seventy-two Chilean high school students (51% girls) in grades 5–12 (i.e., 12–18 years old, M = 14.41, SD = 1.635) participated in the study. They came from three different schools (each of them hosted approximately 550 students) located in two northern regions of the country (Arica y Parinacota and Tarapacá). Of 972 students, 16% were 12 years old, 17% were 13 years old, 17% were 14 years old, 20% were 15 years old, 19% were 16 years old, 8% were 17 years old, and 3% were 18 years old. In addition, 12% correspond to low, 81% to medium, and 7% to high socioeconomic levels.

 Instrument

The SBI is a nine-item self-report scale grouped into three subscales: exhaustion at school (four items), cynicism toward the meaning of school (three items), and sense of inadequacy at school (two items). All items are scored on a six-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 6 (completely agree).

Study–related emotions were measured using 12 items corresponding to two scales of positive (i.e., excited, energetic, inspired, at ease, relaxed, and satisfied) and negative (i.e., angry, anxious, disgusted, fatigued, discouraged, gloomy) emotions from the Job–related Affective Well–being Scale (Van Katwyk et al., 2000) adapted to the academic context (Carmona-Halty et al., 2019a). Students answered using a Likert–type with scores from 1 (never) to 5 (always), reflecting how they feel about their studies (for example, “my studies make me feel at ease” and “my studies make me feel anxious”). Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega for core study–related positive emotions were 0.736 and 0.734, respectively, and 0.713 and 0.718 for core study–related negative emotions.

Academic psychological capital was measured using the Academic Psychological Capital Questionnaire 12 (APCQ–12; Martínez et al., 2021). The APCQ–12 measure the four dimensions of the psychological capital construct –hope (four items; for example, “Right now I see myself as being pretty successful in my studies”), efficacy (three items; for example, “I feel sure when sharing information about my studies with other people”), resilience (three items; for example, “I usually take the stressful aspects of my studies in stride”), and optimism (two items; for example, “concerning my studies, I’m optimistic about what the future offers me”)– using a Likert–type scale with scores from 1 (totally disagree) to 6 (totally agree). Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega for core academic psychological capital were 0.834 and 0.837, respectively.

Academic engagement was measured using the student version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES–9, Schaufeli et al., 2006) adapted to the Chilean context (Carmona-Halty et al., 2019b). The UWES measure the three dimensions of the academic engagement construct – vigor (three items; for example, “When I’m doing my work as a student, I feel bursting with energy”), dedication (three items; for example, “My studies inspire me”), and absorption (three items; for example, “I feel happy when I am studying intensely”)– using a Likert–type scale with scores from 0 (never) to 6 (always). Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega for core academic engagement were 0.852 and 0.855, respectively.

 Procedure

The ethics committee of Universidad de Tarapacá approved the research project. The participants voluntarily filled out an online questionnaire during their usual class schedule. For the purposes of this study, a Spanish SBI version was developed following the International Test Commission Guidelines for test translation and adaptation (Muñiz et al., 2013). Prior to general data collection, the SBI items were piloted on a small sample (n = 12) of high school students to find difficulties in understanding the translated and adapted version of the inventory. At this stage, no students reported difficulties in understanding the items. Sampling was non-probabilistic by convenience (Ato et al., 2013) and no participant was removed from dataset.

 Statistical Analyses

All data analyses were conducted using Jamovi 1.2 (The Jamovi Project, 2020) and Mplus 8.2 (Muthén and Muthén, 1998). For preliminary analysis, descriptive statistics, normality tests, and gender differences were tested. For reliability analysis, Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega coefficients, corrected homogeneity index, and test-retest (with a time lag of four-month) index were calculated. For evidence of validity based on the internal structure, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was realized, using the Robust Maximum Likelihood (RML) estimation method. In addition, gender invariance through multi-group CFA and three levels of equivalence were assessed (i.e., configural invariance, metric invariance, and scalar invariance) using changes in CFI and Standard Root Mean Residual (SRMR; Δ < 0.010) as criteria for determining whether measurement invariance was established (Cheung and Rensvold, 2002; Chen, 2007; Dimitrov, 2010). Schreiber (2017) recommendations were used to help evaluate the cut-off and determine model fit for the following indicators: chi-squared (χ2) and normed χ2, root-mean-squared error of approximation (RMSEA) with a confidence interval (90% CI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and SRMR. Finally, to examine criterion validity of SBI, we conducted both correlation and regression analysis between school burnout, study–related (positive and negative) emotions, academic psychological capital (i.e., hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism), and academic engagement (i.e., vigor, dedication, and absorption).

 Results

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for the SBI at item levels. Independent sample t-test revealed that there are not statistical significance differences between boys’ (M = 3.309, SD = 0.949) and girls’ (M = 3.354, SD = 0.960) SBI scores [t (970) = 0.728, p > 0.05, d = 0.047, 95% IC (-0.165,0.076)].

Descriptive information of the school burnout inventory.

Descriptive statistics
Mean (SD) S K Shapiro-Wilk (p) Corrected homogeneity index
1. I feel overwhelmed by my schoolwork. 3.84 (1.37) –0.16 −0.77 0.93 (> 0.001) 0.39
2. I feel a lack of motivation in my schoolwork and often think of giving up. 3.24 (1.67) 0.12 −1.21 0.90 (> 0.001) 0.56
3. I often have feelings of inadequacy in my schoolwork. 3.11 (1.35) 0.16 −0.58 0.93 (> 0.001) 0.56
4. I often sleep badly because of matters related to my schoolwork. 3.38 (1.74) 0.04 −1.31 0.89 (> 0.001) 0.51
5. I feel that I am losing interest in my schoolwork. 2.89 (1.58) 0.46 −0.92 0.89 (> 0.001) 0.58
6. I’m continually wondering whether my schoolwork has any meaning. 3.57 (1.73) –0.08 −1.30 0.90 (> 0.001) 0.43
7. I brood over matters related to my schoolwork a lot during my free time. 3.29 (1.42) 0.25 −0.67 0.92 (> 0.001) 0.10
8. I used to have higher expectations of my schoolwork than I do now. 3.66 (1.65) –0.12 −1.14 0.91(> 0.001) 0.48
9. The pressure of my schoolwork causes me problems in my close relationships with others. 3.02 (1.71) 0.31 −1.20 0.88 (> 0.001) 0.54

SD = Standard Deviation; S = Skewness; K = Kurtosis.

 Within-Network Construct Validation

Considering the corrected homogeneity index, it seems convenient to eliminate item seven (see Table 1). Thus, this item was excluded from further analyses. The SBI showed good internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega indexes of 0.776 and 0.787, respectively. In addition, internal consistency for each dimension were at least sufficient in both exhaustion (ω = 0.65; α = 0.64) and cynicism (ω = 0.70; α = 0.67) dimensions, although slightly lower in the case of inadequacy dimension (ω = 0.52; α = 0.51).

According to previous research on the evidence of the validity of the SBI (e.g., Salmela-Aro et al., 2009a), three models were examined, namely, one that assumes that there is one latent factor underlying all the SBI items (M1), one that proposes three related factors (M2), and one that explains three first-order factors by a second-order factor (M3). The results of the CFA show that M2 and M3 showed an adequate fit (see Table 2 and Figure 1). The multiple-group CFA shows that the differences in the CFI and SRMR across the three invariance models (i.e., configural, metric, and scalar) were lower than .01, which indicates gender invariance (see Table 2). Finally, in terms of test-retest reliability (n = 775), the total SBI score shows a correlation of 0.597, while its dimensions reach similar values: exhaustion (r = 0.541; p < 0.001), cynicism (r = 0.548; p < 0.001), inadequacy (r = 0.501; p < 0.001).

Fit indexes for single–group and multiple–group CFA of the school burnout inventory.

χ2 df χ2/df RMSEA 90% CI CFI TLI SRMR CMs Δ CFI Δ SRMR
Single–group CFA
M1 One factor 181.42 20 9.071 0.091 [0.079,0.104] 0.898 0.857 0.049 – – –
M2 Three–factors 75.456 17 4.438 0.059 [0.046,0.073] 0.963 0.939 0.030 – – –
M3 Second order factor 75.457 17 4.438 0.059 [0.046,0.073] 0.963 0.939 0.030 – – –
Multiple–group CFA
M4 Configural invariance 141.64 34 4.165 0.081 [0.067,0.095] 0.975 0.958 0.027 – – –
M5 Metric invariance 141.55 39 3.629 0.074 [0.061,0.087] 0.976 0.965 0.028 M4–M5 0.001 0.001
M6 Scalar invariance 159.50 68 2.345 0.053 [0.042,0.063] 0.978 0.982 0.030 M5–M6 0.003 0.003

χ2 = Chi-square; df = degree of freedom; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; CI = 90% Confidence Interval; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; CMs = Comparisons between models.

Measurement models of school burnout.

 Between-Network Construct Validation

As shown in Table 3, our results showed that school burnout was significant –and in the expected direction– related with all assessed constructs. In addition, they predict a substantial percentage (29.10%) of the school burnout variance measured with the SBI.

Correlations and regression analysis.

Pearson’s correlation indices
 Linear regression indices
1 2 3 4 R2 F β βstd t
1. School burnout – 0.291 99.206
2. Study–related positive emotions −0.284* – 0.037 0.026ns 0.624
3. Study–related negative emotions 0.485* −0.275* – 0.633 0.396* 13.661
4. Academic psychological capital −0.349* 0.619* −0.296* – –0.157 −0.146* –3.852
5. Academic engagement −0.368* 0.742* −0.352* 0.677* –0.123 −0.149* –3.304

*p < 0.001; ns = non-significant.

 Discussion

The current study aims to examine the psychometric properties of the SBI in a convenience sample of high school Chilean students to offer a potential contribution to the school burnout literature.

First, our results suggest that both the three–factors solution and second–order factor of SBI was applicable for high school Chilean students and comparable across gender, which is coherent with previous research (Salmela-Aro et al., 2009a; Moyano and Riaño-Hernández, 2013; Secer et al., 2013; Fiorilli et al., 2014; Meylan et al., 2015; Osorio et al., 2019; May et al., 2020). In addition, reliability analysis, based on Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega indexes, indicated good internal consistency, whereas the test–retest index shows a moderated relation over a time of four months.

Second, our results suggest that the SBI score relates to other theoretically linked variables to the school burnout construct. In this line, students with high levels of exhaustion, cynicism, and inadequacy, on the one hand, are more likely to experience a high frequency of student–related negative emotions (i.e., angry, anxious, disgusted, fatigued, discouraged, and gloomy), and, on the other hand, a low frequency of study–related positive emotions (i.e., excited, energetic, inspired, at ease, relaxed, and satisfied). In addition, they will also report lower levels of academic, personal resources –measured in terms of hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism (i.e., psychological capital)– and academic well–being –measured in terms of vigor, dedication, and absorption (i.e., academic engagement)– which is coherent with previous studies (Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2012; Raiziene et al., 2013; Burr and Dallaghan, 2019; Gungor, 2019; Fiorilli et al., 2020; Romano et al., 2021).

Third, our study has some important strengths, such as the large sample used, considering both within-network and between-network approaches, and analyzing the temporal stability of the SBI. However, as a limitation, we can mention that we did not obtain representative data from high school Chilean students; thus, the generalization of the results should be made with caution. Additionally, we use only self–report measures without considering other sources of information (e.g., teachers’reports or grade point average).

Finally, future research can expand our results to other student segments (e.g., undergraduate university students), use samples from different South American countries, and propose cut-off criteria for low, medium, and high levels of school burnout.

 Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

 Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Comité Ético Científico of the Universidad de Tarapacá. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.

 Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the research design and wrote the manuscript.

 Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

 Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

 Funding

This work was supported by Universidad de Tarapacá, Chile (UTA Mayor Award Number 3764–20).

 References Ato M. López-García J. Benavente A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología 29 1038–1059. 10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511 Bakker A. B. Demerouti E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. J. Manag. Psychol. 22 309–328. 10.1108/02683940710733115 Bask M. Salmela-Aro K. (2013). Burned out to drop out: Exploring the relationship between school burnout and school dropout. Eur. J. Psychol. Edu. 28 511–528. 10.1007/s10212-012-0126-5 Bresó E. Schaufeli W. B. Salanova M. (2011). Can a self-efficacy-based intervention decrease burnout, increase engagement, and enhance performance? A quasi-experimental study. High. Edu. 61 339–355. 10.1007/s10734-010-9334-6 Burr J. Dallaghan G. L. B. (2019). The relationship of emotions and burnout to medical students’ academic performance. Teach. Learn. Med. 2019:237. 10.1080/10401334.2019.1613237 31116577 Carmona-Halty M. Salanova M. Llorens S. Schaufeli W. B. (2019a). How psychological capital mediates between study-related positive emotions and academic performance. J. Hap. Stud. 20 605–617. 10.1007/s10902-018-9963-5 Carmona-Halty M. Schaufeli W. B. Salanova M. (2019b). The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale for Students (UWES–9S): psychometric properties and measurement invariance in a Chilean sample of undergraduate university students. Front. Psychol. 10:1017. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01017 31114533 Chen F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidis. J. 14 464–504. 10.1080/10705510701301834 Cheung G. W. Rensvold R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 9 233–255. 10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 33486653 De la Fuente J. Paoloni P. V. Vera-Martinez M. M. GarzonUmerenkova A. (2020). Effects of levels of self-regulation and situational stress on achievement emotions in undergraduate students: class, study, and testing. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:4293. 10.3390/ijerph17124293 32560173 Demerouti E. Bakker A. B. Nachreiner F. Schaufeli W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. J. Appl. Psychol. 86 499–512. 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 Dimitrov D. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measur. Eval. Counsel. Dev. 43 121–149. 10.1177/0748175610373459 Fiorilli C. Farina E. Buonomo I. Costa S. Romano L. Larcan R. (2020). Trait emotional intelligence and school burnout: The mediating role of resilience and academic anxiety in high school. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:3058. 10.3390/ijerph17093058 32354010 Fiorilli C. Galimberti V. De Stasio S. Di Chiacchio C. Albanese O. (2014). L’utilizzazione dello School Burnout Inventory (SBI) con student italiani di scuola superior di primo e secondo grado. Psicologia Clinica Dello Sviluppo 18 403–423. 10.1449/78365 Gabola P. Meylan N. Hoscoët M. De Stasio S. Fiorilli C. (2021). Adolescents’ school burnout: a comparative study between Italy and Switzerland. Eur. J. Invest. Health Psychol. Edu. 11 849–859. 10.3390/ejihpe11030062 34563075 Gungor A. (2019). Investigating the relationship between social support and school burnout in Turkish middle school students: the mediating role of hope. Sch. Psychol. Int. 40 581–597. 10.1177/0143034319866492 Kiuru N. Aunola K. Nurmi J. E. Leskinen E. Salmela-Aro K. (2008). Peer group influence and selection in adolescents’ school burnout: A longitudinal study. Merril-Palmer Quart. 54 23–55. 10.1353/mpq.2008.0008 34409987 Lupşa D. Vîrgã D. (2020). Psychological capital, health, and performance: The mediating role of burnout. Psihologia Resurselor Umane 18 7–22. 10.24837/pru.v18i1.458 Luthans F. Youssef-Morgan C. M. Avolio B. (2015). Psychological Capital and Beyond. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Martínez I. M. Meneghel I. Carmona-Halty M. Yousef-Morgan C. (2021). Adaptation and validation to spanish of the psychological capital questionnaire – 12 (PCQ–12) in academic contexts. Curr. Psychol. 40 3409–3416. 10.1007/s12144-019-00276-z Maslach C. Jackson S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. J. Org. Behav. 2 99–133. 10.1002/job.4030020205 Maslach C. Schaufeli W. B. Leiter M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 52 397–422. 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397 11148311 May R. W. Bauer K. N. Fincham F. D. (2015). School burnout: Diminished academic and cognitive performance. Learn. Ind. Diff. 42 126–131. 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.015 May R. W. Bauer K. N. Seibert G. S. Jaurequi M. E. Fincham F. D. (2020). School burnout is related to sleep quality and perseverative cognition regulation at bedtime in young adults. Learn. Ind. Diff. 78:101821. 10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101821 Meylan N. Doudin P. A. Antonietti J. P. Stephan P. (2015). School Burnout Inventory: a French validation. Eur. Rev. Appl. Psychol. 65 285–293. 10.1016/j.erap.2015.10.002 Moyano N. Riaño-Hernández D. (2013). Burnout in spanish adolescents: adaptation and validation of the school burnout inventory. Ansiedad Estrés 19 95–103. 10.1186/1472-6920-11-103 22151576 Muñiz J. Elosua P. Hambleton R. K. (2013). International test commission guidelines for test translation and adaption: Second edition. Psicothema 25 151–157. 10.7334/psicothema2013.24 23628527 Muthén L. Muthén B. (1998). Mplus User’s Guide (8th Edition). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén. Osorio M. Prado C. Parrello S. Bazán G. (2019). Psychometric characteristics and factor structure of the School Burnout Inventory in Mexican university Students. Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación 2 141–150. 10.21865/RIDEP55.2.10 Pekrun R. Goetz T. Titz W. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Edu. Psychol. 37 91–115. 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4 Ponkosonsirilert T. Laemsak O. Pisitsungkagarn K. Jarukasemthawee S. Audboon S. Leangsuksant T. (2020). Stress, self-compassion, and school burnout in Thai high school students. Int. J. Adol. Med. Health 2020:109. 10.1515/ijamh-2020-0109 32853165 Raiziene S. Pilkauskaite-Valickiene R. Zukauskiene R. (2013). School burnout and subjective well-being: Evidence from cross-lagged relations in a 1 year longitudinal sample. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 116 3254–3258. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.743 Romano L. Consiglio P. Angelini G. Fiorilli C. (2021). Between academic resilience and burnout: The moderating role of satisfaction on school context relationships. Eur. J. Invest. Health Psychol. Edu. 11 770–780. 10.3390/ejihpe11030055 34563068 Sakakibara K. Shimazu A. Toyama H. Schaufeli W. B. (2020). Validation of the japanese version of the burnout assessment tool. Front. Psychol. 11:1819. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01819 32849072 Salanova M. Schaufeli W. B. Martinez I. Bresó E. (2010). How obstacles and facilitators predict academic performance: the mediating role of study burnout and engagement. Anx. Stress Cop. 23 53–70. 10.1080/10615800802609965 19326271 Salmela-Aro K. (2016). Dark and bright sides of thriving – school burnout and engagement in the Finnish context. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2016:517. 10.1080/17405629.2016.1207517 Salmela-Aro K. Read S. (2017). Study engagement and burnout profiles among Finnish higher education students. Burnout Res. 7 21–28. 10.1016/j.burn.2017.11.001 Salmela-Aro K. Upadyaya K. (2012). The schoolwork engagement inventory. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 28 60–67. 10.1027/1015-5759/a000091 Salmela-Aro K. Upadyaya K. (2014). School burnout and engagement in the context of demands-resources model. Br. J. Edu. Psychol. 84 137–151. 10.1027/1016-9040.13.1.12 Salmela-Aro K. Kiuru N. Pietikäinen M. Jokela J. (2008). Does school matter? The role of school context in adolescents’ school-related burnout. Eur. Psychol. 13 12–23. Salmela-Aro K. Savolainen H. Holopainen L. (2009b). Depressive symptoms and school burnout during adolescence: evidence from two cross-lagged longitudinal studies. J. Youth Adol. 38 1316–1327. 10.1007/s10964-008-9334-3 19779808 Salmela-Aro K. Kiuru N. Leskinen E. Nurmi J. E. (2009a). School burnout inventory (SBI): reliability and validity. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 25 48–57. 10.1027/1015-5759.25.1.48 Schaufeli W. B. Bakker A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J. Org. Behav. 25 293–299. 10.1002/job.248 Schaufeli W. B. Bakker A. B. Salanova M. (2006). The measures of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Edu. Psychol. Measur. 66 701–716. 10.1177/0013164405282471 Schaufeli W. B. Martínez I. Marques Pinto A. Salanova M. Bakker A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 33 464–481. 10.1177/0022022102033005003 Schreiber J. B. (2017). Update to core reporting practices in structural equation modeling. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 13, 634–643. 10.1016/j.sapharm.2016.06.006 27567146 Secer I. Halmatov S. Veyis F. Ates B. (2013). Adapting school burnout inventory to turkish culture: study of validity and reliability. Turk. J. Edu. 2 13–24. Sulea C. van Beek I. Sarbescu P. Virga D. Schaufeli W. B. (2015). Engagement, boredom, and burnout among students: Basic need satisfaction matters more than personality traits. Learn. Ind. Diff. 42 132–138. The Jamovi Project (2020). Jamovi (version 1.8.1) [Computer Software]. Available online at: https://www.jamovi.org. [accessed 5 April 2021] Van Katwyk P. T. Fox S. Spector P. E. Kelloway E. K. (2000). Using the Job– related Affective Well–being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 5 219–230. 10.1037/1076-8998.5.2.219 10784286 Vîrgã D. Pattusamy M. Kumar D. P. (2020). How psychological capital is related to academic performance, burnout, and boredom? The mediating role of study engagement. Curr. Psychol. 2020:9. 10.1007/s12144-020-01162-9 Walburg V. (2014). Burnout among high school students: A literature review. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 42 28–33. 10.1016/j.chilyouth.2014.03.020 Walburg V. Mialhes A. Moncla D. (2016). Does school-related burnout influence problematic Facebook use? Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 61 327–331. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.01.009