The study, published in the International Journal for Equity in Health, assessed 503 displaced women in the Gaza Strip during the 2023–2025 war using a mixed-methods design that combined a structured quantitative survey with in-depth qualitative interviews. The average participant was 29.4 years old, with a standard deviation of 7.3 years, and the majority were married, unemployed, and living below the deep poverty line. Most had been displaced for nearly a year, and the overwhelming majority were sheltering in tents under conditions of severe overcrowding and acute food shortage.

When researchers measured post-traumatic stress symptoms using the Impact of Event Scale–Revised, a widely used screening instrument that evaluates intrusion, avoidance, and hyperarousal symptoms following traumatic exposure, they found that 98.2 percent of participants scored in the severe range. The mean IES-R score across the sample was 61.5, with a standard deviation of 9.5 — a figure far above the thresholds typically used to flag clinically significant trauma-related distress. The authors are careful to note that because symptoms were assessed with a screening tool rather than a formal diagnostic clinical interview, the results should be interpreted as reflecting an extremely high burden of trauma-related distress within the study sample rather than confirmed clinical diagnoses. Even with that caveat, the near-universality of severe scores stands out even against the backdrop of other conflict-affected populations, where severe symptom prevalence rarely approaches such levels.

Food emerged as one of the strongest statistical correlates of psychological suffering. Severe food insecurity, measured with the Food Insecurity Experience Scale developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization, affected approximately 71 percent of participants. Women experiencing severe food insecurity had significantly higher PTSD symptom severity scores, an association that held at a p-value below 0.001. The researchers also identified a cluster of socioeconomic and living-condition factors associated with worse outcomes: being divorced or widowed, living in an extended-family household, sheltering in a tent or collective shelter during displacement, and reporting that food was simply unavailable were all significantly linked to elevated symptom scores.

These quantitative patterns were given texture and depth by the qualitative arm of the study, in which trained researchers conducted semi-structured, face-to-face interviews in Arabic with 34 of the women. Analysis of the transcripts revealed five overarching themes: poverty and inequity; food as a luxury; wounds you cannot see; on the move, nowhere to belong; and small acts of resilience. Together, the themes trace an arc from material deprivation to psychological injury and, ultimately, to the fragile coping strategies women deployed to keep themselves and their families functioning.

The theme of food as a luxury captured how a basic biological need had been transformed into an object of obsession and grief. Women described rationing scraps, skipping meals so children could eat, and the humiliating experience of standing in lines for aid that never arrived. The researchers note that this chronic preoccupation with food security operated on two fronts — it was simultaneously a source of traumatic stress in its own right and an amplifier of existing war trauma, since hunger stripped away one of the last remaining domains in which mothers could still protect their children.

The “wounds you cannot see” theme speaks directly to the invisible nature of psychological injury in wartime. Women recounted nightmares, intrusive memories of bombings and the deaths of relatives, hypervigilance, emotional numbness, and an inability to feel safe even in moments of quiet. Several described the stigma of admitting psychological suffering, or the sense that mental distress was a luxury they could not afford to acknowledge while survival demanded constant action. The researchers interpret these accounts as illustrating how trauma in this context is not a discrete event but a continuous condition, woven into the fabric of daily life.

Displacement itself — the theme of being “on the move, nowhere to belong” — emerged as a distinct psychological stressor. Women described repeated forced evacuations, the loss of homes that anchored family identity and memory, and the corrosive instability of living in tents that leaked in rain, baked in heat, and offered no privacy for grieving or for motherhood. The loss of place, the authors suggest, compounds the loss of people, producing a grief that has nowhere to settle.

Yet the final theme, small acts of resilience, complicates a narrative of pure victimhood. Women described prayer, mutual aid among neighbors, storytelling with children, and small rituals of domesticity — making tea, arranging a tent, celebrating a birthday with almost nothing — as deliberate acts of psychological resistance. The researchers frame these behaviors as adaptive coping mechanisms that, while insufficient to protect against severe trauma symptoms, sustained a sense of agency and dignity under conditions designed to strip both away.

Methodologically, the study relied on a convenience sample recruited through structured surveys administered via Google Forms, a pragmatic choice given the destruction of infrastructure and the impossibility of random sampling in an active war zone. The authors acknowledge this limitation, along with the screening-based measurement of PTSD and the absence of consistent formal referral pathways for psychological care during data collection, which meant that women who became distressed during interviews could not always be directed to clinical services. Interviews followed strict ethical protocols approved by the Institutional Review Board at An-Najah National University, with verbal informed consent, anonymization, and trained interviewers instructed to pause or terminate any conversation that caused visible distress.

The demographic profile of the sample underscores the socioeconomic dimension of psychological vulnerability. That most participants were unemployed and living below the deep poverty line before and during the war reflects broader patterns in which economic deprivation and mental health outcomes are tightly intertwined in conflict settings. Divorced and widowed women — those without a partner’s social and economic support — fared significantly worse, as did women in extended-family households, possibly reflecting crowded conditions and multiplied caregiving burdens.

The study carries a sobering human footnote. The acknowledgments honor the memory of co-author Ayman S. Abutair, a clinical nutrition researcher at Al-Azhar University-Gaza, who lost his life during the war before the paper’s publication. His death stands as a stark reminder that the researchers documenting these invisible wounds were themselves living within the same catastrophe.

The authors argue that their findings demonstrate an urgent and unmet need for comprehensive humanitarian and psychosocial support tailored to displaced women — support that integrates mental health care with food assistance, shelter improvement, and protection for female-headed households. They emphasize that because caregiving responsibilities fall disproportionately on women during war and displacement, their psychological deterioration radiates outward to children and entire family systems, making women’s mental health a strategic priority for any humanitarian response rather than an afterthought.

What the study ultimately documents is the entanglement of hunger and trauma at a scale rarely captured in research. Where most studies of conflict-related PTSD examine populations after violence has subsided, this research measured psychological injury while bombs were still falling, while displacement was ongoing, and while food systems had collapsed. The result is a portrait of a population in which severe trauma symptoms are not an unfortunate consequence of war but, in effect, a near-universal condition — visible not in wounds, but in sleepless nights, interrupted meals, and the quiet endurance of half a million women carrying burdens that remain, for now, largely untreated.

Conducted by a collaborative team from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the University of Haifa, the study surveyed 329 Jewish and Arab high school teachers amid eight months of protracted conflict. This demographic cross-section allowed for nuanced insights into how educators from diverse backgrounds experience and cope with war’s psychological burdens. Importantly, the research disentangles the objective exposure to traumatic events from the subjective emotional toll these events exact, illuminating the pivotal psychological processes that underlie professional exhaustion.

Contrary to conventional assumptions that direct exposure—such as being evacuated or knowing war casualties—is the primary driver of burnout, the findings underscore the supremacy of internal psychological experience. Subjective feelings of helplessness, stress, and emotional distress were markedly stronger predictors of burnout than any measurable external exposure to war events. This paradigm shift calls for a reevaluation of how educational stakeholders measure and address teacher well-being in conflict zones, moving beyond simplistic exposure metrics toward comprehensive emotional support systems.

Central to this transformative research is the concept of “cognitive reappraisal,” an adaptive emotion regulation technique allowing individuals to reframe and reinterpret adverse situations, thereby altering their emotional impact. Teachers who habitually employed cognitive reappraisal reported significantly lower burnout symptoms, suggesting that resilience is not a static trait but a dynamic skill that can be cultivated. This insight opens fertile ground for targeted interventions aimed at fortifying educators’ psychological defenses amid chronic crisis.

Cognitive reappraisal operates by modulating the appraisal phase of emotional processing, where individuals reassess potentially distressing stimuli to diminish negative affective responses. In the context of war, this might mean viewing dangerous or distressing events through a lens that emphasizes controllability, meaning, or personal agency rather than threat or victimhood. This form of emotion regulation interrupts the cascade of stress responses that contribute to chronic exhaustion and cynicism—hallmarks of burnout.

The implications for policy and practice are profound. Traditional support mechanisms for educators in conflict zones often concentrate on logistical or physical safety measures. However, this study advocates for the integration of psychological resilience training into professional development curricula. Workshops designed to nurture cognitive reappraisal skills could empower teachers to maintain efficacy and emotional stability, thereby preserving the educational infrastructure during tumultuous times.

Moreover, by prioritizing emotional resilience, educational institutions affirm the interconnectedness of teacher well-being and student mental health. Teachers’ psychological distress does not occur in a vacuum; it reverberates through classrooms, affecting student engagement, learning outcomes, and overall school climate. Hence, bolstering teachers’ emotional tools is tantamount to safeguarding the broader educational ecosystem.

The interdisciplinary collaboration behind this study—melding social work, special education, and brain research expertise—strengthens its theoretical and practical grounding. It acknowledges that addressing teacher burnout, especially in war contexts, necessitates a multi-faceted approach that includes neurological, psychological, and social dimensions. This holistic methodology enhances the robustness of the study’s conclusions and points toward integrative support frameworks.

The research further challenges educational leaders and policymakers to rethink metrics of resilience and burnout. Instead of solely quantifying external factors such as war-related events, there is an urgent need to develop and implement assessment tools capturing subjective emotional states. Such tools can inform more precise, individualized interventions rather than broad, one-size-fits-all approaches, promoting more effective resource allocation.

Underlying the study is a nuanced appreciation for the complexities of human emotion under duress. Burnout is not produced merely by exposure to adversity, but by the intricate interplay between external events and internal psychological processes. This insight aligns with recent advances in affective neuroscience and cognitive psychology, which emphasize the malleability of emotional responses through cognitive strategies—a beacon of hope amidst crisis.

The findings also highlight the particular vulnerability and resilience of teachers amidst the Israel-Hamas war, who must balance their roles as educators with being members of communities under threat. This dual identity intensifies emotional distress, making effective coping mechanisms indispensable. Recognizing and supporting this dual burden is essential for sustaining teacher motivation and preventing attrition.

Looking ahead, the study’s authors advocate for experimental trials of cognitive reappraisal training in real-world educational settings affected by conflict. Such intervention studies could quantify how strengthening emotion regulation translates into measurable reductions in burnout, improved teacher retention, and enhanced student support. This research trajectory promises to transform crisis response strategies in education.

In an era where protracted conflicts increasingly affect civilian populations, including educators, the study offers a timely, evidence-based blueprint for psychological intervention. It underscores that while war’s external ravages are inevitable, the internal emotional landscape can be reshaped through deliberate, skill-based approaches. This empowerment narrative not only serves educators in Israel but resonates globally wherever educators endure chronic stress.

Ultimately, this groundbreaking research reframes the conversation about teacher burnout in wartime, shifting the focus from what happens to educators to how they internally experience and regulate these events. By embracing the science of cognitive reappraisal, education systems can equip teachers with the resilience necessary to withstand the emotional storms of conflict and continue illuminating the path for future generations.

Subject of Research: People

Article Title: The effects of war on teachers’ burnout: The moderating role of emotion regulation

News Publication Date: 21-Jan-2026

Web References:
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2026.116942

Keywords: Professional development, Education administration, Mental health