Purpose This study compared self‐reported burnout between dual‐role oncologists (oncologists who also do psychosocial work) and single‐role oncologists, to explore if dual role is protective against or a risk factor for burnout. Methods Dual‐role oncologists from across China (n = 131) were consecutively recruited via the Chinese Psychosocial Oncology Society and asked to identify single‐role oncologist peers (n = 168) working in the same institution. Participants completed an anonymous online questionnaire, which included measures of demographic and work characteristics, Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey, the Short Version Effort‐Reward Inventory, the Job Demands‐Resources (JD‐R) Scales, and Work and Meaning Inventory. Fully adjusted multivariate analyses compared burnout scores for the 2 groups. Results Group analysis revealed single‐role participants' scores indicated significantly poorer performance than dual‐role participants for depersonalization (DP), work‐family conflict (JD‐R demands scale), and decision authority (JD‐R scale). Single‐role participants showed an increased risk of DP. Higher effort‐reward imbalance ratio predicted greater DP in single‐, dual‐role and pooled participants, and emotional exhaustion (EE) in pooled‐ and dual‐role participants. Overcommitment was independently associated with EE in all 3 groupings, with JD‐R scores among pooled‐ and dual‐role groups, while higher decision authority scores were associated with decreased EE. Work and Meaning Inventory was associated with a decreased risk of DP among pooled and dual‐role participants. Conclusion Differences in burnout‐related DP scores between dual‐ and single‐role oncologists are consistent with a protective effect from a psychosocial orientation in oncologists.