Emotional Intelligence: correlations with academic performance

As revealed in our previous blog, there is growing consensus on two conceptualizations of EI: (i) the ability model, measuring maximal performance (Mayer et al., 2008) and (ii) the trait model, measuring typical performance (Petrides et al., 2007).

Based on the view that EI is a form of intelligence, moderate relations should exist between EI and other measures of cognitive abilities. Correlations between MSCEIT scales with verbal intelligence and verbal SAT of about r = 0.36 (emotional understanding shows the strongest relation) were reported. The correlation with reasoning ability (fluid intelligence) was about  r = 0.20 or less (Mayer et al., 2008). Furthermore, several correlational studies between intelligence and success in life, defined as socioeconomic success (academic and job performance), have shown correlations around .50, with academic performance being the highest (.58), followed by educational attainment (.56),  job performance estimated by supervisory rating (.53), and occupational attainment (.43) (Strenze, 2007). Thus, one could expect positive correlations between measures of ability EI and academic performance.

On the other hand, a prevailing postulation of trait EI theory is that affective personality traits should be orthogonal and only weakly related to academic performance (Perera and DiGiacomo, 2013). However, some authors have argued that trait EI is likely to exert influence on academic achievement when academic demands outweigh cognitive resources (low IQ) and under stressful conditions (Ferrando et al., 2011). Additionally, Perera and DiGiacomo (2013) proposed that a link between trait EI and performance could be theoretically explained via (i) the motivational component referred to as willingness to perform or achieve which centers on initiative and determination; (ii) emotion regulation (opposite to neuroticism); (iii) facilitating interaction with academic processes in increasingly collaborative educational environments; and (iv) self-control that may contribute to sustained academic goal-approach.

There is far more research relating trait EI with academic performance than there are studies for ability EI. Furthermore, the problem with the latter was that MSCEIT or MEIS were usually not used as measures of EI, but more “exotic” instruments were employed, for which validity or reliability measures were not reported. Given that even the MSCEIT, which is probably the most investigated instrument in EI research, was criticized with respect to its validity measuring the EI construct, caution must be taken in interpreting the obtained correlations.

Peters et al. (2009) reported positive correlations between the MSCEIT and the reading subtests of the WJ-III Tests of Achievement (r = 0 .35). Positive correlations were observed for three EI branches (perceiving, facilitating and understanding emotions), while no relation was observed for the managing emotions branch. A similar trend was also observed for the SAT 10 reading subtest (r = 0.53), while on the math subtest a lower correlation was noted (r = 0.36), which was only significant for the branch of understanding emotions. A shortcoming of the study was a rather small sample size including just 50 students.

Using ability EI measures similar to the MSCEIT, positive correlations between the subtest understanding and analyzing emotions with achievement in literacy and numeracy in a group of preadolescents was observed (Billings et al., 2014). Similar findings were also reported in a longitudinal study by Costa and Faria (2015). Research further aimed to evaluate the prediction validity of EI measures in professions requiring communication skills. For instance, it was suggested that effective communication and interpersonal sensitivity in doctor-patient interactions influence therapeutic outcomes. Libbrecht et al. (2014) reported that the ability to regulate emotions predicted performance in courses on communication and interpersonal sensitivity, whereas no significant correlations for medical subject domains could be observed.

Yet another strand of research tried to shed light on the cognitive underpinning of the relation between academic performance and EI. The focus was mostly on compensatory effects of EI in low IQ individuals in relation to academic performance. Fiori (2015) for example found that in a self-presentation task that required participants to obtain positive evaluations from others, individuals low in IQ but high in EI performed as well as the high IQ individuals. Furthermore, Checa and Fernández-Berrocal (2015) observed that the branch of managing emotions (MSCEIT) negatively correlated with impulsivity, suggesting that EI competencies may contribute to human cognitive control processes.

All in all, it seems that EI as a predictor in academic performance has some value mainly in subject domains requiring communication and interpersonal sensitivity, but is less effective in subject domains such as math and language, where general intelligence is a superior predictor of success.

To our knowledge the only meta-analysis of the relationship between trait emotional intelligence and academic performance was carried out by Perera and DiGiacomo (2013). Seventy-four effect sizes were drawn from 48 independent samples with a cumulative sample size of 10,292. The analysis included two methodological moderators (measurement unreliability and type of instrument) and four theoretical moderators (age, gender, academic level and transition status, such as the transition from primary to secondary school, or from high school to tertiary settings). It was shown that 45 of the 47 correlations were positive, yielding a small-to-modest summary effect of  .20 ± .04. Among the moderators, only age and academic level showed significant interactions, indicating that the effect was stronger at the primary level of education and consequently increased with decreasing age.

References

Billings, C. E. W., Downey, L. A., Lomas, J. E., Lloyd, J., & Stough, C. (2014). Emotional Intelligence and scholastic achievement in pre-adolescent children. Personality and Individual Differences, 65, 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.017

Checa, P., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2015). The Role of Intelligence Quotient and Emotional Intelligence in Cognitive Control Processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01853

Costa, A., & Faria, L. (2015). The impact of Emotional Intelligence on academic achievement: A longitudinal study in Portuguese secondary school. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.011

Ferrando, M., Prieto  M.D., Almeida, L. S., Ferrandiz, C., Bermejo, R., Lopez-Pina, J. A., et al. (2011). Trait emotional intelligence and academic performance: Controlling for the effects of IQ, personality and self-concept. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 150–159.

Fiori, M. (2015). Emotional intelligence compensates for low IQ and boosts low emotionality individuals in a self-presentation task. Personality and Individual Differences, 81, 169–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.013

Libbrecht, N., Lievens, F., Carette, B., & Côté, S. (2014). Emotional intelligence predicts success in medical school. Emotion, 14(1), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034392

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human Abilities: Emotional Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 507–536. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093646

Perera, H. N., & DiGiacomo, M. (2013). The relationship of trait emotional intelligence with academic performance: A meta-analytic review. Learning and Individual Differences, 28, 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.08.002

Peters, C., Kranzler, J. H., & Rossen, E. (2009). Validity of the Mayer--Salovey-- Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test: Youth Version--Research Edition. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24(1), 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573508329822

Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., & Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional intelligence in personality factor space. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 273–289.

Strenze, T. (2007). Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research. Intelligence, 35(5), 401–426. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.004