Associations Between Emotional Intelligence,Socio-Emotional Adjustment,and Academic Achievement in Childhood

Abstract

French

This study examined the relationship between trait emotional intelligence (EI) with children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement. Children aged 8 to 10 (n = 106) and 11 to 13 years (n = 99) completed the youth version of the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i: YV). Their socio-emotional adjustment was measured with scales from the Teacher’s Report Form assessing socio-emotional problems and adaptive functioning at school. Trait EI was positively correlated with aspects of children’s adaptive functioning and academic achievement only in the 11- to 13-year-old but not in the 8- to 10-year-old group. Our results illustrate the importance of taking age into consideration when assessing the relationship between trait EI with socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement. The consequences and limitations of these findings are discussed.

Keywords

academic achievement age socio-emotional adjustment trait emotional intelligence

The construct of Emotional Intelligence (EI) has received a great deal of research attention in the past two decades. A prevailing view in this field has been that EI is an important predictor of children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement (Ferrando et al., 2011; Parker, Saklofske, Wood, & Collin, 2009). However, the evidence in support of this view comes mainly from studies focusing on college students and late adolescents (e.g., Keefer, Parker, & Wood, 2012). In contrast, considerably fewer studies have focused on children. The present study explores associations between EI, socio-emotional adjustment at school, and academic achievement in two groups of children aged 8 to 10 and 11 to 13 years.

Conceptualizations of EI

Current theoretical approaches conceptualize EI in two ways: (a) as a constellation of cognitive abilities or skills that are related to the accurate processing of emotion-related information (ability models) and (b) as an array of non-cognitive behavioural dispositions and self-perceptions related to emotional functioning (trait models). Advocates of the ability approach measure EI with performance-based tests (e.g., the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test [MSCEIT], Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002), while proponents of the trait approach assess EI using self-report inventories (e.g., the Emotional Quotient Inventory [EQ-i], Bar-On, 1997 and the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire [TEIQue], Petrides, 2009).

The distinction between ability and trait EI has been supported by studies reporting that self-report and ability measures do not correlate significantly or correlate only weakly with each other (see meta-analysis by Joseph & Newman, 2010). These findings notwithstanding, a consensus has begun to emerge over the last few years that the two EI constructs are not antagonistic but complementary to one another, each reflecting a unique aspect of the individual’s adaptive emotional functioning (e.g., Agnoli et al., 2012; Schutte, Malouff, & Hine, 2011). In support of this, recent studies have shown that ability and trait EI contribute in unique but interrelated ways in the prediction of various positive outcomes (see Schutte et al., 2011).

In the current study, the focus is on children’s trait EI. The reasons were twofold. Firstly, in comparison with the extensive literature on children’s emotion recognition and regulation abilities, little work has concentrated on trait EI in childhood. Secondly, in contrast to ability EI that focuses on knowledge and abilities in the emotional domain, trait EI captures what a child believes about her/his abilities (Petrides & Furnham, 2003). In other words, trait EI involves self-evaluations of one’s own emotional knowledge and efficacy, that, regardless of their accuracy, are personally meaningful, and, as Bandura (2001) maintains, may exert a significant influence on how a child manages emotionally challenging situations at school as well as on actions and decisions that are related to academic performance (e.g., how much effort the child will invest on learning; see also Qualter, Gardner, Pope, Hutchinson, & Whiteley, 2012).

EI and Socio-Emotional Adjustment at School

Studies investigating the relationship between trait EI and socio-emotional adjustment have operationalized the latter variable in a variety of ways, including participants’ peer nominations for pro-social and anti-social behaviour and teacher reports of children’s problem behaviours at school. In one of these studies, Mavroveli, Petrides, Shove, and Whitehead (2008) assessed the trait EI of children aged 11 to 12 years. Participants’ socio-emotional competence was assessed by teachers with the “Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire” (SDQ, Goodman, 1997). The results showed low to moderate negative correlations between children’s TEIQue scores and teacher reports of children’s emotional symptoms (r = −.19), conduct problems (r = −.29), peer problems (r = −.22), and hyperactivity (r = −.31).

More recently, Mavroveli and Sánchez -Ruiz (2011) examined whether trait EI can predict peer-reported pro-social and anti-social behaviour at school. Their results showed that compared with children with high trait EI, low trait EI children aged 7 to 12 years were rated by their peers as being more kind (r = −.20), socially competent (r = -.25), and less aggressive (r = −.22) toward their peers. In another recent study, Windingstad, McCallum, Bell, and Dunn (2011) associated the peer likability ratings of a sample of 10-year-old children with their scores on a trait EI measure. They found that, although total trait EI was not correlated significantly with children’s sociometric scores, there was a significant positive association with a subscale of the EQ-i:YV (youth version) assessing children’s interpersonal EI skills.

Taken together, the studies cited above provide evidence indicating that trait EI plays a role in young children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school. However, the reported correlations are in the .15 to .31 range, which suggests a weak association between the two constructs. Moreover, the majority of these studies have focused on children in the preadolescent period and very limited work has been done with younger samples. Yet, little is known about the moderating influence of age on the association between trait EI and different aspects of children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school. Finally, in the majority of the studies reported above, total EI was under investigation. In other words, little research has concentrated on the associations of individual trait EI dimensions with aspects of a child’s socio-emotional adjustment at school.

EI and Academic Achievement

Research investigating the relationship between trait EI and academic achievement has produced mixed findings. Some studies have supported the link, others have reported null results, and yet other studies have shown that the association is specific for some trait EI dimensions but not for others. Eastabrook, Duncan, and Eldridge (2005) divided a sample of primary school children, based on the end-of-year Grade Average Scores (GPA), into three groups: “above average,” “average,” and “below average.” “Above average” children scored higher compared with the other two groups on the overall EQ-i:YV scale and on two of its subscales assessing interpersonal and adaptability skills. Similarly, Qualter, Whiteley, Hutchinson, and Pope (2007) showed that high and average trait EI students achieved significantly better grades at the end of the school year compared with a group of children with lower trait EI scores. More recently, Ferrando et al. (2011), using the TEIQue–Adolescents Short Form (TEIQue-ASF) with a sample of 11- to 12-year-olds, reported that trait EI predicted academic achievement above and beyond intelligence and other personality variables.

In contrast to the positive association between trait EI and academic achievement observed in the studies cited above, one recent investigation (Hansenne & Legrand, 2012) reported that trait EI did not predict academic achievement in a sample of 8- to 12-year-old children. Moreover, other research has shown that the positive relationship between trait EI and academic achievement ceases to be significant when the effect of variables such as chronological age (Mavroveli, Petrides, Sangareau, & Furnham, 2009) and mental age (MA; Agnoli et al., 2012) is moderated. Specifically, Mavroveli et al. (2009) found positive, albeit low, correlations between trait EI and 8- to 12-year-old children’s English (r = .24) and Maths scores (r = .26). They reported, however, that these correlations ceased to be significant once the effect of chronological age was partialled out. Nevertheless, covarying out the effects of chronological age via partial correlations does not reliably rule out the moderating influence of chronological age, rendering Mavroveli and Sánchez-Ruiz’s (2011) finding on this point inconclusive.

Overall, the results of the studies cited above are inconsistent, pinpointing, thus, to the need for further research focusing on the association of trait EI with children’s academic achievement. Moreover, Mavroveli et al.’s (2009) findings concerning the moderating influence of age underscore that it is necessary to clarify how age impacts on this association.

The Current Study

The aims of the study were (i) to examine the relationship between trait EI and children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school and (ii) to assess potential links between trait EI and academic achievement. The study sought to extend previous research in the following ways. Firstly, earlier studies investigating the relationship of trait EI with socio-emotional adjustment and academic achievement have used samples with either a narrow (e.g., 11-12 years) or a relatively wide age range (e.g., 7-12 years) and have failed to reliably assess the effect of age on these associations. The current study examined the moderating influence of age by dividing a sample of 8- to 13-year-olds into two age groups: 8- to 10-year-olds and 11- to 13-year-olds and investigating for potential differences on the associations of trait EI with socio-emotional adjustment and academic achievement between these two age groups.

Secondly, the majority of previous studies have focused exclusively on overall EI and very few have explored links between individual trait EI dimensions with aspects of socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement. Thus, it was considered important to examine the relative contribution of individual dimensions of trait EI on children’s socio-emotional adjustment and achievement at school.

Thirdly, earlier research has, in the majority of cases, operationally defined children’s socio-emotional adjustment either in terms of peer sociometric evaluations or by means of teacher reports of children’s problem behaviours at school (including rule-breaking behaviour and number of unauthorized absences from school). In the current study, an attempt was made to conduct a more comprehensive assessment of children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school by asking children’s teachers to characterize participants’ school behaviour in terms of two dimensions: (a) adaptive functioning, that is, children’s appropriateness of classroom behaviour, school liking, amount of work effort, and learning outcomes and (b) socio-emotional problems, that is, children’s externalizing problems in the school context (including social problems, rule-breaking behaviour, aggressive behaviour, anxiety/depression, withdrawal/depression, and hyperactivity/impulsivity).

In view of the inconsistent and/or inconclusive findings of earlier research, no hypotheses were formulated regarding the relationship between trait EI with aspects of children’s socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement or with respect to the influence of age on these associations.

Method

Participants

Participants were 205 children (103 boys, 102 girls) aged between 8 and 12 years (M = 10.01 years, SD = 1.42). The sample was divided into two age groups: 8- to 10-year-olds (n = 106, 55 boys and 51 girls, M_age = 8.75 years, SD = .73) and 11- to 13-year-olds (n = 99, 48 boys and 51 girls, M_age = 11.22, SD = .69). Participants were recruited from 12 state primary schools located in a medium-size urban area in Cyprus. All children were Caucasian and the majority came from middle-class backgrounds.

Measures

EI

Trait EI was assessed with the Bar-On EQ-i:YV, a 60-item self-report scale that was designed by Bar-On and Parker (2000) for use with children and adolescents aged 7 to 18 years. The EQ-i:YV consists of four subscales assessing principal dimensions of trait EI: intrapersonal EI (i.e., the ability to recognize and express effectively one’s own feelings and needs = 6 items), interpersonal EI (i.e., the ability to understand others’ emotions and engage in satisfying interpersonal relationships = 12 items), adaptability (i.e., the ability to adapt to novel situations and solve problems of a personal or social nature = 12 items), and stress management (i.e., the ability to cope with difficult and strong emotions and the ability to control impulsive behaviours = 12 items). Respondents rate each item using a 4-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (very seldom or not true of me) to 4 (very often true or true of me). Along with the total EI scale (sum of previous four subscales), the instrument has a Positive Impression scale, which serves as an estimate of the tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner.

The EQ-i:YV was normed on a sample of 9,172 North-American children and adolescents aged 7 to 18 years (Bar-On & Parker, 2000). The internal consistency of its four subscales ranged from .65 to .90. Three-week test–retest reliabilities were between .84 and .89. In the present study, reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s α) for different scales were as follows: intrapersonal = .74, interpersonal = .72, stress management = .77, adaptability = .80, and total EI = .85. In Greece, the EQ-i:YV has been translated and standardized by Siskos, Papaioannou, and Proios (2011).

Socio-emotional adjustment at school

Scales from the Teacher Report Form (TRF, Achenbach, 1991) were used to assess children’s adaptive functioning and socio-emotional problems at school. The reliability and validity of the TRF has been widely established (see Bérubé & Achenbach, 2001, for a review). This measure has been translated and standardized in Greek by Roussos et al. (1999).

Adaptive functioning

Adaptive functioning was assessed with four 7-point (1 = much less and 7 = much more) subscales of the TRF measuring the extent to which, according to the teacher, a child “works hard,” “behaves appropriately,” “is happy in class,” and “how well s/he is learning” in relation to his/her typical classmates. The scores from the four subscales were summed and formed the “Total Adaptive Functioning” score (Cronbach’s α for this sample = .83). A high score on any individual subscale (or the composite adaptive functioning score) denotes a higher level of adjustment at school.

Socio-emotional problems

Socio-emotional problems were measured with six subscales of the TRF targeting “social problems” (11 items, e.g., “doesn’t get along”), “anxiety/depression” (16 items, e.g., “cries a lot”), “withdrawal/depression” (8 items, e.g., “prefers to be alone”), “aggressive behaviour” (20 items, e.g., “destroys others’ things”), rule-breaking behaviour (12 items, e.g., “tardy, truant”), and “hyperactivity/impulsivity” (12 items, e.g., “talks too much”). Items were scored on a 3-point scale (0 = not true to 2 = very or often true). A high score on any of these subscales is indicative of more severe socio-emotional difficulties. In the present sample, reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s α) for these subscales were social problems = .76, rule-breaking behaviour = .81, anxiety/depression = .77, withdrawal/depression = .80, aggressive behaviour = .92, and hyperactivity/impulsivity = .90.

Academic achievement

Participants’ end-of-year grades in two core academic subjects, Maths and Greek, over a 2-year period were taken from their school records. Grade average for each academic subject was calculated by summing and averaging each participant’s end of year grades for the specified period. Students in Cyprus are graded at the end of each school year in each subject area. Grades range from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating an outstanding and 1 an insufficient performance.

Procedure

The EQ-i:YV was administered individually to children after parental consent had been obtained. To control for developmental differences in reading ability, the experimenter read each item aloud, while children read the items to themselves. Children were given the opportunity to ask clarifications should they not understand an item, but not to seek help as to how they should respond. The TRF was completed by each participant’s classroom teacher during the last semester of the school year. All teachers taught the children 5 days a week (15-20 hr) and had known them for approximately 8 months at the time of data collection.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

The means and standard deviations of each of the study measures are shown in Table 1 for the whole sample and classified by age group and gender. A 2 (age groups: 8 to 10 years vs. 11 to 13 years) × 2 (gender: boys vs. girls) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted using the various EI and socio-emotional adjustment scores as the dependent variables. The MANOVA revealed that neither the main effects of age group and gender nor the interaction between age group and gender were significant.

Table 1.

Means and Standard Deviations for the EI Variables for the Total Sample and Classified by Age-Group and Gender.

	All			8- to 10-year-olds			11- to 13-year-olds
	Total (N = 205)	Boys (n = 103)	Girls (n = 102)	Total (N = 99)	Boys (n = 48)	Girls (n = 51)	Total (N = 106)	Boys (n = 55)	Girls (n = 51)

	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
EI
Intrapersonal	14.30 (4.01)	14.20 (3.94)	14.40 (4.09)	14.56 (4.11)	14.60 (4.30)	14.52 (3.97)	14.05 (3.91)	13.85 (3.60)	14.27 (4.25)
Interpersonal	38.94 (5.24)	38.57 (5.52)	39.31 (4.93)	38.47 (5.26)	38.02 (5.78)	38.90 (4.73)	39.37 (5.20)	39.05 (5.29)	39.72 (5.13)
Adaptability	30.53 (5.63)	30.47 (5.78)	30.59 (5.50)	30.27 (6.31)	29.95 (6.63)	30.56 (6.04)	30.78 (4.93)	30.92 (4.93)	30.62 (4.97)
Stress management	33.11 (6.79)	32.19 (6.67)	34.03 (6.82)	33.13 (6.77)	32.25 (6.96)	33.96 (6.55)	33.09 (6.84)	32.14 (6.47)	34.11 (7.14)
Total EI	116.89 (14.78)	115.44 (14.14)	118.35 (15.34)	116.44 (14.87)	114.83 (15.71)	117.96 (14.02)	117.31 (14.76)	115.98 (12.73)	118.74(16.68)

Note. EI = emotional intelligence.

Next, a 2 (age-groups: 8 to 10 years vs. 11 to 13 years) × 2 (gender: boys vs. girls) MANOVA was performed using adaptive functioning and social problems scores as the dependent variables. The MANOVA revealed that neither the main effect of age group nor the interaction between age group and gender were significant on any of the socio-emotional adjustment variables. However, gender effects were found in several adaptive functioning measures. Specifically, girls scored higher than boys on the adaptive functioning scales: “working hard,” F(1, 201) = 12.24, p < .001, η² = .057; “behaving appropriately,” F(1, 201) = 29.86, p < .001, η² = .129; and “total adaptive functioning,” F(1, 201) = 12.10, p < .001, η² = .057, scales. Conversely, boys scored higher than girls on the socio-emotional problems scales: “social problems,” F(1, 201) = 7.19, p = .008, η² = .035; “rule-breaking behaviour,” F(1, 201) = 21.51, p <.001, η² = .097; “aggressive behaviour,” F(1, 201) = 19.27, p < .001, η² = .088; and “hyperactivity-impulsivity,” F(1, 201) = 24.33, p < .001, η² = .108.

Correlations Between Trait EI and Socio-Emotional Adjustment at School

Correlations (computed separately for the 8- to 10- and the 11- to 13-year-old groups) among the various EI and socio-emotional adjustment variables were calculated and are presented in Table 2. As the table shows, correlations between EI scales and measures of adaptive functioning differed in the two age groups. For the 8- to 10-year-old group, only one significant positive correlation was found between adaptability and learning (r = .20). For the 11- to 13-year-old group, there were several significant positive correlations between total EI, intrapersonal EI, interpersonal EI, adaptability, stress management, and several of the scales measuring adaptive functioning, including the scales assessing how hard a child works at school, how well she/he learns, how happy she/he is at school as well as with the child’s total adaptive functioning.

Table 2.

Means and Standard Deviations for the Socio-Emotional Adjustment Variables for the Total Sample and Classified by Age-Group and Gender.

	All			8- to 10-year-olds			11- to 13-year-olds
	Total (N = 205)	Boys (n = 103)	Girls (n = 102)	Total (N = 99)	Boys (n = 48)	Girls (n = 51)	Total (N = 106)	Boys (n = 55)	Girls (n = 51)

	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
AF
Working hard	4.21 (1.68)	3.81 (1.64)	4.62 (1.62)	4.28 (1.63)	3.96 (1.62)	4.59 (1.60)	4.14 (1.72)	3.67 (1.66)	4.65 (1.65)
Behaving appropriately	4.95 (1.66)	4.36 (1.76)	5.55 (1.31)	5.01 (1.67)	4.29 (1.77)	5.69 (1.25)	4.90 (1.66)	4.42 (1.77)	5.41 (1.37)
Learning	4.61 (1.73)	4.42 (1.81)	4.80 (1.63)	4.77 (1.65)	4.56 (1.74)	4.96 (1.56)	4.46 (1.80)	4.29 (1.88)	4.65 (1.70)
Being happy	4.90 (1.43)	4.82 (1.50)	4.98 (1.37)	5.06 (1.38)	5.13 (1.52)	5.00 (1.24)	4.75 (1.47)	4.55 (1.43)	4.96 (1.49)
Total AF	18.66 (5.31)	17.39 (5.38)	19.95 (5.38)	19.12 (5.07)	17.93 (5.31)	20.23 (4.61)	18.24 (5.51)	16.92 (5.45)	19.66 (5.26)
Socio-emotional problems
Social problems	2.22 (2.75)	2.73 (3.21)	1.71 (2.09)	2.14 (2.64)	2.75 (3.29)	1.56 (1.68)	2.31 (2.86)	2.72 (3.17)	1.86 (2.44)
Rule-breaking behaviour	1.48 (2.42)	2.24 (2.98)	0.72 (1.32)	1.32 (2.32)	2.04 (2.93)	0.64 (1.26)	1.64 (2.51)	2.41 (3.04)	0.80 (1.40)
Anxious/depressed	3.83 (3.47)	3.59 (3.42)	4.08 (3.52)	4.13 (3.55)	3.56 (3.18)	4.66 (3.81)	3.56 (3.39)	3.61 (3.64)	3.50 (3.13)
Withdrawn/depressed	2.03 (2.62)	2.12 (2.49)	1.95 (2.75)	1.80 (2.55)	1.77 (2.32)	1.84 (2.78)	2.25 (2.67)	2.43 (2.60)	2.05 (2.75)
Aggressive behaviour	4.10 (6.63)	6.04 (8.27)	2.14 (3.47)	4.18 (6.70)	6.35 (8.53)	2.13 (3.30)	4.03 (6.60)	5.78 (8.11)	2.15 (3.67)
Hyperactivity/impulsivity	3.41 (4.52)	4.87 (5.35)	1.94 (2.84)	3.79 (4.70)	5.35 (5.67)	2.33 (2.93)	3.05 (4.34)	4.45 (5.08)	1.54 (2.71)

Note. AF = adaptive functioning.

The correlations between EI scales and scales assessing socio-emotional problems were all non-significant in the 8- to 10-year-old group, with the exception of one, low, positive correlation between adaptability and social problems (r = .19). Similarly, in the 11- to 13-year-old group, only one, low, significant negative correlation was found between intrapersonal EI and children’s scores on the anxiety/depression subscale of the TRF (r = −.24).

The analysis also examined whether the above pattern of findings reflected social desirability biases. To this effect, partial correlations between each of the EI variables and each of the adaptive functioning and socio-emotional problems measures were calculated controlling for scores on the Positive Impression subscale of the EQ-i:YV. The results are reported in Table 3. As can be seen in the table, the differences between simple and partial correlations were mostly negligible, indicating that the associations between EI and socio-emotional adjustment variables were not mediated by social desirability responding.

Table 3.

Correlations Between EI and Socio-Emotional Adjustment Measures for the 8- to 10-Year-Old and 11- to 13-Year-Old Children, Before (C) and After Controlling for Positive Impression (PIC).

	8- to 10-year-olds					11- to 13-year-olds
	Intra EI	Inter EI	Str Man	Adap	Total EI	Intra EI	Inter EI	Str Man	Adap	Total EI

	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC	C/PIC
AF
Work hard	.02/.04	.06/.12	.13/.16	−.00/.03	.09/.15	.22/.22	.16/.17	.20*/.20	.28/.28	.33/.34
Behaving appropriately	−.08/−.08	.12/.15	.17/.19	.12/.14	.14/.18	−.01/−.03	.12/.07	.14/.12	.11/.08	.15/.11
Learning	−.09/−.12	.06/.02	.16/.14	.20*/.18	.14/.11	.24/.25	.17/.21*	.20/.22*	.25/27*	.32/.37
Be happy	.01/−.03	.10/.04	.15/.11	.24/−.04	.11/.05	.32/.31	.24/.22	.09/.07	.30/.29	.34/.32
Total AF	−.04/−.06	.10/.10	.19/.18	.11/.10	.15/.15	.23/.23	.22/.20	.20*/.19	.29/28*	.36/.35
Socio-emotional problems
Social problems	.09/.12	−.17/−.16	−.05/−.03	−.19*/−.19	−.12/−.11	−.04/−.02	.03/.08	−.12/−.10	−.03/−.01	−.06/−.03
Rule-breaking behaviour	.08/.07	−.06/−.11	−.12/−.15	−.04/−.08	−.07/−.13	.13/.13	.08/.08	−.10/−.11	.08/.08	.05/.08
Anxious/depressed	.14/.15	.02/.04	.06/.07	−.10/−.10	.04/.06	−.24/−.24	−.03/−.00	.10/.12	−.11/−.10	−.08/−.06
Withdrawn/depressed	−.01/.04	.14/.07	.02/.04	−.16/−.10	−.11/−.03	−.14/−.15	.07/−.00	.07/.07	−.12/−.12	−.06/−.06
Aggressive behaviour	.04/.04	−.13/−.17	−.11/−.13	−.06/−.08	−.11/−.15	.05/.05	.10/.12	−.10/−.09	.09/.11	.04/.06
Hyperactivity/impulsivity	−.08/−.11	−.07/−.12	−.15/−.19	−.05/−.09	−.13/−.17	.05/.06	.08/.12	−.15/−.13	.06/.07	.00/.03

Note. EI = emotional intelligence; Intra EI = intrapersonal EI; Inter EI = interpersonal EI; Str Man = stress management; Adap = adaptability; AF = adaptive functioning.

p < .05, two-tailed. **p < .01, two-tailed.

Correlations Between Trait EI and Academic Achievement

Next, two-tailed correlations between children’s EI scores and grade average in Maths and Greek were computed separately for the 8 to 10 and the 11- to 13-year-old group. As shown in Table 4, in the 8- to 10-year-old group, total EI was not significantly correlated with academic achievement. Moreover, at the subscale level, only one of the EQ-i:YV subscales, adaptability, correlated positively with young children’s average-grade scores in Maths (r = .26) and Greek (r = .24). In contrast, in the 11- to 13-year-old group, children’s Greek and Math scores were positively correlated with total EI (r = .34 and r = .37 for Maths and Greek, respectively) as well as with three of the four EQ-i:YV subscales, specifically with the subscales assessing intrapersonal EI, stress management, and adaptability skills.

Table 4.

Correlations Between EI With Performance in Maths and Greek for the 8- to 10-Year-Old and 11- to 13-Year-Old Children.

	8- to 10-year-olds		11- to 13-year-olds
EI	Maths	Greek	Maths	Greek
Intra EI	.17	−.16	.23**	.29**
Inter EI	.03	.12	.16	.17
Str Man	−.10	.13	.27*	.29*
Adap	.26**	.24*	.23*	.22*
Total EI	.09	.14	.34**	.37**

Note. EI = emotional intelligence; Intra EI = intrapersonal EI; Inter EI = interpersonal EI; Str Man = stress management; Adap = Adaptability.

p < .05, two-tailed. **p < .01, two-tailed.

Discussion

This study was set out to examine links between trait EI with socio-emotional adjustment at school and academic achievement. The study also investigated whether age has a moderating influence on these associations. The results are discussed in the following sections.

EI and Socio-Emotional Adjustment

In regard to the relationship between children’s trait EI and teacher ratings of their adaptive functioning at school, the results were divergent. In the 8- to 10-year-old group, total EI did not correlate with any of the adaptive functioning measures. The only significant correlation in this age group was a positive correlation between the EQ-i:YV subscale of adaptability and one of the indices of adaptive functioning, learning, indicating that young children’s learning performance—as assessed by their teachers—is influenced by their adaptability skills, that is their ability to adjust their emotions and behaviours to the changing situations and/or conditions in the school. In contrast, in the 11- to 13-year-old group, several significant correlations were found between EQ-i:YV total and subscale scores and aspects of children’s adaptive functioning at school. Specifically, from the four indices of adaptive functioning assessed, three—learning, working hard, and being happy at school—as well as total adaptive functioning were found to be positively correlated with total EI as well as with the majority of the individual EI dimensions. This asymmetry in the correlations of the younger and older children indicates that the association between trait EI and the various measures of adaptive functioning is age dependent. The results suggest that as children get older, the association between emotional self efficacy and adaptive functioning in the school context becomes stronger.

The findings concerning the older age group’s adaptive functioning are in line with earlier research on preadolescent children (e.g., Mavroveli et al., 2008) showing that trait EI is positively associated with children’s use of adaptive coping strategies at school. In line with this earlier work, our results indicate that trait EI has a significant influence on teachers’ perceptions of how a preadolescent child manages her/his behaviour in emotionally challenging school situations. Preadolescents with higher trait EI are perceived by their teachers as being more motivated to engage in adaptive behaviours and as more adept at controlling—that is, purposefully hiding, minimizing, and/or modifying—the expression of maladaptive ones. In contrast, preadolescents with low trait EI are perceived by their teachers as having adjustment difficulties and, to a lesser extent, socio-emotional problems.

The findings concerning the relationship of trait EI with socio-emotional problems yielded a very different picture. The correlations between total and subscale EI scores and teachers’ judgements of children’s socio-emotional problems were mostly non-significant in both age groups. The only exceptions to this pattern were (i) a significant negative correlation between adaptability and social problems in the 8- to 10-year-old group and (ii) a significant negative correlation between intrapersonal EI and anxiety/depression in the 11- to 13-year-old group. The former finding is in line with Mavroveli and Sánchez-Ruiz’s (2011) study reporting that trait EI differentiates between children with behavioural, emotional, and social difficulties from those without any such difficulties. The latter finding is theoretically reasonable—as intrapersonal EI involves capacities such as mood regulation—and, moreover, is in accordance with Mavroveli, Petrides, Rieffe, and Bakker’s (2007) finding that high trait EI is moderately associated with preadolescents’ lower levels of depression.

EI and Academic Achievement

In regard to the relationship between trait EI and academic achievement, the results were again divergent. In the 8- to 10-year-old group, total EI did not correlate significantly with children’s performance in Maths and Greek. And from the four EQ-i:YV subscales, only adaptability predicted children’s academic achievement. Conversely, in the 11- to 13-year-old group, the results showed that children’s total EQ-i:YV scores predicted performance in both academic subjects. At the subscale level, significant positive associations were found between the EI scales: stress management, intrapersonal EI, adaptability skills with children’s grade average in both academic subjects. In contrast to the other individual trait EI dimensions, interpersonal EI did not correlate significantly with neither of the two academic subjects.

These results are consistent with earlier reports (Ferrando et al., 2011; Mavroveli et al., 2009; Qualter et al., 2007) indicating that trait EI can predict the academic achievement of preadolescent children. Moreover, the asymmetry in the correlations of younger and older children is in line with Mavroveli et al.’s (2009) observation that trait EI and academic achievement ceased to be significantly correlated once age was partialled out. Thus, along with those of Mavroveli et al.’s (2009), our findings indicate that age is a variable that influences the association between trait EI and academic achievement.

Overall

When the abovementioned is taken together, it becomes evident that the associations between trait EI with adaptive functioning at school on the one hand and between trait EI and academic achievement on the other change as a function of age. This conclusion is developmentally meaningful and receives some support from developmental models of EI (e.g., Meerum Terwogt & Stegge, 2001). In accordance with the propositions of the developmental EI models, our results indicate that advances in children’s emotion knowledge and beliefs about emotional abilities (emotional self efficacy) go hand in hand with improvements in their ability to manage their behaviour in the context of the school. And, further, that advances in self-evaluative judgements are associated with improvements in school performance (see also Bandura, 1997).

The current study further indicates that besides total trait EI, individual EI dimensions—intrapersonal EI, interpersonal EI, adaptability, and stress management—are important predictors of adaptive functioning at school and academic achievement—at least for preadolescent children. The interpersonal dimension of EI involves capacities (e.g., empathy, social responsibility) enabling a child to establish and maintain cooperative social relationships. Intrapersonal EI involves capacities enabling a child to recognize and manage his/her feelings. Adaptability is the ability to use effectively one’s emotions to facilitate problem solving and thinking. Stress management involves a number of emotion-regulation competencies (e.g., management of negative emotions) that help the child to cope with difficult and stressful situations. It seems that older students who have advanced levels of these competencies are able to cope better with the challenging demands of the school environment and succeed on academic tasks better compared with other students.

The association between these specific EI competencies and young children’s adaptive functioning and academic achievement is not surprising. Primary school is by design a challenging context for children (Ladd, 2004). Children have to learn to work on a variety of academic tasks, comply with classroom rules and responsibilities, learn how to interact with and accept the authority of the teacher, and negotiate social interactions with a large group of peers. Many developmental studies (for a review see Eisenberg, 2006) have shown that mastery of emotion-related skills, including the ability to control emotions, empathize with others’ feelings, and use emotions effectively to solve problems, helps children to cope with the demands and challenges of the primary school and is associated with greater well-being and better academic outcomes. In contrast, deficits in the development of these competencies are associated with personal, social, and academic difficulties.

Our findings should be interpreted in the light of several methodological limitations. Firstly, children’s trait EI was assessed using a self-report measure. Several authors (e.g., Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2007) have argued against the use of self-report measures with children, because of children’s need to present themselves in a socially desirable manner. Although we were able to statistically control the independent impact of social desirability responding from our data, future research should assess trait EI using measures that are not subject to social desirability biases. The ideal approach would be to attempt to replicate our findings using multi-informant assessment of EI that utilizes both the self and observer measures of trait EI (Wood, Parker, & Keefer, 2009). Second, the sample of the present study included children as young as 8 years of age. Younger participants may have not yet developed the ability to understand and accurately describe their emotional experiences, which may have potentially confounded the results. Although we attempted to control for individual differences in children’s ability to report their emotional experiences by giving them the opportunity to ask questions should they not understand individual items of the EQ-i:YV, it is necessary for future studies to also measure whether there are age differences in children’s emotion vocabulary and ability to describe their emotion experiences. Thirdly, the associations reported in this study are based in a cross-sectional data set. Hence, the direction of the relationships of trait EI with children’s socio-emotional adjustment and academic achievement cannot be determined. Future studies, using a longitudinal design, should be conducted to elucidate the direction of these associations and to also determine which specific EI processes contribute to advanced school adjustment and achievement.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Andreas Brouzos, PhD, is a professor of education and school counseling at the Department of Primary Education of the University of Ioannina, Greece.

Plousia Misailidi, PhD, is an assistant professor of developmental psychology at the Department of Primary Education of the University of Ioannina, Greece.

Anastasia Hadjimattheou, MA, is a former postgraduate student at the Department of Primary Education of the University of Ioannina, and works as a primary school teacher in Cyprus.

References

Achenbach

T. M.

(1991). Manual for the Teacher’s Report Form and 1991 Profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.

Agnoli

Mancini

Pozzoli

Baldaro

Russo

Surcinelli

(2012). The interaction between emotional intelligence and cognitive ability in predicting scholastic performance in school-aged children. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 660-665.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26.

Bar-On

(1997). EQ-i. Bar-On emotional quotient inventory: A measure of emotional intelligence. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.

Bar-On

Parker

J. D. A.

(2000). The Bar-On EQ-i:YV: Technical manual. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.

Bérubé

R. L.

Achenbach

T. M.

(2001). Bibliography of published studies using ASEBA instruments: 2001 edition. Burlington: Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families, University of Vermont.

Eastabrook

J. M.

Duncan

Eldridge

(2005, June). Academic success in elementary school: Does EI matter? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Psychological Association, Montreal, Qubec, Canada.

Eisenberg

(Ed.). (2006). Social, emotional, and personality development. In Damon

Lerner

R. M.

(Series Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3 (6th ed., pp. 24-98). New York, NY: Wiley.

10.

Ferrando

Prieto

M. D.

Almeida

L. S.

Ferrándiz

Bermejo

López-Pina

J. A.

. . . Fernández

M.-C.

(2011). Trait emotional intelligence and academic performance: Controlling for the effects of IQ, personality, and self-concept. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 150-159.

11.

Goodman

(1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581-586.

12.

Hansenne

Legrand

(2012). Creativity, emotional intelligence and school performance in children. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 264-268.

13.

Joseph

D. L.

Newman

D. A.

(2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 54-78.

14.

Keefer

K. V.

Parker

J. D. A.

Wood

L. M.

(2012). Trait emotional intelligence and university graduation outcomes: Using latent profile analysis to identify students at risk for degree noncompletion. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 402-413.

15.

Ladd

G. W.

(2004). Probing the adaptive significance of children’s behavior and relationships in the school context: A child by environment perspective. In Kail

(Ed.), Advances in child behavior and development (pp. 1-15). New York, NY: Wiley.

16.

Matthews

Zeidner

Roberts

R. D.

(2007). Emotional intelligence: Science and myth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

17.

Mavroveli

Petrides

K. V.

Rieffe

Bakker

(2007). Trait emotional intelligence, psychological well-being and peer-rated social competence in adolescence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 263-275.

18.

Mavroveli

Petrides

K. V.

Sangareau

Furnham

(2009). Exploring the relationships between trait emotional intelligence and objective socio-emotional outcomes in childhood. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 259-272.

19.

Mavroveli

Petrides

K. V.

Shove

Whitehead

(2008). Investigation of the construct of trait emotional intelligence in children. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 17, 516-526.

20.

Mavroveli

Sánchez -Ruiz

M. J.

(2011). Trait emotional intelligence influences on academic achievement and school behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 11, 112-134.

21.

Mayer

J. D.

Salovey

Caruso

(2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT): User’s manual. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.

22.

Meerum Terwogt

M. M.

Stegge

(2001). The development of emotional intelligence. In Goodyer

I. M.

(Ed.), The depressed child and adolescent (pp. 24-45). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

23.

Parker

J. D. A.

Saklofske

D. H.

Wood

L. M.

Collin

(2009). The role of emotional intelligence in education. In Stough

Saklofske

D. H.

Parker

J. D. A.

(Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 239-255). New York, NY: Springer.

24.

Petrides

K. V.

(2009). Technical Manual for the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). London, England: London Psychometric Laboratory.

25.

Petrides

K. V.

Furnham

(2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioural validation in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of Personality, 17, 39-75.

26.

Qualter

Gardner

K. J.

Pope

Hutchinson

J. M.

Whiteley

H. E.

(2012). Ability emotional intelligence, trait emotional intelligence, and academic success in British secondary schools: A 5-year longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 83-91.

27.

Qualter

Whiteley

H. E.

Hutchinson

J. M.

Pope

D. J.

(2007). Supporting the development of emotional intelligence competencies to ease the transition from primary to high school. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23, 79-95.

28.

Roussos

Karantanos

Richardson

Hartman

Karajiannis

Kyprianos

. . . Zoubou

(1999). Achenbach’s Child Behaviour Checklist and Teacher’s Report Form in a normative sample of Greek children 6–12 years old. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 8, 165-172.

29.

Schutte

N. S.

Malouff

J. M.

Hine

D. W.

(2011). The association of ability and trait emotional intelligence with alcohol problems. Addiction Research & Theory, 19, 260-265.

30.

Siskos

B. N.

Papaioannou

A. G.

Proios

M. K.

(2011). Causal effects between emotional intelligence and a perceived caring classroom climate in physical education. International Journal of Physical Education, 1, 7-17.

31.

Windingstad

McCallum

S. R.

Bell

S. M.

Dunn

(2011). Measures of emotional intelligence and social acceptability: A concurrent validity study. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26, 107-126.

32.

Wood

L. M.

Parker

J. D. A.

Keefer

K. V.

(2009). Assessing emotional intelligence using the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) and related instruments. In Stough

Saklofske

D. H.

Parker

J. D. A.

(Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 67-84). New York, NY: Springer Science.