Abstract
M.A.
The principal aim of the study was to determine whether or not certain aspects of
emotional intelligence account for the difference between students' academic success or
failure. Although an in-depth study of existing literature on the topic of academic
prowess soon disclosed that all aspects of an individual's functioning play a part in his or
her academic performance, a flaw was uncovered in this argument in terms of the link
between the individual's ability to deal with emotional processes and his or her academic
functioning. The present study could, therefore, be considered to be the springboard for
theory-building regarding the link between aspects of emotional intelligence and
academic performance.
Various studies in the domain of emotions have been undertaken with a view to study the
manner in which individuals evaluate, communicate and apply emotions in their bid to
solve problems and to adapt to circumstances of life. Emotional intelligence can be
viewed as a meta ability that co-determines the extent to which an individual develops his
or her potential, acquires and hones skills (including his or her intellect) and achieves his
or her objectives. The manner in which the individual processes emotional contents
could, therefore, have a profound effect on all intra and interpersonal aspects of his or her
functioning, including his or her academic performance.
In addition, existing literature soon discloses the multidimensional nature of the concept
academic success to be a complex interchange between cognitive and non-cognitive
factors. The interdependency between a number of these factors often serves to
complicate any attempt to study them, however, and oft-times results in inconsistent and
even contradictory findings. In the present study, the part that the individual's way of
coping with emotional contents plays in his or her academic performance is subjected to
close scrutiny.
The experimental group selected for the purposes of the present study comprised 133
students in the age group 18 to 23 enrolled for a course in Psychology 1 at the Rand
Afrikaans University. The said experimental group was deemed to represent the
population of Human Sciences students at this institution. Based on their final-marks for
Psychology 1, these students were divided into two categories, namely students who
achieved academic success and students who failed to achieve academic success.
Following, both groups of students were subjected to the Emotional Intelligence Battery
of tests.
Hotelling's T2-test was then used to determine whether or not the mean vectors of the two
groups differed from each other. The F-test was applied to determine whether or not the
variances between the two independent groups were homogeneous. Student's t-test was
used to determine whether or not there be a statistically significant difference between the
two means in terms of the five sub-scales of the Emotional Intelligence Battery. A stepwise discriminant analysis was conducted to determine which of the five variables
(viz. the Social Translations (CBT) sub-scale of the Four Factor Tests of Social
Intelligence, the Hogan Empathy Scale (HIES), the Self—Control Schedule (SCS), the
Neuroticism sub-scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), the total score of
the Adolescent Self-Concept Scale (ASCS)) to the greatest extent contributed towards the
differences between the two criterion groups (viz. academically successful students;
academically unsuccessful students).
The results of Hotelling's T 2-test indicated that the Emotional Intelligence Battery did
indeed differentiate between students who achieved academic success and those who
failed to achieve academic success in the specified population. Statistically significant
differences were found in the vectors of means of Group 1 (viz. students who achieved
academic success) and Group 2 (viz. students who failed to achieve academic success)
with respect to the five sub-scales of the Emotional Intelligence Battery taken together.
Statistically significant differences were found between the means of the two groups in
respect of both the Social Translations sub-scale of the Four Factor Tests of Social
Intelligence and the Hogan Empathy Scale. No statistically significant differences were,
however, uncovered between the means of the two groups in respect of the rest of the
sub-scales of the Emotional Intelligence Battery.
The results of the stepwise discriminant analysis indicated that the variables Test 1 (the
Social Translations sub-scale of the Four Factor Tests of Social Intelligence) and Test 5
(the Adolescent Self-Concept Scale (ASCS)) contributed towards the discrimination
between Group 1 (academically successful students) and Group 2 (academically
unsuccessful students). All in all, 64.8% of the experimental subjects was correctly
classified by the two variables.
In the present study, research was only undertaken in respect of the link between certain
aspects of emotional intelligence and academic success. The present study could,
therefore, be deemed to constitude an exploratory study, as no other study has ever been
undertaken in the domain of the processing of emotional content in academic success. It
is recommended that future research subject academic performance to a multidimensional
scrutiny, with emotional intelligence being one of the factors. Further, it is recommended
that future research be undertaken to determine the skills and abilities of experimental
subjects from different cultural backgrounds and of both sexes, and that a comparison be
drawn between these subjects' abilities and skills and their emotional intelligence.