The concept of intelligence has historically been central to psychology and education, often related to the ability to reason logically and solve problems. However, contemporary approaches recognize its multifaceted nature, highlighting forms of intelligence that go beyond the IQ, such as emotional intelligence (EI) and social intelligence (SI). The study conducted by Lada Kaliská (2015) offers an empirical analysis of the relationship between these three forms of intelligence—emotional, social, and general—and the academic performance of high school students, revealing important nuances that challenge traditional models of school assessment.
Emotional intelligence, as adopted in the trait model proposed by Petrides and Furnham (2001), is understood as a personality characteristic. Assessed using the TEIQue–AF instrument, it is divided into four major factors: Well-being, Self-control, Emotionality, and Sociability. Each factor comprises specific dimensions, such as optimism, self-esteem, emotional regulation, and perception of emotions. Trait EI reflects emotional self-efficacy, that is, the perceived ability to process, regulate, and use emotions, both in the intrapersonal and interpersonal context. In the study, EI demonstrated weak to null correlations with academic performance, although specific dimensions, such as emotional perception and relational competence, presented statistically significant correlations, albeit of low magnitude, with grades in Mathematics and Slovak Language (Kaliská, 2015).
Regarding social intelligence, measured by the Tromso Social Intelligence Scale (TSIS), the data also point to weak correlations with academic performance. SI was operationalized based on three domains: social information processing, social skills, and social awareness. These domains encompass both cognitive and behavioral aspects of social interaction. The significant correlations observed between SI and academic grades—for example, between social awareness and grades in Slovak—support the idea that more socially competent students may perform better, especially in contexts where communicative skills are required. However, the strength of these associations is limited, suggesting that SI contributes more indirectly to academic performance (Kaliská, 2015).
General intelligence, in turn, assessed by the Intellectual Potential Test (IPT), showed a moderately negative correlation (R=–0.39; p<0.01) with grades in Mathematics, indicating that students with greater intellectual potential achieve better results in this subject. This result is consistent with the classical literature that associates fluid intelligence — the ability for abstract reasoning, systematization and problem-solving — with performance in logical-structured subjects. Interestingly, this same association was weaker in relation to the Slovak language, revealing that IQ may not fully capture the skills necessary for success in more subjective or linguistic areas (Kaliská, 2015).
The integrated analysis of the data leads to an important conclusion: although general intelligence continues to be a significant predictor, it is not sufficient to explain school performance in its entirety. Emotional and social intelligence, even with modest statistical correlations, prove to be relevant components, especially in the context of an education that values the integral development of the individual. These findings support the notion that the school environment, by focusing excessively on cognitive assessment, can neglect skills that are crucial to the overall development of students. As was well observed in the study, students with similar levels of general intelligence can present different school performances, influenced by emotional and social factors such as stress, anxiety and the ability to navigate interpersonal interactions.
It is also important to highlight that emotional intelligence can act as a mediator of academic performance, particularly in students with lower cognitive potential. When these students develop emotional skills, they demonstrate a greater ability to cope with stressful situations, seek social support and maintain a positive attitude towards learning, which contributes to more favorable academic results. Recognizing these dynamics invites reflection on the need for pedagogical reformulations that include strategies for the development of emotional and social intelligence as part of the school curriculum (Kaliská, 2015).
In short, the data presented by Kaliská reveal the complexity of school performance and challenge the reductionist view of academic success based exclusively on IQ. Although general intelligence plays an important role — especially in subjects such as Mathematics — emotional and social aspects also demonstrate influences, albeit subtle ones. Therefore, the appreciation of socio-emotional skills should not be seen as an optional complement, but as a fundamental component in the teaching-learning process, contributing not only to academic success, but also to the well-being and personal development of students.
Reference:
KALISKÁ, Lada. Three types of intelligences and their relationship to students’ school performance. The New Educational Review, vol. 41, no. 3, p. 276–286, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2015.41.3.22.
