Claims

EI task nature, country, academic performance criterion, and age do not significantly moderate the EI–academic success relationship

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? EI task nature [Q(1) = 0.71, p = .40], country [Q(1) = 3.08, p = .08], and academic performance criterion [Q(1) = 0.38, p = .54] did not significantly explain variability in the mean effect; age was also non-significant (b = 0.011, p = .17). → Alabbasi Ahmed M. Abdulla 2023

Evidence

Alabbasi Ahmed M. Abdulla 2023

Alabbasi Ahmed M. Abdulla, Alabbasi Fatema A., AlSaleh Aseel, Alansari Ahmed M., Sequeira Reginald P. (2023). Emotional intelligence weakly predicts academic success in medical programs: a multilevel meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04417-8

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Moderator analyses in the three-level meta-analysis testing task nature, country, academic performance criterion, and age (treated as continuous, b = 0.011, SE = 0.007, p = 0.17). None significantly explained variability in the mean effect size.

"whereas EI task nature [Q(1) = 0.71, p = 0.40], country [Q(1) = 3.08, p = 0.08], and academic performance criterion [Q(1) = 0.38, p = 0.54] did not significantly explain variability in the mean effect"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.