ABSTRACT

Introduction: The present study examines the relationship between emotional intelligence and
resilience among university students. In the current academic context, students experience
various stressors such as academic pressure, social challenges, and uncertainty about future
careers, which can affect their psychological well-being. Emotional intelligence, which involves
the ability to perceive, understand, and manage emotions, is considered an important factor in
coping with such challenges, while resilience refers to the ability to adapt and recover from
adversity.

Methods: The study adopted a quantitative approach with a descriptive and correlation research
design. A sample of 157 university students aged between 18 and 25 years was selected using
purposive sampling. Data were collected using the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence
Test (SSEIT) and the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Statistical analysis such as descriptive
statistics, Pearson correlation, and regression analysis were employed.

Results: The findings indicated a weak positive correlation between emotional intelligence and
resilience, which was statistically significant.. However, the results also suggest that resilience is
influenced by multiple factors beyond emotional intelligence. Although emotional intelligence
contributes to resilience, it does not solely determine it, indicating the role of other
psychological, social, and environmental variables. Thus, emotional intelligence can be
considered an important but partial predictor of resilience.

Conclusion: The study emphasizes the need to focus on developing emotional intelligence along
with other supportive factors to enhance resilience among university students, thereby promoting
better mental health, effective coping, and overall well-being.
 1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
 2

 DEFINITIONS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

1)“Being able to monitor and regulate one’s own and others’ feelings, and to use feelings to
guide thought and action” (Salovey & Mayer, 1990).

2)“Emotional Intelligence refers to the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of
others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our
relationships” (Goleman, 1998).

3)“Emotional intelligence is a set of emotional and social competencies, skills, and facilitators
that determine how effectively individuals understand and express themselves, understand others
and relate with them, and cope with daily demands, challenges, and pressures.” (Reuven Bar-On
1997).

4)“Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to reason about emotions and to use emotions to
enhance thinking.” (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso 2004).

5)“Emotional intelligence is your ability to recognize and understand emotions in yourself and
others, and your ability to use this awareness to manage your behavior and relationships”
(Bradberry & Greaves, 2009).

 CAUSES OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

1) BIOLOGICAL AND GENETIC FACTORS

Biological and genetic factors that affect how people process and react to emotional information
have an impact on emotional intelligence. Emotional perception, regulation, and social conduct
are significantly influenced by neurobiological processes, especially the activity of brain areas
like the prefrontal cortex and amygdala. The prefrontal cortex is engaged in regulating and
managing emotional reactions, whereas the amygdala is linked to these reactions. Additionally,
temperament and emotional reactivity may be influenced by genetic predispositions, which could
impact how emotional intelligence develops.
 3

2) THE EARLY CHILDHOOD ENVIRONMENT AND FAMILY

Style of Parenting: Early development of emotional intelligence is greatly influenced by

parenting practices. Children can freely express and comprehend their feelings in a safe setting
when their parents are warm, encouraging, and emotionally sensitive. Such parenting promotes
confidence, self-control, and emotional awareness. On the other hand, emotional development
may be hampered by strict or careless parenting, which can result in issues with emotion
regulation and interpersonal interactions.

Attachment Styles: Emotional growth and subsequent emotional intelligence are greatly
influenced by early attachment interactions. Children who have a secure attachment to their
caregivers are better able to build trust, emotional stability, and useful coping skills. These kids
are more likely to develop positive relationships and control their emotions. Conversely, insecure
attachment can lead to emotional instability, poor self-control, and trouble empathizing with
others.

Emotional Behavior Modeling: By seeing their parents and other caregivers, children pick up
emotional reactions and behaviors. Children often emulate their caregivers when they exhibit
appropriate emotional expression, empathy, and useful coping mechanisms. Emotional
awareness, empathy, and social competence are all developed through this modeling process.
Therefore, a major factor in developing emotional intelligence is the emotional environment at
home.

3) CULTURAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS

Peer relationships: Peer relationships are essential to the growth of emotional intelligence.
People gain empathy, become more adept at communicating, and learn to identify emotional
clues through social interaction. Opportunities to develop cooperation, dispute resolution, and
emotional expression are presented by peer interactions. These encounters make people more
socially conscious and emotionally capable of managing social circumstances.
 4
Cultural customs: The expression, perception, and control of emotions are strongly influenced by
cultural norms and values. People tend to become more emotionally aware and socially sensitive
in societies that promote interpersonal connection and open emotional expression. On the other
hand, emotional learning chances may be restricted in societies that discourage emotional
expressiveness. Therefore, the development and application of emotional intelligence are
influenced by cultural context.

4. INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCES
Stress and difficulties in life: The development of emotional intelligence is significantly
influenced by challenges and stress. People can develop emotional fortitude, flexibility, and
useful coping strategies by confronting and handling challenging circumstances. Higher
emotional intelligence is a result of these experiences, which improve one's capacity to control
emotions and react positively to hardship.

Introspection and self-reflection: Enhancing emotional intelligence is mostly dependent on

introspection and self-reflection. People who regularly analyze their ideas, feelings, and
responses become more self-aware and have better emotional regulation. This method aids in
recognizing emotional triggers, comprehending individual behavior, and making deliberate
attempts to react more skillfully in various circumstances. Such introspective exercises improve
emotional control and general emotional competency over time.

 COMPONENTS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

BEING SELF-AWARE :The capacity to identify and comprehend one's own feelings and how
they affect one's ideas and actions is referred to as self-awareness. People who have a high level
of self-awareness are aware of their emotional states and are able to pinpoint their emotional
triggers, shortcomings, and strengths. The development of further emotional intelligence abilities
is based on this awareness
 5

SELF-CONTROL: The capacity to control and manage one's emotions, particularly in trying
circumstances, is known as self-regulation. It entails managing spontaneous responses,
remaining composed under duress, and adjusting to shifting conditions. Strong self-regulation
enables people to react wisely as opposed to impulsively, which promotes emotional stability and
balance.

MOTIVATION: The ability to use emotions to accomplish goals with tenacity, zeal, and
optimism is known as motivation in emotional intelligence. People with emotional intelligence
are frequently resilient, self-motivated, and long-term success-oriented. They are able to
overcome challenges and keep an optimistic outlook despite challenges.

EMPATHY: The capacity to identify, comprehend, and react suitably to the feelings of others is
known as empathy. It entails having empathy for the thoughts and feelings of others, which
promotes trust and solid interpersonal bonds. Effective communication and social understanding
depend on empathy.

SOCIAL COMPETENCIES: The capacity to properly manage relationships and engage in

constructive interactions with others is referred to as social skills. Clear communication,
teamwork, dispute resolution, and the capacity to motivate and inspire others are all examples of
this. People with strong social skills are able to form deep connections and perform well in both
social and professional settings

 THEORIES OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

ABILITY THEORY OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: In 1990, Peter Salovey

and John D. Mayer proposed the Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence, which was improved
upon in 2000. This paradigm defines emotional intelligence as the capacity to recognize,
comprehend, control, and apply emotions in a way that promotes critical thinking, problem-
 6

solving, and adaptive behavior. The approach emphasizes the processing of emotional
information rather than personality traits or taught competencies, and it views emotional
intelligence as a type of cognitive ability that is comparable to traditional intelligence. It sees
emotions as important information sources that can influence social interaction, cognition, and
decision-making.

There are four essential skills in the model. The ability to correctly recognize emotions in oneself
and others by body language, tone of voice, and facial expressions is known as perceiving
emotions. Since identifying emotions is necessary for additional processing, this is seen as the
basis of emotional intelligence. The second is "using emotions to facilitate thought," which
entails using emotions to improve cognitive functions including creativity, problem-solving, and
decision-making. For example, a little worry prior to an exam can boost motivation and focus.
Understanding complicated emotional states, determining their causes, recognizing how
emotions change over time, and forecasting emotional reactions in various contexts are all
included in the third ability. Effective stress management, improved interpersonal interactions,
and general psychological well-being are all facilitated by the fourth ability, which is managing
emotions, which is defined as controlling one's own emotions and positively impacting those of
others.

MIXED MODEL OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Daniel Goleman first put

forth the Mixed Model of Emotional Intelligence in 1995, and it was expanded upon in 2001.
This approach defines emotional intelligence as a combination of social skills, emotional
competencies, and personality qualities that affect how well people identify, comprehend,
control, and utilize emotions in both themselves and other people.

The mixed model integrates both emotional abilities and personality traits, highlighting its
practical application in real-life scenarios like interpersonal relationships, job performance, and
leadership, in contrast to the ability model, which sees emotional intelligence as a purely
cognitive capacity. This paradigm emphasizes how crucial emotional intelligence is to success,
sustaining productive connections with others, and exhibiting strong leadership traits. There are
 7

five main parts to the model. Self-awareness is the capacity to identify and comprehend one's
own feelings, as well as to accurately perceive one's own advantages and disadvantages as well
as how emotions affect other people. The ability to control and manage disruptive emotions and
impulses, preserve emotional equilibrium, and calmly adjust to changing conditions are all
components of self-regulation. The ability to use emotions to pursue goals with vigor,
perseverance, and optimism is known as motivation, or self-motivation. This ability is frequently
demonstrated by achieving drive and dedication. The capacity to comprehend and react to the
feelings of others is known as empathy, and it is crucial for fostering social awareness and solid
interpersonal bonds. Successful interpersonal and professional interactions are facilitated by
social skills, usually referred to as relationship management, which include the capacity for
effective communication, dispute resolution, teamwork, and positive impact.

THE TRAIT MODEL OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Konstantin’s V.

Petrides and Adrian Furnham first suggested the Trait Model of Emotional Intelligence in 2001,
and it was expanded upon in 2003. According to this paradigm, emotional intelligence is a
collection of behavioral tendencies and self-perceived emotional skills that are integrated into the
larger field of personality.

The trait model sees emotional intelligence as a personality-based construct, in contrast to the
ability model, which sees it as a cognitive capacity, and the hybrid model, which integrates
abilities and competences. It focuses on how people view their own emotional capacities and
how these views affect their behavior, general well-being, and social interactions. Instead than
utilizing performance-based assessments, this paradigm usually uses self-report measures to
evaluate emotional intelligence. A number of essential elements that represent various facets of
emotional functioning are included in the model. The awareness and assessment of one's own
emotional capacity is known as emotional self-perception. The ability to express emotions in a
variety of contexts is known as emotion expression. Interpersonal interactions emphasize the
capacity to cultivate empathy, comprehend others, and sustain significant social ties.
Adaptability is the capacity to change with the times and overcome obstacles. The capacity to
 8

control emotions and maintain composure under duress is a key component of stress
management. Persistence, optimism, and the capacity to pursue objectives in the face of setbacks
are characteristics of self-motivation. When taken as a whole, these elements show how
personality-related emotional characteristics affect daily functioning and contribute to total
emotional intelligence.

EMOTIONAL-SOCIAL MODEL OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE:

Reuven Bar-On first suggested the Emotional–Social Model of Emotional Intelligence in 1997,
and it was further developed in 2000. This paradigm defines emotional intelligence as a
collection of interconnected emotional and social competences, skills, and facilitators that affect
how well people comprehend and express themselves, comprehend others, and manage pressures
and expectations from their surroundings. This approach incorporates both emotional and social
aspects, with a significant emphasis on practical functioning, adaptation, and general
psychological well-being, in contrast to theories that describe emotional intelligence only as a
cognitive ability or as a personality attribute. It highlights the importance of emotional
intelligence in attaining life pleasure, upholding productive social connections, and handling
day-to-day difficulties.

The model is made up of a number of fundamental elements that represent various aspects of
social and emotional functioning. Self-awareness, assertiveness, self-regard, independence, and
emotional self-expression are examples of intrapersonal abilities that enable people to effectively
comprehend and control their own emotions. Empathy, social responsibility, and the capacity to
sustain deep connections are examples of interpersonal abilities that help people communicate
effectively with others. Stress management is the capacity to control impulses and handle stress,
which enables people to maintain composure and react correctly under duress. Problem-solving
skills, reality testing, and flexibility are all components of adaptability that help people deal with
change and difficult circumstances. Motivation, resilience, and psychological well-being are all
impacted by general mood, which includes optimism, happiness, and general life satisfaction.
 9

When taken as a whole, these elements emphasize how crucial social and emotional skills are to
fostering efficient functioning and a balanced life.

 CHARACTERISTICS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

LOW LEVELS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Poor Self-Awareness and Low Emotional Intelligence: It might be difficult for those with low
emotional intelligence to identify and comprehend their own feelings. Confusion and bad
decision-making may result from their ignorance of how their emotions affect their ideas and
actions.

Impulsive Conduct: These people frequently respond emotionally without considering the
repercussions. Inappropriate reactions, miscommunications, and confrontations in social and
personal contexts can arise from this lack of impulse control.

Stress Management Issues: It might be difficult for people with low emotional intelligence to
handle pressure and stress. In challenging circumstances, they could find it difficult to keep
emotional equilibrium and become easily overwhelmed.

Insufficient Empathy: People who lack empathy find it challenging to relate to or comprehend
the feelings of others. Relationships may suffer as a result of their apparent insensitivity or lack
of empathy.

Inadequate Social Skills: Effective communication, dispute resolution, and keeping positive
relationships can be challenging for people with poor emotional intelligence. Clarity,
cooperation, and emotional understanding may be lacking in their interactions.

 CONSEQUENCES OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

 10
Regular Interpersonal Disagreements: People with low emotional intelligence frequently have
trouble controlling their emotions and comprehending others, which can result in
miscommunications and recurring disputes in social and personal interactions.

Having Trouble Managing Stress or Change: They might struggle to handle pressure, stress, or
unforeseen changes. Emotional instability and trouble adjusting to new circumstances may
follow from this.

Inadequate Leadership or Teamwork Capabilities: Their capacity to lead others or function well
in teams may be impacted by their lack of empathy and poor communication abilities. They
might find it difficult to work together, settle disputes, or inspire other group members.

Decreased Achievement in Personal and Professional Life: Overall development and success
might be adversely affected by low emotional intelligence. Both professional and personal
growth may be hampered by emotional and interpersonal management issues.

 HIGH LEVELS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

High Self-Awareness: People who possess strong emotional intelligence are well-aware of their
own feelings and how they affect their ideas and choices. They are able to make more thoughtful
and well-rounded decisions thanks to this insight.

Self-Control: Even under pressure, they are able to properly regulate their emotions and restrain
their impulses. This enables them to maintain composure, think rationally, and adjust to shifting
conditions.
High Level of Empathy: These people are able to effectively identify and comprehend other
people's emotions. Their capacity to react suitably to others' emotions contributes to the
development of trust and the upkeep of deep connections.
 11

Resilience and Motivation: Despite obstacles or failures, they have a strong sense of motivation
and stay committed to their objectives. They are able to persevere and succeed in the long run
because of their perseverance and upbeat outlook.

A positive outlook: Instead than concentrating on issues, they frequently highlight possibilities
and solutions. Their capacity to handle challenges and preserve emotional equilibrium is
improved by this optimistic perspective.

Being Receptive to Input: They are open to criticism and see it as a chance to improve. They use
constructive criticism to enhance their performance and behavior rather than getting defensive.

 BENEFITS OF HIGH EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Healthier, More Robust Relationships: Through effective communication, empathy, and mutual
understanding, people with high emotional intelligence are able to form deeper and more lasting
connections.

Improved Collaboration and Conflict Resolution: They are adept at handling conflict and
collaborating with others. More peaceful interactions and effective teamwork result from this.

Enhanced Decision-Making and Leadership: Emotionally intelligent people exhibit great

leadership traits and make deliberate decisions. They are able to effectively mentor others while
taking social and emotional aspects into account.

Improved Life Satisfaction and Mental Health: Stress reduction, improved emotional health, and
a higher sense of fulfillment in both personal and professional life are all associated with high
emotional intelligence.
 12
 MEANING OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

1)The ability to recognize and understand your own emotions.2) The skill to manage or control
your emotional responses effectively.

3) Understanding the emotions of others (empathy).

4) Using emotions to guide thinking and decision-making.

5) Maintaining positive relationships through emotional awareness.

6) Staying motivated and managing stress through emotional regulation.

 STRATEGIES OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Self-Awareness Techniques: Monitoring and thinking about one's feelings on a frequent basis
can help one become more self-aware. People might find patterns, triggers, and emotional
reactions by keeping an emotion journal. Pausing before responding also gives you time to
comprehend emotions and give a more considered response.

Self-Control Techniques: Techniques that assist in controlling emotional responses can enhance
self-regulation. Stress reduction and emotional equilibrium are supported by techniques
including deep breathing, mindfulness, and relaxation. Additionally, positive self-talk aids in
regulating impulsive reactions and encouraging composed conduct.

Strategies for Motivation: Establishing reasonable and attainable goals and regularly monitoring
advancement can boost motivation. Persistence, optimism, and long-term goal achievement are
encouraged by concentrating on personal development and seeing errors as teaching
opportunities.
 13
Techniques for Empathy: Giving others your whole attention during conversations and actively
listening to them without interjecting helps improve empathy. Understanding others' emotions
more precisely is made possible by paying attention to non-verbal clues like tone of voice and
body language.

Strategies for Social Skills: Clear and assertive communication that respectfully and non-
aggressively presents ideas can help people enhance their social skills. Interpersonal
effectiveness is further strengthened by establishing and preserving positive relationships based
on mutual respect, cooperation, and trust.

 COPING STYLES RELATED TO EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Problem-Oriented Coping: Instead than ignoring the source of stress, problem-focused coping is
actively confronting it. To properly address the problem, people employ techniques including
planning, making decisions, and consulting others.

Emotion-Based Coping: Instead of altering the stressful environment, emotion-focused coping

seeks to control emotional reactions to it. Emotional anguish can be lessened by methods
including journaling, meditation, and relaxation.

Coping with Avoidance: In order to lessen emotional discomfort, avoidance coping is

momentarily diverting attention from stress. While indulging in hobbies or watching movies may
offer short-term respite, this strategy is typically less successful over time.

Adaptive Management: Using constructive and healthful coping mechanisms to manage stress
while preserving relationships and emotional well-being is known as adaptive coping. Common
adaptation strategies include asking for help from others, exercising, and keeping a balanced
viewpoint.

Coping with Reflection: Learning from previous emotional experiences to enhance future
 14

reactions is known as reflective coping. Over time, people can improve their coping mechanisms
and emotional intelligence by examining past experiences.

 DEFINITIONS OF RESILIENCE

1)“Resilience refers to the capacity for recovery and maintenance of adaptive behavior following
stressful life events.”(Norman Garmezy 1971).

2)“Resilience involves cognitive appraisal and coping processes that enable individuals to
manage stress effectively.” (Richard S. Lazarus 1993).

3)“Resilience is the ability to successfully adapt despite exposure to stress and adversity.”
(Emmy E. Werner 1982).

4) “Resilience is reflected in a strong sense of coherence that enables individuals to cope

successfully with stressors.” (Aaron Antonovsky 1987).

5)“Resilience is the ability to bounce back from adversity by maintaining optimism, hope, and
effective coping strategies.” (Seligman 1998, 2006).

6)“Resilience refers to a class of phenomena characterized by good outcomes in spite of serious

threats to adaptation or development.” (Ann S. Masten 2001).

7)“Resilience is the ability of individuals to maintain relatively stable, healthy levels of

psychological functioning after traumatic events.” (George A. Bonanno 2004).

 CAUSES OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

1)GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS

Biological and genetic factors that affect how people react to stress and hardship have an impact
on resilience. An individual's ability to handle difficulties is influenced by inherited
characteristics including temperament and emotional responsiveness. Resilience levels are also
influenced by brain regions including the amygdala and prefrontal cortex, which are involved in
 15
stress reactions and emotional control.

2)FAMILY AND EARLY CHILDHOOD ENVIRONMENT

Secure Attachment : Strong emotional foundations provided by secure attachment to caregivers

enable people to manage stress. Early connections that are loving and supportive foster
emotional stability, self-assurance, and adaptive coping strategies.

Style of Parenting: The development of emotional and social competence is facilitated by

authoritative, warm, and responsive parenting. These settings foster self-reliance, emotional
control, and problem-solving skills, all of which strengthen resilience.

Modeling: By watching their parents and other caregivers, kids pick up coping mechanisms and
adaptive behaviors. Children learn resilience from positive role models who exhibit effective
stress management and emotional control.

3)SOCIAL SUPPORT AND PEER RELATIONSHIPS

Peer Communication: Good peer relationships offer possibilities for social and problem-solving
skill development as well as emotional support. Through collaboration and shared experiences,
these relationships assist people in managing stress and developing resilience.

Social Networks and Communities: Support from mentors, educators, and neighbors serves as a
buffer against stress. Strong social networks offer resources, support, and direction that improve
a person's capacity to overcome hardship.

4)INDIVIDUAL TRAITS AND PERSONAL FACTORS

Positivity and an optimistic view: People who have an optimistic outlook are more inclined to
see obstacles as chances for personal development. They are able to sustain resilience and
 16
bounce back from setbacks faster because to this positive mindset.

Self-Belief and Self-Efficacy: Self-confidence fortifies coping strategies and motivates people to
confront obstacles head-on. Persistence and successful problem-solving are encouraged by high
self-efficacy.

Personality: Resilience is influenced by personality qualities like emotional stability,

adaptability, and flexibility. People with steady and flexible temperaments are more adept at
handling stress and adapting to new situations.

5)EXPERIENCES IN LIFE AND COPING MECHANISMS

Exposure to Controllable Stressors: Over time, people develop resilience via encountering and
overcoming obstacles. Stress levels that are moderate can improve coping skills and get people
ready for challenges in the future.

Thinking Back and Gaining Knowledge from Misfortune: People can learn from difficulties and
create more effective coping mechanisms by thinking back on their past experiences. This
procedure enhances future reactions to difficult circumstances and fosters personal development.

6)ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS

Cultural Values and Norms: People's perceptions and reactions to hardship are influenced by
their cultural values and beliefs. Higher degrees of resilience are typically fostered by societies
that encourage collaboration, emotional expression, and problem-solving.

Obtaining Resources: Resilience is aided by the availability of resources like healthcare,

education, and secure housing. These elements give people the resources and networks of
support they need to deal with difficulties successfully.
 17
 COMPONENTS OF RESILIENCE

COMPETENCE: The ability to successfully manage life's obstacles by applying the necessary
abilities and knowledge is referred to as competence. High competence people are able to solve
issues, make choices, and adjust to challenging circumstances, all of which increase their
resilience.

SELF-ASSURANCE: Strong belief in one's own skills and value is a prerequisite for confidence.
People who are self-assured typically have faith in their ability to conquer challenges, which
empowers them to confront difficulties with tenacity and fortitude.

MANAGING: Coping is the capacity to control emotions, handle stress, and bounce back from
failures. Resilience is increased when people use effective coping mechanisms to deal with
hardship in a positive way.

CONTROL: Control is the feeling of independence and the conviction that one can affect life's
results. People who feel in charge of their situation are more inclined to be proactive in
overcoming obstacles and preserving resilience.

PERSONALITY: Having strong moral and ethical principles that direct action is a sign of
character. These principles provide people direction and a feeling of purpose, enabling them to
make moral choices even under trying circumstances.

CONNECTION: The ability to establish and preserve wholesome and encouraging relationships
with family, friends, and the community is referred to as connection. Strong social ties work as a
stress reliever and offer emotional support.

CONTRIBUTION: The feeling of being able to benefit society and other people is known as
contribution. Self-worth is increased and resilience is fostered when one feels useful and
involved in worthwhile activities.
 18

 THEORIES OF RESILIENCE

1)PROTECTIVE FACTORS THEORY OF RESILIENCE: Norman Garmezy

created the Protective Factors Theory of Resilience in the 1970s, and Emmy E. Werner expanded
it in 1982. According to this view, resilience is the capacity to preserve or restore adaptive
functioning and mental health in the face of severe adversity. It highlights that resilience refers to
the existence of protective variables that lessen or buffer the negative consequences of
unfavorable circumstances rather than the absence of risk. This viewpoint holds that people are
resilient when their inherent strengths and external support networks work well together to
provide favorable results even in the face of stress or adversity.

Risk factors and protective factors are the two main ideas that the theory emphasizes. Risk
factors include things like poverty, family strife, trauma, and ongoing stress that make a person
more susceptible to unfavorable consequences. Protective factors, on the other hand, are
characteristics or assets that assist people in overcoming hardship and lessening the effects of
these dangers. These protective elements might be external, like social and environmental
support networks, or internal, like personal strengths.

Protective factors improve resilience through a number of essential elements. People who
possess individual competence—which includes intelligence, problem-solving skills, self-
efficacy, and emotional control—are better equipped to deal with difficulties. A stable basis for
managing stress is provided by family support, which is defined by warmth, direction, and caring
interactions. Resilience-boosting tools and encouragement are provided by social support from
mentors, teachers, peers, and the community. Planning, decision-making, and stress management
are examples of cognitive and coping abilities that are essential for assisting people in effectively
adjusting to challenging circumstances. These elements work together to support resilience and
constructive growth in the face of hardship.
 19

2)ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM THEORY OF RESILIENCE: Urie Bronfenbrenner

first suggested the Ecological Systems Theory of Resilience in 1979, and Ann S. Masten adapted
it to resilience in 2001. According to this theory, an individual's ability to constructively adapt in
the face of adversity is determined by their dynamic interactions with the different environmental
systems in which they are embedded. It highlights the fact that resilience is a result of ongoing
interactions between individual traits and environmental factors rather than being purely an
individual trait. From the immediate environment to larger societal and cultural contexts, risk
and protective variables function on many levels.

This theory holds that a number of interrelated environmental systems have an impact on human
development and resilience. A person's immediate surroundings, such as their family, friends,
school, and neighborhood, are represented by the microsystem. At this stage, protective variables
include encouraging school environments, supportive partnerships, and healthy peer interactions.
The relationships between various microsystems, such those between family and school, are part
of the mesosystem. Stability and resilience are improved by constant communication and support
in these contexts.

The exosystem consists of external settings that have an indirect impact on the person, like social
institutions, community services, and a parent's place of employment. Even though the person
may not actively engage in these settings, having access to resources like healthcare, steady
work, and community programs can offer substantial support. The broader cultural ideals, social
conventions, economic circumstances, and laws that influence a person's experiences are all
included in the macrosystem. Resilience is supported by societies that prioritize social welfare,
equality, and education. Lastly, the chronosystem describes the aspect of time that includes
important sociohistorical events and life transitions. Over time, resilience is impacted by events
like family structure changes, educational transitions, or more general social shifts, especially
when people receive sufficient support during these times. When taken as a whole, these
 20

interrelated systems demonstrate how resilience is a dynamic process influenced by both

environmental and personal factors.

3)STRESS ADAPTATION MODEL OF RESILIENCE: Ann S. Masten (2001) and

Suniya S. Luthar (1999) developed the Stress–Adaptation (Compensatory) Model of Resilience.
According to this approach, resilience is the ability to actively adapt and employ protective
mechanisms to preserve or restore mental health and adaptive functioning in the face of severe
adversity or stress. It highlights that resilience is a dynamic process that evolves over time rather
than a fixed characteristic. The approach emphasizes that when people's inherent strengths and
external support networks cooperate, they may effectively adjust to stress. Because protective
variables assist counteract or lessen the detrimental effects of risk and stress, it is frequently
referred to as the compensatory model.

Adversity or stressors, protective or compensatory variables, and adaptive responses are the three
main ideas of the paradigm. Any circumstance that endangers a person's mental, emotional, or
physical health is referred to as adversity. Examples include trauma, poverty, family strife,
chronic sickness, or loss. In order to mitigate the consequences of stress, protective factors
include both external and internal resources, such as family ties and community resources, as
well as personal competence, optimism, and emotional control. Successful coping and positive
adjustment in the face of adversity is referred to as adaptive reaction, and it can be demonstrated
in one's physical health, social skills, academic achievement, or psychological well-being.

Adversity or stressors, protective or compensatory variables, and adaptive responses are the three
main ideas of the paradigm. Any circumstance that endangers a person's mental, emotional, or
physical health is referred to as adversity. Examples include trauma, poverty, family strife,
chronic sickness, or loss. In order to mitigate the consequences of stress, protective factors
include both external and internal resources, such as family ties and community resources, as
well as personal competence, optimism, and emotional control. Successful coping and positive
 21

adjustment in the face of adversity is referred to as adaptive reaction, and it can be demonstrated
in one's physical health, social skills, academic achievement, or psychological well-being.

4)POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY/ STRENGTH-BASED MODEL OF

RESILIENCE: Martin Seligman (1998), Ann S. Masten (2001), and George A. Bonanno
(2004) all contributed to the development of the Positive Psychology or Strength-Based Model
of Resilience. According to this paradigm, resilience is the existence and activation of positive
characteristics, strengths, and psychological abilities that allow people to flourish, develop, and
adapt effectively in the face of hardship or stressful situations. It highlights that resilience is
more than just the lack of psychological issues; rather, it is the existence of traits that enable
people to bounce back from adversity, adapt, and even flourish. The paradigm focuses on
attaining positive outcomes, including post-traumatic growth, and emphasizes the significance of
positive psychological elements like optimism, hope, courage, and meaning-making in managing
stress and trauma.

This method holds that resilience is bolstered by a number of essential elements. The idea that
good things can happen even under trying circumstances is known as optimism, and it promotes
perseverance and adaptive coping. Hope and purpose entail upholding significant objectives and
a feeling of direction in life, which serve as inspiration throughout trying times. People with
courage are able to confront uncertainty, anxiety, and hardship head-on. The capacity to modify
ideas and actions in reaction to shifting conditions is referred to as flexibility or adaptability. Joy,
thankfulness, and participation in worthwhile activities are examples of positive emotions and
engagement that improve general well-being and coping ability.

Finding meaning or purpose in difficult situations is known as "meaning-making," and it

promotes psychological resilience and personal development. When taken as a whole, these
elements show how emphasizing positive traits and strengths can foster resilience and wellbeing
even in the face of hardship.
 22

 CHARACTERISTICS OF RESILIENCE

LOW LEVELS OF RESILIENCE

DIFFICULTY COPING WITH STRESS: Might be quickly overpowered by obstacles or

failures, which impairs their capacity to remain composed in trying circumstances.

NEGATIVE THOUGHTS: They may anticipate failure and have a tendency to concentrate on
issues rather than solutions. Continually dwelling on errors and unfavorable consequences might
lower motivation and impede efficient coping.

AVOIDANCE CONDUCT: These people could shy away from challenges or retreat from trying
circumstances. They could give up easily rather than face challenges, which hinders personal
development and adaptation.

LOW FLEXIBILITY: Having trouble adapting to change or unforeseen circumstances is

frequently linked to low resilience. People may be resistant to change and find it difficult to deal
with novel or unpredictable circumstances.

FRAGILITY OF EMOTIONS: They might frequently feel depressed, anxious, or frustrated. It is

more difficult to bounce back from setbacks because of this emotional instability.

RELIANCE: People who lack resilience frequently rely significantly on other people for
encouragement and approval. Their capacity to handle obstacles in life on their own may be
diminished by this reliance.

 CONSEQUENCES OF LOW RESILIENCE

POOR STRESS MANAGEMENT :High stress levels brought on by ineffective coping can raise
the risk of burnout, anxiety, and emotional tiredness.
 23

DIFFICULTY ACHIEVING GOALS: Due to a lack of perseverance and adequate coping

mechanisms, obstacles and failures may keep people from achieving their objectives.

TENSE RELATIONSHIPS: Relationships can suffer from emotional instability, anger, or

withdrawal, which can result in arguments or social isolation.
REDUCED WELL-BEING: Reduced life satisfaction and general psychological well-being are
frequently linked to low resilience.

 HIGH LEVELS OF RESILIENCE

PERSISTENCE: Despite challenges or disappointments, resilient people never give up on their

objectives. Their perseverance enables them to overcome obstacles and succeed.

ADAPTABILITY: They can adapt to shifting circumstances or unforeseen occurrences because

they are adaptable. They are able to deal with uncertainty well because of their flexibility.

EMOTIONAL REGULATION: Strong emotional control is linked to high resilience. People are
able to control their emotions and bounce back fast from unpleasant emotional events.

SELF-RELIANCE : They have faith in their own problem-solving and self-sufficiency. Their
ability to overcome obstacles in life is strengthened by their independence.

 BENEFITS OF HIGH RESILIENCE

BETTER MENTAL WELL-BEING: Reduced stress and anxiety are associated with high
resilience, which improves mental health in general.

REACHING LONG TERM GOALS: People who are resilient are more likely to succeed
 24

because they persevere and maintain concentration in the face of adversity.

STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS: Their capacity for efficient communication and emotional

regulation aids in the development of wholesome and encouraging relationships.

INCREASED CONTENTMENT WITH LIFE: A greater sense of fulfillment, purpose, and

general life happiness are all correlated with high resilience.

 MEANING OF RESILIENCE

1. The capacity to recover quickly from difficulties or setbacks.

2. The ability to adapt positively to stress, trauma, or change.

3. Maintaining mental strength during challenging situations.

4. Bouncing back stronger after failure or adversity.

5. Using coping strategies to manage pressure effectively.

6. Sustaining hope, perseverance, and problem-solving in tough times.

 STRATEGIES TO BUILD RESILIENCE

OPTIMISM AND POSITIVE THOUGHTS: People who have an optimistic attitude are better
able to concentrate on their accomplishments, abilities, and future prospects rather than their
issues. Optimism fosters perseverance and hope, both of which are necessary for conquering
 25
obstacles.

PROBLEM-SOLVING TECHNIQUES: Planning workable solutions and breaking problems

down into manageable steps are key components of effective problem-solving. This method
makes people feel more in control and better prepared to deal with challenging circumstances.

HANDLING STRESS: Developing resilience requires effective stress management. Deep

breathing, yoga, and meditation are some methods that may ease stress, encourage relaxation,
and enhance emotional stability.

GOAL SETTING: Establishing attainable and reasonable goals gives you focus and inspiration.
It supports people in keeping track of their progress, staying focused, and feeling purposeful
even under trying circumstances.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE: Asking friends, relatives, or mentors for help offers consolation and
direction on an emotional level. Robust support networks serve as a buffer, enabling people to
deal with stress and hardship more skillfully.

SELF-CARE TECHNIQUES: Resilience requires maintaining both physical and mental well-
being through appropriate sleep, diet, exercise, and leisure activities. Self-care improves the
capacity to manage stress and maintains energy levels.

 COPING STYLES RELATED TO RESILIENCE

ACTIVE COPING: Instead than avoiding the cause of stress, active coping is dealing with it
head-on. To fix the problem, people take concrete actions like looking for answers, making
choices, or requesting assistance.

EMOTION-BASED COPING: Managing emotional reactions to stress is the main goal of this
 26
coping strategy. Psychological well-being is enhanced and emotional distress is lessened by
methods including journaling, meditation, and expressing emotions.

COGNITIVE RESTRUCTURING: Changing negative thought patterns and adopting a more

optimistic or constructive perspective on adversity are two aspects of cognitive restructuring.
This aids people in concentrating on their education, development, and problem-solving.

ACCEPTANCE: Acknowledging circumstances that cannot be altered and concentrating on

elements that are under your control is known as acceptance. This strategy helps people adjust
more successfully and lessens irritation.

SEEKING SOCIAL ASSISTANCE: Reassurance, perspective, and encouragement can be

obtained by sharing feelings and experiences with people you can trust. In order to manage stress
and preserve resilience, social support is essential.

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT: Using constructive and healthy coping mechanisms to manage

stress while preserving mental and physical health is known as adaptive coping. It encourages
resilience in the face of difficulties and long-term adjustment.

 NEED FOR THE STUDY

The contemporary university environment exposes students to a wide range of academic, social,
and personal challenges, including heavy academic workload, peer pressure, and uncertainty
regarding future career prospects. These stressors often contribute to increased levels of stress,
anxiety, and emotional difficulties among students, thereby affecting their overall well-being and
academic performance.

Emotional Intelligence (EI), defined as the ability to perceive, understand, regulate, and manage
emotions effectively, plays a crucial role in helping individuals cope with such challenges.
Resilience, on the other hand, refers to the capacity to adapt positively and recover from stressful
 27

or adverse situations. Both constructs are essential for maintaining psychological well-being and
effective functioning in demanding environments such as universities.

The present study is significant as it aims to examine the impact of emotional intelligence on
resilience among university students. Understanding this relationship is important for several
reasons. First, it helps in identifying how emotional intelligence contributes to students’ ability to
manage stress and overcome academic and personal challenges. Second, it provides a foundation
for developing targeted interventions, training programs, and counseling strategies to enhance
emotional competence and resilience among students. Third, it enables students to develop
effective coping mechanisms, improve their academic performance, and foster healthy
interpersonal relationships.

Therefore, the study is essential in promoting mental health, strengthening resilience, and
equipping students with the necessary emotional skills to successfully navigate challenges,
ultimately contributing to their overall personal and academic development.
 28

CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 29

K. Hettigoda and M. W. S. Gunawardhana (2026) explored the relationship between emotional

intelligence and resilience among psychology students. The study emphasized that emotional
intelligence and resilience are essential psychological competencies for students pursuing
psychology, as they support both academic success and professional development. The study was
based on empirical data collected from undergraduate psychology students at the University of
Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. Findings revealed a significant positive relationship between emotional
intelligence and resilience, indicating that students with higher emotional intelligence tend to
demonstrate greater psychological [Link] authors highlighted that emotional intelligence
enhances emotional regulation, empathy, and reflective thinking, which in turn strengthen
resilience. The study also emphasized the importance of integrating emotional intelligence and
resilience training into psychology curricula to prepare students for professional [Link] study
concluded that educational institutions should actively promote emotional and psychological
skill development to enhance student well-being and professional readiness.

Xing, L., Deng, S. W., and Ho, G. W. (2025) conducted a study to examine the mediating role of
emotional intelligence in the relationship between empathy and resilience among college
students. The objective of the study was to explore how emotional intelligence influences the
association between empathy and resilience in emerging adulthood. The sample consisted of 788
college students, and standardized instruments such as the Interpersonal Reactivity Index,
Emotional Intelligence Scale, and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale were used to measure the
[Link] findings revealed that empathy significantly predicted resilience, and emotional
intelligence was found to fully mediate the relationship between empathy and resilience. This
indicates that individuals with higher emotional intelligence are better able to translate empathic
abilities into resilient behavior. The study highlights the crucial role of emotional intelligence in
enhancing resilience by facilitating emotional understanding and regulation.

Yu, Pinyopornpanish, Wongpakaran, O’Donnell, and Wongpakaran (2025) conducted a study to

examine the moderating role of psychological resilience in the relationship between childhood
trauma and mental health outcomes, specifically depression and post-traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD), among older adults in Thailand. The study aimed to understand whether resilience could
buffer the long-term psychological effects of early-life adversity in an aging population. A cross-
 30

sectional research design was employed, and data were collected from 201 older patients with a
mean age of 68.6 years from geriatric psychiatry and family medicine clinics. Standardized
measures were used to assess childhood trauma, resilience, depression, and PTSD symptoms.
Moderation analysis was performed while controlling for variables such as education, family
support, and psychiatric history. The findings revealed that psychological resilience significantly
reduced the impact of childhood trauma on depression, indicating its protective role in mental
health. However, resilience did not significantly buffer PTSD symptoms, suggesting that its
influence may vary across different psychological conditions. The study concluded that while
resilience is an important factor in reducing depressive outcomes, it may have limitations in
addressing trauma-specific disorders like PTSD. These findings highlight the need for trauma-
informed interventions and further research focusing on resilience in diverse cultural and aging
populations.

Al- Fatlawi and Alrubaye (2025) conducted a study to examine the relationship between
emotional intelligence and cyberbullying among short-stature football players. The study aimed
to determine whether higher emotional intelligence is associated with lower involvement in
cyberbullying behaviors. A total of 120 male football players participated in the study. Data were
collected using specially developed and validated Cyberbullying and Emotional Intelligence
scales, and analyzed using correlation and regression [Link] findings indicated a
significant negative relationship between emotional intelligence and cyberbullying behaviors.
Players with higher emotional intelligence reported lower levels of engagement in cyberbullying.
Among the dimensions of emotional intelligence, empathy and emotional regulation showed the
strongest negative associations with cyberbullying. The study concluded that emotional
intelligence plays a crucial role in reducing aggressive online behavior and emphasized the
importance of incorporating emotional intelligence training in sports and psychological
development programs.

Kartol, A., Üztemur, S., Griffiths, M. D., and Şahin, D. (2024) conducted a study to explore the
relationship between emotional intelligence, psychological resilience, perceived stress, and life
satisfaction among university students. The primary objective of the study was to examine the
mediating roles of perceived stress and resilience in the relationship between emotional
 31

intelligence and life satisfaction. The sample consisted of 780 university students from different
regions of Türkiye. Data were collected using standardized scales, including the Emotional
Intelligence Scale, Psychological Resilience Scale, Perceived Stress Scale, and Satisfaction with
Life Scale. A multifactorial predictive correlational design was employed for [Link]
findings revealed that emotional intelligence was positively correlated with psychological
resilience and life satisfaction, and negatively correlated with perceived stress. Furthermore, both
perceived stress and resilience were found to act as mediating variables in the relationship
between emotional intelligence and life satisfaction. The results suggest that higher emotional
intelligence contributes to lower stress levels and enhances resilience, which in turn improves
overall well-being. The study emphasizes the importance of developing emotional intelligence to
promote psychological resilience and life satisfaction among students.

Abualruz, H., Hayajneh, F., Othman, E. H., Abu Sabra, M. A., Khalil, M. M., Khalifeh, A. H.,
Yasin, I., Alhamory, S., and Zyoud, A. H. (2024) conducted a study to examine the relationship
between emotional intelligence, resilience, and psychological distress among nurses in Jordan.
The study aimed to investigate how emotional intelligence and resilience influence levels of
depression, anxiety, and stress. A cross-sectional descriptive design was employed, and the
sample consisted of 152 nurses working in private [Link] findings indicated that
emotional intelligence and resilience were significantly associated with lower levels of
psychological distress, including depression, anxiety, and stress. Nurses with higher emotional
intelligence demonstrated better coping abilities and greater resilience, which helped in
managing work-related stress. The study highlights the protective role of emotional intelligence
and resilience in reducing psychological problems in high-stress professional environments.

Jabeen, S., Khan, Z. H., and Mursaleen, M. (2024) conducted a study to explore the relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience from a clinical psychological perspective. The
study aimed to understand how these two constructs interact, particularly in high-stress
environments. A mixed-method approach was used, combining quantitative assessment of
emotional intelligence and resilience with qualitative interviews to gain deeper [Link]
findings suggested that emotional intelligence and resilience are closely interconnected and
function as complementary psychological resources. The study emphasized that both variables
 32

play a crucial role in helping individuals cope with stress and adapt to challenging life situations.
However, the interaction between emotional intelligence and resilience in extreme stress
conditions requires further investigation. The study also highlighted the importance of
developing interventions to enhance both emotional intelligence and resilience for improved
well-being.

Wang, C., and Chiu, Y.-H. (2024) conducted a study to examine the role of emotional
intelligence and psychological resilience in the adaptive performance of foreign academics. The
objective of the study was to explore how emotional intelligence and resilience contribute to
individuals’ ability to adjust to new academic and cultural environments. A structured
questionnaire was administered to 800 lecturers working in higher educational institutions across
major cities in China. The data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation
modeling. The findings revealed that both emotional intelligence and psychological resilience
significantly influence adaptive performance. Furthermore, psychological resilience was found to
mediate the relationship between emotional intelligence and adaptive performance, indicating
that individuals with higher emotional intelligence are more likely to develop resilience, which in
turn enhances their ability to adapt to new environments. The study highlights the importance of
emotional intelligence and resilience in facilitating successful adjustment and performance in
challenging and dynamic contexts.

Sahanowas S. K. and Santoshi Halder (2024) examined the effect of emotional intelligence and
critical thinking disposition on resilience among students transitioning to higher education. The
study emphasized that resilience is a crucial psychological resource for first-year undergraduate
students, helping them adjust, persist, and succeed in academic environments.
The researchers conducted the study on 490 undergraduate students from West Bengal, India,
using standardized self-report instruments, including the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale, a
profile of emotional competency, and a critical thinking disposition assessment. The study aimed
to analyze both the individual and combined influence of emotional intelligence and critical
thinking on [Link] from Pearson correlation analysis indicated that resilience was
positively associated with both emotional intelligence and critical thinking disposition. Further,
 33
multiple regression analysis revealed that both emotional intelligence and critical thinking
contributed significantly—both uniquely and jointly—to the prediction of resilience. However,
emotional intelligence emerged as a stronger predictor compared to critical thinking disposition.
The study concluded that emotionally intelligent students, along with those possessing strong
critical thinking abilities, are better equipped to handle academic transition challenges. The
authors recommended that colleges and counseling services implement targeted interventions to
enhance both emotional intelligence and critical thinking skills in order to strengthen student
resilience.

Nguyen, N. N., Nham, T. P., and Takahashi, Y. (2023) conducted a study to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among university students during the
COVID-19 crisis. The study employed a large-scale quantitative design, collecting data from
2,252 students across various universities in Vietnam during the pandemic. The objective was to
understand how different components of emotional intelligence influence resilience under
stressful conditions. Advanced statistical techniques, including mediation analysis, were used to
analyze the data. The findings revealed that positive and negative affect fully mediated the
relationship between emotional intelligence components and resilience. Specifically, self-
emotion appraisal was positively associated with resilience through its effect on emotional
experiences. However, some components, such as other-emotion appraisal, showed complex
effects by increasing negative affect while decreasing positive affect. Additionally, emotional
regulation was not directly related to resilience but showed an indirect association through
positive affect. Overall, the study highlights the complex and indirect role of emotional
intelligence in enhancing resilience during crisis situations.

Valverde - Janer, M., Ortega-Caballero, M., Ortega-Caballero, I., Ortega-Caballero, A., and
Segura-Robles, A. (2023) conducted a study to examine the factors associated with the
development of emotional intelligence and resilience among university students pursuing degrees
in educational sciences. The primary objective of the study was to analyze the relationship
between emotional intelligence, resilience, and personality variables. A quantitative research
design was employed, including non-experimental, descriptive, comparative, and correlational
 34

[Link] findings revealed that students demonstrated above-average levels of both

emotional intelligence and resilience, with resilience showing the highest values. A positive
relationship was observed between emotional intelligence and resilience, particularly
highlighting emotional clarity and emotional regulation (repair) as important contributors to
resilience. Gender differences were also noted, with males exhibiting higher resilience levels,
while females showed higher levels of certain emotional traits. Additionally, students from
physical activity and sports sciences demonstrated higher emotional intelligence and resilience
compared to other groups. Overall, the study emphasizes the significant role of emotional
intelligence, especially emotional regulation, in enhancing resilience among university students.

Versel, J. L., Plezia, A., Jennings, L., Sontag-Milobsky, I., Adams, W., and Shahid, R. (2023)
conducted a study to examine the effectiveness of an emotional intelligence and resilience
training program among preclinical medical students. The study aimed to determine whether a
structured educational intervention could improve emotional intelligence and stress management
skills. The program consisted of six sessions focusing on emotional intelligence development
and resilience-building strategies. A total of 70 students participated, and emotional intelligence
was assessed before and after the intervention using the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory.
The findings revealed a significant improvement in emotional intelligence scores after the
intervention, along with enhancements in all related subcomponents, including stress
management and well-being. The results suggest that emotional intelligence and resilience skills
can be effectively developed through structured training programs, which in turn may enhance
students’ ability to cope with stress and improve overall well-being.

Torres-Gázquez, S. C., López-García, G. D., and Granero-Gallegos, A. (2023) conducted a study

to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among secondary
school physical education students during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives of the study
were to analyze the correlation between emotional intelligence and resilience, to examine gender
differences, and to determine whether emotional intelligence predicts resilience. A cross-
sectional, descriptive design was used, and the sample consisted of 150 students aged between 12
 35

and 18 years. Standardized tools such as the Emotional Quotient Inventory and the Resilience
Scale were used for data collection. The findings revealed a positive and significant relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience. Emotional intelligence was also found to be a
significant predictor of resilience. Additionally, gender differences were observed, with higher
levels of emotional intelligence and resilience reported among male students compared to female
students. The study highlights the important role of emotional intelligence in enhancing
resilience, particularly in challenging situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Jiménez -Rodríguez, D., Molero Jurado, M. M., Pérez-Fuentes, M. C., Arrogante, O., Oropesa-
Ruiz, N. F., and Gázquez-Linares, J. J. (2022) conducted a study to examine the effects of a non-
technical skills training program on emotional intelligence and resilience among undergraduate
nursing students. The study employed a pre-experimental longitudinal design with pre- and post-
intervention assessments. The sample consisted of 60 nursing students who participated in a
structured psychoeducational program that included classroom sessions, workshops, and
individual activities. The findings revealed a significant improvement in emotional intelligence
dimensions, particularly emotional clarity and emotional repair, after the intervention.
Additionally, resilience levels increased significantly following the program. The study
highlights that structured training programs can effectively enhance emotional intelligence and
resilience, emphasizing their importance in personal and professional development.

Ogbeta, M. (2022) conducted a study to examine the relationship between academic resilience,
emotional intelligence, and academic performance among undergraduate students. The study
aimed to explore how these psychological constructs contribute to academic success. The sample
consisted of 179 final-year undergraduate students, and partial least squares modeling was used
to analyze the relationships among the [Link] findings indicated that emotional
intelligence and academic resilience are important personal resources that significantly
contribute to academic performance. The study emphasizes that integrating emotional
intelligence and resilience into educational practices can enhance students’ adaptability,
performance, and overall success.
 36

Zheng, Chu, Zhang, Ding, Song, Liu, Peng, Cao, Zou, and Yi (2022) conducted a study to
examine the mediating roles of psychological resilience and daily stress in the relationship
between childhood trauma and depression among individuals with psychological disorders. The
study aimed to understand how these psychological factors influence the impact of early-life
trauma on depressive symptoms in adulthood. A cross-sectional research design was employed,
and data were collected from 569 clinical patients using standardized instruments, including the
Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale
(CES-D), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC).
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the relationships among childhood
trauma, resilience, daily stress, and depression. The findings revealed that both psychological
resilience and daily stress partially mediated the relationship between childhood trauma and
depression. Childhood trauma had both direct and indirect effects on depressive symptoms, with
a significant chain mediation pathway (resilience → daily stress) accounting for a substantial
portion of the overall effect. The study concluded that enhancing resilience can help individuals
manage daily stress more effectively, thereby reducing the negative impact of childhood trauma
on depression.

Zheng, Y., Cai, D., Zhao, J.-L., Yang, C., Xia, T., and Xu, Z. (2021) conducted a longitudinal
study to examine the bidirectional relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience
among adolescents. The study aimed to explore how emotional intelligence and resilience
influence each other over time, as well as the role of contextual factors. The sample consisted of
988 students, and data were collected across three time points using standardized scales.
Structural equation modeling was employed to analyze the relationships among the [Link]
findings indicated that emotional intelligence positively predicted resilience over time, whereas
resilience did not significantly predict emotional intelligence in later stages. The study also
identified that contextual factors such as social support positively influenced both emotional
intelligence and resilience, while negative factors such as family conflict and bullying had
adverse effects. The results highlight the dynamic and developmental nature of the relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience.
 37

Thomas, C., and Zolkoski, S. (2020) conducted a study to examine the relationship among
emotional intelligence, emotional regulation, resilience, and perceived stress among
undergraduate students. The study aimed to understand how these psychological variables
interact to influence stress levels. The sample consisted of 277 undergraduate students, and
standardized instruments such as the Brief Emotional Intelligence Scale, Emotion Regulation
Questionnaire, Brief Resilience Scale, and Perceived Stress Scale were used. Path analysis was
employed to analyze the relationships among the variables. The findings revealed that resilience
was a significant negative predictor of perceived stress, indicating that higher resilience is
associated with lower stress levels. Additionally, emotional intelligence was found to have an
indirect effect on perceived stress through emotional regulation and resilience. The study
highlights that emotional intelligence contributes to resilience and stress management through
indirect pathways, emphasizing its importance in promoting psychological well-being among
students.

Thomas, C., and Zolkoski, S. (2020) conducted a study to examine the relationship among
emotional intelligence, emotional regulation, resilience, and perceived stress among
undergraduate students. The study aimed to understand how these psychological variables
interact to influence stress levels. The sample consisted of 277 undergraduate students, and
standardized instruments such as the Brief Emotional Intelligence Scale, Emotion Regulation
Questionnaire, Brief Resilience Scale, and Perceived Stress Scale were used. Path analysis was
employed to analyze the relationships among the [Link] findings revealed that resilience
was a significant negative predictor of perceived stress, indicating that higher resilience is
associated with lower stress levels. Additionally, emotional intelligence was found to have
anindirect effect on perceived stress through emotional regulation and resilience. The study
highlights that emotional intelligence contributes to resilience and stress management through
indirect pathways, emphasizing its importance in promoting psychological well-being among
students.

Bano, Z., and Pervaiz, S. (2020) conducted a study to examine the predictive relationship
between emotional intelligence, resilience, and psychological well-being among medical
students. The study employed a cross-sectional correlational design with a sample of 200
 38

students. Standardized scales were used to measure emotional intelligence, resilience, and
psychological well-being, and regression analysis was [Link] findings revealed a
significant predictive relationship between emotional intelligence, resilience, and psychological
well-being. Both emotional intelligence and resilience were found to contribute positively to
students’ mental health and overall well-being. The study highlights that these psychological
constructs play a vital role in promoting positive development and healthy functioning among
students.

Deepanjana Varshney and Nirbhay Krishna Varshney (2020) conducted a study examining
workforce agility and its relationship with emotional intelligence and workforce performance in
small entrepreneurial firms in India. The study highlighted that small businesses, although vital
to economic development, often face challenges due to limited resources and managerial
expertise. In such contexts, psychological and behavioral competencies like emotional
intelligence become important for improving employee [Link] researchers collected
data through a survey of six small entrepreneurial firms in India. Workforce performance was
conceptualized into three dimensions: task performance, adaptive performance, and contextual
performance. The study specifically investigated whether workforce agility mediates the
relationship between emotional intelligence and different dimensions of [Link]
revealed that workforce agility significantly mediated the relationship between emotional
intelligence and both adaptive performance and contextual performance. However, no significant
mediating effect was found for task performance. This suggests that emotionally intelligent
employees are more likely to demonstrate flexibility and adaptability in dynamic work
environments, which enhances overall performance beyond routine task [Link] study
concluded that in volatile and uncertain business environments, emotional intelligence
contributes to improved workforce performance primarily through enhancing workforce agility.
The authors emphasized that small entrepreneurial firms can improve employee productivity by
developing emotional intelligence and agility-based training programs.

Niyogi, J., Yesodharan, R., and Dsa, R. J. (2020) conducted a study to examine the relationship
between emotional intelligence, self-esteem, and assertiveness among South Indian youth. The
study aimed to explore how these psychological variables are interrelated. A descriptive cross-
 39

sectional design was adopted, and data were collected from 432 youth aged between 18 and 23
years using standardized tools including the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test,
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and Youth Assertiveness Scale. Pearson’s correlation analysis was
used to assess relationships among variables. The findings indicated that emotional intelligence
had a weak but significant positive relationship with both self-esteem and assertiveness.
Additionally, a positive relationship was observed between self-esteem and assertiveness. The
study suggests that improving self-esteem and assertiveness may help individuals better manage
their emotions and enhance emotional intelligence. Overall, the results emphasize the importance
of psychological development in youth for better emotional functioning.

Droppert, K., Downey, L., Lomas, J., Bunnett, E. R., Simmons, N., Wheaton, A., Nield, C., and
Stough, C. (2019) conducted a study to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence,
resilience, and scholastic performance among adolescent male students. The primary objective of
the study was to investigate whether resilience mediates the relationship between emotional
intelligence and academic achievement. The sample consisted of 153 year-10 male students.
Standardized instruments such as the Adolescent Swinburne Emotional Intelligence Test and the
Resiliency Scale for Children and Adolescents were used, along with academic performance
data. The findings revealed that both emotional intelligence and resilience significantly predicted
academic performance in various subjects. Additionally, resilience was found to mediate the
relationship between certain dimensions of emotional intelligence and scholastic performance,
particularly in terms of grade point average and science scores. The study highlights the
important role of emotional intelligence and resilience in influencing academic outcomes and
suggests that improving these skills may enhance students’ academic performance.

Tang (2019) conducted a study to explore the relationships among resilience, self-compassion,
achievement emotions, test anxiety, intolerance of uncertainty, and academic performance
among undergraduate students. The study aimed to understand how psychological factors
interact to influence students’ emotional and academic [Link] study included 202
undergraduate students from universities in Hong Kong, and data were collected using self-
report questionnaires. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and path analysis were used to
examine the relationships among the [Link] findings indicated that self-compassion
 40

positively predicted resilience, and resilience emerged as a strong predictor of intolerance of

uncertainty. Additionally, cognitive test anxiety showed significant associations with self-
compassion and other emotional factors. The study concluded that resilience and self-
compassion play important roles in shaping students’ emotional responses to academic
challenges and can influence their ability to cope with uncertainty and anxiety.

Sarrionandia, A., Ramos-Díaz, E., and Fernández-Lasarte, O. (2018) conducted a cross-country

study to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence, resilience, and perceived stress
among university students. The main objective of the study was to investigate how emotional
intelligence and resilience interact to influence stress levels across different cultural contexts.
The sample consisted of 696 undergraduate students from universities in the United States and
the Basque Country in Spain. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the relationships
among the variables. The findings revealed that emotional intelligence and resilience were both
negatively associated with perceived stress. Furthermore, resilience was found to act as a
mediating variable between emotional intelligence and stress, indicating that individuals with
higher emotional intelligence tend to develop greater resilience, which in turn reduces their
perceived stress levels. The results were consistent across both cultural groups, suggesting the
universal importance of these variables. The study highlights that enhancing emotional
intelligence and resilience can be effective in reducing stress among students.

Cleary, M., Visentin, D., West, S., Lopez, V., and Kornhaber, R. (2018) conducted an integrative
review to examine the role of emotional intelligence and resilience among undergraduate nursing
students. The objective of the study was to synthesize existing research findings on how these
psychological constructs influence students’ academic and professional performance. Data were
collected from multiple electronic databases including CINAHL, PubMed, ERIC, Scopus, and
PsycINFO, and a total of fourteen studies were included in the review. The findings indicated
that resilience has a positive relationship with academic performance and professional practice
among nursing students. Students with higher resilience were better able to cope with academic
and clinical challenges. While emotional intelligence was found to play a role in students’
development, the evidence regarding its direct impact on communication skills, academic
success, and retention was found to be inconclusive. Overall, the study highlights the importance
 41

of resilience in managing academic and professional demands, while suggesting that further
research is needed to establish the role of emotional intelligence more clearly.

McCrimmon, A. W., Climie, E. A., and Huynh, S. (2018) conducted a study to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among at-risk children, including
those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and high-functioning autism
spectrum disorder (HFASD). The sample consisted of 54 children aged 8 to 12 years, including
children with ADHD, HFASD, and typically developing individuals. Standardized tools such as
the Resilience Scales for Children and Adolescents and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient
Inventory were used for data collection, and statistical techniques such as analysis of variance
and correlation were [Link] findings revealed that there were no significant differences
between the groups in terms of emotional intelligence and resilience. However, unique
relationships between emotional intelligence and resilience were observed within each group.
The study suggests that emotional intelligence may play an important role in enhancing
resilience, particularly in clinical populations, although the nature of this relationship may vary
across different groups.

Nemati Sogolitappeh, F., Hedayat, A., Rezaee Arjmand, M., and Khaledian, M. (2018)
conducted a study to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence, spiritual
intelligence, and resilience among undergraduate students. The sample consisted of 100 students
selected using random sampling techniques. Standardized questionnaires were used to assess
emotional intelligence, spiritual intelligence, and resilience, and statistical analyses such as
correlation and regression were [Link] findings indicated a significant positive relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience. Additionally, both emotional intelligence and
spiritual intelligence were found to significantly predict resilience, accounting for a substantial
proportion of variance. The study emphasizes that emotional intelligence plays a key role in
enhancing resilience among students, along with other psychological factors.

Tehranineshat et al. (2020) conducted a study to examine the relationship between resilience,
self-efficacy, and quality of life among burn patients. The study included 305 hospitalized
patients and used a descriptive cross-sectional design. Data were collected using standardized
 42

tools including the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, self-efficacy scale, and Burn-Specific
Health Scale. Statistical analyses such as Pearson correlation and regression were performed.
The findings revealed significant positive correlations between resilience and self-efficacy,
resilience and quality of life, and self-efficacy and quality of life. This indicates that higher
resilience and self-efficacy are associated with better adjustment and improved life quality
among patients. The study concluded that enhancing resilience and self-efficacy can help
individuals cope more effectively with traumatic and stressful life conditions.

Ding, Han, Zhang, Wang, Gong, and Yang (2017) conducted a study to investigate the mediating
and moderating roles of resilience in the relationship between childhood trauma and depressive
symptoms among adolescents. The study aimed to determine whether resilience acts as a
protective factor that can reduce the adverse psychological effects of early-life [Link] study
included a large sample of 6,406 school-going adolescents aged between 9 and 17 years from
multiple schools in China. Data were collected using self-report questionnaires measuring
childhood trauma, resilience, and depressive [Link] findings indicated that resilience
played both a mediating and moderating role in the relationship between childhood trauma and
depression. Specifically, resilience partially mediated the effect of trauma on depressive
symptoms and also weakened the strength of this relationship. The study concluded that
resilience is a crucial protective factor, and interventions aimed at strengthening resilience may
be effective in preventing and reducing depression among adolescents exposed to childhood
trauma.

Baba, M. M. (2017) conducted a study to examine the relationship between emotional

intelligence, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction among university teachers. The
study aimed to explore how emotional intelligence influences job satisfaction and organizational
commitment, as well as the role of demographic factors such as gender and age. The research
adopted a descriptive survey design, and data were collected from 223 university teachers. The
findings indicated that emotional intelligence had a positive and significant relationship with
both organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Additionally, organizational commitment
was positively related to job satisfaction. The study also found significant differences based on
gender and age in relation to emotional intelligence, organizational commitment, and job
 43

satisfaction. Overall, the study highlights the importance of emotional intelligence in improving
commitment and satisfaction levels among teachers.

Magnano, P., Craparo, G., and Paolillo, A. (2016) conducted a study to examine the role of
emotional intelligence and resilience in achievement motivation within the framework of
positive organizational behavior. The study aimed to investigate whether emotional intelligence
mediates the relationship between resilience and achievement motivation. The sample consisted
of 488 Italian workers aged between 18 and 55 years. The findings indicated that emotional
intelligence has a significant positive relationship with resilience and plays a crucial role in
enhancing achievement motivation. Emotional intelligence was also found to act as an
antecedent to resilience, suggesting that individuals with higher emotional intelligence are more
likely to develop resilience. The study highlights the importance of emotional intelligence in
influencing both resilience and motivational outcomes.

Cejudo, J., López-Delgado, M. L., and Rubio, M. J. (2016) conducted a study to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence, resilience, and life satisfaction among university
students. The sample consisted of 432 students aged between 17 and 59 years. Standardized self-
report measures, including the Trait Meta-Mood Scale, Resilience Scale, and Life Satisfaction
Scale, were used to collect [Link] findings indicated a significant positive relationship between
emotional intelligence, particularly emotional clarity and emotional repair, and life satisfaction.
Similarly, resilience was positively associated with life satisfaction. Regression analysis further
confirmed that emotional intelligence and resilience significantly predict well-being outcomes.
However, emotional attention showed a negative association with life satisfaction. The study
emphasizes the importance of emotional intelligence and resilience in promoting overall well-
being among students.

Frajo-Apor, B., Pardeller, S., Kemmler, G., and Hofer, A. (2016) conducted a study to examine
the relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among mental health professionals
working with patients suffering from serious mental illness. The study aimed to determine
whether emotional intelligence and resilience act as protective factors in high-stress professional
environments. A cross-sectional design was used, and the sample consisted of 61 mental health
 44

professionals and 61 control participants. Standardized instruments, including the Mayer-

Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test and the Resilience Scale, were used to assess the
[Link] findings indicated that both groups demonstrated average levels of emotional
intelligence and high levels of resilience, with no significant differences between them.
However, correlation analysis revealed a small but positive relationship between emotional
intelligence and resilience. The results suggest that although emotional intelligence is associated
with resilience, the strength of this relationship is relatively weak. The study highlights that
emotional intelligence may still serve as a potential factor for enhancing resilience through
training and development.

Bande, B., Fernández-Ferrín, P., Varela, J. A., and Jaramillo, F. (2015) conducted a study to
examine the influence of emotional intelligence and resilience on salesperson propensity to leave
their organization. The study aimed to understand how these emotional skills affect workplace
outcomes such as emotional exhaustion and work–family conflict. The sample consisted of 209
salespeople from 105 enterprises across various industries. The study employed statistical
analysis to examine both direct and indirect relationships among the [Link] findings
revealed that emotional intelligence and resilience significantly contribute to reducing emotional
exhaustion and work-related stress, which in turn decreases employees’ intention to leave their
organization. Both variables were found to have direct and indirect effects on turnover intention
through their impact on work–family conflict and emotional exhaustion. Additionally, leadership
factors were found to moderate these relationships. Overall, the study highlights the importance
of emotional intelligence and resilience in managing stress and improving occupational
outcomes.

Akbari, A., and Khormaiee, F. (2015) conducted a study to examine the mediating role of
resilience in the relationship between emotional intelligence and psychological well-being
among high school students. The study was based on a positive psychology framework and
aimed to understand how emotional intelligence contributes to mental health outcomes. The
sample consisted of 405 high school students selected through multi-stage cluster sampling.
Standardized instruments were used to measure emotional intelligence, resilience, and
psychological well-being, and regression analysis was employed to test the proposed [Link]
 45

findings revealed that resilience plays a partial mediating role between emotional intelligence
and psychological well-being. Emotional intelligence was found to have both direct and indirect
effects on psychological well-being, with resilience acting as an important mechanism through
which emotional intelligence enhances mental health. The study highlights the significant role of
emotional intelligence in promoting resilience and improving overall psychological well-being.

Keshtegar, M., and Jenaabadi, H. (2015) conducted a study to examine the relationship among
emotional intelligence, spiritual intelligence, and resilience among university students at the
University of Zabol. The study adopted a descriptive survey design, and data were collected
using standardized instruments such as the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire, the Adult
Resilience Scale, and the Spiritual Intelligence Inventory. The sample consisted of university
students selected from the [Link] findings indicated a significant positive relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience among students. Additionally, spiritual
intelligence was also found to be positively associated with resilience. The study highlights that
emotional intelligence plays an important role in enhancing resilience, while also suggesting that
other psychological factors, such as spiritual intelligence, may contribute to resilience
development.

Schneider, T. R., Lyons, J. B., and Khazon, S. (2013) conducted a study to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence and the stress process. The study aimed to determine
whether individuals with higher emotional intelligence exhibit better resilience when exposed to
stress. A total of 126 participants were included in the study, who completed an ability-based
measure of emotional intelligence and were then exposed to two stress-inducing situations. The
researchers assessed stress appraisal, emotional responses, and physiological reactions over
[Link] findings revealed that higher emotional intelligence was associated with lower threat
appraisal, reduced negative emotional responses, and better maintenance of positive affect.
Individuals with higher emotional intelligence demonstrated more adaptive, challenge-oriented
physiological responses to stress, indicating greater resilience. However, gender differences were
observed in the outcomes. Overall, the study provides strong evidence that emotional intelligence
plays a significant role in enhancing stress resilience.
 46

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY
 47

Problem statement:

The present study is attempted to find the relationship between emotional intelligence and
resilience among university students and to determine whether emotional intelligence
significantly predicts resilience.

Aim:

To study the relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among university
students.

Objectives of the Study:

[Link] assess the level of emotional intelligence among university students.

[Link] determine the level of resilience among university students.

[Link] find the relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience.

[Link] determine the impact of emotional intelligence on resilience.

Hypotheses:

There will be a significant relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among
university students.
 48

Research design:
The present study adopted a quantitative research approach with a descriptive and correlation
research design. The study is descriptive in nature as it aims to describe the levels of emotional
intelligence and resilience among university students, and correlation as it examines the
relationship and predictive role between the variables. No variables are within the researcher’s
direct control or manipulation . Hence the design was adopted because the researcher is
expecting to find the correlation.

Samples and sampling technique:

Sample size of the study is 157 which involves university students of age group 18 to 25. This
study involves 84 males and 73 females. The sample was selected using purposive sampling
technique, as the participants were chosen based on certain criteria, not just any random people.

Inclusion criteria:

[Link] sample will involve both boys and girls.

2. The sample will involve university students aged between 18-25 years.

3. The participants will be from all branches and from all universities.

4. Students who were able to understand the questionnaire.

Exclusion criteria:

1. Individuals below 18 years and above 25 years of age.

[Link]-university students.

[Link] who were unable to understand the questionnaire properly.

 49

Variables:

Emotional Intelligence – Independent variable

Resilience – Dependent variable

Statistical analysis:

The collected data were analyzed using the following statistical methods: Descriptive Statistics
Mean, Standard Deviation, Frequency, and Percentage , Pearson Correlation to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience, Regression Analysis to determine the
predictive role of emotional intelligence on resilience .t-test / ANOVA to analyze differences
based on demographic variables.

Tools used:

The Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SSEIT), also known as the Assessing
Emotions Scale, was developed by Schutte, Malouff, Hall, Haggerty, Cooper, Golden, and
Dornheim (1998). The SSEIT is a widely used self-report measure designed to assess general
emotional intelligence. It is suitable for adolescents and adults, typically aged 16 years and
above. The scale is based on the ability model of emotional intelligence and evaluates how
individuals perceive, understand, regulate, and utilize emotions. The scale consists of 33 items
and uses a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 =
Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree. The total score is obtained by summing all 33 items. Reverse
scoring is applied to items 5, 28, and 33. The average score is approximately 124. Scores below
111 indicate low emotional intelligence, whereas scores above 137 indicate high emotional
intelligence. The scale demonstrates good internal consistency reliability, with a Cronbach’s
alpha of approximately 0.87 reported in previous studies. The SSEIT has established construct
validity and criterion-related validity and has been found to correlate positively with optimism,
 50

emotional regulation, and interpersonal relationships, indicating that it is a valid measure of

emotional intelligence. The SSEIT is widely used in research studies, including the present
study, as well as in educational and organizational settings. It also helps in personal development
and counseling and can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of training programs aimed at
improving emotional intelligence.

The Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) was developed by Smith, Dalen, Wiggins, Tooley,
Christopher, and Bernard in 2008. It is designed to assess an individual’s ability to bounce back
or recover from stress and adversity, focusing specifically on resilience as the capacity to recover
from difficult situations. The scale consists of six items and uses a 5-point Likert response
format, where 1 indicates strongly disagree, 2 indicates disagree, 3 indicates neutral, 4 indicates
agree, and 5 indicates strongly agree. Reverse scoring is applied to items 2, 4, and 6. The total
score is calculated by summing the responses to all six items, yielding a score range from 6 to
30, and then dividing the total by the number of items to obtain a mean score. The interpretation
of scores is as follows: scores ranging from 1.00 to 2.99 indicate low resilience, scores from 3.00
to 4.30 indicate normal resilience, and scores from 4.31 to 5.00 indicate high resilience. The
Brief Resilience Scale is suitable for use with adults and late adolescents, typically aged 17 years
and above, making it appropriate for the present study, which includes participants aged 18 to 25
years. The scale is widely used in research studies, educational settings, clinical and counseling
contexts, and organizational environments, and it is also useful in evaluating stress management
and coping interventions. The BRS has demonstrated good internal consistency reliability, with
Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from approximately 0.80 to 0.91 in previous studies.
Furthermore, the scale has established construct and convergent validity, as it has been found to
correlate positively with well-being and effective coping and negatively with stress, anxiety, and
depression, indicating that it is a valid and reliable measure of resilience.
 51

Demographic details:

Age:

The durartion of an object’s or person’s experience.

Gender:

The socially constructed qualities of males,females, boys and girls are referred to as gender.

Place of Residence:

Refers to the type of area where an individual lives.

Socioeconomic status:

A means of classifying people according to their level of education, annual income and
employment.

Residential status:

Refers to the living arrangement of an individual in relation to their educational institution.

Birth order:

The biological or total order refers to the order in which children are born throughout the course
of her lifetime.

Number of siblings:

Total count of brother and sisters an individual has within their family.

Social media usage:

 52

The extent to which individuals engage with social networking platforms.

Type of institution:

The nature of the educational organization in which the individual is enrolled.

Procedure:

The researcher had investigated to show the relationship between the emotional intelligence and
resilience. Secondly, the researcher search for the questionnaires and scales with validity,
reliability with scoring and interpretation. The questionnaire is The Schutte Self Report
Emotional Intelligence Scale by was developed by Schutte, Malouff, Hall, Haggerty, Cooper, Golden,
and Dornheim (1998) and The Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) was developed by Smith, Dalen,
Wiggins, Tooley, Christopher, and Bernard in 2008. All the questionnaire were given to
university students. After data collection put scores for all the data. For both the questionnaires
the researcher did reverse scoring for some questions and after getting the scorings the researcher
did the interpretation.
 53

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 54

Table-1 Distribution of the sample based on age.

Age N %
18-21 48 30.6
22-23 60 38.2
24-25 49 31.2

Figure 1: Percentage analysis of age

 55

Result

The distribution of participants based on age indicates that the total sample (N = 157) was
divided into three age groups. Among them, 60 participants (38.2%) belonged to the 22–23 age
group, representing the largest proportion of the sample. This was followed by 49 participants
(31.2%) in the 24–25 age group and 48 participants (30.6%) in the 18–21 age group. The age
groups of 18–21 and 24–25 showed nearly equal representation, while the 22–23 group had a
comparatively higher percentage of participants.

Discussion

The distribution of participants across the three age groups appears to be relatively balanced,
with each group contributing a substantial proportion to the overall sample. Such a distribution is
beneficial for statistical analysis, as it reduces the possibility of bias and allows for more reliable
comparisons across age groups. Although the 22–23 age group had a slightly higher
representation, the difference is not large enough to affect the overall balance of the sample.

The higher proportion of participants in the 22–23 age group may reflect the typical age range of
students who are in the later stages of undergraduate education or early stages of postgraduate
studies. At this stage, students are likely to have greater academic exposure and life experience,
which may influence psychological variables such as emotional intelligence and resilience.

Overall, the fairly even distribution of participants ensures that the findings of the study are
representative across different age groups. This enhances the generalizability of the results and
supports meaningful comparison and interpretation in further statistical analyses.
 56

Table 2: Distribution of the sample based on gender.

Gender N %
Male 84 53.5
Female 73 46.5

Figure 2: Percentage analysis of gender

Result

The distribution of participants based on gender shows that out of the total sample (N = 157), 84
participants (53.5%) were male and 73 participants (46.5%) were female. The findings indicate
 57

that male participants constituted a slightly higher proportion of the sample compared to female
participants. However, the difference between the two groups is relatively small.

Discussion

The gender distribution of the sample appears to be fairly balanced, with both male and female
participants adequately represented. Although males constitute a slightly higher percentage, the
difference is not substantial enough to create a significant imbalance. This balanced
representation is advantageous for the study, as it minimizes the potential for gender bias and
allows for more reliable and meaningful comparisons between male and female participants.

Including participants from both genders enhances the overall validity and generalizability of the
findings, as it ensures that the results reflect diverse perspectives and experiences. Since
emotional intelligence and resilience may vary across individuals, having a balanced gender
distribution supports a more comprehensive understanding of these psychological variables
among university students.

Table 3: Distribution of the sample based on place of residence.

Place of Residence N %
Urban 100 63.7
Rural 57 36.3
 58

Figure 3: Percentage analysis of place of residence.

Result

The distribution of participants based on place of residence shows that out of the total sample (N
= 157), 100 participants (63.7%) were from urban areas, while 57 participants (36.3%) were
from rural areas. The findings indicate that a majority of the participants belonged to urban areas,
with a comparatively smaller proportion from rural backgrounds.

Discussion

The distribution indicates that urban participants are more represented than rural participants in
the sample. However, both groups are sufficiently represented, allowing for meaningful
comparisons between students from different residential backgrounds. The inclusion of
participants from both urban and rural areas enhances the diversity of the sample and provides a
 59

broader understanding of emotional intelligence and resilience across different living

[Link] the number of urban participants is higher, the presence of a substantial
proportion of rural participants ensures that the findings are not limited to a single group. This
contributes to the overall reliability and generalizability of the study. Differences in lifestyle,
access to resources, and social environments between urban and rural areas may influence
psychological variables, making such representation important for comprehensive analysis.

Table 4: Distribution of the sample based on socio-economic status.

Socio-economic status N %
Low 25 15.9
Middle 130 82.8
High 2 1.3

Figure 4: Percentage analysis of socio-economic status

 60

Result
Out of the entire sample (N = 157), 25 participants (15.9%) belonged to the low socioeconomic
group, 130 participants (82.8%) to the middle socioeconomic group, and only 2 participants
(1.3%) to the high socioeconomic group, according to the frequency and percentage distribution
of socioeconomic status. According to the findings, most of the participants came from middle-
class backgrounds.

Discussion

With very little participation from the high socioeconomic category, the distribution shows a
significant concentration of individuals in the middle socioeconomic group. The extremely small
number of participants in the high group may limit the capacity to establish trustworthy
comparisons involving this category, even though the existence of low and intermediate groups
permits relevant research. When analyzing results pertaining to socioeconomic status, this
discrepancy should be taken into account.
Despite this drawback, the sample is somewhat more diverse due to the participation of
individuals from various socioeconomic backgrounds. The results, however, might mostly
represent the experiences of this group because the majority of participants are in the middle.

Table 5: Distribution of the sample based on residential status.

Residential status N %
Day scholar 82 52.2
Hosteler 75 47.8
 61

Figure 5: Percentage analysis based of residential status

Result

Out of the whole sample (N = 157), 82 participants (52.2%) were day scholars and 75
participants (47.8%) were hostellers, according to the frequency and percentage distribution of
residential status. The findings show that, with a marginally higher proportion of day scholars,
both categories are about equally represented.

Discussion
Day scholars and hostellers make up almost equal shares of the sample, indicating a highly
balanced residential status distribution. The study benefits from this balanced representation
since it makes it possible to compare the two groups in a meaningful way without significantly
favoring one group over the other. The analysis's overall reliability is unaffected by the little
 62
numerical discrepancy.
Since day scholars and hostellers may have different daily schedules, social connections, and
housing situations, include both groups offers a more comprehensive perspective of students'
experiences. By guaranteeing that the results represent a range of residential circumstances
within the academic setting, this diversity enhances the study.

Table 6: Distribution of the sample based on birth order.

Birth order N %
First-born 75 47.8
Middle child 13 8.3
Last born 59 37.6
Only child 10 6.4

Figure 6: Percentage analysis based of birth order

 63

Result

Out of the entire sample (N = 157), 75 participants (47.8%) were first-born, 13 participants
(8.3%) were middle children, 59 participants (37.6%) were last-born, and 10 participants (6.4%)
were only children, according to the frequency and percentage distribution of birth order.
According to the findings, the largest group of participants were first-borns, followed by last-
borns; middle children and only children made up lower percentages of the sample.

Discussion

With comparatively fewer middle children and only children, the distribution reveals that the
bulk of participants are either first-born or last-born. First and last-born people are more
represented in the sample, which may be a reflection of typical family arrangements where two-
child households are more common. Although the sample is more diverse due to the inclusion of
all birth order categories, comprehensive comparisons for middle and only children may be
limited due to their lesser numbers.

Despite this disparity, taking into account various birth order classifications offers insightful
information about family dynamics and how they could affect psychological factors. Overall, the
distribution enables a basic knowledge of how birth order is represented within the sample, albeit
the variance in group sizes should be taken into account when interpreting the results.
 64

Table 7: Distribution of the sample based on number of siblings.

Number of siblings N %
None 15 9.6
One 107 68.2
Two 26 16.6
More than two 9 5.7

Figure 7: Percentage analysis of number of siblings

 65

Result

Out of the entire sample (N = 157), 15 participants (9.6%) had no siblings, 107 participants
(68.2%) had one, 26 participants (16.6%) had two, and 9 participants (5.7%) had more than two
siblings, according to the frequency and percentage distribution of the number of siblings. The
findings show that most individuals had a single sibling.

Discussion

According to the distribution, the majority of participants have one sibling, whereas lesser
percentages belong to the groups with no siblings, two siblings, and more than two siblings. This
indicates that the most prevalent trend in the sample is having one sibling. While certain groups
have comparatively lower representation, comparison is possible due to the existence of
participants in all categories.

The strength of comparisons involving these groups may be limited since some categories,
especially those with no siblings and those with more than two siblings, have fewer participants.

Table 8: Distribution of the sample based on social media usage.

Social media usage N %

Low 25 15.9
Moderate 101 64.3
High 31 19.7
 66

Figure 8: Percentage analysis of the social media usage.

Result

Out of the entire sample (N = 157), 25 participants (15.9%) indicated low usage, 101 participants
(64.3%) reported moderate usage, and 31 participants (19.7%) reported high usage, according to
the frequency and percentage distribution of social media usage. According to the findings, most
participants use social media at a moderate level.

Discussion

According to the distribution, the majority of participants use social media at a moderate level,
with lesser percentages falling into the low and high usage groups. This implies that among the
participants, moderate usage is the most prevalent pattern. All three categories are present, so
 67

comparisons are possible, even if the moderate group is more represented than the others.

When analyzing related data, it is important to take into account that the number of participants
is not equally distributed throughout all categories, especially with fewer people in the low and
high usage groups. However, the distribution offers a helpful summary of the sample's social
media usage trends.

Table 9: Distribution of the sample based on type of institution.

Type of institution N %

Government 97 61.8

Private 60 38.2

Figure 9: Percentage analysis of type of institution.

 68

Result

Out of the whole sample (N = 157), 97 participants (61.8%) were from government institutions
and 60 participants (38.2%) were from private institutions, according to the frequency and
percentage distribution of institution type. The findings show that most of the participants were
from government institutions.

Discussion

Participants from government institutions are more prevalent in the distribution than those from
private organizations. Nonetheless, a meaningful comparison between the two groups is possible
due to their adequate representation. Participants from both kinds of institutions contribute to the
sample's diversity and aid in comprehending the variables in various academic contexts.

The existence of a sizable percentage of participants from private institutions guarantees that the
results are not restricted to a single category, even though the number of participants from
government institutions is higher. The study's dependability is reinforced by this fair depiction,
which also permits a more comprehensive interpretation of the findings
 69

Table 10: Independent Samples t-test for Emotional Intelligence and

Resilience Based on Gender.

Variable Gender N Mean SD t df p

Emotional Male 84 115.10 16.63 -0.94 155 .351

Intelligence

Female 73 118.15 11.54

Resilience Male 84 17.80 2.92 -0.99 155 .325

Female 73 18.05 2.52

Result

An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence

and resilience between male and female participants. The results indicated that there was no
statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence between males (M = 115.10, SD =
16.63) and females (M = 118.15, SD = 11.54), t(155) = -0.94, p > .05. Although females showed
slightly higher mean scores, the difference was not statistically significant.

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience between males (M = 17.80, SD =

2.92) and females (M = 18.05, SD = 2.52), t(155) = -0.99, p > .05. The mean scores were very
close, indicating minimal variation between the two groups.
 70

Discussion

The findings suggest that gender does not have a significant influence on emotional intelligence
and resilience among university students. Although female participants showed slightly higher
mean scores in both emotional intelligence and resilience, these differences were not strong
enough to reach statistical significance.. A possible reason for higher emotional intelligence
among females may be that they are often more expressive, emotionally aware, and socially
oriented, which can enhance their ability to understand and manage emotions. In contrast, males
may be less encouraged to express emotions openly, which might contribute to slightly lower
scores.

Similarly, the slightly higher resilience among females may be due to better use of social support
systems and emotional coping strategies. Females may be more likely to seek help, share
problems, and adapt to stressful situations, whereas males may rely more on independent coping,
which can sometimes limit emotional processing. However, since the differences were not
statistically significant, these variations are minor and should be interpreted cautiously,
indicating that both genders have relatively similar levels of emotional intelligence and
resilience.
 71

Table 11: Independent Sample t-test for Emotional Intelligence and Resilience
Based on Place of Residence.

Variable Place of N Mean SD t df p

residence
Emotional Urban 100 116.31 13.47 -0.05 155 .962
Intelligence
Rural 57 116.88 16.33
Resilience Urban 100 18.02 2.60 0.95 155 .345
Rural 57 17.78 2.96

Result

An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence

and resilience between students from urban and rural areas. The results indicated that there was
no statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence between urban (M = 116.31, SD =
13.47) and rural participants (M = 116.88, SD = 16.33), t(155) = -0.05, p > .05. The mean scores
were very similar, indicating minimal variation between the two groups.

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience between urban (M = 18.02, SD =

2.60) and rural participants (M = 17.78, SD = 2.96), t(155) = 0.95, p > .05. Although urban
participants showed slightly higher resilience scores, the difference was not statistically
significant.
 72

Discussion

The findings suggest that emotional intelligence and resilience are similar across urban and rural
students, as the differences in mean scores were minimal and not statistically significant.
Although rural participants showed slightly higher emotional intelligence, the difference is
negligible and may be due to chance. A possible explanation is that rural students may develop
emotional understanding through close-knit social interactions and community relationships. On
the other hand, urban students may have access to more diverse social experiences, balancing out
these differences.

For resilience, urban participants showed slightly higher mean scores compared to rural
participants, but again the difference was very small. This may be because urban students are
often exposed to competitive environments and varied challenges, which may help in developing
coping skills. However, since both results are not statistically significant, it indicates that place
of residence does not meaningfully influence emotional intelligence and resilience, and both
groups can be considered similar in these aspects.
 73

Table 12: Independent sample t-test For Emotional Intelligence and Resilience
Based on Type of Residence

Variable Type of N Mean SD t df p

residence
Emotional Day 82 117.11 14.19 -0.13 155 .901
Intelligence scholar
Hosteler 75 115.87 14.95
Resilience Day 82 18.11 2.71 -0.19 155 .853
scholar
Hosteler 75 17.76 2.83

Result

An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence

and resilience between day scholars and hostellers. The results indicated that there was no
statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence between day scholars (M = 117.11,
SD = 14.19) and hostellers (M = 115.87, SD = 14.95), t(155) = -0.13, p > .05. Although day
scholars showed slightly higher mean scores, the difference was not statistically significant.

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience between day scholars (M = 18.11, SD
= 2.71) and hostellers (M = 17.76, SD = 2.83), t(155) = -0.19, p > .05. The mean scores were
very close, indicating minimal variation between the two groups.
 74

Discussion

The findings suggest that emotional intelligence and resilience are similar between day scholars
and hostellers, as the differences in mean scores were very small and not statistically significant.
Although day scholars showed slightly higher emotional intelligence, the difference is negligible
and may be due to chance. A possible reason is that day scholars may receive consistent family
support and emotional interaction at home, which could slightly enhance emotional
understanding and [Link], day scholars showed marginally higher resilience
compared to hostellers, but the difference is minimal. This may be because living with family
can provide emotional security and support, helping students cope with stress. On the other hand,
hostellers may develop independence and self-reliance through managing life away from home,
which also supports resilience. Since the differences are not statistically significant, it can be
concluded that type of residence does not meaningfully influence emotional intelligence and
resilience, and both groups are largely similar.

Table 13: Independent sample t-test for Emotional Intelligence and Resilience
Based on Type of Institution.

Variable Type of N Mean SD t df p

institution
Emotional Government 97 116.70 13.71 0.51 155 .608
Intelligence
Private 60 116.22 15.87
Resilience Government 97 17.92 2.68 -0.34 155 .731
Private 60 17.85 2.79
 75

Result

An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence

and resilience between students from government and private institutions. The results indicated
that there was no statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence between students
from government institutions (M = 116.70, SD = 13.71) and private institutions (M = 116.22, SD
= 15.87), t(155) = 0.51, p > .05. The mean scores were very similar, indicating minimal variation
between the two groups.

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience between students from government
institutions (M = 17.92, SD = 2.68) and private institutions (M = 17.85, SD = 2.79), t(155) = -
0.34, p > .05. The scores were almost identical, suggesting no meaningful difference between the
groups.

Discussion

The findings suggest that the type of institution does not have a significant influence on
emotional intelligence and resilience among university students. Students from both government
and private institutions demonstrated similar levels of emotional intelligence, indicating that their
ability to understand and manage emotions is not dependent on the type of educational institution
they attend. Likewise, resilience levels were also comparable, suggesting that coping abilities
and adaptability are consistent across both groups.

This may be due to similar academic demands, social environments, and developmental
experiences shared by students across different types of institutions. It also indicates that factors
 76

such as individual differences, personal experiences, and social support systems may play a more
important role than institutional type in shaping emotional intelligence and resilience.

Table 14: One-Way ANOVA for Emotional Intelligence and Resilience Based
On Age.

Variable Age N Mean SD F df p

Emotional 18-21 48 115.33 16.02 0.32 (2,154) .726
Intelligence
22-23 60 116.80 13.50
24-25 49 117.30 14.20
Resilience 18-21 48 17.75 2.85 0.41 (2,154) .663
22-23 60 17.95 2.60
24-25 49 18.05 2.70

Result

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence and

resilience across age groups (18–21, 22–23, and 24–25). The results indicated that there was no
statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence among the age groups, F(2,154) =
0.32, p > .05. However, the 24–25 age group showed the highest mean score (M = 117.30, SD =
14.20), followed by the 22–23 group (M = 116.80, SD = 13.50), while the 18–21 group showed
the lowest mean score (M = 115.33, SD = 16.02).

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience across age groups, F(2,154) = 0.41, p
> .05. The 24–25 group again showed the highest mean score (M = 18.05, SD = 2.70), followed
 77

by the 22–23 group (M = 17.95, SD = 2.60), while the 18–21 group showed the lowest mean
score (M = 17.75, SD = 2.85). Overall, the differences in mean scores were small.

Discussion

The findings suggest that emotional intelligence and resilience are similar across different age
groups, as the differences were not statistically significant. Although the 24–25 age group
showed slightly higher mean scores in both variables, these differences are minimal and may
have occurred by chance.

A possible explanation is that individuals in the older age group may have gained more life
experience and emotional maturity, which could slightly enhance emotional understanding and
coping abilities. However, since the differences are not statistically significant, age does not
appear to have a meaningful impact on emotional intelligence and resilience in this sample. All
age groups can be considered to have relatively similar levels of these psychological
characteristics.
 78

Table 15: One-Way ANOVA for Emotional Intelligence and Resilience Based
on Socio-economic Status.

Variable Socio- N Mean SD F df p

economic
status
Emotional Low 25 113.44 16.49 1.78 (2,154) .172
Intelligence
Middle 130 117.33 14.08
High 2 102.00 8.49
Resilience Low 25 17.52 2.18 0.34 (2,154) .710
Middle 130 18.00 2.85
High 2 17.50 0.71

Result

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence and

resilience across levels of socioeconomic status (low, middle, and high). The results indicated
that there was no statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence among the groups,
F(2,154) = 1.78, p > .05. Although students from the middle socioeconomic group showed
slightly higher mean scores (M = 117.33, SD = 14.08) compared to those from the low (M =
113.44, SD = 16.49) and high (M = 102.00, SD = 8.49) groups, these differences were not
statistically significant. It is also important to note that the high socioeconomic group had a very
small sample size (N = 2), which may limit the reliability of comparisons.
 79

Similarly, no significant difference was found in resilience across socioeconomic status, F(2,154)
= 0.34, p > .05. The middle group showed slightly higher mean scores (M = 18.00, SD = 2.85)
compared to the low (M = 17.52, SD = 2.18) and high (M = 17.50, SD = 0.71) groups, but these
differences were minimal and statistically non-significant. Overall, the findings suggest that
socioeconomic status does not significantly influence emotional intelligence or resilience among
the participants.

Discussion

These findings suggest that emotional intelligence and resilience are not solely dependent on a
student’s economic background. Regardless of whether students come from low, middle, or high
socioeconomic status, they appear to develop similar abilities to understand emotions and cope
with challenges. This may be because university environments provide shared experiences—
such as academic stress, peer interaction, and exposure to similar learning conditions—which
contribute equally to emotional and psychological development across different socioeconomic
groups.

Furthermore, resilience and emotional intelligence are deeply rooted in personal experiences,
family environment, social support, and individual personality rather than financial status alone.

Even students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may develop strong coping skills through
life challenges, while those from higher backgrounds may rely on different forms of support. The
lack of significant differences highlights that human adaptability and emotional growth are
complex processes influenced by multiple factors, making socioeconomic status only a limited
contributor in shaping these psychological traits.
 80

Table 16: One-Way ANOVA For Emotional Intelligence And Resilience Based
On Birth Order

Variable Birth N Mean SD F df p

order
Emotional First- 75 114.37 14.29 2.19 (3,153) .111
Intelligence born
Middle 13 114.31 15.84
child
Last 59 120.05 14.79
born
Only 10 114.60 10.17
child
Resilience First- 75 18.23 2.69 3.12 (3,153) 0.43
born
Middle 13 18.46 1.27
child
Last 59 17.17 2.61
born
Only 10 19.30 4.14
Child

Result

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence and

resilience based on birth order (first-born, middle child, last-born, and only child). The results
 81

indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence among the
groups, F(3,153) = 2.19, p > .05. However, the mean scores showed that last-born participants
had slightly higher emotional intelligence (M = 120.05, SD = 14.79), while middle children had
comparatively lower scores (M = 114.31, SD = 15.84).

Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in resilience among the birth order
groups, F(3,153) = 3.12, p > .05 (p = .43). Although only children showed the highest mean
resilience (M = 19.30, SD = 4.14) and last-born participants showed the lowest (M = 17.17, SD =
2.61), these differences were not statistically significant.

Discussion

The findings indicate that birth order does not have a significant influence on emotional
intelligence and resilience among university students. Although some variations in mean scores
were observed, these differences were not strong enough to reach statistical significance and may
have occurred by chance.

The slightly higher emotional intelligence among last-born individuals may be due to greater
social interaction within the family, as they often engage with older siblings, which can enhance
communication skills and emotional understanding. Similarly, only children showed slightly
higher resilience, which may be linked to greater independence and self-reliance developed in
the absence of siblings.

However, since both emotional intelligence and resilience differences were not statistically
significant, it suggests that birth order alone is not a strong determining factor. Instead, these
psychological characteristics are likely influenced by multiple factors such as personality traits,
family environment, social support, and life experiences.
 82

Table 17: One-Way ANOVA For Emotional Intelligence And Resilience Based
On Number Of Siblings

Variable Number N Mean SD F df P

of
siblings
Emotional None 15 111.00 11.59 2.91 (3,153) .053
Intelligence
One 107 117.85 14.95
Two 26 113.42 14.63
More 9 118.78 11.55
than two
Resilience None 15 19.13 3.38 1.18 (3,153) .334
One 107 17.65 2.66
Two 26 18.04 2.71
More 9 18.67 2.12
than two

Result

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence and

resilience based on the number of siblings. The results indicated that there was no statistically
significant difference in emotional intelligence among the groups, F(3,153) = 2.91, p = .053 (>
 83

.05). However, the result is very close to significance, suggesting a possible trend. Participants
with more than two siblings showed the highest mean emotional intelligence (M = 118.78, SD =
11.55), followed by those with one sibling (M = 117.85, SD = 14.95), while participants with no
siblings showed the lowest mean score (M = 111.00, SD = 11.59).

Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in resilience based on the number of
siblings, F(3,153) = 1.18, p = .334 (> .05). Participants with no siblings showed the highest mean
resilience (M = 19.13, SD = 3.38), while those with one sibling showed the lowest mean (M =
17.65, SD = 2.66). Overall, the differences across groups were small.

Discussion

The slightly higher emotional intelligence among individuals with more than two siblings may
be explained by increased opportunities for social interaction, sharing, conflict resolution, and
emotional understanding within the family. Growing up in larger families often exposes
individuals to diverse emotional situations, which can help in developing empathy and emotional
regulation skills. However, since the differences were not statistically significant, it suggests that
these experiences do not uniformly translate into higher emotional intelligence for all
individuals, as personal traits and external influences also play a crucial role.

In contrast, participants with no siblings (only children) reported higher resilience, which may be
attributed to greater independence and self-reliance developed over time. Without siblings,
individuals may learn to manage challenges on their own, thereby strengthening their coping
abilities. On the other hand, those with siblings might rely more on family support during
difficult situations, which could slightly reduce the need to develop independent coping.

mechanisms. Nevertheless, the absence of significant differences indicates that resilience is

influenced by a combination of factors such as personality, life experiences, and support systems,
rather than the number of siblings alone.
 84

Table 18: One-Way ANOVA For Emotional Intelligence And Resilience Based
On Social Media Usage.

Variable Social N Mean SD F df P

media
usage
Emotional Low 25 117.48 18.42 0.24 (2,154) .790
Intelligence
Moderate 101 116.28 12.76
High 31 116.52 16.79
Resilience Low 25 17.92 2.60 0.03 (2,154) .968
Moderate 101 17.94 2.73
High 31 17.84 2.92

Result

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in emotional intelligence and

resilience based on levels of social media usage (low, moderate, and high). The results indicated
that there was no statistically significant difference in emotional intelligence among the groups,
F(2,154) = 0.24, p = .790 (> .05). The mean scores were very similar across all groups,
indicating minimal variation. However, the low social media usage group showed slightly higher
mean emotional intelligence (M = 117.48, SD = 18.42) compared to moderate (M = 116.28, SD
= 12.76) and high usage groups (M = 116.52, SD = 16.79).
 85

Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in resilience based on social media
usage, F(2,154) = 0.03, p = .968 (> .05). The mean scores across all groups were nearly identical,
with the moderate usage group showing marginally higher resilience (M = 17.94) compared to
low (M = 17.92, SD = 2.60) and high usage groups (M = 17.84, SD = 2.92). Overall, the
differences were negligible.

Discussion

The absence of significant differences suggests that the amount of time spent on social media
alone does not determine a student’s emotional intelligence or resilience. Although individuals
with low social media usage showed slightly higher emotional intelligence scores, the
differences were minimal, indicating that emotional skills such as understanding and managing
emotions are likely shaped by deeper personal and social experiences rather than screen time
alone.

The findings indicate that the moderate social media usage group showed slightly higher
resilience scores compared to low and high usage groups. However, these differences were very
small and not statistically significant. This suggests that while moderate users appear to have
marginally better coping ability, the variation is minimal and may have occurred by chance.

A possible explanation is that moderate use of social media may provide a balance. Students who
use social media in moderation can benefit from social connection, emotional support, and
access to information, which may help them cope with stress. At the same time, they are less
likely to experience negative effects such as distraction, comparison, or overdependence that can
occur with excessive use. In contrast, very low usage may limit social interaction, while very
high usage may lead to stress or reduced focus. However, since the differences are not
statistically significant, these explanations should be interpreted cautiously. This highlights that
quality of usage, rather than quantity, may be more important in influencing psychological
outcomes.
 86

Table 19: Correlation between Emotional Intelligence and Resilience.

Variable Emotional Intelligence Resilience

Emotional Intelligence 0.22**

Resilience 0.22**

Result
The relationship between emotional intelligence and resilience among university students was
examined using Pearson’s correlation. The results revealed a positive correlation (r = .22)
between emotional intelligence and resilience, which was statistically significant at the 0.01 level
(p < .01). This indicates that as emotional intelligence increases, resilience also tends to increase.
However, the strength of the relationship is low, suggesting only a slight association between the
two variables.

Discussion

The present study found a low positive correlation between emotional intelligence and resilience,
indicating that individuals who are better at understanding and managing their emotions are more
likely to cope effectively with stress and challenges. Emotional intelligence may help individuals
regulate their emotions, maintain a positive outlook, and use adaptive coping strategies, which in
turn enhance resilience.

However, the low magnitude of the correlation (r = .22) suggests that resilience is influenced by
multiple factors beyond emotional intelligence. Other variables such as personality traits, social
 87

support, life experiences, and environmental influences may also play a significant role in
determining resilience levels.

The relatively large sample size (N = 157) may have contributed to the statistical significance
despite the low strength of the relationship. This finding is consistent with psychological
research, where relationships between variables are often small but meaningful. Overall, the
results indicate that emotional intelligence contributes to resilience, but it is not the sole
determinant, and other factors also play an important role.

Table 20:Simple Linear Regression Analysis Predicting Resilience From

Emotional Intelligence.

Model R R² Adjusted F P
R²
Emotional .215 .046 .040 7.55 .007**
Intelligence
predicting
Resilience

Result

A simple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine whether emotional intelligence
predicts resilience among university students. The results indicated that the regression model was
statistically significant, F(1,155) = 7.55, p < .01. The model showed a positive relationship
between emotional intelligence and resilience, with R = .215. The coefficient of determination
(R² = .046) indicates that emotional intelligence explains 4.6% of the variance in resilience, with
an adjusted R² of .040.
 88

Discussion
The results indicate that emotional intelligence has a significant positive influence on resilience
among university students. This suggests that individuals with higher emotional intelligence tend
to show slightly higher resilience, as they are better able to understand and manage their
emotions when facing stress and challenges.

However, the relatively low R² value indicates that resilience is only partially explained by
emotional intelligence. This suggests that other factors, such as personality traits, social support,
environmental conditions, and life experiences, also play an important role. Therefore, although
emotional intelligence contributes to resilience, it is not the sole determining factor.

Overall, the findings indicate a statistically significant but weak relationship, highlighting the
importance of considering additional variables to better understand resilience.

Table 21: Regression Coefficients for Emotional Intelligence Predicting

Resilience.

Predictor Unstandardized Standardized t P

Coefficient Coefficient
(B) (β)
Constant 13.35 .000
Emotional 0.047 .215 2.75 .007**
Intelligence
 89

Result

The regression coefficients indicate that emotional intelligence is a significant predictor of

resilience among university students. Emotional intelligence showed an unstandardized
coefficient of B = 0.047 and a standardized coefficient of β = .215. The t-value (t = 2.75) was
statistically significant (p = .007, p < .01), indicating that emotional intelligence significantly
contributes to predicting resilience.

The constant value (B = 13.35, p < .001) represents the baseline level of resilience when
emotional intelligence is zero.

Discussion

The findings suggest that emotional intelligence has a positive and statistically significant effect
on resilience among university students. The positive unstandardized coefficient (B = 0.047)
indicates that as emotional intelligence increases, resilience also increases.

However, the standardized coefficient (β = .215) indicates that the strength of this relationship is
relatively weak, suggesting that emotional intelligence explains only a small portion of the
variation in resilience. This implies that while emotional intelligence plays an important role,
resilience is influenced by multiple other factors such as personality traits, social support, and
life experiences.

Overall, the results highlight that emotional intelligence is a significant but modest predictor of
resilience, and a more comprehensive understanding of resilience would require considering
additional contributing variables.
 90

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

 91

The current study aimed to investigate the association between emotional intelligence and
resilience among university students, as well as to evaluate if emotional intelligence predicts
resilience. The study used a quantitative research strategy that included both descriptive and
correlation elements. A purposive sampling strategy was used to pick 157 university students
aged 18 to 25 years. Emotional intelligence and resilience were assessed using standardized self-
report measures, specifically the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SSEIT) and
the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS).

The data were examined using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, regression analysis, and
inferential statistics such the t-test and ANOVA. The study found a favorable and statistically
significant correlation (r =.22, p <.01) between emotional intelligence and resilience in university
students. Regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between emotional intelligence
and resilience (β =.215, p <.01), accounting for 4.6% of the variance. However, the relationship's
strength was determined to be minimal, indicating the presence of other significant factors.

The study also looked at variances based on demographic factors like age, socioeconomic
position. The findings revealed no statistically significant variations in emotional intelligence or
resilience across these variables, implying that these psychological dimensions are relatively
stable across demographic groupings. Overall, the study emphasizes the relevance of emotional
intelligence in building resilience, while also noting that resilience is influenced by a variety of
circumstances.

Conclusion:

The study's findings suggest that emotional intelligence has a major impact on resilience among
university students. The findings show that students with higher emotional intelligence may
 92
better comprehend, manage, and regulate their emotions, allowing them to cope more effectively
with stress and adversity. Although a positive and substantial association was discovered
between emotional intelligence and resilience, the strength of the relationship was rather weak,
implying that emotional intelligence alone cannot fully explain resilience.

The findings indicate that resilience is a multifaceted construct influenced by a variety of factors,
including personality traits, social support, life experiences, and environmental conditions. As a
result, while increasing emotional intelligence can help to improve resilience, it should be
addressed alongside other psychological and social elements. The study underlines the need of
educational institutions focusing on building students' emotional skills and resilience through
training programs, counseling, and supportive environments in order to improve overall well-
being and successful coping.

Scope for the future study:

The current study suggests various directions for future research. First, future studies should
include a bigger and more diverse sample size to improve the findings' generalizability. Second,
other variables such as personality traits, stress levels, coping techniques, social support, and
mental health factors can be included to gain a better understanding of the elements that
influence resilience. Third, longitudinal studies can be used to track changes in emotional
intelligence and resilience across time. Fourth, experimental or intervention-based research can
be conducted to test the efficacy of emotional intelligence training programs in improving
student resilience. Finally, future study might explore these characteristics in diverse populations
such as school children, working professionals, and clinical groups to acquire a better
understanding of their relationship.

Limitations:
The current study has some limitations that should be noted when interpreting the findings. First,
the study used purposive sampling, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to the
larger community.
 93

Second, online survey are not reliable as we do not know the respondent answers or the proxy
answers.
Third, the sample was restricted to university students aged 18 to 25, limiting the findings'
application to other age groups.
Fourth, the study used self-report questionnaires, which may be prone to response bias, social
desirability, and mistakes in self-perception.
Fifth, the cross-sectional research design restricts the potential to show causal links between
emotional intelligence and resilience.
Sixth, the low R² value suggests that emotional intelligence only explains a tiny part of the
variance in resilience, indicating that other relevant variables were not considered in the study.
.
 94

CHAPTER 6

REFERENCES
 95

Abualruz, H., Hayajneh, F., Othman, E. H., Abu Sabra, M. A., Khalil, M. M., Khalifeh, A. H.,
Yasin, I., Alhamory, S., & Zyoud, A. H. (2024). Emotional intelligence, resilience, and
psychological distress among nurses. Journal of Nursing Management.

Akbari, A., & Khormaiee, F. (2015). The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between
emotional intelligence and psychological well-being. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Bande, B., Fernández-Ferrín, P., Varela, J. A., & Jaramillo, F. (2015). Emotions, resilience, and
salesperson performance. Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2238–2246.
[Link]

Bano, Z., & Pervaiz, S. (2020). Emotional intelligence and resilience among medical students.
Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research.

Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional intelligence 2.0. TalentSmart.

Cejudo, J., López-Delgado, M. L., & Rubio, M. J. (2016). Emotional intelligence and resilience:
A study in university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 1107–1113.
[Link]

Cleary, M., Visentin, D., West, S., Lopez, V., & Kornhaber, R. (2018). Promoting emotional
intelligence and resilience in undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 68, 112–
117. [Link]

Ding, H., Han, J., Zhang, M., Wang, K., Gong, J., & Yang, S. (2017). Moderating and mediating
effects of resilience between childhood trauma and depressive symptoms. Journal of Affective
Disorders, 211, 130–135. [Link]

Droppert, K., Downey, L., Lomas, J., Bunnett, E. R., Simmons, N., Wheaton, A., Nield, C., &
Stough, C. (2019). Emotional intelligence, resilience, and academic performance. Personality
and Individual Differences, 140, 77–82.
 96

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. Bantam Books.

Jiménez-Rodríguez, D., Molero Jurado, M. M., Pérez-Fuentes, M. C., Arrogante, O., Oropesa-
Ruiz, N. F., & Gázquez-Linares, J. J. (2022). Emotional intelligence and resilience in nursing
students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(4), 2248.
[Link]

Kartol, A., Üztemur, S., Griffiths, M. D., & Şahin, D. (2024). Emotional intelligence, stress, and
life satisfaction among university students. Current Psychology.

Magnano, P., Craparo, G., & Paolillo, A. (2016). Resilience and emotional intelligence: Which
role in achievement motivation. International Journal of Psychological Research, 9(1), 9–20.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and
implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15(3), 197–215.

Nguyen, N. N., Nham, T. P., & Takahashi, Y. (2023). Emotional intelligence and resilience
during COVID-19. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies.

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and
Personality, 9(3), 185–211. [Link]

Sarrionandia, A., Ramos-Díaz, E., & Fernández-Lasarte, O. (2018). Resilience as a mediator of

emotional intelligence and stress. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 208.
[Link]

Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., &
Dornheim, L. (1998). Development of emotional intelligence scale. Personality and Individual
Differences, 25(2), 167–177. [Link]
 97

Smith, B. W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P., & Bernard, J. (2008). The brief
resilience scale. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 15(3), 194–200.
[Link]

Tehranineshat, B., et al. (2020). Resilience and quality of life among burn patients. Burns
Journal.

Thomas, C., & Zolkoski, S. (2020). Emotional intelligence, resilience, and stress. Journal of
Education and Development.

Torres-Gázquez, S. C., López-García, G. D., & Granero-Gallegos, A. (2023). Emotional

intelligence and resilience during COVID-19. Sustainability, 15(3), 2100.

Valverde-Janer, M., Ortega-Caballero, M., Ortega-Caballero, I., Ortega-Caballero, A., & Segura-
Robles, A. (2023). Emotional intelligence and resilience in students. Education Sciences, 13(2),
150.

Wang, C., & Chiu, Y.-H. (2024). Emotional intelligence and adaptive performance. Journal of
Organizational Psychology.

Zheng, Y., Cai, D., Zhao, J.-L., Yang, C., Xia, T., & Xu, Z. (2021). Emotional intelligence and
resilience: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences, 177, 110813.
[Link]
 98

CHAPTER 7

APPPENDIX
 99

APPENDIX A

Please provide the following details

AGE

 18-21
 22-23
 24-25

GENDER

 Male
 Female

PLACE OF RESIDENCE

 Urban
 Rural

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS

 Low
 Middle
 High
 100

RESIDENTIAL STATUS

 Day Scholar
 Hosteler

BIRTH ORDER

 First-born
 Middle child
 Last born
 Only child

NUMBER OF SIBLINGS

 None
 One
 Two
 More than two

SOCIAL MEDIA USAGE

 Low
 Moderate
 High
 101

TYPE OF INSTITUTION

 Government
 Private
 102

APPENDIX B

THE SCHUTTE SELF REPORT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE TEST

Instructions: Indicate the extent to which each item applies to you using the scale in the five
columns to the right of each item.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither disagree nor agree Agree Strongly agree

1 2 3 4 5

1. I know when to speak about my personal problems to others

2. When I am faced with obstacles, I remember times I overcame similar obstacles
3. I expect that I will do well on most things I try
4. Other people find it easy to confide in me
5. I find it hard to understand non-verbal messages of others
6. Major life events have led me to re-evaluate what is important
7. When my mood changes, I see new possibilities
8. Emotions make my life worth living
 103
9. I am aware of my emotions as I experience them
10. I expect good things to happen
11.I like to share my emotions with others
12. When I feel positive emotions, I know how to maintain them
13.I arrange events others enjoy
14. I seek activities that make me happy
15. I am aware of non-verbal messages I send
16.I present myself in a good way to others
[Link] in a good mood, solving problems is easy
18.I recognize emotions through facial expressions
19. I understand why my emotions change
[Link] a good mood, I generate new ideas
21. I have control over my emotions
22. I easily recognize my emotions
23. I motivate myself by imagining success
24.I compliment others when they do well
25. I understand others’ non-verbal messages
26. I emotionally relate to others’ experiences
27. Emotional changes help me think creatively
28.I give up easily when facing challenges
29.I can tell how people feel by looking at them
30.I help others feel better when they are down
31.I use positive mood to persist through challenges
32.I understand emotions through tone of voice
33. I find it difficult to understand others’ emotions
 104

APPENDIX C

BRIEF RESILIENCE SCALE

INSTRUCTIONS: Please respond to each statement by choosing one option:

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

1 2 3 4 5

1. I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times

2. I have a hard time making it through stressful events
3. It does not take me long to recover from a stressful event
4. It is hard for me to snap back when something bad happens
5. I usually come through difficult times with little trouble
6. I tend to take a long time to get over setbacks in my life