Four dimensions of digital intelligence and their associations with mental health resilience among university students in Kerala India

Digital technologies have reshaped how university students learn, connect, and manage their emotional lives. Public and scholarly discourse has concentrated largely on the harms of prolonged online exposure, yet accumulating evidence suggests that students who develop digital capability report more favourable psychological outcomes. Which specific dimensions of digital capability are most strongly associated with psychological resilience, however, remains insufficiently examined, and the field continues to use the terms digital intelligence and digital competency inconsistently. This study conceptualises digital intelligence as an umbrella construct encompassing distinct, empirically separable competency dimensions, and examines the associations between four such dimensions and Mental Health Resilience (MHR) among university students. The dimensions assessed are Digital Literacy and Information Navigation (DLIN), Digital Communication and Collaboration (DCC), Digital Safety and Security (DSS), and Digital Emotional Intelligence (DEI). A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 400 university students recruited through stratified random sampling across Arts and Science colleges in Palakkad District, Kerala, India. The four predictor dimensions were assessed through 14 items in total and the outcome through 8 items, all adapted from previously validated instruments. Data were analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) in SmartPLS 4.0, covering measurement and structural model evaluation. Common method variance was examined using Harman’s single-factor test and a full collinearity (VIF) assessment, alongside procedural remedies applied at the design stage. The structural model accounted for 78.1% of the variance in mental health resilience (R² = 0.781; Q² = 0.467). Among the four predictors, Digital Emotional Intelligence showed the largest coefficient (β = 0.404, p < 0.001), followed by Digital Safety and Security (β = 0.313, p < 0.001), Digital Literacy and Information Navigation (β = 0.207, p < 0.01), and Digital Communication and Collaboration (β = 0.169, p < 0.05). All four hypothesised paths reached statistical significance. Digital intelligence, conceptualised as a multidimensional umbrella construct, is positively associated with mental health resilience among university students, with emotional and safety-related competencies showing stronger associations than technical-cognitive ones. Two interpretive cautions are central to the reading of these results. First, the two-item operationalisation of digital emotional intelligence raises a substantive risk of construct underrepresentation and item redundancy, and the magnitude and rank position of the DEI coefficient may therefore be inflated. Second, the unusually high explained variance is best understood as reflecting the cross-sectional, single-source design and probable conceptual proximity between predictors and outcome, rather than the magnitude of any causal contribution. Within these boundaries, the findings offer preliminary evidence that may inform curriculum design, digital literacy education, student support services, and teacher professional development. Longitudinal, multi-source, and mediation-based research is required before causal or prescriptive claims can be advanced.