Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Higher education is typically explained in terms of cognitive ability (IQ) when linked to academic achievement. However, despite evidence of non-cognitive intelligence, specifically emotional and spiritual intelligence, its association with academic achievement remains underexplored. In Ghana, where spiritual orientation is strong, research on the relationship between emotional and spiritual intelligence and academic achievement among higher education students remains limited. This study used Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) and Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (FsQCA) to assess symmetrical and asymmetrical pathways. The study used a quantitative cross-sectional correlation design, drawing on data from 339 students across six colleges at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST). PLS-SEM shows that emotional intelligence is significantly related to academic achievement (β = 0.344, p < .001) and spiritual intelligence (β = 0.661, p < .001). Spiritual intelligence is associated with academic achievement (β = 0.371, p < .001). The model explains 43. 4% of the variance in academic achievement. The FsQCA results showed that a single configuration was consistently associated with high academic achievement. The combined presence of both high emotional intelligence and spiritual intelligence had a consistency of 0.825 and a coverage of 0.766. Configurations in which one intelligence was high showed high consistency but low PRI consistency, so they were associated with both high and low achievement. The same findings appear in the robustness analysis. Therefore, emotional intelligence and spiritual intelligence appear to relate to achievement conjecturally, as co-occurring resources rather than independent or compensatory routes. The findings call for Ghanaian evidence on the multidimensionality of intelligence and show the value of integrating PLS-SEM and FsQCA to inform educational research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Appiah-Kubi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: