Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Introduction Understanding factors influencing students’ academic performance is crucial for improving educational planning and outcomes. This study examined the effect of emotional intelligence on academic performance, with academic self-regulation as a mediator, among students at Jiroft University of Medical Sciences, Iran, in 2024. Methods A descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study was conducted among 290 students (from a population of 1136) across medicine, nursing, midwifery, public health, environmental health, laboratory sciences, operating room, and anesthesiology. Inclusion criteria were enrollment in the second semester of 2023–2024, willingness to participate, and no psychiatric medication use in the previous month. Exclusion criteria included unwillingness, physical illnesses affecting academic performance, and neurological disorders. Stratified random sampling was applied. Data were collected using standardized questionnaires on emotional intelligence, academic performance, and self-regulation. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with Partial Least Squares (PLS) was used, analyzed with SmartPLS3 and SPSS23. Results Emotional intelligence significantly predicted academic performance perceptions (p < 0.001, β = 0.67). It was positively associated with academic self-regulation (p = 0.001, β = 0.61), which in turn enhanced academic performance perceptions (p = 0.001, β = 0.55). Mediation analysis supported that academic self-regulation significantly mediated the relationship between emotional intelligence and academic performance (p < 0.001). Conclusion Higher levels of emotional intelligence and academic self-regulation can enhance students’ self-reported academic performance perceptions. It is recommended that university administrators facilitate workshops and training programs to improve students’ emotional intelligence and self-regulation, thereby fostering their academic success and development. However, as this is a cross-sectional study using self-report tools, the results should be interpreted as associations rather than causal relationships.
Bordbar et al. (Tue,) studied this question.