Emotional Intelligence, Linguistic Intelligence, and their Relevance to Speaking Anxiety of EFL Learners
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was conducted to investigate any possible correlation between the speech anxiety and EFL learners‟ Emotional Intelligence and Linguistic Intelligence. The selected skills of EI in this study were interpersonal and stress management. The participants of the present research were 55 EFL learners both male and female who were selected randomly among the senior and junior learners of the Islamic, Salmas branch Azad University. Three questionnaires were used to measure the participants‟ speech anxiety, EI, and LI. The first questionnaire applied was Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). Among which the construct of speech anxiety was taken into consideration in this study. The second and the third questionnaires were Baron‟s EI and LI test respectively. The results of the study indicated that there was a negative correlation between the speech anxiety and total EI. The results showed negative correlations between the variables i.e. speech anxiety with stress management and stress tolerance. However, no correlations were observed amid the speech anxiety with impulse control, interpersonal, empathy, interpersonal relationship and social responsibility. The results also found that there was a negative relationship between the speech anxiety and LI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it