Emotional Intelligence in Undergraduate Accounting Students: Preliminary Assessment
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
Abstract There is a growing recognition among researchers and practitioners that the workplace is not the strictly cognitively-managed environment it was once assumed to be. Emotions play a large role in organizational life, and emotional intelligence (the ability to recognize, use and manage emotions) has become a skill that may allow accountants to perform better in a variety of areas such as leadership, client relations, and perhaps even decision-making. In addition, it is a skill that employers seem to value and that may be important to personal development as well. Thus, accounting education must attempt to inculcate emotional intelligence in its graduates in addition to technical knowledge. This paper investigates the level of emotional intelligence of accounting students using the MSCEIT, an instrument that measures ability rather than acquired competencies. The results show that the level of emotional intelligence of the students in the sample could be a concern. There is no evidence that one term of traditional accounting education can be expected to provide an opportunity for improvement. Thus, attempts to increase the emotional intelligence of the students may require targeted educational interventions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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