MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410554948 · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105067

Research development of teachers' emotional intelligence in the 21st century: A bibliometric analysis

2025· article· en· W4410554948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dong Wang, Jing Qin

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Psychologica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMajor Project of Philosophy and Social Science Research in Colleges and Universities of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional intelligence (EI) has been recognized as a critical factor in shaping teachers' teaching effectiveness, classroom management, professional well-being, and mental health. As a key psychological construct in the teaching profession, teacher emotional intelligence (TEI) has received increasing scholarly attention in recent years. This study employs bibliometric analysis to quantitatively and visually analyze 258 academic publications on TEI from the WOS core databases in the 21st century. The study reports some bibliometric characteristics of these publications, in which it found that the number of annual publications over the years went through two distinct phases: a nascent and early exploratory period (2000-2018) and a rapid growth period (2019-2023). Spain and China emerged as leading contributors, while Canada's studies demonstrated the highest citation impact (average citations per article). The study also shows other valuable information such as the primary sources of publications, the most prolific authors and institutions, and the most cited publications, etc. Moreover, the relationships among items of publications and keywords were identified and analyzed to present the research status of this field. "Burnout", "job satisfaction" and "self-efficacy" are the high-frequency and core keywords. It can be found that research on TEI has constantly evolved into more diverse themes in the 21st century, with "EI", "higher education" and "engagement" being consistent themes across different development periods. Notably, topics like "support", "mindfulness" and "intention" are emerging, expected to continue gaining intention. Based on data analysis and literature reading, this article provides several possible directions for future research in TEI.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0370.163
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PsychologicaSame topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207