SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Meta-analysis of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral predictors of academic achievement in higher education students.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Higher education outcomes are frequently associated with cognitive ability and the outcomes of previous school years, but there are likely emotional and behavioral factors that contribute to these as well. This meta-analysis examined the relative effects of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral predictors on academic performance in university and college students. Methods: Seventeen studies with higher education students were included. Eligible studies reported on at least one cognitive predictor (e.g., prior GPA, working memory, metacognition), emotional predictor (e.g., emotional intelligence, achievement emotions, emotion regulation), or behavioral/self-regulatory predictor (e.g., study habits, time management, engagement, procrastination) of one of the outcomes (GPA, course grades, or pass/fail status). Random effects models were used to transform effect sizes to Fisher's z and pooled. Subgroup and meta regression analyses were used to investigate heterogeneity and moderators (design, field, region, measurement characteristics) while multiple diagnostics were used to assess publication bias. Results: The cognitive domain showed the strongest pooled association with academic achievement, r = 0.197, 95% CI [0.037, 0.347]. Emotional predictors showed a weak and imprecise association with academic achievement, r = -0.105, 95% CI [-0.376, 0.182]. Overall, the pooled effect across all predictors was small and not statistically strong, r = 0.017, 95% CI [-0.170, 0.202], with very high heterogeneity. Behavioral predictors showed an unstable estimate, r = 0.002, 95% CI [-0.477, 0.481], and should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusion: Taken together, the corrected synthesis suggests that cognitive predictors are the most consistent domain, whereas emotional and behavioral findings are less stable and require cautious interpretation. Cognitive predictors appear to be the most reliable domain in the current evidence base, while emotional and behavioral predictors remain tentative. Therefore, interventions that integrate cognitive assistance with specific training in SRL and emotion management are more in line with the evidence than interventions based on performance only.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.