ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Assessing differences in emotional intelligence among lifestyle and AI usage profiles generated via Self-Organizing Maps in first-year university students.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The transition to higher education exposes first-year students to significant lifestyle changes and the challenges of a hyperconnected ecosystem, including the rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI). While physical activity and digital flourishing are recognized as protective factors, their interaction with students' emotional competencies remains underexplored through non-linear, multidimensional approaches. Objective: This study aimed to identify topological profiles among incoming university students based on lifestyle, digital flourishing, and AI usage, and to analyze differences in intrapersonal emotional intelligence across these distinct profiles. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 385 first-year students. Data on physical activity, digital flourishing, AI perceptions and usage, and emotional intelligence were collected using validated self-reported instruments. A person-centered topological approach using Self-Organizing Maps (SOM) and k-means clustering was employed to identify student profiles, followed by one-way ANOVA to evaluate differences in emotional attention, clarity, and repair. Results: The SOM analysis successfully identified six distinct behavioral and psychosocial profiles. A clear divergence emerged between an adaptive profile (Cluster 6, characterized by active lifestyles, high digital flourishing, and instrumental AI use) and a vulnerable profile (Cluster 1, marked by relative physical inactivity and lower scores across digital dimensions). Crucially, the inferential analysis revealed that the profiles exhibited significant differences in their emotional competencies, with the adaptive profile showing significantly higher levels of emotional clarity and repair compared to the vulnerable group. Conclusion: Successful adaptation to the university and technological environment transcends the mere acquisition of isolated skills. Intrapersonal emotional intelligence acts as a key psychological factor differentiating adaptive from vulnerable student profiles, underscoring the potential benefit of holistic institutional interventions that simultaneously integrate the promotion of physical activity, digital wellbeing, and emotional competence.
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.