Table 3.
Meta-analysis results for emotional intelligence and sports performance.
| Statistic for Each Study | Publication bias | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Author (Year) | N | R | 95% CI | % weight | Study Residual | Study Removed | Fail-Safe N | (a) | rADJUSTED |
| [78] Araya et al. (2001) | 10 | 0.62 * | [−0.01, 0.90] | 0.61 | 1.47 | 0.16 | |||
| [79] Arribas-Galarraga et al. (2017) | 386 | 0.16 ** | [0.07, 0.26] | 8.86 | 0.01 | 0.16 | |||
| [89] Bal et al. (2014) | 60 | 0.15 | [−0.11, 0.39] | 3.62 | −0.12 | 0.16 | |||
| [77] Berry (2013) | 97 | 0.05 | [−0.16, 0.24] | 4.98 | .0.90 | 0.17 | |||
| [37] Crombie et al. (2009) | 12 | 0.69 ** | [0.19, 0.91] | 0.77 | 1.99 | 0.16 | |||
| [81] Dimick (2017) | 69 | −0.01 | [−0.25, 0.22] | 4.00 | −1.20 | 0.17 | |||
| [82] Hemmatinezhad et al. (2012) | 95 | 0.21 * | [0.01, 0.40] | 4.92 | 0.37 | 0.16 | |||
| [83] Karimi Khiavi et al. (2014) | 376 | 0.21 ** | [0.11, 0.30] | 8.80 | 0.46 | 0.16 | |||
| [42] Laborde et al. (2014) | 28 | 0.25 | [−0.14, 0.57] | 1.91 | 0.42 | 0.16 | |||
| [38] Laborde et al. (2014) | |||||||||
| Sample 1 | 973 | 0.05 | [−0.01, 0.11] | 10.46 | −1.29 | 0.18 | |||
| Sample 2 | 291 | 0.25 ** | [0.14, 0.36] | 8.18 | 0.90 | 0.16 | |||
| [84] Martínez Ferreiro (2016) | 30 | 0.20 | [−0.18, 0.52] | 2.04 | 0.16 | 0.16 | |||
| [85] Mitić et al. (2011) | 22 | 0.27 | [−0.17, 0.62] | 1.51 | 0.47 | 0.16 | |||
| [86] Mohammad et al. (2015) | 200 | 0.25 ** | [0.12, 0.38] | 7.15 | 0.87 | 0.16 | |||
| [39] Perlini et al. (2006) | 79 | −0.16 | [−0.37, 0.06] | 4.38 | −2.31 | 0.18 | |||
| [40] Petrides et al. (2006) | 34 | 0.35 * | [0.01, 0.62] | 2.29 | 1.02 | 0.16 | |||
| [80] Saies et al. (2014) | 347 | 0.23 ** | [0.13, 0.33] | 8.61 | 0.69 | 0.16 | |||
| [87] Soflu et al. (2011) | 160 | 0.03 | [−0.13, 0.18] | 6.49 | −1.21 | 0.17 | |||
| [88] Stough et al. (2009) | 49 | 0.25 | [−0.03, 0.50] | 3.10 | 0.55 | 0.16 | |||
| [41] Tok et al. (2013). | 52 | 0.26 | [−0.01, 0.50] | 3.25 | 0.62 | 0.16 | |||
| [34] Zizzi et al. (2003) | |||||||||
| Sample 1 | 21 | 0.34 | [−0.11, 0.67] | 1.44 | 0.76 | 0.16 | |||
| Sample 2 | 40 | 0.01 | [−0.30, 0.32] | 2.63 | −0.83 | 0.17 | |||
|
Overall (k = 22) Random effect model |
3431 | 0.16 ** | [0.11, 0.22] | 369 | 0.85 | 0.15 ** | |||
N = sample size; r = effect size (Pearson’s r); CI = confidence interval [lower limit, upper limit]; % weight = relative weight; study removed = shows the overall mean weighted effect size r for all studies, except the study in each row; Fail-safe N = number of studies needed to nullify a significant effect; (a) = intercept value Egger test; rADJUSTED= adjusted estimate of effect (if publication bias is present) through an iterative statistical procedure to calculate a symmetrical funnel plot; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.