yagya

'''Abstract:''' Navigating the complex landscape of adolescence in the digital age presents unique challenges, with social media, technological divides, and academic pressures intensifying the already demanding expectations placed on teenagers. This study explores the role of Emotional Intelligence (EI) in ethical decision-making among high school students. Emotional Intelligence, encompassing abilities such as self-awareness, empathy, and emotional regulation, plays a crucial role in understanding and managing emotions, which is essential for ethical reasoning. A survey was conducted among 68 students from an ethnically and academically diverse suburban high school, assessing their EI levels and ethical decision-making capabilities through a series of dilemmas. The results indicate a significant correlation between higher EI scores and better ethical decision-making abilities. Respondents with higher EI were more adept at navigating moral dilemmas, suggesting that EI serves as a valuable predictor of ethical behavior. Additionally, a secondary survey compared students' theoretical ethical choices with their anticipated real-life actions, highlighting the influence of peer pressure and social norms on decision-making. The findings underscore the importance of fostering EI skills in educational settings to better equip students for the ethical challenges they will face. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on the intersection of EI and ethics, emphasizing the need for holistic educational approaches that prioritize emotional and ethical development. Future research should expand to diverse populations and employ longitudinal methods to further elucidate the causal relationships between EI and ethical decision-making.

'''Introduction'''

Navigating the complex landscape of adolescence in the digital age presents a unique set of challenges that previous generations may not have encountered. The proliferation of social media platforms and the ever-present Apple/Android technological divide have fundamentally altered the dynamics of friendship and social interaction. While our parents may have had to contend with peer pressure and social hierarchies, today's teenagers face the added complexities of maintaining online personas, managing digital footprints, and negotiating the intricacies of virtual communication.

Furthermore, the academic landscape has become increasingly competitive, with students feeling immense pressure to excel in rigorous coursework such as Advanced Placement (AP) classes. The quest for acceptance into prestigious universities has become a driving force behind academic pursuits, intensifying the already demanding expectations placed on adolescence.

In the midst of these challenges, the importance of Emotional Intelligence (EI) cannot be overstated. EI, a multifaceted construct encompassing the ability to perceive, understand, manage, and regulate one's own emotions, as well as effectively navigate the emotions of others, plays a pivotal role in ethical decision-making. While the connection between emotions and moral reasoning has been a topic of philosophical discourse for centuries, recent advancements in psychology, neuroscience, and organizational behavior have shed new light on the intricate relationship between affective states and ethical judgments.

The notion that emotions play a pivotal role in ethical decision-making is not a recent revelation. Scholars and thinkers across disciplines such as Aristotle and Immanuel Kant have long debated the intricate relationship between affective states and moral reasoning. Recent advancements in psychology, neuroscience, and organizational behavior have further fueled interest in how Emotional Intelligence serves as a catalyst or impediment in the ethical decision-making process.

To appreciate the role of Emotional Intelligence in ethical decision making, it is essential to delve into the roots of this complicated and intertwined construct. At the forefront of this research are scholars such as Peter Salovey, president of Yale University, and psychologist Daniel Goleman, a Harvard graduate. Salovey's seminal work laid the foundation for the modern understanding of EI, conceptualizing it as the capacity to monitor and discriminate among one's own and others' feelings, and to utilize this emotional information to inform decision-making processes (Mayer et al.). Goleman, building upon Salovey's framework, popularized the concept of EI and emphasized its relevance across various domains of human life, including leadership, interpersonal relationships, and, notably, ethical decision-making (Drigas et al.).  

In today's rapidly changing world, where adolescents face unprecedented social, academic, and technological pressures, cultivating Emotional Intelligence emerges as a vital skillset. By honing their ability to recognize and manage their emotions, as well as empathize with others, teenagers can navigate the complexities of adolescence with greater resilience and integrity. Moreover, by integrating EI into their ethical decision-making processes, young people can foster a sense of moral responsibility and contribute to creating a more compassionate and ethical society.

'''Literature Review'''

Several studies across different health professions have highlighted the importance of EI in fostering effective therapeutic relationships and improving patient outcomes. However, within the pharmacy profession, research on EI remains limited, presenting a gap in our understanding of its role and relevance. The existing literature underscores the multifaceted nature of EI, encompassing abilities such as self-awareness, empathy, and emotional regulation, all of which are crucial for pharmacists in their interactions with patients, colleagues, and other healthcare professionals. According to Frank Romanelli, professor of pharmacy at UK College, while traditional markers of intelligence have long been used in pharmacy education and practice, the incorporation of EI may offer a complementary approach to enhancing professional competence and patient-centered care. Studies outside pharmacy, particularly in medicine and nursing, have shown associations between EI and various outcomes, including improved communication, greater patient satisfaction, and enhanced coping with stress (Romanelli et al.). These findings suggest that EI could serve as a valuable predictor of success and effectiveness in healthcare settings, including pharmacies. However, challenges exist in defining and measuring EI, with debates surrounding its conceptualization and the reliability of assessment instruments. The lack of standardized measures tailored specifically for pharmacy professionals further complicates research efforts in this area. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of understanding and incorporating EI into pharmacy education and practice are considerable. By fostering emotional intelligence skills among pharmacists and pharmacy students, such as active listening, empathy, and conflict resolution, pharmacy practice could evolve towards a more patient-centered approach, ultimately improving health outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Emotional Intelligence (EI) is closely linked to ethical decision-making, acting as a guiding force in understanding and managing emotions, both in oneself and others. The concept, initially conceptualized by Peter Salovey and further popularized by Daniel Goleman, underscores the importance of EI in various facets of human life, including ethical decision-making. Individuals with higher EI are generally better equipped to navigate complex emotional landscapes, which often accompany ethical dilemmas, allowing for a more balanced and thoughtful decision-making process. This connection suggests that EI plays a pivotal role in influencing the quality of ethical decisions, as it facilitates a deeper understanding and consideration of emotional nuances in moral reasoning. Building on this understanding, recent neuroscientific studies, as highlighted by Joshua D. Greene from Harvard University, have identified neural pathways linking emotional centers in the brain with regions responsible for moral reasoning. These findings provide empirical support for the inherent link between emotional experiences and the ethical judgments individuals make. The ethical decision-making process frequently presents individuals with moral predicaments demanding careful consideration and reflection, necessitating a harmonious balance between reason and emotion (Greene et al.). The ethical decision making process often confronts individuals with moral predicaments that require careful consideration and reflection. From corporate boardrooms to healthcare settings, professionals are tasked with navigating ethical dilemmas that necessitate a delicate balance between reason and emotion. 

To comprehend the impact of Emotional Intelligence on these decisions, we turn to the work of ethics such as Lawrence Kohlberg, professor in the Psychology Department at the University of Chicago and at the Graduate School of Education at Harvard University, and Carol Gilligan, Graduate of Harvard University, who have explored the developmental stages of moral reasoning and underscored the role of emotions in shaping ethical perspective (Kohlberg et al.). Kohlberg describes six stages of moral development, grouped into three levels: pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional. Each stage represents a different way of understanding and reasoning about moral dilemmas, with increasingly complex and abstract moral considerations at higher stages. Kohlberg presents empirical evidence to support his theory, drawing from longitudinal studies and cross-cultural research. He discusses how individuals progress through the stages of moral development and the factors that influence moral reasoning, such as cognitive development and socialization. Kohlberg discusses the practical implications of his theory for education, parenting, and moral reasoning in society. He argues that fostering moral development requires creating environments that promote critical thinking, perspective-taking, and moral reflection. 

Peter J. Jordan, a Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Griffith Business School, states beyond individual decision-makers, organizations are increasingly recognizing the relevance of Emotional Intelligence in fostering ethical cultures. High levels of EI among leaders have been linked to improved ethical climate, employee satisfaction, and organization performance (Jordan et al.).  Within differing opinions, it is crucial to consider the thoughts of everyone, especially those who are directly affected or involved in ethical decision-making. That is why researchers have surveyed corporate employees, healthcare workers and the general public. However, the one group that has been left out of the discussion is high school students. Given high schoolers age and environment, understanding their opinion regarding important decisions that they will make in the future is valuable. Thus, this study aims to explore and interpret the question: What is the role of Emotional Intelligence in Ethical Decision-Making?

'''Methods'''

In order to address this question a survey was designed that asked the participant to answer a number of questions to determine their emotional intelligence level and Ethical decision-making capabilities. All participants came from an ethnically diverse, co-ed, 9-12th grade suburban highschool (MHS) and they were between the ages of 14-18 and grades 9-12th. As much as my participants were ethnically diverse they were academically diverse as well. To collect data, participants filled out an anonymous survey.

The survey first included demographic questions which included questions on grade, age, gender, ethnicity and daily phone usage. 

It was then followed up with questions to determine the participants' Emotional Intelligence. Emotional Intelligence is known to have a variety of pillars, These include self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, social skills, emotional expression, adaptability, conflict resolution, stress management and relationship building. Each pillar included 2 yes or no questions to determine the participants emotional intelligence. Participants scoring from 17-20 were considered to have high emotional intelligence, 13-16 points: moderate emotional intelligence, 8-12 points: developing emotional intelligence and 0-7 points: low emotional intelligence. An example of questions included were ‘Are you generally motivated to achieve your goals, even in the face of obstacles?’ and ‘Can you easily understand and share the feelings of others?’

Finally, the third part of the survey included 5 different situations, which were adapted from Santa Clara County’s workplace ethics survey, from which the participant was provided a dilemma where they had to choose the most ethical between 3 different decisions. Additionally, participants were instructed to pick what they thought was the most ethically correct answer and not what they would do in the situation since these don’t always align. Question one was a confidentiality situation where the participant overheard their teacher discussing another student's confidential information with someone who is not involved in the student. Question 2 being an integrity dilemma, participants had to decide what is the most ethical course of action when a peer asks you to manipulate data. Third, an environmental dilemma, participants had to decide what to do when seeing their teacher smoking a cigarette on school grounds. Forth was an inclusion predicament where one of the participants' classmates constantly dismissed ideas from a classmate who comes from a different cultural background. And last was testing your personal integrity where you accidentally receive an email containing confidential information about a student's academic achievements. 

Once the survey was complete the participant was then provided the correct answer in addition to the reason the other choices were incorrect or not as strong of a decision.

Finally the most ethical answer earned 1 point while the 2 less ethical answers received 0.

Total points were then calculated for an individual's ethical decision-making score (ranging from 0 to 5). With higher scores indicate a better understanding and application of ethical principles in the given scenarios.

'''Results'''

68 people participated in this study. 35 were male 334 were female. High school juniors made up the largest group with 37 (53%) followed by 15 were seniors, 11 sophomores and 4 freshmen. The average of respondents was 16.29 years old. Additionally about 80% of students used their phone for more than 4 hours a day. 

Respondents were given an emotional intelligence survey, shown which included 20 Yes/No questions which were used to evaluate their emotional intelligence score. The range of emotional intelligence scores were from 13 to 18 with the mean emotional intelligence (EI) score of respondents being 1 or interpreted as ‘developing emotional intelligence’. This can be seen in table 1 which displays how students  responded to the Emotional Intelligence survey. The question most commonly answered yes to was “Do you actively work to build and maintain positive relations with others?” with 84% of respondents answering yes to. The question most commonly answered was “Can you easily understand and share the feelings of others?” with only 36% of respondents answering yes.

Table 1: Evaluated EI Score
{|
|
|Low EI

0-7
|Developing EI

8-12
|Moderate EI

13-16
|High EI

17-20
|-
|Number of Students
|2
|35
|17
|13
|}

Consequently, respondents were given 5 ethical dilemmas in school settings. Each dilemma had 3 answer choices, ranging from unethical to most ethical. The most common correctly answered dilemma was the personal integrity dilemma followed by the school integrity, confidentiality, environmental responsibility and diversity and inclusion with the most incorrect answers. On average respondents got a score of 2.67 out of 5 points on the ethical dilemma survey shown on table 2.

Table 2: Ethical Decision-Making Scores
{|
|Score(X/5):
|0 - Low
|1
|2
|3
|4
|5 - High
|-
|Number of Students:
|7
|11
|11
|15
|14
|9
|}

Table 3: Average Ethical Score in terms of EI
{|
!EI Score
!Average Ethical 

Score
|7
|0
|-
|8
|0
|-
|9
|1.57
|-
|10
|1.42
|-
|11
|3.45
|-
|12
|3
|-
|13
|2
|-
|14
|4
|-
|15
|4
|-
|16
|3.6
|-
|17
|4.5
|-
|18
|4.6
|}

Additionally, a separate survey was conducted with the same sample of teenagers where respondents were asked to pick what they would do in the scenario compared to what they thought was the best decision in the original survey. This separate survey was conducted because the researcher hypothesized that students would choose differently depending on the situation. According to Dustin Albert a professor at Duke University, When adolescents are in the presence of peers, their risk-taking behavior increases significantly compared to when they are alone. This is not observed to the same extent in adults. (Albert et al.) Making decisions may seem inherently simple however we can see how this may not be the case in many situations. For example, making the decision to recycle is generally easy and is widely recognized as an important step towards conserving natural resources, reducing pollution, and combating climate change. Many people are aware of the benefits of recycling and understand the importance of separating recyclable materials from regular waste to minimize environmental harm. However, putting this decision into action can be challenging due to various obstacles.

From this we saw a similar emotional intelligence score, displayed in table 5, ranging from 6-18 with a similar mean emotional independence(EI) score of respondents being 11 or interpreted as ‘developing emotional intelligence’. When comparing table 1 and 5, we can see how in both surveys students answered the Ethical decision-making questions similarly. The fifth table shows a vast difference in ethical decision-making scores when compared to table 2; a lot lower scores and an average score of 1.04 out of 5 points was also seen when comparing tables 3 and 6. From this we can see the difference in what students would do in the situation and what they believe is the right thing to do. Factors such as being friends with a person, peer pressure or social norms plays a role in this difference in score.

'''Additional''' '''Data'''

Table 4: Survey 2 Evaluated EI Score
{|
|
|Low EI

0-7
|Developing EI

8-12
|Moderate EI

13-16
|High EI

17-20
|-
|Number of Students
|3
|11
|5
|4
|}

Table 5: Survey 2 Ethical Decision-Making Scores
{|
|Score(X/5):
|0
|1
|2
|3
|4
|5
|-
|Number of Students:
|6
|12
|3
|2
|0
|0
|}

Table 6: Survey 2 Average Ethical Score in terms of EI 
{|
!EI Score
!Average Ethical 

Score
|6
|0
|-
|7
|0
|-
|8
|0
|-
|9
|1
|-
|10
|0.25
|-
|11
|1.16
|-
|12
|<nowiki>-</nowiki>
|-
|13
|1
|-
|14
|0.25
|-
|15
|1.83
|-
|16
|0.5
|-
|17
|0
|-
|18
|1
|}

'''Discussion'''

The findings of this study indicate that a significant portion of high school students fall into the category of "developing emotional intelligence," with the mean emotional intelligence (EI) score among respondents being 1. This suggests that there is a considerable opportunity for growth and development in emotional intelligence skills among adolescents. While this may seem concerning at first glance, it aligns with previous research highlighting the developmental nature of emotional intelligence during the teenage years. Rocio Collado-Soler of the Health Research Centre from University of Almeria states a strong relationship between age and emotional intelligence, particularly when adequate levels of both are present. This suggests that adolescents who are older generally show a higher level of Emotional Intelligence (Collado-Soler et al.). It's not entirely surprising to find that many teenagers are still in the process of honing their emotional intelligence skills as they navigate the complexities of adolescence. Comparing these results to data from the entire population could offer valuable insights into how suburban high school students fare in terms of emotional intelligence compared to their peers nationwide.

Additionally, a correlation between emotional intelligence and ethical decision making can be seen in a school setting. As respondents scored higher on the emotional intelligence survey, they also scored higher on the ethical decision making  survey. This correlation is displayed in table 3 where emotional intelligence scores and ethical decision making scores were compared. Additionally based on the data from the second survey we can see how ethical decision making is not only affected by emotional intelligence but a variety of other factors such as peer pressure and biases.

With students spending a majority of their adolescence in learning environments we can see how schools play a crucial role in not only academic development but also in fostering social and emotional skills that are essential for navigating ethical dilemmas effectively. Additionally, the results of the ethical dilemma survey demonstrate areas where students may need further education or support in making ethical decisions. 

For example, the lower scores on dilemmas related to diversity and inclusion suggest a need for fostering a more inclusive environment within schools and promoting cultural understanding among students. Finding that a majority of respondents fell into the "developing emotional intelligence" category this may be a sign for schools and educators to implement programs to enhance emotional intelligence skills among students, which could in turn positively impact their ethical decision-making abilities.

The correlation observed between emotional intelligence (EI) and ethical decision-making among high school students in this study presents intriguing implications for both educational practice and policy. The findings suggest that students with higher EI scores tend to exhibit better ethical decision-making abilities, emphasizing the integral role of emotional intelligence in navigating complex moral dilemmas.

The relationship between EI and ethical decision-making is particularly significant in the context of adolescence, a critical period of social, emotional, and cognitive development. As students transition through high school, they encounter a variety of challenges that require not only academic intelligence but also emotional resilience and ethical discernment. The results of this study underscore the importance of incorporating emotional intelligence training and ethical decision making into school lessons to equip students with the essential skills needed to make sound ethical choices.

Furthermore, the study highlights specific areas where students may benefit from targeted interventions, such as diversity and inclusion. The lower scores observed in dilemmas related to cultural sensitivity suggest a need for fostering a more inclusive school environment and promoting cultural understanding among students. By addressing these areas through educational programs and initiatives, schools can play a pivotal role in cultivating an ethical and inclusive community.

'''Limitations'''

Some limitations that come with survey based research is inability to establish causation, sampling bias and misinterpretation. Although surveys can identify associations between variables, they cannot prove causation. Other research methods, such as experiments, are often needed to establish causal relationships.

Another limitation that comes with a survey is Sampling Bias. Since my survey only relies on samples from my highschool it doesn’t exactly represent all highschool students in the U.S. or around the world and doesn’t reflect the views of the entire population.

Additionally, it's important to acknowledge that the sample population in this study consisted of teenagers who are still in the process of emotional and cognitive development. This developmental stage may influence both their emotional intelligence and ethical decision-making abilities. Considering that Lawrence Kohlberg's theory describes a moral development process that may never be fully complete, it raises questions about the extent to which we can assess the ethical decision-making of adolescents in surveys. Therefore, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results, recognizing the potential limitations associated with the developmental stage of the participants.

Lastly, misinterpretation can also be a limitation with a survey. Since my survey was trying to determine how strong a student's ethical decision-making skills were, I didn’t want them to exactly pick what they would do in the situation but pick what they thought was the most ethically correct answer, which is where misinterpretation could happen in the case they misread or skip the instructions.

'''Further Research'''

	Firstly, the use of a survey-based methodology restricts the depth and complexity of the data collected. Surveys, by their nature, are limited to self-reported responses, which may be influenced by social desirability bias or misinterpretation of the questions. Future research employing mixed-method approaches, combining surveys with interviews or observational studies, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms linking EI and ethical decision-making.

Secondly, the sample population of this study was confined to a single suburban high school, limiting the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. High schools across different regions, socioeconomic backgrounds, and cultural contexts may exhibit varying levels of emotional intelligence and ethical decision-making abilities. Therefore, caution should be exercised when extrapolating these findings to other educational settings.

Thirdly, the cross-sectional design of the study prevents the establishment of causal relationships between EI and ethical decision-making. While the observed correlation suggests a potential link between these variables, it does not confirm that higher EI directly causes better ethical decision-making. Longitudinal studies tracking students' EI development and ethical decision-making abilities over time would be necessary to establish a causal relationship.

Lastly, the dichotomous scoring system employed in the EI survey may not capture the full spectrum of emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence is a multifaceted construct encompassing various dimensions, including self-awareness, empathy, and social skills. Future research could benefit from using validated, multidimensional measures of EI to provide a more nuanced understanding of its impact on ethical decision-making.

Despite these limitations, this study contributes to the growing body of literature exploring the intersection between emotional intelligence and ethics in educational settings. By highlighting the pivotal role of EI in shaping moral judgments among high school students, the findings underscore the importance of fostering emotional intelligence skills as part of a comprehensive approach to education.

'''Conclusion'''

The intricate relationship between Emotional Intelligence (EI) and ethical decision-making is a compelling area of study, particularly in the context of high school education. This study offers valuable insights into the correlation between EI scores and ethical decision-making abilities among high school students, highlighting the pivotal role of emotional intelligence in shaping moral judgments.

The findings indicate that higher EI scores are associated with better ethical decision-making abilities among students. This correlation underscores the importance of fostering emotional intelligence skills as part of holistic education, equipping students with the tools needed to navigate complex ethical dilemmas effectively.

Despite the limitations inherent in survey-based research, the results provide a valuable starting point for further exploration and intervention. The data suggests a need for schools to prioritize the development of emotional intelligence skills, alongside academic and cognitive skills, to better prepare students for the ethical challenges they will inevitably face.

Furthermore, the study highlights specific areas, such as diversity and inclusion, where targeted interventions may be beneficial. By addressing these areas through educational programs and initiatives, schools can contribute to creating a more inclusive and ethically aware environment, empowering students to make informed and ethical decisions.

In conclusion, Emotional Intelligence plays a crucial role in ethical decision-making, offering a lens through which to understand and navigate the complexities of moral reasoning. As educators, policymakers, and stakeholders in the education system, fostering emotional intelligence skills should be a priority, ensuring that our future leaders are equipped to make ethical decisions that positively impact society.

==3 Bibliography<!-- 
Citations in text will follow a citation-sequence system (i.e. sources are numbered by order of reference so that the first reference cited in the document is [1], the second [2], and so on) with the number of the reference in square brackets. Once a source has been cited, the same number is used in all subsequent references. If the numbers are not in a continuous sequence, use commas (with no spaces) between numbers. If you have more than two numbers in a continuous sequence, use the first and last number of the sequence joined by a hyphen 

You should ensure that all references are cited in the text and that the reference list. References should preferably refer to documents published in Scipedia. Unpublished results should not be included in the reference list, but can be mentioned in the text. The reference data must be updated once publication is ready. Complete bibliographic information for all cited references must be given following the standards in the field (IEEE and ISO 690 standards are recommended). If possible, a hyperlink to the referenced publication should be given. See examples for Scipedia’s articles [1], other publication articles [2], books [3], book chapter [4], conference proceedings [5], and online documents [6], shown in references section below. -->==




==4 Acknowledgments<!-- Acknowledgments should be inserted at the end of the document, before the references section. -->==




==5 References<!--[1] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Article code. Available: http://www.scipedia.com/ucode.

[2] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Volume number, first page-last page.

[3] Author, C. (Year). Title of work: Subtitle (edition.). Volume(s). Place of publication: Publisher.

[4] Author of Part, D. (Year). Title of chapter or part. In A. Editor & B. Editor (Eds.), Title: Subtitle of book (edition, inclusive page numbers). Place of publication: Publisher.

[5] Author, E. (Year, Month date). Title of the article. In A. Editor, B. Editor, and C. Editor. Title of published proceedings. Paper presented at title of conference, Volume number, first page-last page. Place of publication.

[6] Institution or author. Title of the document. Year. [Online] (Date consulted: day, month and year). Available: http://www.scipedia.com/document.pdf. 
-->==