The term socio-emotional competence refers to a set of competencies that encompass two key components: the social and emotional domains. Several theoretical approaches have been developed to support these two domains, including those centered on intelligence, skills, and competencies. D. C. McClelland (1973) suggested shifting the focus from intelligence to competence assessment. The latter represents a broader and more intensive ability to understand the environment in order to perceive, interpret, and anticipate appropriate actions (Gottfredson, 1997). In summary, skills are elements of competencies that contribute to the development of various types of competencies and are associated with know-how (Carroll, 1993).

On the other hand, competencies are associated with task execution and are defined as a set of knowledge and practical skills (D. C. McClelland, 1973). Thus, three terms (intelligence, competencies, and skills) are frequently used in efforts to understand the socio-emotional dimension, with variations that include social, emotional, and socio-emotional aspects. One of the earliest related concepts is social intelligence, a term first used by Thorndike (1920), who defined it as the capacity to understand and manage individuals, act wisely in relationships with others, and respond or adapt to different social situations (Mayer & Salovey, 1993). The term social skills appears more frequently in recent literature and refers to different classes of social, situational, and cultural behaviors that contribute to healthy and productive interactions with others (Del Prette & Del Prette, 2019). Regarding the term social competence, although not equivalent, the concept is sometimes used as a synonym for social skill. Social competence can be understood as an evaluative concept referring to performance (manifest and/or private) in interpersonal tasks that meet situational demands and produce consequences. Thus, having well-developed social skills is a necessary but not sufficient condition for possessing social competence, which also requires the ability to perform those skills (Del Prette & Del Prette, 2019).

From the perspective of emotional dimensions, the concepts of emotional intelligence, competence, and skill also stand out. One of the earliest approaches in this area is emotional intelligence, which refers to the ability to perceive, understand, manage, and use emotions effectively in oneself and others. According to Mayer and Salovey (1993), emotional intelligence is conceptualized as a set of cognitive abilities organized into four branches: perceiving emotions, using emotions to facilitate thinking, understanding emotional meanings, and managing emotions. This model emphasizes emotional intelligence as a form of intelligence related to information processing involving emotions. Mayer et al. (2016) further refined this definition, highlighting emotional intelligence as the capacity to reason about emotions and to use emotional information to enhance thought and decision-making. Complementarily, Goleman (1995) popularized the concept in applied contexts, framing emotional intelligence as a set of competencies that influence how individuals manage themselves and their relationships, including self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. Furthermore, Bar-On (1997) conceptualized emotional intelligence as a set of emotional, personal, and social competencies that influence an individual’s ability to succeed in life and maintain psychological well-being. Unlike approaches focused on cognitive abilities, Bar-On defines emotional intelligence as a construct that encompasses five core domains: intrapersonal, interpersonal, stress management, adaptability (reality testing and problem-solving), and general mood (optimism and happiness). Together, these perspectives underline the role of emotional intelligence in psychological well-being, interpersonal functioning, and adaptive behavior.

On the other hand, emotional competence can be understood as a set of knowledge, abilities, skills, and attitudes necessary to understand, express, and regulate appropriate emotional phenomena in oneself and in relation to others (Bisquerra Alzina, 2003). Emotional skills, in turn, are organized into five basic dimensions: cooperation, assertiveness, responsibility, empathy, and self-control. These dimensions are convergent with the concept of emotional intelligence, which encompasses self-awareness and emotional management, self-motivation, empathy, and social skills (Mayer & Salovey, 1993).

In this study, we used the term socio-emotional competencies in accordance with Schoon’s (2021) integrative taxonomy, Domains and Manifestations of Social-Emotional Competencies (DOMASEC), as it is broader and incorporates a range of skills. Socio-emotional competencies can be conceptualized as a set of adaptive capacities that develop through the interplay of social and affective processes, enabling individuals to perceive, experience, and regulate their own emotions, interpret others’ emotional states, and modify behavior in response to shifting circumstances (Marin et al., 2017). These competencies—distinct from strictly academic skills—emerge from reciprocal interactions between innate predispositions and environmental influences, evolve gradually over the lifespan, and remain amenable to enhancement through both formal and informal learning experiences (De Fruyt et al., 2015). Their manifestation—in relatively stable yet context-sensitive patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors—depends on situational demands and can therefore be targeted by tailored interventions aimed at improving individual functioning (Schoon, 2021).

Because socio-emotional competencies reflect dimensions of human capital—such as goal setting, responsible conduct, emotional self-control, and resilience—they have been empirically linked to academic achievement, career success, well-being, and broader socioeconomic outcomes (Organização para Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômicos [OCDE, 2015]; D. Santos & Primi, 2014). Research on these competencies spans multiple domains: in education, they inform programs for holistic student development from early childhood onward (Abed, 2016; D. Santos & Primi, 2014); in psychology, they underpin research on personality, school adjustment, and occupational behavior and in vocational guidance they guide interventions to support the adaptation of adolescents, young adults, and professionals across diverse training backgrounds and career transitions.

In the context of hiring individuals or services, managers often report dissatisfaction with workers’ emotional regulation. They argue that cognitive and technical skills alone are insufficient to address the complex challenges of contemporary society. Thus, the present review focuses on studies addressing socio-emotional competencies in higher education. The development of these competencies is essential for fostering personal, social, and professional relationships. The contemporary world is characterized as volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA), as well as brittle, anxious, non-linear, and incomprehensible (BANI), requiring individuals to possess a diverse set of skills to navigate their personal and professional lives (Grabmeier, 2019). College students, who will soon enter the workforce, must be equipped with these socio-emotional resources.

The term “socio-emotional competencies” broadly describes the cluster of abilities that enable individuals to perceive, express, and manage their own emotions; interpret and respond to others’ emotions; and to adapt behavior effectively as situations evolve. Often referred to in the literature as non-cognitive, character, or “soft” skills—in contrast to more readily quantifiable cognitive abilities (Abrahams et al., 2019)—these capacities range from emotion recognition and regulation to interpersonal problem-solving. Although “skill” and “competence” are sometimes used interchangeably, the term competence usually implies a broader repertoire, encompassing multiple, interrelated skills (OCDE, 2015). In practice, both the conceptualization and measurement of socio-emotional competencies vary widely across research traditions and academic disciplines (Schoon, 2021).

Socio-emotional competencies have been defined and organized within various theoretical frameworks, each emphasizing different facets of emotional and interpersonal functioning. From a developmental-psychological perspective, Saarni (1999) identified eight core emotional competence skills: (a) awareness of one’s own emotions, (b) accurate perception of others’ emotions, (c) facility with an emotion-specific vocabulary, (d) empathic responsiveness, (e) differentiation between internal emotional experience and external expression, (f) adaptive regulation of aversive emotions, (g) effective emotional communication within relationships, and (h) emotional self-efficacy. This model highlights both intrapersonal awareness and the interpersonal application of emotional skills.

In contrast, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL, 2020) proposes a five-domain framework designed for educational contexts: (a) self-awareness, (b) self-management, (c) social awareness, (d) relationship skills, and (e) responsible decision-making (CASEL, 2020). Whereas Saarni’ (1999) framework emphasizes discrete emotion-processing abilities, the CASEL model foregrounds school-based skill development that integrates cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions to support academic and life success.

Lechner et al. (2019) propose that the Big Five personality traits serve as an overarching organizational scaffold for socio-emotional competencies, since each broad trait—Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability—encompasses multiple, more-specific socio-emotional capacities (e.g., conscientiousness includes self-regulation and goal persistence; agreeableness includes empathy and cooperation). By mapping finer-grained skills onto enduring trait dimensions, researchers can leverage the well-validated Big Five taxonomy to predict educational, occupational, and health outcomes across diverse populations and cultures.

Most recently, Schoon (2021) introduced the DOMASEC taxonomy as a response to long-standing conceptual inconsistencies in the field of social-emotional competencies. This two-level model organizes constructs across three core domains—intrapersonal (self-orientation), interpersonal (other-orientation), and task-oriented—and three distinct manifestations within each domain: affective, cognitive, and behavioral. For instance, within the intrapersonal domain, emotional self-efficacy (affective), self-concept (cognitive), and self-regulation (behavioral) are delineated; likewise, empathy (affective), perspective-taking (cognitive), and cooperation (behavioral) represent key facets of the interpersonal domain. A central motivation for developing this taxonomy was to address the pervasive jingle-jangle fallacy, a conceptual pitfall that undermines theoretical clarity and empirical comparability. The jingle fallacy involves applying the same label to different constructs, while the jangle fallacy refers to using different labels for conceptually similar constructs. These issues, rooted in divergent disciplinary languages and measurement approaches, have led to a fragmented knowledge base. As Schoon (2021) emphasizes, the DOMASEC framework aims to harmonize terminology across disciplines, promote conceptual precision, and support the classification, assessment, and integration of social-emotional competencies within and across research traditions.

Although the Big Five functions effectively as a macro-level organizer—providing parsimonious, stable dimensions that subsume many socio-emotional skills—it differs conceptually from “competencies,” which are defined as trainable, context-sensitive abilities to recognize, regulate, and express emotions or behaviors in specific situations (Lechner et al., 2019). Personality traits describe a person’s general dispositions or tendencies (“I am generally organized”), whereas socio-emotional competencies refer to actionable capabilities (“I can apply stress-management strategies under pressure”) that can be explicitly taught, learned, and assessed in educational or therapeutic settings. By combining the trait framework with competence-based taxonomies such as DOMASEC, researchers and practitioners can achieve both broad predictive power and fine-grained guidance for intervention design.

Political, health, and social changes, along with globalization and advances in technology and science, have been reshaping the world of work—intensifying the challenges of entering and remaining in the labor market and demanding lifelong, continuous learning (A. M. S. Silva et al., 2015). In this context, higher education plays a decisive role in the university–to-work transition, as students must develop not only cognitive and technical competencies but also socio-emotional competencies (Gondim et al., 2014). Accordingly, institutions should revise their curricula by incorporating interdisciplinary, active, and personalized teaching approaches that foster digital literacy, experiential learning, and the strengthening of socio-emotional repertoires (Teng et al., 2019).

The growing demand for professionals capable of addressing complex problems with adaptability and resilience has elevated socio-emotional competencies—such as self-awareness, emotional regulation, empathy, and teamwork—to a central position in the contemporary job market (Adib-Hajbaghery & Sharifi, 2017). Empirical studies have identified these competencies as predictors of academic success, professional adjustment, and the physical and psychological well-being of university students (Expósito et al., 2018). Given their malleability and positive impact on the development of technical and cognitive skills, it is essential to map the primary correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies in university student populations. Studies investigating the predictors and consequents of socio-emotional competencies remain relevant, as these competencies contribute to strengthening students’ cognitive and technical skills sets. A systematic examination of variables identified in the literature as correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies can help elucidate theoretical models of how socio-emotional competencies interact with other variables in higher education. Therefore, this study aimed to identify, analyze, and synthesize the correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies through a scoping review of quantitative studies addressing university student samples.

A scoping review is a method used to synthesize and disseminate research findings on a specific subject (Tricco et al., 2016). Its purpose is to map the state of the art in a thematic area using a rigorous and transparent process, providing a descriptive overview of the studies reviewed (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews do not aim to evaluate the quality of available evidence, but instead focus on identifying key concepts and research gaps within a given field (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). They also differ from traditional literature reviews, as they follow a systematic approach.

This scoping review identified, analyzed, and summarized the correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies based on eight articles retrieved from online databases in the fields of education, psychology and psychiatry, health, medical, and social sciences. Four studies investigated five correlates of socio-emotional competencies, one study investigated two antecedent variables, and three investigated four consequents. The identified variables are related to key aspects of life and career, particularly within academic and professional settings. These variables were classified into four categories: (a) social, referring to social functioning and interpersonal relationships; (b) emotional, focused on the identification of emotions; (c) reasoning and learning, encompassing understanding, judgment, decision-making, and knowledge acquisition; and (d) overcoming academic barriers, defined as strategies for achieving goals despite challenges.

The correlates identified fall within the emotional domain (emotional intelligence and alexithymia) and the reasoning and learning domain (decision-making, critical thinking, and lifelong learning). These findings suggest that developing socio-emotional competencies may help prevent impulsive and unplanned decision-making. The results corroborate the literature, as socio-emotional competencies are frequently associated with a sense of control over one’s environment and an interest in learning (Gondim et al., 2014), as well as with emotional regulation and creativity, which are linked to positive affect and well-being in interpersonal relationships (Costa & Sánchez, 2013). The results also align with the findings of Damásio (2017), who argue that emotions support reasoning and learning. Although emotions were historically viewed as opposed to reason, current perspectives recognize their integration into reasoning, learning, and decision-making. Thus, emotions play a central role in cognitive orientation (F. M. T. Santos, 2007).

Moreover, two antecedents were identified, both related to the reasoning and learning domain (self-regulation and critical thinking). These variables predicted socio-emotional competencies associated with interpersonal relationships and life administration and management. By managing their learning environment and maintaining a sense of a purpose, students gain greater control and a sense of responsibility over their plans and goals. The development of socio-emotional competencies is also associated with the creation of social networks that support the construction of life and career projects. Control over the learning environment enhances the depth and content of discussions and improves critical thinking. Therefore, critical thinking was identified as a mediating factor in the relationship between self-regulation and socio-emotional competencies. This finding aligns with the studies by M. M. McClelland et al. (2007) and Zimmerman et al. (1992), which show that self-regulation contributes to motivation, goal setting, and sustained attention in the classroom. Critical thinking can improve academic performance and also support the development of students’ socio-emotional competencies (Akcaalan, 2016).

Finally, the identified consequents relate to the social domain (leadership and psychological and social adjustment) and to overcoming academic barriers (likelihood of dropout and performance motivation). These variables emerged from socio-emotional competencies in the domains of interpersonal relationships, self-management of emotions, and life administration and management. These findings are consistent García-Sancho et al. (2014), who argue that the development of socio-emotional competencies promotes academic success, the ability to adapt to the external demands, cope with adversity and stress, and establish and maintain healthier relationships and effective leadership. Similarly, Damásio (2017) states that individuals with well-developed socio-emotional competencies exhibit more positive self-perceptions, including greater self-efficacy, persistence toward goals, commitment, and higher academic performance.

A greater number of studies have been conducted in other contexts, particularly in elementary education. Consequently, the body of knowledge in this field is more consolidated and advanced, with additional studies identifying further correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies. Gonçalves (2022) found that socio-emotional competencies are strong predictors of academic performance in school-aged children, highlighting the relevance of socio-emotional learning for academic success. Souza (2019) examined high school students and found that those with experience in the labor market tend to exhibit more developed socio-emotional competencies and greater career adaptability than their peers without such experience. Still within the educational context, Abed (2016) found that personality, self-efficacy, self-concept, and self-confidence positively predict individual achievement, development, academic training, and future success. Well-developed socio-emotional competencies are also associated with improved individual and team performance, better health and quality of life, a more positive organizational climate, and enhanced cognitive and learning skills.

These findings prompt relevant reflections regarding the potential overlap between the proposed categories of socio-emotional competencies. It is recognized that certain socio-emotional competencies may exert influence across multiple dimensions of human functioning, reflecting the inherently multidimensional and integrative nature of these constructs (CASEL, 2020; Schoon, 2021). However, the categorization adopted in this study was guided by the predominant functional role of each competence, prioritizing its core theoretical focus as defined in the instruments and conceptual frameworks employed. For example, although decision-making may positively affect interpersonal relationships—by supporting conflict resolution or enhancing communication strategies—it is conceptually more closely aligned with self-regulation, goal setting, and life management processes. Therefore, it was classified under “life administration and management”, as this is the domain where its application is most autonomous and structurally significant. Such overlaps are intrinsic to the field of socio-emotional competencies, reflecting the complexity of real-life contexts in which different skills operate in an interdependent and dynamic manner. Rather than compromising the analytical clarity of the proposed framework, this overlap reinforces the understanding of socio-emotional competencies as dynamic systems capable of producing transversal effects across various contexts. This insight highlights the need for future research aimed at deepening the understanding of these interrelationships, thereby contributing to the development of more refined and comprehensive theoretical models and taxonomies. Moreover, further research focused on the university environment is essential to advance knowledge production and support the consolidation of theoretical models and robust interventions in higher education and professional contexts.

This scoping review identified, analyzed and summarized the correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competence in studies conducted with university students. The findings show relevant relationships between socio-emotional competence and social and emotional variables, reasoning, learning, and coping with academic challenges. These findings underscore the importance of further research and practical applications aimed at fostering the development of socio-emotional competence in university students.

Most of the retrieved studies were cross-sectional, with only one using a longitudinal design, revealing a gap in studies of this nature. The publications predominantly investigated correlations between variables, with few studies focusing on antecedents and consequents; evidence in these areas remain limited. These findings suggest that socio-emotional competencies are seen as predictors of other variables, supporting the development of theoretical models that can inform the design of interventions. Such findings highlight the importance of fostering socio-emotional competencies to promote other competencies relevant for life and career.

Regarding limitations, this scoping review followed the systematic and rigorous procedures in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (Tricco et al., 2016). The selection of online databases, search terms, and inclusion and exclusion criteria were well-founded and justified but reflect the authors’ methodological choices. Alternative decisions might have yielded different results, conclusions, and insights. Moreover, the use of varied terminology, such as social and emotional competencies, socio-emotional skills, emotional-social learning, social emotional learning, socio-emotional abilities, and social and emotional intelligence reveals the lack of terminological standardization, which may have hindered access to other relevant studies on this topic. Broader search strategies, including keywords related only to social or emotional adjectives, might have retrieved additional studies. However, we intentionally focused on studies that addressed both domains of competence (social and emotional) to specifically examine studies that conceptualize this construct as an independent domain. Finally, including other types of documents, such as theses and dissertations, might have expanded the scope of findings and perhaps uncovered additional correlates, antecedents, and consequents of socio-emotional competencies.

The search and identification of correlates, antecedents, or consequents of emotional competencies is important, as it can provide insights for further investigations, support the design of interventions, and inform the development of educational policies. Thus, this study provides a comprehensive and systematized overview of the variables associated with socio-emotional competencies in higher education, serving as a reliable source for future researchers to identify both consolidated findings and gaps in the literature, thereby guiding new studies and research agendas. This may also support the implementation of programs to foster socio-emotional competencies more systematically and universally across disciplines and undergraduate and graduate programs. Based on the findings of the reviewed studies, there are potential implications for practices in both educational and career contexts, which can contribute to strengthening socio-emotional competencies. Interventions intentionally designed to promote these competencies, as well as other transversal and transferable competencies, are suggested. As an educational policy, more deliberate actions should be taken to encourage exploratory behavior, openness to new experiences, human interaction, and social engagement. For example, institutions could promote students’ involvement in activities beyond the classroom, such as sports, voluntary internships, participation in research laboratories, and university extension programs.

The role of educational institutions is to encourage the continuous pursuit of knowledge and to prepare future generations to engage in environmentally sustainable, economically viable, socially equitable, and culturally inclusive activities. In this sense, well-developed and well-regulated socio-emotional competencies enable individuals to deal with the complex challenges of the 21^st century.