THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTRAPERSONAL / INTERPERSONAL

INTELLIGENCE AND PERCEIVED SELF-ESTEEM OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

STUDENTS IN LAGUNA COLLEGE’S A.Y. 2023-2024

Apostol, Jezkiel Raymond M.

Contemplacion, Charisse D.

Garcia, Alvie Jennel E.

Lucido, Luke Matthew A.

Maleon, Joscel F.

Roda, Mary Franchesca A.

LAGUNA COLLEGE

A.Y. 2023-2024
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Self-esteem plays a significant role in our lives. Various research indicates that

having high self-esteem has numerous positive outcomes, including better social

relationships, more success at school and work, improved mental and physical health,

and less antisocial behavior (Orth & Robins, 2022).

According to Donnellan et al. (2011), self-esteem is an individual's subjective

evaluation of their worth as a person. High self-esteem means having a highly positive

view of oneself, while low self-esteem refers to uncertain or negative views of oneself

(Campbell et al., 1996). Reflective self-evaluations and appraisals of others are widely

regarded as the antecedents of self-esteem. For instance, William James (1890), the

first to introduce the concept of self-esteem, defined it in terms of success or

competence in personally valued domains. Conversely, theories that are social in nature

suggest that perceived appraisals from others (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934) and the level

of social acceptance (Leary & Baumeister, 2000) influence self-esteem. These theories

both highlight that positive feedback from others will increase one's own level of

self-esteem.

Considering the link between these concepts, Howard Gardner's idea of

'personal intelligences' may be potentially relevant. The term 'personal intelligences'

refers to both intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence, two of the eight intelligences

described by Gardner (1983) in his theory of Multiple Intelligences. According to

Gardner, intrapersonal intelligence is the ability to recognize and understand one’s own

moods, temperaments, motivations, and intentions, while interpersonal intelligence is

the ability to recognize and understand the moods, temperaments, motivations, and

intentions of others.

Intrapersonally intelligent individuals are characterized by having self-knowledge

and the ability to act adaptively based on that knowledge, including having an accurate

picture of oneself, such as one’s strengths and limitations, as well as the capacity for

self-discipline, self-understanding, and self-esteem (Armstrong, 2018). In contrast,

interpersonally intelligent individuals are characterized by having an ability to cooperate

in groups, be instinctively sensitive to the feelings of others, have good communication

skills, and naturally make distinctions between people easily (Sellars, 2008). These

abilities play a key role in fostering positive outcomes, such as having positive

self-evaluations and positive social responses linked to self-esteem. A small amount of

research supports this relationship (Hoyle, 2006; Riggio et al., 1990). Hoyle (2006)

concluded that people with more negative self-knowledge tend to have lower

self-esteem, and the amount and complexity play a role in influencing the level of

self-esteem. Conversely, Riggio et al. (1990) found a positive correlation between social

skills and self-esteem. However, despite these insights, there is a scarce amount of

literature on the topic. Studies investigating the relationship between social skills, social

relationships, and self-esteem present inconsistent findings. More importantly, the topic
of personal intelligences as a whole is also not given much attention. Therefore, it is of

the researchers' interest to conduct a study on the relationship between personal

intelligence and self-esteem.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of the study is to determine the relationship between the personal

intelligences and self-esteem among Laguna College’s Senior High School Students, in

the academic year 2023-2024.

Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents, in terms of:

1.1 Age

1.2 Gender

1.3 Academic Strand

2. Is interpersonal intelligence more dominant than interpersonal intelligence among

Laguna College’s Senior High School students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents demographic, in terms of:

3.1 Age

3.2 Gender

3.3 Academic Strand

4. What is the Laguna College’s Senior High School students' level of self-esteem?
 5. Is there a significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and the

respondents demographic, in terms of:

5.1 Age

5.2 Gender

5.3 Academic Strand

6. Is there a significant relationship between intrapersonal/ interpersonal

intelligence and levels of self- esteem?

Hypothesis

1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents age.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents' age.

2. Ho: There is no significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents gender.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents' gender.

3. Ho: There is no significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents academic strand.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligence and the respondents' academic strand.

4. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and

the respondents age.

 Ha: There is a significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and the

respondents' age.

5. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and

the respondents gender.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and the

respondents' gender.

6. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and

the respondents academic strand.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between the perceived self-esteem and the

respondents' academic strand.

7. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligences and the level of self-esteem of the Laguna College’s Senior High

School Students.

Ha: There is a significant relationship between the interpersonal / intrapersonal

intelligences and the level of self-esteem of the Laguna College’s Senior High

School Students.
Conceptual Framework

Figure 1.1: Paradigm of the Study

Figure 1.1 illustrates the paradigm of the study, which represents the research

Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model. The input of the study involved the demographic

profile of the respondents in terms of their age, gender and academic strand as well as

their level of self esteem and type of personal intelligence which is Intrapersonal

Intelligence and Interpersonal Intelligence. Questionnaires were provided in order to

collect adequate data to measure and determine the respondents' dominant personal

intelligence and their level of self esteem. The gathered results were then analyzed and
evaluated to know their dominant personal intelligence, their level of self esteem and

their relationship with each other.

Significance of the Study

This study titled “The Relationship between Intrapersonal / Interpersonal

Intelligence and perceived Self-esteem of Senior High School Students in Laguna

College’s A.Y. 2023-24 ” may be conducted to benefit the following:

Senior High School Students. Understanding these relationships may aid

senior high school students in comprehending self-esteem factors, enabling them to

develop strategies to improve their interpersonal and intrapersonal skills,as well as their

self-esteem.

Educators. This research provides valuable insights into the relationship

between personal intelligence and students' self-esteem, aiding in the development of

effective teaching methods and support systems.

Parents and Guardians. Understanding the interaction between these factors

may help parents support their children's emotional development, improve

communication, and provide guidance to boost self-esteem.

Guidance Counselor. This research could guide the guidance counselors in

developing interventions and programs that promote intrapersonal and interpersonal

skill development and enhance students' self-esteem.

 Future Researchers. This study offers a comprehensive understanding of the

relationship between intrapersonal intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and

self-esteem in a specific demographic.

Scope and Limitation

The researchers aim to investigate the relationship between

intrapersonal/interpersonal intelligence and perceived self-esteem of Senior High

School Students of Laguna College’s A.Y. 2023-2024. Only the Intrapersonal and

Interpersonal intelligence from Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligence may be

considered. It may use a standardized approach via google forms online of Laguna

College Senior High School Department. The investigation may be limited to Laguna

College Senior High School Department and may be conducted during the second

semester of Laguna College’s A.Y. 2023-2024.

Definition of Terms

1. Intrapersonal Intelligence is an ability to recognize and understand one’s own

moods, desires, motivations, and intentions.

2. Interpersonal Intelligence is an ability to recognize and understand other

people’s moods, desires, motivations, and intentions.

3. Personal Intelligence refers to both intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence.

4. Self-Esteem is an individual's subjective evaluation of their worth as a person.

(Donnellan et al., 2011)

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter is dedicated to presenting and analyzing relevant literature and

studies sourced both internationally and locally. Its purpose is to offer deeper insights

into the current study.

Foreign Literature

Multiple Intelligences is a theory developed by American psychologist Howard

Gardner that posits that humans have various capabilities or intelligence. He

characterizes 8 of these forms of intelligence as linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial,

musical, bodily-kinesthetic, naturalistic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal.

Gardner (1983) refers to interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence as the

‘personal intelligences’. Notably, these two forms of intelligence are significantly different

compared to the other forms of intelligence. One key distinction is how Gardner views

the ‘personal intelligences’ as interweaving to form a ‘sense of self,’ a symbol

representing all kinds of information about a person and a construct that every individual

develops for themselves (Gardner, 2006, p. 18). Additionally, he also suggests the

influence of cultural norms on the development of these two forms of intelligence, such

as how interpersonal intelligence is more prominent in cultures where more importance

is placed on social connections. More importantly, he also emphasizes that neither form

of intelligence can develop without the other under ordinary circumstances (Gardner,
1983, p. 255).

Interpersonal intelligence refers to the ability to observe and discern differences

among individuals, particularly their moods, temperaments, motivations, and intentions.

People with high interpersonal intelligence tend to excel in group cooperation, are

naturally attuned to others' emotions, and have good communication skills (Sellars,

2008). In contrast, intrapersonal intelligence refers to the knowledge of one's internal

aspects such as being aware of one's feelings, recognizing and distinguishing emotions,

labeling them, and utilizing them to guide and comprehend one's actions. This type of

intelligence includes understanding one's strengths and weaknesses and the capacity

for self-discipline, self-understanding, and self-esteem (Armstrong, 2009).

Regarding self-esteem, William James first coined the term in 1890 to describe

the sense of self-worth when one consistently meets their own expectations for

personally valued activities. However, over time, the definition of self-esteem has

changed. According to Brown (1998), researchers have defined self-esteem in three

different ways. Firstly, self-esteem can refer to 'global self-esteem,' which refers to an

individual's overall affection or general feeling about themselves.Secondly, self-esteem

can be 'domain-specific,' which refers to how individuals evaluate themselves in specific

areas, such as academics or sports. Finally, self-esteem can refer to 'state self-esteem,'

which refers to momentary feelings of self-worth. In this definition, self-worth is the

fleeting emotional state that arises from a positive or negative outcome, such as feeling

proud or ashamed of oneself.

 Furthermore, there are various perspectives regarding the nature and origin of

self-esteem. Brown (1998) classifies some of these approaches as affective, cognitive,

and sociological. The affective approach proposes that feelings of belonging and a

sense of mastery influence self-esteem and that these feelings develop early in life,

owing largely to parent-child interactions. On the other hand, the cognitive approach

contends that the aggregate of one’s self-evaluations in various domains determines

one's overall level of self-esteem. Finally, the sociological approach suggests that

societal variables such as occupational prestige, wealth, education, and social standing

can influence self-esteem. For example, if individuals feel that they are respected and

valued by society as a whole, they tend to possess high self-esteem.

The notion that self-esteem is influenced by one’s self and others is widely

theorized and researched among the body of literature regarding self-esteem. For

instance, according to Moller et al. (2006), understanding the relative influence of

interpersonal and intrapersonal processes on self-esteem can be understood through

the Self-determination theory (SDT). From this perspective, the relative influence of

interpersonal and intrapersonal processes depends on whether self-esteem is true or

contingent. True self-esteem is considered relatively stable and is not particularly

noticeable to the person. Contingent self-esteem, in contrast, is considered more

superficial and salient and is dependent on a person’s internalized criteria, such as

meeting an achievement standard, controlling one’s emotions, amassing wealth, or

becoming famous. This self-esteem, in particular, is characterized by objective

self-awareness that is seeing oneself “through others’ eyes.” According to Moller et al.,

the SDT perspective explains that whether self-esteem is true or contingent depends on

the dialectic between their innate desire to fulfill universal psychological needs for

autonomy, competence, and relatedness and the social environment that either

supports or impedes those strivings. In essence, the SDT perspective maintains that

interpersonal processes, namely the amount of needs satisfied by significant others,

play an important role in determining whether self-esteem is true versus contingent. To

the extent that people experience ongoing satisfaction of their basic needs within the

social environment during their childhood years, they tend to become secure within

themselves and experience a true sense of self-worth, establishing true self-esteem. On

the other hand, if basic needs are not well met during development and within the social

environment, this results in deficits and leads to self-esteem being contingent. When

contingent self-esteem is central for some people, they are compelled to seek

interpersonal feedback that will signify their excellence in conditions that are required for

them to feel good about themselves. In this case, Moller et al. suggests that

interpersonal processes play a much more central role in determining people’s level of

self-esteem.

Mark Leary (2006), in his essay titled “To What Extent is Self-Esteem Influenced

by Interpersonal as Compared with Intrapersonal Processes? What are These

Processes?,” examined the role of interpersonal and intrapersonal factors in

self-esteem. He initially categorized interpersonal and intrapersonal perspectives on

self-esteem into three. The first perspective, which he calls the private self-evaluation
perspective, maintains that healthy self-esteem is based on one’s internal standards

and not affected by interpersonal evaluations. This means that a person’s self-esteem

should not be affected by the appraisals of other people and in the case of that, the

individual is regarded as ‘inauthentic, maladjusted, or overly concerned with

approbation.’ In contrast to this perspective, there is the passive appraisal perspective

that asserts that self-esteem is naturally affected by other people’s evaluations, as well

as other events that have implications related to oneself. It conceptualizes self-esteem

as a summary of self-judgment based on a combination of interpersonal and

intrapersonal information, along with direct experience of the environment. The active

appraisal perspective builds upon this, suggesting that self-esteem is affected by

interpersonal factors because self-esteem is inherently involved in processing certain

kinds of social information. Theories with this perspective regard self-esteem as part of

a process by which people actively seek to assess their interpersonal, social, or cultural

standing. From the three perspectives, Leary finds theories that account for the uniquely

strong influence of interpersonal factors on self-esteem to be the most viable, being

backed by research evidence and being able to explain the important function of

self-esteem in the lives of humans. Nonetheless, Leary recognizes that self-esteem is

still affected by intrapersonal processes, such as people’s private self-evaluations. He

states that after all, interpretations of interpersonal events are always filtered through

people’s existing beliefs, including their beliefs about themselves. He concludes that

although self-esteem is affected by both interpersonal and intrapersonal factors, they

are ultimately rooted in people’s concerns with other people’s perceptions and

evaluations of them.
 On the other hand, Swann and Seyle (2006) hold that intrapersonal and

interpersonal processes are deeply interwoven and mutually influence self-esteem.

They contend that neither process holds dominance over the other, disagreeing on

dividing their influence on self-esteem. As to how they are interwoven, Swann and

Seyle argue that intrapersonal concepts, such as self-views, can only exist if they are

nourished by the interpersonal arena, which is in turn guided by intrapersonal

processes. Essentially, they suggest that our self-esteem is shaped by our interactions

and experiences in society, while simultaneously influencing how we perceive and

respond to those social interactions.

Meanwhile, a substantial amount of research has shown that a clear self-concept

is strongly related to positive evaluations of the self (Brandt & Vonk, 2006). A clear

self-concept, in this case, is “the degree to which the self-concept is stable, consistent,

clear, and confidently defined.” Brandt and Vonk (2006) define self-concept clarity as the

knowledge components of the self, such as one’s knowledge of his or her traits,

physical characteristics, and roles and goals in life. However, self-concept clarity does

not imply accuracy of the self-concept but a set of subjective beliefs or people’s clear

idea of who they think they are. In understanding the relationship between self-concept

clarity and high self-esteem, Brandt and Vonk found a substantial correlation between

self-concept clarity and explicit self-esteem, suggesting that “believing that we know

who we are is connected to believing that we like ourselves.” They suggested that this

relationship stems from a basic self-theory of “I’m doing fine,” and inferred that
“believing that we are doing well leads us to state that we feel worthy, and convinces us

that we have clear views on ourselves.” Moreover, Brandt and Vonk suggested that this

also leads to positive illusions about the self. In support of this, they found a modest but

significant correlation between self-deception and explicit self-esteem.

Although the foregoing literature has elucidated that there is a relationship between

interpersonal (e.g., influence of social environment) and intrapersonal aspects (e.g.,

self-evaluations and self-concept) to self-esteem, there is no existing literature

regarding the relationship between the ‘personal intelligences’ and self-esteem as of

present. Nevertheless, there are still a handful of related studies that can provide

relevant insight on the topic.

Foreign Studies

A few studies explored the correlation between American psychologist Edward

Thorndike's social intelligence and self-esteem. Similar to Gardner's concept of

interpersonal intelligence, social intelligence is "the ability to act wisely in human

relations" (Thorndike, 1920, p. 228).

The study by Riggio et al. (1990), titled "Social Skills and Self-Esteem," aimed to

examine the interrelations among a multidimensional self-report measure of social

skills/competence, the Social Skills Inventory, and measures of self-esteem, social

anxiety, locus of control, loneliness, and well-being. One hundred and twenty-one

undergraduate volunteers (38 males and 83 females) completed a battery of self-report

measures using Riggio's "Social Skills Inventory." The results were not significantly

correlated with either the locus of control or general well-being measure. However, all of

the various measures, with the exception of locus of control, appeared to share a

common dimension - one that might be labeled a sense of ‘social self-efficacy.’

The study by Marilingappa (2019), titled "Social Intelligence and Self-Esteem

Among Working and Non-working Women," aimed to measure the difference in social

intelligence among working and non-working women, the difference in self-esteem

among working and non-working women, and the correlation between social intelligence

and self-esteem. The study was conducted on 100 women, both working and

non-working (N=50 each). Those who volunteered for the study were administered the

social intelligence scale and Rosenberg self-esteem scale. The results showed that

there is a significant difference in social intelligence among working and non-working

women. It also revealed that there is a significant difference in self-esteem among

working and non-working women. The obtained results showed that there is a positive

correlation between social intelligence and self-esteem.

The study by Özdemir and Adıgüzel (2021), titled "The Relationship Between

Social Intelligence, Self-Esteem, and Resilience in Healthcare Professionals and the

Affecting Factors," aimed to determine the relationship between social intelligence,

self-esteem, and resilience in healthcare professionals and the affecting factors. Two

hundred and forty-one healthcare professionals who agreed to participate in the study

were included. The data were collected using a personal information form, the
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), the Tromso Social Intelligence Scale (TSIS),

and the short version of the Resilience Scale (RS-14). The data were analyzed using

SPSS Windows 22.0. The results showed a positive statistically significant relationship

between scores on the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, the short version of the

Resilience Scale, and the Tromso Social Intelligence scale and social intelligence

subscales (p<0.001). Additionally, social intelligence was determined to be a factor

predicting self-esteem and resilience. The self-esteem, social intelligence, and

resilience of the healthcare professionals who were good at self-expression were

statistically significant and high (p<0.05).

The study by Aktas et al. (2020), titled "The Association Between Social

Intelligence, Self-esteem, and Academic Self-efficacy States of Nursing Students,"

aimed to find out the association between social intelligence, self-esteem, and

academic self-efficacy states of nursing students. Two hundred and fifty-nine students

who agreed to participate in the study and who filled in the data collection forms

completely formed the sample. The data were collected by the researcher through

face-to-face interviews using the "Personal Qualities Form," "Tromso Social Intelligence

Scale," "Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale," and "Academic Self-efficacy Scale." SPSS 23.0

package program was used in the statistical analysis of the data. The results showed a

negative and moderately significant association between the participants’ "Tromso

Social Intelligence Scale" scores and their "Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale" scores (r=

-.445), while a positive and weak significant association was found between their

"Tromso Social Intelligence Scale" scores and their "Academic Self-efficacy Scale"
scores (r= .257). Additionally, a negative and weak significant association was found

between their "Academic Self-efficacy Scale" scores and "Rosenberg Self-esteem

Scale.”On the other hand, a few studies also explored the relationship between

self-esteem and self-knowledge, a concept related to intrapersonal intelligence. A

systematic review by Hoyle (2006) reveals that individuals with negative self-knowledge,

particularly those that are complex and mixed with some positive ones, tend to have

lower self-esteem.

Local Literature

A study by Vergara and Tajonera (2023) aimed to assess the life skills of

adolescents in a Catholic University in Central Philippines in terms of self-awareness,

effective communication, empathy, interpersonal relations, creative and critical thinking,

decision-making, problem-solving, coping with emotions, and dealing with stress.

Furthermore, they examined the relationship of these variables with the demographic

profile of the respondents in terms of sex, birth order, and family structure. Ultimately,

the findings reveal that the respondents have an average level of life skills, followed by

a high rating in the self-awareness dimension, a low rating in coping with stress, and a

moderate rating in other areas, such as interpersonal relationships. Vergara and

Tajonera attributed these findings to the physiological, psychological, and social

changes experienced by the adolescent respondents. In addition, they emphasized the

need to develop adolescents' life skills further. According to them, enhancing

adolescents' life skills is essential to navigate life and deal with its challenges and

demands successfully.
Local Studies

Asio et al. (2021) conducted a study that explored the relationship between

multiple intelligences and students' participation rates in extracurricular activities in a

Catholic educational institution. The findings showed that intrapersonal intelligence was

the second most dominant intelligence among the students. Asio et al. attributed this to

the influence of technology-based learning on intrapersonally intelligent individuals.

They cited Suhana's (2017) claim that children who use information and communication

technologies may become isolated from social life and lack emotional management

skills. Furthermore, the study also found that interpersonal intelligence was the fourth

most dominant intelligence among the students. Asio et al. suggested that this could be

due to increased gadget use and exposure to social media, which may lead to a lack of

social and life skills. In addition, one of the recommendations made by Asio et al. is that

students should consider determining their intelligence, as this could boost their

self-confidence both as individuals and as students.

 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter outlines the methodology used for collecting and analyzing data for

the study. It encompasses the research design, research setting, research respondents,

samples and sampling technique, research instruments, data gathering procedure, and

statistical treatment.

Research Design

A descriptive-correlational research design was adopted by the study to fulfill its

objectives and to analyze the obtained data. Descriptive-correlational is a quantitative

research design that focuses on describing the relationship among variables rather than

inferring a causal relationship (Lappe, 2000). The researchers chose this research

design as the study's objective was to identify and describe the respondents'

demographic profile, dominant personal intelligence, and level of self-esteem, as well as

to analyze the relationships among these variables.

Research Setting

The study was conducted at Laguna College, a private, nonsectarian,

co-educational institution located in San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines. The

researchers chose this setting as they are interested in Laguna College's senior high

school students and foresee that the study's findings would benefit them. Furthermore,

Laguna College has a total of 559 senior high school students enrolled during the A.Y
2023-2024, which provides a sufficiently large population necessary for the study to

produce significant results and draw meaningful conclusions.

Research Respondents

The respondents of the study are Senior High School Students of Laguna

College during the Academic Year 2023-2024. Specifically, the study involves Grade 11

and Grade 12 students from all available strands and sections (i.e., STEM, ABM,

HUMSS, GAS) enrolled in Laguna College during the timeframe of the study. The

respondents were selected using the stratified random sampling technique with

proportional allocation, where the population is divided into smaller groups known as

strata.

Samples and Sampling Technique

The respondents of the study are Senior High School Students of the Laguna

College enrolled during the A.Y. 2023-2024. In determining the study’s sample size, the

Slovin’s formula is used, which is described as:

𝑁
𝑛= 2
1+𝑁𝑒

Wherein:

n = sample size

N = population size

e = margin of error
Based on the given population of 559 with a margin of error of 5%, 234 students were

chosen as respondents.

559
𝑛= 2 = 234
1+(559)(0.05)

The proportional allocation method formula is used in stratified random sampling to

determine the necessary number of respondents to take from each stratum. The

formula is expressed as:

𝑁𝑖
𝑛𝑖 = 𝑛 𝑁

Wherein:

𝑛𝑖= necessary sample size for the stratum

n = total sample size of the study

𝑁𝑖= population size of the stratum

N = population size of the study

The calculated population size and sample size of each stratum are shown in the table

below:
 Table 1. Population and Sample Size for each Stratum

STRATUM 𝑁𝑖 𝑛𝑖

Grade 11 STEM 1 39 17

Grade 11 STEM 2 40 17

Grade 11 STEM 3 43 18

Grade 11 STEM 4 42 18

Grade 11 STEM 5 35 15

Grade 11 STEM 6 30 13

Grade 11 ABM 34 15

Grade 11 HUMSS - GAS 29 13

Grade 12 STEM 1 39 17

Grade 12 STEM 2 38 16

Grade 12 STEM 3 42 18

Grade 12 STEM 4 41 18

Grade 12 STEM 5 32 14

Grade 12 ABM 1 24 11

Grade 12 ABM 2 26 11
 Grade 12 HUMSS - GAS 25 11

After obtaining the necessary sample sizes for each stratum, the students to be

included in each sample were identified using a numbered class list and the random

number generator key on a calculator.

Research Instrument

The research instrument used for collecting the necessary data was a three-part

questionnaire composed of demographic profile questions (i.e., name, age, gender, and

academic strand) and two standardized questionnaires: the Multiple Intelligences (MI)

Inventory for assessing the respondents ‘personal intelligences’ and the Rosenberg

Self-esteem Scale (RSE) for measuring their level of self-esteem.

The Multiple Intelligences (MI) Inventory is an inventory developed by Walter

Mckenzie (1999) that measures an individual’s perceived MI preference among nine

types, namely, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, existential intelligence, interpersonal

intelligence, intrapersonal intelligence, linguistic intelligence, logical-mathematical

intelligence, musical intelligence, naturalistic intelligence, and spatial intelligence. As

the study will only focus on Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Intelligence, the

questionnaire was adapted.

On the other hand, the Rosenberg Self-esteem scale (RSES) is a widely used

self-report instrument developed by Morris Rosenberg (1965) for evaluating individual

self-esteem. The scale comprises ten items that measure an individual’s positive and
negative feelings about oneself and are answered using a 4-point Likert scale format

(i.e., Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree). Items 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 are

reverse scored: "Strongly Disagree" is equivalent to 1 point,"Disagree" 2 points,"Agree”

3 points, and "Strongly Agree" 4 points. Items 1, 3, 4, 7, and 10 are then scored

normally. Obtained scores between 10-25 are interpreted as low self esteem, scores

between 26-29 as medium self esteem, and scores between 30-40 as high self esteem.

Statistical Treatment

1. Frequency and Percentage

Frequency and percentage was used to summarize the different demographic

profiles of the respondents and to describe the general characteristics of data.

Additionally, it is also used in identifying the Interpersonal Intelligence and Intrapersonal

Intelligence of the respondents. The formula for computing percentage is given as:

𝐹
𝑃= 𝑁
𝑥 100

Where:

P = percentage

F = frequency

N = total number of respondents

 2. Weighted Mean

The weighted mean is a statistical measure that takes into account the

importance of different data points. In this research, the weighted mean was used to

determine the level of self-esteem of the respondents. The formula for the weighted

mean is given as:

Where:

W= weighted average

n= number of terms to be averaged

Wi= weights applied to x values

Xi= data values to be averaged

3. Chi-Square

Chi-square was used to identify the relationship between intrapersonal/

interpersonal intelligence and perceived self-esteem of Senior High School Students

students of Laguna College A.Y. 2023-2024. The formula for computing Chi-square is

given as:
 2
2 (𝑂𝑖−𝐸𝑖)
𝑥 =∑ 𝐸𝑖

Wherein:

2
𝑥 = chi-square

𝑂𝑖 = observed value

𝐸𝑖= expected value

4. Interpretation of Data

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

Scores are calculated as follows:

For numbers 1, 3, 4, 7, and 10

● Strongly agree = 4

● Agree =3

● Disagree = 2

● Strongly disagree = 1

For items 2,5,6,8, and 9 (which are reversed in valence):

● Strongly agree = 1

● Agree = 2

● Disagree = 3

● Strongly disagree = 4
 The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale scoring is straightforward to do. Out of 10

questions, 5 questions are scored straight like, “Strongly Agree”- 4 and “Strongly

disagree”- 1. For another set of 5 questions, it is scored reversely. Since the Rosenberg

scale consists of both positive and negative patterned questions, the scoring differs

accordingly. After noting down the scores for each question, they are summed up to get

the total score. The score ranges from 10-40; the higher the scores, the higher their

self-esteem. https://blocksurvey.io/calculator/rosenberg-self-esteem-scale

Interpreting Results

● Low (10–25): Feelings of incompetence, inadequacy, and difficulty facing life’s

challenges

● Medium (26–29): Fluctuating between feelings of approval and rejection

● High (30–40): Self-judgment of value, confidence, and competence

https://www.verywellhealth.com/rosenberg-self-esteem-scale-5270574
 Research Matrix

Statement of the Problem Questionnaire

1. Demographic Profile

1.1 Age

1.2 Gender

1.3 Grade and Section

2. Which personal intelligence is most dominant Multiple Intelligences (M.I) Inventory

among LC Senior High School Students? by Walter Mckenzie

3. Is there a significant relationship between the Multiple Intelligences (M.I) Inventory

personal intelligences and the respondents by Walter Mckenzie

demographic, in terms of:

3.1 Age

3.2 Gender

3.3 Academic Strand

4. What is the Laguna College’s Senior High School Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

students' level of self-esteem? by Marianne Rosenberg

5. Is there a significant relationship between the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

level of self esteem and the respondents by Marianne Rosenberg

demographic, in terms of:

5.1 Age

5.2 Gender

5.3 Academic Strand

6. Is there a significant relationship between Multiple Intelligences (M.I) Inventory

personal intelligence and levels of self- esteem? by Walter Mckenzie &

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

by Marianne Rosenberg
 APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRES

The Relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence, Interpersonal Intelligence,

and Self-esteem among Laguna College’s Grade 11 Students

SECTION I

DEMOGRAPHICS

Name: ______________________________

Strand & Section:_____________

Age: _________

Gender: _____________

SECTION II

Instructions:

The following questions are questions to identify the Grade 11 students of

Laguna College A.Y. 2023-2024’s level of self esteem and its relationship with

intrapersonal intelligence, and interpersonal intelligence.

 TEST I

Walter McKenzie (http://surfaquarium.com/MI/index.htm)

Part 1

Complete each section by placing a “1” next to each statement you feel accurately

describes you. If you do not identify with a statement, leave the space provided blank.

Then total the column in each section.

INTERPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE SECTION:

_____ I learn best interacting with others

_____ “The more the merrier”

_____ Study groups are very productive for me

_____ I enjoy chat rooms

_____ Participating in politics is important

_____ Television and radio talk shows are enjoyable

_____ I am a “team player”

_____ I dislike working alone

_____ Clubs and extracurricular activities are fun

_____ I pay attention to social issues and causes

Total number of 1’s used in Interpersonal intelligence section:__________

INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE SECTION:

_____I am keenly aware of my moral beliefs

_____ I learn best when I have an emotional attachment to the subject

_____ Fairness is important to me

_____ My attitude affects how I learn

_____ Social justice issues concern me

_____ Working alone can be just as productive as working in a group

_____ I need to know why I should do something before I agree to do it

_____ When I believe in something I will give 100% effort to it

_____ I like to be involved in causes that help others

_____ I am willing to protest or sign a petition to right a wrong

Total number of 1’s used in Intrapersonal Intelligence Section:__________

Part II

Now carry forward your total from each section and multiply by 10 below:
 SECTION NUMBER OF MULTIPLY MULTIPLIED

1’s SCORE

INTERPERSONAL X10

INTELLIGENCE

INTRAPERSONAL X10

INTELLIGENCE

Part III

Now plot your scores on the bar graph provided… color in the blocks up to the

multiplied score.

100

90

80

70

60

50

40
30

20

10

0 INTERPERSONAL INTRAPERSONAL

INTELLIGENCE INTELLIGENCE

SECTION SECTION
 TEST II

SELF- ESTEEM

https://novopsych.com.au/assessments/well-being/rosenberg-self-esteem-scale-rses/

STRONGL AGREE DISAGRE STRONGL

STATEMENT Y AGREE E Y

DISAGREE

1. On the whole, I am satisfied

with myself.

2. At times I think I am no

good at all.

3. I feel that I have a number

of good qualities.

4. I am able to do things as

well as most other people.

5. I feel I do not have much to

be proud of.
 6. I certainly feel useless at

times

7. I feel that I am a person of

worth, at least on an equal

plane with others.

8. I wish I could have more

respect for myself.

9. All in all, I am inclined to feel

that I am a failure.

10 I take a positive attitude

. toward myself

Scores are calculated as follows:

For numbers 1, 3, 4, 7, and 10

● Strongly agree = 4

● Agree =3

● Disagree = 2

● Strongly disagree = 1
For items 2,5,6,8, and 9 (which are reversed in valence):

● Strongly agree = 1

● Agree = 2

● Disagree = 3

● Strongly disagree = 4

The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale scoring is straightforward to do. Out of 10

questions, 5 questions are scored straight like, “Strongly Agree”- 4 and “Strongly

disagree”- 1. For another set of 5 questions, it is scored reversely. Since the Rosenberg

scale consists of both positive and negative patterned questions, the scoring differs

accordingly. After noting down the scores for each question, they are summed up to get

the total score. The score ranges from 10-40; the higher the scores, the higher their

self-esteem. https://blocksurvey.io/calculator/rosenberg-self-esteem-scale

Interpreting Results

● Low (10–25): Feelings of incompetence, inadequacy, and difficulty facing life’s

challenges

● Medium (26–29): Fluctuating between feelings of approval and rejection

● High (30–40): Self-judgment of value, confidence, and competence

https://www.verywellhealth.com/rosenberg-self-esteem-scale-527057
REFERENCES

Armstrong, T. W. (1994). Multiple intelligences in the classroom.

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA27270713

Asio, J. M. R., Francisco, C. D. C., & Nuqui, A. V. (2021). The Relationship between

Multiple Intelligences and Participation Rate in Extracurricular Activities of Students

from a Catholic Education Institution. International Journal of Professional Development,

Learners and Learning, 3(1), ep2107. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/10956

Brandt, A. C., & Vonk, R. (2006). Who Do You Think You Are? On the Link Between

Self-Knowledge and Self-Esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Self-esteem issues and

answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives (pp. 224–228). Psychology Press.

Brown, J. (1998). The self. Psychology Press.

Donnellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Robins, R. W. (2011). Self-esteem: Enduring

issues and controversies. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham

(Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 718–746). Wiley

Blackwell.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: A Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic

Books

Gardner, H. E. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice.

Basic Books.

H Marilingappa (2019). Social intelligence and self-esteem among working and

non-working women. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 7(4), 902-916.

Hoyle, R. H. (2006). Self-knowledge and self-esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Self-esteem

issues and answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives (pp. 208–215). New York,

NY: Psychology Press.

Leary, M. R. (2006). To What Extent is Self-Esteem Influenced by Interpersonal as

Compared with Intrapersonal Processes? What are These Processes? In M. H. Kernis

(Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives (pp.

195–200). Psychology Press.

Moller, A. C., Friedman, R., & Deci, E. L. (2006). A Self-Determination Theory

Perspective on the Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Aspects of Self-Esteem. In M. H.

Kernis (Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives

(pp. 188–194). Psychology Press.

Özdemir, N. (2020). The relationship between social intelligence, Self-Esteem with

psychological resilience for healthcare professionals and affecting factors. Psikiyatri

Hemşireliği Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2020.96658

Riggio, R. E., Throckmorton, B., & DePaola, S. (1990). Social skills and self-esteem.

Personality and Individual Differences, 11(8), 799–804.

https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(90)90188-w

Swann, W., & Seyle, D. C. (2006). The Antecedents of Self-Esteem. In M. H. Kernis

(Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives (pp.

201–206). Psychology Press.

Vergara, T. M., & Tajonera, C. F. J. (2023). Life Skills of Adolescents in a Catholic

University in Central Philippines. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 44(1), 788–803.

https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v44i1.9069