Gender and Socioeconomic Influences on Academic Jealousy: Differential Patterns in Competition and Gratitude Among Pakistani Undergraduates

Authors

  • Asif Khan
  • Muhammad Ilyas*
  • Masooma Ali

Abstract

Academic competition is an integral aspect of higher education, but it can elicit negative emotions such as jealousy, which may undermine well-being and interpersonal relationships. The present study examined gender and socioeconomic status–based differences in academic competition, academic jealousy, and gratitude among Pakistani undergraduate students, as well as the interactive effects of gender and socioeconomic status on these variables. Using a cross-sectional survey design, data were collected from 256 students through convenient sampling. Participants completed the Revised Competitiveness Index (CI-R), Academic Jealousy Scale (AJS), and Gratitude Questionnaire–Six Item Form (GQ-6). Data were analyzed using independent samples t-tests, one-way ANOVA, and two-way ANOVA in SPSS-27. Results revealed no significant gender or socioeconomic differences in academic competition and jealousy, although males reported higher levels of gratitude (M = 28.22, SD = 9.46) than females (M = 24.59, SD = 8.97). A significant interaction between gender and socioeconomic status was observed for academic jealousy, indicating that these demographic factors jointly influence students’ jealousy experiences. Findings highlight the complex interaction between demographic variables and academic emotions and underscore the protective role of gratitude in promoting adaptive responses within competitive academic settings.

Keywords: Academic Competition, Academic Jealousy, Gratitude, Undergraduate Students, Gender, Socioeconomic Status

10.5281/zenodo.18384373

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18384373

Downloads

Published

2026-01-27

How to Cite

Asif Khan, Muhammad Ilyas*, & Masooma Ali. (2026). Gender and Socioeconomic Influences on Academic Jealousy: Differential Patterns in Competition and Gratitude Among Pakistani Undergraduates. Dialogue Social Science Review (DSSR), 4(1), 165–177. Retrieved from https://dialoguesreview.com/index.php/2/article/view/1408