Socio-Emotional Competencies for Sustainable Development: An Exploratory Review

Abstract

This article explores the importance of integrating socio-emotional competencies into the formal education of adolescents to promote sustainable development. It argues that social and emotional learning (SEL) not only enhances personal and academic well-being, but also facilitates the building of more resilient and sustainable communities. A scoping review was conducted using a qualitative methodology based on document analysis through matrix-based reviews. The 49 selected studies were analyzed in relation to the personality facets of the Big Five (OCEAN) model. The results of the interventions show improvements in self-efficacy, empathy, motivation, school climate, bullying reduction, and the prevention of mental health issues. It is concluded that a more holistic approach is needed, combining SEL with character education to achieve lasting impacts. Furthermore, interventions must be sensitive to cultural contexts and the specific realities of each school community.

1. Introduction

The world today is constantly facing critical environmental challenges and accelerated social transformations within a context of growing global interdependence (Barcia Cedeño et al., 2024). Along with these changes, an increase in mental health problems and decreased levels of emotional well-being and social skills are observed in adolescents (Canals-Sans et al., 2018; Díez-Gómez et al., 2022; Feiss et al., 2019; Fonseca-Pedrero et al., 2023; König et al., 2020; Lucas-Molina et al., 2018; Mulraney et al., 2021; Rodríguez-González et al., 2024; Santomauro et al., 2021; Solmi et al., 2022). These challenges demand that education enables the construction of more resilient and sustainable societies. However, to achieve this, traditional educational systems require a profound transformation—one through which teachers prepare their students not only to understand the issues around them, but also to become emotionally aware citizens and agents of change toward sustainability (Barcia Cedeño et al., 2024; Mayo Lara et al., 2023). In this regard, social and emotional learning (SEL) is recognized as crucial for the holistic development of individuals, equipping them with the socio-emotional skills or competencies (SESs) to understand and manage emotions, build positive relationships, resolve conflicts constructively, and make informed decisions (Arango Benítez et al., 2024; Chunchi Orellana & Ordóñez Vásquez, 2024; Durlak et al., 2022; Mayo Lara et al., 2023). This transformation includes concrete classroom actions and a new view of the relationship between teaching and learning (Durlak et al., 2011; Schonert-Reichl, 2017; Isohätälä et al., 2020).

The most widely studied model for understanding sustainability is the three-pillar framework, which encompasses environmental, economic, and social aspects (Boussemart et al., 2017; Hansmann et al., 2012; Purvis et al., 2019). While there is no firm consensus on the exact scope of each pillar, various researchers have demonstrated that the social pillar encompasses not only the external circumstances of individuals within a society, but also their subjective circumstances and emotional well-being. In some articles, this is referred to as citizen happiness or quality of life (Huete-Alcocer et al., 2024). This holistic view of sustainability reveals that even environmental proposals necessitate the development of subjective skills, many of which are socio-emotional, to be sustainable. Conversely, striking an integrated balance between the environmental and ecological pillars can promote better emotional health standards and social cohesion (Murphy, 2012). Sustainability is not an alien political or social structure that is acquired once and for all. Instead, it is shaped by the attitudes of specific individuals and their subjective experiences, which are usually mediated by social expectations and comparisons (Moser, 2009). Therefore, it is logical to explore schemes that enable the development of socio-emotional skills to guarantee this fundamental aspect. SEL interaction is extremely useful in the holistic analysis of sustainability across the three pillars, particularly through the social pillar.

SEL and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are present in most education systems. SEL has proven to be a flexible approach that achieves results in different educational and cultural contexts, and it is applied in various ways (Abd Hadi et al., 2023; Berg et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2021; Franck et al., 2020; Primi et al., 2021; Van De Sande et al., 2022). SEL is included because there is growing evidence of its contribution to personal well-being, improved academic performance, and reduced risk behaviors (Durlak et al., 2022; Jiménez Morales & López Zafra, 2009). Education for sustainable development equips people with the knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes necessary to live in respectful interaction with the environment and to make responsible decisions that help create a better future for all (UNESCO, 2022). While some might consider these aspects to be unrelated, the truth is that sustainability education must have a broad framework that allows students to acquire a set of basic skills that directly influence their behavior and decisions. In this regard, many efforts are being made to establish the relationship between broad educational frameworks and the development of the skills necessary for sustainability (González-Salamanca et al., 2020). “Education for sustainable development (ESD) presents its learning objectives as specific cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral learning outcomes. In short, ESD aims at equipping all individuals with the knowledge and competencies required to bring about transformation and thereby contribute to achieving SDGs” (Gamage & de Silva, 2022, p. 3).

An education that integrates SEL plays a key role in shaping the beliefs and behaviors essential for achieving various Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Furthermore, it is necessary to address the interrelationship between emotions and ethics (Conesa-Lareo, 2025), which facilitates the identification of the ways in which emotions can contribute positively to the development of attitudes and skills that promote sustainability. For example, SEL contributes fundamentally to the achievement of goals such as Goal 1 (No poverty), Goal 3 (Good health and well-being), Goal 12 (Responsible consumption and production), Goal 13 (Climate action), Goal 15 (Life on land), and Goal 16 (Peace, justice and strong institutions), among others (UNESCO, 2024). This is because SEL helps individuals to understand and manage their emotions, which enables them to participate positively in their communities. Moreover, by developing empathy, individuals are more likely to care about the well-being of others and the planet. This can lead to greater engagement in sustainable practices and collaboration in projects that benefit both the community and the environment.

SEL focuses on the development of essential skills such as motivation, social skills, and leadership—skills necessary for building more just and sustainable societies. It facilitates informed and responsible decision-making that can positively impact the surrounding environment. As previously discussed, addressing the specific challenges of each SDG through education requires promoting cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral learning outcomes.

The cognitive domain encompasses the knowledge and thinking tools needed to better understand the SDGs and the challenges involved in achieving them. The socio-emotional domain includes consistent patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that enable individuals to accomplish goals, work with others, and manage emotions (OECD, 2015). The behavioral domain refers to action-based competencies (UNESCO, 2017). This calls for a holistic vision of education and learning—one that transcends the traditional dichotomies between cognitive, emotional, and ethical dimensions (UNESCO, 2015; Barrios Tao et al., 2019). In this regard, Novo (2009) proposes a path of reflection and action aimed at improving ourselves as individuals, enhancing the quality of our relationships, and respecting and caring for our world through solidarity and reciprocity. Additionally, the cultural context in which educational programs are launched must be taken into account (Willen, 2022). This cultural difference is significant because it can impact the objectives of SEL programs and how their results are evaluated (Abd Hadi et al., 2023).

Taking this integrated vision of learning as a reference, the OECD developed its model of 35 SESs within the framework of the “Education 2030” project (OECD, 2015), which is compatible with the widely recognized Five-Factor Model of Personality (OCEAN) in psychology (McCrae & Costa, 1999). This model classifies personality traits into five main dimensions: Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. Each of these factors includes a set of facets (30 in total), allowing for the deeper exploration of each trait and contributing to a better understanding of individual differences.

Despite being a model of psychology, it can be taken as a helpful reference framework for socio-emotional educational intervention. SEL and OCEAN can be considered different taxonomies with many elements in common, although they start from different fields of study. For Primi and his team, SEL and OCEAN have followed a parallel path in establishing constructs that explain personality development. The OECD ended up categorizing five dimensions of socio-emotional skills that “show strong conceptual similarities with the Big Five personality dimensions” (Primi et al., 2021, p. 2).

In this sense, while SEL is presented as a broad range of interventions and objectives, OCEAN determines a group of specific and relevant fields on which programs should focus, including the skills needed to achieve the SDGs. In a field that suffers from what some authors call the jingle-jangle fallacy (Olderbak & Wilhelm, 2020), the structure presented by the OECD allows information that is similar between SEL and OCEAN to be organized. Having established the close links between the skills that can be developed through SEL and the skills needed to achieve the SDGs, the OECD’s OCEAN approach is an optimal way of proposing specific actions and evaluating them efficiently.

The OECD adapts personality development dimensions to the educational context, translating them into practical and developable competencies that support the formation of individuals capable of managing emotions, establishing positive relationships, and acting ethically. For instance, Openness to Experience is reflected in intellectual curiosity and creativity, and Extraversion—engaging with others—in skills such as assertiveness and sociability. Similarly, Agreeableness is expressed through empathy, trust, and cooperation, while low Neuroticism relates to resilience and emotional control (OECD, 2021).

This approach aims to integrate theory and practice to strengthen SESs as a core component of education for sustainable development. Finally, the specific facets that we used as a reference are outlined in

Table 1. Facets that compose each factor.

Factors	Facets
Open-mindedness	Intellectual Curiosity, Boldness/Action, Emotionality/Feelings, Independence of Judgment/Values, Esthetic Sensitivity, and Imagination
Skill performance	Need for Achievement, Competence, Order, Sense of Duty, Deliberation, and Self-Discipline
Commitment to others	Amiability, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Positive Emotions/Joy, Thrill or Sensation Seeking, and Activity Level
Collaboration	Sensitivity to Others/Empathy, Modesty, Trust, Openness, Cooperation, and Altruism
Emotional dysregulation	Anxiety, Vulnerability to Stress, Social Anxiety, Depression, Impulsiveness, and Hostility

Source: own elaboration from (Olderbak & Wilhelm, 2020; OECD, 2021).

.

This research aims to provide teachers with guidance for developing SESs in the classroom. Therefore, we inquire about the characteristics and scope of SEL interventions in formal education. To address this question, we will conduct a scoping review to analyze SEL interventions for adolescents and examine whether it is possible to establish actionable recommendations to develop the facets of the Big Five personality traits. Regarding the development of sustainability-related attitudes in students, we believe it is essential that, as a foundation, they develop SESs. However, ethical education is also needed. Without a doubt, this requires teachers who are trained in these areas and who, in turn, can help students to develop the skills associated with socio-emotional intelligence (Sancassiani et al., 2015; Machado Pérez, 2022). According to Bisquerra (2006), the initial and ongoing training of teachers is the greatest challenge faced in socio-emotional education.

2. Materials and Methods

The objective of a scoping review is to rapidly map the key concepts underpinning a research area, as well as the main sources and types of evidence (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). This scoping review was based on the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), following these steps: (1) identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting the studies, (4) charting the data, and (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results.

To ensure the validity of the process, the 22-item PRISMA-ScR diagram was used (excluding item 22, which refers to funding) (Tricco et al., 2018).

2.1. Research Question and Objectives

The research question posed is the following:

What are the characteristics and effects of SEL interventions in formal education for adolescent students aged 12 to 16 years from any geographical area?

Specifically, we propose the following objectives:

(a)

To analyze the SEL interventions presented in the selected publications, as well as the strengths, limitations, and missing points of the SEL interventions.

The characteristics examined were objectives, target age groups, sample characteristics, and outcomes.

(b)

To establish actionable recommendations to develop socio-emotional skills (SESs) based on the facets of the Big Five personality traits.

To ensure sustainable development via SEL, ethical/moral/character issues were included in the recommendations.

2.2. Data Source and Search Strategy

To address our objective, we chose to conduct a scoping review of the literature. This type of review allows us to synthesize the existing knowledge, analyzing and summarizing the academic literature related to our topic of interest, rather than determining the effectiveness of a specific intervention (Codina et al., 2021). This methodology ensures a systematized review (Booth et al., 2012), integrating both quantitative and qualitative information.

This scoping review included all publications in peer-reviewed journals. The databases used were Web of Science and Scopus. The general SALSA framework (Search, Appraisal, Analysis, Synthesis) guided the steps taken to search for articles (sources and search equations), appraise them (inclusion and exclusion criteria), analyze them (data extraction from each article), and synthesize the findings (presentation of the obtained information) (Grant & Booth, 2009).

The search terms were defined in response to the research question. By combining these terms using Boolean operators, the final search equation was the combination of three levels (

Table 2. Search strings.

	“social and emotional skill*” OR “social-emotional skill*” OR “socioemotional skill*” OR “socio-emotional skill*” OR “social emotional skill*” OR “habilidades socioemocionales” OR “social and emotional learning” OR “social-emotional learning” OR “socioemotional learning” OR “socio-emotional learning” OR “social emotional learning” OR “aprendizaje socioemocional” OR “social and emotional competenc*” OR “social-emotional competenc*” OR “socioemotional competenc*” OR “socio-emotional competenc*” OR “social emotional competenc*” OR “competencias socioemocionales” OR “social and emotional abilit*” OR “social-emotional abilit*” OR “socioemotional abilit*” OR “socio-emotional abilit*” OR “social emotional abilit*” OR “habilidades socioemocionales” OR “SEL”
AND
	“middle school” OR “high school” OR “secondary school” OR “secondary education” OR “teen*” OR “adolescen*” OR “bachillerato” OR “educación secundaria”
AND
	“program*” OR “training” OR “interven*” OR “project*” OR “proyecto*”

).

2.3. Eligibility Criteria and Selection Process

The selection process was managed by three coders. The systematic and sequential selection process began with the screening of titles and abstracts in the aforementioned databases. All publications before 2010, non-academic articles, or those written in a language other than English or Spanish were excluded. There is no criterion regarding the research methodology, type of study, or geographical focus, because our objective was to broadly explore the benefits of SEL interventions in adolescents. In addition, the researchers limited the age range to 12 to 16 years in order to focus the sample on secondary education.

As a result, 123 academic article references (that present research results, analysis, or discussion on a topic) were identified (67 in Scopus and 56 in Web of Science), from which 48 duplicate publications were removed, leaving a total of 75. Then, 25 publications were excluded after reviewing their titles and abstracts, as they did not meet the remaining inclusion criteria (

Table 3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Categories	Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
Field of knowledge	Educational Sciences, Health Sciences	Other fields
Educational setting	Formal education	Non-formal and informal education
Population age	12–16 y.o.	Outside the age range
Year of publication	Since 2010	Prior to 2010
Type of publication	SEL research, experiences, case studies	Books, book chapters, theses, theoretical articles, essays, dissertations
Condition	Peer-reviewed journal papers	Conference proceedings, chapters, books, doctoral theses, dissertations, reports
Language	English or Spanish	Other languages

). During the full-text screening, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The final number of articles included was 49, after removing 1 article that presented a protocol for future research. Once the information was extracted, a narrative description of the articles was conducted. The process is illustrated in the flowchart in Figure 1.

2.4. Data Extraction

To increase the reliability of the process, the study selection was carried out by three members of the team using the Covidence tool, which ensures that each excluded or included article is reviewed by every researcher. We used 90% agreement to support a reliable selection process, minimizing subjectivity and bias in the selection of articles. There were hardly any disagreements between coders during article selection or data extraction, and they were resolved through discussion.

The coders compiled the data into a table composed of two sections. The first section included all bibliographic information (title, date, authors, source, program purpose, and population). According to the SALSA framework (Grant & Booth, 2009), the second section included data related to the research question, research objective, quality assessment method, and type of synthesis method. In this way, the variables collected were directly related to the interventions—specifically, to recommendations, addressed factors and facets, proposed actions, and observations.

2.5. Data Analysis

We began by providing a general overview of SEL interventions based on the scientific literature. Secondly, we recorded the factors and facets identified in each publication. The objective was to inductively categorize the findings before proceeding to their interpretation.

The OCEAN model is highly suitable for interpreting SEL components because it provides a comprehensive, empirically validated framework that captures the full range of individual differences in emotional, social, and behavioral functioning. Each of the five broad dimensions (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) with their respective facets align closely with key competencies targeted by SEL programs, such as self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making (Domitrovich et al., 2017).

The facets correspond to the OCEAN model (McCrae & John, 1992): F1 (Intellectual curiosity); F2 (Willingness to experiment); F3 (Emotionality); F4 (Independence of judgment); F5 (Artistic interests); F6 (Imagination); F7 (Achievement striving); F8 (Self-efficacy); F9 (Orderliness); F10 (Dutifulness); F11 (Cautiousness); F12 (Self-discipline); F13 (Outgoing); F14 (Sociability); F15 (Assertiveness); F16 (Cheerfulness); F17 (Excitement seeking); F18 (Activity level); F19 (Empathy); F20 (Modesty); F21 (Trust); F22 (Honesty); F23 (Cooperation); F24 (Altruism); F25 (Anxiety); F26 (Vulnerability to stress); F27 (Social Anxiety); F28 (Depression); F29 (Impulsiveness); and F30 (Hostility).

Furthermore, the OCEAN model is stable across development, yet responsive to interventions during adolescence (Soto et al., 2011), making it ideal for analyzing how SEL initiatives can support both short-term skill acquisition and longer-term personality development. Using OCEAN allows researchers and practitioners to map SEL outcomes onto a well-established psychological structure, facilitating clearer interpretation, comparison across studies, and integration with broader psychological theories (John et al., 2008).

In this way, we conducted an in-depth analysis of the practices associated with each facet. This classification enabled us to organize our results around the research questions addressed and to present our conclusions. Data from the included studies were extracted into a structured charting form capturing key information (study characteristics, population details, interventions, and main outcomes). A descriptive analytical approach was used to summarize and organize the data. Facets across the studies were identified through an inductive coding process. The findings were then synthesized narratively and presented in tables and figures relevant to the research questions.

3. Results

Below, we present the findings obtained in our research. First, we offer an overview of the general aspects of the interventions addressed in the final sample of publications, followed by an analysis of the intervention practices and their categorization.

3.1. Overview of SEL Interventions

First, regarding the journals in which the articles from the final sample were published, five of them appeared in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (7, 8, 10, 31, and 33), making it the journal with the highest number of publications. Second, the journal Children included three articles (1, 25, and 27). Finally, journals that featured two articles each were Frontiers in Public Health (3 and 5), Revista Interamericana de Psicología (20 and 47), Frontiers in Psychology (19 and 24), Universitas Psychologica (9 and 48), and Revista de Psicología Clínica con Niños y Adolescentes (46 and 49). The Frontiers group, therefore, published a total of four articles from the sample.

Regarding the countries of the populations in the sample, we found that Europe was the region represented by the highest number of countries, with a total of 13. It was followed by Asia with five, the Americas with four, and Africa and Oceania with only one country each. Spain appeared most frequently in the different populations, with a total of 14 articles. It was followed by the United States with six, Portugal and the United Kingdom with four each, and Romania with three. Tanzania, Puerto Rico, China, and Germany appeared in two publications each. Samples from Mexico, Panama, South Korea, India, Malaysia, Turkey, Slovenia, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, The Netherlands, and Australia appeared in a single publication each (Figure 2).

Regarding the frequency with which each facet is addressed in the analyzed documents, we can state that facet F19 (Empathy) is the most targeted in the publications, appearing in 14 of them. Secondly, F3 (Emotionality) appears in 11 publications, and in third place, F28 (Depression) appears in 9 publications. Eight publications address F25 (Anxiety) and F29 (Impulsiveness), while seven address F12 (Self-discipline), F15 (Assertiveness), F30 (Hostility), and F8 (Self-efficacy). Six publications address F7 (Achievement striving), F13 (Outgoing), F14 (Sociability), F23 (Cooperation), F26 (Vulnerability to stress), and F27 (Social anxiety). F1 (Intellectual curiosity) is addressed in five publications; F11 (Cautiousness), F2 (Willingness to experiment), and F24 (Altruism) in four publications; F16 (Cheerfulness), F21 (Trust), and F4 (Independence of judgment) in three publications; F5 (Artistic interests) in two publications; and F10 (Dutifulness) in only one. On the other hand, the facets F6 (Imagination), F9 (Orderliness), F17 (Excitement seeking), F18 (Activity level), F20 (Modesty), and F22 (Honesty) were not addressed in any document from the review sample. This information is presented in Figure 3.

3.2. Intervention Results

Table 4. First final sample of publications about SEL interventions with OCEAN model facets.

No.	Publication	Facet	Country	Sample y.o.	Objective	Main Results
1	Veríssimo et al. (2022)	F1 F3	Portugal	12	Evaluate the effectiveness of a program promoting SESs among socio-culturally vulnerable adolescents.	Impact on self-concept. Increase in behavioral adjustment, happiness, and satisfaction. Reduction in anxiety.
2	Ogurlu et al. (2018)	F1 F8 F14 F21 F26	Turkey	10–14	Examine the relationship between SESs and perceived social support among gifted students.	Perceived social support can improve the socio-emotional skills of gifted students.
3	Abd Hadi et al. (2023)	F1 F3 F14 F15 F19 F24	Malaysia	-	Explore the conceptualization of SESs among parents and teachers to determine culturally sensitive SEL constructs for Malaysian adolescents.	Correlation between SESs and social support. Gifted students saw close friends and teachers as important sources of support.
4	Cherewick et al. (2021a)	F1 F7 F8 F12 F19 F23 F24	Tanzania	10–11	Evaluate the potential of an SEL intervention for very young adolescents to improve mindset and SESs.	Crucial SEL topics and subtopics for Malaysian adolescents align with CASEL’s five competency domains. CASEL’s relationship and decision-making domains reflect Asian cultural values.
5	Cherewick et al. (2021b)	F1 F3 F13 F23	Tanzania	10–14	Create SEL experiences and flexible distance learning opportunities in low-income countries.	Significant improvements in socio-emotional mindset and skills (generosity, curiosity, growth mindset, perseverance, purpose, and teamwork). Experiential learning in small groups with community and parent involvement showed greater effects.
6	Hatchimonji et al. (2022)	F2 F7 F8 F24	USA	11–16	Test the relationships between the objectives of the SECD approach (Social–Emotional and Character Development) for character development.	Technology can be leveraged to create SEL experiences and offer flexible learning opportunities in low-income countries.
7	Cejudo et al. (2020)	F2 F3 F25 F28	Spain	12–17		The five character virtues are associated with purpose and SEL, providing empirical support for the SECD intervention framework.
8	Cojocaru (2023)	F2 F16 F23 F25	Romania	13–18	Evaluate the effects of a program through the video game “Aislados” aimed at improving subjective well-being, mental health, and emotional intelligence.	Participation in group activities strengthens group identity and can promote optimism through social recognition. It fosters patience, tolerance, and empathy, allowing adolescents to develop socially, assume responsibility, solve problems, improve self-management, and learn to listen, and it also provides emotional stability. It also improves academic performance and reduces disruptive behaviors.
9	Amutio et al. (2020)	F3	Spain	12–16	Investigate to what extent participation in school-organized projects for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups contributed to the development of Transformative SEL (T-SEL) in adolescents.	Statistically significant differences in health-related quality of life, positive affect, and mental health.
10	Chen et al. (2021)	F3 F12 F29	China	16	Explore the relationships between REMIND (relaxation, meditation, and mindfulness), emotional competence, and academic performance in adolescents.	Participation in school club activities stimulated and developed T-SEL competencies among adolescents.
11	Marín-López et al. (2020)	F3 F15 F16	Spain	13–14	Understand problematic internet use (PIU) among adolescents and the associations between SEL competencies and PIU through an integrated and hierarchical model.	A high level of SESs was negatively related to cybervictimization and cyberperpetration, and was associated with a greater use of emotional content online. The use of more emotional content online was associated with greater cybervictimization and cyberperpetration. A high level of SESs also protected against cyberbullying, but excessive use of emotions online was a risk factor.
12	Coelho et al. (2014)	F2 F3 F19 F23	Portugal	12–15	Explore the relationship between SESs, online emotional content, cybervictimization, and cyberperpetration.	REMIND’s influence on academic performance is indirect, mediated by emotional competencies. Teachers are encouraged to implement REMIND-based practices to enhance emotional competencies and academic performance.
13	Sweetman (2021)	F3 F8 F12 F15 F19	Ireland	12–14		Male students reported higher levels of general PIU and more problematic time management. SEL competencies were negatively associated with PIU. Emphasis on promoting SEL competencies to prevent PIU.
14	Donohue et al. (2020)	F3 F14 F19	USA	5–14	Investigate whether a universal SEL program would promote academic, social, and emotional self-concept. It analyzes differences by gender and among students with lower initial self-concept.	A high level of social and emotional competencies was negatively associated with both cybervictimization and cyberperpetration. Exposure to more emotional online content was associated with higher cybervictimization and cyberperpetration.
15	Rodríguez-Ledo et al. (2018)	F3 F15 F19	Spain	11–14	Explore the impact of domestic violence on adolescent victims through the lens of SEL.	Increases were observed in social, emotional, and overall self-concept, which remained stable over two years and across genders—except in emotional self-concept, where only boys showed benefits. Students with low levels of self-awareness benefited more than their peers in academic and social self-awareness.
16	Harrison et al. (2021)	F4 F21 F26 F27	United kingdom	8–18	Early preventive intervention.	Thematic analysis showed a reduction in shame and guilt, increased self-esteem and self-efficacy, greater participation in education and recreation, and improved family relationships.

,

Table 5. Second final sample of publications about SEL interventions with OCEAN model facets.

No.	Publication	Facet	Country	Sample y.o.	Objective	Main results
17	Portela-Pino et al. (2021)	F4 F5 F11	Spain	11–18	Evaluate the impact of an emotional competencies development program based on the SEA theoretical model (emotional attention and understanding, emotional regulation and repair, and emotional expression).	SES deficits in the preschool period promote deteriorated reparative response trajectories. Early preventive interventions should focus on understanding emotions, social functioning, maladaptive guilt, and psychiatric symptoms.
18	Urrea-Monclús et al. (2021)	F4 F8	Spain	12–17	Describe how to adapt Cognitive Remediation and Emotion Skills Training (CREST) for use with adolescents with anorexia nervosa in an emergency hospital setting.	Improvement in SEL, especially related to adaptive emotional expression in social contexts. Improvements were also noted in empathy and social adjustment.
19	Kastner et al. (2021)	F5	Germany	12–19	Analyze the relationship between SEL and sex, physical activity index, after-school attendance, and type of after-school activities.	Good acceptability with Patient Satisfaction. Patients showed medium-sized improvements in socio-emotional functioning components.
20	Martín-Moya et al. (2018)	F7	Spain	17–18	Validate the DCSE-J (Situational Test for the Development of Socio-emotional Competence in Youth), based on peer evaluation.	Students who participated in extracurricular activities scored higher in social awareness. Artistic and musical activities were associated with SESs, while sports activities were not.
21	Van De Sande et al. (2022)	F7 F8 F10 F11	The Netherlands	14–19	Design and evaluate a visual arts education program based on production theory, to investigate whether it generates positive effects on specific SESs and levels.	Students most frequently nominated by peers also scored higher. Girls were nominated more often and obtained higher scores. Mastering more complex competencies requires mastering more basic ones. The results supported the validity of the test.
22	Hebard et al. (2021)	F7 F8	USA	-	Identify motivational variations according to goal-setting theory using the innovative program DiverHealth.	A visual expression approach improved recognition of emotions, perspectives, and self-expression, particularly in vulnerable students. The results support the effectiveness of visual arts programs in enhancing SESs.
23	Yang et al. (2021)	F11 F12 F14 F19	USA	12–18	Evaluate the effectiveness of the S4L (Skills4Life) SEL program for education.	Differences in motivational variables. Girls in the experimental group scored higher than boys. Personalized tutoring may improve student motivation.
24	Berg et al. (2021)	F11 F19 F25 F26 F29 F30	Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Spain	12–15	Capture the lived experiences of coaches (Athletic Administrators, AAs) applying a novel SEL-based program (InsideOut Initiative, ISOI) with coaches and student athletes in secondary school sports.	The results highlight the importance of promoting student well-being, especially through social awareness and relationship skills, as a goal of SEL programs.
25	Colomeischi et al. (2022a)	F12 F25 F28 F29 F30	Romania	4–16	Examine associations between students’ perceptions of four core SESs (responsible decision-making, social awareness, self-management, and relationship skills), school climate, and cyberbullying experience.	The PROMEHS program improves SESs and well-being, prevents behavioral problems, and reduces psychosocial difficulties. Improvements in self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relational skills, and responsible decision-making.
26	Newman et al. (2020)	F12 F23 F25 F29	USA	14–16	Evaluate teacher and student readiness for SEL during an intervention.	Experienced compared to students taught by regular teachers. Changes are needed in the socio-cultural approach of the Skills4Life program and in teacher training.
27	Colomeischi et al. (2022b)	F12 F25 F28	Romania	11–18	Investigate the effectiveness of the school-based PROMEHS program (Mental Health Promotion in Schools) designed to foster learning and prevent psychosocial difficulties.	The coach–athlete relationship mediated the connection between sports participation and character, health, and well-being outcomes for student athletes. AAs in secondary schools can provide leadership, mentorship, and direction to help coaches enhance student athletes’ performance and human development.
28	Shinde et al. (2022)	F13	India	11–15	Investigate the outcomes of a biopsychosocial SEL intervention based on yogic breathing, across gender and ethnicity.	Cyberbullying victimization (CBV) was negatively associated with responsible decision-making and self-management, and positively associated with social awareness. The negative association with self-management and CBV was stronger when the school climate was more positive; the link between CBV and responsible decision-making was mitigated by the school climate. The strongest association was between CBV and self-management.
29	Gràcia et al. (2022)	F13	Spain	12–16	Deepen the understanding of how SEL, resilience, and internalizing problems (personal/internal impacts) are related, focusing on the mediating role of resilience.	Results indicated favorable development in some measured skills in the intervention group, though effects varied between the two age groups.
30	Avivar-Cáceres et al. (2022)	F13 F14 F15 F19	Spain	11–17	Present a qualitative evaluation of the Heartfulness Way, a socio-emotional program for secondary schools based on mindfulness techniques delivered by teachers.	Results indicated that the PROMEHS program was effective in improving SESs across all school levels and reducing internalizing problems.
31	Song & Kim (2022)	F13 F14 F15 F19	South Korea	12–16	Analyze an Intelligent Pedagogical Assistance System (SIAP) designed to support teachers in planning, assessing, and guiding participatory lessons that foster oral competence.	Significant effects of the program on social competence, emotional regulation, empathy, and bullying behavior at the 1-month follow-up.
32	Araúz-Ledezma et al. (2022)	F13 F19 F29 F30	Panama	12–15	Evaluate the effectiveness of the FHACE-up! program for training in communication and social skills.	Significant improvements were found in all seven measured outcomes. The biopsychosocial approach was associated with positive SEL outcomes across all genders and ethnic groups.

and

Table 6. Third final sample of publications about SEL interventions with OCEAN model facets.

No.	Publication	Facet	Country	Sample y.o.	Objective	Main Results
33	Franck et al. (2020)	F15 F23 F24	Australia	13–15	Develop a program to improve SESs for adolescents who engage in bullying, and investigate its effects on bullying behavior and mental health.	Results show that resilience mediates the relationship between self-awareness and internalizing problems, between self-management and internalizing problems, and between responsible decision-making and internalizing problems.
34	Laakso et al. (2023)	F16	Finland	10–12	Identify levels of fidelity and integrity, and explore enabling and limiting factors faced during the SEL intervention.	Overall, participants strongly supported the mindfulness-based curriculum. Students reported positive responses, prosocial behavior, self-acceptance, and supportive relationships.
35	Díaz López et al. (2019)	F19	Spain	12–13		Indicators showed that as teachers achieved instructional goals, students’ oral competence improved. A questionnaire also revealed increased self-concept related to students’ communication skills in the intervention group.
36	Lim et al. (2011)	F19	United kingdom, Germany	13–14	Evaluate an SEL program for internal Aboriginal youth and identify contextual factors affecting its effectiveness.	Results showed significant improvement in school violence, the perception of the school climate, and communication skills.
37	Coelho et al. (2017)	F19 F27 F29	Portugal	11–17	Examine changes in students’ daily positive and negative emotions through participation in the Flourishing Students program.	The program had a significant positive impact on adolescents’ perception of violence and the school climate.
38	Muela et al. (2021)	F21 F26 F28	Spain	14–17	Evaluate the effectiveness of an emotional intelligence program in improving the school climate, reducing bullying, and developing emotional skills.	The effects of the program were significant on social competence, emotional regulation, empathy, and bullying behavior at the one-month follow-up. The SECE program was effective in reducing bullying behavior among adolescents.
39	Neth et al. (2020)	F25 F27 F28 F29 F30	USA	11–13	Educate on intercultural empathy using ORIENT (role-playing technology). Present the prototype and evaluation.	The program was highly accepted by students, teachers, and parents. Key enablers included innovation, responsiveness to local needs, lesson adaptability, and program acceptability. Barriers included time constraints, cultural transferability, and organizational context.
40	Deli et al. (2021)	F25 F26	China	14	Investigate the effectiveness of a universal school-based SEL program and compare different implementation formats.	Improvements were seen in students who sought and offered help, worked in groups, handled conflicts, were assertive, and discussed cultural topics.
41	Vestad & Tharaldsen (2022)	F26	Norway	13–14	Pilot and evaluate the OverCome-AAI program, using animal-assisted interventions for young people at high risk of suicidal behavior.	The intervention buffered increases in negative daily emotions. Participants experienced positive changes such as reduced loneliness and higher levels of calm and enjoyment of solitude. The effect was stronger among girls.
42	Sousa et al. (2023)	F27	Portugal	12–14	Evaluate the impact of Strong Kids, an SEL curriculum in a middle school, on students’ symptoms.	The program improved the school climate and reduced bullying, while enhancing motivation and empathy. Emotional education was presented as a preventive tool for school coexistence issues in adolescence.
43	Wigelsworth et al. (2013)	F27	United Kingdom	11–12	Investigate the effectiveness of two types of SEL interventions delivered by different types of teachers, to reduce learning anxiety and intention to drop out.	ORIENT software offers a new framework for role-playing and storytelling that enables users to interact with virtual social actors to promote intercultural empathy. It uses tangible interaction modalities to increase user motivation to learn about the culture of others and collaborate effectively.
44	Evans et al. (2015)	F27 F30	United Kingdom	12–14	Explore how participants experienced relationship skills, emotional regulation, mindfulness, growth mindset, and problem solving when facing academic stress.	Positive results in social awareness, self-control, self-esteem, social isolation, and social anxiety. The pre-taught format led to better outcomes in self-esteem and social isolation.
45	Sáez-Santiago & Torres Arroyo (2016)	F28	Puerto Rico	12–14	Analyze the effectiveness of a program on social withdrawal and social anxiety, and the role of individual perceptions of school climate.	Reductions in suicidal ideation, suicide plans, and non-suicidal self-harm, along with increased help-seeking. Reduction in emotional pain intensity, though no changes in despair or depression indicators. The program effectively reduced suicidal behavior in residential youth at high risk.
46	Cuéto-López et al. (2022)	F28	Mexico	12–15	Evaluate the impact of the SEAL secondary school program on students with low, average, and high SESs (at-risk students).	Strong Kids improved students’ socio-emotional knowledge and reduced internalizing symptoms. However, no significant changes were observed in externalizing symptoms.
47	Sáez-Santiago et al. (2013)	F28	Puerto Rico	12	Explore the theoretical foundations of the SAP (Student Assistance Program), assess dissemination and implementation levels, and analyze participants’ experiences.	Psychology teachers were more effective in improving SEL knowledge, while regular teachers were more effective in reducing learning anxiety.
48	Sidera et al. (2019)	F29	Spain	14	Evaluate the viability of a teacher-delivered depression prevention program for adolescents in public schools in Puerto Rico.	Students experienced mindfulness, problem-solving, and the growth mindset as helpful. Emotional regulation and relationship skills were harder to use. More practical exercises are needed for these competencies.
49	Vegas & Mateos-Agut (2023)	F30	Spain	14–18	Describe the effect of an interactive universal prevention program on disordered eating, body dissatisfaction, thin-ideal internalization, nutrition knowledge, anxiety, and depression.	Analyses showed positive results in reducing social withdrawal and social anxiety. Students with more positive teacher–student relationships benefited more from the intervention.

present the evidence of actions gathered from the scientific literature, including the objectives of the studies and the facets addressed in those actions. This information will allow us to respond to the objectives proposed. We now proceed to addressing each of them. Due to the large number of publications in the final sample, we have divided it into three groups, with their respective subsections. However, first, we include a subsection about the overall analysis of all the interventions and, finally, a subsection about actionable recommendations from all the interventions.

3.2.1. Overall Analysis of the Interventions

Given that the educational setting of the review is formal education and the selected age range is 12 to 16 years, the objectives and outcomes of the interventions presented in the articles differ in certain aspects.

• Regarding the cultural context, most publications tend to evaluate programs from a particular cultural perspective. The question is: Is that a matter of different program objectives or a different cultural perspective (taking the context into account)? A notable difference can be seen in the intended benefits of SEL training between European and Hispanic American countries. In the former, issues related to integration and multiculturalism are emphasized, to the extent that failing to consider these factors may produce negative effects for some students (Van De Sande et al., 2022). In Hispanic American countries, SEL interventions are perceived as effective tools to reduce teenage pregnancy, bullying, and sexual violence, while promoting equity and respect between boys and girls (Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022);
• The analyzed actions show that SEL interventions have a significant impact on the development of SESs, particularly self-concept, empathy, and motivation. They also help reduce anxiety, providing strong support in coping with academic stress. These interventions have a positive effect in reducing bullying behavior and peer violence, and contribute to improving communication skills. The increase in behavioral adjustment among adolescents leads to a significant improvement in the school climate (Veríssimo et al., 2022; Cherewick et al., 2021a; Cejudo et al., 2020; Cojocaru, 2023; Amutio et al., 2020; Sweetman, 2021; Rodríguez-Ledo et al., 2018; Martín-Moya et al., 2018; Avivar-Cáceres et al., 2022; Song & Kim, 2022; Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022; Vestad & Tharaldsen, 2022; Sousa et al., 2023; Cuéto-López et al., 2022).
• The emotional dysregulation factor—which includes the facets of Anxiety, Vulnerability to stress, Social Anxiety, Depression, Impulsiveness, and Hostility—was by far the most addressed in the analyzed publications. A striking number of programs equate SEL training with actions for mental health promotion and prevention in that field, including suicide prevention (Muela et al., 2021), depression prevention or improvement (Sáez-Santiago & Torres Arroyo, 2016), relief from anorexia nervosa (Rodríguez-Ledo et al., 2018) etc., placing SEL and mental health education nearly on the same level;
• There are high expectations regarding SEL effectiveness that are not always met, as shown in articles analyzing program implementation experiences that have resulted in adverse or counterproductive effects. The lived experience of youth participants is often omitted in research (Evans et al., 2015). For this reason, the potential for interventions to generate unintended or adverse effects has not been theoretically or empirically explored. Based on a qualitative case study on student participation in an SEL intervention—specifically, the Student Assistance Program (Evans et al., 2015)—four iatrogenic processes were identified, meaning that unintended and generally harmful effects resulted from the intervention: (1) The way schools select participating students can be perceived as a negative label, leading to rejection by peers. (2) Failing in the SEL program may be used by students as a means to improve social status, but maintaining that status requires continued resistance to the intervention. (3) When the SEL intervention focuses on reversing the specific behaviors commonly used by a tight-knit peer group as a means of cohesion, members may prioritize their friendship over the program and reinforce the targeted behaviors. (4) Students may seek to reposition themselves within specific peer groups by boasting or reinforcing anti-school behaviors, which leads to an amplification of deviance.

Another example (Sidera et al., 2019) describes the implementation and evaluation of a socio-emotional training program aimed at reducing moral disengagement, improving coexistence, and preventing aggression in the classroom. The evaluation revealed that the intervention was not effective—there were no statistically significant changes in aggression, empathy, or moral disengagement. Moreover, the school climate worsened in both the control and intervention groups.

Other publications indirectly acknowledge these risks (Newman et al., 2020), describing how SEL interventions were designed to avoid stigmatization or the rejection of participants, particularly in cases where target populations came from very different socio-cultural backgrounds. To address this issue, Dowling and Barry (2020) propose an implementation variability to avoid the negative effects of SEL interventions, while Domitrovich et al. (2017) focus on research into effective approaches.

E.

Interesting associations are found between SEL programs and the development of positive emotions, which in many cases is linked to the reduction or self-regulation of problematic internet use, cyberbullying prevention, and related behaviors (Laakso et al., 2023).

F.

Regarding problematic internet use, it is worth noting that it is more prevalent among boys and is associated with poorer socio-emotional health (Chen et al., 2021; Marín-López et al., 2020; Coelho et al., 2017). Girls show better outcomes (Ogurlu et al., 2018), which is reflected in a slightly more pronounced effect of the intervention among girls compared to boys (Laakso et al., 2023).

G.

Several publications focus on the professionals facilitating the SEL intervention—both to assess the adequacy of their training as psychologists or teachers (Deli et al., 2021; Sáez-Santiago & Torres Arroyo, 2016), and to observe whether prior training leads to improvements in the teaching of social skills in the classroom (Berg et al., 2021), or whether there are school-related factors that influence the implementation of the program (Gràcia et al., 2022). Additionally, the degree of teacher adherence to delivering the lessons within an intervention was identified as a parallel objective to the main focus of the research (Neth et al., 2020).

H.

In examining the implementation of SEL to improve academic performance, some publications were related to social support for gifted students (Ogurlu et al., 2018), the relationship between learning anxiety and school dropout (Deli et al., 2021), and its influence on academic stress (Vestad & Tharaldsen, 2022), as well as its relevance for athlete training (Hebard et al., 2021). The direct relationship between SEL and overall academic achievement is also addressed (Amutio et al., 2020; Portela-Pino et al., 2021). In low-income countries, SEL implementation has been analyzed as a means of achieving flexible distance learning (Cherewick et al., 2021b).

I.

It is surprising that we found only one publication linking SEL with the arts. Specifically, it explores whether participation in a visual arts program at a museum can produce positive transfer effects on specific socio-emotional levels and certain skills (Kastner et al., 2021). The same applies to animal-assisted interventions, of which we identified only one within our sample (Muela et al., 2021).

3.2.2. Analysis of the First Final Sample

The first final sample of interventions reveals how the development of SEL competencies is fundamental to adolescents’ personal, social, and academic well-being; and the interventions’ impact variables, such as self-concept, emotional regulation, interpersonal relationships, prosocial behavior, and the reduction in emotional and behavioral problems.

Regarding the Openness dimension, SEL programs strengthen self-concept and self-regulation, elements associated with Openness to Experience and responsibility (Veríssimo et al., 2022; Coelho et al., 2014, and Rodríguez-Ledo et al., 2018). In the Extraversion dimension, publications focused on how transformative learning and gender equity encourage adolescents to assertively express their identities and social ties (Cherewick et al., 2021a, 2021b; Cojocaru, 2023). Several publications show results that impact kindness. Strengthening character virtues and SESs not only fosters cooperative behaviors, but also a sense of positive purpose, reinforcing prosocial traits linked to kindness (Hatchimonji et al., 2022; Cejudo et al., 2020). Agreeableness is also enhanced by perceived social support and its relationship with empathy (Ogurlu et al., 2018), and by mindfulness practices, which also promote emotional regulation and reduce disruptive behaviors (Amutio et al., 2020).

Finally, various results have been found that impact the Neuroticism or emotional dysregulation dimension. Research on online behavior shows that adequate emotional competencies reduce problematic behaviors and cyberbullying, suggesting more effective control of negative impulses also related to Neuroticism (Chen et al., 2021; Marín-López et al., 2020).

Similarly, strengthening SESs reduces feelings of social withdrawal and anxiety, thus mitigating Neuroticism characteristics in victims of domestic violence (Sweetman, 2021). In this sense, therapeutic programs focused on social skills help to stabilize complex emotional profiles, reducing patterns of anxiety, impulsivity, or withdrawal, all associated with Neuroticism (Donohue et al., 2020; Harrison et al., 2021).

3.2.3. Analysis of the Second Final Sample

The second final sample of publications indicates that systematic work with SESs not only improves adolescents’ immediate well-being, but also contributes to consolidating stable, adaptive, and functional personality traits over the long term. This impact is observable in school, community, clinical, and extracurricular settings, and in diverse populations.

Openness to Experience, specifically in areas such as imagination, intellectual curiosity, and esthetic interest, fosters creativity through art (Kastner et al., 2021) or oral communication programs (Gràcia et al., 2022). Responsibility is also enhanced by strengthening organizational competence, a sense of duty, self-discipline, and achievement skills, especially among underachieving adolescents or those in vulnerable situations (Portela-Pino et al., 2021; Van De Sande et al., 2022; Colomeischi et al., 2022a). The Agreeableness dimension, and within it the facets of empathy, cooperation, and Modesty, are consistently addressed in several publications (Urrea-Monclús et al., 2021; Avivar-Cáceres et al., 2022; Song & Kim, 2022; Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022), which demonstrates that SEL programs are effective in reducing aggressive behavior, promoting prosocial attitudes, and improving conflict management, all of which are central to the development of healthy interpersonal relationships.

Some publications show positive impacts on the Extraversion dimension, especially in facets such as sociability, assertiveness, and enthusiasm, through interventions that promote leadership, collaborative work, or emotional expression, both in the sports context (Hebard et al., 2021) and in teacher training (Berg et al., 2021). An improved school climate is also associated with greater Extraversion (Yang et al., 2021; Shinde et al., 2022). Regarding the Neuroticism dimension, a reduction in facets such as anxiety, emotional vulnerability, and hostility, as well as internalizing problems, is observed, strengthening emotional resilience after the implementation of SEL programs (Colomeischi et al., 2022a; Newman et al., 2020; Colomeischi et al., 2022b).

3.2.4. Analysis of the Third Final Sample

The third final sample of publications indicates that socio-emotional development not only improves momentary variables such as mood or classroom behavior, but also contributes to modulating personality traits or their associated facets. The benefits are observed both in preventing problems (anxiety, bullying, or dropping out of school) and in promoting strengths (resilience, motivation, or social skills). These effects also cut across diverse contexts, suggesting that well-designed SEL programs are powerful tools for the holistic development of adolescents.

Many of the SEL programs analyzed are closely linked to strengthening responsibility or the dimension of Conscientiousness, particularly in facets such as self-discipline, sense of duty, and achievement competency. For example, some programs (Coelho et al., 2017; Muela et al., 2021) promote emotional self-regulation and persistence skills, essential for academic performance and responsible decision-making. At the same time, the Agreeableness dimension appears strengthened in programs that foster empathy, cooperation, and altruism, such as those reported by some authors (Díaz López et al., 2019; Lim et al., 2011; Sidera et al., 2019), which address both the development of intercultural empathy and the prevention of relational conflicts (e.g., bullying or school violence). Regarding the Neuroticism dimension, several publications report a significant reduction in facets such as anxiety, hostility, or emotional vulnerability, evidencing a decrease in emotional symptoms and withdrawal behaviors or social anxiety, indicating that SEL programs can play a preventive role in the fight against mental health problems (Laakso et al., 2023; Sousa et al., 2023; Sáez-Santiago & Torres Arroyo, 2016).

The Openness to Experience dimension is addressed to a lesser extent, although it is represented in publications that promote creativity, cognitive flexibility, and moral thinking, such as the program based on digital role-playing games (Lim et al., 2011) or interventions that integrate cultural experiences (Franck et al., 2020). These proposals enhance aspects such as intellectual curiosity, esthetic sensitivity, and tolerance for novelty, favoring a disposition to learn from diversity. On the other hand, extraversion is reinforced in programs that stimulate social affiliation, assertiveness, and emotional expression, reporting improvements in social participation and relationships between peers (Neth et al., 2020), or offering strategies to cope with academic stress with social support (Vestad & Tharaldsen, 2022). However, the effectiveness of these programs may vary depending on the context of application, the quality of implementation, and the perceptions of the adolescents themselves, which highlights the importance of an approach that is sensitive to the individual and social characteristics of the participants (Wigelsworth et al., 2013; Evans et al., 2015).

3.2.5. Actionable Recommendations (Objective 2)

The review carried out, beyond the outcomes of the SEL interventions, allows us to identify relevant aspects that may contribute, to some extent, to the success and development of such actions. We highlight the following:

1. Two critical facilitators were highlighted in the design and implementation of the program. First, the establishment of safe and trusting relationships among all school participants and the staff delivering the program. Second, the participation of students in gender-separated groups (Franck et al., 2020).

2. Some programs have shown that technology is a useful tool for creating SEL experiences and offering flexible learning opportunities, such as distance learning in low-income countries (Cherewick et al., 2021b).

3. The importance of assessing and monitoring the school climate has been emphasized to identify the need and opportunity to develop cyberbullying prevention programs with an SEL approach (Yang et al., 2021).

4. Adolescence is highlighted as a developmental period that presents an opportunity for strategic investment to improve youth trajectories in health, education, and well-being. More specifically, neurological changes during pubertal maturation influence the brain circuits involved in processing emotions, risk, rewards, and social relationships. Accordingly, early preventive interventions should focus on emotional understanding, social functioning, maladaptive guilt, and early psychiatric symptoms. It was also emphasized that intervention design should align program delivery formats with developmental needs (Coelho et al., 2017). In addition, it was acknowledged that certain classroom behaviors require the mastery of various SESs (Cherewick et al., 2021b). All of this leads to the exploratory conclusion that adolescence is an ideal developmental stage for addressing emotional education as a preventive tool for school coexistence problems (Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022).

5. It has been suggested that virtue education (moral education) is a strong ally of socio-emotional education. When character virtues are integrated with SEL interventions, positive socio-emotional outcomes are enhanced. An educational intervention based on SEL and moral education is recommended to promote classroom coexistence and to prevent and reduce aggression in secondary schools (Sidera et al., 2019).

6. The ethical, moral, and character-building components are addressed in many of the interventions in the analyzed publications. Some directly address these aspects, working on the development of character virtues (Honesty, empathy, and responsibility) (Hatchimonji et al., 2022), promoting gender equity in adolescents by connecting SEL with social justice values (Cherewick et al., 2021a, 2021b), empowering adolescents in equity, moral agency, and community engagement (Cherewick et al., 2021a; Cojocaru, 2023), or analyzing SEL programs for adolescent victims of violence, reinforcing justice, dignity, or the right to protection (Sweetman, 2021). Others implicitly address ethical or moral aspects even though they are not their main focus (Veríssimo et al., 2022; Ogurlu et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2021; Marín-López et al., 2020; Coelho et al., 2014, 2017; Muela et al., 2021; Sousa et al., 2023). Although they focus on emotional well-being, self-concept, or conflict reduction, they promote attitudes such as respect, cooperation, empathy, and responsibility, which have a clear moral basis. Finally, some publications address the ethical–moral connection from a secondary perspective, such as emotional well-being in indigenous youth (Franck et al., 2020), the unintended consequences of SEL interventions (Evans et al., 2015), SEL implementation in schools with great ethnic diversity (Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022), or the prevention of cyberbullying through the school climate (Yang et al., 2021).

7. Several publications have emphasized the need to train teachers so that they can support all students in developing the SESs necessary for success in school and later in the workplace. This teacher preparation must be complemented by the theoretical and practical development of ongoing professional development in SEL and its potential role in reducing problematic behaviors among students. Within this context of training needs, several potential barriers were also identified, including insufficient current teacher training and the need for direct supervision during implementation (Van De Sande et al., 2022; Berg et al., 2021; Shinde et al., 2022), as well as the difficulty in finding suitable teachers to deliver the programs (Deli et al., 2021). In fact, teachers reported feeling unprepared to handle the serious emotional situations experienced by students (Sáez-Santiago et al., 2013).

8. Some common difficulties or barriers include a lack of time for interventions, challenges in transferring programs to other cultural contexts, and insufficient commitment and collaboration from the organizational environment (Araúz-Ledezma et al., 2022). Specifically, four points were identified for implementation to avoid the risk of compromising the program’s integrity and, therefore, its effectiveness: (1) training in intervention delivery to gain knowledge and experience in executing a program; (2) evaluation of the intervention in relation to contextual needs; (3) clarification of the intervention, including knowledge transfer across the organization to ensure support for implementation; and (4) assignment of responsibilities during the intervention to ensure its long-term sustainability (Evans et al., 2015).

9. The findings highlight the importance of the family in the socio-emotional education of adolescents, recommending strengthening family communication, specifically through shared family meals (Vegas & Mateos-Agut, 2023).

10. There is causal evidence that visual arts programs situated within the context of an art museum, when properly designed, can enhance SESs (Kastner et al., 2021).

4. Discussion

In this scoping review, we set out to gather evidence from the scientific literature since 2010 to establish school-based SEL proposals aimed at developing the OCEAN personality facets (McCrae & John, 1992) in adolescents. Based on the results, we identified two key challenges in the field of evaluation: (a) the diversity of methodological practices (which can lead to confusion) and synthesis designs; and (b) a frequent omission of quality assessments.

The first sample of publications highlights the crucial role of SEL in enhancing adolescents’ well-being across personal, social, and academic domains. SEL programs positively influence traits linked to the Big Five, such as self-regulation (Openness), identity expression (Extraversion), and prosocial behavior (Kindness and Agreeableness). Practices like mindfulness and character education foster empathy, cooperation, and emotional stability. Notably, interventions also mitigate Neuroticism by reducing anxiety, impulsivity, and online behavioral risks through emotional and social skill development.

The second sample of publications shows that sustained SEL work enhances not only adolescents’ immediate well-being, but also their long-term personality development across varied contexts. SEL fosters Openness through creativity, responsibility via self-discipline, and Agreeableness by improving empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution. Extraversion is strengthened through activities that build sociability and leadership, positively affecting the school climate. Neuroticism is mitigated by reducing anxiety and emotional vulnerability, reinforcing emotional resilience and mental health.

The third sample of publications shows that SEL programs not only improve immediate outcomes like mood and behavior, but also help to shape stable personality traits. They are effective in both preventing issues like anxiety and bullying and promoting strengths such as resilience and social skills across varied contexts. SEL notably enhances Conscientiousness and Agreeableness through self-regulation, empathy, and conflict resolution, while also reducing neurotic traits like anxiety and emotional vulnerability. Although less frequent, some programs also foster Openness and Extraversion by promoting creativity, cultural engagement, and supportive peer interactions, with effectiveness influenced by context and implementation quality.

Considering actionable recommendations, this review identifies the key factors influencing the success of SEL interventions beyond the immediate outcomes. Critical elements include safe, trusting school relationships, culturally sensitive formats (e.g., gender-separated groups), and the integration of technology and virtue ethics into program design. Developmentally, adolescence is framed as a strategic period for emotional education, supported by neuroscience and the need for early preventive efforts. Effective implementation depends on teacher training, organizational support, family involvement, and context-aware adaptation to sustain long-term SEL impact.

Taking into account the distinctions between the types of SEL programs considered in the sample of publications, we have found universal SEL—preventive and inclusive, aimed at fostering emotional literacy, empathy, and decision-making across the entire student population, targeted SEL—designed for at-risk, underserved, or high-need populations such as victims of violence, bullies, or students with mental health concerns, community-based SEL—often informal, conducted through clubs, museums, or therapy settings, focusing on real-world application and equity, and hybrid SEL—uses blended delivery (e.g., tech-assisted platforms or cross-sector collaborations) to extend SEL beyond the classroom.

The methodological diversity in SEL evaluations presents several key challenges, which stem from variations in research design, outcome measures, and cultural contexts. Across the sampled SEL studies, we see a wide range of evaluation designs. These differing designs limit comparability and meta-analytic synthesis. RCTs offer strong internal validity, but many community-based or culturally grounded SEL programs opt for more flexible or qualitative designs, which may sacrifice generalizability for contextual richness. In addition, SESs are assessed through a broad range of tools; without a core set of validated, cross-culturally appropriate SEL measures, studies often create or adapt tools ad hoc, reducing reliability and making cross-study comparisons problematic. Programs differ substantially in cultural settings, implementation settings, and norms around emotion and behavior. Evaluations conducted in one cultural or institutional context may not generalize to those conducted in another. This complicates scaling and raises questions about what counts as SEL success across global or multicultural contexts.

Many of the studies reviewed tend to focus on individual-level behavioral or emotional changes without sufficiently addressing how these broader systemic and relational contexts can amplify or undermine program effectiveness. School climate—encompassing norms, values, relationships, and organizational structures—plays a central role in shaping the success of SEL interventions. However, several studies in the sample treated climate as a static backdrop rather than a dynamic factor influenced by and influencing SEL programs. Some evaluations failed to assess whether the school climate was receptive or resistant to SEL principles—e.g., equity, emotional Openness, inclusive discipline. For example, studies that implemented SEL in isolation from broader climate initiatives may have missed cumulative or synergistic effects—such as improved student–teacher relationships or a general increase in prosocial norms. In addition, SEL programs aim to enhance interpersonal skills, but peer group norms, hierarchies, and social reinforcement patterns can either facilitate or hinder these skills taking root. Few studies examined how peer interactions changed over time or how peer acceptance of SEL concepts influenced engagement. Without supportive peer environments, students may be reluctant to practice SEL skills—e.g., conflict resolution or emotional expression—for fear of ridicule or social exclusion. Institutional buy-in—from leadership, teachers, and broader school systems—is essential for the fidelity, sustainability, and integration of SEL programs. Where teachers were not trained adequately or saw SEL as “extra work”, students likely experienced inconsistent delivery, weakening programs’ potential benefits.

As previously noted, the prominence given to the Neuroticism dimension—highlighted by the fact that its facets are the most frequently addressed in SEL programs (anxiety, vulnerability to stress, social anxiety, depression, impulsiveness, and hostility)—suggests a tendency to identify SEL training with mental health promotion and prevention efforts. This trend reflects how the societal shift toward a therapeutic culture (Furedi, 2004; Ecclestone & Hayes, 2009) has already permeated the educational sphere. As Azrak (2020) notes, pedagogical discourse has been displaced by the pathologization of learning challenges. While SEL programs are complementary to clinical treatment and have only a low-intensity impact, they nevertheless continue to associate SEL with clinical rather than pedagogical activity (Harrison et al., 2021).

This psychological colonization of the educational discourse (Solé Blanch & Moyano Mangas, 2017) has led to the increasing presence in the classroom of the protagonism of psychological diagnoses, thus reconfiguring the school scenario because it gradually assimilates it with the clinical model by transforming the learning difficulty into an illness or a disorder that is not a learning disorder (Azrak, 2020). As Ocampo (2019) recalls, it is undeniable that psychological knowledge is useful to enhance the work of the teacher, because it facilitates a greater understanding of the cognitive processes that operate in learning. But the psychological discourse has not been limited to that role, rather in the educational field it has become hegemonic, to the point that it has conquered the curricula. De Vos (2016) has underlined this, using the example of the minimum learning outcome objectives stipulated by the Flemish government and riddled with psychological terms, assimilating it to the trend in the United Kingdom where concern for well-being and mental health had occupied the classroom through what Ecclestone and Hayes (2009) call a curriculum of the self. This same phenomenon can be observed in the educational policies of most Western countries.

The consequences of this trend are manifold. In the discourse of efficiency and quality, the school has been redesigned to offer a comprehensive package of schooling, education, and therapy (De Vos, 2008); the tendency to replace teaching with a form of counseling or psychological advice—entrusting the teacher with a dual role, that of teacher and psychologist—is replacing pedagogical responsibility with that of offering therapeutic care. Awakening interest and focusing attention are acts fitting to pedagogical responsibility that help to put in the effort required for study, because attention is directed toward something valuable that is beyond and takes the student out of their world, which is an exciting experience where well-being is not a fundamental concern. However, the psychologizing tendency tends to speak of this effort in traumatic terms and to translate the act of arousing interest into motivation that is personal and brings the student back into their world in a self-referential movement. Exhaustive psychologizing by fully framing the pedagogical act in the context of the emotional well-being of students causes the pedagogical act to no longer be performed for the love of the world, and prevents young people from allowing themselves to be seduced by something that is beyond their psychological universe (Masschelein & Simons, 2014).

Attending to the ethical and moral aspects that interventions promote, approximately half of the articles explicitly incorporate ethical or moral aspects (virtues, equity, justice, or active citizenship). The remainder tend to focus on social and emotional competencies that, although not always labeled as “ethical”, involve essential moral values for sustainable societies—e.g., respect, responsibility, resilience, cooperation. Character and the way it is taught among young people constitute an umbrella term that encompasses moral education, civic education, values education, etc., which makes it difficult to identify interventions in this regard (Balaguer & Berkowitz, 2021; Balaguer, 2023).

Regarding the association between SEL programs and the development of positive emotions and thinking, as well as the high expectations surrounding their effectiveness—expectations that have sometimes gone unmet or even led to counterproductive effects (Sáez-Santiago & Torres Arroyo, 2016; Vegas & Mateos-Agut, 2023)—the findings highlight the importance of how implementation is carried out. They also underscore the need to situate SEL programs within a broader framework that includes character education and ethical reflection, to address the challenges not explicitly contemplated by the programs but present in the specific school contexts in which they are implemented—e.g., disruptive groups that use the rejection of SEL programs as a means of self-affirmation and group cohesion. In this way, the personal is linked to the social, encouraging committed citizenship (Balaguer, 2016). Emotional education becomes an integral formation, not just emotional management.

This aligns with the approach of Newman et al. (2020). They propose a biopsychosocial model to avoid stigma toward or the rejection of participants in SEL programs. These authors suggest implementing a single SEL program for all students, adapted according to ethnicity and sociodemographic background. This avoids the problem of selecting only a few students for a “special program” and the associated risk of labeling, but it does not resolve the underlying issue—rather, it circumvents it.

Nevertheless, no article questioned the benefits of SEL training. Generally, failures were attributed to a lack of institutional support, poor implementation strategies, or insufficient training and engagement on the part of program facilitators. Such is the case of Wigelsworth et al. (2013), who, after evaluating an emotional education program applied in 41 secondary schools to a total of 3306 students and finding no significant improvements in any group, stated that these findings do not imply that preventive interventions such as SEL are without value or place in education. Instead, they argue that it is essential to discuss what can be prevented or improved before launching large-scale, high-cost programs (Wigelsworth et al., 2013).

In this regard, we previously emphasized the need for a comprehensive and well-defined framework that can be complemented by other aspects of education, such as character education (Kristjánsson, 2018, 2020; Schwartz, 2022), flourishing (VanderWeele, 2020), and more. The excessive isolation of SEL interventions, combined with overly ambitious expectations for the development of various facets in students, may underlie some of the cases of total or partial failure observed in SEL implementations.

This research is not without limitations. Only two databases were used for the search. Although they are the most relevant, it would have been interesting to use other relevant databases for the search (e.g., PubMed, Google Scholar, etc.). It would have been equally interesting to expand the sample to a younger age range, given the positive results that SEL programs are achieving with children. Nevertheless, we consider this research to be quite comprehensive, covering studies without restrictions based on methodological design, geographic area, or type of school.

In addition, a notable limitation across several studies in our sample is the omission of comprehensive quality assessments, particularly in areas like implementation fidelity, participant engagement, dosage, facilitator competency, and contextual relevance. These omissions may compromise both program effectiveness and the credibility of the evaluation findings. It undermines validity, hinders scalability, and reduces stakeholder trust. As for this, some recommendations for strengthening SEL evaluations could be to incorporate structured implementation fidelity tools, e.g., observation checklists, fidelity logs, train and assess facilitators regularly, measure participant engagement through surveys or attendance logs, include qualitative feedback from students and educators, and document dosage explicitly in evaluation reports.

As a proposal for future research, we researchers believe that it is appropriate to evaluate the success of SEL programs based on the cultural environment in which they are implemented. Other factors such as poverty, gender inequalities, mental health, and emotional dysregulation could also be the subject of further studies that could expand this field of research. It is also crucial to consider the personnel who implement these programs, as they are key to their success.

5. Conclusions

All of the publications that highlight challenges in implementation conclude that further research is needed to address the inconsistencies between the goals and approaches of SEL programs on the one hand, and their implementation on the other. We believe that this missing research should also include a discussion of the ethical implications embedded in the design of SEL intervention programs. In doing so, it would be possible to contribute to a more holistic education that strengthens the internal coherence and consistency of SEL programs.

Properly speaking, the ethical dimension is not absent in emotional education programs. The publications reviewed show that, for the most part, the SEL approach not only promotes personal and social skills, but also explicitly or implicitly incorporates ethical and moral dimensions fundamental to the sustainable development of societies, such as social justice, responsibility, empathy, and civic engagement.

What we propose is an investigation that directly addresses the interrelationship between emotions and ethics. In this sense, the ethical perspective would help to overcome the dichotomous division of emotions into positive (those that should be encouraged) and negative (those that should be regulated), not only because it is a reductionist view of the complex human affective world (Zaldívar Sansuán, 2024), but above all because ethics relates emotions to the world outside the subject: a reality that can be good or bad. Thus, the ethical perspective can help us to understand that what is psychologically considered a negative emotion, such as ‘anger’, can be the ethically correct emotion, and, therefore, one that should be encouraged when we are faced with a bad reality, such as an injustice (Conesa-Lareo, 2025). In this sense, incorporating ethical issues into SEL programs means teaching to prioritize the good over subjective well-being, and to this end, teaching to foster the emotion that is appropriate to the reality that provokes it, repositioning the division of positive and negative emotions in a broader framework of emotions that are ethically appropriate or inappropriate to the reality that provokes them.

Future studies could address the gap between emotional and ethical education by working with two approaches: the psychological and the pedagogical. Pedagogy is an eminently ethical science since it aspires to the integral education of the person, which includes teaching to grow in freedom, that is, to freely desire the good. The incorporation of this learning illuminates the meaning of human emotions by incorporating them into the full development of the person as a free being, and helps to uncover the role they play in the free search for the good.

All of the above also seems to us to be related to the selection of facets carried out in the studies. For example, the facets of Orderliness, Modesty, and Honesty were not addressed in any of the documents included in this review. While these are not the only omitted facets, they can be grouped among those most directly related to character virtues. Several publications refer to other character-related virtues, whether more socially oriented (such as Cordiality, Sociability, or Assertiveness) or more individual in nature (such as Independence of judgment, Dutifulness, Cautiousness, or Self-discipline). The fact that the choice of facets omits some virtues again means that ethical consideration is not absent, but it is partial. The inseparability of virtues—since Augustine of Hippo (1904)—is an ethical proposition widely shared by philosophers who speak of virtue as necessary for life. When one grows in one virtue, one grows in the others, and if one is lacking, it also affects the other virtues. For this reason, the ethical perspective always contemplates the complete corpus of virtues.

Nevertheless, this absence may reflect the need for SEL approaches to be complemented with a moral component, one that encourages students to recognize and choose the good. Elias et al. (2014), after analyzing core theoretical assumptions in both SEL and character education, identified essential points of complementarity that would benefit both fields. Character education can incorporate SEL’s attention to emotional analysis and education, while SEL can draw on character education to promote “stronger moral sensibilities and morally guided action in youth” (p. 284).

Ultimately, any profile aiming to cultivate skills and strengths for environmental protection and the creation of sustainable conditions must include a foundational ethical component (Guevara Pérez, 2009; Kals & Müller, 2014). This review reveals that, in practice, such complementarity is less widespread and more difficult to implement than some theorists might hope.

The cultural context and the distinct aims of SEL training in Europe and Latin America suggest that the impact of these differing environmental realities on program effectiveness indicates that SEL programs are only optimal when adapted to the real problems of each specific social and cultural context (Abd Hadi et al., 2023). It also shows that SEL has become a kind of umbrella concept for very different approaches—perhaps because it is not as uniform as it might initially appear. For example, Abd Hadi et al. (2023) link the success of an SEL program for Malaysian students to its cultural and social adaptation.

According to Mckay (2016), this adaptation to social and cultural reality by the social sciences that deal with well-being—among which SEL is included—is a pending task. Fundamentally, this is because these eminently quantitative social sciences seek to abstract and reduce the complexity of historical specificities, and set aside the cultural situation, to provide an explanation composed of basic key values that can be found in all cultures. This specific epistemic procedure is not a problem in itself, since it is the task of the social sciences to abstract as many particularities as possible to reach a framework from which to think about any phenomenon that applies cross-culturally. The problem arises when the phenomenon to be studied is emotional well-being and its relationship with virtue, because this has a cultural history that must be taken into account. Perhaps for this reason, many of the publications do not focus on specific personality facets, but rather on SEL training in general—either to explore optimal implementation conditions or to examine other dimensions such as teacher training needs, program evaluation, or acceptability. To overcome this task, McKay proposes to complete the studies of quantitative social sciences with the contribution of qualitative social sciences, such as history and anthropology, and with the study of virtue ethics, in which the role of culture is an essential element for the realization of well-being, understood as vital fulfillment. A similar position is adopted by Willen (2022) in his defense that this vital plenitude is not an abstract concept, and to understand it in depth, it is necessary to study it from its context and socio-cultural roots as well as from the consideration of everyday life. Thus, he points out that we cannot ignore the fact that the opportunities to achieve this fullness are shaped, limited, promoted, and frustrated by the more general circumstances of people’s lives, which range from the structural circumstances in which they live to the socio-cultural fabric of their communities and their social position.

In addition, we observed that SEL interventions serve very different purposes: as a preventive tool (Donohue et al., 2020), for impact evaluation of a specific program, or for the promotion of mental health and well-being. A fourth purpose involves the exploratory implementation of a program (Sweetman, 2021)—that is, to understand the effects of a particular trauma or lived experience.

In short, there is a clear trend toward ongoing adaptation—or at least an interest in implementing SEL in the best way possible—when acknowledging failures that are not attributable to the model itself, but rather to contextual factors that shape its application. We believe that as long as researchers and educators promoting SEL maintain a healthy spirit of self-criticism and a willingness to overcome obstacles, the result will be a model in constant evolution—one that seeks to adapt to each user.

This aligns with the transformative potential that SEL interventions can have, beyond being just a tool for improvement. In a way, this is the very mindset expected of students prepared to become committed citizens and change agents for sustainability. The environment is constantly changing, and its care does not require fixed recipes, but rather a conscious and responsible attitude to respond to the challenges brought about by globalization—sharing the common goal of fostering an understanding of the world, positive relationships, and active, transformative participation in and for society (Sanz Leal et al., 2022).

Educating future generations to face the challenges of globalization implies developing competency-based education approaches grounded in humanistic principles, aimed at enhancing the capabilities and potential of each person so they can lead better lives and become active agents of societal transformation.

To equip students with the skills to become emotionally aware citizens and agents of change for sustainability, it may be necessary to systematically and interdisciplinarily integrate SESs into school curricula. This includes the implementation of specific programs, continuous teacher training, and extracurricular activities (Arango Benítez et al., 2024). Additionally, changes in pedagogical methodologies and strategies may be required, such as experiential learning through sustainability-focused projects and methods that promote critical thinking and collaboration (Barcia Cedeño et al., 2024; Chunchi Orellana & Ordóñez Vásquez, 2024).

Curriculum redesigns could include the incorporation of new subjects or the restructuring of existing ones to address sustainability-related content (Abad-Villaverde et al., 2022) and socio-emotional development as cross-cutting elements that address the complexity of current challenges (Barcia Cedeño et al., 2024), alongside other innovations aimed at providing a truly holistic education that integrates the cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral dimensions needed for sustainability (Martínez-Agut, 2018).