Abstract

Present study measured the relationship between Social Emotional Competence, Religiosity, and Pro-Social behavior among Adolescents. Study conducted on following hypotheses 1). There would be a significant relationship between Social-Emotional Competence and Religiosity among Adolescence.2). There would be a significant relationship between Religiosity and Pro-social behavior among Adolescence. 3). There would be a significant impact of Social Emotional Competence on Pro-social behavior of Adolescence.4). There would be a significant impact of Religiosity on Pro-Social behavior of Adolescence. Sample of the study was 200 students, and the data was collected from the different government and private colleges located in Faisalabad. To calculate the data psychological measures were used 1) The Social-Emotional Competence (SEC) 2) The Religiosity scale for Youth 3) The Altruistic personality scale to measure the Pro-social behavior of Adolescence. SPSS's used for analysis of t-test, regression, and Pearson correlation. Study showed that there is significant relationship between variables.

Key Words

Social Emotional Competence, Religiosity, Pro-Social Behavior, Adolescence

Introduction

Adolescence is a critical phase marked by significant physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development. The confluence of pro-social behavior, religiosity, and social-emotional competence stands out as a fascinating field to investigate among the various variables that affect adolescent development (Raver, 2002). Emotions are everywhere in our lives. We all experience emotions on a daily basis (Bukhari, et al., 2024). They provide each of us with essential knowledge about others and ourselves. Since social-emotional competence has been linked to both short- and long-term benefits, it is a worthwhile and significant objective for the development of children and adolescents (Spinrad et al., 2015). The Social and Emotional Competence School Model states that basic psychological need satisfaction induces social-emotional autonomous motivation, which in turn promotes socially and emotionally competent actions. Most children between the ages of 5 and 18 spend the bulk of their waking hours at school, where they are exposed to a greater variety of cultures and acquire education (Eccles & Roeser, 2015). 

Researchers should assess children's competence in relation to the environmental requirements that they are socialized to meet, which are likely to differ among cultures, as highlighted by Ogbu (1981). A significant area of study in the field of child and adolescent religion has been the relationship between various dimensions of social adjustment and religiosity/spirituality. According to Carver (1995), religion impacts social competence by encouraging and supporting certain behaviors (like pro-social behavior) while restricting the presentation of other behaviors (Imran, et al., 2023). 

Researchers from North America and Europe have made an effort to differentiate between religiosity and spirituality in their studies (Roehlkepartain, 2006). The term "religiousness" describes individual convictions and behaviors (such as prayer and meditation) that might not be associated with a formal religion. Being religious entails adhering to a specific religious community's customs (Dowling et al., 2004). It offered proof that these two conceptions are independent of one another. They discovered that adolescent spirituality and religiosity's hidden components independently predicted positive development, or thriving. The term "spirituality" describes individual convictions and behaviors (such as prayer and meditation) that might not be associated with a formal religion. Being religious means conforming to a specific religious community's customs (Dowling et al., 2004). Active Management (Self-Control) One feature of temperament that helps to moderate individual variances in reactivity, including emotionality, is effortful regulation (Rothbart et al., 2007). It encompasses functions that seem to be influenced by both genetics and socialization, such as the capacity to concentrate attention and to inhibit and activate behavior as needed by the situation (Rothbart & Bates, 2006).

Furthermore, self-regulation may be motivated by the moral precepts found in religious practice. Through indirect routes, emotional regulation may also be linked to religious participation. Religious involvement is often connected with internalizing normative ideals, such as those that advocate for emotion-related self-regulation in Indonesia, self-control is highly regarded (Magnis, 1997) and has been connected to conduct that is considered socially acceptable among youngsters from Java and Sundanese communities (Eisenberg et al., 2001). The self-regulation correlates in young people from Indonesia and the United States seem to be comparable (Eisenberg et al., 2001). Benda and Corwyn (1997) came to the conclusion that religious involvement is more strongly associated with the commission of drug-related and status offenses than it is with other types of criminal activity. As a result, when religious adolescents talk with each other, religious principles will come up when they debate whether or not to breach the law. Elder and Conger (2000) discovered that among a sample of rural American adolescents, religious participation was adversely correlated with involvement with classmates who used drugs and engaged in other rule-breaking behaviors. We may anticipate that higher levels of religiosity would be linked to higher levels of pro-sociality if religious adherents absorb religious laws as their own moral principles. These predictions appear to have some support based on self-report data. For instance, higher volunteerism and blood donations are linked to religiosity and church attendance (Marris et al., 2000). 

Even though the majority of the literature on adolescents still focuses on problematic development, studies on adolescents’ prosocial development have increased significantly since the 1990s (Imran, Zaidi, & Khanzada, 2023; Eisenberg et al., 2000). This growth coincides with the paradigm shift from a deficit-based model of development to one that focuses on the positive attributes of youth (Benson et al., 2006). Generally accepted to be an expression of altruistic deeds intended to benefit others (Imran & Akhtar, 2023; Carlo, 2006). There may be various kinds of pro-social behaviors, according to empirical research on the pro-social development of teenagers. For instance, six categories of pro-social dispositions were identified by Carlo and colleagues (Carlo et al., 2010). Calderón-Tena et al. (2011) discovered that compliant, emotional, and dire helping may be positively correlated with one another, despite other studies suggesting that altruistic helping may differ from other forms of pro-social inclinations (Brittian et al., 2013). Studies reveal that teenagers consider the situational environment when deciding whether or not to act in a pro-social manner (Tisak et al., 2002). 

The rationale for this study stems from the need to understand the interconnected factors that influence adolescent development, particularly in the realms of social-emotional competence, religiosity, and pro-social behavior. It refers to the capacity for responsible decision-making, constructive relationship-building, and efficient emotion management (Oad, Zaidi, & Phulpoto, 2023). Studying social-emotional competence is crucial because adolescents who possess it are better able to handle the emotional difficulties and intricacies of life. Religious teachings frequently encourage virtues that are strongly associated with pro-social actions, such as empathy, compassion, and altruism (Imran, Zaidi, & Rehan, 2024). This study tries to understand how spiritual and moral guidance affects adolescent’s social and emotional development and their willingness to participate in activities that help others by looking at the impact of religiosity. It is essential to community well-being and social integration. It involves acts such as lending a hand, sharing, and showing empathy for others (Phulpoto, Oad, & Imran, 2024). Strategies for developing a more cooperative and empathetic society can benefit from an understanding of the aspects that support pro-social conduct during adolescence. The study intends to shed light on these links in order to help guide interventions, policy-making, and educational practices that promote the positive development of young people. Finding strategies to help teenagers develop into well-rounded people who make significant contributions to their communities is the ultimate objective.




Objective of the Study

? To identify the significant relationship between Social-Emotional Competence, Religiosity, and Pro-Social Behavior among Adolescents.

? To identify the significant impact of Social Emotional Competence on the Pro-social behavior of Adolescents

? To identify the significant impact of Religiosity on Pro-Social behavior in Adolescence.




Hypothesis of the Study

? There would be a significant relationship between Social-Emotional Competence, Religiosity, and pro-social behavior among Adolescents.

? There would be a significant impact of Social Emotional Competence on the Pro-social behavior of Adolescence

? There would be a significant impact of Religiosity on Pro-Social behavior in Adolescence.

Literature Review

Researchers and educators have been paying more and more attention to social-emotional learning (SEL), which has grown in importance as a component of basic education in recent years. SEL is a process that gives both adults and children the information and abilities they need to perform well in a variety of social situations. It is linked to five basic skills, which include learning to recognize and control one's own emotions, developing empathy and compassion for others, making responsible decisions, forming wholesome relationships, and handling challenging circumstances with grace (Sollarova&Kaliska, 2019). Building social-emotional competence (SEC) through social and emotional learning (SEL) is considered one of the most important ways to give students the tools they need to effectively control their learning experiences and self-monitor their behavior. According to a recent meta-analysis of over 200 SEL evaluations involving over 270,000 students, children who participated in SEL programs reported significant gains in their academic ability in addition to a wide range of social and emotional benefits (Durlak et al., 2011). 

SEC is a group of skills that includes the capacity to recognize and manage our emotions, develop empathy and concern for others, create wholesome relationships, form morally sound decisions, and handle challenging situations. As a thorough framework for social and emotional learning (SEL), the study used the CASEL (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning) model, which incorporates important components described in important theoretical models. This model was chosen because it covers all the important facets of social and emotional competency in great detail (Imran, Zaidi, & Rehan, 2024; Elias et al., 1997).  Social-emotional skills are viewed at two levels in the CASEL model: the interpersonal and interpersonal levels. While the latter entails understanding others' emotions, relationships with others, and the ability to make responsible decisions, the former involves understanding and controlling one's own emotions. This framework consists of five domains: relationship management, social awareness, self-awareness, self-management, and responsible decision-making. Understanding one's own sentiments and emotions, as well as how they could impact one's performance, is a key component of self-awareness (Béland, 2007).

According to the Emotional Intelligence Theory, which was put forth by Mayer and Salovey in 1990, people are intelligent in the sense that they are able to identify, comprehend, and control their emotions. This idea states that there are four primary components that make up emotional intelligence: Perceiving Emotions, Facilitating Emotions, Understanding Emotions, and Managing emotions (Mayer, Salovey 1990). 

For the objectives of this research, one's activities and beliefs regarding God or religion are considered their level of religiosity. This study's definition of spirituality is based on definitions from Good and Willoughby (2006). Spirituality is the individual's unique and customized application of their religious rituals and beliefs. It is a person's personal interpretation and application of religion (Piedmont, 1999). Dropped cortisol stress responses, psychological well-being, thankfulness, pleasant mood, and emotions of purpose. Nevertheless, care must be used when interpreting these results because spirituality and religiosity were defined and assessed differently in several studies. Nonetheless, there appears to be proof connecting spirituality and/or religion to enhanced adult well-being (Fehring, 1987). 

Research on young people's spirituality and religiosity is scarce. Sesma and Roehlkipartain (2006) found that, in 2000, over 84% of high school seniors surveyed claimed to belong to a particular religion after reexamining and reanalyzing data from two national datasets. Furthermore, as kids advanced through middle and high school, the majority of teenagers' perceptions of the relevance of religion or spirituality were mostly unchanged; yet, their engagement in religious activities decreased (Smith, 2002). According to findings from the National Study of Youth and Religion (2004), 80% of teenagers think religion is essential, 95% of them believe in God, and 80% of them pray. According to Benson and associates, spirituality has a significant role in young people's development. Adolescents' lives may also receive significant meaning from their spirituality and religiosity (Werner, 1984). 

Furthermore, tales of gods from all faiths and civilizations imply that these entities care about human morality and are prepared to punish or reward in accordance with it (Roes & Raymond 2003). But what are the actual effects of religion on pro-social behavior? The research on psychology demonstrates that moral behavior and religious belief have a complex relationship that can, in some circumstances, contribute to higher pro-social behavior but not in others. We present an updated overview of the theory and research on religious pro-sociality in this chapter. Pro-social conduct here is described as helping behavior, which is providing a target with personal assistance through overt actions like donations or volunteer work, as well as more covert ones like direct acts. This narrow definition omits additional behaviors that are generally ethically significant but not very beneficial, like lying, cheating, and discriminating (Allport & Ross, 1967). Moreover, we do not discuss harming others here, even if it is an antisocial behavior with strong connections to religion (Bushman et al., 2007). The literature on the subject of religion and pro-sociality has produced several very good reviews (Hunsberger & Jackson, 1994). This chapter aims to provide a study of the connection between pro-sociality and religion. Our goal is to present a comprehensive understanding of religious pro-sociality, which is multifaceted and involves the interplay of social, cognitive, and personal factors. Through informal social learning parents modeling behaviors and kids observing how parents interact with other members of society—adolescents may acquire pro-social tendencies (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Research Methodology

This study employed a correlational research approach to investigate the association between adolescent's pro-social behavior, religiosity, and social-emotional competence. The study contained 200 college students as a sample. The participants ranged in age from 13 to 19. This study's target audience consists of college and high-school students. The study employed a convenient sampling strategy to get data from the participants. Convenience sampling is a non-probability sampling strategy that selects sample units based on those that are easiest for the researcher to access.




Inclusion criteria

? The age range of participants from 13-19 years. 

? Only matric and college students were included in the current study 




Exclusion criteria

1. Students aged less than 13 or above 19 were excluded. 

2. The uneducated boys and girls were excluded. 




Instruments

Measures of self-report that will yield insightful information about the variables being studied will be employed. The present study will employ instruments with strong psychometric qualities, in accordance with the theoretical framework. 

The instruments are as follows:

1. Demographic Questionnaire

2. Social Emotional Competence Scale (SEC)

3. The Religiosity and spirituality scale for youth (RaSSY)

4. Pro-Social Behavior Scale (PSB)




Demographic Questionnaire

The demographics involved the age, gender, sibling, birth order, socioeconomic status, Education, residential area, and family system of the participant in the research




Social Emotional Competence Scale (SEC)

Roger Weissberg and Timothy Shriver developed the Social-Emotional Competence scale (Zhou,2012). For the Social Emotional Competence Questionnaire (SECQ), a set of 25 items was developed to reflect the five characteristics of SEC: social awareness, self-awareness, relationship management, self-management, and responsible decision-making (CASEL, 2012). On a scale of 1 to 6, 1 meant that this was not true for me, and 6 meant that this was very true. The five SEC components significant associations with academic achievement served as proof of the instrument's predictive validity. These findings, which were derived from a large number of samples, suggested that the scale holds promise as an accurate and reliable indicator of SEC.




Religiosity and Spirituality Scale for Youth (RaSSY)

Brittany C. Hernandez of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College established the Religiosity and Spirituality Scale, a tool that evaluates people's levels of spirituality and religiosity. A total of 37 items were developed. The scale has 37 elements, with 0 representing strongly disagreeing or not present and 3 representing strongly agreeing or present.  Two factors were made in this scale. Factor I, Faith-based Coping, has 22 elements that reflect using religious knowledge, beliefs, and prayer to find solace, support, direction, or strength. Fifteen items in Factor II, Religious Social Support/Activities, evaluate involvement in various religious activities as well as religious social support. Strong internal consistency estimates (? =.94 for faith-based coping, ? =.90 for religious social support/activities, and ? =.95 for the composite) were shown by both factors and a composite that combined the items on the two factors (Hernandez et al., 2010).




Pro Social Behavior Scale (PSB)

J. Philippe Rushton, Roland D. Chrisgohn, and G. Cynthia Fekken developed the Pro-Social Behavior scale, also known as the Self-Report Altruistic scale, in the psychology department of the Faculty of Social Science at the University of Western Ontario in Canada (Rushton and Sorrentino, 1981). The 20 items of the Self-Report Altruism (SRA) Scale are self-reporting in an easy-to-administer format. The categories "Never," "Once," and "More Than Once" are used to ask respondents how often they have performed deeds of kindness. "Very Often" and "Often" Initial assessments of information gathered from two distinct student samples at the University of Western Ontario showed that the SRA-scale exhibited psychometric stability. 




Procedure

After the successful approval of the topic from the department and Board of Advance Study and Research (BASR), the data collection procedure was started. The necessary consent has been obtained; participants will be selected using the Convenient sampling method. Tell the participants about the aim of the study. The participant firstly signs the informed consent form, fills in the demographics, and then fills in all the test items. Must provide a comfortable environment to all participants. At the end of data collection, some greetings like thank you have been used for their cooperation. 




Ethical Considerations

The following ethical considerations will be made in this study. The participants will receive a detailed explanation of the questionnaire and its subject. Participants in the research will be treated with dignity. The participants' informed consent will also be sought before they may participate in the study. Confidentiality about the participants and their data will be guaranteed. Prior authorization from authors of scale and anonymity will be taken into consideration for the quantitative study. 




Statistical Analysis

After scoring according to the given manuals of scale, the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS-21) version was used to examine the results. Descriptive statistics was used to measure the demographic characteristics which include the frequency of research participants. Reliability analysis was used to measure scale reliability. Different inferential statistic test was used which include correlation, regression, t-test, and one-way ANOVA. 

Results

To conduct the analysis and understand the relationship among the variables, 200 participants were taken through a convenient sampling technique. Data was collected from college students in the region of Faisalabad using different scales to assess the Social-emotional competence, Religiosity, and pro-social behavior of Adolescents.




 

Table 1

Demographic data of the participants (N=200)

Characteristics	Frequency	%	Cumulative Percentages
Gender
Boys	103	51.5	51.5
Girls	97	48.5	100
Age
13-15	8	4	4
16-19	192	96	100.0
Education
9th	13	6.5	6.5
10th	3	1.5	8.0
11th	145	72.5	81.5
12th	38	19.0	100.0
Socioeconomic Status
Lower	10	5.0	5.0
Middle	185	92.5	97.5
Upper	5	2.5	100.0
Number of Siblings
No Sibling	4	2.0	2.0
1 Sibling	4	2.0	4.5
2 Siblings	11	5.5	9.5
3 or more Siblings	181	90.5	100.0
Birth order
First	53	26.5	26.5
Middle	122	61.0	87.5
Last	21	10.5	98.0
Only child	4	2.0	100.0
Family system
Joint	74	37.0	37.0
Nuclear	126	63.0	100.0
Residential Area
Rural	34	17.0	83.0
Urban	166	83.0	100.0

 




Table 1 which showed the demographics of participants (n=200) highlighted gender, age, level of education, socioeconomic status, family system, siblings, birth order, and place of residence. Among 200 participants, 103 were boys, totaling frequency was 51.5% and 97 were girls which was 48.5%. The 8 research participants were from age 13-15, their frequency was 4% and 192 research participants were from age 16-19, their frequency was 96%. Of the 13 participants, a frequency of 6.5% was in the 9th class, 3 participants, a frequency of 1.5% was in the 10th class, 145 participants, a frequency of 72.5% was in the 11th class, while the remaining 38 participants, a frequency 19% were in 2nd year. It was shown that 10 participants, a frequency of 5% were in lower socioeconomic status, 185 participants, a frequency of 92.5% were in middle socioeconomic status, and 5 participants, a frequency of 2.5% were in higher socioeconomic status. It investigated that the number of siblings was different in this study in which 4 participants, a frequency of 2% had no siblings, 4 participants, a frequency of 2% had 1 sibling, 11 participants, a frequency of 5.5% had 2 siblings, and 181 participants, frequency of 90.0% have 3 or more siblings. Further study of the table showed that in 53 participants, a frequency of 26.5% had first birth order, 122 participants, had a frequency of 61% had middle birth order, 21 participants, a frequency of 10.5% had last birth order, and 4 participants, frequency 2% were only child. This table also showed that of 74 participants, a frequency of 37% belonged to joint families whereas of 126 participants, a frequency of 63% belonged to the joint family system. This table showed that 34 participants, a frequency of 17% belonged to rural areas, and 166 participants, a frequency of 83% belonged to urban areas.




 

 

Table 2

Reliability Analysis of Research Measures N=203)

Variables	No. of Items	Alpha Coefficient
Social Emotional Competence Scale	25	0.69
Pro-Social-Altruistic Personality Scale	20	0.78
Religiosity Scale	37	0.79

 




Table 2, as displayed, exhibits the reliability of the Social Emotional Competence Scale, Pro-Social-Altruistic Personality Scale, and Religiosity Scale. As per results shown in the above table, showed the reliability of the measures. The reliability coefficient of Social Emotional Competence scale is 0.69 which is in the category of acceptable. The reliability coefficient of the Religiosity scale is 0.79 which is in the category of good. The reliability coefficient of Pro-Social behavior is 0.78 which is also in the category of good.




 

Table 3

Descriptive Statistics of the Study Variables (N=200)

Variables	Mean	S. D	Skewness	Kurtosis
SEC	109.2	12.54	.018	.588
RS	84.6	11.7	-.184	1.53
PSB	55.08	12.9	.699	.612

Note: M=Mean and SD=Standard Deviation

 




Table 3 displayed the traits of pro-social conduct, religiosity, and social-emotional competence in adolescents. The table above displays the mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis values. Additionally, the average score for social-emotional competence is 109.2, with a standard deviation of 12.54. The average score on the religiosity scale was 84.6, with a standard deviation of 11.7. And, the Pro-social behavior showed a mean value of 55.08 with a standard deviation of 12.9. The Skewness of Social Emotional competence is .018, Religiosity is -.184, and Pro-social behavior is .699. The Kurtosis of Social-emotional competence is .588, Religiosity is 1.53, and Prosocial behavior is .612.




 

Table 4

Pearson Correlation between Study Variables (N=200)

	SA	SA	SM	RM	RDM	PSB	RS
SA	1	.317**	.126	.104	.348**	.095	.072
SA		1	.101	.125	.298**	.159*	.011
SM			1	.109	.126	.116	-.016
RM				1	.292**	.230**	.301**
RDM					1	.028	.232**
PSB						1	.263**
RS							1

Note: SA=Self Awareness; SA=Social Awareness; SM=Self-Management; RM=Relationship

 




Management; RDM=Responsible Decision Making; RS=Religiosity Scale; PSB=Pro-Social Behavior

Table 4 shows the correlation among variables. The correlation between Self-awareness and social awareness is .317**(significant). The correlation between self-management and the Religiosity scale is negative (-.016). The correlation between Responsible decision-making and Religiosity is positively significant (232^**). The correlation between Social Awareness and Self-Management is .101. The Correlation between Pro-social behavior and Religiosity scale is (263^**). This table describes a detailed overview of all the correlations among variables.




 

Table 5

Regression using Social-Emotional Competence and Religiosity as a predictor of Pro-Social Behavior among adolescents (N=200)

Variable	B	?	p	t	F	R Square	Adjusted R Square
SEC	.181	.175	.012	2.54	10.812	.099	.090
RS	.255	.231	.001	3.36

Note: F=ANOVA value; p=significance level; RS= Religiosity Scale; SEC= Social-Emotional Competence; ?=Beta Value

 




Table 5 shows the effect of Social-Emotional Competence and Religiosity on Pro-Social Behavior. The value of Social Emotional Competence in terms of ? is .175 and Religiosity is .231. The findings revealed that social-emotional competence and religiosity predict pro-social behavior. The value of R is .314, the R square is .099 and the Adjusted R Square is .090. 

Social-emotional competence and Religiosity act as predictors that affect Pro-Social Behavior.  The overall model is significant because the p-value of Social-emotional Competence is .012 and the Religiosity scale is .001 which is less than 0.05. 

Discussion

The present study aims to find the relationship between Social Emotional Competence, Religiosity, and Pro-Social behavior among Adolescents. Different tests were administered in SPSS to test the hypothesis. Different results tables were drawn in chapter 4 related to results.

Hypothesis 1: There would be a significant relationship between Social-Emotional Competence, Pro-social behavior, and Religiosity among Adolescents. This was predicted through the correlation coefficient. This hypothesis was approved. Test results showed a significant relationship between Social Emotional Competence, Religiosity, and Pro-Social Behavior. The prior study intended to understand the psychological well-being of adolescents in relation to spirituality and pro-social behavior. Though the study found a strong relationship between psychological well-being and spirituality, the relationship between psychological well-being and pro-social behavior is contradictory to the previous studies. Carlo et al. (2002)study stated that pro-social behaviors are less common among adolescents during this period. Since, early adolescence is a time in which major biological, psychological, and social contextual changes occur. Whereas some young adolescents flourish during this transition period, other adolescents find the transitions difficult. For some young adolescents, this transition period includes negative outcomes such as declining motivation for academic achievement, declining grades, increased dropout and truancy rates, and decreased self-esteem. Although, these changes are not extreme for most adolescents, but, these data suggest that young adolescent's pro-social and moral development might be hindered when multiple changes occur during adolescent transitions. Wink and Dillon (2003) found that psychological well-being and spirituality are related and produce a conjoined effect on the healthy liver. The current findings are congruent with earlier studies by proving that psychological well-being and spirituality are related, and spirituality can enhance adolescents' psychological well-being.

Hypothesis 2:  There would be a significant impact of Social Emotional Competence on Pro-social behavior in Adolescence. This was predicted through Regression. The value of Social Emotional Competence in terms of ? is .175. The findings revealed that social-emotional competence predicts pro-social behavior. The regression model is significant. The p-value of Social-emotional Competence is .012 which is less than 0.05 which means that the overall model is significant. 

Hypothesis 3: There would be a significant impact of Religiosity on Pro-Social behavior in Adolescence. This was predicted through Regression. The value of ? in terms of Religiosity is .231. The findings revealed Religiosity predicts pro-social behavior. The p-value of the Religiosity scale is .001 which is less than 0.05 which means that the overall model is significant. 

Conclusion

This study highlights the complex connections among adolescent's pro-social behavior, religiosity, and social-emotional competence. Notwithstanding the difficulties associated with language barriers and the constraints imposed by self-reported data and cross-sectional design, the results highlight the significance of these elements in promoting healthy teenage development. The findings imply that pro-social behavior can be strongly encouraged by integrating moral and religious education and improving social-emotional competency, which will improve social interactions and general well-being.

Furthermore, there are significant ramifications for community involvement, mental health services, educational policies, and intervention programs. In order to better assist adolescents in developing into well-rounded, socially responsible adults, stakeholders should emphasize holistic development, which takes into account emotional, social, and moral aspects. In summary, it is critical to comprehend how social-emotional competency, religiosity, and pro-social behavior interact. Subsequent investigations and pragmatic implementations ought to strive towards establishing conducive settings that foster these facets, consequently endorsing the constructive growth of teenagers in varied circumstances.

Recommendations

? To ensure better comprehension and more accurate responses, future research should think about simplifying the questionnaire's language or offering versions in the participants' native tongue.

? Researchers should receive thorough training on how to explain the questionnaires effectively. This reduces the chance of misunderstandings by ensuring clear and consistent communication between all parties.

? Make use of any digital tools or programs that can help with questionnaire administration and explanation. Adolescents may find the questions more interesting and comprehensible when they are presented using interactive technologies. 

Limitations

? The main drawback was how hard it was for participants to understand the questionnaire written in English. The accuracy of the responses may have been impacted by some distinctions that were missed in the researcher's explanations.

? Because the study depended on self-reported data, it is at risk for biases including social desirability bias, where participants may give true information but instead give information they think will be accepted by society.

References

• Béland, D. (2007). Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift. Social Science Quarterly, 88(1), 20–38. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956169

• Benda, B. B., & Corwyn, R. F. (1997). Religion and Delinquency: The Relationship after Considering Family and Peer Influences. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.2307/1387884
• Benson, K. L., Brailsford, T. J., & Humphrey, J. E. (2006). Do socially responsible fund managers really invest differently? Journal of Business Ethics, 65(4), 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-0003-8
• Brittian, A. S., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., & Derlan, C. L. (2013b). An examination of biracial college youths’ family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and adjustment: Do self-identification labels and university context matter? Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19(2), 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029438
• Bukhari, S. R. H., Ahmed, S. T., Haider, S., Sattar, Z., Imran, M., & Iqbal, S., (2024). Shaping Political Landscapes: The Role of Civil Society and Educational Institutions in Political Socialization to Achieve SDGs. Research, 9(2), 207- 262.
• Calderón-Tena, C. O., Knight, G. P., & Carlo, G. (2011). The socialization of prosocial behavioral tendencies among Mexican American adolescents: The role of familism values. Cultural diversity & ethnic minority psychology, 17(1), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021825 
• Carlo, G. (2006). Care-based and altruistically based morality. In M. Killen & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 551–579). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 
• Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The development of a measure of prosocial behaviors for late adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014033032440
•  Carver, C. W. (1995). The development of Social competence and religiosity. Journal of Psychology, 14(8), 168-195.
• Dowling, E. M., Gestsdottir, S., Anderson, P. M., Von Eye, A., & Lerner, R. M. (2003). Spirituality, Religiosity, and Thriving among Adolescents: identification and confirmation of factor structures. Applied Developmental Science, 7(4), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0704_4
•  Dowling, G. R. (2004). Corporate reputations: Should you compete on yours? California Management Review, 46(3), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166219
• Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The Impact of Enhancing Students' Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta‐Analysis of School‐Based Universal Interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
•  Eccles, J. S., &Roeser, R. W. (2015). School and community influences on human development. Developmental science of psychology, 18(7), 645-728.
• Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Guthrie, I. K., & Reiser, M. (2000). Dispositional emotionality and regulation: Their role in predicting quality of social functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 136–157. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.136 
• Eisenberg, N., Pidada, S., & Liew, J. (2001). The relations of regulation and negative emotionality to Indonesian children's social functioning. Child Development, 72(6), 1747–1763. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00376 
• Elder, G. H., Jr., & Conger, R. D. (2000). Children of the land: Adversity and success in rural America. The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226224978.001.0001 
• Elias, M., Zins, J. E., &Weissberg, R. P. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning.Guidelines for educators, 35(16), 520-550.
• Good, M., & Willoughby, T. (2006). The Role of Spirituality Versus Religiosity in Adolescent Psychosocial Adjustment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9018-1 
• Imran, M., & Akhtar, N. (2023). Impact of ethical leadership practices on teachers’ psychological safety and performance: a case of primary school heads in Karachi - Pakistan. Academy of Education and Social Sciences Review, 3(2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.48112/aessr.v3i2.505
• Imran, M., Ahmad, N., Al-Harthy, A. a. Q., & Jat, Z. G. (2023). Early Identification and Intervention: Amplifying the voice of slow learners. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8394354
• Imran, M., Zaidi, S.S., & Khanzada, R. A., (2023). A Comparative Analysis of South Asian Countries and East Asian Countries on Moral Education. Spry Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (SJHSS), 1(2), 120-134. 
• Imran, M., Zaidi, S. S., & Rehan, F. (2024). The Impact of Excessive Internet Usage on the Emotional Maturity of Adolescents: A Case Study in Pakistan. ., 2(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.62681/sprypublishers.sjhss/2/1/1 
• Jackson, J. B. C. (1974). Biogeographic Consequences of Eurytopy and Stenotopy Among Marine Bivalves and Their Evolutionary Significance. The American Naturalist, 108(962), 541–560. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2459685
•  Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Learning related to religious beliefs. Journal of youth and adolescence, 33(11), 91-100.
• Magnis-Suseno, F. (1997). Theories related to Emotional Competence.Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(2), 161-183.
• Marris, J. W. (2000). The relationship between Religiosity and Emotional Competence. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30(2), 169-195.
• Oad, L., Zaidi, S.S., & Phulpoto, S. A. J., (2023). Helicopter Parenting and its Influence on the Children of Pakistan: Thematic Analysis. Spry Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (SJHSS), 1(2), 72-87. 
• Ogbu, J. U. (1981). Origins of Human Competence: A Cultural-Ecological Perspective. Child Development, 52(2), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129158
• Phulpoto, S. a. J., Oad, L., & Imran, M. (2024). Enhancing teacher performance in E-Learning: Addressing barriers and promoting sustainable education in public universities of Pakistan. PAKISTAN LANGUAGES AND HUMANITIES REVIEW, 8(I). https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2024(8-i)38
• Piedmont, R. L. (1999). Does spirituality represent the sixth factor of personality? Spiritual transcendence and the Five‐Factor model. Journal of Personality, 67(6), 985–1013. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00080
•  Raver, C. C. (2002). Emotions matter: Making the case for the role of young children’s emotional development for early school readiness. Social Policy Report, 16(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2002.tb00041.x
•  Roehlkepartain, E. C., Benson, P. L., King, P. E., & Wagener, L. M. (2006). Spiritual development in Childhood and Adolescence: Moving to the scientific mainstream. In SAGE Publications, Inc. eBooks (pp. 1–16). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976657.n1
•  Roes, F. (2003). Belief in moralizing gods. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(2), 126–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1090-5138(02)00134-4
•  Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Advances in temperament. Handbook of temperament, 12(7), 3-20.
• Rushton, J. P., Chrisjohn, R. D., & Fekken, G. C. (1981). The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 2(4), 293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(81)90084-2
• Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990).Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition and personality, 9(3), 185-211.
• Smith, C., Denton, M. L., Faris, R., & Regnerus, M. (2002). Mapping American adolescent religious participation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4), 597–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906.00148
• Sollarova, E., & Kaliska, L. (2019). THE ROLE OF TRAIT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PROCESS OF CAREER DECISION-MAKING. Psychological Applications and Trends 2019. https://doi.org/10.36315/2019inpact031
• Spinrad, T. L., & Eisenberg, N. (2015). Prosocial emotions. Handbook of emotional development, 19(8), 351-372.
• Smith, C. S., Folkard, S., Schmieder, R. A., Parra, L. F., Spelten, E., Almiral, H., Sen, R., Sahu, S., Perez, L. M., & Tisak, J. (2002). Investigation of morning–evening orientation in six countries using the preferences scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(6), 949–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00098-8 
• Werner, E. E. (1984). Empathy and altruistic behavior among preschoolers: An attempt to measure empathy of children based on teacher's report. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13(14), 53-61.
• Wink, P., & Dillon, M. (2003). Religiousness, spirituality, and psychosocial functioning in late Adulthood: Findings from a longitudinal study. Psychology and Aging, 18(4), 916–924. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.18.4.916
• Zhou, M., & Ee, J. (2012). Development and Validation of the Social Emotional Competence Questionnaire (SECQ). International Journal of Emotional Education, 4(2), 27–42. https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/bitstream/123456789/6140/1/ENSECV4I2P2.pdf