Chapter 7

Emotional intelligence

Introduction
Chapter 6 discussed the broad personality traits which were discovered by exploring the
‘lexical hypothesis’ – the idea that if a personality characteristic exists, then words will have
been invented to describe it. Thus broad personality traits should emerge when people’s
responses to the various words are factor analysed. It did not take long for it to be recognised
that this approach did not seem to reveal all important aspects of personality. This chapter,
and Chapters 9 and 10, explore narrow personality traits – traits which are hypothesised to
exist, but which did not seem to appear as broad personality factors in the fve-factor (or any
other) model.
One apparent gap is ‘emotional intelligence’, or ‘EI’. Whilst each of the personality models
considered in Chapter 6 included a factor of ‘neuroticism’, ‘anxiety’ or ‘emotional
[in]stability’, these refer to feelings of anxiety, depression and other negative emotions; some
people are habitually more anxious/depressed/moody than others. It might also be interesting
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

to discover how people use their emotions. Why are some individuals ‘good with people’ – by
which I mean able to identify their emotional state, work out the right thing to say and
demonstrate social awareness? Likewise, why do some people fy into passionate rages
and appear to be at the mercy of their emotions, while others seem to be able to understand
and manage their feelings?
The whole area received a massive burst of publicity in 1995 following the publication of
Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman, a journalist with a PhD in psychology (Goleman,
1995). It was written for a popular audience and made several far-reaching claims: for
example, the sub-title of the book is ‘why it [emotional intelligence] can matter more than
IQ’. Because this work is so well known (and often accepted uncritically by non-psychologists),
it is important to outline its merits and its shortcomings.

125

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Learning outcomes
Having read this chapter you should be able to:
l Describe and evaluate Goleman’s contribution, and explain the difference
between ability emotional intelligence (ability-EI) and trait-EI.
l Outline Mayer and Salovey’s four-branch model of ability-EI, and discuss
experimental evidence which may support the model.
l Discuss how ability-EI may be measured using the MSCEIT, STEM and STEU.
l Consider the overlap between ability-EI and general intelligence (g), and
the problems that this presents for researchers.
l Discuss Bar-On’s model, and evaluate the claim that it measures 15 aspects
of trait-EI.
l Evaluate Schutte’s, and Petrides and Furnham’s models of trait-EI, and
their relationship to other aspects of personality.

Goleman’s contribution
Throughout his book Goleman argued that mainstream psychology has paid insuffcient
attention to recognising and managing emotions. He argues that the being able to recognise
one’s own and other people’s emotions and learning how to regulate one’s own emotional
state is important in understanding why the most successful people are not (he claims) always
the most intelligent – i.e., why EI is important in everyday life. He suggests that problems in
recognising, regulating and using emotions can have important implications for everyday life
(e.g., our dealings with others; high school shootings) and points to the importance for
psychological and social wellbeing of controlling impulses and negative feelings such as rage
or worry. Only then can we reach the ‘fow’ – a condition in which we are able to focus
completely on what we are doing, with little awareness of events in the outside world; this
produces a feeling of great satisfaction or joy.
Goleman presents a number of case studies to support his thesis that emotional intelligence
really matters. These include the burglar who ‘saw red’ and bludgeoned two people to death,
the child who is skilled at using several techniques to alter their sibling’s emotional state, and
people with no social graces who simply lack the self-insight to recognise when they are boring
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

others or behaving inappropriately.

Goleman discusses some literature which shows that the limbic system and amygdala are
important in determining how we express our emotions, and that cognitive techniques also
modify the nature and strength of the emotions that we experience. For example, we may
recognise that we are starting to feel upset, so focus on some happy memory. All this does not
sound very different from Eysenck’s theory of personality. As outlined in Chapters 6 and 11,
Eysenck’s factor of neuroticism describes, at one extreme, people who are at the mercy of their
negative feelings, such as worry, guilt, anxiety and depression, and mood swings and, at the
other, people who are sanguine, in touch with their inner emotional life and emotionally
stable. Is this form of ‘emotional intelligence’ the same as neuroticism? Unfortunately, it is
impossible to tell this from reading Goleman’s book, as it does not contain a single reference
to any of the researchers who have studied anxiety/neuroticism, such as Eysenck, Cattell,
Costa or Goldberg. Neither does Goleman give any hints as to how we should go about

126

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

assessing this form of emotional intelligence, which makes the theory diffcult to test. Without
having an operational defnition of emotional intelligence one can only rely on case studies
and persuasive argument – neither of which are particularly scientifc, as the accuracy of the
model and its predictions cannot be shown to be false.
The clinical approaches discussed in Chapter 4 showed that although case studies may
make interesting reading, these alone cannot always reveal psychological truths. Much the
same applies to Goleman’s thesis. Although he argues that emotional intelligence is important,
his thesis tends to depend on anecdote rather than sound empirical research with good
operational defnitions of theoretical concepts.
Goleman also sometimes ignores alternative explanations for phenomena. For example, he
cites Mischel et al. (1989) on delay of gratifcation. Here young children are given the choice
of taking one small reward (a marshmallow) immediately or being promised that they will
receive two when the experimenter returns in 20 minutes. Goleman argues that delay of
gratifcation is an early attempt at emotional control and so children with higher scores on
emotional intelligence will be more likely to opt for two marshmallows. However, there is
also a substantial literature relating performance on this task to general intelligence (g).
A meta-analysis (Shamosh and Gray, 2008) shows that intelligent children delay gratifcation.
Finding that some children delay gratifcation while others do not is not, on its own, sound
evidence for emotional intelligence. Indeed, one could argue that an emotionally aware child
who is well aware of the fckle nature of adults should take the marshmallow immediately,
given there is no guarantee that the experimenter will ever return – the very opposite of
Goleman’s prediction!
Goleman recounts how children who delay gratifcation when aged 4 also tend to show
higher scores on mental ability tests, are better adjusted as adolescents and are far superior
as students to those who act on a whim. This might indicate that being able to manage one’s
emotions leads to positive outcomes in later life, as Goleman suggests. However it is dangerous
to assume a causal model from correlational data. Mehrabian (2000) factor analysed several
measures, including delay of gratifcation, emotional sensitivity and general intelligence (g).
Delay of gratifcation fell out on the same factor as did general intelligence; it did not have a
large loading on the emotional intelligence factor. It is therefore more likely that the delay of
gratifcation task is infuenced by general intelligence (or vice versa), and that general
intelligence (rather than emotional intelligence) infuences performance later in life.
It is probably unkind of me to criticise Goleman’s work in this way as his book was written
early and was intended for the general public rather than the specialist. The reason I comment
on it is to show that:
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

l as we learned in Chapter 4, a collection of case studies cannot really provide solid evidence
for the usefulness of a theory. Proper operational defnitions, sound experimental design
and the analysis of data from carefully constructed samples of the population are far
preferable.
l it is incredibly important to read widely and test for alternative explanations whenever
performing research in individual differences. This is something which I have tried to do
throughout this book; rather than just listing theories and empirical studies I have tried to
evaluate them. Of course some of my evaluations may be quite wrong – but critical evaluation
is a useful skill to develop whenever you read a journal article, or a story in the popular
press. Are there plausible alternative explanations? Does the literature suggest that any of
the alternative explanations are more likely? Applying Occam’s razor, which explanation is
the simplest? This is how science progresses, and this ‘deep processing’ of information will
also help you understand and remember what you read (Gordon and Debus, 2002).

127

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence: ability trait,

personality trait, or both?
The frst experimental studies of emotional intelligence took place in the late 1980s when
researchers such as Salovey and Mayer (1990) reviewed the literature and started to develop
a detailed model of emotional intelligence. They defned emotional intelligence as the ‘ability
to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to
use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions’ and link it to the concept of ‘social
intelligence’. According to this defnition, emotional intelligence is an ability, as it should be
possible to evaluate how well a person can monitor their own feelings, discriminate between
different emotions in themselves and others, and use information about emotional states to
infuence one’s own or others’ behaviour. There may be clear right and wrong answers. Does
that grimace indicate amusement, disgust or fear? Should I listen to gentle relaxing music if
I want to ‘brainstorm’ and come up with creative ideas? What should you say to calm a
customer who is shouting at sales staff?
Other researchers such as Bar-On (1997) and Petrides and Furnham (2000) have argued
that this is not the whole story. Being sensitive, genuine, well adjusted, assertive, optimistic,
happy, able to inspire trust, and being self-actualised are all qualities that may refect emotional
intelligence. However they are (arguably) not abilities: they are instead descriptions of how a
person usually behaves across most situations. They are personality traits, in other words
refecting style of behaviour, rather than how well a person can perform. Hence it is usual to
treat emotional intelligence as both an ability and a personality trait. Some researchers focus
on one branch, and some on the other. When reading the literature on emotional intelligence
it is important to bear in mind whether a particular book or research paper refers to ability-EI
or what some authors have called ‘trait-EI’, the branch of research which treats EI more like
a personality trait. (The term ‘trait-EI’ is unfortunate as ability-EI is also a trait, but the term
is now well ingrained in the literature.)

Self-assessment question 7.1

What is the essential distinction between trait-EI and ability-EI?

Ability-El
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Mayer and Salovey (1997) argued that there are four main areas in which people can
demonstrate their level of ability-EI: the ‘four-branch model’ shown in Figure 7.1. They claim
that scores on these four abilities are correlated so that it is also possible to combine scores
in these four areas and use an overall measure of ability-EI. They expanded the theory slightly
in 2016 (Mayer et al., 2016).

Perceiving emotion
Perceiving emotion is perhaps the most obvious way of assessing a person’s ability-EI. For
example, how well can a person perceive the emotion in someone’s face, tone of voice, posture,
behaviour and so on? Can we tell when others try to deceive us when they display an ‘emotion’

128

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Figure 7.1 Mayer and Salovey’s four-branch model of ability-EI

which they do not really feel? Can we recognise emotions in music and other forms of art?
How accurately can we perceive our own emotional states? Some of these are clearly more
diffcult than others.
The literature shows that there are substantial individual differences in people’s ability to
‘read’ the emotional state of others, although these skills are also affected by cultural factors,
group membership, etc. (Reich et al., 2001). Factors other than EI seem to matter when
recognising emotions. It is perhaps unsurprising to discover that emotional recognition can
be learned; what is most surprising is that it is learned very early in life. Dunn et al. (1991)
assessed the extent to which parents, children aged 36 months and a sibling used ‘feeling state
terms’ (words such as ‘sad’ or expressions such as ‘that’s disgusting’) when interacting
normally at home. The 36 month old infants were followed up and it transpired that there
was a signifcant correlation between the amount of emotional talk at 36 months and these
children’s ability to recognise emotions when they were 6 years old – and this did not just
seem to happen just because some children were more verbally fuent than others. It also seems
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

that social skills are important predictor of later individual differences in emotional
understanding; children seem to develop at different rates but those who have good social
skills, good language skills and parents who understand their child’s perspective are better
able to understand emotions as they develop (Karstad et al., 2015).

Emotions and thought

The second branch of emotional ability concerns how well people understand the links between
emotions and thought. Mayer et al. (2016) suggest that this may include generating emotions
in oneself so as to better relate to the experiences of another person, or to improve one’s
judgement or memory (calming oneself down before an examination, or before making an
important decision, for example). Or we could decide what cognitive operations would be
most appropriate given our emotional state; for example, brainstorming and generating new

129

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

ideas when excited or slightly manic. There is a considerable literature showing that a person’s
emotional state (both natural and induced) infuences the way in which they tackle problems
and the quality of thought. Isen’s (2001) review demonstrates that positive feelings increase
creativity and improve problem solving in both laboratory-style tasks and more practical tasks,
such as resolving disputes between people and even making accurate medical diagnoses. It has
been suggested (Spering et al., 2005) that false feedback about performance on an intelligence
test produces ‘negative affect’ (feelings of sadness – see Chapter 16) and this changes the way
in which information is processed, leading to more low-level information gathering and careful
analysis. The usual interpretation of this is that our mood may affect our cognitive skills. It is
however dangerous to infer causality from a correlation. It seems just as possible that when a
person thinks they have performed poorly on an intelligence task, it might be better to slow
down, make sure that one has not missed any important information and take care in future
tasks; negative affect may have no direct infuence on performance. Whatever the fne details
of such relationships, someone with high levels of emotional intelligence should be sensitive
to the ways in which their moods affect their cognitive processes.

Understanding emotions
The third aspect of ability-EI involves the understanding of emotions – for example, being
able to say which emotion one is experiencing, understanding which situations are likely to
lead to which emotions, forecasting how a person might feel if their situation changes, or
knowing what the emotional impact of a particular event is likely to be for oneself or others.
This can be assessed by presenting people with various scenarios and asking them to assess
their likely emotional impact. This ability too seems to have a surprisingly early onset. Denham
et al. (1994) asked preschool children (aged approximately 48 months) to identify the
emotions shown by four puppets (happy, sad, angry and afraid). The children were asked to
describe events that could have made the puppet feel like this. For example, the child might
feel that a puppet was happy because it had been given an ice cream. These authors were
mainly interested in the origins of such skills (socialisation), but from our perspective the
interesting thing is that such young children were able to identify sensible causes of emotion
at all. It has also been found that these children’s understanding of emotion predicts their
social competence later in life (Denham et al., 2003; Denham, 2018), so individual differences
in social understanding emerge at an early age.
The presence of autistic traits and the development of theory of mind are both likely to
affect performance on this aspect of ability-EI. For adults, this ability is likely to be more
analytical: for example, to be able to appreciate the distinction between liking and loving, to
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

understand complex feelings such as awe and to appreciate the possibility of feeling love and
hate simultaneously.

Emotion management
The fnal area of ability-EI is the management of emotion. Sometimes feelings just develop
as a consequence of life events (for example, sadness following a tragedy) but at other times
it may be possible to manage or manipulate emotions in oneself or in others. For example,
an emotionally intelligent individual may know which activities will help them to manage
their anger or depression or what to say to another person in order to change their mood in
some desired direction. Playing sport or exercising in order to get in the mood to study is
one obvious example. This aspect of ability-EI has also been studied in another context by
Gross and John (2003), whose Emotion Regulation Questionnaire measures the extent to

130

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

which people cognitively re-appraise situations (i.e., look at things in a different way) in
order to change their mood.

Self-assessment question 7.2

What are the four branches of ability-EI proposed by Mayer and Salovey
(1997)?

Measuring ability-EI
The MSCEIT. Ability-EI is usually assessed using the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional
Intelligence Test, the MSCEIT (Mayer et al., 2002) a good description of which is given by
Mayer et al. (2003).
Figure 7.2 shows a still from a video (McRorie and Sneddon, 2007) recorded as part of a
research project designed to capture real (rather than acted) emotions. To test your emotional
intelligence, what emotion do you think is being experienced?
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Figure 7.2 Spot the emotion (reproduced from McRorie and Sneddon
(2007), with permission)

131

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Perceiving emotion is perhaps the most obvious way of assessing a person’s ability-EI. For
example, how well can a person perceive the emotion in someone’s face, tone of voice, posture
and so on? In Figure 7.2, Lynne Spence (our long-suffering school secretary) was genuinely
experiencing great fear – she was teetering on top of a high and (she thought) extremely unsafe
stack of crates and the rope round her waist was (she thought) only loosely attached to a tree
branch.
Unfortunately almost all research in this area asks people to judge emotions from photographs
which are posed by actors under the direction of a psychologist – as with Figure 7.3.
The frst problem is that there is no guarantee that the emotions posed in this way resemble
genuine emotions. What the psychologist believes to be a typical expression of fear or joy may
not be accurate. Some facial muscles may not be under voluntary control, so the actor may
not be physically able to display a realistic emotion. Secondly, viewing a still picture (rather
than a video) reduces the information available to the observer and makes the whole exercise
rather artifcial; we do not look at still photographs when assessing emotions in our everyday
lives. A meta-analysis of smiling by Gunnery and Ruben (2016) shows that both of these
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Figure 7.3 A posed facial expression from Ebner et al. (2010)

132

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

things can really matter, and it is worthwhile bearing this issue in mind when reading the
ability-EI literature.
Ability-EI can sometimes be assessed like any other ability – by developing a test whose
items can each be scored as correct or incorrect – for example, whether a person can correctly
identify the emotions being depicted in posed (or ideally naturalistic) photographs or videos.
It is also possible to write items to explore how well a person can understand or use their
emotions using items such as those shown in Table 7.1.
That one is fairly straightforward. Others are harder, such as the item in Table 7.2 which
measures how people know how to use their emotions.
The MSCEIT is not without its controversies. First, how should one determine the ‘correct’
answers to items such as the one shown in Table 7.2? How should one score the items? Two
approaches have been followed: consensus scoring and expert scoring.
Consensus scoring simply means administering the items to a large sample of people
(several thousands) and assuming that the most popular answer is ‘correct’. For example, if
most people feel that tension would be a fairly useful emotion to feel when meeting in-laws,
people who answered ‘fairly useful’ might be awarded fve points. The adjacent answers (‘very
useful and ‘neutral’) might get four points, ‘not very useful’ three points and ‘not at all useful’
two points. Thus unlike most ability tests the items in the MSCEIT are not scored as ‘correct’
or ‘incorrect’, but rather how close they are to the best answer. The problem is that some
people may give the most socially desirable response, or rely on stereotypes; there is no
guarantee that the popular view is correct.

Table 7.1 Sample item from the MSCEIT (Caruso, 2019)

Tom felt anxious and became a bit stressed when he thought about all the work he
needed to do. When his supervisor brought him an additional project, he felt ____. (Select
the best choice.)

a) Overwhelmed c) Ashamed
b) Depressed d) Self-Conscious
e) Jittery
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Table 7.2 A second sample item from the MSCEIT (Caruso, 2019)

What mood(s) might be helpful to feel when meeting in-laws for the very frst time?

Mood Not at Not very Neutral Fairly Very

all useful useful useful useful

Tension 1 2 3 4 5
Surprise 1 2 3 4 5
Joy 1 2 3 4 5

133

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Expert scoring involved a panel of 21 expert researchers making essentially the same
decision. Roberts et al. (2001) and Maul (2012) identify this as being a problem, and also
outline a number of other issues with the MSCEIT; Mayer et al. (2012) respond. Anyone
planning to use the MSCEIT could usefully read these papers. As this is a commercial test,
the scoring system is not publicly available, which makes life diffcult for those who want to
check out the psychometric properties of the scales (e.g., their factor structure).
One obvious problem with this test is that cultural differences may well creep in; it is
probably wise to be wary of using the (US-based) scoring scheme in other cultures. Although
there is some disquiet in the literature about the merits of these approaches and concern
that they may sometimes produce very different results (Roberts et al., 2001), if just a few
items have been wrongly scored as a result of this procedure, this should be detected
via the factor analysis/item analysis procedure and so such items are likely to be removed
from the test.
There are other problems with this approach which are a little too technical to cover here
although readers who plan to use the MSCEIT should explore them. When the scoring system
is improved to eliminate these (Legree et al., 2014) there seems to be little evidence for the
four-branch model shown in Figure 7.1. Instead there is just a single factor of ability-EI which
correlates very substantially (0.79) with general intelligence. It also seems that the items in
the MSCEIT are rather easy for most adults, and that several of its items do not measure
emotional intelligence very well (Fiori and Antonakis, 2011).

The STEM and the STEU. MacCann and Roberts (2008) have developed two tests, The
Situational Test of Emotion Management (STEM) and Situational Test of Emotional
Understanding (STEU) to measure two aspects of ability-EI; their paper shows that the
two scales seem to assess what they claim, which was also the case in the analyses
performed by Austin (2010). Furthermore the MacCann and Roberts tests are free to use
(rather than being a commercial product like the MSCEIT) and the details of the scoring
procedure are freely available – two features which make them extremely attractive to
researchers.
Typical items from the STEM and STUE are shown in Table 7.3.
These two tests have not yet been as widely used as the MSCEIT but seem to have a lot of
potential.

Tests of emotional competence. Developmental psychologists have also studied ability-EI

in children, which they call ‘emotional competence’. The Test of Emotional Comprehension
(Pons and Harris, 2000) is typical of work in this area. It presents children with pictures; a
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

story is read to them and they are asked to choose between several possible emotions (by
pointing at a face) to show which emotion a character is experiencing. Some of the variables
measured by this test involve theory of mind as well as emotional competence (for example,
how does a rabbit feel when it eats a carrot, unaware of a fox hiding behind a tree) but many
of the variables measured by this test certainly seem to resemble ability-EI. These include
identifcation of emotions from facial expressions, understanding how events may infuence
emotions, the regulation of emotion and the possibility of hiding one’s emotional state; there
are others, too. A Portuguese study suggests that the items form factors much as they
are supposed to (Rocha et al., 2015), but I cannot fnd any literature which links performance
on this scale to the MSCEIT, or which develops a similar measure for adults. This is a shame,
as the format looks promising.

134

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Table 7.3 Examples of items from the STEM and STUI (MacCann and
Roberts, 2008)

Katerina takes a long time to set the DVD timer. With the family watching, her sister says,
‘You idiot, you’re doing it all wrong, can’t you work the video?’ Katerina is quite close to
her sister and family. What action would be the most effective for Katerina?
a Ignore her sister and keep at the task.
b Get her sister to help or to do it.
c Tell her sister she is being mean.
d Never work appliances in front of her sister or family again.

An irritating neighbour of Eve’s moves to another state. Eve is most likely to feel:
a regret
b hope
c relief
d sadness
e joy

The importance of ability-EI

When assessing the importance of ability-EI for making real world decisions about people
(e.g., for personnel selection) it is important to consider two distinct issues. First, do people’s
scores on a test measuring ability-EI correlate with real world behaviour, such as performance
at work or school, or health or emotional problems. An applied psychologist with little
interest in theory would need to know nothing more than this. They just want a test which
predicts behaviour. However as scientists we academics also need to understand why such
correlations are found. Is it because being able to identify, understand, use and manage
emotions is an important new characteristic of people which was previously overlooked?
Or is ability-EI really not much more than a mixture of several well-known and well-
understood abilities and (perhaps) personality traits? If it is an ability, does it behave like
an ability?
It is possible to train emotional competence in children (Sprung et al., 2015) which is
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

interesting for two reasons. First, it shows that emotional competence behaves rather
differently from general intelligence, which is resistant to training (Redick et al., 2013) –
although of course training people on how to approach the particular cognitive test which is
used can be effective, training someone to perform well at intelligence tests does not necessarily
boost their intelligence. It might just teach them how to best tackle the problems. Second, it
raises the question of what a person’s ability-EI tells us. Is it an ability, or is it more of an
attainment (as defned in Chapter 3)? Remember that the defnition of ability used there was
that the problems in ability tests should be unfamiliar; it is not obvious that asking people to
identify emotions is a totally unfamiliar task! However this is just my personal view, and many
researchers and practitioners regard ability-EI as a cognitive ability (Mayer et al., 1999). That
said, there are some oddities. For example, Elizabeth Austin shows that there is no simple link

135

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

between ability-EI and performance on other tasks which correlate with intelligence. Intelligent
people tend to have faster reactions, as discussed in Chapter 13. Intelligent people are also
better able to identify shapes which are presented for shorter periods of time. However there
is no link between ability-EI and either of these variables (Austin, 2009; Farrelly and Austin,
2007) suggesting that ability-EI does not behave as one might expect if it were a form of
intelligence.
It is also important to check that any correlation between ability-EI and performance
does not simply occur because both are infuenced by general ability. In other words, it is
necessary to ensure that ability-EI adds something over and above general ability. We have
already noted that when it is scored differently the MSCEIT correlates substantially with
intelligence (Legree et al., 2014). Schulte et al. (2004) administered the MSCEIT alongside
a Big Five personality questionnaire and a test of ability scored it in the conventional way
and found that these scores correlated 0.45 with general cognitive ability (‘general
intelligence’). Their analysis showed that scores on the MSCEIT very closely resembled the
scores which people obtained on a test of general intelligence combined with measures of
the Big Five personality factors. The multiple correlation was over 0.8 and as these authors
had a restricted range of ability in their student sample, the value in the general population
would probably be even higher. They concluded that the MSCEIT really just measured a
mixture of general intelligence and personality. Perhaps being able to assess emotional states
is not a distinct ability at all.
The importance of ability-EI in applied psychology (education, psychology at work, etc.)
will be discussed in Chapter 18.

Trait-El
Several models of the personality-like trait emotional intelligence have emerged since the
1980s. Trait-EI deals with sensitivity to one’s own and other people’s emotional state, being
able to control one’s emotions, social skills and so on. We will consider just two models in
detail – the Bar-On model because it is widely used, and Petrides and colleagues’ Trait
Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) because it is well supported by research.
One problem with the trait-EI approach concerns the sampling of items. Precisely what types
of question should go into a questionnaire measuring emotional intelligence? Theorists
cannot take a global approach like Cattell and the early fve-factor theorists did, identifying
all the words in the language that could possibly describe emotional intelligence – because
by defnition, no one knows at the outset what emotional intelligence actually is! Some
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

theorists view traits such as ‘conscientiousness’ and ‘achievement drive’ as components of

emotional intelligence, which is odd considering they are major and well-studied traits in
their own right. There is a real danger that the concept of emotional intelligence may have
been over-extended by ‘pop psychologists’ and those wishing to sell tests to occupational
psychologists under this fag of convenience. Many authors seem to draw on Salovey and
Mayer’s (1990) list of facets of emotional intelligence (see Table 7.4) which includes several
facets that were dropped from their 1997 theory of ability-EI because they did not seem to
measure abilities.

Bar-On’s model
Reuven Bar-On initially studied factors associated with feelings of wellbeing and developed
15 scales/133 items to measure 15 factors of emotional intelligence. These 15 scales, each of

136

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Table 7.4 Salovey and Mayer’s (1990) original facets of emotional intelligence

Original label Current label Abbreviation Defnition Sample item

Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.

Emotion in the Recognition of RecSlf Being in touch with one’s feelings and If I am upset, I know the cause
self: verbal emotion in the self describing those feelings in words of it
Emotion in the Nonverbal emotional NvExp Communicating one’s feelings to others I like to hug those who are
self: nonverbal expression through bodily (i.e., nonverbal) expression emotionally close to me
Emotion in others: Recognition of RecOth Attending to others’ nonverbal emotional I can tell how people are feeling
nonverbal emotion in others cues, such as facial expressions and tone of even if they never tell me
voice
Emotion in others: Empathy Emp Understanding others’ emotions by relating I am sensitive to other people’s
empathy them to one’s own experiences feelings
Regulation of Regulation of RegSlf Controlling one’s own emotional states, I can keep myself calm even in
emotion in the self emotion in the self particularly in emotionally arousing highly stressful situations
situations
Regulation of Regulation of RegOth Managing others’ emotional states, Usually, I know what it takes to
emotion in others emotion in others particularly in emotionally arousing turn someone else’s boredom
situations into excitement
Flexible planning Intuition versus IvR Using emotions in the pursuit of life goals; I often use my intuition in
reason basing decisions on feelings over logic planning for the future
Creative thinking Creative thinking CrTh Using emotions to facilitate divergent People think my ideas are daring
thinking
Mood redirected Mood redirected MRA Interpreting strong – usually negative – Having strong emotions forces
attention attention emotions in a positive light me to understand myself
Motivating Motivating emotions MotEm Pursuing one’s goals with drive, perseverance I believe I can do almost
emotions and optimism anything I set out to do

137
Emotional intelligence

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
 Emotional intelligence

which is supposed to indicate an aspect of successful emotional functioning, are supposed to

form fve higher-order factors as shown in Figure 7.4. There is also a short (51-item) version
of the test and versions designed for younger participants.
Although it claims to be based on a comprehensive survey of the literature, very little of
Bar-On’s work has been published in academic journals. It is very much a commercial (rather
than an academic) enterprise and the test has reached the marketplace without the usual
processes of peer commentary, debate over the soundness of the underlying theory, statistical
methods and so on.
There are several points of interest about this model. First, the defnition of emotional
intelligence is very broad. Reality testing, for example, is supposedly the ability to recognise
whether one’s impressions accurately correspond with the real world: problem solving is the
ability to defne and solve problems. It is not at all obvious to me why these are included.
Neither is it clear why happiness and optimism are thought to be indices of emotional
intelligence. Even if it can be successfully argued that happiness and optimism should be
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Figure 7.4 The Bar-On model of trait emotional intelligence

138

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

included, my second point is that there could well be explanations other than EI that account
for some people being happier than others. Third, some of the concepts seem rather similar:
happiness and optimism again, for example. Is it possible to be optimistic without being
happy? Fourth, as Palmer et al. (2003) observe, Bar-On’s own empirical evidence for the
15-factor/fve dimension structure of the test is less than convincing; he sometimes suggests
that other models ft the data better.
Palmer et al. (2003) factor analysed the items of the EQ-i using an Australian sample.
Their analyses were methodologically superior to those used by Bar-On, and showed just
six (not 15) scales. The most important factor found in their analysis comprised items that
should, in theory, have formed two quite different scales: self-regard and happiness items,
together with a scatter of items from other scales. The impulse control, problem solving
and emotional self-awareness factors were found to emerge cleanly, while items that should
have formed two separate fexibility and independence factors all loaded on the same factor.
Items that should have formed three distinct factors (interpersonal relationship, social
responsibility and empathy) all loaded substantially on one factor, suggesting that no
meaningful distinction can be made between these concepts. All this is hardly convincing
evidence for the structure of the EQ-i. When just one factor was extracted, most of Bar-On’s
items showed substantial loadings on the factor, suggesting that it might be safer to talk in
terms of a general factor of EI rather than Bar-On’s 15-factor/fve-dimensional model. There
appear to have been no later attempts to test the structure of the English version of this
scale.
It seems that there are real problems with the Bar-On model. The items may measure a
single trait of emotional intelligence, but there is scant evidence that the items in the
questionnaire measure 15 facets of trait-EI which form fve factors.

Self-assessment question 7.3

What other sorts of experiment might you run to check whether a test
claiming to assess emotional intelligence really did assess this trait?

Schutte’s model
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Schutte et al. (1998) developed a short self-report measure of trait-EI, the Emotional
Intelligence Scale, which was designed to assess a single factor of emotional intelligence.
Subsequently, others such as Petrides and Furnham (2000) and Saklofske et al. (2003) noted
that only 33 of the 62 items which Schutte administered actually showed large loadings on
this EI factor; the others were simply dropped from the questionnaire. This makes it diffcult
to argue that Schutte’s questionnaire measures all aspects of EI. Like Saklofske et al. and
others, Keele and Bell (2008) showed that the 62 items actually measured four factors of
EI labelled ‘optimism/mood regulation’, ‘appraisal of emotions’, ‘social skills’ and
‘utilisation of emotions’ although some others have occasionally found different structures
(Gong and Paulson, 2018). Despite these problems the Schutte scale is still fairly widely
used, not least because it is not a carefully protected commercial test; the 33 items are
reproduced in the original 1998 article.

139

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Petrides and colleagues’ model

Petrides and his colleagues at University College London have been developing and testing a
four-factor model of trait emotional intelligence which they have defned as a constellation of
emotional perceptions measured through questionnaires and rating scales (Petrides et al.,
2016; Petrides et al., 2007). It tried to include measures of all of the variables shown in Table
7.1, plus other relevant personality characteristics such as alexithymia (inability to identify
and describe emotions). These 15 facets of trait emotional intelligence are (sensibly) not
interpreted individually, but are found to form four factors – wellbeing, self-control,
emotionality and sociability. These four factors then intercorrelate to produce a second-order
factor of trait emotional intelligence. In addition, two additional facets infuence the second-
order general factor of emotional intelligence directly. Table 7.5 shows the detailed structure
of this scale.
The test which measures these factors, the TEIQue (the Trait Emotional Intelligence
Questionnaire; Petrides, 2009) has been extensively peer reviewed, is available in both a long
and a short form (153 or 30 items) and has been translated into more than 30 languages.
Some sample items are shown in Table 7.5.
Best of all it is free to use (although donations are encouraged), and may be downloaded
from http://psychometriclab.com/. This site also contains a number of useful links and
offprints. The structure of the TEIQue has received much empirical support from other
researchers, for example, Mikolajczak et al. (2007), whilst a wealth of other studies. (e.g.,
Chirumbolo et al., 2019; Laborde et al., 2016) fnd good support for its structure in different
cultures. It seems that if one wants to measure trait emotional intelligence, the TEIQue is the
test to use.
It has been found that trait-EI is very closely related to the general factor of personality
(tentatively named ‘social effectiveness’) which was outlined in Chapter 6. The evidence for this
is reviewed by van der Linden et al. (2016) who conclude that trait-EI ‘centralizes the emotion-
related variance that is scattered among the fve, supposedly orthogonal, higher-order personality
dimensions and augments it by incorporating signifcant additional variance as refected in its
compelling evidence of incremental validity’. Their analysis of a large body of data revealed a
correlation of 0.86 between the general factor of personality and trait-EI as measured by the
TEIQue, after correcting for errors of measurement. The two traits are extremely similar. This
is all the more impressive as the items in the questionnaires which measure the general factor
of personality are not generally similar in meaning to those in the TEIQue.
The importance of trait-EI in applied psychology (education, psychology at work, etc.) will
be discussed in Chapters 17 and 18.
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

EXERCISE

Scores on the general factor of personality are calculated by combining the

traits from the fve-factor model of personality. Van der Linden et al. (2016)
demonstrated that the general factor of personality is very similar to trait-EI.
Think whether knowledge of people’s scores on trait-EI can be expected to
predict behaviour much better than knowing their fve personality traits?

140

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Table 7.5 Sample items from the TEIQue. Adapted from Petrides (2009) with permission

Factor Facet Description Sample item (‘R”’= reverse-scored)

Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.

Well-being Self-esteem successful and self-confdent I believe I’m full of personal strengths.
Happiness cheerful and satisfed with their lives Life is beautiful.
Optimism confdent and likely to ‘look on the bright side’ of life I generally believe that things will work
out fne in my life.
Self-control Emotion regulation capable of controlling their emotions When someone offends me, I’m usually
able to remain calm.
Impulse control refective and less likely to give in to urges I tend to get ‘carried away’ easily. (R)
Stress management capable of withstanding pressure and regulating I’m usually able to deal with problems
stress others fnd upsetting.
Emotionality Emotion perception clear about their own and other people’s feelings I often it diffcult to recognise what
(self and others) emotion I’m feeling
Emotion expression capable of communicating their feelings to others Others tell me that I rarely speak about how
I feel. (R)
Empathy capable of taking someone else’s perspective I fnd it diffcult to understand why certain
people get upset with certain things. (R)
Relationships capable of maintaining fulflling personal I generally don’t keep in touch with
relationships friends. (R)
Sociability Social awareness accomplished networkers with superior social skills. I can deal effectively with people.
Emotion capable of infuencing other people’s feelings I’m usually able to infuence the way other
management (others) people feel.
Assertiveness forthright, frank, and willing to stand up for their When I disagree with someone, I usually
rights fnd it easy to say so.
Facets which Adaptability fexible and willing to adapt to new conditions I usually fnd it diffcult to make
infuence adjustments to my lifestyle. (R)
general EI Self-motivation driven and unlikely to give up in the face of I tend to get a lot of pleasure just from
directly adversity doing something well.

141
Emotional intelligence

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
 Emotional intelligence

Summary
Two aspects of emotional intelligence (ability-EI and trait-EI) seek to explain how well people
can identify and use emotions, and understand why it is that some people seem to show better
emotional awareness and sensitivity than others. We briefy discuss some experimental
evidence supporting several models of ability-EI and trait-EI together with methods of
assessing them. We show that some caution needs to be used when interpreting the results of
scales measuring ability-EI, and that the TEIQue appears to be an effective means of measuring
trait-EI.

Suggested additional reading

You might wish to download the TEIQue from http://www.psychometriclab.com to look
at its items. As the norms are not publicly available you will not be able to interpret your
score – re-read Chapter 3 if this seems unfamiliar. You could however compare scores with
friends, to see who is highest, and perhaps produce a table of norms for your class.
Very little of the literature in this area is particularly technical (although some does require
a basic grasp of multiple regression techniques) and so any of the references cited in this chapter
can safely be recommended. Mayer et al. (2016) spell out some of their more recent thoughts
about ability-EI. For a broad overview of the area coupled with a discussion of how EI is related
to performance at work, Cartwright and Pappas (2008) is hard to beat. Mayer et al.’s (2008)
upbeat overview of the status of EI is also worth reading – although perhaps in conjunction
with Schulte et al. (2004), as it is possible that the reason that ability-EI predicts performance
is because it is correlated with general cognitive ability, g. (See also Chapter 12 of this book.)
Petrides et al. (2016) offer a well-balanced overview of recent developments in the area, while
Andrei et al. (2016) present a large meta-analysis based on the TEIQue. The paper by Westfall
and Yarkoni (2016) is crucially important when determining whether any measure of EI
measures anything over and above general intelligence or the Big Five personality traits, but at
the time of writing EI researchers do not appear to have explored the issues which it raises.

Answers to self-assessment questions

SAQ 7.1
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Trait-EI refers to personal characteristics – personality traits, if you like – that

describe how ‘emotionally intelligent’ a person is – but where the assessment
method does not require them to demonstrate how good they are at
perceiving, managing, regulating or using emotions. Trait-EI is typically
assessed by asking someone to rate how well various statements such as ‘It is
important for me to keep in touch with my true emotions’, ‘People have told
me that I am “genuine”’, ‘I am good at calming other people down’, for
example, apply to them.
Ability-EI requires people to demonstrate how effectively they can use
emotions. For example, someone might be asked to identify which emotions

142

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

they would experience in a particular situation or what emotion another

person is experiencing in a video clip (where there is a strong consensus from
experts as to what the ‘correct’ answers are).

SAQ 7.2
Mayer and Salovey’s four branches of ability-EI refer to:
1. perceiving emotions accurately in others and oneself
2. being able to use emotions to facilitate thought
3. grasping the meaning of emotions, recognising how your actions may
affect other people’s emotional state and being able to talk about
emotions
4. managing emotions where necessary – e.g., preventing anger leading to
road rage.

SAQ 7.3
In order to test whether EI is the cause of a particular relationship – for
example, to test whether high levels of EI result in greater happiness – it is
necessary to also measure other variables which could affect EI and
happiness: for example, the Big Five personality traits and perhaps general
intelligence. Then one can perform some statistical analyses that essentially
determine how well the Big Five personality traits and g (but not EI) predict
happiness. Finally, one can consider whether adding EI to this selection of
tests signifcantly improves the overall level of prediction. If so, then it is
clear that the correlation between EI and happiness does not just come
about because some other traits (the Big Five and g) infuence both happiness
and scores on the trait-EI questionnaire. It is instead likely that there is
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

something ‘special’ about EI, which causes it to infuence happiness, quite

independently of the other traits. Hierarchical regression analysis, path
analysis and partial correlations are some of the types of analysis that can
be used to test this.

References
Andrei, F., Siegling, A. B., Aloe, A.M., Baldaro, B. & Petrides, K. V. 2016. The Incremental
Validity of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue): A Systematic Review
and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 261–276.

143

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Austin, E. J. 2009. A Reaction Time Study of Responses to Trait and Ability Emotional
Intelligence Test Items. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 381–383.
Austin, E. J. 2010. Measurement of Ability Emotional Intelligence: Results for Two New Tests.
British Journal of Psychology, 101, 563–578.
Bar-On, R. 1997. Manual for the Bar-on Emotional Quotient Inventory. North Tonawanda,
NY: Multi Health Systems.
Cartwright, S. & Pappas, C. 2008. Emotional Intelligence, Its Measurement and Implications
for the Workplace. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10, 149–171.
Caruso, D. 2019. Example MSCEIT Items [Online]. Available: https://www.eiskillsgroup.
com/example-items/
Chirumbolo, A., Picconi, L., Morelli, M. & Petrides, K. V. 2019. The Assessment of Trait
Emotional Intelligence: Psychometric Characteristics of the TEIQue-Full Form in a Large
Italian Adult Sample. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02786
Denham, S. A. 2018. Implications of Carolyn Saarni’s Work for Preschoolers’ Emotional
Competence. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15, 643–657.
Denham, S. A., Blair, K. A., Demulder, E., Levitas, J., Sawyer, K., Auerbach-Major, S. &
Queenan, P. 2003. Preschool Emotional Competence: Pathway to Social Competence?
Child Development, 74, 238–256.
Denham, S. A., Zoller, D. & Couchoud, E. A. 1994. Socialization of Preschoolers’ Emotion
Understanding. Developmental Psychology, 30, 928–936.
Dunn, J., Brown, J. & Beardsall, L. 1991. Family Talk About Feeling States and Children’s
Later Understanding of Others’ Emotions. Developmental Psychology, 27, 448–455.
Ebner, N. C., Riediger, M. & Lindenberger, U. 2010. Faces – A Database of Facial Expressions
in Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Women and Men: Development and Validation.
Behavior Research Methods, 42, 351–362.
Farrelly, D. & Austin, E. J. 2007. Ability El as an Intelligence? Associations of the MSCEIT
with Performance on Emotion Processing and Social Tasks and with Cognitive Ability.
Cognition & Emotion, 21, 1043–1063.
Fiori, M. & Antonakis, J. 2011. The Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence: Searching for
Valid Measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 329–334.
Goleman, D. 1995. Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Gong, X. P. & Paulson, S. E. 2018. Validation of the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence
Scale with American College Students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36,
175–181.
Gordon, C. & Debus, R. 2002. Developing Deep Learning Approaches and Personal Teaching
Effcacy within a Preservice Teacher Education Context. British Journal of Educational
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

Psychology, 72, 483–511.

Gross, J. J. & John, O. P. 2003. Individual Differences in Two Emotion Regulation Processes:
Implications for Affect, Relationships, and Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 85, 348–362.
Gunnery, S. D. & Ruben, M. A. 2016. Perceptions of Duchenne and Non-Duchenne Smiles:
A Meta-Analysis. Cognition & Emotion, 30, 501–515.
Isen, A.M. 2001. An Infuence of Positive Affect on Decision Making in Complex Situations:
Theoretical Issues with Practical Implications. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11,
75–85.
Karstad, S.B., Wichstrom, L., Reinfjell, T., Belsky, J. & Berg-Nielsen, T.S. 2015. What Enhances
the Development of Emotion Understanding in Young Children? A Longitudinal Study of
Interpersonal Predictors. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 33, 340–354.

144

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Keele, S. M. & Bell, R. C. 2008. The Factorial Validity of Emotional Intelligence: An Unresolved
Issue. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 487–500.
Laborde, S., Allen, M. S. & Guillen, F. 2016. Construct and Concurrent Validity of the Short-
and Long-Form Versions of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. Personality
and Individual Differences, 101, 232–235.
Legree, P. J., Psotka, J., Robbins, J., Roberts, R. D., Putka, D. J. & Mullins, H. M. 2014. Profle
Similarity Metrics as an Alternate Framework to Score Rating-Based Tests: MSCEIT
Reanalyses. Intelligence, 47, 159–174.
MacCann, C. & Roberts, R. D. 2008. New Paradigms for Assessing Emotional Intelligence:
Theory and Data. Emotion, 8, 540–551.
Maul, A. 2012. The Validity of the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test
(MSCEIT) as a Measure of Emotional Intelligence. Emotion Review, 4, 394–402.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R. & Salovey, P. 1999. Emotional Intelligence Meets Traditional
Standards for an Intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267–298.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R. & Salovey, P. 2016. The Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence:
Principles and Updates. Emotion Review, 8, 290–300.
Mayer, J. D. & Salovey, P. 1997. What Is Emotional Intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter
(ed.) Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications. New
York: Harper Collins.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. R. 2002. Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence
Test (MSCEIT) User’s Manual. Toronto, ON: MHS Publishers.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. R. 2008. Emotional Intelligence – New Ability or
Eclectic Traits? American Psychologist, 63, 503–517.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. R. 2012. The Validity of the MSCEIT: Additional
Analyses and Evidence. Emotion Review, 4, 403–408.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R. & Sitarenios, G. 2003. Measuring Emotional
Intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, 3, 97–105.
McRorie, M. & Sneddon, I. 2007. Real Emotion Is Dynamic and Interactive. Second
International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (ACII2007)
Lisbon, Portugal.
Mehrabian, A. 2000. Beyond IQ: Broad-Based Measurement of Individual Success Potential
or ‘Emotional Intelligence’. Genetic Social and General Psychology Monographs, 126,
133–239.
Mikolajczak, M. R., Luminet, O., Leroy, C. & Roy, E. 2007. Psychometric Properties of the
Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire: Factor Structure, Reliability, Construct, and
Incremental Validity in a French-Speaking Population. Journal of Personality Assessment,
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

88, 338–353.
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y. & Rodriguez, M. L. 1989. Delay of Gratifcation in Children. Science,
244, 933–938.
Palmer, B. R., Manocha, R., Gignac, G. & Stough, C. 2003. Examining the Factor Structure
of the Bar On Emotional Quotient Inventory with an Australian General Population
Sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1191–1210.
Petrides, K. V. 2009. Psychometric Properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire
(TEIQue). In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske & J. D. A. Parker (eds.) Assessing Emotional
Intelligence: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York, NY: Springer Science +
Business Media.
Petrides, K. V. & Furnham, A. 2000. On the Dimensional Structure of Emotional Intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 313–320.

145

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.
 Emotional intelligence

Petrides, K. V., Mikolajczak, M., Mavroveli, S., Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Furnham, A. & Perez-
Gonzalez, J. C. 2016. Developments in Trait Emotional Intelligence Research. Emotion
Review, 8, 335–341.
Petrides, K. V., Pita, R. & Kokkinaki, F. 2007. The Location of Trait Emotional Intelligence
in Personality Factor Space. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 273–289.
Pons, F. & Harris, P. 2000. Test of Emotion Comprehension: TEC. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Redick, T. S., Shipstead, Z., Harrison, T. L., Hicks, K. L., Fried, D. E., Hambrick, D. Z.,
Kane, M. J. & Engle, R. W. 2013. No Evidence of Intelligence Improvement after Working
Memory Training: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study. Journal of Experimental
Psychology-General, 142, 359–379.
Reich, J. W., Zautra, A. J. & Potter, P. T. 2001. Cognitive Structure and the Independence of
Positive and Negative Affect. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20, 99–115.
Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M. & Matthews, G. 2001. Does Emotional Intelligence Meet
Traditional Standards for an Intelligence? Some New Data and Conclusions. Emotion, 1,
196–231.
Rocha, A. A., Roazzi, A., Silva, A. L., Candeais, A. A., Minervino, C. A., Roazzi, M. M. &
Pons, F. 2015. Test of Emotion Comprehension: Exploring the Underlying Structure
through Confrmatory Factor Analysis and Similarity Structure Analysis. In A. Roazzi,
B.C. D. Souza & W. Bilsky (eds.) Facet Theory: Searching for Structure in Complex Social,
Cultural and Psychological Phenomena. Recife, Brazil: Editora UFPE.
Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J. & Minski, P. S. 2003. Factor Structure and Validity of a Trait
Emotional Intelligence Measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 707–721.
Salovey, P. & Mayer, J. D. 1990. Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and
Personality, 9, 185–211.
Schulte, M. J., Ree, M. J. & Carretta, T. R. 2004. Emotional Intelligence: Not Much More
Than g and Personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1059–1068.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J. &
Dornheim, L. 1998. Development and Validation of a Measure of Emotional Intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–177.
Shamosh, N. A. & Gray, J. R. 2008. Delay Discounting and Intelligence: A Meta-Analysis.
Intelligence, 36, 289–305.
Spering, M., Wagener, D. & Funke, J. 2005. The Role of Emotions in Complex Problem-
Solving. Cognition & Emotion, 19, 1252–1261.
Sprung, M., Munch, H. M., Harris, P. L., Ebesutani, C. & Hofmann, S. G. 2015. Children’s
Emotion Understanding: A Meta-Analysis of Training Studies. Developmental Review, 37,
Copyright © 2020. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.

41–65.
Van der Linden, D., Dunkel, C. S. & Petrides, K. V. 2016. The General Factor of Personality
(Gfp) as Social Effectiveness: Review of the Literature. Personality and Individual
Differences, 101, 98–105.
Westfall, J. & Yarkoni, T. 2016. Statistically Controlling for Confounding Constructs Is
Harder Than You Think. Plos One, 11, 22.

146

Cooper, Colin. Individual Differences and Personality, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=6282242.
Created from csuau on 2023-11-08 11:31:40.