research article emotional intelligence

EDITORIAL article

Editorial: emotional intelligence: current research and future perspectives on mental health and individual differences.

• 1 Giovanni Maria Bertin Department of Education Studies, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
• 2 Department of Management, College of Business, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States
• 3 Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Editorial on the Research Topic Emotional intelligence: Current research and future perspectives on mental health and individual differences

The last two decades have seen a steadily growing interest in emotional intelligence (EI) research and its applications. As a side effect of this boom in research activity, a flood of conceptualizations and measures of EI have been introduced. Consequently, the label “EI” has been used for a wide array of (often conflicting) models and measures, which has impeded consistent summaries of empirical evidence. This confusion among models/measures is problematic because different measurement approaches produce different results, which makes it difficult to theorize what EI really is or what it predicts since there is limited consistency in the empirical data. On one side there are proponents of the ability model (see Mayer et al., 2016 ) which recognizes that EI includes four distinct types of ability and defines EI as the ability to perceive and integrate emotion to facilitate thoughts, understand and regulate emotions to promote personal growth ( Mayer and Salovey, 1997 ). This kind of EI would only be measurable through maximum performance tests. On the opposite side, we find supporters of the trait model. In particular, Petrides et al. (2007) defines trait EI as a constellation of emotional perceptions assessed through questionnaires and rating scales. The theory of trait EI is summarized with applications from the domains of clinical, educational, and organizational psychology ( Petrides et al., 2016 ) and it's clearly distinguished from the notion of EI as a cognitive ability. Of course, there is no scarcity of other models and perspectives of EI, including mixed approaches, often used in professional setting to train and evaluate management potential and skills, that consider EI as a broad concept that includes (among others) motivations, interpersonal and intrapersonal abilities, empathy, personality factors and wellbeing (see Mayer et al., 2008 ).

In accordance with Hughes and Evans (2018) , we argue that various conceptualizations of EI may be considered constituents of existing perspectives of cognitive ability (ability EI), personality (trait EI), emotion regulation (EI competencies), and emotional awareness (the aptitude to conceptualize and describe one's own emotions and those of others). Across all models, EI involves handling emotions and putting them at the disposal of thinking activity. Although EI is an ability to understand and control emotions in general, this is only a small part of some models of EI. Indeed, trait EI concerns our perceptions of our emotional world and comprises a broad collection of traits linked to the opportunity of understanding, managing, and utilizing our own and other people's emotions, helping us figure out and dealing with emotional and social situations. All these facets are critical for intelligent behavior because they enable and facilitate our capacities for resilience, communication, and reasoning, to name a few, across the life span. Indeed, existing literature suggests that individual differences in EI consistently predict human behavior and EI is now recognized by the scientific community as a relevant psychological factor for several important real-life domains, including a successful socialization, community mental health and individual wellbeing. To advance the field both theoretically and practically, this special issue aims to provide new data which may help to critically review EI's theory.

The collection of articles is quite diverse and covers a number of issues relevant to an advancement of the field by including participants from several cultural contexts (e.g., Italian, Brazilian, and Turkish). Seven articles used self-report tools for the assessment of EI, while only two studies employed an ability measure (the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test). With regards to the topic being addressed, one study focuses on psychometrics, and confirms the validity of the Trait EI Questionnaire as an assessment tool for trait EI in a large Brazilian sample ( Zuanazzi et al. ), while seven analyzed the relationship between EI and research questions pertaining the domain of psychological health and wellbeing. Among these, the papers by García-Martínez et al. and Kökçam et al. analyze instead the relationship between EI and stress management in university students. García-Martínez et al. found mixed results compared to existing literature on the path from EI and academic achievement, while Kökçam et al. found that EI plays an important role in the identification of stress profiles.

Through a systematic review Pérez-Fernández et al. highlights that EI may be a protective factor of emotional disorders in general population and offers a starting point for a theoretical and practical understanding of the role played by EI in the management of diabetes. Along these lines Sergi et al. showed that the domains of EI involved in emotion recognition and control in the social context to reduce the risk to be affected by depression and anxiety, while Pulido-Martos et al. show the contribution of socioemotional resources (including EI) to the preservation of mental health. Iqbal et al. considered the associations among EI, relational engagement (RE) and cognitive outcomes (COs) and found that EI directly and indirectly influenced COs during the pandemic: the students with higher levels of EI and RE may achieve better COs.

Last, the two articles using the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test show that coping strategies mediate the relationships of ability EI with both well- and ill-being ( MacCann et al. ), and give some preliminary evidence on the associations between ability EI, attachment security, and reflective functioning ( Rosso ).

Despite their specific aims, these studies demonstrate the importance to stake on individuals' EI to favor a high psychological and physical wellbeing. At the same time, the present articles collection highlights some open issues to be addressed by future research, including: putting order and possibly connecting the existence of many conflicting models and related measures of EI; deepen the study of the relation between EI with other partially overlapping constructs; identify the most helpful training to increase EI in individuals of all ages, such as children and their parents, adolescents, adults.

Author contributions

GM and FA drafted the editorial. RB, DJ, and ET participated in the discussion on the ideas presented and have edited and supervised the editorial. All authors approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Hughes, D. J., and Evans, T. R. (2018). Putting ‘emotional intelligences' in their place: introducing the integrated model of affect-related individual differences. Front. Psychol. 9, 2155. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02155

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., and Salovey, P. (2016). The ability model of emotional intelligence: principles and updates. Emot. Rev . 8, 290–300. doi: 10.1177/1754073916639667

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., and Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: emotional intelligence. Annu. Rev. Psychol . 59, 507–536. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093646

Mayer, J. D., and Salovey, P. (1997). “What is emotional intelligence?,” in Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Implications for Educators , eds P. Salovey and D. Sluyter (New York, NY: Basic Books), 3–31.

Google Scholar

Petrides, K. V., Mikolajczak, M., Mavroveli, S., Sanchez-Ruiz, M.-J., Furnham, A., and Pérez-González, J.-C. (2016). Developments in trait emotional intelligence research. Emot. Rev . 8, 335–341. doi: 10.1177/1754073916650493

Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., and Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional intelligence in personality factor space. Br. J. Psychol. 98, 273–289. doi: 10.1348/000712606X120618

Keywords: emotional intelligence, mental health, psychological wellbeing, individual differences, emotions

Citation: Mancini G, Biolcati R, Joseph D, Trombini E and Andrei F (2022) Editorial: Emotional intelligence: Current research and future perspectives on mental health and individual differences. Front. Psychol. 13:1049431. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1049431

Received: 20 September 2022; Accepted: 04 October 2022; Published: 13 October 2022.

Edited and reviewed by: Stefano Triberti , University of Milan, Italy

Copyright © 2022 Mancini, Biolcati, Joseph, Trombini and Andrei. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Giacomo Mancini, giacomo.mancini7@unibo.it

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Emotional Intelligence Measures: A Systematic Review

Affiliations.

• 1 Department of Basic Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Speech Therapy, Universitat de València, 46010 Valencia, Spain.
• 2 Psychology Research Institute, Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Lima 15102, Peru.
• 3 Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Universidad Nacional Federico Villarreal, San Miguel 15088, Peru.
• PMID: 34946422
• PMCID: PMC8701889
• DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9121696

Emotional intelligence (EI) refers to the ability to perceive, express, understand, and manage emotions. Current research indicates that it may protect against the emotional burden experienced in certain professions. This article aims to provide an updated systematic review of existing instruments to assess EI in professionals, focusing on the description of their characteristics as well as their psychometric properties (reliability and validity). A literature search was conducted in Web of Science (WoS). A total of 2761 items met the eligibility criteria, from which a total of 40 different instruments were extracted and analysed. Most were based on three main models (i.e., skill-based, trait-based, and mixed), which differ in the way they conceptualize and measure EI. All have been shown to have advantages and disadvantages inherent to the type of tool. The instruments reported in the largest number of studies are Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i), Schutte Self Report-Inventory (SSRI), Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test 2.0 (MSCEIT 2.0), Trait Meta-Mood Scale (TMMS), Wong and Law's Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS), and Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). The main measure of the estimated reliability has been internal consistency, and the construction of EI measures was predominantly based on linear modelling or classical test theory. The study has limitations: we only searched a single database, the impossibility of estimating inter-rater reliability, and non-compliance with some items required by PRISMA.

Keywords: emotional intelligence; measure; questionnaire; scale; systematic review; test.

Publication types

Emotional Intelligence as an Ability: Theory, Challenges, and New Directions

• Open Access
• First Online: 14 July 2018

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Marina Fiori 6 &
• Ashley K. Vesely-Maillefer 6  

Part of the book series: The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality ((SSHE))

38k Accesses

35 Citations

11 Altmetric

• The original version of this chapter was revised. The correction to this chapter is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90633-1_17

About 25 years ago emotional intelligence (EI) was first introduced to the scientific community. In this chapter, we provide a general framework for understanding EI conceptualized as an ability. We start by identifying the origins of the construct rooted in the intelligence literature and the foundational four-branch model of ability EI, then describe the most commonly employed measures of EI as ability, and critically review predictive validity evidence. We further approach current challenges, including the difficulties of scoring answers as “correct” in the emotional sphere, and open a discussion on how to increase the incremental validity of ability EI. We finally suggest new directions by introducing a distinction between a crystallized component of EI, based on knowledge of emotions, and a fluid component, based on the processing of emotion information.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Current Concepts in the Assessment of Emotional Intelligence

Rasch model analysis of the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding – brief in a large Portuguese sample

Working memory updating of emotional stimuli predicts emotional intelligence in females

• Emotional intelligence
• Crystallized EI
• Emotion information processing
• Emotion knowledge

Research in the domains of psychology, education, and organizational behavior in the past 30 years has been characterized by a resurgence of interest for emotions, opening the door to new conceptualizations of intelligence that point to the role of emotions in guiding intelligent thinking (e.g., Bower, 1981 ; Zajonc, 1980 ). Earlier work often raised concern surrounding the compatibility between logic and emotion, and the potential interference of emotion in rational behavior, as they were considered to be in “opposition” (e.g., Lloyd, 1979 ). Research shifted into the study of how cognition and emotional processes could interact to enhance thinking, in which context Salovey and Mayer first introduced the construct of emotional intelligence (EI). Their initial definition described EI as the “ability to monitor one’s own and other’s feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions” (Salovey & Mayer, 1990 , p. 189).

The definition of EI was heavily influenced by early work focused on describing, defining, and assessing socially competent behavior such as social intelligence (Thorndike, 1920 ). The attempt to understand social intelligence led to further inquiries by theorists such as Gardner ( 1983 ) and Sternberg ( 1988 ), who proposed more inclusive approaches to understanding general intelligence. Gardner’s concepts of intrapersonal intelligence , namely, the ability to know one’s emotions, and interpersonal intelligence, which is the ability to understand other individuals’ emotions and intentions, aided in the development of later models in which EI was originally introduced as a subset of social intelligence (Salovey & Mayer, 1990 ). Further prehistory to EI involved the investigation of the relation of social intelligence to alexithymia , a clinical construct defined by difficulties recognizing, understanding, and describing emotions (e.g., MacLean, 1949 ; Nemiah, Freyberger, & Sifneos, 1976 ), as well as research examining the ability to recognize facial emotions and expressions (Ekman, Friesen, & Ancoli, 1980 ).

EI was popularized in the 1990s by Daniel Goleman’s ( 1995 ) best-selling book, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ , as well as through a number of other popular books (e.g., Cooper & Sawaf, 1997 ). However, the lack of empirical evidence available at the time to support the “exciting” statements and claims about the importance of EI in understanding human behavior and individual differences (Davies, Stankov, & Roberts, 1998 ) prompted critiques and further investigation into the construct. Major psychological factors such as intelligence, temperament, personality, information processing, and emotional self-regulation have been considered in the conceptualization of EI, leading to a general consensus that EI may be multifaceted and could be studied from different perspectives (Austin, Saklofske, & Egan, 2005 ; Stough, Saklofske, & Parker, 2009 ; Zeidner, Roberts, & Matthews, 2008 ).

Two conceptually different approaches dominate the current study of EI: the trait and the ability approach (Petrides & Furnham, 2001 ). The trait approach conceives EI as dispositional tendencies, such as personality traits or self-efficacy beliefs (see Petrides, Sanchez-Ruiz, Siegling, Saklofske, & Mavroveli, Chap. 3 , this volume). This approach is often indicated in the literature as also including “mixed” models, although such models are conceptually distinct from conceptions of EI as personality because they consider EI as a mixture of traits, competences, and abilities (e.g., Bar-On, 2006 ; Goleman, 1998 ). Both the trait approach and the “mixed” models share the same measurement methods of EI, namely, self-report questionnaires. In contrast, the ability approach conceptualizes EI as a cognitive ability based on the processing of emotion information and assesses it with performance tests. The current chapter deals with the latter approach, where we first outline Mayer and Salovey’s ( 1997 ) foundational four-branch ability EI model, then describe commonly used and new measures of EI abilities, critically review evidence of EI’s predictive validity, and finally discuss outstanding challenges, suggesting new directions for the measurement and conceptualization of EI as an ability.

Although not the focus of the present contribution, it should be noted that some attempts to integrate both ability and trait EI perspectives exist in the literature, including the multi-level developmental investment model (Zeidner, Matthews, Roberts, & MacCann, 2003 ) and the tripartite model (Mikolajczak, 2009 ). For example, the tripartite model suggests three levels of EI: (1) knowledge about emotions, (2) ability to apply this knowledge in real-world situations, and (3) traits reflecting the propensity to behave in a certain way in emotional situations (typical behavior). Research and applications on this tripartite model are currently underway (e.g., Laborde, Mosley, Ackermann, Mrsic, & Dosseville, Chap. 11 , this volume; Maillefer, Udayar, Fiori, submitted ). More theory and research is needed to elucidate how the different EI approaches are related with each other. What all of these theoretical frameworks share in common is their conceptualization of EI as a distinct construct from traditional IQ and personality, which facilitates the potential for prediction of, and influence on, various real-life outcomes (Ciarrochi, Chan, & Caputi, 2000 ; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2008 ; Petrides, Perez-Gonzalez, & Furnham, 2007 ).

The Four-Branch Ability EI Model

The main characteristic of the ability approach is that EI is conceived as a form of intelligence. It specifies that cognitive processing is implicated in emotions, is related to general intelligence, and therefore ought to be assessed through performance measures that require respondents to perform discrete tasks and solve specific problems (Freeland, Terry, & Rodgers, 2008 ; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2016 ; Mayer & Salovey, 1997 ). The mainstream model of EI as an ability is the four-branch model introduced by Mayer and Salovey ( 1997 ), which has received wide acknowledgment and use and has been foundational in the development of other EI models and measures. The four-branch model identifies EI as being comprised of a number of mental abilities that allow for the appraisal, expression, and regulation of emotion, as well the integration of these emotion processes with cognitive processes used to promote growth and achievement (Salovey & Grewal, 2005 ; Salovey & Mayer, 1990 ). The model is comprised of four hierarchically linked ability areas, or branches: perceiving emotions, facilitating thought using emotions, understanding emotions, and managing emotions (see Fig. 2.1 ).

The Mayer and Salovey ( 1997 ) four-branch model of emotional intelligence (EI) abilities

Perceiving emotions (Branch 1) refers to the ability to identify emotions accurately through the attendance, detection, and deciphering of emotional signals in faces, pictures, or voices (Papadogiannis, Logan, & Sitarenios, 2009 ). This ability involves identifying emotions in one’s own physical and psychological states, as well as an awareness of, and sensitivity to, the emotions of others (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999 ; Papadogiannis et al., 2009 ).

Facilitating thought using emotions (Branch 2) involves the integration of emotions to facilitate thought. This occurs through the analysis of, attendance to, or reflection on emotional information, which in turn assists higher-order cognitive activities such as reasoning, problem-solving, decision-making, and consideration of the perspectives of others (Mayer & Salovey, 1997 ; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002 ; Papadogiannis et al., 2009 ). Individuals with a strong ability to use emotions would be able to select and prioritize cognitive activities that are most conducive to their current mood state, as well as change their mood to fit the given situation in a way that would foster better contextual adaptation.

Understanding emotions (Branch 3) comprises the ability to comprehend the connections between different emotions and how emotions change over time and situations (Rivers, Brackett, Salovey, & Mayer, 2007 ). This would involve knowledge of emotion language and its utilization to identify slight variations in emotion and describe different combinations of feelings. Individuals stronger in this domain understand the complex and transitional relationships between emotions and can recognize emotional cues learned from previous experiences, thus allowing them to predict expressions in others in the future (Papadogiannis et al., 2009 ). For example, an understanding that a colleague is getting frustrated, through subtle changes in tone or expression, can improve individuals’ communication in relationships and their personal and professional performances.

Finally, managing emotions (Branch 4) refers to the ability to regulate one’s own and others’ emotions successfully. Such ability would entail the capacity to maintain, shift, and cater emotional responses, either positive or negative, to a given situation (Rivers et al., 2007 ). This could be reflected in the maintenance of a positive mood in a challenging situation or curbing elation at a time in which an important decision must be made. Recovering quickly from being angry or generating motivation or encouragement for a friend prior to an important activity are illustrations of high-level emotion management (Papadogiannis et al., 2009 ).

The four EI branches are theorized to be hierarchically organized, with the last two abilities (understanding and management), which involve higher-order (strategic) cognitive processes, building on the first two abilities (perception and facilitation), which involve rapid (experiential) processing of emotion information (Mayer & Salovey, 1997 ; Salovey & Grewal, 2005 ). It should be noted that the proposed hierarchical structure of the model, as well as its four distinctive branches, have been contradicted. First, developmental evidence suggests that abilities in different EI domains (e.g., perceiving, managing) are acquired in parallel rather than sequentially, through a complex learning process involving a wide range of biological and environmental influences (Zeidner et al., 2003 ). Though this conceptualization supports the notion that lower-level competencies aid in the development of more sophisticated skills, it also identifies ways in which the four EI branches are sometimes developed simultaneously, with lower-level abilities of perceiving, facilitating, understanding, and managing emotions at the same time leading to their later improvement.

The four-branch model has also been challenged through factor analysis in several cases, which did not support a hierarchical model with one underlying global EI factor (Fiori & Antonakis, 2011 ; Rossen, Kranzler, & Algina, 2008 ). Moreover, facilitating thought using emotions (Branch 2) did not emerge as a separate factor and was found to be empirically redundant with the other branches (Fan, Jackson, Yang, Tang, & Zhang, 2010 ; Fiori et al., 2014 ; Fiori & Antonakis, 2011 ; Gignac, 2005 ; Palmer, Gignac, Manocha, & Stough, 2005 ), leading scholars to adopt a revised three-branch model of ability EI, comprised of emotion recognition, emotion understanding, and emotion management (Joseph & Newman, 2010 ; MacCann, Joseph, Newman, & Roberts, 2014 ). Nevertheless, the four branches remain the foundation for current ability EI models, and their description aids in the theoretical understanding of the content domains covered by ability-based perspectives on EI (Mayer et al., 2016 ).

Measurement of EI Abilities

How ability EI is measured is critically important to how the results are interpreted. The fact that ability EI is measured by maximum-performance tests, as is appropriate for a form of intelligence, instead of self-report questionnaires, as is the case for trait EI (see Petrides et al., Chap. 3 , this volume) can, in itself, lead to different results (Brackett, Rivers, Shiffman, Lerner, & Salovey, 2006 ). This is analogous to asking people to provide evidence of their intelligence by utilizing a performance IQ measure versus asking them how high they think their IQ is. Although most individuals have insight with regard to their own abilities, there are those who do not. There are, of course, others who over- or underestimate their intelligence unintentionally or for social desirability purposes, resulting in different scores depending on the format of measurement. Thus, it would be challenging to determine whether the results are attributable to the construct itself or to the assessment methods that are being used (MacCann & Roberts, 2008 ).

Though this example is referring to empirically acknowledged problems with self-report measures in general, reflected in vulnerability to faking, social desirability, and ecological validity (Grubb & McDaniel, 2007 ; Roberts, Zeidner, & Matthews, 2007 ), problems with performance measures of EI that may alter the response outcome also exist. For instance, typical ability EI items require individuals to demonstrate their “ability” to perceive, use, understand, and manage emotions by responding to a variety of hypothetical scenarios and visual stimuli, thus deeming the incorrect/correct response format as a method of scoring. Although this may correlate with real-life outcomes, it may not be an accurate representation of EI in real-life social interactions (Vesely, 2011 ; Vesely-Maillefer, 2015 ).

With these considerations in mind , we provide below a short description of the most commonly used as well as some newly developed tests to measure EI abilities.

The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test

The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; Mayer et al., 2002 ; Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003 ) is the corresponding measure of the dominant-to-date four-branch theoretical model of ability EI (Mayer & Salovey, 1997 ). This is a performance-based measure that provides a comprehensive coverage of ability EI by assessing how people perform emotion tasks and solve emotional problems. It assesses the four EI branches with 141 items distributed across eight tasks (two tasks per branch). Perceiving emotions (Branch 1) is assessed with two emotion perception tasks: (1) the faces task involves identifying emotions conveyed through expressions in photographs of people’s faces; and (2) the pictures task involves identifying emotions in pictures of landscapes and abstract art. For both tasks, respondents are asked to rate on a 5-point scale the degree to which five different emotions are expressed in each stimulus. Facilitating thought (Branch 2) is assessed with two tasks: (1) the facilitation task involves evaluating how different moods may facilitate specific cognitive activities; and (2) the sensations task involves comparing emotions to other sensations, such as color, light, and temperature. For both tasks, respondents are asked to indicate which of the different emotions best match the target activity/sensation. Understanding emotions (Branch 3) is assessed with two multiple-choice tests: (1) the changes test involves questions about how emotions connect to certain situations and how emotions may change and develop over time; and (2) the blends test involves questions about how different emotions combine and interact to form new emotions. For both tests, respondents are asked to choose the most appropriate of five possible response options. Managing emotions (Branch 4) is assessed with two situational judgment tests (SJTs) using a series of vignettes depicting real-life social and emotional situations: (1) the emotion management test involves judgments about strategies for regulating the protagonist’s own emotions in each situation; and (2) the emotional relations test involves judgments about strategies for managing emotions within the protagonist’s social relationships. For both tests, respondents are asked to rate the level of effectiveness of several different strategies, ranging from 1 = very ineffective to 5 = very effective.

The MSCEIT assessment yields a total EI score, four-branch scores, and two area scores for experiential EI (Branches 1 and 2 combined) and strategic EI (Branches 3 and 4 combined). Consistent with the view of EI as a cognitive ability , the scoring of item responses follows the correct/incorrect format of an ability-based IQ test while also requiring the individual to be attuned to social norms (Salovey & Grewal, 2005 ). The correctness of the MSCEIT responses can be determined in one of two ways: (a) based on congruence with the answers of emotion experts (expert scoring) or (b) based on the proportion of the sample that endorsed the same answer (general consensus scoring) (Mayer et al., 2003 ; Papadogiannis et al., 2009 ; Salovey & Grewal, 2005 ). Mayer et al. ( 2003 ) reported high agreement between the two scoring methods in terms of correct answers ( r  = 0.91) and test scores ( r  = 0.98). The test internal consistency reliability (split half) is r  = 0.91–0.93 for the total EI and r  = 0.76–0.91 for the four-branch scores, with expert scoring producing slightly higher reliability estimates (Mayer et al., 2003 ).

The MSCEIT has been the only test available to measure EI as an ability for a long time, and much of the existing validity evidence on ability EI, which we review in the next section, is based on the MSCEIT, introducing the risk of mono-method bias in research. Although there are other standardized tests that can be used to measure specific EI abilities (described below), the MSCEIT remains the only omnibus test to measure all four branches of the ability EI model in one standardized assessment. Another attractive feature of the MSCEIT is the availability of a matching youth research version (MSCEIT-YRV; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2005 ; Rivers et al., 2012 ), which assesses the same four EI branches using age-appropriate items for children and adolescents (ages 10–17). However, a major barrier to research uses of the MSCEIT and its derivatives is that these tests are sold commercially and scored off-site by the publisher, Multi-Health Systems Inc. Furthermore, the MSCEIT has several well-documented psychometric limitations (Fiori et al., 2014 ; Fiori & Antonakis, 2011 ; Maul, 2012 ; Rossen et al., 2008 ), which have prompted researchers to develop alternative instruments, to generalize findings across assessments , and to create non-commercial alternatives for research.

Tests of Emotion Understanding and Management

Recently, there has been an important advancement in ability EI measurement: the introduction of a second generation of ability EI tests, notably the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU) and the Situational Test of Emotion Management (STEM) introduced by MacCann and Roberts ( 2008 ). Both the STEU and the STEM follow the SJT format similar to that used for the managing emotions branch of the MSCEIT, where respondents are presented with short vignettes depicting real-life social and emotional situations (42 on the STEU and 44 on the STEM) and asked to select, among a list of five, which emotion best describes how the protagonist would feel in each situation (STEU) or which course of action would be most effective in managing emotions in each situation (STEM). Correct answers on the STEU are scored according to Roseman’s (2001) appraisal theory (theory-based scoring), and correct answers on the STEM are scored according to the judgments provided by emotion experts (expert scoring). The reliability of the two tests is reported to be between alpha = 0.71 and 0.72 for STEU and between alpha = 0.68 and 0.85 for STEM (Libbrecht & Lievens, 2012 ; MacCann & Roberts, 2008 ). Brief forms of both tests (18–19 items) have also been developed for research contexts where comprehensive assessment of EI is not required (Allen et al., 2015 ). There is also an 11-item youth version of the STEM (STEM-Y; MacCann, Wang, Matthews, & Roberts, 2010 ) adapted for young adolescents. The STEU and STEM items are available free of charge in the American Psychological Association PsycTESTS database (see also https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012746.supp ). These tests look promising, although they have been introduced recently and more research is needed to ascertain their construct and predictive validity (but see Burrus et al., 2012 ; Libbrecht & Lievens, 2012 ; Libbrecht, Lievens, Carette, & Côté, 2014 ).

The text-based format of the SJT items on the STEU, STEM, and MSCEIT raises concerns about their ecological validity, as real-life social encounters require judgments of verbal as well as nonverbal cues . To address this concern, MacCann, Lievens, Libbrecht, and Roberts ( 2016 ) recently developed a multimedia test of emotion management, the 28-item multimedia emotion management assessment (MEMA) , by transforming the original text-based scenarios and response options from the STEM into a video format. MacCann et al.’s ( 2016 ) comparisons of the MEMA with the text-based items from the MSCEIT managing emotions branch produced equivalent evidence of construct and predictive validity for the two tests.

Tests of Emotion Perception

There are several long-existing standardized measures of perceptual accuracy in recognizing emotions, many of which were introduced even before the construct of EI. Therefore, these were not presented as EI tests but do capture the perceiving emotions branch of EI and could be considered as viable alternatives to the MSCEIT. Among the most frequently used of these tests are the Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy (DANVA ; Nowicki & Duke 1994 ), the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS ; Rosenthal, Hall, DiMatteo, Rogers, & Archer, 1979 ), and the Japanese and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART ; Matsumoto et al., 2000 ). Like the MSCEIT faces task, these tests involve viewing a series of stimuli portraying another person’s emotion, and the respondent’s task is to correctly identify the emotion expressed. However, unlike the rating-scale format of the MSCEIT faces items, these other tests use a multiple-choice format, where respondents must choose one emotion, from a list of several, that best matches the stimulus. This difference in response format could be one possible reason why performance on the MSCEIT perceiving branch shows weak convergence with these other emotion recognition tests (MacCann et al., 2016 ).

Different emotion recognition tests use different types of stimuli and modalities (e.g., photos of faces, audio recordings) and cover different numbers of target emotions. For example, the DANVA uses 24 photos of male and female facial expressions and 24 audio recordings of male and female vocal expressions of the same neutral sentence (“I am going out of the room now but I’ll be back later”), representing 1 of 4 emotions (happiness, sadness, anger, and fear) in 2 intensities, either weak or strong. The PONS is presented as a test assessing interpersonal sensitivity, or the accuracy in judging other people’s nonverbal cues and affective states. It includes 20 short audio and video segments of a woman for a total length of 47 minutes. The task is to identify which of two emotion situations best describes the woman’s expression. The JACBART uses 56 pictures of Japanese and Caucasian faces expressing 1 of 5 emotions (fear, happiness, sadness, anger, surprise, contempt, and disgust). The interesting feature of this test, in comparison to others, is that it employs a very brief presentation time (200 ms). Each expressive picture is preceded and followed by the neutral version of the same person expressing the emotion in the target picture, so as to reduce post effects of the pictures and get a more spontaneous evaluation of the perceived emotion.

Both the MSCEIT perceiving branch and the earlier emotion recognition tests have been critiqued for their focus on a single modality (i.e., still photos vs. audio recordings), as well as for their restricted range of target emotions (i.e., few basic emotions, only one of them positive), which limits their ecological validity and precludes assessing the ability to differentiate between more nuanced emotion states (Schlegel, Fontaine, & Scherer, 2017 ; Schlegel, Grandjean, & Scherer, 2014 ). The new wave of emotion recognition tests developed at the Swiss Center for Affective Sciences – the Multimodal Emotion Recognition Test (MERT ; Bänziger, Grandjean, & Scherer, 2009 ) and the Geneva Emotion Recognition Test (GERT ; Schlegel et al., 2014 ) – aim to rectify both problems by employing more ecologically valid stimuli, involving dynamic multimodal (vocal plus visual) portrayals of 10 (MERT) to 14 (GERT) different emotions, half of them positive. For example, the GERT consists of 83 videos (1–3 s long) of professional male and female actors expressing 14 emotions (joy, amusement, pride, pleasure, relief, interest, anger, fear, despair, irritation, anxiety, sadness, disgust, and surprise) through facial expressions, nonverbal gestural/postural behavior, and audible pseudo-linguistic phrases that resemble the tone of voice of the spoken language. A short version (GERT-S) is also available with 42 items only (Schlegel & Scherer, 2015 ). The reliability is 0.74 for the long version. The emerging evidence for the construct and predictive validity of the GERT looks promising (Schlegel et al., 2017 ).

Predictive Validity of Ability EI

Among the most researched and debated questions in the ability EI literature is whether ability EI can predict meaningful variance in life outcomes – does ability EI matter? (Antonakis, Ashkanasy, & Dasborough, 2009 ; Brackett, Rivers, & Salovey, 2011 ; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2008 ). Several studies have shown that ability EI predicts health-related outcomes, including higher satisfaction with life, lower depression, and fewer health issues (Fernández-Berrocal & Extremera, 2016 ; Martins, Ramalho, & Morin, 2010 ). Furthermore, high EI individuals tend to be perceived by others more positively because of their greater social-emotional skills (Fiori, 2015 ; Lopes, Cote, & Salovey, 2006 ) and thus enjoy better interpersonal functioning in the family (Brackett et al., 2005 ), at work (Côte & Miners, 2006 ), and in social relationships (Brackett et al., 2006 ). Ability EI has also been positively implicated in workplace performance and leadership (Côte, Lopes, Salovey, & Miners, 2010 ; O’Boyle, Humphrey, Pollack, Hawver, & Story, 2011 ).

Evidence for ability EI predicting academic success is mixed in post-secondary settings (see Parker, Taylor, Keefer, & Summerfeldt, Chap. 16 , this volume) but more consistent for secondary school outcomes, where ability EI measures have been associated with fewer teacher-rated behavioral and learning problems and higher academic grades (Ivcevic & Brackett, 2014 ; Rivers et al., 2012 ). There is also compelling evidence from over 200 controlled studies of school-based social and emotional learning (SEL) programs, showing that well-executed SEL programs reduce instances of behavioral and emotional problems and produce improvements in students’ academic engagement and grades (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011 ; see also Elias, Nayman, & Duffell, Chap. 12 , this volume). Hoffmann, Ivcevic, and Brackett (Chap. 7 , this volume) describe one notable example of such evidence-based SEL program, the RULER approach , which is directly grounded in the four-branch ability EI model.

Although these results are certainly encouraging regarding the importance of ability EI as a predictor of personal, social, and performance outcomes, there are several important caveats to this conclusion. First, ability EI measures may capture predominantly the knowledge aspects of EI, which can be distinct from the routine application of that knowledge in real-life social-emotional interaction. This disconnect between emotional knowledge and application of knowledge is also supported by the tripartite model of EI mentioned above (Mikolajczak, 2009 ), which separates the ability-based knowledge from trait-based applications within its theory. For example, it posits the possibility that a person with strong cognitive knowledge and verbal ability can describe which emotional expression would be useful in a given situation, but may not be able to select or even display the corresponding emotion in a particular social encounter. Indeed, many other factors, apart from intelligence, contribute to people’s actual behavior, including personality, motives, beliefs, and situational influences.

This leads to the second caveat: whether ability EI is distinct enough from other established constructs, such as personality and IQ, to predict incremental variance in outcomes beyond these well-known variables. Although the overlap of EI measures with known constructs is more evident for trait EI measures (Joseph, Jin, Newman, & O’Boyle, 2015 ), some studies have shown that a substantial amount of variance in ability EI tests, in particular the MSCEIT, was predicted by intelligence, but also by personality traits, especially the trait of agreeableness (Fiori & Antonakis, 2011 ). These results suggest that ability EI, as measured with the MSCEIT, pertains not only to the sphere of emotional abilities, as it was originally envisioned, but depends also on one’s personality characteristics, which conflicts with the idea that ability EI should be conceived (and measured) solely as a form of intelligence. Given these overlaps, the contribution of ability EI lowers once personality and IQ are accounted for. For example, the meta-analysis by Joseph and Newman ( 2010 ) showed that ability EI provided significant but rather limited incremental validity in predicting job performance over personality and IQ.

Of course, one may argue that even a small portion of incremental variance that is not accounted for by known constructs is worth the effort. Further and indeed, a more constructive reflection on the role of ability EI in predicting various outcomes refers to understanding why its contributions may have been limited so far. The outcomes predicted by ability EI should be emotion-specific, given that it is deemed to be a form of intelligence that pertains to the emotional sphere. There is no strong rationale for expecting ability EI to predict generic work outcomes such as job performance; for this type of outcome, we already know that IQ and personality account for the most variance. Instead, work-related outcomes that involve the regulation of emotions, such as emotional labor, would be more appropriate. This idea is corroborated by the meta-analytic evidence showing stronger incremental predictive validity of ability EI for jobs high in emotional labor, such as customer service positions (Joseph & Newman, 2010 ; Newman, Joseph, & MacCann, 2010 ).

Another reason why the incremental validity of ability EI measures appears to be rather small may be related to the limits of current EI measures. For example, the MSCEIT has shown to be best suited to discriminate individuals at the low end of the EI ability distribution (Fiori et al., 2014 ). For the other individuals (medium and high in EI), variation in the MSCEIT scores does not seem to reflect true variation in EI ability. Given that most of the evidence on ability EI to date is based on the MSCEIT, it is likely that some incremental validity of ability EI was “lost” due to the limitations of the test utilized to measure it.

Another caveat concerns making inferences about predictive validity of ability EI from the outcomes of EI and SEL programs. Here, the issue is in part complicated by the fact that terms such as “ability” and “competence” are often used interchangeably, but in fact reflect different characteristics, the latter being a trait-like solidification of the former through practice and experience. Many EI programs are in fact meant to build emotional competence, going beyond the mere acquisition of emotional knowledge and working toward the application of that knowledge across different contexts. As such, other processes and factors, apart from direct teaching and learning of EI abilities, likely contribute to positive program outcomes. For example, the most effective school-based SEL programs are those that also modify school and relational environments in ways that would model, reinforce, and provide opportunities for students to practice the newly acquired EI skills in everyday situations (see also Elias et al., Chap. 12 , this volume; Humphrey, Chap. 8 , this volume). Thus, it would be inappropriate to attribute the outcomes of such programs solely to increases in students’ EI abilities, without acknowledging the supportive social and contextual influences.

It is also important to better understand which processes mediate the role of ability EI in improving individuals’ emotional functioning. Social cognitive theories of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997 ) and self-concept (Marsh & Craven, 2006 ) can inform which types of processes might be involved in linking ability to behavioral change. Specifically, successful acquisition and repeated practice of EI skills can build individuals’ sense of confidence in using those skills (i.e., higher perceived EI self-efficacy), which would increase the likelihood of drawing upon those skills in future situations, in turn providing further opportunities to hone the skills and reinforce the sense of self-competence (Keefer, 2015 ). Research on self-efficacy beliefs in one’s ability to regulate emotions supports this view (Alessandri, Vecchione, & Caprara, 2015 ).

Mayer et al. ( 2016 ) cogently summarized the ambivalent nature of predictive validity evidence for ability EI: “the prediction from intelligence to individual instances of “smart” behavior is fraught with complications and weak in any single instance. At the same time, more emotionally intelligent people have outcomes that differ in important ways from those who are less emotionally intelligent” (p. 291). We concur with this conclusion but would treat it as tentative, given that there are several unresolved issues with the way ability EI has been measured and conceptualized, as discussed below. This opens the possibility that EI’s predictive validity would improve once these measurement and theoretical issues have been clarified.

Measurement and Conceptual Issues

Scoring of correct responses.

One of the greatest challenges of operationalizing EI as an ability has been (and still is) how to score a correct answer on an ability EI test. Indeed, in contrast to personality questionnaires in which answers depend on the unrestricted choice of the respondent and any answer is a valid one, ability test responses are deemed correct or wrong based on an external criterion of correctness. Among the most problematic aspects is the identification of such criterion; it is difficult to find the one best way across individuals who may differ with respect to how they feel and manage emotions effectively (Fiori et al., 2014 ). After all, the very essence of being intelligent implies finding the best solution to contextual adaptation given the resources one possesses. For example, one may be aware that, in principle, a good way to deal with a relational conflict is to talk with the other person to clarify the sources of conflict and/or misunderstanding. However, if one knows they and/or their partner are not good at managing interpersonal relationships , one may choose to avoid confrontation as a more effective strategy in the moment, given the personal characteristics of the individuals involved (Fiori et al., 2014 ).

This example evokes another issue that has not been addressed in the literature on ability EI, namely, the potential difference between what response would be more “intelligent” personally versus socially. One may argue that the solution should fill both needs; however, these may be in contradiction. For instance, suppression of one’s own feelings may help to avoid an interpersonal conflict, an action seen as socially adaptive ; however, this same strategy maybe personally unhealthy if the person does not manage their suppressed emotion in other constructive ways. In this case, a more socially unacceptable response that releases emotion may have been more “emotionally intelligent” as it relates to the self but less so as it relates to others. The problematic part is that current measurement tools do not take these nuances into account. This relates also to the lack of distinction in the literature on emotion skills related to the “self” versus “others,” a criticism discussed below.

In addition, “correctness” of an emotional reaction may depend on the time frame within which one intends to pursue a goal that has emotional implications. For example, if a person is focused on the short-term goal of getting one’s way after being treated unfairly by his or her supervisor, the most “effective” way to manage the situation would be to defend one’s position in front of the supervisor regardless of possible ramifications . In contrast, if one is aiming at a more long-term goal, such as to preserve a good relationship with the boss, the person may accept what is perceived as an unfair treatment and try to “let it go” (Fiori et al., 2014 ).

Scholars who have introduced ability EI measures have attempted to address these difficulties by implementing one of these three strategies to find a correct answer: (a) judge whether an answer is correct according to the extent to which it overlaps with the answer provided by the majority of respondents, also called the consensus scoring ; (b) identify correctness according to the choice provided by a pool of emotion experts, or expert scoring ; and (c) identify whether an answer is correct according to the principles of emotion theories, or theoretical scoring . The consensus scoring was introduced by Mayer et al. ( 1999 ) as a scoring option for the MSCEIT, based on the idea that emotions are genetically determined and shared by all human beings and that, for this reason, the answer chosen by the majority of people can be taken as the correct way to experience emotions. Unfortunately, this logic appears profoundly faulty once one realizes that answers chosen by the majority of people are by definition easy to endorse and that tests based on this logic are not challenging enough for individuals with average or above average EI (for a thorough explanation of this measurement issue, see Fiori et al., 2014 ).

Furthermore, what the majority of people say about emotions may simply reflect lay theories, which, although shared by most, can still be incorrect. The ability to spot a fake smile is a good example of this effect. This task is challenging for all but a restricted group of emotion experts (Maul, 2012 ). In this case, the “correct” answer should be modeled on the few that can spot fake emotions, not on the modal answer in the general population. In fact, the emotionally intelligent “prototype” should be among the very few that can spot fake emotions, rather than among the vast majority of people that get them wrong. Thus, from a conceptual point of view, it would make better sense to score test takers’ responses with respect to a group of emotion experts (high EI individuals ), as long as items reflect differences between typical individuals and those that are higher than the norm (Fiori et al., 2014 ). Items for which the opinion of experts is very close to that of common people should be discarded in testing EI abilities, because they would not be difficult enough to discriminate among individuals with different levels of EI.

Finally, scoring grounded in emotion theories offers a valuable alternative, as it allows setting item difficulties and response options in correspondence with theory-informed emotion processes (Schlegel, 2016 ). Some of the recently developed ability EI tests have utilized this approach. For example, response options on the STEM-B (Allen et al., 2015 ) and MEMA (MacCann et al., 2016 ) map onto the various emotion regulation strategies outlined in Gross’ ( 1998 ) process model of emotion regulation. Based on this theory, certain strategies (e.g., positive reappraisal, direct modification) would be more adaptive than others (e.g., emotion suppression, avoidance), and the correct responses on the ability EI items can be set accordingly. However, this too may appear to be a “subjective” criterion because of the differences among theories regarding what is deemed the adaptive way to experience, label, and regulate emotions. For example, suppression is regarded as a deleterious strategy to manage emotions because of its negative long-term effects (Gross, 1998 ). However, evidence suggests (Bonanno, Papa, Lalande, Westphal, & Coifman, 2004 ; Matsumoto et al., 2008 ) that the damaging effect of suppressing emotions may depend on how this strategy fits with the social and cultural contexts, as also discussed earlier in the example of the relational conflict. Moreover, there are systematic differences across cultures in how emotions are to be expressed, understood, and regulated “intelligently” (see Huynh, Oakes, & Grossman, Chap. 5 , this volume), which poses additional challenges for developing an unbiased scoring system for ability EI tests.

Self- vs. Other-Related EI Abilities

Another issue that has not received much attention in the literature and that might explain why ability EI contributions in predicting outcomes are limited refers to the fact that ability EI theorization, in particular Mayer and Salovey’s ( 1997 ) four-branch model, blurs the distinction between emotional abilities that refer to the self with those that refer to others (e.g., perceiving emotions in oneself vs. in others, understanding what one is feeling vs. someone else is feeling, etc.), as if using the abilities for perceiving/understanding/managing emotions in oneself would automatically entail using these abilities successfully with others. However, being good at understanding one’s own emotional reactions does not automatically entail being able to understand others’ emotional reactions (and vice versa). There is some intuitive evidence: some professionals (e.g., emotion experts, psychologists) may be very good at understanding their patients’ emotional reactions, but not as good at understanding their own emotional reactions. Further, scientific evidence also exists : knowledge about the self seems to be processed in a distinctive way compared to social knowledge. For example, brain imaging studies show that taking the self-perspective or the perspective of someone else activates partially different neural mechanisms and brain regions (David et al., 2006 ; Vogeley et al., 2001 ).

The most important implication of considering the two sets of abilities (e.g., employed for oneself or with respect to others) as distinct rather than equivalent is that each of them might predict different outcomes. Recent evidence comes from a program evaluation study of an EI training program for teachers investigating the mechanisms by which EI skills are learned (described in Vesely-Maillefer & Saklofske, Chap. 14 , this volume). Preliminary results showed differential perceived outcomes in self- versus other-related EI skills , dependent on which ones were taught and practiced. Specifically, practice of self-relevant EI skills was the primary focus of the program, and these were perceived to have increased by the program’s end more than the other-related EI skills (Vesely-Maillefer, 2015 ).

It is worth noting that some recently introduced measures of EI make the explicit distinction between the self- and other-oriented domains of abilities. For instance, the Profile of Emotional Competence (PEC; Brasseur, Grégoire, Bourdu, & Mikolajczak, 2013 ) is a trait EI questionnaire that distinguishes between intrapersonal and interpersonal EI competences, and the Genos emotional intelligence test (Gignac, 2008 ) measures awareness and management of emotions in both self and others separately. Additionally, a new ability EI test currently under development at the University of Geneva, the Geneva Emotional Competence Test (Mortillaro & Schlegel), distinguishes between emotion regulation in oneself (emotion regulation) and in others (emotion management). The adoption of these more precise operationalizations of self- and other-related EI abilities would allow collecting “cleaner” validity data for the ability EI construct.

Conscious vs. Automatic Processes

Among the most compelling theoretical challenges EI researchers need to address is to understand the extent to which ability EI depends on conscious versus automatic processes (Fiori, 2009 ). Most ability EI research, if not all, has dealt with the investigation of how individuals thoughtfully reason about their own and others’ emotional experience by consciously feeling, understanding, regulating, and recognizing emotions. However, a large portion of emotional behavior is, in fact, not conscious (Feldman Barrett, Niedenthal, & Winkielman, 2005 ). For example, individuals may process emotional signals, such as nonverbal emotional behavior, without having any hint of conscious perception (Tamietto & de Gelder, 2010 ). Applied to the domain of ability EI, this implies that individuals may be able to use emotions intelligently even without being aware of how they do it and/or without even realizing that they are doing it. Research on cognitive biases in emotional disorders supports this idea: systematic errors in the automatic processing of emotion information have been causally implicated in vulnerability for mood and anxiety disorders (Mathews & MacLeod, 2005 ).

EI scholars need to acknowledge the automaticity component of ability EI, first, because it is theoretically relevant and second, because it might explain additional variance in emotionally intelligent behavior due to subconscious or unconscious processes that have been ignored to date. Some contributions have provided conceptual models (Fiori, 2009 ) and raised theoretical issues (Ybarra, Kross, & Sanchez-Burks, 2014 ) that would help to move forward in this direction. Evidence-based research is the next step and would require scholars to employ experimental paradigms in which the level of emotional consciousness is manipulated in order to observe its effects on emotionally intelligent behavior.

New Developments and Future Directions

The domain of research on ability EI is in its early developmental stage, and there is still much to explore, both on the theoretical and the measurement side. The seminal four-branch model introduced by Mayer and Salovey ( 1997 ) needs to be further developed and refined on the basis of the most recent research findings. As mentioned above, the model of ability EI as composed of four hierarchically related branches underlying a latent global EI factor does not seem to be supported, at least in its original formulation (e.g., Fiori & Antonakis, 2011 ; Rossen et al., 2008 ). On the measurement side, it seems as if progress has been made in terms of introducing new tests to measure specific EI abilities. A further step is to clarify what exactly scores on these tests are measuring and what mechanisms account for test performance. For instance, in the past the possibility was raised that individuals high in EI might be overly sensitive to emotions felt by themselves and by others in a way that could in certain circumstances compromise their health (e.g., Ciarrochi et al., 2002 ) and social effectiveness (Antonakis et al., 2009 ). Recent empirical evidence (Fiori & Ortony, 2016 ) showed that indeed high EI individuals were more strongly affected by incidental anger in forming impressions of an ambiguous target (study 1) and that they amplified the importance of emotion information, which affected their social perception (study 2). This characteristic associated with being high in EI was called “hypersensitivity ,” and it was deemed to have either positive or negative effects depending on the context (Fiori & Ortony, 2016 ).

Further investigation should also clarify which aspects of ability EI may be missing in current measurement and theorization. Ability EI tests, including the second generation, show moderate correlations with measures of intelligence, a finding that supports the conceptualization of EI as a form of intelligence. Interestingly, the component of intelligence most strongly correlated with measures of EI abilities – particularly the strategic branches of understanding and managing – is crystallized intelligence , or g c (Farrelly & Austin, 2007 ; MacCann, 2010 ; Mayer, Roberts, & Barsade, 2008 ; Roberts et al., 2006 , 2008 ), which suggests that current tests represent especially the acquired knowledge about emotions people possess. Indeed, items of the STEU and the STEM (as well as most items of the MSCEIT) require respondents to identify the best strategy to cope with emotionally involving situations described in a short vignette or to understand the emotion one would feel in a hypothetical scenario. Individuals may correctly answer such items relying on what they know about emotions, leaving open the question of whether they would be able to apply that knowledge in novel situations. For instance, individuals with Asperger’s syndrome undertaking ability EI training improved their EI scores while still lacking fundamental interpersonal skills (Montgomery, McCrimmon, Schwean, & Saklosfke, 2010 ). All in all, it appears that the STEU and the STEM measure performance in hypothetical situations, rather than actual performance, the former being more dependent on the declarative knowledge individuals possess about emotions (Fiori, 2009 ; Fiori & Antonakis, 2012 ). Tests employed to measure emotion recognition ability (e.g., JACBART) are not based on hypothetical scenarios but on pictures or videos of individuals showing emotions. Although these tests require the use of perceptual skills – differently from the tests of strategic EI abilities – they still show a significant association with g c  although to a lesser extent (Roberts et al., 2006 ). Indeed, individuals may rely on the knowledge they possess of how emotions are expressed to correctly identify emotions.

At the same time, ability EI measures show little associations with emotion-processing tasks that are more strongly related to the fluid component of intelligence, or g f , such as inspection time and selective attention to emotional stimuli (Farrelly & Austin, 2007 ; Fiori & Antonakis, 2012 ). For example, Fiori and Antonakis ( 2012 ) examined predictors of performance on a selective attention task requiring participants to ignore distracting emotion information. Results showed that fluid intelligence and the personality trait of openness predicted faster correct answers on the attentional task. Interestingly, none of the ability EI test facets (as measured with the MSCEIT) predicted performance, suggesting that the MSCEIT taps into something different from emotion information processing . Austin ( 2010 ) examined the associations of the STEU and the STEM with inspection time on an emotion perception task and found no relations for the STEM. The STEU scores predicted inspection time only at intermediate and long stimulus durations, but not at very brief exposures requiring rapid processing of the stimuli, suggesting that the STEU captures conscious rather than preconscious emotion information processing. MacCann, Pearce, and Roberts ( 2011 ) looked at the associations of the strategic EI abilities (measured with the STEU and STEM), fluid and crystallized intelligence , and emotion recognition tasks based on processing of visual and auditory emotional stimuli. Their results revealed an ability EI factor distinct from g, but with some subcomponents more strongly related to g f (particularly those involving visual perception of emotional stimuli ) and others to g c (those concerning strategic abilities and the auditory perception of emotional stimuli). This study suggested the presence of potentially distinct subcomponents of fluid and crystallized ability EI, although the authors did not investigate this possibility (MacCann et al., 2011 ).

The association between current ability EI tests and emotion-information processing tasks has not been systematically addressed in the literature and deserves further investigation. In fact, it is expected that high-EI individuals would have wider emotion knowledge but also stronger emotion-processing abilities in dealing with emotional stimuli, both accounting for how individuals perform in emotionally charged situations and each predicting distinct portions of emotionally intelligent behavior. The identification of a component of ability EI that is not (fully) captured by current tests is important because it would reveal an aspect of EI that is not measured (and therefore omitted) in current research. Yet, such a component may be relevant to predicting emotionally intelligent behavior. For example, Ortony, Revelle, and Zinbarg ( 2008 ), in making the case as to why ability EI would need a fluid , experiential component, cite the case of intelligent machines, which, on the basis of algorithmic processes, would be able to perform well on the ability EI test even without being able to experience any emotion. This example highlights the importance of measuring factors associated with emotional experience and the processing of emotion information, beyond emotion knowledge, which would be better captured by bottom-up processes generated by the encoding and treatment of emotion information.

In sum, research suggests that within a broad conceptualization of ability EI as a unique construct, there might be two distinct components : one related to top-down, higher-order reasoning about emotions, depending more strongly on acquired and culture-bound knowledge about emotions, hereafter named the crystallized component of ability EI (EI c , or emotion knowledge ), and another based on bottom-up perceptual responses to emotion information, requiring fast processing and hereafter named the fluid component of ability EI (EI f , or emotion information processing ) (see Fig. 2.2 ).

Conceptualization of ability EI as composed of a fluid (EI f ) and crystallized (EI c ) component, both affected by conscious and automatic emotion processes

An additional way to look at the relationship between the two components underlying ability EI is by considering what might account for such differences, namely, the type of processing (conscious vs. automatic) necessary for ability EI tests. The role automatic processes might play in EI has been approached only recently (Fiori, 2009 ), and it is progressively gaining recognition and interest especially in organizational research (Walter, Cole, & Humphrey, 2011 ; Ybarra et al., 2014 ). With respect to the relationship between a crystallized and a fluid component of ability EI, it is plausible that answers to current ability EI tests strongly rely on conscious reasoning about emotions, whereas performance on emotional tasks, such as inspection time and fast categorization of emotional stimuli, for example, relies more on automatic processing. This may be the case as individuals in the latter tasks provide answers without being fully aware of what drives their responses. Thus, current ability EI tests and emotion information processing tasks may be tapping into different ways of processing emotion information (conscious vs. automatic; see also Fiori, 2009 ). The extent to which current ability EI tests depend on controlled processes and are affected by cognitive load is still unaddressed (Ybarra et al., 2014 ). Given that no task is process pure (Jacoby, 1991 ), both controlled and automatic processes are likely to account for responses in current ability EI tests. However, such tests require great effort and deep reasoning about emotions and thus likely tap mostly into controlled processes.

The most important implication of the engagement of two types of processing in ability EI is that each of them may predict a different type of emotional performance. More specifically, ability EI tests that rely more on emotion knowledge or the crystallized component of EI may be more suited to predict effortful and consciously accessible emotional behavior, whereas tasks meant to “catch the mind in action” (Robinson & Neighbors, 2006 ), such as those based on emotion information processing , may account mostly for spontaneous and unintentional behavior . If this is the case, then current ability EI tests may predict to a greater extent consciously accessible performance and to a lower extent emotionally intelligent behaviors that depend on spontaneous/automatic processing (Fiori, 2009 ; Fiori & Antonakis, 2012 ). The hypothesized relationship is illustrated in Fig. 2.3 .

Hypothesized effects of the fluid (EI f ) and crystallized (EI c ) ability EI components on emotional behavior

The next generation of ability EI tests will hopefully incorporate more recent theoretical advancements related to additional components of EI – such as sub- or unconscious processes or the fluid , emotion-information processing component of EI. Some may ask how the perfect measure would look like. Knowing that EI is a complex construct, it seems unlikely that “one perfect” measure that would capture all the different components of EI is in the near future. It may be more realistic to aim for “several good” measures of EI, each of them capturing key aspects of this construct with satisfactory reliability and validity. Despite some noted theoretical and practical gaps in the current literature on ability EI, the construct of EI is still in its developmental stages. With increasing interest in EI’s potential for real-world applications and its growing literature, this domain of research provides a challenging yet exciting opportunity for innovative researchers.

Change history

31 december 2019.

Chapter 2 of this book has been converted to open access and the copyright holder has been changed to ‘The Author(s)’.The book has also been updated with these changes.

Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., & Caprara, G. V. (2015). Assessment of regulatory emotional self-efficacy beliefs: A review of the status of the art and some suggestions to move the field forward. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33 (1), 24–32.

Google Scholar  

Allen, V., Rahman, N., Weissman, A., MacCann, C., Lewis, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2015). The Situational Test of Emotional Management–Brief (STEM-B): Development and validation using item response theory and latent class analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 81 , 195–200.

Antonakis, J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2009). Does leadership need emotional intelligence? The Leadership Quarterly, 20 (2), 247–261.

Austin, E. J. (2010). Measurement of ability emotional intelligence: Results for two new tests. British Journal of Psychology, 101 (3), 563–578.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H., & Egan, V. (2005). Personality, well-being and health correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38 , 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.009

Article   Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

Bänziger, T., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2009). Emotion recognition from expressions in face, voice, and body: The Multimodal Emotion Recognition Test (MERT). Emotion, 9 , 691–704.

Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of Emotional-Social Intelligence (ESI). Psicothema, 18 , 13–25.

Bonanno, G. A., Papa, A., Lalande, K., Westphal, M., & Coifman, K. (2004). The importance of being flexible: The ability to both enhance and suppress emotional expression predicts long-term adjustment. Psychological Science, 15 (7), 482–487.

Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36 , 129–148.

Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Implications for personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5 , 88–103.

Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., Shiffman, S., Lerner, N., & Salovey, P. (2006). Relating emotional abilities to social functioning: A comparison of self-report and performance measures of emotional intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91 , 780–795. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.780

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brackett, M. A., Warner, R. M., & Bosco, J. S. (2005). Emotional intelligence and relationship quality among couples. Personal Relationships, 12 , 197–212.

Brasseur, S., Grégoire, J., Bourdu, R., & Mikolajczak, M. (2013). The profile of emotional competence (PEC): Development and validation of a self-reported measure that fits dimensions of emotional competence theory. PLoS One, 8 (5), e62635.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Burrus, J., Betnacourt, A., Holtzman, S., Minsky, J., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2012). Emotional intelligence relates to wellbeing: Evidence from the situational judgment test of emotional management. Applied Psychology. Health and Well-Being, 4 , 151–166.

Ciarrochi, J. V., Chan, A. Y. C., & Caputi, P. (2000). A critical evaluation of the emotional intelligence construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 28 , 539–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00119-1

Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 32 (2), 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00012-5

Cooper, R. K., & Sawaf, A. (1997). Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations . New York: Grosset/Putnam.

Côté, S., & Miners, C. T. (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51 (1), 1–28.

Côte, S., Lopes, P. N., Salovey, P., & Miners, C. T. H. (2010). Emotional intelligence and leadership emergence in small groups. The Leadership Quarterly, 21 , 496–508.

David, N., Bewernick, B. H., Cohen, M. X., Newen, A., Lux, S., Fink, G. R., … Vogeley, K. (2006). Neural representations of self versus other: Visual-spatial perspective taking and agency in a virtual ball-tossing game. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18 (6), 898–910.

Davies, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search of an elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 , 989–1015. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.989

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.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Ancoli, S. (1980). Facial signs of emotional experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (6), 1125–1134.

Fan, H., Jackson, T., Yang, X., Tang, W., & Zhang, J. (2010). The factor structure of the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test V 2.0 (MSCEIT): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 48 (7), 781–785.

Farrelly, D., & Austin, E. J. (2007). Ability EI as an intelligence? Associations of the MSCEIT with performance on emotion processing and social tasks and with cognitive ability. Cognition and Emotion, 21 (5), 1043–1063.

Feldman-Barrett, L., Niedenthal, P. M., & Winkielman, P. (Eds.). (2005). Emotion: conscious and unconscious . New York: Guilford Press.

Fernández-Berrocal, P., & Extremera, N. (2016). Ability emotional intelligence, depression, and well-being. Emotion Review, 8 , 311–315.

Fiori, M. (2009). A new look at emotional intelligence: A dual process framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13 , 21–44.

Fiori, M., & Antonakis, J. (2011). The ability model of emotional intelligence: Searching for valid measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 50 , 329–334.

Fiori, M., & Antonakis, J. (2012). Selective attention to emotional stimuli: What IQ and openness do, and emotional intelligence does not. Intelligence, 40 (3), 245–254.

Fiori, M., Antonietti, J. P., Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Hansenne, M., & Rossier, J. (2014). What is the ability emotional intelligence test (MSCEIT) good for? An evaluation using Item Response Theory. PLoSOne, 9 (6), e98827. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098827

Fiori, M. (2015). Emotional intelligence compensates for low IQ and boosts low emotionality individuals in a selfpresentation task. Personality and Individual Differences, 81 , 169–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.013

Fiori, M., & Ortony, A. (2016). Are emotionally intelligent individuals hypersensitive to emotions? Testing the “curse of emotion”. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2016 (1), 10023.

Freeland, E. M., Terry, R. A., & Rodgers, J. L. (2008). Emotional intelligence: What’s in a name? In J. C. Cassady & M. A. Eissa (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: Perspectives on educational and positive psychology (pp. 93–117). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing. US.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences . New York: Basic Books.

Gignac, G. E. (2005). Evaluating the MSCEIT V2.0 via CFA: Comment on Mayer et al. Emotion, 5 , 233–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.5.2.233

Gignac, G. E. (2008). Genos emotional intelligence inventory: technical manual . Sydney: NSW. Genos Press.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ . New York: Bantam Books.

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence . New York: Bantam Books.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2 , 271–299.

Grubb, W. L., III, & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The fakability of Bar-On’s Emotional Quotient Inventory Short Form: Catch me if you can. Human Performance, 20 , 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup2001_3

Ivcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. (2014). Predicting school success: Comparing conscientiousness, grit, and emotion regulation ability. Journal of Research in Personality, 52 , 29–36.

Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30 , 513–541.

Joseph, D. L., Jin, J., Newman, D. A., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2015). Why does self-reported emotional intelligence predict job performance? A meta-analytic investigation of mixed EI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100 (2), 298–342.

Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95 , 54–78.

Keefer, K. V. (2015). Self-report assessments of emotional competencies: A critical look at methods and meanings. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33 , 3–23.

Libbrecht, N., & Lievens, F. (2012). Validity evidence for the situational judgment test paradigm in emotional intelligence measurement. International Journal of Psychology, 47 , 438–447.

Libbrecht, N., Lievens, F., Carette, B., & Côté, S. C. (2014). Emotional intelligence predicts success in medical school. Emotion, 14 , 64–73.

Lloyd, G. (1979). The man of reason. Metaphilosophy, 10 (1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.1979.tb00062.x

Lopes, P. N., Cote, S., & Salovey, P. (2006). An ability model of emotional intelligence: Implications for assessment and training. In V. Druskat, F. Sala, & G. Mount (Eds.), Linking emotional intelligence and performance at work (pp. 53–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

MacCann, C. (2010). Further examination of emotional intelligence as a standard intelligence: A latent variable analysis of fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 49 (5), 490–496.

MacCann, C., Joseph, D. L., Newman, D. A., & Roberts, R. D. (2014). Emotional intelligence is a second-stratum factor of intelligence: Evidence from hierarchical and bifactor models. Emotion, 14 , 358–374.

MacCann, C., Lievens, F., Libbrecht, N., & Roberts, R. D. (2016). Differences between multimedia and text-based assessments of emotion management: An exploration with the Multimedia Emotion Management Assessment (MEMA). Cognition and Emotion, 30 (7), 1317–1331.

MacCann, C., Pearce, N., & D Roberts, R. (2011). Emotional intelligence as assessed by situational judgment and emotion recognition tests: Building the nomological net. Psihologijske Teme, 20 (3), 393–412.

MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2008). New paradigms for assessing emotional intelligence: Theory and data. Emotion, 8 , 540–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012746

MacCann, C., Wang, L., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2010). Emotional intelligence and the eye of the beholder: Comparing self- and parent-rated situational judgments in adolescents. Journal of Research in Personality, 44 , 673–676.

MacLean, P. D. (1949). Psychosomatic disease and the visceral brain: Recent developments bearing on the Papez theory of emotion. Psychosomatic Medicine, 11 , 338–353.

Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1 , 133–163.

Martins, A., Ramalho, N., & Morin, E. (2010). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the relationship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 49 , 554–564.

Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (2005). Cognitive vulnerability to emotional disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1 , 167–195.

Matsumoto, D., LeRoux, J., Wilson-Cohn, C., Raroque, J., Kooken, K., Ekman, P., et al. (2000). A new test to measure emotion recognition ability: Matsumoto and Ekman’s Japanese and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART). Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24 , 179–209.

Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S. H., Nakagawa, S., & 37 Members of the Multinational Study of Cultural Display Rules. (2008). Culture, emotion regulation, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 , 925–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.925

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., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators (pp. 3–31). New York: Basic Books.

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for intelligence. Intelligence, 27 , 267–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(99)00016-1

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2016). The ability model of emotional intelligence: Principles and updates. Emotion Review, 8 (4), 290–300.

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59 , 507–536.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3–34). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso emotional intelligence test manual . Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2005). The Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test – Youth Version (MSCEIT-YV), research version . Toronto, ON: Multi Health Systems.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist, 63 , 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.503

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, 3 , 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.97

Maillefer, A., Udayar, S., & Fiori, M. (submitted). Enhancing the prediction of emotionally intelligent behavior: The PAT framework of EI Involving Trait EI, Ability EI, and Emotion Information Processing.

Mikolajczak, M. (2009). Moving beyond the ability-trait debate: A three level model of emotional intelligence. E-Journal of Applied Psychology, 5 , 25–31.

Montgomery, J. M., McCrimmon, A. W., Schwean, V. L., & Saklofske, D. H. (2010). Emotional intelligence in Asperger Syndrome: Implications of dissonance between intellect and affect. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45 , 655–582.

Nemiah, J. C., Freyberger, H., & Sifneos, P. E. (1976). Alexithymia: A view of the psychosomatic process. In O. W. Hill (Ed.), Modern trends in psychosomatic medicine (Vol. 3, pp. 430–439). London, England: Butterworths.

Newman, D. A., Joseph, D. L., & MacCann, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence and job performance: The importance of emotion regulation and emotional labor context. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3 (2), 159–164.

Nowicki, S., & Duke, M. P. (1994). Individual Differences in the Nonverbal Communication of Affect The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy Scale. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18 , 9–35.

O’Boyle, E. H., Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., Hawver, T. H., & Story, P. A. (2011). The relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32 , 788–818.

Ortony, A., Revelle, W. & Zinbarg, R. (2008) Why emotional intelligence needs a fluid component. In Matthews, G., Roberts, R., Zeidner, M. (eds) Emotional ... Revelle, W. (2007) Experimental approaches to the study of personality, In B. Robins, C. Fraley, and R. Krueger, Personality Research Methods, Guilford. p. 37–61.

Palmer, B., Gignac, G., Manocha, R., & Stough, C. (2005). A psychometric evaluation of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test version 2.0. Intelligence, 33 , 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2004.11.003

Papadogiannis, P. K., Logan, D., & Sitarenios, G. (2009). An ability model of emotional intelligence: A rationale, description, and application of the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 9–40). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_3

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15 , 425–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.416

Petrides, K. V., Perez-Gonzalez, J. C., & Furnham, A. (2007). On the criterion and incremental validity of trait emotional intelligence. Cognition and Emotion, 21 , 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930601038912

Rivers, S. E., Brackett, M. A., Reyes, M. R., Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2012). Measuring emotional intelligence in early adolescence with the MSCEIT-YV: Psychometric properties and relationship with academic performance and psychosocial functioning. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30 (4), 344–366.

Rivers, S. E., Brackett, M. A., Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (2007). Measuring emotional intelligence as a set of mental abilities. In G. Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 230–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roberts, R. D., Schulze, R., O’Brien, K., MacCann, C., Reid, J., & Maul, A. (2006). Exploring the validity of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) with established emotions measures. Emotion, 6 (4), 663–669.

Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2007). Emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. In G. Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 419–474). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roberts, R. D., Schulze, R., & MacCann, C. (2008). The measurement of emotional intelligence: A decade of progress? In G. J. Boyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality . New York: Sage.

Robinson, M. D., & Neighbors, C. (2006). Catching the mind in action: Implicit methods in personality research and assessment. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 115–125). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Rosenthal, R., Hall, J. A., DiMateo, M. R., Rogers, L. P., & Archer, D. (1979). Sensitivity to nonverbal communication. The PONS test . Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Rossen, E., Kranzler, J. H., & Algina, J. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test V2.0 (MSCEIT). Personality and Individual Differences, 44 , 1258–1269.

Salovey, P., & Grewal, D. (2005). The science of emotional intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14 , 281–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00381.x

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9 , 185–211. https://doi.org/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG

Schlegel, K. (2016). Comment: Looking beyond the ability EI model facilitates the development of new performance-based tests. Emotion Review, 8 (4), 302–303.

Schlegel, K., Fontaine, J. R., & Scherer, K. R. (2017). The nomological network of emotion recognition ability. European Journal of Psychological Assessment .

Schlegel, K., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2014). Introducing the Geneva Emotion Recognition Test: An example of Rasch-based test development. Psychological Assessment, 26 , 666–672.

Schlegel, K., & Scherer, K. R. (2015). Introducing a short version of the Geneva Emotion Recognition Test (GERT-S): Psychometric properties and construct validation. Behavior Research Methods, 48 , 1383–1392. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0646-4

Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence . New York: Viking.

Stough, C., Saklofske, D. H., & Parker, J. D. A. (2009). A brief analysis of 20 years of emotional intelligence: An introduction to assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 3–8). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_1

Tamietto, M., & De Gelder, B. (2010). Neural bases of the non-conscious perception of emotional signals. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11 (10), 697–709.

Thorndike, E. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s Magazine, 140 , 227–235.

Vesely, A. K. (2011). Differential effects of perfectionism and anxiety on trait and ability emotional intelligence (Master’s thesis). Available from DSpace at University of Calgary.

Vesely-Maillefer, A. K. (2015). Striving for teaching success: Enhancing emotional intelligence in pre-service teachers (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Western Ontario.

Vogeley, K., Bussfeld, P., Newen, A., Herrmann, S., Happé, F., Falkai, P., … Zilles, K. (2001). Mind reading: Neural mechanisms of theory of mind and self-perspective. NeuroImage, 14 (1), 170–181.

Walter, F., Cole, M. S., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Sine qua non of leadership or folderol? Academy of Management Perspectives, 25 , 45–59.

Ybarra, O., Kross, E., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2014). The “big idea” that is yet to be: Toward a more motivated, contextual, and dynamic model of emotional intelligence. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28 , 93–107. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0106

Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35 , 161–175.

Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., Roberts, R. D., & MacCann, C. (2003). Development of emotional intelligence: Toward a multi-level investment model. Human Development, 46 , 69–96.

Zeidner, M., Roberts, R. D., & Matthews, G. (2008). The science of emotional intelligence: Current consensus and controversies. European Psychologist, 13 , 64–78.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This chapter benefited from the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant no 100014_165605 awarded to Marina Fiori).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

Marina Fiori & Ashley K. Vesely-Maillefer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marina Fiori .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada

Kateryna V. Keefer

James D. A. Parker

Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada

Donald H. Saklofske

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution [4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)], which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Fiori, M., Vesely-Maillefer, A.K. (2018). Emotional Intelligence as an Ability: Theory, Challenges, and New Directions. In: Keefer, K., Parker, J., Saklofske, D. (eds) Emotional Intelligence in Education. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90633-1_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90633-1_2

Published : 14 July 2018

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-90631-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-90633-1

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 04 June 2021

Emotional intelligence: predictor of employees’ wellbeing, quality of patient care, and psychological empowerment

• Leila Karimi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2364-504X 1 ,
• Sandra G. Leggat 1 ,
• Timothy Bartram 2 ,
• Leila Afshari 3 ,
• Sarah Sarkeshik 1 &
• Tengiz Verulava 4  

BMC Psychology volume  9 , Article number:  93 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

21k Accesses

18 Citations

84 Altmetric

Metrics details

The study explored the role of emotional intelligence (EI) on employees’ perceived wellbeing and empowerment, as well as their performance, by measuring their quality of care.

The baseline data for the present project was collected from 78 staff of a Victorian aged care organization in Australia. Self-administered surveys were used to assess participants’ emotional intelligence, general well-being, psychological empowerment, quality of care, and demographic characteristics. The model fit was assessed using structural equation modelling by AMOS (v 24) software.

The evaluated model confirmed that emotional intelligence predicts the employees’ psychological empowerment, wellbeing, and quality of care in a statistically significant way.

Conclusions

The current research indicates that employees with higher EI will more likely deliver a better quality of patient care. Present research extends the current knowledge of the psychological empowerment and wellbeing of employees with a particular focus on emotional intelligence as an antecedent in an under-investigated setting like aged care setting in Australia.

Peer Review reports

Today's organisations are under increasing pressure to expand the quality of work and ability to compete in the workplace that is continuously changing. These changes involve increased dependency on social skills and new technologies, continuous competency development, risk-taking, networking, and innovation. They also include changes in organisational structure and relationships, such as reduced hierarchies, blurred boundaries, moves to teams as basic building blocks, and increased complexity of work. As the current pandemic has shown, they also embrace profound and fast changes to the way we work in the face of crises and organisations are looking at new strategies to promote such qualities as wellbeing, psychological empowerment and work engagement which are antecedents of job satisfaction and quality of patient care [ 1 , 2 , 3 ].

There is strong evidence that EI is an important factor in improving work performance [ 4 ]. Research indicates that higher EI leads to enhanced psychological wellbeing and higher rates of positive emotional states [ 5 , 6 , 7 ], and that emotional intelligence training can develop meaningfulness at work and happiness [ 8 , 9 ]. In a meta-analysis, O'Boyle et al. [ 10 ] found overall validity for three streams of EI research (ability measures, self- and peer-report measures, and mixed models) predicting job performance equally well. EI also influences the success with which employees interact with colleagues, the strategies they use to manage conflict and stress, and positively contributes to several aspects of workplace performance [ 11 ].

Researching the relationship between EI and job satisfaction among nurses, Gong et al. [ 12 ] examined the mediating effect of psychological empowerment and work engagement in this association. Using structural equation modelling, they found that high trait EI may improve occupational wellbeing through the chain-mediating effects of these two constructs. A 2017 meta-analysis of EI and work attitudes has found that all three types of EI are significantly related to job satisfaction [ 13 ]. The results indicate that workers with higher EI have higher job satisfaction, higher organizational commitment, and are less likely to change jobs. Another recent study has found statistically significant positive relationships between EI, empowering leadership, psychological empowerment and work engagement [ 14 ]. This finding suggests that EI training of health workers to improve psychological empowerment and work engagement could help their organisations to improve their relationships with patients, provide better care, and reduce staff turnover. Emotional intelligence may be most important in the service sector and in other jobs where employees interact with customers. Several studies found a positive association between the EI of nurses and service quality and patients' compliance with care [ 15 , 16 , 17 ].

There is evidence that communication effectiveness and job satisfaction of the employees are related to their managers' EI [ 18 ]. Research shows that leaders who build effective interpersonal relationships with those in lower rank are using EI to lead individuals to work more effectively and with increased overall job satisfaction [ 19 , 20 ]. Udod et al. [ 21 ] found that leaders who use EI to build interpersonal relationships with their subordinates achieve higher overall job satisfaction and better work effectiveness among those employees. These positive changes are strongly influenced by the leaders who value and respect their employee’s opinions, abilities, personal emotions, and character. Increased empowerment was directly related to the support and level of autonomy given by the leader and a work environment allowing career growth and development [ 21 ].

There has been much interest in empowerment in the workplace for a variety of reasons. Studies found that empowering subordinates contributes to managerial and organisational effectiveness. There is a significant relationship between psychological empowerment and work engagement. Alotaibi et al. [ 14 ] investigated the role of EI and empowering leadership (EL) in improving psychological empowerment and work engagement. They found significant positive relationships between EI, EL, psychological empowerment and work engagement, suggesting that EI is a good predictor of EL and psychological empowerment, while EL supports work engagement.

Staff empowerment is linked to work behaviours, attitudes, and performance. It tends to have a direct effect on performance and indirect effects through its influence on job satisfaction and innovativeness [ 22 ]. In healthcare, employee empowerment denotes the level to which caregivers have the authority to make decisions, such as evaluating the patient condition and determining the most suitable treatment. A review of studies exploring the effect of structural empowerment of nurses on quality outcomes in hospitals found that there are positive associations between the structural empowerment of nurses and the quality of outcomes, such as patient safety, work effectiveness, efficiency, and patient‐centeredness of patient care in hospitals [ 23 ].

Quality of healthcare can be defined in many ways. The Institute of Medicine defines quality as the "degree to which health services for individuals and populations increase the likelihood of desired health outcomes and are consistent with current professional knowledge” [ 24 ]. A more recent study defined quality of healthcare, using various healthcare stakeholder perceptions and expectations, as “consistently delighting the patient by providing efficacious, effective and efficient healthcare services according to the latest clinical guidelines and standards, which meet the patient's needs and satisfies providers” [ 25 ].

Many nursing studies have shown an association between EI and nurses' quality of care. A 2017 study examining the relationship between patient satisfaction and EI skills of nurses found a strong correlation between the satisfaction scores and emphatic concern, utilization of emotions, and emotional awareness subheadings of the patients [ 26 ]. A 2018 study, exploring the role of EI in engagement in nurses, found that nurses with higher levels of EI also scored higher in engagement. The greatest predictor of engagement was the interpersonal factor [ 27 ]. A study investigating emotional labour among Australian community nurses found that emotional labour and EI predicts wellbeing as well as job-stress [ 28 ]. With the current shortage in the nursing workforce, effective EI training may provide the key to keeping nurses in their jobs while helping them reduce job-stress and burnout levels. Emotional intelligence also seems to correlate highly with wellbeing in nurses, has a positive correlation with work performance and the ability to positively affect patient safety [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. Today, EI is one of the most sought-after skills in the workplace. When it comes to healthcare workers and nurses, increased EI may save lives, not to mention relieve stress.

The model fit was in this study was assessed using structural equation modelling (SEM). SEM has been used successfully in research involving EI and nurses. For example, a 2016 study used SEM to analyse the goodness of fit of the hypothetical model of nurses' turnover intention. The results suggest that increasing EI in nurses might significantly decrease nurses' turnover intention by reducing the effect of emotional labour on burnout [ 32 ]. Another study used SEM to examine the mediatory role of positive and negative affect at work. The researchers found that these mediate the relationship between EI and job satisfaction with positive affect exerting a stronger influence [ 33 ].

The present research project investigated the importance of EI as an antecedent to wellbeing, psychological empowerment and quality of care. The research is one of the few studies in Australia in a much under-researched area of aged care setting. It contributes to international literature by examining the EI link with the three constructs. Thus, it was hypothesised that:

Higher emotional intelligence is a predictor of better wellbeing,

Higher emotional intelligence is a predictor of psychological empowerment,

Higher emotional intelligence leads to better quality of patient care among aged care staff.

This study aimed to further explore the role of EI on psychological empowerment and the quality of care and wellbeing in an aged care setting. The current research used a sample of 78 participants of a Victorian aged care facility. The workers from all levels of the organisation having contact with the residents were included, including personal care workers (PCW), nurses, and lifestyle, food and safety staff.

The demographic characteristic of the staff are detailed in Table 1 . The staffs' age on average was 45.7 years, and they had almost 12 years of experience of working in their position, with 25 working hours per week. Majority of the staff were female (82%), nursing and personal care workers (61%).

General wellbeing

The General Well-being Questionnaire (GWBQ), developed by Cox et al. [ 34 ]. The GWBQ is a scale with 24 questions that assess general malaise frequency on a 5-Likert response where a high score is indicating lower wellbeing.

• Psychological empowerment

Psychological empowerment Scale [ 35 ] for evaluating the perceived empowerment on a 5-likert response using 12 statements, where higher score represent higher level of empowerment.

Patient satisfaction

Patient Satisfaction with Nursing Care Quality Questionnaire (PSNCQQ) [ 36 ] was used to measure the quality of patient care. The terminology was modified slightly to make it suitable for use in an aged care population. Seventeen items were adapted (two items related to the discharge, and after-discharge coordination were removed as were not relevant to the aged care setting); higher scores refer to a higher quality of patient care.

Emotional quotient inventory (EQ-i 2.0®)

The EQ-i 2.0 used in this study which assesses the social and emotional elements [ 37 ]. Sing 133 questions on a Likert response of 1 (never/rarely) to 5 (always/almost always). The EQ-i 2.0 is a self-report measure to measure constructs related to EI. A total score of the EQ-I 2.0 was used in this study to measure emotional intelligence (EI).

Validity and reliability

All the surveys used in this study are pre-validated scales. However, the reliability of the scales was also assessed in this study. The study scales showed excellent reliability: The General Wellbeing Questionnaire (GWBQ) (α = 0.92) and Psychological Empowerment (α = 0.92), PSNCQQ (α = 0.91).

Ethical considerations

The Human Research Ethics Committee of the participating organisation was obtained for this study.

Data analysis

Structural equation modelling (SEM) by AMOS (v 24) software was used to assess the model fit. Chi-square as a goodness of fit statistics provides a good description of the data. A non-significant chi-square means the proposed hypothesis of model fit is supported, and the null model (no relationship between constructs) is rejected. However, chi-square is highly influenced by sample size; therefore, a more robust measure of the relative chi-square (CMIN/DF) is used for model fit evaluation. Besides, other fit indices are proposed, including the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI) and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). RMSEA is the suggested fit indices representing absolute fit; CFI is recommended for model comparison. A combination of these fit indices, such as CMIN/DF, RMSEA and CFI, are commonly used in research. The AIC is another measure of fit that was used for this study. The smaller value of AIC indicates a superior model fit [ 38 ].

Normality and bootstrapping approach

The normal distribution of data and outliers were assessed before proceeding with the model fit evaluation. Although the data were within the normal threshold at univariate level (where kurtosis and skewness were smaller than 7 and 3 in order), multivariate critical ratio and kurtosis were greater than 1.96 and 5 in order, indicating violation of the normality assumptions. Hence the bootstrapping procedure was implemented due to violation of normality and relatively small sample size (n = 78), to assess the parameter estimates. The number of bootstrapping subsamples needs to be high enough to deliver valid results. They must be higher than the number of valid observations in the original dataset (in this study, higher than 78). As a general rule, 500 bootstrap samples are recommended in SEM [ 39 ]. In this study, the bootstrapping procedure and the Bollen-Stine bootstrap procedure were implemented to test the proposed model.

Model evaluation

Figure  1 presents the model used in this study and evaluated by SEM. The model fit evaluation indicated χ 2 /df less than 3 which represents great goodness of model fit (χ 2 /df (19) = 1.39). The fit indices in Table 2 also show acceptable fit for the model (CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.07 (0.05, 0.06). RMSEA less than 0.08 and 0.05 & CFI of greater than 0.90 and 0.95 were considered as marginal and good fit respectively for this study. AIC for the proposed model was significantly smaller which indicated a better model fit (AIC = 76.53). The standardised regression weights were all significant (p < 0.05) and presented in Table 3.

Path coefficients of the proposed model. Note : *higher score in wellbeing represents lower wellbeing and high illness

The paths of factor loadings of emotional intelligence to wellbeing, quality of care and psychological empowerment were all significant (p < 0.05). Figure  1 presents the standardised factor loadings of the model. Psychological empowerment deemed to be significantly related to EI skills (β = 0.34). Quality of care was correlated positively with EI skills where higher EI skills were associated with a higher level of quality of care (β = 0.26). Wellbeing (ill health) was negatively associated with EI skills where higher EI associated with the lower level of illness (β = 0.26).

The bootstrapping procedure showed relatively stable parameter estimates, demonstrating the validity of the results. The Bollen-Stine approach showed that the evaluated model was not significantly changed from the model resulting from 500 bootstrapping samples (p = 0.13).

The present project, aimed to explore the role of EI with wellbeing, quality of patient care and psychological empowerment among a group of Australian aged care employees. The evaluated model confirmed that emotional intelligence is related to all three variables in a statistically significant but moderate way. Both psychological empowerment and quality of care were significantly related to EI skills. Wellbeing (ill health) was significantly predicted by EI skills.

This study shows that those with a high level of EI are possibly more psychologically empowered.

According to Spreitzer [ 35 ] and Kanter [ 40 ], psychologically empowered employees are driven by intrinsic motivation, and they are more likely to perform effectively [ 22 , 41 ]. However, the results need to be treated with caution because SEM-based analyses reported here are estimates based on cross-sectional data; they do not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of a causal relationship.

The results also suggest that if EI is related to employees' wellbeing, empowerment and quality of care, then implementation of interventions for employees in the healthcare sector to learn and practice EI skills seem to be valuable for employee empowerment and consequently for enhancing employees' performance. This finding has been substantiated by an integrative literature review by Kline et al. [ 42 ] who found that EI is central to nursing practice and should be included in nursing education. Evidence shows that EI impacts on ethical decision-making, critical thinking, evidence and knowledge use in practice.

The study also provided evidence for a significant association between EI and wellbeing of employees, demonstrating that staff with higher EI are more likely to have better emotional and psychological wellness. This finding is in line with recent studies such as Karimi et al. [ 28 ], [ 43 ], that reported a significant relationship between EI and wellbeing among nurses and aged care staff.

Finally, the findings indicate that the employees' EI is related to the quality of the care for the aged care residents. Specifically, the care provided by emotionally intelligent employees is more likely to result in desired outcomes for the residents and consequently in an increased level of residents' satisfaction with the quality of patient care.

Our study extends the current knowledge of psychological empowerment and wellbeing of employees with a particular focus on emotional intelligence as an antecedent. Our findings demonstrate that employees' emotional intelligence not only relates to the residents' satisfaction with the quality of patient care but also seems to be associated with employees' psychological empowerment and wellbeing. This indicates that EI is an important skill to be learnt in order to generate the desired outcomes for two main stakeholders in the aged care sector: the residents and the employees.

Although bootstrapping procedure used to report more stable and valid results, the relatively small sample size and lack of previous studies on Australian aged care made the generalizability of the findings limited. Future studies on aged care setting with a bigger sample size is recommended. In addition, longitudinal studies assessing the EI training skills on employees' mental health and performance is strongly recommended in order to shed more light in this area.

The aged care industry is facing significant challenges with difficulties in staff retention, recruitment, and most importantly, in the quality of patient care. The current study highlighted the need for paying attention to non-clinical skills such as EI (in addition to clinical) for quality care improvement in the aged care industry as well as improving psychological empowerment and wellbeing. The findings suggest that EI contributes to employee empowerment and quality of patient care and adds valuable skills that are important in working with aged care residents and other stakeholders.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

• Emotional intelligence

The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

Comparative fit index

General Well-being Questionnaire

Emotional quotient inventory

Moura D, Orgambídez A, Jesus S. Psychological empowerment and work engagement as predictors of work satisfaction: a sample of hotel employees. J Spat Organ Dyn. 2015;III:125–34.

Google Scholar  

Bartram T, Karimi L, Leggat SG, Stanton P. Social identification: linking high performance work systems, psychological empowerment and patient care. Int J Hum Resour Manag. 2014;25(17):2401–19.

Article   Google Scholar  

Scheepers RA, Boerebach BCM, Arah OA, Heineman MJ, Lombarts KMJMH. A systematic review of the impact of physicians’ occupational well-being on the quality of patient care. Int J Behav Med. 2015;22(6):683–98.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Karimi L, Leggat SG, Bartram T, Rada J. The effects of emotional intelligence training on the job performance of Australian aged care workers. Health Care Manage Rev. 2020;45(1):41–51.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Lin DT, Liebert CA, Tran J, Lau JN, Salles A. Emotional intelligence as a predictor of resident well-being. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223(2):352–8.

Guerra-Bustamante J, León-Del-Barco B, Yuste-Tosina R, López-Ramos VM, Mendo-Lázaro S. Emotional intelligence and psychological well-being in adolescents. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(10):1720.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cejudo J, Rodrigo-Ruiz D, López-Delgado ML, Losada L. Emotional intelligence and its relationship with levels of social anxiety and stress in adolescents. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(6):56.

Thory K. Developing meaningfulness at work through emotional intelligence training. Int J Train Dev. 2016;20(1):58–77.

Callea A, De Rosa D, Ferri G, Lipari F, Costanzi M. Are more intelligent people happier? Emotional intelligence as mediator between need for relatedness, happiness and flourishing. Sustainability. 2019;11(4):56.

O’Boyle EH, Humphrey RH, Pollack JM, Hawver TH, Story PA. The relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. 2010;32(5):788–818.

Brackett MA, Rivers SE, Salovey P. Emotional intelligence: implications for personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. 2011;5(1):88–103.

Gong Y, Wu Y, Huang P, Yan X, Luo Z. Psychological empowerment and work engagement as mediating roles between trait emotional intelligence and job satisfaction. Front Psychol. 2020;11(232):56.

Miao C, Humphrey RH, Qian S. A meta-analysis of emotional intelligence and work attitudes. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2017;90(2):177–202.

Alotaibi SM, Amin M, Winterton J. Does emotional intelligence and empowering leadership affect psychological empowerment and work engagement? Leadersh Org Dev J. 2020;41(8):971–91.

Adams KL, Iseler JI. The relationship of bedside nurses’ emotional intelligence with quality of care. J Nurs Care Qual. 2014;29(2):174–81.

Warren B. Healthcare Emotional Intelligence: Its role in patient outcomes and organizational success. 2014. http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/healthcare-emotional-intelligence-its-role-in-patient-outcomes-and-organizational-success.html .

Ezzatabadi MR, Bahrami MA, Hadizadeh F, Arab M, Nasiri S, Amiresmaili M, et al. Nurses’ emotional intelligence impact on the quality of hospital services. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2012;14(12):758–63.

Jorfi H, Yacco HFB, Shah IM. Role of gender in emotional intelligence: relationship among emotional intelligence, communication effectiveness and job satisfaction. Int J Manag. 2012;29(4):590.

Cummings G. Investing relational energy: the hallmark of resonant leadership. Nurs Leadersh Tor Ont. 2004;17(4):76–87.

Heckemann B, Schols JM, Halfens RJ. A reflective framework to foster emotionally intelligent leadership in nursing. J Nurs Manag. 2015;23(6):744–53.

Udod SA, Hammond-Collins K, Jenkins M. Dynamics of emotional intelligence and empowerment: the perspectives of middle managers. SAGE Open. 2020;10(2):2158244020919508.

Fernandez S, Moldogaziev T. Employee empowerment, employee attitudes, and performance: testing a causal model. Public Adm Rev. 2013;73(3):490–506.

Goedhart NS, van Oostveen CJ, Vermeulen H. The effect of structural empowerment of nurses on quality outcomes in hospitals: a scoping review. J Nurs Manag. 2017;25(3):194–206.

Shaneyfelt TM. Building bridges to quality. JAMA. 2001;286(20):2600–1.

Mohammad MA. Healthcare service quality: towards a broad definition. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2013;26(3):203–19.

Oyur CG. The relationship between patient satisfaction and emotional intelligence skills of nurses working in surgical clinics. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:1363–8.

Pérez-Fuentes MDC, Molero Jurado MDM, Gázquez Linares JJ, Oropesa Ruiz NF. The role of emotional intelligence in engagement in nurses. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(9):1915.

PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Karimi L, Leggat SG, Donohue L, Farrell G, Couper GE. Emotional rescue: the role of emotional intelligence and emotional labour on well-being and job-stress among community nurses. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70(1):176–86.

Codier E. Emotional intelligence: why walking the talk transforms nursing care. Am Nurse Today. 2012;7(4):56.

Codier E, Codier DD. Could emotional intelligence make patients safer? Am J Nurs. 2017;117(7):56.

Ann Bernasyl EV. The relationship between nurses’ emotional intelligence and their perceived work performance. Univ Visayas J Res. 2015;9(1):56.

Hong E, Lee YS. The mediating effect of emotional intelligence between emotional labour, job stress, burnout and nurses’ turnover intention. Int J Nurs Pract. 2016;22(6):625–32.

Kafetsios K, Zampetakis LA. Emotional intelligence and job satisfaction: testing the mediatory role of positive and negative affect at work. Pers Individ Differ. 2008;44(3):712–22.

Cox T, Thirlaway M, Gotts G, Cox S. The nature and assessment of general well-being. J Psychosom Res. 1983;27(5):353–9.

Spreitzer GM. Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Acad Manag J. 1995;38(5):1442–65.

Laschinger HKS. Job and career satisfaction and turnover intentions of newly graduated nurses. J Nurs Manag. 2012;20:472–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01293.x .

Statistical Solutions. Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) 2.0 2015. http://www.statisticssolutions.com/emotional-quotient-inventory-eq-i-2-0/ .

Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki BF, editors. Second international symposium on information theory. Budapest: Academiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267–81.

Cheung GW, Lau RS. Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organ Res Methods. 2007;11(2):296–325.

Kanter R. Power failure in management circuits. Harv Bus Rev. 1979;57:65–75.

Kirkman BL, Rosen B. A model of work team empowerment. In: Woodman RW, Pasmore WA, editors. Research in organizational change and development, vol. 10. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press; 1997. p. 131–67.

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press; 1998.

Karimi L, Bartram T, Leggat S. The effects of emotional intelligence training on the job performance of Australian aged care workers. Health Care Manag Rev. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000200 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The researchers acknowledge the aged care staff and residents and their next of kin who participated in this research and kindly shared their time and experience.

Part of the project was funded by the Royal Freemasons Aged Care (3.1062). The funding body had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Rd, Bundoora, VIC, Australia

Leila Karimi, Sandra G. Leggat & Sarah Sarkeshik

School of Management, College of Business, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

Timothy Bartram

School of Business, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

Leila Afshari

School of Medicine and Healthcare Management, Caucasus University, Tbilisi, Georgia

Tengiz Verulava

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors contributed to the study and development of the paper. All authors have agreed on the final version of the paper and either had: (1) substantial contributions to conception and design (TB, SL, LK), acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data (LK, LA, SS, TV) and/or (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content (SL, TB, LK, TV, LA, SS). All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leila Karimi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The Human Research Ethics Committee of the participating organisation was obtained for this study. Participation in the study was voluntary and written consent was obtained for each participant.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Karimi, L., Leggat, S.G., Bartram, T. et al. Emotional intelligence: predictor of employees’ wellbeing, quality of patient care, and psychological empowerment. BMC Psychol 9 , 93 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00593-8

Download citation

Received : 17 May 2020

Accepted : 14 May 2021

Published : 04 June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00593-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Quality of patient care

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Emotional Intelligence

What Is Emotional Intelligence and Why Does It Matter?

Learn to embrace your emotions and communicate effectively despite them..

Posted May 31, 2024 | Reviewed by Tyler Woods

• When stuck in a strong emotion, we are more likely to do and say things we regret.
• Learning how to manage strong emotions is a key tenet of emotional intelligence.
• Emotional intelligence involves awareness of emotions, emotion regulation, and effective communication.
• Emotional intelligence is teachable and is correlated with stronger and more satisfying social support.

When was the last time you felt consumed by an overwhelming emotion and lost your ability to think, listen, engage with others, or problem-solve? Maybe you were engulfed in anger , your body charged up with adrenaline, your muscles tensed and ready for action? In clinical psychology terms, we call this state of overwhelm emotion dysregulation (Linehan, Bohus, & Lynch, 2007).

Emotion dysregulation is a natural reaction that occurs when you are flooded by strong emotions that dictate your actions. In the midst of emotion dysregulation, your emotions can cloud your ability to think clearly, address the triggering situation effectively, and determine how best to manage your emotions. When we are stuck in emotion dysregulation or blindsided by it, we’re more likely to do and say things we regret, resulting in more emotional suffering later. This subsequent suffering often comes in the form of embarrassment , disappointment, sadness, or shame . Moreover, we are especially prone to emotion dysregulation during challenging conversations with the people we care about deeply or when the topic is something important to us.

The Challenge: Emotion Dysregulation

So, what happens in the body when we’re emotionally dysregulated? Your body is equipped with a natural reaction to intense emotions and stressors called fight, flight, or freeze. When faced with high levels of emotional distress, your nervous system turns on this fight-flight-or-freeze mode, attempting to protect you from the stressor. Stressful interactions, such as an argument with your partner, feeling unappreciated by your boss, or a snide comment from a friend, can quickly activate our nervous system to help us react to and address the stressor. A rapid-fire nervous system can be quite helpful when you are faced with a true threat to your safety, such as encountering a bear while on a hike. However, sometimes our nervous system activates too frequently, misinterprets a stressor as threatening when it isn’t, or overreacts to small threats or challenges. In these circumstances, nervous system activation can become a barrier to effective communication.

In fight mode, your body will prepare to defend you, verbally or physically. This could look like lashing out at others, firing off a harsh email to a colleague who’s annoyed you, dismissing someone’s concerns, or getting defensive.

In flight mode, your body sends signals to quickly remove yourself from the stressful situation. Examples of this include abruptly leaving the room, ending the conversation, or canceling something you’d planned to attend at the last minute.

In freeze mode, you might feel frozen and immobilized and unsure of what to say. Freeze mode occurs when your body’s signals send messages of system overload. Freezing can look like shutting down, taking in minimal, if any, information during an interaction, or difficulty finding the words to respond.

Fight-flight-or-freeze reactions are automatic and natural; as much as we may wish we could control when they are triggered, we cannot. Similarly to responding to our emotions, we can’t turn this mechanism off, but we can learn how to respond to nervous system activation effectively with repeated practice.

As much as we may wish we didn’t have to feel certain emotions, they have many benefits. Emotions can provide vital messages about our values, needs, and interests. In fact, sometimes our emotion messages are crucial. Anger is a great example. Anger can bring our attention to an injustice, a boundary violation, or threats to our safety, amongst other things. If we don’t spend time experiencing anger when we feel it and exploring its message (without being reactive and emotionally dysregulated), we can easily miss that message.

When an emotion message isn’t seen or heard, we experience more and more challenging emotions. If we don’t notice or listen to the message, our emotions will get louder and louder until we do. Returning to anger again, there may be a variety of messages. Is the message to assert ourselves? To change jobs because our boss is a micromanager and we’re losing confidence in our abilities? Does our anger tell us to advocate for others? The messages we can decode from our emotions can help us clarify our values and point us in the direction of honoring them.

The Solution: Emotional Intelligence

As you surely know, emotion dysregulation is an intense, overwhelming experience. When it occurs during interactions with others, it can derail an important conversation, result in ruptures in relationships, set the stage for misunderstandings, and lead to saying and doing things we regret, causing more suffering in the future.

This might be surprising to read, but having strong emotions is actually not the problem. Our agency lies in how we choose to respond to our emotions. Thankfully, there is a pause button we can all access, with repeated practice. Once you’re aware of your fight-flight-or-freeze reactions, you can learn how to respond to them effectively. The key is emotional intelligence .

So, what exactly is emotional intelligence (EI)? And how do you improve in it? Emotional intelligence is a combination of the following skills:

• Awareness of our emotions and acceptance of them
• The ability to manage them when they are strong or overwhelming
• The ability to communicate effectively verbally and non-verbally despite the presence of strong or overwhelming emotions.

Put simply, EI involves managing emotional discomfort while communicating skillfully and adjusting your communication approach to suit the context. If this sounds complicated, rest assured, EI is teachable. Not only can you improve your skills in a short period of time, you can also measure EI to track your progress over time (Mattingly and Kraiger 2019).

Emotional Intelligence and Well-Being

Emotional intelligence has a host of benefits. Research shows that it serves as a buffer against developing mental and physical health issues (Mao, Huang, and Chen, 2021). In a large meta-analysis (with a sample of 7,898), researchers found that higher EI was associated with better mental health and better physical health (Schutte et al., 2007). People with higher emotional intelligence tend to have more positive mood, higher self-esteem , and can more effectively recover from negative experiences (Schutte et al., 2002); higher EI is related to greater resilience in the face of distress. Lastly, people with higher emotional intelligence have more social support and are more satisfied with the social support they have (Ciarocchi, Chan, Bajgar, 2001).

What can we take away from this information? Emotional intelligence supports resilience-building and is a protective shield against developing mental and physical health issues. Additionally, emotional intelligence can assist in having a stronger social support network. For a social species that is heavily reliant on collaboration , communication, and connection, emotional intelligence is a foundational skill set we can all learn and benefit from.

Ciarocchi, J., A. Y. C. Chan, and J. Bajgar. 2001. “Measuring Emotional Intelligence in Adolescents.” Personality and Individual Differences 31(7): 1105–1119.

Linehan, M., Bohus, M., & Lynch, T. (2007). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Pervasive Emotion Dysregulation. In Gross, J. & Thompson, R.A. (Eds.), Handbook of Emotion Regulation (p. 581-605). Guilford Press: New York, NY.

Mao, L., L. Huang, and Q. Chen. 2021. “Promoting Resilience and Lower Stress in Nurses and Improving Inpatient Experience Through Emotional Intelligence Training in China: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” Nurse Education Today 107: 105–130.

Mattingly, V., and K. Kraiger. 2019. “Can Emotional Intelligence Be Trained? A Meta-Analytical Investigation.” Human Resource Management Review 29(2): 140–155.

Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Simunek, M., McKenley, J., & Hollander, S. 2002. Characteristic Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Well-being. Cognition & Emotion 16(6): 769-785.

Schutte, N. S., J. M. Malouff, E. B. Thorsteinsson, N. Bhullar, and S. E. Rooke. 2007. “A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence and Health.” Personality and Individual Differences 42(6): 921–933

Stephanie Catella, PsyD, is a co-author of The Emotional Intelligence Skills Workbook.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

How To Improve Emotional Intelligence

Sara Viezzer

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc in Applied Neuropsychology

Sara Viezzer is a graduate of psychological studies at the University of Bristol and Padova. She has worked as an Assistant Psychologist in the NHS for the past two years in neuroscience and health psychology. Sara is presently pursuing a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Emotional intelligence (EI or EQ) is the ability to identify and regulate our own emotions as well as recognize, understand, and engage with the emotions of others (Goleman, 1996). 

It is a critical skill to build stronger and empathetic relationships, and it helps connect with our deepest feelings, allowing us to make decisions that are more aligned with our values and personal goals. 

Emotional intelligence is commonly defined by four attributes:

• Self-awareness is the ability to recognize our own emotions and the impact they have on others;
• Self-management is the capacity to regulate emotions , control impulsive reactions and flexibly adapt to changing circumstances;
• Social awareness is the ability to understand and empathize with the emotions of others;
• Relationship management comprises a set of social skills, including positive influence, teamwork, clear communication, and conflict management.

How to develop emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence is a flexible skill that can be learned.

Even though some individuals might naturally be more emotionally intelligent than others, high EI can be developed with time through regular practice.

Below are some ways which may help to increase emotional intelligence.

Practice active listening

Active listening is about hearing beyond people’s words. It involves fully attuning to what is being communicated, including the content of the message and the attitude that underlies it (Rogers and Farson, 1957). 

Paying attention to another’s body language, as well as the tone and speed of their voice, can help identify the speaker’s emotional state in that moment and any messages beyond what they are saying. 

To practice active listening, it is important to let the other person’s train of thought flow without interruptions, as this will facilitate open communication and create a climate of trust and acceptance. 

Secondly, controlling external and internal distractions can help facilitate active listening. In particular, the internal chatter in our minds and the need to plan our responses will allow us to be fully present in the moment and sharpen our listening skills (Lunenburg, 2010).   

Emotional awareness

When experiencing uncomfortable emotions, we might have the tendency to ignore them or bottle them up rather than accept them as a normal and sometimes useful part of our life.

Leaning into our uncomfortable emotions can give us the opportunity to deal with our feelings productively, increasing our self-awareness and ability to introduce positive changes in our lives (Bradberry and Greaves, 2009). 

By exploring with curiosity our full range of emotions , we can gain a more objective view of the person we are and how our feelings are influencing our actions. To see things from a wider perspective, we can also open up to feedback from others, asking about specific situations where we acted with poor emotional awareness.

Identify the emotions

Learning to label emotions with more specific vocabulary can help identify more precisely the type of emotional state we are experiencing and feel more in control of our responses (David, 2016). 

Beyond the six core emotions – happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise – there is a vast spectrum that can be explored through the emotions wheel (Figure 2). 

By recognizing, for example, that sadness differs from boredom or a sense of loneliness; we can become better able to pinpoint our emotions and manage them effectively. 

An additional strategy to develop emotional awareness might be keeping a diary, where we write a description of our emotions and how these are brought up by specific circumstances. 

After a few weeks, we may begin to see patterns. We may come to understand which emotions are most difficult for us to tolerate, which ones are triggering, and which ones contribute to feeling more connected with our own values and satisfaction with our lives.

Understand your stressors

Knowing what situations are triggering is critical for developing the ability to manage our emotional reactions and maintain calm. 

We can use a diary to also identify the sources of stress or write down a list that includes a) specific situations – when we are most likely to feel frightened, disempowered, or not in control b) people – for example, those who appear to be toxic , friends not respecting boundaries or work colleagues trying to impose their opinions c) conditions in the environment – such as crowded or noisy places. 

This will help us anticipate our stressors and then think about ways to put in place strategies to handle our emotions more appropriately (Bradberry and Greaves, 2009).  

Channel emotions in a healthy way

Once we develop greater openness towards our emotions, it is also important to learn how to use them to our advantage rather than letting them control us. 

The first step is to avoid judging our emotions and labeling them as good or bad. Instead, we should recognize them as powerful sources of information which can be used to drive our actions toward what matters to us (Bradberry and Greaves, 2009). 

Refocusing our attention on things that are under our control and can be improved also allows us to not feel trapped in a downward emotional spiral and engage in more committed actions. 

To give our minds a break, we should also prioritize scheduling activities in our routines that make us feel mentally recharged. These may include exercise, yoga, meditation, or other relaxing activities for the mind.

How to encourage emotional intelligence in others

Developing emotional competencies is not only important at the personal level.

Encouraging emotional intelligence in others, including children, students, romantic partners, and work teams, can help increase sensitivity to emotional cues that are often missed within oneself and the environment and ultimately boost the quality of interpersonal relationships (Nagarjuna Nagar, 2020). 

There are a few tips we can follow to enhance EI in others:

Be open and curious

Creating opportunities to share opinions can help build trust in both dyadic and group interactions, reinforcing the importance of self-expression and promoting transparent communication between individuals. 

For example, in a work setting, we might start by asking our team how they are feeling about a particular decision rather than appointing a quick solution to a problem without explaining the rationale behind it. 

We might also try to engage in conversations by asking our co-workers about things that disappoint them at work, what motivates them the most, and how they deal with emotional stress related to work.

Name the emotion

To encourage self-expression in others, such as in children, we might ask them to name an emotion matching their present state. If they find this exercise difficult or give flat answers like “I feel fine/good,” we can ask them to rate an emotion on a 1-10 scale or make use of the emotions wheel.

For example, you could ask: ‘How worried do you feel on a scale of 1-10?’

This technique can even work for adults who may struggle with identifying their emotions. 

Offer your perspective

It may be useful to give some constructive feedback to others about situations where they acted with poor emotional awareness. 

Did they not show enough care or support to people who needed their help? Did they say something that could be perceived as disrespectful or inconsiderate of others’ feelings? Are they often adopting unclear or inconsistent communication of tasks? 

Ensure this feedback is not confrontational or using blaming language but expressed in a kind manner so as to encourage open, healthy discussion. 

Promote a collaborative group culture

Encouraging cooperation within groups facilitates sharing of objectives, values, and concerns, which can ultimately result in an increased sense of group identity and commitment to tasks. 

To enhance a team’s EI, we can highlight participants’ strengths and weaknesses, build a team spirit to spark passion and motivation and constantly provide a space to reflect on personal progress and ways to improve existing skills.

Why is emotional intelligence important?

“What really matters for success, character, happiness and life long achievements is a definite set of emotional skills – your EQ — not just purely cognitive abilities that are measured by conventional IQ tests.” Daniel Goleman

In accordance with Goleman’s statement, emotional intelligence can benefit our personal and professional life in several ways. 

It is a valuable tool to utilize when handling unpredictable and emotionally charged situations, it promotes better clarity of our motivations and goals, and it is an integral part of developing more satisfying relationships with others. 

EI is also a significant predictor of professional success, believed to account for 58% of performance in all types of jobs (Bradberry and Greaves, 2006).

When is emotional intelligence important?

Overall, EI has been found to subsume a variety of skills that are critical in our day-to-day life (Figure 1).

Communication

Increased sensitivity to the feelings of others allows more effective communication and prevents the escalation of tension and conflicts. 

As we are more aware of the emotional needs of the people we interact with, we are more likely to adopt a collaborative attitude and be open to compromise (Petrovici and Dobrescu, 2014).

Stress management

Recognizing how specific situations can trigger stressful emotions can help us feel more in control of our reactions, replacing negative feelings with appropriate coping skills to deal with them. 

Neglecting how emotional stress drives our behaviors can lead to irrational decisions and ultimately exacerbate mental health outcomes (Ciarrochi, Deane, and Anderson, 2002).

Decision-making

Understanding how emotions influence our thoughts can prevent us from making misguided decisions, both in our personal lives and in the workplace. 

As we are able to identify emotions that are superfluous or unrelated to a problem, we can form more objective judgments and enhance the quality of decision-making (Hess and Bacigalupo, 2011).

Change tolerance

Changes in our personal and professional life are constant and can sometimes be emotionally intense. 

Reflecting on the emotional reactions that make us resistant to change as well as the interpretations and preconceptions associated with them, can help us assume a more positive outlook and think more optimistically about opportunities that can derive from change (Lin et al., 2016).

With high EI, we can better understand the meaning of our aspirations and the motivational skills required to achieve goals in relation to our work, personal life, and health (Magnano, Craparo, and Paolillo, 2016). 

In addition, with the capacity to recognize emotions, we can also impact other people’s motivations, encouraging positive attitudes towards shared goals when working in teams.

Frequently asked questions

Does emotional intelligence tend to improve with age.

Since EI is a skill that can be continuously developed and refined over time, it makes sense that our ability to deal with emotional challenges might increase with age. 

Indeed, research suggests that older adults are better able to balance emotions and cognition when problem-solving and making decisions compared to their younger counterparts. 

In addition, older adults seem to be better able to regulate emotions and minimize the intensity and duration of negative affect (Carstensen et al., 2000). 

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that a person’s age does not always mirror their level of emotional maturity, and some EI competencies might require more consistent practice and training (Fariselli, Ghini, and Freedman, 2008).

What problems can result from low emotional intelligence?

Low EI manifests with difficulty dealing with our own feelings and relating to the emotional experiences of others (Goleman, 1996).

Being emotionally disconnected may result in uncontrolled and impulsive behaviors, such as emotional outbursts, insensitive responses, or blaming others, all of which can compromise the quality of our relationships. 

Ignoring other people’s feelings can also increase the risk of conflicts if the conversations are too closed, self-centered and foster misunderstandings (Hansen, 2015).

Ultimately, low EI may result in a reduction of a person’s social circle and level of emotional support, with detrimental effects on mental health and well-being.

Can you have a high IQ but low emotional intelligence?

Though IQ and EI are sometimes related, they represent two separate constructs that might present with different levels of development in the same person. 

Having a strong ability to analyze and interpret situations (often associated with a high IQ) does not necessarily translate into the ability to read other people’s emotions or attend to emotional cues. 

Similarly, the ability to find rational solutions to problems might not manifest in social situations where strong EI skills are needed to manage conflict and reach a compromise (Goleman, 2020).

Can emotional intelligence be taught to others?

Considering the increasingly important role of EI in academic and work success, as well as in managing stress and life transitions, there is a growing interest in teaching emotional intelligence to teenagers and students. 

In a classroom environment, incorporating training focused on enhancing assertive communication and managing negative self-talk can result in an improvement in EI skills (Chang, 2006). 

In addition, students who show the greatest benefit from EI programs are also more likely to persist with their studies in the future (Qualter et al., 2009).

In practice, introducing behaviors in classrooms that are informed by EI principles, such as promoting collaboration between students and practicing self-reflection exercises, can help students gradually assimilate this skill.

Atkins, P., & Stough, C. (2005). Does emotional intelligence change with age. In Society for Research in Adult Development annual conference, Atlanta, GA .

Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2006). The emotional intelligence quick book: Everything you need to know to put your EQ to work . Simon and Schuster.

Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional Intelligence 2.0 . TalentSmart.

Carstensen, L. L., Pasupathi, M., Mayr, U., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2000). Emotional experience in everyday life across the adult life span. Journal of personality and social psychology , 79 (4), 644.

Chang, K. B. (2006). Can we teach emotional intelligence?.

Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between stress and mental health. Personality and individual differences , 32 (2), 197-209.

David, S. (2016). Emotional agility: Get unstuck, embrace change, and thrive in work and life . Penguin.

Fariselli, L., Ghini, M., & Freedman, J. (2008). Age and emotional intelligence. Six Seconds: The Emotional Intelligence Network , 1-10.

Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ . Bloomsbury Publishing.

Goleman, D. (2020). Emotional intelligence . Bloomsbury Publishing.

Hansen, S. (2015). “10 Things High EQ People Don’t Do.” Lifehack. Web.

Hess, J. D., & Bacigalupo, A. C. (2011). Enhancing decisions and decision‐making processes through the application of emotional intelligence skills. Management decision .

Lin, D. T., Liebert, C. A., Tran, J., Lau, J. N., & Salles, A. (2016). Emotional intelligence as a predictor of resident well-being. Journal of the American College of Surgeons , 223 (2), 352-358.

Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Communication: The process, barriers, and improving effectiveness. Schooling , 1 (1), 1-10.

Magnano, P., Craparo, G., & Paolillo, A. (2016). Resilience and Emotional Intelligence: which role in achievement motivation. International Journal of Psychological Research , 9 (1), 9-20.

Nagarjuna Nagar, A. P. (2020). Can Emotional Intelligence Be Developed?. Editorial Board , 9 (7).

Petrovici, A., & Dobrescu, T. (2014). The role of emotional intelligence in building interpersonal communication skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 116 , 1405-1410.

Qualter, P., Whiteley, H., Morley, A., & Dudiak, H. (2009). The role of emotional intelligence in the decision to persist with academic studies in HE. Research in Post‐Compulsory Education , 14 (3), 219-231.

Rogers, C. R., & Farson, R. E. (1957). Active listening (p. 84). Chicago, IL: Industrial Relations Center of the University of Chicago.

Related Articles

What Is Masking?

How To Stop Being Passive-Aggressive

Neurodiversity , Emotions

Managing Emotional Dysregulation In ADHD

ADHD Emotional Dysregulation: When Emotions Become Too Much

Dating Tips , Self-Care

How To Stop Being Insecure In A Relationship

Emotions , Self-Care

IQ vs EQ: Why Emotional Intelligence Matters More Than You Think

Computer Science Leadership Blog , Leadership Blogs

The EI of AI: How Technology Drives Emotional Intelligence

Dr. Alexander Tuzhilin, Dean, Computer Science

Updated: June 3, 2024

Published: June 1, 2024

Emotional intelligence (EI) in the business world transcends mere interpersonal skills. It encompasses the ability to understand, manage, and harness one’s own emotions, as well as to influence the emotions of others. In the workplace, this translates into better decision-making, improved conflict resolution, and enhanced performance under pressure. 

Leaders who exhibit high emotional intelligence can foster a positive work environment, thereby improving team morale and productivity. They are adept at recognizing the emotional needs of their employees, which enables them to tailor their management approach for greater efficacy and engagement. 

While emotional intelligence centers on human capabilities like empathy, self-awareness, and interpersonal skills, artificial intelligence (AI) introduces a different set of strengths to the workplace. Recent insights suggest that AI does not diminish emotional intelligence but rather redefines its context and utility to suit modern business environments. 

AI can analyze and process vast amounts of data faster than humans, yet it lacks the nuanced understanding of human emotions that come naturally to people. Therefore, humans must be involved in the design and interpretation of AI, says Forbes’ Amit Walia . 

By training AI through data enriched with emotional cues and contexts, and with continual refinement via human feedback, systems are better able to recognize, interpret, and respond to human emotions. This collaboration ensures that AI can support roles that demand emotional intelligence, such as customer service, mental health therapy, patient care, etc.

AI chatbots are revolutionizing customer service . Facial recognition, voice analysis, and biometric sensor technologies can detect subtleties in human expression and adapt their responses accordingly, significantly enhancing customer satisfaction and engagement. Moreover, by automating routine inquiries and tasks, chatbots alleviate the workload on human agents, leading to a more efficient customer service operation and reduced costs. 

AI systems are also being designed to coach leaders to better emotional intelligence. By analyzing communication patterns, AI can offer personalized feedback, helping individuals improve their empathetic engagement and emotional responses. Leaders can use the technology to help resolve conflicts between co-workers or practice difficult conversations, for example. This feedback loop not only enhances individual emotional skills but also enriches interpersonal dynamics in professional and personal settings. 

AI in mental health therapy primarily functions through chatbots and AI-driven applications that simulate conversation or therapeutic interaction. These tools use natural language processing to understand and respond to user input, potentially offering cognitive behavioral techniques, mood tracking, and crisis intervention. By analyzing speech patterns and word choice, AI can help identify mental health issues and provide coping mechanisms or immediate assistance for individuals in distress.

The ethical implications of using AI in a mental health context are significant. Key concerns include ensuring informed consent, where users fully understand how their data will be used, as well as the limitations of AI therapy. Confidentiality and competence in handling sensitive information are also crucial, as AI systems must securely store and process personal data without breach. Another ethical issue arises when AI delivers incorrect or problematic advice. 

Unlike human therapists, AI lacks a nuanced understanding of human psychology and may provide generalized or inappropriate guidance, potentially exacerbating a patient’s condition. It’s essential for humans to rigorously oversee AI-driven tools to minimize the risk of harm and ensure that the systems complement traditional therapeutic practices.

Of course, there are a range of other ethical issues to consider when implementing AI in any sector. Of major concern is the incorporation of bias and discrimination. When AI is trained on data that is not inclusive, bias manifests as skewed outputs that favor certain groups over others. This becomes especially problematic in critical areas like hiring, law enforcement, and lending. These biases can inadvertently reinforce existing social inequalities by perpetuating stereotypes and excluding marginalized groups. 

While AI can assist in the development of emotional intelligence, there is an ongoing debate about its long-term effects on human cognitive capabilities . Some argue that reliance on AI for emotional and cognitive tasks could lead to the atrophy of these innate human skills. Conversely, others believe that AI serves as a cognitive and emotional enhancer, pushing human capabilities to new heights by handling routine or data-intensive tasks, allowing humans more space for creative and emotional growth.

As AI continues to evolve, its integration with emotional intelligence could reshape many aspects of society, from enhancing personal relationships to transforming workplace dynamics. In this dynamic landscape, the symbiosis between AI and human intelligence presents both opportunities and challenges. 

As we navigate this terrain, it is crucial to foster a dialogue that emphasizes the responsible and ethical use of AI, ensuring it supports rather than undermines human emotional and intellectual

development. The key will be to harness these technologies in ways that bolster our human qualities, rather than replace them, maintaining a balance between technological advancement and the intrinsic values that define human interaction.

Related Articles

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Can emotional intelligence be improved? A randomized experimental study of a business-oriented EI training program for senior managers

Raquel gilar-corbi.

Developmental and Educational Psychology Department, University of Alicante, San Vicente del Raspeig, Alicante, Spain

Teresa Pozo-Rico

Bárbara sánchez, juan-luís castejón, associated data.

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Purpose: This article presents the results of a training program in emotional intelligence. Design/methodology/approach: Emotional Intelligence (EI) involves two important competencies: (1) the ability to recognize feelings and emotions in oneself and others, and (2) the ability to use that information to resolve conflicts and problems to improve interactions with others. We provided a 30-hour Training Course on Emotional Intelligence (TCEI) for 54 senior managers of a private company. A pretest-posttest design with a control group was adopted. Findings: EI assessed using mixed and ability-based measures can be improved after training. Originality/value: The study’s results revealed that EI can be improved within business environments. Results and implications of including EI training in professional development plans for private organizations are discussed.

Introduction

This research study focused on EI training in business environments. Accordingly, the aim of the study was to examine the effectiveness of an original EI training program in improving the EI of senior managers. In this article, we delineate the principles and methodology of an EI training program that was conducted to improve the EI of senior managers of a private company The article begins with a brief introduction to the main models of EI that are embedded with the existing scientific literature. This is followed by a description of the EI training program that was conducted in the present study and presentation of results about its effectiveness in improving EI. Finally, the present findings are discussed in relation to the existing empirical literature, and the limitations and conclusions of the present study are articulated.

Defining EI

Various models of emotional intelligence (EI) have been proposed. The existing scientific literature offers three main models of EI: mixed, ability, and trait models. First, mixed models conceptualize EI as a combination of emotional skills and personality dimensions such as assertiveness and optimism [ 1 , 2 ]. Thus, according to the Bar-On model [ 3 ], emotional-social intelligence (ESI) is a multifactorial set of competencies, skills, and facilitators that determine how people express and understand themselves, understand and relate to others, and respond to daily situations The construct of ESI consists of 10 key components (i.e., self-regard, interpersonal relationships, impulse control, problem solving, emotional self-awareness, flexibility, reality-testing, stress tolerance, assertiveness, and empathy) and five facilitators (optimism, self-actualization, happiness, independence, and social responsibility). Emotionally and socially intelligent people accept and understand their emotions; they are also capable of expressing themselves assertively, being empathetic, cooperating with and relating to others in an appropriate manner, managing stressful situations and changes successfully, solving personal and interpersonal problems effectively, and having an optimistic perspective toward life. Second, ability models of EI focus on the processing of information and related abilities [ 3 ]. Accordingly, Mayer and Salovey [ 4 ] have conceptualized EI as a type of social intelligence that entails the ability to manage and understand one’s own and others’ emotions. Indeed, this implies that EI also entails the ability to use emotional information to manage thoughts and actions in an adaptive manner [ 5 ]. Third, the trait EI approach understands EI as emotion-related information [ 6 ]. According to trait models, EI refers to self-perceptions and dispositions that can be incorporated into fundamental taxonomies of personality. Therefore, according to Petrides and Furnham [ 7 ], trait EI is partially determined by several dimensions of personality and can be situated within the lower levels of personality hierarchies. However, it is a distinct construct that can be differentiated from other personality constructs. In addition, the construct of trait EI includes various personality dispositions as well as the self-perceived aspects of social intelligence, personal intelligence, and ability EI. The following facets are subsumed by the construct of trait EI: adaptability, assertiveness, emotion perception (self and others), emotion expression, management (others), and regulation, impulsiveness (low), relationships, self-esteem, self-motivation, social awareness, stress management, trait empathy, happiness, and optimism [ 7 ]. Finally, as Hodzic et al. [ 8 ] have indicated, most existing definitions of EI permit us to draw the conclusion that EI is a measurable individual characteristic that refers to a way of experiencing and processing emotions and emotional information. It is noteworthy that these models are not mutually exclusive [ 7 ].

Effects of EI on different outcomes

EI has been found to be related to workplace performance in highly demanding work environments (see e.g. [ 9 ]). Consequently, companies, entities, and organizations tend to recognize the importance of EI, promote it on a daily basis to facilitate career growth, and recruit those who possess this ability. [ 10 ].

With regard to research that has examined the EI-performance link, Van Rooy and Viswesvaran [ 11 ] conducted a metanalytic study to examine the predictive power of EI in the workplace. They found that approximately 5% of the variance in workplace performance was explained by EI, and this percentage is adequately significant to increase savings and promote improvements within organizations. In addition, the authors concluded that further in-depth investigations are needed to comprehensively understand the construct of EI.

However, the EI-performance link must be interpreted with caution. Specifically, Joseph and Newman [ 12 ] examined emotional competence in the workplace and found that EI predicts performance among those with high emotional labor jobs but not their counterparts with low emotional labor jobs. In addition, they indicated that further research is required to delineate the relationship between EI and actual job performance, gender and race differences in EI, and the utility of different types of EI measures that are based on ability or mixed models in training and selection. Accordingly, Pérez-González and Qualter [ 13 ] have underscored the need for emotional education. Further, Brasseur et al. [ 14 ] found that better job performance is related to EI, especially among those with jobs for which interpersonal contact is very important.

It is noteworthy that EI is positively related to job satisfaction. Accordingly, Chiva and Alegre [ 15 ] found that there was an indirect positive relationship between self-reported EI (i.e., as per mixed models) and job satisfaction. A total of 157 workers from several companies participated in this study. These findings suggest that people with higher levels of EI are more satisfied with their jobs and demonstrate a greater capacity for learning than their counterparts with lower levels of EI.

Similarly, Sener, Demirel, and Sarlak [ 16 ] adopted a mixed model of EI and examine its effect on job satisfaction. They found that individuals with strong emotional and social competencies demonstrated greater self-control. A total of 80 workers participated in this study. They were able to manage and understand their own and others’ emotions in an intelligent and adaptive manner in their personal and professional lives.

In addition, EI (i.e., as per mixed models) predicts job success because it influences one’s ability to deal with environmental demands and pressures [ 17 ]. Therefore, it has been contended that several components of EI (i.e., as per mixed models) contribute to success and productivity in the workplace [ 18 ]; future research studies should extend this line of inquiry. Several studies have shown that people with high levels of ability EI communicate in an interesting and assertive manner, which in turn makes others feel more comfortable in the workplace [ 19 ]. In addition, it has been contended that EI (i.e., as per mixed models) plays a valuable role in group development because effective teamwork occurs when team members possess knowledge about the strengths and weaknesses of others and the ability to use these strengths when necessary [ 15 , 20 ]. It is especially important for senior managers to demonstrate high levels of EI because they play a predominant role in team management, leadership, and organizational development.

Finally, studies that have examined the relationship between EI and wellbeing have found that ability EI is a predictor of professional success, wellbeing, and socially relevant outcomes [ 21 – 23 ]. Extending this line of inquiry, Slaski and Cartwright [ 24 ] investigated the relationship between EI and the quality of working life among middle managers and found that higher levels of EI is related to better performance, health, and wellbeing.

EI and leadership

The actions of organizational leaders play a crucial role in modulating the emotional experiences of employees [ 25 ]. Accordingly, Thiel, Connelly, and Griffith [ 26 ] found that, within the workplace, emotions affect critical cognitive tasks including information processing and decision making. In addition, the authors have contended that leadership plays a key role in helping subordinates manage their emotions. In another study, Batool [ 27 ] found that the EI of leaders have a positive impact on the stress management, motivation, and productivity of employees.

Gardner and Stough [ 28 ] further investigated the relationship between leadership and EI among senior managers and found that leaders’ management of positive and negative emotions had a beneficial impact on motivation, optimism, innovation, and problem resolution in the workplace. Therefore, the EI of directors and managers is expected to be positively correlated with employees’ work motivation and achievement.

Additionally, EI competencies are involved in the following activities: choosing organizational objectives, planning and organizing work activities, maintaining cooperative interpersonal relationships, and receiving the support that is necessary to achieve organizational goals [ 29 ]. In this regard, some authors have provided compelling theoretical arguments in favor of the existence of a relationship between EI and leadership [ 30 – 34 ]. In this way, several researches [ 30 – 34 ] show that EI is a core and key variable positively related to effective and transformational leadership and this is important for positive effects on job performance and attitudes that are desirable in the organization.

Further, people with high levels of EI are more capable of regulating their emotions to reduce work stress [ 35 ]; thus, it is necessary to emphasize the importance of EI in order to meet the workplace challenges of the 21st century.

In conclusion, EI competencies are considered to be key qualities that individuals who occupy management positions must possess [ 36 ]. Further, EI transcends managerial hierarchies when an organization flourishes [ 37 ]. Finally, emotionally intelligent managers tend to create a positive work environment that improves the job satisfaction of employees [ 38 ].

EI trainings

Past studies have shown that training improves the EI of students [ 22 , 39 , 40 – 44 ], employees [ 45 – 47 ], and managers [ 48 – 52 ]. More specifically, within the academic context, Nelis et al. [ 22 ] found that group-based EI training significantly improved emotion identification and management skills. In another study, Nelis et al. [ 39 ] found that EI training significantly improved emotion regulation and comprehension and general emotional skills. It also had a positive impact on psychological wellbeing, subjective perceptions of health, quality of social relations, and employability. Similarly, several studies that have been conducted within the workplace have shown that EI can be improved through training [ 45 – 52 ] and have underscored the key role that it plays in effective performance [ 53 , 54 ].

In addition, two relevant metanalyses [ 8 , 55 ] concluded that there has been an increase in research interest in EI, recognition of its influence on various aspects of people’s lives, and the number of interventions that aim to improve EI. Relatedly, Kotsou et al. [ 55 ] and Hodzic et al. [ 8 ] reviewed the findings of past studies that have examined the effects of EI training to explore whether such training programs do indeed improve EI.

First, Hodzic et al. [ 8 ] concluded that EI training has a moderate effect on EI and that interventions that are based on ability models of EI have the largest effects. In addition, the improvements that had resulted from these interventions were found to have been temporally sustained.

Second, the conclusions of Kotsou et al.’s [ 55 ] systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of EI training make it evident that more rigorous and controlled studies are needed to permit one to draw concrete conclusions about whether training improves ability EI. Studies that had adopted mixed models of EI tended to more consistently find that training improves EI. Accordingly, the results of Kotsou et al.’s [ 55 ] metanalytic study revealed that EI training enhances teamwork, conflict management, employability, job satisfaction, and work performance.

Finally, it is necessary to identify and address the limitations of past interventions in future studies to improve their quality and effectiveness.

Purpose of the study

In the systematic review conducted by Kotsou et al. [ 55 ] regarding research published on interventions to improve EI in adults, one out of five studies with managers, was performed on a sample of middle managers, without randomization, with an inactive control group, no immediate measures after the training, and only one evaluation was performed six months after the training. In the other four studies collected in Kotsou et al.’s systematic review [ 55 ], only one study utilized a control group (inactive control group), one employed randomizations, and two studies performed follow-up measures six months after the intervention.

The two metanalyses confirmed and identified some problems or gaps we have tried to overcome in the present study. For this reason, in our study, we propose to deepen the assessment of EI training for senior managers, aiming to overcome most of the limitations mentioned in the studies of Kotsou et al. [ 55 ] and Hodzic et al. [ 8 ] by implementing the following: 1) Include a control group (waiting list group); 2) Conduct follow-up measurements (12 months later); 3) Employ an experimental design; 3) Include a workshop approach with group discussions and interactive participation; 4) Identify specific individual differences (i.e., age, gender) that might determine the effects of interventions; and 5) Use self-report and ability measures. For these reasons, two different ways of evaluating EI have been selected in this study to assess the emotional competencies applied within the labor and business world to solve practical problems: the EQ-i questionnaire [ 2 ], based on mixed models to provide a self-perceived index of EI, and the Situational Test of Emotional Management (STEM) and the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU) [ 56 ] based on the ability model. Thus, including two different EI measure we aim at obtaining a more reliable validation of the intervention used.

Therefore, the objective of our study was to investigate whether EI can be improved among employees who occupy senior management positions in a private company. Thus, the research hypothesis was that participation in the designed program would improve EI among senior managers.

EI training development

The Course on Emotional Intelligence (TCEI) was created to provide senior managers with emotional knowledge and practical emotional skills so that they can apply and transfer their new understanding to teamwork and find solutions to real company problems and challenges. In this way, TCEI prepares workers to use the emotional learning resources appropriate to each work situation. In addition, TCEI combines face-to-face work sessions with a cross-sectional training through an e-learning platform. For more details, see S1 Appendix 1.

According to Mikolajczak [ 57 ], three interrelated levels of emotional intelligence can be differentiated: a) conceptual-declarative emotion knowledge, b) emotion-related abilities, and c) emotion-related dispositions. The TCEI aims at developing emotional skills, which are included on the second level of Mikolajczak’s model. Moreover, the present study uses the mixed model and the ability model measures to assess the level of EI. In using these measures, it is possible to assess the second level of Mikolajczak’s model. Pérez-González and Qualter [ 13 ] also suggest that activities related to ability EI should be included in emotional education programs.

Thus, this EI program was designed to allow senior managers to make use of their understanding and management of emotions as a strategy to assist them in facing the challenges within their work environment and managing their workgroups. Following the recommendation of Pérez-Gonzáles and Qualter, the training intervention methodology is founded in DAPHnE key practices [ 13 ]. It is important to emphasize that this training is grounded in practicality since it works based on the resolution of real cases, utilizing participative teaching-learning techniques and cooperative learning, while promoting the transfer of all aspects of EI and applied to various situations that can occur in the workplace. The e-learning system in the Moodle platform also provides an added value since it allows the creation of an environment providing exposure to professional experiences and continuous training. This type of pedagogical approach based on skills training and mediated through e-learning is a methodology that emerged in the 1990s when business organizations sought to create environments better suited to improving the management of large groups of employees. After its success, it began to be used in other contexts, including higher education and organizational development [ 58 – 60 ].

Finally, in order to justify the chosen training, it is important to note that the following official competencies for senior managers have been designated by the company:

• Supervise the staff and guarantee optimum employee performance by fostering a motivational working environment where employees receive the appropriate support and respect and their initiatives are given the consideration they deserve.
• Make decisions and promote clear goals, efficient leadership, competitive compensation, and acknowledgment of the employees’ achievements.
• Justify their decisions to executives and directors, explaining how they have ensured training by creating opportunities for appropriate professional development for all employees and how they have facilitated conditions for a better balance in achieving the company’s objectives.

In conclusion, considering the above-mentioned professional competencies required, senior managers were selected as participants in this study since they need to possess and apply aspects related to EI in order to accomplish their leadership and staff management responsibilities.

Participants

The company participating in this study was an international company with almost 175 years of history that occupies a select position in a branch of industry in the natural gas value chain, from the source of supply to market, including supply, liquefaction, shipping, regasification, and distribution. The company is present in over 30 countries around the world.

This study was conducted involving a sample of 54 senior managers selected from a company in a European country. The sample was extracted from the entire population of senior managers within this company following a stratified random sampling procedure, taking into account the gender of the population in order to select 50% of each gender.

The mean age of participants was 37.61 years (standard deviation = 8.55) and the percentage of female senior managers was 50%. For evaluation purposes, these employees were randomly divided into two groups: the experimental group ( n = 26; mean age = 35.57 (7.54); 50% women) and the control group ( n = 28; mean age = 39.50 (9.11); 50% women). The control group received EI training after the last data collection.

Initially, a group of senior managers from the company was selected to participate in the study, as they are employees who need a special domain of EI due to the competencies assigned to their professional category. In all cases, informed consent was requested for their participation in the study.

Assignment of participants to each condition, experimental or control, was performed using a random-number program. In addition, to avoid the Hawthorne effect, participants were not told if they were assigned to the experimental or control group; only their consent to participate in research on the development of EI was asked. Participants from the control group completed the same evaluations as the training group but were not exposed to the training.

The scales were administered during the pretest phase (Time 1) on an online platform for the experimental and control groups. On average, approximately 90 minutes were needed to complete the tests.

After the data were collected in the pre-test phase, only the experimental group participated in the TCEI over seven weeks, and they received a diploma.

Later, the scales were administered during the posttest phase (Time 2). Similarly, we collected the same data one year later (Time 3). A lapse of one year was allowed to pass because all training programs carried out in this company are re-evaluated one year later to determine whether improvements in employees’ skills were maintained over time. In fact, this demonstrates a clear commitment to monitoring the results achieved. Other studies have also used reevaluations of their results. For example, according to Nelis et al. [ 22 ] and Nelis et al. [ 39 ], the purpose of their studies was to evaluate whether trait EI could be improved and if these changes remained. To accomplish this, the authors performed three assessments: prior to the intervention, at the end of the intervention, and six months later. Therefore, as recommended by Kirkpatrick [ 61 ], research on the effectiveness of training should also include a long-term assessment of skills transfer.

Finally, is important to remark that all participants were properly informed of the investigation, and their written consent was obtained. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations and the study was approved by University of Alicante Ethics Committee (UA-2015-07-06) and carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.

As mentioned before, two different ways of defining and evaluating EI were selected for this study: (1) EQ-i, based on mixed models, and (2) the STEM/STEU questionnaires, based on the ability model of EI.

• 1 The Emotional Quotient Inventory [ 2 ]

To measure EI based on the mixed models, the short version of the EQ-i was used, which comprises 51 self-referencing statements and requires subjects to rate the extent to which they agree or disagree with each statement on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). An example item is the following; “In handling situations that arise, I try to think of as many approaches as I can.” The EQ-i comprises five factors: Intrapersonal EI and Self-Perception, Interpersonal EI, Adaptability and Decision Making, General Mood and Self-Expression, Stress Management, and a Total EQ-i score, which serves as a global EI measure. The author of this instrument reports a Cronbach’s alpha ranging from .69 to .86 for the 5 subscales [ 2 , 62 ] and the Cronbach’s alpha of the Emotional Quotient Inventory was .80 for the present sample of senior manager.

• 2 Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU) and Situational Test of Emotion Management (STEM) [ 63 ]

Two tests were used to measure EI based on the ability model. Emotion understanding was evaluated by the short version of the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU) [ 63 ]. This test is composed of 25 items that present an emotional situation (decontextualized, workplace-related, or private-life-related). For each item, participants have to choose which emotion will most likely elicit the described situation. Cronbach’s alpha of STEU is .83 [ 63 ] and the Cronbach’s alpha of the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding was .86 for the present sample of senior manager. An example item is the following: “An unwanted situation becomes less likely or stops altogether. The person involved is most likely to feel: (a) regret, (b) hope, (c) joy, (d) sadness, (e) relief” (in this case, the correct answer is “relief”).

On the other hand, emotion management was evaluated by the short version of the Situational Test of Emotion Management (STEM) [ 63 ]. This test is composed of a 20-item situational judgment test (SJT) that uses hypothetical behavioral scenarios followed by a set of possible responses to the situation. Respondents must choose which option they would most likely select in a “real” situation. Cronbach’s alpha of STEM is .68 [ 63 ] and the Cronbach’s alpha of the Situational Test of Emotion Management was .84 for the present sample of senior manager. An example item is the following: “Pete has specific skills that his workmates do not, and he feels that his workload is higher because of it. What action would be the most effective for Pete? (a) Speak to his boss about this; (b) Start looking for a new job; (c) Be very proud of his unique skills; (d) Speak to his workmates about this.”

TCEI content and organization

The program schedule spanned seven weeks with a face-to-face session of 95 minutes each week, which was delivered by one of the researchers specifically trained for this purpose. All the experimental group participants were taught together in these sessions. The content of each session was the following:

1st Session : Introduction. The objectives and methodology of the training were explained to participants.

2nd Session : Intrapersonal EI and self-perception. Trainees learned to identify their own emotions.

3rd Session : Interpersonal EI. Participants learned to identify others’ emotions.

4th Session : Adaptability and decision making. The objective was to improve trainees’ ability to identify and understand the impact that their own feelings can have on thoughts, decisions, behavior, and work performance resulting in better decisions and workplace adaptability.

5th Session : General mood and self-expression. Trainees worked on expressing their emotions and improving their skills to effectively control their mood.

6th Session : Stress management. Participants learned EI skills to manage stress effectively.

7th Session : Emotional understanding and emotion management. Trainees learned skills to effectively manage their emotions as well as skills that influence the moods and emotions of others.

In addition, access to the virtual environment (Moodle platform) was required after each face-to-face session. The time spent in the platform was registered, with a minimum of five hours required per week.

The virtual environment allowed the researcher to review all the content completed in each face-to-face session.

All of the EI abilities included in the virtual part of the training have been previously used in the face-to-face part; thus, virtual training is simply a method used to consolidate EI knowledge. In fact, the virtual environment has the same function as completing a workbook about the information presented during the face-to-face session. However, the added advantage of working in an e-learning environment is that all of the trainers are connected and can share their tasks and progress with others. At times, in addition to reviewing the contents of the previous session, the e-learning environment also introduces some important terms for the next session utilizing the principles of the well-known flipped classroom methodology. In short, the following activities were carried out through the Moodle platform to consolidate the participants’ knowledge:

1st Session: Participants were informed that e-learning would be part of the training in order to consolidate EI knowledge.

2nd Session: Participants explored the skills of Intrapersonal EI and self-perception in the virtual environment through discussion forums.

3rd Session: Participants learned the skills of identifying others’ emotions and utilizing this emotional information for decision-making. This information was summarized in the virtual environment through discussion forums.

4th Session: Participants sharpened their skills of adaptability and decision-making through the production of innovative ideas and the utilization of critical thinking skills in assessing the impact that their own feelings can have on others’ work performance. Trainees learned how to express their own emotions, as well as the skill of effectively controlling their mood, through the resolution of practical cases in the virtual environment; in these cases, innovative ideas and critical thinking skills were required in order to make better decisions during emotionally impactful; situations. In addition, trainees utilized the forum to reflect on why their own emotional regulation is important for ensuring long-term workplace adaptability.

5th Session: Verbal quiz, discussion, and forum contribution. Trainees participated in an online debate about key emotional skills in order to understand how to apply them in a real work environment. In particular, the debate focused on regulating the self-expression skill and equilibrating the general mood when there are difficult situations within the company. In this way, the participants identified the skills required to effectively manage the stress experienced in order to maintain a positive mood A discussion about common stressful situations at work was carried out in the virtual environment, and strategies for regulating the mood during critical work situations were shared.

6th Session: Discussion of ideas related to EI. Trainees participated in an online debate about key emotional skills in order to understand how to apply stress management skills to the real work environment. It was necessary to share previous work experiences where stress was a significant challenge and reevaluate the emotionally intelligent way to deter stress and maintain a balanced senior manager life.

7th Session: Participants concluded the training on target strategies to effectively manage their emotions as well as skills that influence the moods and emotions of others. This session, therefore, was a period for feedback where brief answers to specific doubts were provided. In addition, the outcomes of the training were established by the participants. Finally, senior managers were encouraged to stay connected through the Moodle platform in order to resolve future challenges together using the EI skills learned and internalized during the training period.

Data analysis

An experimental pretest-posttest with a control group design was adopted. Under this design, multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA) and univariate variance analysis (ANOVA) of repeated measures were performed, in which the measures of dependent variables were treated as variables evaluated within the same subjects, and groups operated as variables between subjects. Finally, all statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS statistical software, version 21.0 (IBM, Armonk, USA).

First, sample normality analysis indicated that the population followed a normal distribution. The results of Box’s M test did not show homogeneity in the variance-covariance matrix on the EQ-i Total Scale (M = 59.29; F = 9.26, p ≥ 0.00) or on the STEM/STEU (M = 231.01; F = 36.07, p ≥0.00). However, Hair et al. [ 64 ] have stated that if the control and the experimental groups are of equal size, which was the case in this study, then that factor tends to mitigate the effects of violations of the normality assumption.

Second, to test whether there was any significant difference between the experimental group and control group at the time of pretest, Student’s t -test was performed to determine the differences in means of all the variables measured ( Table 1 ). Table 1 shows that there were no significant differences at the time of pretest. This finding suggests that both groups began in analogous situations.

Note. t1 = pretest; t2 = posttest; t3 = follow-up.

1 = direct score

Therefore, we came to the conclusion that the two groups of workers could not be distinguished by EI level before the TCEI program. In addition, the mean age of each group was analyzed and no baseline differences were found between the two groups.

To assess the impact of the program on EI, the scores obtained by both groups were compared before its implementation (pretest–Time 1) and shortly after the program was delivered (posttest–Time 2), as well as one year later (follow-up–Time 3). Group membership was the independent factor or variable, and the scores obtained by the subjects regarding EI were the criteria or dependent variables.

Two control variables, gender and age, were included in the analysis because they could affect the results. However, none of these variables showed a statistically significant effect in any of the variables assessed (p≥ .50 in all cases).

Regarding the implementation of the program, Table 2 presents the test results for intra-subject effects, which showed significant Group x Time interaction for all variables except for Adaptability.

The observed power was highest in the key scales: 1.00 for the STEU/STEM and Total EQ-i. Regarding the subscales, the observed power was also 1.00 for the Intrapersonal, Stress Management, and General Mood subscales; on the other hand, the observed power for the Interpersonal and the Adaptability subscales was .66 and .55, respectively.

Similarly, the effect size (η 2 ), the proportion of total variability attributable to a factor, and the magnitude of the difference between one time and another resulting from the interaction between the time of assessment and implementation of the program, was high for the key scales: ≥.71 for the STEU/STEM, and .82 for the Total EQ-i. With regards to the subscales, the effect size (η 2 ) was the following: .44 for Intrapersonal, .07 for Interpersonal, .32 for Stress Management, .05 for Adaptability, and .26 for General Mood.

To further explain these results, complementary analyses were performed. On the one hand, as shown in Table 1 , we carried out an average comparison between the experimental and control groups at the measurement moments T2 and T3. Results revealed significant differences between the experimental group and the control group regarding all variables and in both moments (T2 and T3), except for the Interpersonal variable, in which the experimental group obtained higher scores in these two moments but without being statistically significant these differences. This could explain the small effect size obtained for this variable.

In addition, the Adaptability variable showed statistically significant differences between the experimental group and the control group at time T2, with the control group scoring higher, while at time T3, the experimental group also obtains higher scores regarding Adaptability; however, this score difference with regards to the control group was not statistically significant. This could explain why the interaction was not significant and the small effect size obtained for this variable.

In order to compare differences between moments T1, T2, and T3, the marginal means were analyzed for both groups (experimental and control) per moment and variable ( Table 3 ).

Note. EG = experimental group; CG = control group; t1 = pretest; t2 = posttest; t3 = follow-up.

In general, in the experimental group, there was a significant improvement between moments T1 and T2 in all variables, except Interpersonal and Adaptability, which did not present changes at any of the three moments (T1, T2, T3). On the other hand, scores remained without significant changes regarding all variables between moments T2 and T3, except in the case of STEU and STEM, in which the scores continued to improve between moments T2 and T3.

In the control group, the results were the same as in the experimental group concerning the Interpersonal and Adaptability variables. However, with regards to other variables, the trend was inverse to the experimental group between moments T1 and T2; in this case, there was a significant decrease in the scores between these two moments in the rest of the variables. Between moments T2 and T3, the scores remained without significant changes in all the variables measured with the EQ-i. In the case of variables measured with the ability test, there was a significant decrease in the STEU scores between moments T2 and T3, whereas the STEM scores remained without significant changes.

Figs ​ Figs1 1 – 3 show the scores obtained in the EQ-i total scale and STEM/STEU total scales by both groups at Times 1, 2, and 3. At Times 2 and 3, the experimental group, which had received the EI training, had an increase in its scores, whereas the control group did not present any substantial change in scores.

The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an EI training program among the senior managers (N = 54) of a private company. Consistent with Pérez-González and Qualter [ 13 ], Hodznik et al. [ 8 ], and Kotsou et al.’s [ 55 ] recommendations, we aimed to contribute new research findings and extend the existing literature on the effectiveness of EI training in the workplace. The main findings of this study revealed that intrapersonal EI, self-perception, general mood, self-expression, and stress management were maintained after the completion of the training. On the other hand, improvements in emotional understanding and emotion management had strengthened over time. However, the results also revealed that training did not result in similar improvements across all variables. Specifically, training had a nonsignificant impact on interpersonal and adaptability skills.

Theoretical implications of the study

With regard to the theoretical implications of the present findings, the observed effectiveness of the TCEI, which was conducted using an innovative methodology that entailed face-to-face training and a virtual campus support system among senior managers, extends the existing literature on the development of EI training programs.

The training program that was conducted as a part of this study failed to improve two dimensions of EI: interpersonal and adaptability skills. There are two possible explanations for why these variables did not demonstrate improvement. First, high-quality training that addresses all the dimensions of EI is necessary to produce large effects. Therefore, the time and exercises that are devoted to these two dimensions of EI may need to be redefined. Accordingly, the second and fourth sessions of this training (i.e., interpersonal and adaptability skills, respectively) can be enriched by adding new activities and including long-term evaluation of the transfer of skills to real workplace situations in which these abilities are required to resolve challenges. Indeed, allocating more time and exercises to these topics may have offered participants greater experience in practicing these interpersonal and adaptability skills in regular and virtual classroom settings before applying them in the workplace.

On the other hand, changes in these two dimensions of EI may not be detectable immediately after the completion of the training or soon after a year has elapsed. Similarly, the studies that Kotsou et al. reviewed [ 55 ] also indicated that improvements in EI may not be detectable immediately or shortly after the completion of an intervention. Further, the conclusions of this review appear to suggest that shorter training programs do not improve some dimensions of EI. Therefore, a more intensive training and longer time gap between completion of training and assessment (i.e., after more than a year has elapsed) may yield significant results for these two dimensions of EI. Indeed, other studies have used longer time gaps such as more than two years [ 40 ] and yearly evaluations across three years [ 47 ].

In any case, the present findings suggest that the proposed training intervention is effective in improving some dimensions of EI. In particular, senior managers who received EI training demonstrated significant improvements in their ability to perceive, understand, and accept their own and others’ emotions in an effective way, be self-reliant, achieve personal goals, manage stress, have a positive attitude, and control and manage emotions; these findings are consistent with those of past studies that have aimed to improve EI by providing training in workplaces [ 45 – 52 ].

The largest effects emerged for the total scores for EI (as per mixed models; total EQ-i), followed by emotion management (STEM) and understanding (STEU), intrapersonal aspects, stress management, and finally, general mood. Moreover, improvements in emotional understanding and emotion management that had resulted from the training intervention had strengthened over time.

Similarly, several researchers have indicated that EI plays a key role in leadership development and success in the workplace [ 65 , 66 ]. The behaviors of managers shape critical stages of their subordinates’ careers as well as the provision of optimal training and promotion [ 67 , 68 ]. Given the unique significance that EI and optimal leadership bears to this group of professionals, the present study aimed to improve the EI of senior managers.

In sum, the proposed program is a training intervention that can be used to enhance the EI of senior managers because, as the previously articulated extensive literature review has demonstrated, EI plays a key role within work environments. Therefore, the present findings suggest that the TCEI is an effective training program that can improve the ability to identify one’s own and others’ emotions as well as identify and understand the impact of one’s feelings on thoughts, decisions, behaviors, and performance at work.

Practical implications

The present findings serve as empirical evidence of the effectiveness of the training program that was conducted in the present study in improving key dimensions of EI that foster the emotional skills that are both necessary and desirable in the workplace. Accordingly, the present findings have practical implications because they support the future use of the EI training program that was used in the present study. In this regard, the present findings revealed that EI training can promote the emotional development of senior managers.

In addition, the methodology of the training program is noteworthy because it required participants to use communication and work as a group to solve real practical problems that necessitate the application of EI skills in the workplace. Similarly, the use of face-to-face training alongside an e-learning platform helped participants acquire the ability to learn independently as well as synergically (i.e., with other senior managers). This encouraged the group to reflect on their knowledge about EI and apply their EI skills to handle workplace challenges.

It is important to emphasize that there were significant temporal changes in the scores of measures of emotional understanding and emotion management; in other words, the scores continued to improve a year after the completion of training. It is interesting to note that the methodology of the last training session was unique because it involved the creation of a “life and career roadmap” and “commitment to growth and development. We believe that these exercises were responsible for the continued improvement in important EI skills over time that was observed in the present study.

This finding has important practical implications because it underscores the importance of requiring senior managers to indicate their commitment to the transfer of knowledge. Indeed, the roadmap defines the results that are expected to follow the implementation of the learned emotional strategies and verifies the achievement of these results. In addition, all managers signed an online contract to indicate their commitment to remain connected through the virtual campus support system to resolve any conflicts that may arise within the company in an emotionally intelligent manner.

We believe that the method of learning that our intervention entailed is more effective than conventionally used methods. Further, the uniqueness of this method may have contributed to the observed change in scores because it allowed frustrated senior managers to share their unresolved issues. Finally, by practicing emotional understanding and emotional management during the training, the created a plan of action and implemented their solutions using EI strategies.

In addition, we believe that signing the online contract helped them understand their responsibilities and the impact that their emotional understanding and emotion management can have on the organization. The fact that their scores on measures of emotional understanding and emotion management continued to increase over time indicates that the subjects had acquired these skills and that, once they had acquired them, they continued to develop them. Similarly, Kotsou et al. [ 55 ] also found that training resulted in stable improvements in EI. In addition to providing their participants with EI tools and skills as a part of their training, they also motivated them to apply these skills and use these tools in the future.

Taken together, the present findings have promising practical implications. Specifically, the findings suggest that a training methodology that facilitates knowledge transfer (i.e., application of knowledge about EI in the management of workplace challenges) can enhance the following dimensions of EI: emotional understanding, emotion management, self-perception (through training activities that pertain to self-regard, self-actualization, and emotional self-awareness), decision making (through training activities that pertain to problem solving, reality testing, and impulse control), self-expression (through training activities that pertain to emotional expression, assertiveness, and independence), and stress management (through training activities that pertain to flexibility, stress tolerance, and optimism).

Limitations and future studies

The present study has several limitations that require explication. First, we included only age and gender as control variables and omitted other individual differences that could have influenced the results. However, it is important for future researchers to define and examine the role of individual differences in the effects of EI training in greater detail. In addition, in accordance with Kotsou et al. [ 55 ] and Hodzic et al.’s [ 8 ] suggestions, detailed behavioral indicators must be examined because they may play a crucial role in the effectiveness of EI training. Another limitation of the present study is that the intervention program was conducted in only one company. Therefore, future studies must implement this program in different companies and across varied business contexts. The present results make it apparent that further refinements are needed in order to address the aforementioned limitations of this intervention.

Another limitation of the present study is that it did not assess the effect that improvements in EI can have on other variables. Accordingly, recommendations for further research include the determination of whether improvements in EI that result from training lead to improvements in other variables such as job satisfaction and performance and successful leadership, in accordance with the results of other research studies [ 69 – 72 ]. Thus, future research studies must consider these possibilities when they examine whether the TCEI has the potential to produce all the aforementioned outcomes at an organizational level. Furthermore, the intervention can be redesigned in such a manner that it yields specific performance outcomes. Further, longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of EI training must be conducted across several sectors and countries.

Finally, senior managers define and direct the careers of the rest of a company’s personnel; Therefore, future research studies must examine how EI training can be used to promote its previously observed desirable effects such as the demonstration of good leadership behaviors, effective cooperation, and teamwork [ 29 , 31 , 34 – 38 , 69 ]. In fact, this is an interesting line of inquiry for future researchers.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the present findings contribute to the existing knowledge on the development of EI because they indicate that the training program resulted in improvements in many dimensions of the EI of senior managers. More specifically, the longitudinal effects of EI training on senior managers’ emotional skills had maintained over time, whereas the corresponding effects on emotional understanding and emotion management had strengthened at one-year follow up. Finally, the implementation of this intervention in organizational settings can nurture and promote a sense of fulfillment among employees.

Supporting information

Data underlying the findings described.

TCEI planning schedule.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (EDU2015-64562-R)

Funding Statement

This research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (EDU2015-64562-R) to R.G-C. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Data Availability