EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: The Three Major Theories In The Field

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE:The Three Major Theories in the FieldBachelor Degree Project in Cognitive NeuroscienceG2E15 ECTSSpring term 2011Maria HultinSupervisor: Daniel BromanExaminer: Judith Annett

Emotional Intelligence: The Three Major Theories in the FieldSubmitted by Maria Hultin to the University of Skövde as a final year project towards thedegree of B.Sc. in the School of Humanities and Informatics. The project has been supervisedby Daniel Broman.2011-06-06I hereby certify that all material in this final year project which is not my own work has beenidentified and that no work is included for which a degree has already been conferred on me.Signature:

3AbstractEmotional intelligence (EI) is a term that has several definitions and theories. Three majorviews in the field of EI will be presented and discussed in this thesis, furthermore somepractical implications for the research. There will also be a brief overview of the two fields ofemotion and intelligence research, from where the concept of EI has emerged. The first viewpresented is Mayer and Salovey‟s four-branch model of EI, measured with the MayerSalovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (the MSCEIT). The second view is the Bar-Onmodel of emotional-social intelligence, closely related to the Emotional Quotient Inventory(the EQ-i). The third view is Goleman and colleagues‟ model of EI, which is measured withthe Emotional Competence Inventory (the ECI). These different views of EI will be discussedin terms of ability-models and mixed-models, where the first model presented is referred to asan ability-model of EI and the following two models are seen as mixed-models of EI.Keywords: Emotion, intelligence, emotional intelligence, MSCEIT, EmotionalCompetence Inventory (ECI), Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i)

4Table of nt concepts of intelligenceSpearman‟s two-factor theory.99Thurstone and the primary mental abilities.10The Cattel-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory.10Gardner and the theory of multiple intelligences.11Sternberg and the triarchic theory of intelligence.12Factor analysisEmotions1313Defining emotion13Different concepts of emotion14Basic emotions.14The circumplex model of affect.14The approach-withdrawal distinction.15History of emotion researchMayer and Salovey‟s view of emotional intelligence1616The view‟s definition of emotional intelligence18The four-branch model19Measuring emotional intelligence22Practical implications for this model25Bar On‟s view of emotional intelligenceThe view‟s definition of emotional intelligence2828

5The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i)28The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence32Practical implications for this model33Goleman‟s view of emotional intelligence35The view‟s definition of emotional intelligence37The Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI)37Goleman‟s model of emotional intelligence40Practical implications for this model41A comparison of the three views42Discussion49Ability-models versus mixed-models of emotional intelligence49Strengths and weaknesses in the three major views of emotional intelligence50Mayer and Salovey‟s view of emotional intelligence.50Bar-On‟s view of emotional intelligence.51Goleman‟s view of emotional intelligence.53Overarching reflections and conclusionsReferences5558

6IntroductionThere are different views of what emotional intelligence (EI) is and how it should bedefined. According to Fernández-Berrocal and Extremera (2006) there are especially threetheories in the field of EI that are accepted in the scientific community. This work focuses onthese three major views and the aim of this thesis is to explain these different views of EI.Furthermore, present some of the strengths and weaknesses of the three views of EI.Emotional intelligence is a growing field of research and since the term „emotionalintelligence‟ has become very popular for the public it is important to point out that there isnot just one clear definition. All three views have their different definitions, theoreticalmodels and different ways to measure emotional intelligence and this work will go throughthem one by one. In addition it will also look at some of the practical implications for theresearch of EI, from the perspectives of the three views. Furthermore, this work also focuseson studies, reviews and meta-analyses in the field in order to compare the different views ofEI. Lastly there will be a discussion, which includes the strengths and weaknesses of the threeviews. Since emotional intelligence relates to the more established research fields of emotionand intelligence, this work starts with a brief overview around some of the theories in thesefields. This overview also provides readers without deeper knowledge in these fields withsome background and historical understanding for the areas that the concept of EI hasemerged from.The different views of EI are often divided into ability-models and mixed-models,based on what they believe are included in the concept of EI. The first approach presenteddefines emotional intelligence as consisting of mental abilities and it falls under the abilitymodels approach. The predecessors of this view are Peter Salovey and John Mayer withcolleagues. They presented the first definition of emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey,1990) and based on this definition, a model of emotional intelligence was created. Their

7model is often referred to as the four-branch model of EI. Following this model a performancetest (i.e., an ability test) was developed for measuring the four branches in their model. Thelatest version of this test is called the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence TestVersion 2.0 (MSCEIT V2.0) (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003).The second view that will be addressed is the one from Reuven Bar-On. This viewfalls under the mixed-models approach, because it is said to use a wider definition of EI,mixing mental abilities with personality constructs and competencies (Mayer, Salovey, &Caruso, 2000). Bar-On uses a self-report measure, called the Emotional Quotient Inventory(the EQ-i), to measure emotionally and socially intelligent behavior. From using this test hehas come up with a model, which he refers to as the Bar-On Model of Emotional-SocialIntelligence (ESI) (Bar-On, 2000).The third view is from Daniel Goleman. Goleman wrote a book, EmotionalIntelligence, in 1995, where he popularized the concept of emotional intelligence. This bookwas a bestseller and Goleman‟s ideas of how to define EI became the most known for thepublic. This model is based on the first definition of EI that Mayer and Salovey made 1990. InGoleman‟s popular book, he changed Mayer and Salovey‟s definition somewhat and addeddifferent skills and characteristics into his own concept, and this became a new and differentmodel of EI. Goleman‟s model of EI is also known as a mixed-model (Goleman, 1995). Formeasuring Goleman‟s model a multirater measure was developed. This measure passes underthe name of the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) (Sala, 2002).Intelligence“Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, toadapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms ofreasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought.” (Neisser et al., 1996, p. 77). Differentconcepts of intelligence try to explain and organize this complex set of phenomena.

8Intelligence is one of the most researched areas in psychology, but there is not one unifiedview of how it should be defined and measured. There are as many definitions as there areexperts who will define it (Neisser et al., 1996).There are two things that experts seem to agree upon to be present in intelligence.Intelligence has to do with the capacity to learn from experience, and the capacity to adapt toone‟s environment. When asking laypersons to define intelligence and to present what typesof behaviors are typical for an intelligent person, the answers are pretty similar to those we getfrom experts. The common view is that verbal ability and problem-solving are important partsof intelligence (Gregory, 2007). When looking at traditional intelligence tests they ofteninclude measures for these two types of abilities (Williams, McIntosh, Dixon, Newton, &Youman, 2010; Canivez & Watkins, 2010). There are also some differences in laypersons‟and experts‟ views of intelligence. Laypersons believe that social competence is important foran intelligent person, whereas experts points at practical intelligence. Practical intelligencemeans how the person can determine how to achieve goals, if the person displays awarenessof the world and shows interest in the world. The social competence is more about relationswith others, how well the person accepts others for what they are, how punctual they are andif they can admit mistakes. These two parts of intelligence are generally not measured inintelligence tests, partly because it is difficult to make tests for measuring these abilities, butalso because many test developers have accepted the incomplete conceptions of intelligencefrom history and just followed in those tracks, not taking into account these two parts ofintelligence. Now new tests start to evolve that measure practical intelligence (Gregory,2007), and the concept of social competence relates to the development of theories aboutemotional intelligence.

9Different concepts of intelligenceIt is important to look at the history of intelligence theories, if we want to understandthe structure and content of intelligence tests (IQ tests), and the import of intelligence. Also ifwe want to be able to judge the validity of different IQ tests the theories are important.Therefore, some of the most important ones, among all the numerous intelligence theories,will be addressed.The dominant approach in intelligence research is the so called Psychometricapproach. It means that intelligence is something that can be measured using differentpsychometric tests. The use of psychometric instruments for measuring different things iswidely used in Europe and America, for example to make diagnoses and evaluations. Fromthe beginning, many of the tests that exist are not intended to measure intelligence itself, butother related abilities, like scholastic aptitude and school achievement. These tests are oftenused for selection purposes, for example the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) is much used inthe US to be admitted to college (Neisser et al., 1996).The first three theories presented below fall under the notion of the psychometricapproaches, and the two last ones have different views of how intelligence could be measured.Spearman’s two-factor theory. Maltby, Day, and Macaskill (2010) summarizeCharles Spearman‟s contribution in the intelligence research. They mean that Spearmanbelieved it to be two types of factors that constitute intelligence and thereby determinedperformance. The first factor of intelligence consists of specific abilities (s), there existseveral specific abilities s1, s2, s3 sn. For example vocabulary intelligence is a specificability, and mathematical and spatial intelligence are two other specific abilities. Thesespecific abilities are thought to be measured in different amounts in different tests formeasuring intellectual ability. This is shown by low correlations between different tests. Thesecond factor is general intelligence (g), which is seen as a mental energy underlying all the