40 M. Fiori and A. K. Vesely-Maillefer Fig. 2.2 Conceptualization of ability EI as composed of a fluid (EIf) and crystallized (EIc) compo- nent, both affected by conscious and automatic emotion processes 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 pro- cessing of emotion information, beyond emotion knowledge, which would be better captured by bottom-up processes generated by the encoding and treatment of emo- tion 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 compo- nent of ability EI (EIc, or emotion knowledge), and another based on bottom-up perceptual responses to emotion information, requiring fast processing and hereaf- ter named the fluid component of ability EI (EIf, or emotion information processing) (see Fig. 2.2). An additional way to look at the relationship between the two components under- lying 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 organi- zational 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 inspec- tion 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 dif- ferent ways of processing emotion information (conscious vs. automatic; see also Fiori, 2009). The extent to which current ability EI tests depend on controlled pro- cesses and are affected by cognitive load is still unaddressed (Ybarra et al., 2014).
2 EI as an Ability 41 Fig. 2.3 Hypothesized effects of the fluid (EIf) and crystallized (EIc) ability EI components on emotional behavior 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 perfor- mance. 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 con- sciously 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. 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
42 M. Fiori and A. K. Vesely-Maillefer applications and its growing literature, this domain of research provides a challeng- ing yet exciting opportunity for innovative researchers. Acknowledgments This chapter benefited from the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant no 100014_165605 awarded to Marina Fiori). References 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 for- ward. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(1), 24–32. 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. 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 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 per- sonal, 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 emo- tional abilities to social functioning: A comparison of self-report and performance measures of e motional intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 780–795. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.780 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 com- petence (PEC): Development and validation of a self-reported measure that fits dimensions of emotional competence theory. PLoS One, 8(5), e62635. 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 intelli- gence construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 539–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0191-8869(99)00119-1
2 EI as an Ability 43 Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relation- ship 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 orga- nizations. New York: Grosset/Putnam. Côté, S., & Miners, C. T. (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job perfor- mance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1), 1–28. Côte, S., Lopes, P. N., Salovey, P., & Miners, C. T. H. (2010). Emotional intelligence and leader- ship 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 elu- sive 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 indi- viduals 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.
44 M. Fiori and A. K. Vesely-Maillefer 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 meth- ods 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 suc- cess 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 intel- ligence 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 intel- ligence. 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 multime- dia 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 situ- ational 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 bear- ing 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 relation- ship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 554–564.
2 EI as an Ability 45 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 perfor- mance: 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.
46 M. Fiori and A. K. Vesely-Maillefer 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 intel- ligence: 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 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 incremen- tal 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 intelli- gence 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 per- sonality research and assessment. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod mea- surement 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 non- verbal 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 recog- nition 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
2 EI as an Ability 47 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 appli- cations. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intel- ligence: 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 leader- ship 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.
Chapter 3 Emotional Intelligence as Personality: Measurement and Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence in Educational Contexts K. V. Petrides, Maria-Jose Sanchez-Ruiz, Alex B. Siegling, Donald H. Saklofske, and Stella Mavroveli Abstract Trait emotional intelligence (trait EI or trait emotional self-efficacy) is formally defined as a constellation of emotional perceptions assessed through ques- tionnaires and rating scales (Petrides et al. Br J Psychol 98:273–289, 2007). The construct describes our perceptions of our emotional world (e.g., how good we believe we are in terms of understanding, managing, and utilizing our own and other people’s emotions). Although it has been empirically demonstrated that these per- ceptions affect virtually every area of our life, the present chapter focuses exclu- sively on their role in education. We begin with a brief overview of trait EI theory and measures that have been salient in education research, with particular emphasis on scales developed for children and adolescents. Subsequently, we summarize the effects of trait EI on academic performance and related variables across primary, secondary, and tertiary education. The review of the evidence indicates that research- based applications of trait EI theory in educational settings can yield concrete and lasting advantages for both individuals and schools. K. V. Petrides (*) 49 London Psychometric Laboratory, University College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected]; http://www.psychometriclab.com/ M.-J. Sanchez-Ruiz Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon e-mail: [email protected] A. B. Siegling University College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] D. H. Saklofske Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada e-mail: [email protected] S. Mavroveli Imperial College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 K. V. Keefer et al. (eds.), Emotional Intelligence in Education, The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90633-1_3
50 K. V. Petrides et al. Trait emotional intelligence (trait EI) describes our perceptions of our emotional world: what our emotional dispositions are and how good we believe we are in terms of perceiving, understanding, managing, and utilizing our own and other peo- ple’s emotions. The roots of trait EI lie in the long-standing study of emotions within personality psychology (e.g., Revelle & Scherer, 2009). The construct, which has also been labeled as “trait emotional self-efficacy,” is formally defined as a con- stellation of emotional perceptions assessed via questionnaires and rating scales (Petrides, Pita, & Kokkinaki, 2007). In this chapter, we provide a summary of the role of trait EI in primary, second- ary, and tertiary educational settings. Due to lack of space, we do not consider the related areas of career and vocational choice and guidance, wherein trait EI cer- tainly has a role to play (for a review, see Chap. 13 by Di Fabio & Saklofske, this volume). For example, we note in passing that there are reliable differences in the trait EI profiles of students in different university departments (e.g., arts students score higher on the emotionality factor of trait EI than students in technical disci- plines; Sanchez-Ruiz, Pérez-González, & Petrides, 2010) and that trait EI has been linked to career-related decision-making (Di Fabio & Saklofske, 2014) and career adaptability (Coetzee & Harry, 2014). The chapter is divided into three major parts. The first part provides a brief over- view of trait EI theory. The second part presents fairly detailed descriptions of the main trait EI measures used in child development and education-related research, while the third part examines the effects of the construct on school behavior and, especially, on academic achievement, followed by a brief note on trait EI interven- tions in educational contexts. Trait EI Theory Trait EI theory was introduced by Petrides (2001) and proposed, among several other fundamental ideas, the distinction between trait and ability EI, where the for- mer mainly concerns emotional perceptions assessed via questionnaires and rating scales (Petrides et al., 2007) and the latter concerns emotion-related cognitive abili- ties that ought, in theory, to be amenable to IQ-type testing (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Unlike the construct of ability EI that strives to capture an aspect of human intel- ligence that is presumed to be universally adaptive, trait EI theory does not assume that there is one “correct” or “best” way to be; rather, certain trait EI profiles will be advantageous in some contexts, but not in others (Petrides, 2010). For example, when concentrating on an independent study project, being emotionally and socially reserved may be more conducive to succeeding on the project than being expressive and sociable. By the same token, trait EI theory recognizes that people’s emotional experiences are both subjective and socially constructed and what may be an adap- tive emotional response for one person, or in one cultural group, may be ineffectual
3 Trait EI in Education 51 Table 3.1 The sampling domain of trait emotional intelligence in adults and adolescents High scorers perceive themselves as… Well-being …successful and self-confident. Self-esteem …cheerful and satisfied with their lives. Trait happiness …confident and likely to “look on the bright side” of Trait optimism life. Self-control …capable of controlling their emotions. Emotion control …capable of withstanding pressure and regulating Stress management stress. …reflective and less likely to give into their urges. Impulse control Emotionality …clear about their own and other people’s feelings. Emotion perception (self and …capable of communicating their feelings to others. others) …capable of having fulfilling personal relationships. Emotion expression …capable of taking someone else’s perspective Relationships Trait empathy …accomplished networkers with excellent social skills. Sociability …capable of influencing other people’s feelings. Social awareness …forthright, frank, and willing to stand up for their Emotion management (others) rights. Assertiveness …flexible and willing to adapt to new conditions. Independent facetsa …driven and unlikely to give up in the face of adversity. Adaptability Self-motivation aThese two facets feed directly into the global trait emotional intelligence score without going through any factor for another (for a discussion of the role of culture, see Chap. 5 by Huynh, Oakes, & Grossmann, this volume). Sampling Domain Positioned within the realm of personality, the sampling domain of trait EI consists of lower-level personality facets and surface traits that are typically assessed on questionnaires of EI and cognate constructs (e.g., empathy, assertiveness, and adapt- ability). These facets are organized under four higher-order trait EI factors of emo- tionality, sociability, self-control, and well-being (see Table 3.1). Because of the increasing complexity and differentiation of self-perceptions with age (Marsh & Ayotte, 2003), different trait EI sampling domains have been estab- lished for children and adults. These are presented in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, respec- tively. The adolescent sampling domain, which falls in-between, has been aligned
52 K. V. Petrides et al. Table 3.2 The sampling domain of trait emotional intelligence in children Facets Brief description Example items “I find it hard to get used to Adaptability Children’s perceptions of how well they adapt to a new school year” new situations and people “I’m a very happy kid” Affective Children’s perceptions of the frequency and “I always find the words to disposition intensity with which they experience emotions show how I feel” “It’s easy for me to Emotion Children’s perceptions of how effectively they understand how I feel” expression can express their emotions “I can control my anger” Emotion Children’s perceptions of how accurately they “I don’t like waiting to get perception identify their own and others’ emotions what I want” “I listen to other children’s Emotion Children’s perceptions of how well they can problems” regulation control their emotions “I feel great about myself” “I always try to become Low impulsivity Children’s perceptions of how effectively they better at school” can control themselves Peer relations Children’s perceptions of the quality of their relationships with their classmates Self-esteem Children’s perceptions of their self-worth Self-motivation Children’s perceptions of their drive and motivation with the adult domain. As shown in these tables, the trait EI domain comprises 15 facets in adults, but only 9 in children. This key difference is also reflected in the factor structures of the trait EI construct in the two age groups, with four factors in adults (Petrides, 2009), but only two in children (Russo et al., 2012). Adolescent data, on the other hand, broadly follow the structure of adult data. Relations Vis-à-Vis Basic Personality Factor-analytic investigations of trait EI in relation to the Big Five and Giant Three personality taxonomies have shown that trait EI can be isolated as a coherent factor that is distinguishable from but nevertheless related to basic personality dimensions, particularly neuroticism (negatively) and extraversion (Pérez-González & Sanchez- Ruiz, 2014; Petrides et al., 2007; Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Although theoretically meaningful, the empirical overlap of trait EI with the higher-order personality traits has raised legitimate concerns about its redundancy as a unique predictor of those criteria that are known to be associated with the Big Five (Harms & Credé, 2010). To this end, a recent meta-analysis of 114 incremental validity analyses of trait EI reported a statistically and practically significant overall effect size of 0.06, concluding that trait EI “consistently explains incremental vari- ance in criteria pertaining to different areas of functioning, beyond higher order personality dimensions and other emotion-related variables” (Andrei, Siegling, Aloe, Baldaro, & Petrides, 2016, p. 261).
3 Trait EI in Education 53 A separate, but related, line of research has examined the relationships between trait EI and the general factor of personality (e.g., Van der Linden, Tsaousis, & Petrides, 2012). This uncovered a very high level of overlap between the two con- structs, to the extent that it can be argued that trait EI is the integrating dimension of human adult personality (Van der Linden et al., 2016). Trait EI Measurement in Children and Adolescents A detailed overview and evaluation of the most oft-used measures in EI research can be found in Siegling, Saklofske, and Petrides (2015). In the present section, we focus specifically on four trait EI measures that have been widely used in research and practice with children and adolescents: the Assessing Emotions Scale (Schutte, Malouff, & Bhullar, 2009), the youth version of the Emotional Quotient Inventory (Wood, Parker, & Keefer, 2009), and the adolescent and child forms of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (Petrides, 2009). Despite the apparent over- lap in content and format, these measures are based on quite different models and vary in terms of the facets used to operationalize trait EI. All four, however, share the characteristics of a superordinate trait EI factor and a self-report response for- mat, although observer (e.g., parent, teacher, and peers) rating scales are also avail- able in some cases. The four measures will be reviewed in turn, featuring descriptions, norms, and basic reliability and validity evidence. A summary of their key features can be found in Table 3.3. Assessing Emotions Scale (AES) Description As one of the earliest non-commercial EI questionnaires available, the AES (Schutte et al., 1998) is one of the most widely used scales in EI research. Although it was developed for adults, it has also been used to assess trait EI in ado- lescents (Ciarrochi, Chan, & Bajgar, 2001). In terms of its content domain, the scale is based on Salovey and Mayer's (1990) four-branch ability EI model, comprising four ability domains: perceiving emotions, understanding emotions, managing emotions, and using emotions to facilitate thought (for full description of the four branches, see Chap. 2 by Fiori & Vesely-Maillefer, this volume). However, as its authors have noted (Schutte et al., 2009), the AES is more appropriately conceptual- ized as a measure of trait EI due to its self-report format. It is intended to measure EI as a superordinate construct, although different models comprising three or four first-order factors have been proposed (Austin, Saklofske, Huang, & McKenney, 2004; Austin, Saklofske, & Egan (2005); Ciarrochi et al., 2001; Gignac, Palmer, Manocha, & Stough, 2005; Ko & Siu, 2013; Petrides & Furnham, 2000: Saklofske, Austin, & Minski, 2003). The four factors have been labelled as perception of
54 K. V. Petrides et al. Table 3.3 Assessment properties of trait EI measures for children and adolescents Measure No. Assessment Observer Reading of time form level Age range items Facets or factors available 5 mins Grade 5 Assessing Unspecified 33 Perception of – Emotions Scale emotions, (AES; Schutte managing own et al., 1998) emotions, managing others’ emotions (social skills), utilization of emotions Emotional 7–18 60 Intrapersonal, 25 to 30 ✓ Grade 4 (30 interpersonal, mins Quotient for stress (10 to 15 short management, mins for Inventory – Youth form) adaptability short form) Version Ancillary scales: General mood, (EQ-i:YV; Bar-On positive impression, & Parker, 2000) inconsistency index Trait Emotional 11–17 153 Fifteen facets and 25 mins ✓ Grade 4 Intelligence (30 four factors: Questionnaire – for Well-being, (10 mins for Adolescent Form short self-control, (TEIQue–AF; form) emotionality, short form) Petrides, 2009) Sociability Trait Emotional 8–12 75 Adaptability, 25 mins ✓ Grade 3 Intelligence (36 affective (10 to 15 Questionnaire – for disposition, mins for Child Form short emotion short form) (TEIQue–CF; form) expression, Mavroveli et al., 2008) emotion perception, emotion regulation, low impulsivity, peer relations, self-esteem, Self-motivation emotion (ten items), managing own emotions (nine items), managing others’ emo- tions or social skills (nine items), and utilization of emotion (six items; Schutte et al., 2009). The AES consists of 33 items of low reading level (fifth grade), making it appro- priate for use with adolescents. Average completion time is 5 minutes (Schutte et al., 2009). Items are responded to on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
3 Trait EI in Education 55 Norms In a sample of 131 Australian adolescents (73 males) aged 13 to 15 years (M = 13.8, SD = 0.74), mean scale scores were 3.65 (SD = 0.42) for global trait EI, 3.57 (SD = 0.58) for perceiving emotions, 3.63 (SD = 0.42) for managing others’ emotions, 3.71 (SD = 0.52) for managing own emotions, and 3.69 (SD = 0.66) for utilizing emotions (Ciarrochi et al., 2001). Adolescent data from a Canadian sample (Charbonneau & Nicol, 2002) yielded a mean trait EI score of 3.77 (SD = 0.44), and from a Malaysian sample (Liau, Liau, Teoh, & Liau, 2003), a mean score of 4.00 (SD = 0.34). A study of Japanese adolescents and youth again showed very similar mean scores and standard deviations for both the global trait EI score and the four factors (Fukuda et al., 2011). Reliability Satisfactory internal reliabilities have been observed for global trait EI (α = 0.84) and the perception subscale (α = 0.76) in Australian adolescents, with lower alphas for the remaining subscales, ranging from 0.55 for utilizing emotions to 0.66 for managing others’ emotions (Ciarrochi et al., 2001). Internal reliabilities have also been satisfactory at the global level in Malaysian (α = 0.76; Liau et al., 2003) and Canadian (α = 0.84; Charbonneau & Nicol, 2002) adolescents, as well as in Japanese youth (α = 0.89; Fukuda et al. 2011). An adaptation for Chinese adoles- cents yielded an alpha of 0.67 for the total AES score and a range from 0.60 (regula- tion of emotion) to 0.83 (appraisal of emotion) for the four factors (Ko & Siu, 2013). The test-retest reliability of the English AES has yet to be investigated in adoles- cents. However, over a 4-week period, test-retest correlations for the Chinese ver- sion ranged from 0.75 to 0.84 (Ko & Siu, 2013). Validity The AES scores correlate positively with the ability to identify emotional expressions, level of social support, satisfaction with social support received, and mood management behavior, even after controlling for the closely related constructs of self-esteem and trait anxiety (Ciarrochi et al., 2001). A recent study showed a negative association between the AES scores and attitudes toward cigarette smoking (Abdollahi, Yaacob, Talib, & Ismail, 2015). Employing a Japanese sample, Fukuda et al. (2011) replicated the four-factor structure of the AES and reported that the global score correlated at 0.75 with the Wong and Law (2002) Emotional Intelligence Scale. The AES scores have been shown to account for variance in alexithymia, depression, and life satisfaction, over and above the Big Five, in adolescents and youth (e.g. Austin et al., 2005; Saklofske Austin, & Minski, 2003). Availability The AES is a public-domain measure and can be found in Schutte et al. (1998). In addition, the AES has been adapted into different languages, such as Hebrew (Carmeli, 2003), Polish (Ogińska-Bulik, 2005), Swedish (Sjoberg, 2001), and Turkish (Yurtsever, 2003).
56 K. V. Petrides et al. Emotional Quotient Inventory: Youth Version (EQ-I:YV) Description The EQ-i:YV (Bar-On & Parker, 2000) is an age-appropriate adapta- tion of the adult Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997) for use with children and adolescents 7–18 years. It should be noted that Bar-On (2006) is explicit in his claim that his EI model does not measure personality traits but rather “competencies, skills, and facilitators” (p. 14; italics in the original). Thus, Bar- On’s instrument (EQ-i) is interpreted as a measure of trait EI only from the perspec- tive of trait EI theory (e.g., Keefer, Holden, & Parker, 2013), which provides a valid conceptual framework for all EI questionnaires alike. Like the adult EQ-i form, the EQ-i:YV measures four broad EI domains outlined in Bar-On’s (2006) model: (1) intrapersonal, which assesses perceived ability to label, express, and communicate one’s own emotions; (2) interpersonal, which mea- sures perceived ability to understand, respect, and empathize with the feelings of others; (3) stress management, which measures perceived emotional reactivity and ability to downregulate upsetting emotions; and (4) adaptability, which assesses perceived ability to appraise, problem solve, and persevere in challenging situa- tions. In addition to the four EI scales, the EQ-i:YV contains three ancillary scales that are not included in the global EI score: general mood, a measure of positive emotionality and well-being; positive impression, an index of socially desirable responding; and inconsistency, an index of aberrant responding. The latter two are validity indices that may be used to determine the accuracy of self-reports. The EQ-i:YV comprises 60 items rated on a 4-point scale, with responses rang- ing from 1 (very seldom true of me) to 4 (very often true of me). It can be completed in 25–30 minutes and has a Grade 4 reading level (Wood et al., 2009). A short 30-item form (EQ-i:YV-S) that omits the general mood scale and inconsistency index is also available; it has completion time of 10–15 minutes. Parent and teacher forms (EQ-i:YV-O) are also available and have shown promising results in the assessment of trait EI in children from the perspective of significant others (Wood et al., 2009). These forms consist of 38 items, rated by observers on a 4-point scale. Norms The EQ-i:YV norms are based on a sample of over 9000 children and ado- lescents from North America, aged 7 to 18, with a mean age of 11.6 years (SD = 3.1) (Bar-On & Parker, 2000). The EQ-i:YV technical manual provides gender- and age- specific scoring norms for four different age groups (7–9, 10–12, 13–15, and 16–18 years of age). Using these norms, raw scores can be converted into standard T scores with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, to facilitate interpreta- tion and comparison of individual results. Reliability The internal consistency reliabilities for the long and short forms of the EQ-i:YV range from 0.65 to 0.90 based on the large North American normative sample (Bar-On & Parker, 2000). Alpha coefficients are lower (0.65–0.80) for younger children (age 7–9) but become progressively higher in every subsequent age group, reaching excellent levels (0.83–0.90) for older adolescents (age 16–18).
3 Trait EI in Education 57 Test-retest reliability over a 3-week period suggested high temporal stability, with coefficients ranging from 0.84 for the interpersonal subscale to 0.89 for global trait EI. In a follow-up study, similar results were reported, ranging from 0.77 for general mood t.o 0.89 for global trait EI (Wood et al., 2009). Validity The EQ-i:YV measurement structure has been supported in several stud- ies, including Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children and youth in Canada (Parker et al., 2005), while other studies have supported the EQ-i:YV-S measurement struc- ture in countries outside of North America, such as Lebanon (El Hassan & El Sader, 2005) and Hungary, albeit not for all of its items (Kun et al., 2012). Parker, Creque et al. (2004) presented criterion validity data showing that global trait EI and three subscales (adaptability, interpersonal, and stress management) were higher in aca- demically successful high school students. Similarly, Brouzos, Misailidi, and Hadjimattheou (2014) found a positive relationship between the EQ-i:YV scores and academic achievement and teacher-rated adaptive functioning, but only in 11- to 13-year-olds (and not in 8- to 10-year-olds). A longitudinal study showed that the EQ-i:YV scores measured in Grade 7 predicted academic success in Grade 11 (Qualter, Gardner, Pope, Hutchinson, & Whiteley, 2012). Parker, Taylor, Eastabrook, Schell, and Wood (2008) showed that the EQ-i:YV is a strong predictor of addiction behaviors, like gambling, internet use, and video game playing in adolescence. In adolescent girls, the intrapersonal and interper- sonal scales were negatively related to sexual risk behaviors, like number of male sex partners in the past 6 months (Lando-King et al., 2015). Combined self-ratings and observer (parent and teacher) ratings of 169 gifted students (Grades 4–8) revealed low-to-moderate self-other correlations and moderate inter-rater (parent- teacher) correlations (Schwean, Saklofske, Parker, & Kloosterman, 2006). Availability The EQ-i instruments are published and sold commercially by Multi- Health Systems. T rait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire–Adolescent Form (TEIQue–AF) The TEIQue instruments (Petrides, 2009) have been developed more recently on the basis of trait EI theory (Petrides et al., 2007; Petrides, 2010) and thus provide direct operationalizations of it, which is crucial for meaningful interpretation of data. The adult TEIQue form and its adolescent (TEIQue–AF) and child (TEIQue–CF) deriv- atives provide comprehensive coverage of their respective trait EI sampling domains (see Tables 3.1 and 3.2). Description The TEIQue–AF (Petrides, 2009) is suitable for adolescents aged 13–17 years. It is based on the same sampling domain as the adult form and yields scores on the four broad trait EI factors of well-being, self-control, emotionality,
58 K. V. Petrides et al. and sociability (see Table 3.1). The full-length TEIQue–AF consists of 153 items and has a completion time of approximately 30 minutes. A 30-item short form (TEIQue–ASF) can be completed in 10 minutes and has been used successfully for children as young as 11 years (Petrides, Sangareau, Furnham, & Frederickson, 2006). It is intended to assess global trait EI but can also yield usable factor, albeit not facet, scores. Both full-length and short-form TEIQue–AF use a 7-point Likert- type response scale, ranging from 1 (Disagree completely) to 7 (Agree completely). Peer ratings can be obtained for the full-length and short-form TEIQue–AF through the relevant TEIQue–360° versions (Petrides, 2009). Norms In a large sample of adolescents (N = 1842; age range,14–16 years; Petrides, 2009), TEIQue–AF descriptive statistics were global trait EI (M = 4.53, SD = 0.58), emotionality (M = 4.71, SD = 0.67), self-control (M = 4.01, SD = 0.75), sociability (M = 4.65, SD = 0.73), and well-being (M = 4.89, SD = 0.96). Very similar values were observed in a sample of 351 Italian adolescents (163 males; mean age = 15.3 years; SD = 1.80; age range, 14–18 years): global trait EI (M = 4.57, SD = 0.51), emotionality (M = 4.72, SD = 0.69), self-control (M = 4.06, SD = 0.68), sociability (M = 4.65, SD = 0.67), and well-being (M = 5.00, SD = 0.89) (Andrei, Mancini, Trombini, Baldaro, & Russo, 2014). Reliability In adolescents, Cronbach’s alphas for global trait EI have been reported at 0.83 (Mikolajczak, Petrides, & Hurry, 2009) and 0.89 (Petrides, 2009). At the factor level, alpha coefficients were 0.74 for emotionality, 0.76 for self-control, 0.80 for sociability, and 0.85 for well-being (Petrides, 2009). In an Italian sample, reli- ability coefficients were 0.85 for global trait EI, 0.82 for well-being, 0.63 for self- control, 0.74 for emotionality, and 0.67 for sociability. In the same sample, alphas for eight facets were low-to-moderate (0.50–0.67; Andrei et al., 2014). Validity In line with trait EI theory, TEIQue–AF scores are orthogonal to cognitive ability and significantly related to higher-order personality dimensions (Andrei et al., 2014). The TEIQue–ASF global score has been shown to correlate positively with adaptive and negatively with maladaptive coping strategies (Mavroveli, Petrides, Rieffe, & Bakker, 2007). Multiple studies have examined the measure’s incremental validity vis-à-vis various criteria, such as disruptive behavior and depression, after controlling for demographics, personality, and cognitive ability (Davis & Humphrey, 2012); aspects of psychopathology, after controlling for gender, another trait EI measure, and abil- ity EI (Williams, Daley, Burnside, & Hammond-Rowley, 2010); socioemotional variables, after controlling for their baseline levels and cognitive ability (Frederickson, Petrides, & Simmonds, 2012); somatic complaints, after controlling for depression (Mavroveli et al., 2007); teacher-rated academic achievement, after controlling for cognitive ability, personality, and self-concept (Ferrando et al., 2011); emotional maladjustment, after controlling for gender, cognitive ability, and personality (Andrei et al., 2014); socioemotional variables, after controlling for
3 Trait EI in Education 59 coping strategies and demographics (Siegling, Vesely, Saklofske, Frederickson, & Petrides, 2017; Study 1); and academic achievement, after controlling for cognitive ability and gender (Siegling, Vesely, et al., 2017; Study 2). Availability All TEIQue instruments are available, free of charge, and in multiple languages for research purposes via www.psychometriclab.com. Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire – Child Form (TEIQue–CF) Description The main aim of the TEIQue–CF (Mavroveli, Petrides, Shove, & Whitehead, 2008) is to assess the emotion-related facets of child personality. Rather than a simple adaptation of the adult form, this variant is based on a sampling domain that has been specifically developed for children aged between 8 and 12 years. Thus, the TEIQue–CF assesses nine distinct facets in the children’s sam- pling domain presented in Table 3.2 (Mavroveli et al., 2008). The measure com- prises 75 items, responded to on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (Disagree completely) to 5 (Agree completely). Completion time is approximately 25 minutes. A short form (TEIQue–CSF) with 36 items and completion time of 10–15 minutes is also available. Norms In a sample of children with a mean age of 9.12 years (SD = 1.27), boys (n = 274) had a global trait EI score of 3.55 (SD = 0.43), which was significantly lower than that of girls (M = 0.65, SD = 0.45; n = 286; Mavroveli & Sánchez-Ruiz, 2011). Reliability Cronbach’s alpha was 0.82 for the TEIQue–CF global score and ranged from 0.58 for adaptability to 0.76 for affective disposition at the level of the nine facets (Mavroveli et al., 2008). In a sample of preadolescents (N = 139, mean age: 11.23 years), Cronbach’s alpha was at 0.76 (Mavroveli et al., 2008). At the facet level, alphas ranged from 0.57 for adaptability and emotion perception to 0.76 for affective disposition (Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011). Test-retest reliability was examined over a 3-month period in a mixed-gender sample; the attenuated and disattenuated coefficients were 0.79 and 1.00, respectively (Mavroveli et al., 2008). Validity In line with trait EI theory, global TEIQue–CF scores are unrelated to cognitive ability while correlating moderately with all personality dimensions (extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, openness, and conscientiousness), as well as with social acceptance (positively) and social rejection (negatively; Andrei, Mancini, Mazzoni, Russo, & Baldaro, 2015). They also correlate weakly with verbal ability and literacy (r = 0.15 and 0.10; Andrei et al., 2015; Mavroveli et al., 2008) and moderately with teacher-rated behavioral and social problems (r = −0.34; Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011). Moreover, the TEIQue–CF scores
60 K. V. Petrides et al. differentiated between pupils with a school record of unauthorized absences or exclusions and controls and predicted teacher-rated positive (r = 0.24) and negative (r = −0.34) behavior (Mavroveli et al., 2008). Availability All TEIQue instruments are available, free of charge, and in multiple languages for research purposes via www.psychometriclab.com. Role of Trait EI in Primary and Secondary Education Trait EI and Adjustment Outcomes School adaptation, especially in the early years of education, can be challenging, as children draw on a range of resources to adjust and thrive in their school environ- ment. Trait EI has been linked to greater overall well-being, characterized by fewer depressive symptoms and somatic complaints in adolescents (Davis & Humphrey, 2012; Mavroveli et al., 2007; Siegling, Vesely, et al., 2017, Study 1). Trait EI has also been positively linked to adaptive school behaviors, such as increased nomina- tions from peers and teachers for positive social attributes, like leadership and kind- ness (Mavroveli et al., 2008; Mavroveli, Petrides, Sangareau, & Furnham, 2009), and negatively linked to maladaptive behaviors, like aggression and delinquency (Santesso, Dana, Schmidt, & Segalowitz, 2006). In a study by Andrei et al. (2015), trait EI correlated positively with peer acceptance and negatively with peer rejection in children aged 8–10 years. Similarly, Mavroveli et al. (2009; see also Mavroveli & Sanchez Ruiz, 2011) reported that children high in trait EI received more nomina- tions from their peers for being kind and having leadership qualities and fewer nom- inations for bullying behavior. Research on trait EI and peer bullying and victimization has been particularly active in recent years. Kokkinos and Kipritsi (2012) replicated earlier reports of negative correlations between total trait EI score and experiences of bullying and victimization in a sample of Greek children. Other studies have focused on under- standing the connections between specific dimensions of trait EI and different types of bullying behaviors, using samples of children and adolescents from Australia, Italy, and the USA (Baroncelli & Ciucci, 2014; Gower et al., 2014; Lomas, Stough, Hansen, & Downey, 2012; Polan, Sieving, & McMorris, 2013; Schokman et al., 2014). Of the various trait EI factors, emotion management/regulation emerged as the single most consistent predictor of bullying involvement across these studies, with both bullies and victims reporting low self-perceptions in this trait EI domain. This finding was consistent regardless of the type of bullying examined (e.g., physi- cal, relational, and cyberbullying). A recent review of studies on trait EI and aggression similarly concluded that there was strong evidence that children, adolescents, and adults high in trait EI engage in less aggressive behavior of all types (García-Sancho, Salguero, & Fernández-Berrocal, 2014). Accordingly, many anti-bullying programs are now
3 Trait EI in Education 61 integrated within a broader school-wide social and emotional learning (SEL) frame- work, recognizing the benefits of SEL not only for improved peer relationships but also for a host of other developmental and academic outcomes (see Chap. 9, Espelage, King, & Colbert, this volume). Lastly, an important link has been discovered between trait EI and school absen- teeism (Mavroveli et al., 2008; see also Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004), showing that children high in trait EI have fewer unauthorized absences and are less likely to have been expelled from school than their low trait EI peers. This effect suggests a positive influence on school adaptation and engagement in childhood (Mavroveli et al., 2007; Mavroveli et al., 2009). Trait EI and Academic Achievement Academic achievement has been traditionally linked to cognitive intelligence (Brody, 2000; Gottfredson, 2003; Laidra, Pullmann, & Allik, 2007); however, there has also been research interest in the potential role of non-cognitive variables, including personality and social constructs (Furnham, Chamorro-Premuzic, & McDougall, 2002; Petrides, Chamorro-Premuzic, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2005; Poropat, 2009). To date, the results across child and adolescent samples suggest the presence of a moderate positive effect of trait EI on academic performance (Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013). A direct relationship between trait EI and scholastic achievement has been reported in a number of studies involving primary-aged children and adolescents, as can be seen in Table 3.4 (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2009; Downey, Mountstephen, Lloyd, Hansen, & Stough, 2008; Ferrando et al., 2011; Mancini et al., 2017; Mavroveli et al., 2008; Parker, Creque, et al., 2004; Siegling, Vesely, et al., 2017, Study 2). These studies showed a direct positive association between trait EI and academic achievement using objective grade point average (GPA) or subject- specific marks. Gender-specific effects have been reported in some studies (Andrei et al., 2015; Costa & Faria, 2015; Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011); however, the findings have not consistently favored one gender or the other. Rather, they tend to be subject- or grade-specific (see Table 3.4). With regard to age effects, younger children seem to benefit more from high trait EI scores than their older counterparts, although there is significant variation in this set of findings, too (e.g., Costa & Faria, 2015; Petrides et al., 2004; see Table 3.4). In these studies, however, one should consider the influ- ence of verbal ability, which could be biasing the results obtained in primary educa- tion, because language-skilled pupils may be selecting more socially desirable responses than their less skilled counterparts (Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011). Cognitive ability has been proposed as a moderator of the relationship between trait EI and academic performance (Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011; Petrides et al., 2004). Specifically, Petrides et al. (2004) posited that such effects as trait EI might have on academic performance are likely to assume prominence when the
62 K. V. Petrides et al. demands of a situation tend to outweigh a pupil’s intellectual resources. This is because, in contrast to their high IQ counterparts, low IQ pupils are more likely to be forced to draw on resources other than their cognitive ability in order to cope with the demands of their courses and examinations. Agnoli et al. (2012) showed a direct effect of trait EI on math and language per- formance and a significant interaction between cognitive ability and trait EI, with high trait EI scores benefiting children with low and medium cognitive ability in language performance only. Qualter et al. (2012) contributed to this line of research with a longitudinal investigation of personality, cognitive ability, and trait EI, which demonstrated direct effects of trait EI in math, English language, English literature, and science, in boys only. In girls, the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and adaptability trait EI dimensions were related to math, English Language, and English literature grades, respectively. Structural equation models with personality and cognitive ability variables have also revealed a significant predictive effect of trait EI on school grades, but only in boys. In their study, Andrei et al. (2015) reported that the effects of trait EI on aca- demic achievement (math and language) did not persist in the presence of nonverbal IQ (see also Qualter et al., 2012). In contrast, Di Fabio and Palazzeschi (2009) observed incremental effects of trait EI on GPA over and above fluid intelligence and the Giant Three personality dimensions. Despite fairly intensive research over the past 15 years, the mechanisms underly- ing the relationship between trait EI and academic performance in childhood and adolescence are generally unknown (see Table 3.4). This is, at least partially, attrib- utable to psychometric difficulties (e.g., the use of substandard measures and poorly operationalized criteria), the dearth of well-controlled longitudinal studies, and the unsystematic application of trait EI theory to the design, implementation, and inter- pretation of research studies in the field. Role of Trait EI in Higher Education Trait EI and Adjustment Outcomes Trait EI is linked to a wide range of mental and physical health variables in adults, like anxiety, depression, hospitalization rates, and legal drug use (Martins et al., 2010; Mikolajczak, Avalosse, et al., 2015). In the context of higher education, trait EI is negatively associated with perceived stress (e.g., Forushani & Besharat, 2011), anxiety and depressive symptomatology (Extremera & Berrocal, 2006), and addiction-related problems (for a review, see Kun & Demetrovics, 2010) and posi- tively associated with peer liking (Song et al., 2010), perceived social support, and general psychological adjustment (Perera & DiGiacomo, 2015). Given that adjust- ment difficulties are one of the most common predictors of university attrition, it is not surprising that students who enter university with higher trait EI scores are less likely than their low-scoring peers to drop out early (Parker, Hogan, Eastabrook,
Table 3.4 Summary of studies on trait EI and academic achievement in children and adolescents 3 Trait EI in Education Citation Measure of trait Academic Results emotional achievement measure Sample intelligence Siegling, Vesely, Saklofske, TEIQue–ASF National Curriculum N = 357–491, Trait EI predicted academic achievement in Frederickson, & Petrides (2017) level in English, Age = 11–13 years; UK English, math, and science over and beyond math, and science cognitive ability and gender Andrei, Mancini, Mazzoni, TEIQue–CF Mean score in N1 = 376, M(age) = 9.39 years Trait EI related to both math and literacy scores Russo, & Baldaro (2015) language literacy and math N2 = 202, (r = 0.30*** and r = 0.29***, respectively). M(age) = 12.05 years; Italy However, it did not show incremental effects after controlling for the Big Five, IQ, and gender Costa, & Faria (2015) Emotional Skills and Math, Portuguese N = 380, M(age) = 15.4 years; Path analysis showed that trait EI predicted Competence grades, and GPA Portugal math in 10th grade students and GPA (in boys Questionnaire only) (ESCQ) Agnoli, Mancini, Pozzoli, TEIQue–CF Language and math N = 352 (188 females), Trait EI positively correlated with math and Baldaro, Russo, & Surcinelli language performance (r = 0.13* & r = 0.18**, (2012) grades M(age) = 9.35 years; Italy respectively). Low and medium IQ children with high trait EI exhibited better language performance (b = 0.66, SE = 0.11, t = 5.99***; b = 0.37, SE = 0.11, t = 3.36**, respectively) Qualter, Gardner, Pope, EQ-i:YV GCSE in English N = 413 (214 females); year The adaptability, stress management, and language, English Hutchinson, & Whiteley (2012) literature, math, and 11; UK interpersonal subscales predicted academic science performance on math, English language, English literature, and science. Structural equation modeling showed that trait EI predicted GSCE performance in boys only (continued) 63
Table 3.4 (continued) Measure of trait Academic Results 64 K. V. Petrides et al. emotional achievement measure Sample Citation intelligence Ferrando et al. (2011) Head-teacher-rated N = 290 (136 females), Trait EI showed incremental validity over IQ, TEIQue–ASF general academic M(age) = 11.53 years; Spain personality, and self-concept (β = 0.20, performance t = 2.10*) in predicting general academic performance Yazici, Seyis, & Altun (2011) Emotional Average score N = 407 (171 females), Only the emotional awareness (β = 0.18**) Mavroveli et al. (2009) Intelligence Scale (Ergin, 2000) M(age) = 11.16 years; Turkey subscale predicted academic achievement TEIQue–CF End-of-year teacher N = 140 (63 females), Correlations between trait EI and English and assessment scores in M(age) = 9.26 years; UK math scores were significant in the total sample math and English (r = 0.24** and r = 0.25**, respectively) but did not persist after Di Fabio & Palazzeschi (2009) EQ-i: Short form GPA N = 124 (90 female), controlling for age and nonverbal IQ M(age) = 17.49 years; Italy Trait EI demonstrated incremental validity for Mavroveli et al. (2008) TEIQue–CF Key stage 2 SAT N = 139 (69 girls), predicting GPA over both fluid intelligence and scores in English, M(age) = 11.23 years; UK the Giant Three (extraversion, neuroticism, and math, science, NfER psychoticism). Results held for global scores reading, and spelling (β = 0.23*, ΔR2 = 0.05*) and jointly for the scores factor scores (ΔR2 = 0.06*) Trait EI scores correlated positively with spelling scores (r = 0.28**) only. Gender-specific analyses revealed that trait EI was unrelated to English, science, and reading scores but was moderately related to math (r = 0.29*) and spelling scores (r = 0.38**), in boys only. With the exception of spelling (total sample: r = 0.25*; boys: r = 0.29*), these correlations lost their significance when controlling for verbal intelligence
Downey, Mountstephen, Lloyd, Adolescent GPA and 8 subject N = 209 (123 females), Global trait EI correlated with GPA (r = 0.15*) 3 Trait EI in Education M(age) = 13.8 years, and grades in geography (r = 0.27**) and Hansen, & Stough (2008) Swinburne grades range = 12–17 years; science (r = 0.14*). Emotion management and Australia control subscale correlated with GPA University Emotional (r = 0.14*) and grades in math (r = 0.24**) and science (r = 0.19*). Understanding emotions Intelligence Test subscale correlated with grades in art (r = 0.34**), geography (r = 0.28**), and (SUEIT-A) science (r = 0.18*). Low-achieving students (GPA 20th percentile or Petrides, Frederickson, & TEIQue Key stage 3 N = 650 (48% female), lower) scored lower on global trait EI, emotion Furnham (2004) assessment (KS3) M(age) = 16.5 years; UK management and control, and understanding results emotions subscales than average-a chieving students (GPA between 20th and 80th percentile) or high-achieving students (GPA 80th percentile or higher) Trait EI moderated the relationship between cognitive ability and academic achievement Trait EI moderated the effect of IQ on English and overall GCSE performance High trait EI was associated with better academic achievement across a range of low IQ scores, but the relationship reversed at IQ scores of about +1 SD (continued) 65
Table 3.4 (continued) 66 K. V. Petrides et al. Citation Measure of trait Academic Results emotional achievement measure Sample intelligence Trait EI correlated with academic achievement (r = 0.33*). High-achieving students (GPA 80th Parker, Creque, Barnhart, EQ-i:YV GPA N = 667 (363 females), percentile or higher) scored higher on the Age = 14–18 years; USA interpersonal, adaptability, and stress Harris, Majeski, Wood, Bond, & management subscales than average-achieving students (GPA between 20th and 80th Hogan (2004) percentile), who, in turn, scored higher than low-achieving students (GPA 20th percentile or lower) Note. GPA = grade point average. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001;? = Relevant information was not available. Research papers with incomplete reporting were omitted.
3 Trait EI in Education 67 Oke, & Wood, 2006; Qualter, Whiteley, Morley, & Dudiak, 2009) and more likely to complete their studies and graduate with a degree (Keefer, Parker, & Wood, 2012; Parker, Saklofske, & Keefer, 2016). Trait EI and Academic Achievement In tertiary education, a meta-analysis of the impact of non-cognitive factors on aca- demic performance revealed moderate correlations with GPA (Richardson, Abraham, & Bond, 2012). Specifically with respect to trait EI, our review of the recent literature (from 2010 to date) shows a rather inconsistent pattern of associa- tions, similar to that found in earlier reviews (Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011). Out of the 13 studies presented in Table 3.5, three reported nonsignificant results, while the rest reported weak-to-moderate correlations, which is in line with other studies and meta-analyses (e.g., Parker, Summerfeldt, et al., 2004; Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013). Even though the effects may not be strong, our review indicates that trait EI does predict unique variance in academic performance in higher educa- tion over and above gender (Pope, Roper & Qualter, 2012), cognitive abilities (Song et al., 2010), and the Big Five personality traits (Sanchez-Ruiz, Mavroveli, & Poullis, 2013). Various trait EI facets and factors have shown significant correlations with aca- demic performance. Overall, adaptability (Fallahzadeh, 2011; Parker, Summerfeldt et al., 2004; Pope et al., 2012; Saklofske et al., 2012), stress management (Fallahzadeh, 2011; O’Connor & Little, 2003; Parker, Summerfeldt, et al., 2004), and empathy (Pope et al., 2012) have been salient predictors among the 15 facets, while well-being has been a salient predictor among the 4 factors (Shipley, Jackson, & Segrest, 2010). In any case, more extensive research is needed at the facet and factor levels in order to increase our confidence and understanding of trait EI’s role in academic achievement. Differences across academic subjects A few studies have uncovered differences in the trait EI profiles of students from different academic domains. For example, Pérez and Castejón (2005) found that students enrolled in education-related majors scored higher in global trait EI than those enrolled in technical studies. Similarly, Sanchez-Ruiz et al. (2010) reported higher scores on the emotionality factor of trait EI among arts and social sciences students than among technical studies students. More recently, psychology students scored higher on trait EI than computer science, electrical engineering, and business and management students (Sanchez-Ruiz, Mavroveli, & Poullis, 2013). In addition, trait EI and its factors seem to have differential impact on academic performance across different academic subjects, which likely contributes to the inconsistencies in the literature. A number of studies have investigated the link between trait EI and academic performance in specific subjects. Overall, the link seems to be more reliable in health-related professions, such as nursing or the medi-
Table 3.5 Summary of studies on trait EI and academic achievement in postsecondary settings 68 K. V. Petrides et al. Citation Measure of Academic Results emotional achievement measure Sample intelligence Perera & DiGiacomo TEIQue–short form Semester-end GPA N = 470 freshmen students; The relationship between trait EI and academic (2015) TEIQue–short form GPA 61.7% female; performance was mediated by engagement TEIQue–short form GPA M(age) = 17.77; Australia coping and academic adjustment Fernandez, Salamonson, & N = 81 nursing students; 80% Trait EI was a significant predictor of academic Griffiths (2012) female; M(age) = 29; Australia achievement (b = 0.25, p < 0.05; F (2, 78) = 5.26, Sanchez-Ruiz, p < 0.01; Adj. R2 = 0.12) Mavroveli & Poullis (2013) N = 323 undergraduates (113 Trait EI correlated with academic performance female); (r = 0.35**) Saklofske, Austin, M(age) = 23; Trait EI significantly predicted academic Mastoras, Beaton & Cyprus performance over and above cognitive ability and Osborne (2012) traditional personality dimensions The Big Five personality traits were added to the Fallahzadeh (2011) equation (b = 0.24***; F (7,302) = 7.3***, Adj r2 = 0.13). At this stage, the model explained significantly more variance in the outcome measure than at step 2; ΔF (7, 296) = 9.43, ΔR2 = 0.03** EQ-i End-of-year GPA N = 238 undergraduates (185 Significant correlation between academic female); performance and the adaptability subscale M(age) = 20.03; (r = 0.17*) Scotland EQ-i: Short form GPA N = 223 Medical science students; Low-to-moderate correlations were found 153 female; between academic performance and trait EI M(age males) = 22.73; M(age (r = 0.14*) and in particular the stress females) = 23.02; Iran management (r = 0.15*) and adaptability (r = 0.16*) subscales
Pope, Roper, & Qualter Emotional Average percentage N = 135 undergraduates; 97 Global trait EI did not significantly predict 3 Trait EI in Education (2012) female; academic performance, but when the individual Competence mark (APM) M(age) =?; UK subscales were entered together in the regression equation, they explained 15% of the variance Inventory Version 2 N = 235 business students; 122 after controlling for gender; F (6, 90) = 3.60**. female; None of them were individually significant (ECI-U II) M(age) = 23; predictors of performance Nigeria Specific trait EI subscales were associated with Olatoye, Akintunde & Wong and Law Cumulative GPA N = 98 nursing students; all academic performance, including adaptability Yakasai (2010) Emotional GPA female; Saudi Arabia (r = 0.31**) and empathy (r = 0.25*) Intelligence Scale N = 193 business students; 48% Suliman (2010) (WLEIS) female; M(age) = 19–29. Nonsignificant correlations between trait EI and Country =? academic performance EQ-i S1: N = 222; 47% female; Nonsignificant correlations between trait EI and Shipley, Jackson, & TEIQue–short form GPA M(age) = 21.30; China. academic performance Segrest (2010) S2: N = 124; 60.5% female; M(age) =?; China Nonsignificant correlations between trait EI and Song, Huang, Peng, Wong and Law S1: GPA academic performance Law, Wong, & Chen Emotional S2: Course grades Students in midrange GPA scored significantly (2010) Intelligence Scale higher on the trait EI Well-being factor than those (WLEIS) in low- and high-range GPA; F (2, 191) = 4.23*) S1: Academic achievement correlated with trait EI (r = 0.22**). Trait EI showed incremental validity over general mental abilities in predicting academic performance (β = 0.17, ΔR2 = 0.03**). S2: Trait EI showed incremental validity in predicting course grade after controlling for general mental abilities and several other variables (β = 0.24, ΔR2 = 0.03*) (continued) 69
Table 3.5 (continued) Measure of Academic Results 70 K. V. Petrides et al. emotional achievement measure Sample Citation intelligence First-year GPA correlated with total trait EI Parker, Summerfeldt, End-of-first-year N = 372 first-year university (r = 0.20*) and the intrapersonal (r = 0.27*), Hogan, & Majeski EQ-i: Short form GPA students; 294 female; stress management (r = 0.32*), and adaptability (2004) M(age) = 19.34; Canada (r = 0.37*) subscales Successful students (first-year GPA of 80% or O’Connor & Little EQ-i GPA N = 90; 37 female; higher) scored higher on total trait EI and the (2003) Age = 18–32; USA intrapersonal, adaptability, and stress management subscales compared to unsuccessful Newsome, Day, & EQ-i GPA N = 180 university students; 118 students (first-year GPA < 60%). These subscales were better predictors of first-year university Catano (2000) female; GPA than high school grades Global trait EI (r = 0.23*) and the intrapersonal (r = 0.22*) and stress management (r = 0.29**) subscales correlated with academic achievement No significant relationships were found between trait EI and GPA M(age) = 21; USA Note. GPA = grade point average; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001;? = Not reported
3 Trait EI in Education 71 cal sciences (Austin, Evans, Goldwater, & Potter, 2005; Fallahzadeh, 2011; Fernandez et al., 2012) than in business-related majors (Olatoye, Akintunde, & Yakasai, 2010; Shipley et al., 2010). However, methodological challenges, such as the use of poorly operationalized criteria, mean that further systematic research is needed in order to elucidate fully the mechanisms through which trait EI impacts on academic performance across specific educational domains. Mediating pathways Research must also start taking into account possible indi- rect routes through which trait EI may be exerting influence on academic perfor- mance. For example, trait EI has been shown to predict important factors for a successful teaching and learning experience, such as critical thinking and collab- orative learning (Fernandez, Salamonson, & Griffiths, 2012), cognitive and affec- tive engagement (Maguire, Egan, Hyland, & Maguire, 2017), and creative skills (Sanchez-Ruiz, Hernández-Torrano, Pérez-González, Batey, & Petrides, 2011). Past work has also shown that emotional self-efficacy enhances academic self-effi- cacy, which, in turn, improves academic performance (Adeyemo, 2007; Hen & Goroshit, 2014). In a recent study, Perera and DiGiacomo (2015) tested several pathways through which trait EI may indirectly affect academic achievement. In the first pathway, trait EI impacted academic achievement through greater perceived social support, which increased students’ positive affect and, in turn, academic performance. In the second pathway, trait EI influenced academic performance through adaptive coping strategies, namely, active coping, positive reinterpretation, and planning, which also increased academic engagement. Indeed, many authors have argued that the reason trait EI is linked to academic outcomes is because it facilitates the adaptive coping and emotion regulation necessary to face academic stress and achieve academic goals (e.g., Por, Barribal, Fitzpatrick, & Roberts, 2011; Saklofske, Austin, Mastoras, Beaton, & Osborne, 2012). An up-to-date review and discussion of the coping hypothesis is provided in Chapter 4 by Zeidner and Matthews (this volume). S ummary In summary, the reviewed research indicates that trait EI is reliably linked to better university adjustment, engagement, and retention outcomes, but its association with academic performance in higher education is less clear-cut. Exploring trait EI fac- tors and facets, in addition to the global score, can be valuable in elucidating the role of the construct in academic performance, since, according to the present review, trait EI factors may have differential weights in the prediction of performance and could even cancel each other out. Students in different academic majors have dis- tinct trait EI profiles, and their precise relationship with academic performance may vary across academic subjects and majors. Indirect trait EI effects through other
72 K. V. Petrides et al. variables (e.g., learning processes, coping strategies) should also be systematically investigated. For a more extended review of the findings, limitations, and promises of EI research in postsecondary settings, the reader is referred to Chapter 16 by Parker, Taylor, Keefer, and Summerfeldt (this volume). R eflections on the Relationship Between Trait EI and Academic Performance While findings for trait EI and adjustment variables are consistent across all educa- tional levels, the literature on the relationship between trait EI and academic perfor- mance has yet to reach a consensus (see Tables 3.3 and 3.4; Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2011). There is no doubt that trait EI is implicated in academic per- formance (e.g., Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013; Petrides et al., 2004); however, the variations across study designs and model operationalizations confound the under- lying relationships and produce heterogeneity in results. Level of Study Trait EI seems to be a more consistent direct predictor in primary and secondary education than in tertiary education (Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013). This could be due to the collaborative nature of education at the primary level, which requires constant social interactions, in contrast to high school and university, where independent learning gradually becomes more common (e.g., Poropat, 2011). Another possible factor is the restriction of range in cognitive ability due to the admission require- ments at universities. Hence, it may be useful to explore the incremental validity of trait EI over and above cognitive ability in order to understand fully its role at dif- ferent educational stages. In postsecondary settings, Saklofske et al. (2012) suggested that trait EI might play a differential role by year of study, being more important in the first year of university (e.g., Parker, Summerfeldt, et al., 2004), when students are faced with adjustment and acclimatization challenges. In other words, year of study could be a potential confounding variable in designs with students at different points in their university career. Thus, future studies may wish explicitly to model year of aca- demic study, ideally in the context of longitudinal designs, which would be as wel- come in this area as they are in psychology (Collins, 2006) and education (White & Arzi, 2005), more generally.
3 Trait EI in Education 73 Indices of Academic Achievement The specific indicator of academic achievement used in a study (e.g., subject- specific grade or cumulative GPA/semester GPA) can determine the direction and strength of associations with trait EI. At university level, the use of GPA as the unique indicator of academic achievement can be problematic (see Sanchez-Ruiz, El Khoury, Saade, & Shrikadian, under review). First, GPA is subject to a number of distortions, from grade inflation (e.g., Johnson, 2003) and non-invariance across institutions (Didier, Kreiter, Bury, & Solow, 2006) to confounding influences that can affect performance, like exam anxiety (Karatas, Alci, & Aydin, 2013). In addition, some tertiary and pre-tertiary educational institutions focus on teach- ing to test, preparing students for particular assessments and thus limiting their learning experience (Atkinson & Geiser, 2009). In primary school, where there is an absence of rigid performance criteria and teachers are mainly monitoring learning milestones, grading can be more subjective and crude. This starts to change in sec- ondary education with the introduction of a more grade-centered educational sys- tem, which, however, is still considered a fallible index of true academic competence (Guskey, 2015). In sum, research should avoid equating GPA with learning, which involves more than final grades, and should be complemented by supplementary approaches, such as formative assessment (Sanchez-Ruiz et al., under review). Trait EI Interventions in Educational Settings It is possible that the optimization of pupils’ perceptions of their emotional and social functioning will result in better educational outcomes. Indeed, there has been a growing interest in behavioral interventions aimed at improving child and adoles- cent trait EI scores, with some evidence pointing to generalized benefits ensuing from improved socioemotional perceptions, such as increased frequency of proso- cial behaviors. For example, McIlvain, Miller, Lawhead, Barbosa-Leiker, and Anderson (2015) applied an 8-week yoga-based intervention to a clinical sample of adolescents. This yielded increases in trait EI scores accompanied by improvements in desirable behaviors as rated by staff (e.g., increases in the adolescents’ ability to self-regulate). Ruttledge and Petrides (2012) administered a cognitive behavior group intervention to a small number of adolescents exhibiting disruptive behaviors. The intervention, which included six hourly sessions, was successful in reducing teacher-rated disruptive behavior and improving self-perceptions, including trait EI. Trait EI interventions have also been successfully implemented in sports appli- cations (see Chap. 11 by Laborde, Mosley, Ackermann, Mrsic, & Dosseville, this volume). In terms of systemic prevention efforts, school-based SEL programs, which inte- grate explicit teaching and practice of social and emotional skills into the school curriculum, have been found to improve students’ social-emotional competencies
74 K. V. Petrides et al. and related self-perceptions, along with a host of behavioral and academic out- comes (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011). The SEL approach is discussed in detail in several other chapters of this book (see Chap. 9 by Espelage et al., this volume; Chap. 7 by Hoffmann, Ivcevic, & Brackett, this vol- ume; Chap. 8 by Humphrey, this volume; Chap. 12 by Elias, Nayman, & Duffell, this volume). There is robust empirical evidence suggesting that trait EI can be developed in university students (Vesely, Saklofske, & Leschied, 2013; Vesely, Saklofske, & Nordstokke, 2014; see also Chap. 15 by Boyatzis & Cavanagh, this volume; Chap. 14 by Vesely-Maillefer & Saklofske, this volume) and in adults (see Mikolajczak & Pena-Sarrionandia, 2015), with effects that are relatively long-lasting (Kotsou, Nelis, Grégoire, & Mikolajczak, 2011). Specifically, Mikolajczak and her col- leagues demonstrated that a well-designed intervention leads to an average increase of 12% in trait EI scores, after a few weeks of training. These effects remained evident for at least a year and were accompanied by improvements in participants’ physical and psychological well-being. Conclusion We conclude that trait EI has important implications for academic behavior and achievement, although its effects vary across studies. The nature of these effects should not be studied in isolation, but with reference to both verbal and nonverbal cognitive ability, as well as other factors that have been consistently linked to achievement, such as gender, socioeconomic status, and parental education and involvement (Brody, 2000). While a number of studies have attempted to control for the aforementioned confounding variables, most do not, and there is now a pressing need to disentangle these knotty associations. It is, therefore, recommended that future studies employ longitudinal multivariate designs, using theoretically and empirically robust mea- surement tools and large sample sizes, allowing for both group-level and subject- specific analyses. In parallel, theoretical focus should expand from the current cognitive- and grade-centered approach to a broader strategy that fosters the devel- opment of socioemotional skills and positive self-perceptions among students and teachers alike. Irrespective of how future research develops, the effects of trait EI on scholastic achievement and general school behavior and adaptation, whether direct or indirect, merit careful consideration by those involved in educational policy, planning, and delivery.
3 Trait EI in Education 75 References Abdollahi, A., Yaacob, S. N., Talib, M. A., & Ismail, Z. (2015). Social anxiety and cigarette smok- ing in adolescents: The mediating role of emotional intelligence. School Mental Health, 7, 184–192. Adeyemo, D. A. (2007). Moderating influence of emotional intelligence on the link between academic self-efficacy and achievement of university students. Psychology & Developing Societies, 19, 199–213. Agnoli, S., Mancini, G., Pozzoli, T., Baldaro, B., Russo, P. M., & Surcinelli, P. (2012). The interac- tion between emotional intelligence and cognitive ability in predicting scholastic performance in school-aged children. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 660–665. Andrei, F., Mancini, G., Mazzoni, E., Russo, P. M., & Baldaro, B. (2015). Social status and its link with personality dimensions, trait emotional intelligence, and scholastic achievement in children and early adolescents. Learning and Individual Differences, 42, 97–105. Andrei, F., Mancini, G., Trombini, E., Baldaro, B., & Russo, P. M. (2014). Testing the incremen- tal validity of trait emotional intelligence: Evidence from an Italian sample of adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 24–29. Andrei, F., Siegling, A. B., Aloe, A. M., Baldaro, B., & Petrides, K. V. (2016). The incremental validity of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 261–276. Atkinson, R. C., & Geiser, S. (2009). Reflections on a century of college admissions tests. Educational Researcher, 38, 665–676. Austin, E. J., Evans, P., Goldwater, R., & Potter, V. (2005). A preliminary study of emotional intelligence, empathy and exam performance in first year medical students. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1395–1405. 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. Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H., Huang, S. H., & McKenney, D. (2004). Measurement of trait emo- tional intelligence: Testing and cross-validating a modified version of Schutte et al.’s (1998) measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 555–562. Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-health Systems. Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI). Psicothema, 18, 13–25. Bar-On, R., & Parker, J. D. A. (2000). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Youth Version (BarOn EQ-I:YV) technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Baroncelli, A., & Ciucci, E. (2014). Unique effects of different components of trait emotional intelligence in traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of Adolescence, 37, 807–815. Brody, N. (2000). History of theories and measurements of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Brouzos, A., Misailidi, P., & Hadjimattheou, A. (2014). Associations between emotional intelli- gence, socio-emotional adjustment, and academic achievement in childhood. The influence of age. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 29, 83–99. Carmeli, A. (2003). The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior and outcomes: An examination among senior managers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 788–813. Charbonneau, D., & Nicol, A. A. (2002). Emotional intelligence and prosocial behaviors in ado- lescents. Psychological Reports, 90, 361–370. Ciarrochi, J., Chan, A. Y., & Bajgar, J. (2001). Measuring emotional intelligence in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1105–1119. Coetzee, M., & Harry, N. (2014). Emotional intelligence as a predictor of employees' career adapt- ability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84, 90–97.
76 K. V. Petrides et al. Collins, L. M. (2006). Analysis of longitudinal data: The integration of theoretical model, temporal design, and statistical model. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 505–528. Costa, A., & Faria, L. (2015). The impact of emotional intelligence on academic achievement: A longitudinal study in Portuguese secondary school. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 38–47. Davis, S. K., & Humphrey, N. (2012). Emotional intelligence predicts adolescent mental health beyond personality and cognitive ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 144–149. Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (2009). An in-depth look at scholastic success: Fluid intelli- gence, personality traits or emotional intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 581–585. Di Fabio, A., & Saklofske, D. H. (2014). Promoting individual resources: The challenge of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 65, 19–23. Didier, T., Kreiter, C. D., Buri, R., & Solow, C. (2006). Investigating the utility of a GPA institu- tional adjustment index. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11, 145–153. Downey, L. A., Mountstephen, J., Lloyd, J., Hansen, K., & Stough, C. (2008). Emotional intelli- gence and scholastic achievement in Australian adolescents. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60, 10–17. 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, 474–501. El Hassan, K., & El Sader, M. (2005). Adapting and validating the BarOn EQ–i:YV in the Lebanese context. International Journal of Testing, 5, 301–317. Extremera, N., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2006). Emotional intelligence as predictor of mental, social, and physical health in university students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 9, 45–51. Fallahzadeh, H. (2011). The relationship between emotional intelligence and academic achieve- ment in medical science students in Iran. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1461–1466. Fernandez, R., Salamonson, Y., & Griffiths, R. (2012). Emotional intelligence as a predictor of academic performance in first-year accelerated graduate entry nursing students. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21, 3485–3492. Ferrando, M., Prieto, M. D., Almeida, L. S., Ferrandiz, C., Bermejo, R., Lopez-Pina, J. A., … Fernandez, M.-C. (2011). Trait emotional intelligence and academic performance: Controlling for the effects of IQ, personality, and self-concept. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 150–159. Forushani, N. Z., & Besharat, M. A. (2011). Relation between emotional intelligence and perceived stress among female students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1109–1112. Frederickson, N., Petrides, K. V., & Simmonds, E. (2012). Trait emotional intelligence as a predic- tor of socioemotional outcomes in early adolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 323–328. Fukuda, E., Saklofske, D. H., Tamaoka, K., Fung, T. S., Miyaoka, Y., & Kiyama, S. (2011). Factor structure of Japanese versions of two emotional intelligence scales. International Journal of Testing, 11, 71–92. Furnham, A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & McDougall, F. (2002). Personality, cognitive ability, and beliefs about intelligence as predictors of academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 14, 47–64. García-Sancho, E., Salguero, J. M., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2014). Relationship between emo- tional intelligence and aggression: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, 584–591. Gignac, G. E., Palmer, B. R., Manocha, R., & Stough, C. (2005). An examination of the factor structure of the Schutte self-report emotional intelligence (SSREI) scale via confirmatory fac- tor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1029–1042. Gottfredson, L. S. (2003). Dissecting practical intelligence theory: Its claims and evidence. Intelligence, 31, 343–397.
3 Trait EI in Education 77 Gower, A. L., Shlafer, R. J., Polan, J., McRee, A. L., McMorris, B. J., Pettingell, S. L., & Sieving, R. E. (2014). Brief report: Associations between adolescent girls' social–emotional intelligence and violence perpetration. Journal of Adolescence, 37, 67–71. Guskey, T. R. (2015). On your mark: Challenging the conventions of grading and reporting. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Harms, P. D., & Credé, M. (2010). Remaining issues in emotional intelligence research: Construct overlap, method artifacts, and lack of incremental validity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 154–158. Hen, M., & Goroshit, M. (2014). Academic self-efficacy, emotional intelligence, GPA and aca- demic procrastination in higher education. Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 1–10. Johnson, V. (2003). Grade inflation: A crisis in higher education. New York: Springer Verlag. Karatas, H., Alci, B., & Aydin, H. (2013). Correlation among high school senior students’ test anxiety, academic performance and points of university entrance exam. Educational Research Reviews, 8, 919–926. Keefer, K. V., Holden, R. R., & Parker, J. D. A. (2013). Longitudinal assessment of trait emotional intelligence: Measurement invariance and construct continuity from late childhood to adoles- cence. Psychological Assessment, 25, 1255–1272. Keefer, K. V., Parker, J. D. A., & Wood, L. M. (2012). Trait emotional intelligence and university graduation outcomes: Using latent profile analysis to identify students at risk for degree non- completion. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 402–413. Ko, F. S. L., & Siu, A. M. H. (2013). Validation of a Chinese version of the Assessing Emotions Scale for measuring the emotional intelligence of Chinese adolescents. International Journal on Disability and Human Development, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijdhd-2013-0017 Kokkinos, C. M., & Kipritsi, E. (2012). The relationship between bullying, victimization, trait emotional intelligence, self-efficacy and empathy among preadolescents. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 41–58. Kotsou, I., Nelis, D., Grégoire, J., & Mikolajczak, M. (2011). Emotional plasticity: Conditions and effects of improving emotional competence in adulthood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 827–839. Kun, B., & Demetrovics, Z. (2010). Emotional intelligence and addictions: A systematic review. Substance Use & Misuse, 45(7–8), 1131–1160. Kun, B., Urbán, R., Paksi, B., Csóbor, L. V., Oláh, A., & Demetrovics, Z. (2012). Psychometric characteristics of the Emotional Quotient Inventory, Youth Version, Short Form in Hungarian high school students. Psychological Assessment, 24, 518–523. Laidra, K., Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2007). Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from elementary to secondary school. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 441–451. Lando-King, E., McRee, A.-L., Gower, A. L., Shlafer, R. J., McMorris, B. J., Pettingell, S., & Sieving, R. E. (2015). Relationships between social-emotional intelligence and sexual risk behaviors in adolescent girls. The Journal of Sex Research, 52, 835–840. Liau, A. K., Liau, A. W. L., Teoh, G. B. S., & Liau, M. T. L. (2003). The case for emotional lit- eracy: The influence of emotional intelligence on problem behaviours in Malaysian secondary school students. Journal of Moral Education, 32, 51–66. Lomas, J., Stough, C., Hansen, K., & Downey, L. A. (2012). Brief report: Emotional intelligence, victimisation and bullying in adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 207–211. Maguire, R., Egan, A., Hyland, P., & Maguire, P. (2017). Engaging students emotionally: The role of emotional intelligence in predicting cognitive and affective engagement in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 36, 343–357. Mancini, G., Andrei, F., Mazzoni, E., Biolcati, R., Baldaro, B., & Trombini, E. (2017). Brief report: Trait emotional intelligence, peer nominations, and scholastic achievement in adoles- cence. Journal of Adolescence, 59, 129–133.
78 K. V. Petrides et al. Marsh, H. W., & Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more dif- ferentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 687. Martins, A., Ramalho, N., & Morin, E. (2010). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the relation- ship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 554–564. Mavroveli, S., Petrides, K. V., Rieffe, C., & Bakker, F. (2007). Trait emotional intelligence, psy- chological Well-being and peer-rated social competence in adolescence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 263–275. Mavroveli, S., Petrides, K. V., Sangareau, Y., & Furnham, A. (2009). Exploring the relationships between trait emotional intelligence and objective socio-emotional outcomes in childhood. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 259–272. Mavroveli, S., Petrides, K. V., Shove, C., & Whitehead, A. (2008). Investigation of the construct of trait emotional intelligence in children. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 17, 516–526. Mavroveli, S., & Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J. (2011). Trait emotional intelligence influences on aca- demic achievement and school behaviour. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 112–134. 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, US: Basic Books. McIlvain, S. J., Miller, B., Lawhead, B. A., Barbosa-Leiker, C., & Anderson, A. (2015). Piloting yoga and assessing outcomes in a residential behavioural health unit. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 22, 199–207. Mikolajczak, M., Avalosse, H., Vancorenland, S., Verniest, R., Callens, M., van Broeck, N., … Mierop, A. (2015). A nationally representative study of emotional competence and health. Emotion, 15, 653–667. Mikolajczak, M., & Pena-Sarrionandia, A. (2015, March). On the efficiency of emotional intel- ligence training in adulthood. Emotion Researcher. Retrieved from http://emotionresearcher. com/on-the-efficiency-of-emotional-intelligence-training-in-adulthood/ Mikolajczak, M., Petrides, K. V., & Hurry, J. (2009). Adolescents choosing self-harm as an emo- tion regulation strategy: The protective role of trait emotional intelligence. The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 181–193. Newsome, S., Day, A. L., & Catano, V. M. (2000). Assessing the predictive validity of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 1005–1016. O'Connor, R. M., & Little, I. S. (2003). Revisiting the predictive validity of emotional intelli- gence: Self-report versus ability-based measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1893–1902. Ogińska-Bulik, N. (2005). Emotional intelligence in the workplace: Exploring its effects on occupational stress and health outcomes in human service workers. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 18, 167–175. Olatoye, R. A., Akintunde, S. O., & Yakasai, M. I. (2010). Emotional intelligence, creativity and academic achievement of business administration students. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 8, 763–786. Parker, J. D. A., Creque, R. E., Barnhart, D. L., Harris, J. I., Majeski, S. A., Wood, L. M., … Hogan, M. J. (2004). Academic achievement in high school: Does emotional intelligence mat- ter? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1321–1330. Parker, J. D. A., Hogan, M. J., Eastabrook, J. M., Oke, A., & Wood, L. M. (2006). Emotional intel- ligence and student retention: Predicting the successful transition from high school to univer- sity. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 1329–1336.
3 Trait EI in Education 79 Parker, J. D. A., Saklofske D. H., & Keefer K. V. (2016). Giftedness and academic success in college and university: Why emotional intelligence matters. Gifted Education International, online release October 2016. Parker, J. D. A., Saklofske, D. H., Shaughnessy, P., Huang, S. H. S., Wood, L. M., & Eastabrook, J. M. (2005). Generalizability of the emotional intelligence construct: A cross-cultural study of North American aboriginal youth. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 215–227. Parker, J. D. A., Summerfeldt, L. J., Hogan, M. J., & Majeski, S. A. (2004). Emotional intelligence and academic success: Examining the transition from high school to university. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 163–172. Parker, J. D. A., Taylor, R. N., Eastabrook, J. M., Schell, S. L., & Wood, L. M. (2008). Problem gambling in adolescence: Relationships with internet misuse, gaming abuse and emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 174–180. Perera, H. N., & DiGiacomo, M. (2013). The relationship of trait emotional intelligence with aca- demic performance: A meta-analytic review. Learning and Individual Differences, 28, 20–33. Perera, H. N., & DiGiacomo, M. (2015). The role of trait emotional intelligence in academic per- formance during the university transition: An integrative model of mediation via social support, coping, and adjustment. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 208–213. Pérez, N., & Castejón, J. L. (2005). Diferencias en el perfil de inteligencia emocional en estudi- antes universitarios de distintas titulaciones [Differences in the emotional intelligence profile in university students from different degrees]. In J. Romay & R. García (Eds.), Psicología de las Organizaciones, del Trabajo y Recursos Humanos y de la Salud [psychology of organizations, employment, human resources and health]. Biblioteca Nueva: Madrid, Spain. Pérez-González, J. C., & Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J. (2014). Trait emotional intelligence anchored within the Big Five, Big Two and Big One frameworks. Personality and Individual Differences, 65, 53–58. Petrides, K. V. (2001). A psychometric investigation into the construct of emotional intelligence. Doctoral dissertation: University College London. Petrides, K. V. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. Parker (Eds.), Advances in the assessment of emotional intelligence. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_5 Petrides, K. V. (2010). Trait emotional intelligence theory. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 136–139. Petrides, K. V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Frederickson, N., & Furnham, A. (2005). Explaining indi- vidual differences in scholastic behaviour and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 239–255. Petrides, K. V., Frederickson, N., & Furnham, A. (2004). The role of trait emotional intelligence in academic performance and deviant behavior at school. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 277–293. Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 313–320. Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15, 425–448. Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., & Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional intelligence in personality factor space. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 273–289. Petrides, K. V., Sangareau, Y., Furnham, A., & Frederickson, N. (2006). Trait emotional intelli- gence and children’s peer relations at school. Social Development, 15, 537–547. Polan, J. C., Sieving, R. E., & McMorris, B. J. (2013). Are young adolescents’ social and emotional skills protective against involvement in violence and bullying behaviors? Health Promotion Practice, 14, 599–606. Pope, D., Roper, C., & Qualter, P. (2012). The influence of emotional intelligence on academic progress and achievement in UK university students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 907–918.
80 K. V. Petrides et al. Por, J., Barriball, L., Fitzpatrick, J., & Roberts, J. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Its relationship to stress, coping, Well-being and professional performance in nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 31, 855–860. Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic per- formance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338. Poropat, A. E. (2011). The Eysenckian personality factors and their correlations with academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 41–58. Qualter, P., Gardner, K. J., Pope, D. J., Hutchinson, J. M., & Whiteley, H. E. (2012). Ability emo- tional intelligence, trait emotional intelligence, and academic success in British secondary schools: A 5year longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 83–91. 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, 219–231. Revelle, W., & Scherer, K. R. (2009). Personality and emotion. In D. Sander & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Oxford Companion to Emotion and the Affective Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students' academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353–387. Russo, P. M., Mancini, G., Trombini, E., Baldaro, B., Mavroveli, S., & Petrides, K. V. (2012). Trait emotional intelligence and the big five: A study on Italian children and preadolescents. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 274–283. Ruttledge, R. A., & Petrides, K. V. (2012). A cognitive-behavioural group approach for adoles- cents with disruptive behaviour in schools. School Psychology International, 33, 223–239. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination Cognition and Personality, 9, 185–211. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., El Khoury, J., Saade, G., & Shrikadian, M. (under review). Self-efficacy variables and academic achievement: The role of emotional intelligence. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Non-cognitive Factors and Educational Attainment. Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Hernández-Torrano, D., Pérez-González, J., Batey, M., & Petrides, K. V. (2011). The relationship between trait emotional intelligence and creativity across subject domains. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 461–473. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Mavroveli, S., & Poullis, J. (2013). Trait emotional intelligence and its links to university performance: An examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 658–662. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Pérez-González, J. C., & Petrides, K. V. (2010). Trait emotional intelligence profiles of students from different university faculties. Australian Journal of Psychology, 62, 51–57. Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., Mastoras, S. M., Beaton, L., & Osborne, S. E. (2012). Relationships of personality, affect, emotional intelligence and coping with student stress and academic success: Different patterns of association for stress and success. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 251–257. Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., & Minski, P. S. (2003). Factor structure and validity of a trait emo- tional intelligence measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 707–721. Santesso, L. D., Dana, L. R., Schmidt, L. A., & Segalowitz, S. J. (2006). Frontal electroencephalo- gram activation asymmetry, emotional intelligence, and externalizing behaviors in 10-year-old children. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 36, 311–328. Schokman, C., Downey, L. A., Lomas, J., Wellham, D., Wheaton, A., Simmons, N., & Stough, C. (2014). Emotional intelligence, victimisation, bullying behaviours and attitudes. Learning and Individual Differences, 36, 194–200. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., & Bhullar, N. (2009). The Assessing Emotions Scale. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications. New York, NY: Springer.
3 Trait EI in Education 81 Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–177. Schwean, V. L., Saklofske, D. H., Parker, J. D. A., & Kloosterman, P. (2006). Emotional intelli- gence and gifted children. E-Journal of Applied Psychology: Emotional Intelligence, 2, 30–37. Shipley, N. L., Jackson, M. J., & Segrest, S. L. (2010). The effects of emotional intelligence, age, work experience, and academic performance. Research in Higher Education Journal, 9, 1–18. Siegling, A. B., Saklofske, D. H., & Petrides, K. V. (2015). Measures of ability and trait emotional intelligence. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Measures of personal- ity and social psychological constructs. San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-0-12-386915-9.00014-0 Siegling, A. B., Vesely, A. K., Saklofske, D. H., Frederickson, N., & Petrides, K. V. (2017). Incremental validity of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire–Adolescent Short Form (TEIQue–ASF). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33, 65–74. Sjoberg, L. (2001). Emotional intelligence: A psychometric analysis. European Psychologist, 6, 79–95. Song, L. J., Huang, G.-H., Peng, K. Z., Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Chen, Z. (2010). The differen- tial effects of general mental ability and emotional intelligence on academic performance and social interactions. Intelligence, 38, 137–143. Suliman, W. A. (2010). The relationship between learning styles, emotional social intelligence, and academic success of undergraduate nursing students. Journal of Nursing Research, 18, 136–143. Van der Linden, D., Pekaar, K., Bakker, A. B., Aitken Schermer, J., Vernon, P. A., & Petrides, K. V. (2016). Overlap between the general factor of personality and emotional intelligence: A meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 36–52. Van der Linden, D., Tsaousis, I., & Petrides, K. V. (2012). Overlap between general factors of personality in the Big Five, Giant Three, and trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 175–179. Vesely, A. K., Saklofske, D. H., & Leschied, A. D. (2013). Teachers - the vital resource: The contribution of emotional intelligence to teacher efficacy and Well-being. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 28, 71–89. Vesely, A. K., Saklofske, D. H., & Nordstokke, D. W. (2014). EI training and pre-service teacher wellbeing. Personality and Individual Differences, 65, 81–85. White, R. T., & Arzi, H. J. (2005). Longitudinal studies: Designs, validity, practicality, and value. Research in Science Education, 35, 137–149. Williams, C., Daley, D., Burnside, E., & Hammond-Rowley, S. (2010). Can trait emotional intel- ligence and objective measures of emotional ability predict psychopathology across the transi- tion to secondary school? Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 161–165. Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243–274. Wood, L. M., Parker, J. D. A., & Keefer, K. V. (2009). Assessing emotional intelligence using the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) and related instruments. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications. New York, NY: Springer. Yazici, H., Seyis, S., & Altun, F. (2011). Emotional intelligence and self-efficacy beliefs as predic- tors of academic achievement among high school students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2319–2323. Yurtsever, G. (2003). Measuring the moral entrepreneurial personality. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 1–12.
Chapter 4 Grace Under Pressure in Educational Contexts: Emotional Intelligence, Stress, and Coping Moshe Zeidner and Gerald Matthews Abstract Proponents of emotional intelligence (EI) often view effective coping with stress as central to the EI construct. In fact, current thinking among EI research- ers suggests that the way people identify, understand, regulate, and repair emotions (in self and others) helps determine coping behaviors and consequent adaptive out- comes. The scientific merit of EI plausibly rests on the working assumption that EI is a coherent attribute of the person that supports and contributes to adaptive coping. In this chapter we review what we have learned so far about the role of EI in coping with stress and in supporting adaptive outcomes – with special concern for students in achievement settings. We briefly discuss the role of emotions and emotional com- petencies in learning contexts. The nature of coping is then described, along with conjectures from the available literature about the likely association between EI and different coping styles. We survey the empirical literature on the role of EI in coping with stress and in affecting outcomes and conclude by presenting a number of con- cerns regarding attempts to explicate the EI-stress relationship. Ever since its inception as a scientific construct in the early 1990s (Salovey & Mayer, 1990), emotional intelligence (EI) remains a popular yet controversial con- cept, having spawned an impressive body of psychological and educational research and practice over the past quarter of a century. Broadly defined, EI refers to a set of hierarchically organized core competencies and skills for identifying, expressing, processing, and regulating emotions – both in self and others (Salovey, Woolery, & Mayer, 2001). There are currently two different conceptual and related measure- ment models of the EI construct: (a) EI as a cognitive ability, best measured via M. Zeidner (*) 83 University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel e-mail: [email protected] G. Matthews University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 K. V. Keefer et al. (eds.), Emotional Intelligence in Education, The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90633-1_4
84 M. Zeidner and G. Matthews performance-type tests, and (b) EI as a noncognitive trait or personality disposition, best measured via self-report inventories. The ongoing debate surrounding the practical utility of EI in educational and other applied settings (work, health, family relations, etc.) has made EI a controver- sial construct in modern psychology. To many enthusiastic supporters, EI is viewed as a quick fix panacea for manifest problems and difficulties in learning settings, including schools and colleges. Furthermore, some rather extravagant claims con- cerning the practical utility of EI have created considerable excitement about the potential of applications of EI in education. Thus, EI has been touted as a major predictor of educational outcomes and even a stronger predictor than existing mea- sures of ability or personality (e.g., Goleman, 1995). Some of the more extravagant claims about the pivotal role of EI in applied settings have been quite deservedly criticized (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2002), leading to a backlash, often over- shadowing and even diminishing the tenability of some of the more careful claims made by more sober supporters of EI. For other less sanguine supporters, EI is often little more than old wine packaged in new and more glittering containers. It is commonly claimed that “heeding the wisdom” provided by the emotional system determines effective coping behaviors and shapes adaptive outcomes in day- to-day life (Goleman, 1995). Theoretical links between EI and coping strategies have been proposed by various researchers. For example, Zeidner, Matthews, and Roberts (2006) suggested that “adaptive coping might be conceptualized as EI in action, supporting mastery of emotions, emotional growth, and both cognitive and emotional differentiation, allowing us to evolve in an ever changing world” (p. 460). Also, Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler, and Mayer (1999) claimed that EI helps individu- als cope successfully because they “accurately perceive and appraise their emo- tional states, know how and when to express their feelings, and can effectively regulate their mood states” (p. 161). Furthermore, it has been suggested that the scientific merit of EI plausibly rests on the working assumption that EI is a coherent attribute of the person that supports and contributes to adaptive coping (Matthews et al., 2002). This chapter reviews what we have learned so far about the role of EI in coping with stress and in supporting adaptive outcomes, with special concern for students in various educational settings. We begin our review by briefly discussing the role of emotions and emotional competencies in learning contexts for student well-being and academic success. The nature of coping is then described, along with conjec- tures from the available literature about the likely association between EI and differ- ent coping styles. We move on to discuss academic stressors and how individuals typically cope with stress. Next, we survey the empirical literature on the role of EI in coping with stress and conclude by presenting a number of concerns regarding attempts to explicate the EI-coping with stress relationship.
4 EI, Stress, Coping 85 The Role of Emotions and Emotional Competencies in Academic Settings We now briefly survey the pivotal roles of emotions and emotional competencies in academic settings. Emotions Emotional processes, it seems, saturate daily life at school and in academia. A stu- dent’s mood may swing from moments of interest, confidence, contentment, pride, flow, gratitude, and joy to moments of boredom, insecurity, discontent, anger, fear, shame, envy, blame, and sadness (Pekrun & Frese, 1992). However, until recently, the importance of emotions at school has been largely ignored by both researchers and practitioners alike, with emotions largely given short shrift in school-based theory, research, and applications. In both Greek philosophical and traditional Judeo-Christian thought, emotions were perceived as being chaotic and irrational and therefore antagonistic to rational thought. Cognitive, motivational, and perfor- mance factors came to be viewed as more urgent for school life and success than emotions, with the latter glossed over, discouraged, and eventually relegated to a relatively minor role in educational research and practice. Fortunately for emotion research, the zeitgeist at the turn of the millennium and the current trend of emphasizing “noncognitive twenty-first-century skills” (see Kyllonen, in press) has offered an alternative view on the interface of reason and emotions. According to this “new look” in education, to be educated means not only to be cognitively intelligent, knowledgeable, and well versed in the sciences, humanities, and the arts but also to be emotionally aware of oneself and others, kind, empathetic, compassionate, caring, considerate, responsible, trustworthy, con- scientious, honest, pro-social, and in control – emotionally intelligent, in short (Elias, Hunter, & Kress, 2001: see also Chap. 12 by Elias, Nayman, & Duffell, this volume). This “new look” requires that the traditional focus on cognitive abilities be supplemented by a strong concern with social and emotional training and develop- ment. Thus, over the past few years, more and more psychologists and researchers have come to realize that emotions are really a central part of school life and crucial for students’ functioning and success. It is of note that the spiraling research on EI over the past 25 years or so has inadvertently served as a “soup stone” (Navon, 1984) and major catalyst driving the resurgent interest in emotions in schools and its emergence as a flourishing area of research. (For updated reviews of a wide array of emotions in education, see the chapters in the 2014 International Handbook of Emotions in Education, edited by Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia.) Emotions and school life are best construed as being mutually determined. On the one hand, emotions are among the primary determinants of day-to-day interac- tions and learning in the school setting, plausibly impacting upon students’
86 M. Zeidner and G. Matthews individual achievement and social well-being. On the other hand, given that school is a sphere of life that is of key importance for most students’ future occupational career, income, self-esteem, and social status in modern society, a student’s aca- demic success is among the primary determinants of emotional life and well-being. Furthermore, students’ affective development and health may influence success or failure at school, through the mediation of emotions. Given that both achievement-related and social emotions in achievement settings may be construed as “on-line” indicators of how well a student is coping with demands, pressures, and affordances, it is readily apparent that emotions may be useful sources of information, with the potential to help students interpret and navi- gate their academic and social environment. Accordingly, students’ emotions and feelings in achievement settings reflect spontaneous emotional responses to the appraisals and interpretations they make of ongoing events involving challenges, threats, and losses, in the classroom or lecture hall. When students believe they are successfully coping with academic or social demands, challenges, and affordances, they tend to feel good about themselves; when they feel they are not successfully coping with ongoing academic or social demands and challenges, they tend to feel bad. Thus, if students can work backward from their experienced emotions, they may be capable of accessing rich information about their appraisals of events and relational meanings that they share inside the learning setting. This may often alter their thinking and actions in such a way as to allow them to negotiate achievement- related or social challenges and threats in a more adaptive manner. The diverse emotions experienced by students in achievement situations are slip- pery and difficult to classify. Depending on the perspective adopted, the same emo- tion can be viewed as positive or negative. One tentative typology of emotions in school settings (Pekrun & Frese, 1992) attempts to specify the universe of learning- relevant emotions based on two major dimensions: valence (positive vs. negative) and focus (task vs. social). These two dimensions reasonably cross-partition the domain of emotions into four discrete categories: 1. Positive task-related emotions (e.g., interest, engagement, flow, happiness, joy, relief, pride) 2. Negative task-related emotions (e.g., boredom, anxiety, guilt, anger, sadness) 3. Positive social emotions (e.g., empathy, gratitude, admiration, compassion) 4. Negative social emotions (e.g., callousness, envy, jealousy, contempt, embarrassment) Social and Emotional Competencies Much of the interest surrounding EI in educational settings is based on the working assumption that emotional competencies are conducive to student learning and well-being and can play a major role in making the school a more productive as well as enjoyable place. Thus, a number of commentators have proposed that the
4 EI, Stress, Coping 87 acquisition of social and emotional skills is a prerequisite for students before they can benefit from the traditional academic material presented in the classroom (Zins, Payton, Weissberg, & O’Brien, 2007). Indeed, in order to succeed academically, students in modern society need a broad arsenal of emotional and social skills, including motivational energy to work hard and persist toward effectively achieving academic goals; adaptability and grit in the face of academic and social obstacles and setbacks; communication skills necessary to work with teachers and classmates and participate in cooperative learning groups; and emotion regulation to maintain a positive and energetic mood in the classroom or college library or lab and to con- tain negative emotions that may disrupt concentration and learning. EI may serve to enhance student academic success, as well as indirectly mediate success by enhanc- ing motivation and self-control, facilitating constructive learning partnerships, min- imizing damaging antisocial behaviors, and protecting students from barriers to learning, such as mental distress, substance abuse, delinquency, teen pregnancy, and violence (Hawkins, Smith, & Catalano, 2004). Proponents of the EI construct have claimed that emotional competencies are systematically related to individual differences in coping with stress at school, which, in turn, should confer generally more or less successful educational out- comes on the individual (cf. Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler, & Mayer, 1999; Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2009). High EI individuals might be more capable at using both positively toned and negatively toned emotions to their advantage to improve performance. Thus, positive emotions, such as enthusiasm and pride, could broaden students’ cognitive-attentional span, encourage creative thought, and stimulate stu- dents to complete their work assignments with enthusiasm or contribute more of their time to school-related tasks (Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005). Conversely, neg- ative emotions such as fear, envy, and sadness, which could adversely impact on students’ ability and motivation to focus on their school tasks (Zeidner, 1998), are effectively regulated by high EI students. Furthermore, high EI students should be more adept at regulating both their own and others’ emotions to foster positive inter- actions with their classmates, which results in positive classroom and school cli- mate and better academic performance. S tress and Coping in the Academic Environment Stressful events impinging on students in various academic contexts – running the gamut from academic hassles (e.g., tests, complex homework assignments, oral pre- sentations) to traumatic events (e.g., school shootings, terror attacks, natural catas- trophes) – are environmental demands, pressures, or constraints, which challenge one’s coping capabilities. Students in modern schools and institutes of higher edu- cation are required to negotiate a wide array of environmental demands and chal- lenges in academic settings (e.g., assimilating demanding course content, meeting deadlines for assignments, taking challenging exams and surprise quizzes, making ends meet financially, fostering satisfactory social relations, etc.) that tax,
88 M. Zeidner and G. Matthews challenge, or exceed students’ coping resources. The degree of stress evoked by these academic stressors depends on a host of factors, including the objective prop- erties of the academic environment (standards of excellence, difficulty of study material, etc.), the students’ perception of the academic environment (perceived competitiveness, perceived social support from teachers, staff, etc.), perceived cop- ing resources of the student (cognitive, social, emotional, physical, spiritual), stu- dents’ available arsenal of coping strategies for transacting with environmental stressors, and the specific cultural lens through which the environmental demands are experienced. From a transactional perspective (see Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), the complex and dynamic interaction between school and social conditions and a student’s per- sonal resources (coping skills, dispositions, values, commitments, and beliefs) con- stitutes a “call for action,” resulting in a meaningful change (disruption or enhancement) of the student’s personal condition, such that the student is forced to deviate from normal functioning. Although stress per se is an important factor to consider in judging adaptive outcomes, what may really matter is how the student copes with the stress at hand, an issue we next address. It seems that whenever a student is hard-pressed to deal with some academic impediment, obstacle, looming threat, or anticipated harm, the experience may be viewed as being stressful. Accordingly, coping with stress in the classroom or aca- demic setting would involve the student’s efforts to reduce, remove, or manage the demands of the student-academic environment transaction that is appraised as stressful (e.g., Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Lazarus, 1991). These constantly chang- ing efforts can be cognitive or behavioral, direct and indirect. Accordingly, when the demands of a particular evaluative academic situation (e.g., taking an important test) are perceived as stressful, efforts are directed at dealing with the problem at hand (planning a step-by-step program of study, monitoring study progress, etc.) and /or regulating emotional stress (ventilating tension, blaming oneself for procras- tinating study behaviors, etc.), in order to manage the troubled person-academic environment transaction (see Lazarus, 1991). Although a wide array of taxonomies of coping strategies are currently available, researchers have typically converged on the following three coping categories: (a) Problem-focused coping, where the person solves the problem by neutralizing or removing the source of stress (e.g., carefully planning for a major exam) (b) Emotion-focused coping, where the person regulates, reduces, channels, or eliminates aversive emotions associated with the stressful encounter (e.g., seek- ing emotional support from friends after performing miserably on a math quiz) (c) Avoidance coping, where the individual employs strategies that are designed to circumvent or avoid the stressful situation (e.g., watching TV, thumbing through the swimsuit shots of top models in Sports Illustrated, walking the dog) For sure, coping is a complex construct, and it is possible to list more ways of coping than we have described here. Skinner and Zimmer-Gembeck (2007) listed as many as 12 “families” of coping, but the focus of the present section is on the afore- mentioned three broad categories.
4 EI, Stress, Coping 89 Coping processes are of pivotal importance in that they may affect adaptive out- comes, for better or worse. Thus, effective coping will help a student adapt to a stressful academic situation by eliminating or modifying the conditions that pro- duce anxiety or by keeping the emotional consequences within manageable bounds. When misplaced, counterproductive coping attempts may make the situation worse and eventually lead to elevated anxiety and even aggravate the external problem. Students will typically develop a repertoire of coping strategies for dealing with the difficulties that arise in relationships at school and in academic difficulties. Most students attain reasonable competence in coping with stress and anxiety through learning (modeling behavior of significant others, direct instruction, rein- forcements) and experience (identifying what works for the individual, positive or negative consequences of coping behaviors). Coping may also affect outcomes through its impact on the frequency, intensity, duration, and patterning of physio- logical stress reactions and the resultant affective and somatic outcomes. Often, coping strategies may impede – rather than promote – health-related behaviors. For example, a student’s health may be negatively affected when coping involves risk- taking (e.g., excessive smoking or drinking, substance abuse, gambling, or high- speed car racing). C oping Strategies: What Works? Unfortunately, the simple question of what works has no simple answer (Zeidner & Saklofske, 1996). In fact, process-based models of stress emphasize that coping processes are not inherently adaptive or maladaptive; the impact of a given coping strategy on well-being depends on the specific context in which it occurs (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). Furthermore, a coping response might be judged successful relative to one outcome criterion (e.g., hours spent studying for an exam) but not another (getting an adequate amount of sleep). Indeed, the resolution of one coping task might even come at the expense of another (e.g., working long hours to com- plete a PhD thesis might contribute to problems at work or a marriage breakdown). It is now readily apparent that coping effectiveness must be examined in the social context in which problems occur. Furthermore, preferred coping methods and perceived effectiveness must be appraised relative to a social or cultural group’s values, norms, worldview, symbols, and orientation (for a discussion of the role of culture, see Chap. 5 by Huynh, Oakes, & Grossmann, this volume). Consider the case of a female student who devotes herself to her partner, children, or ailing par- ents at the expense of personal achievement goals at her academic studies. The evaluation of this coping approach is not merely a scientific matter but also a moral one and may differ in traditional versus achievement-oriented societies. Thus, any statement about coping effectiveness is, at best, a broad generalization. With these cautions in mind, there are a number of specific coping techniques that have been typically judged by researchers as adaptive, others that have been judged as maladaptive, whereas other techniques present dilemmas to researchers.
90 M. Zeidner and G. Matthews Thus, empirical studies suggest that, broadly, coping through problem-focus or active engagement improves outcomes, whereas avoidance, disengagement, and certain forms of emotion-focus are harmful to mental health (for a review see Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010). An adaptive response to remediable situations still requires problem-focused activities in order to effectively remove or ameliorate the threat. In fact, problem-focused coping is preferred by most people and is highly effective in stress reduction, providing a sense of mastery over the problem (Zeidner & Saklofske, 1996). However, as noted, coping effectiveness is both context-specific and related to the specific encounter (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004), meaning that what works in one situation may not work in another. Emotion-focused coping, which may help in maintaining emotional balance by effectively channeling and venting negative emotions or building up positive emotions, may in fact be the strat- egy of choice when the source of stress is unclear, little can be done to eliminate the stressor, or there is a lack of knowledge about how to modify the stressor (Lazarus, 1999). A third category introduced in the literature (Parker & Endler, 1996) – avoid- ant coping – reflects negative responses to stressors such as denial, substance use, and mental disengagement. This form of coping is unlikely to lead to beneficial outcomes in any situation. EI and the Developmental Process Individual Differences in Emotional Development The transactional model of stress emphasizes that coping is a process that unfolds over time, as the person strives to identify the optimal means for dealing with pres- sures that may themselves be changing (Lazarus, 1999). Education involves dynamic factors that are sometimes overlooked in studies of EI (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2006). There are both external and internal sources of temporal change. Education itself is organized to provide a graduated series of challenges (e.g., as the child moves from elementary school to middle school or from high school to univer- sity). Cycles of instruction culminating in formal testing also produce well-defined sequences of threatening events. As the child ages, there are also less well-s tructured changes, such as increasing expectations from parents and teachers, new friendships with peers, and the opportunities afforded by increasing autonomy. At an internal level, the child’s capacity for emotion regulation and coping becomes more sophisticated and elaborated over time. The child develops increas- ing levels of emotional skills from infancy to adolescence (Denham, 1998). Six developing skills that seem critical for EI are listed by Saarni (2008): awareness of one’s emotional state, understanding of the emotions of others, use of an emotion lexicon, capacity for empathy and sympathy, management of emotional expressive- ness, and effective emotion regulation and adaptive coping. Thus, the child’s capacity for effective coping reflects the developmental pro- cess. Preschoolers’ emotional functioning may be limited by lack of an effective vocabulary for representing their own and others’ emotions (Eisenberg,
4 EI, Stress, Coping 91 Sadovsky, & Spinrad, 2005; Izard et al., 2001). Likewise, the immature brain may lack the capacity for effective top-down regulation of emotion, such as sup- pressing outbursts of anger (Rothbart, Sheese, & Conradt, 2009). School-age children acquire the regulatory skills of adults, but it takes time to build up the repertoire of contextualized skills necessary to apply coping flexibly, matching the strategy to the external challenge appropriately. Skinner and Zimmer- Gembeck (2007) reviewed the developmental literature on coping. They con- cluded that preschool children tend to cope through direct action, including seeking help from others, whereas older children are additionally able to employ more cognitive methods, such as constructive problem-s olving and self-distrac- tion. Coping also becomes more embedded in social processes as the child learns to work with others in managing threats. With adolescence comes the capacity for metacognitive coping, as the child builds a self-s chema that can be used to predict future emotional response to imagined situations. It follows that emotionally intelligent coping reflects what is age-appropriate for the child, and models of adult EI may not be well-suited to understanding individual differences in coping in younger children. Zeidner, Matthews, Roberts, and MacCann (2003) proposed a multilevel investment model that aimed to specify the changing constraints on emotionally intelligent coping during the developmental process. In infancy, individual differences in emotion regulation reflect brain-based temperamental factors, such as positive and negative emotionality, which may influ- ence the quality of social interaction between child and caregiver. In children of preschool and elementary school age, language-based regulation of emotion becomes increasingly important. Increasing verbal capabilities allow the child to acquire rules for understanding and expressing emotion, such as “big boys don’t cry,” and for communicating emotion to others. Izard et al.’s (2001) work on emo- tion knowledge shows that in younger children, verbal ability is quite strongly asso- ciated with accuracy of identifying emotion. Relationships may be reciprocal in that social-emotional competence may contribute to acquiring preliteracy skills, such as alphabet knowledge (Curby, Brown, Bassett, & Denham, 2015). Linguistic abilities are also critical for the major categories of coping. Developing a plan for handling a demanding situation (problem-focus) requires a verbal repre- sentation, as does reflection on one’s thoughts and feelings (emotion-focus). Increased language skill can be a double-edged sword to the extent that it also enables maladaptive coping strategies, such as rumination (Michl, McLaughlin, Shepherd, & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2013). In the classroom, worry occupies space on verbal working memory that may hinder effective academic performance (Zeidner & Matthews, 2005). The transition from late childhood to early adolescence (about ages 10 to 12) is marked by increasing self-insight (Saarni, 2008). For example, as the child comes to understand how emotions may affect thinking, he/she may real- ize that it is best not to get upset during a difficult test. Coping thus takes on a more metacognitive element; for example, choice of strategy may be influenced by emo- tional forecasting (e.g., Hoerger, Quirk, Chapman, & Duberstein, 2012) of the pre- dicted outcome of coping. Level of metacognitive skill may limit the effectiveness of coping, and maladaptive metacognitions such as beliefs that worrying is benefi- cial may perpetuate stress (Wells & Matthews, 2015).
Search
Read the Text Version
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- 134
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- 140
- 141
- 142
- 143
- 144
- 145
- 146
- 147
- 148
- 149
- 150
- 151
- 152
- 153
- 154
- 155
- 156
- 157
- 158
- 159
- 160
- 161
- 162
- 163
- 164
- 165
- 166
- 167
- 168
- 169
- 170
- 171
- 172
- 173
- 174
- 175
- 176
- 177
- 178
- 179
- 180
- 181
- 182
- 183
- 184
- 185
- 186
- 187
- 188
- 189
- 190
- 191
- 192
- 193
- 194
- 195
- 196
- 197
- 198
- 199
- 200
- 201
- 202
- 203
- 204
- 205
- 206
- 207
- 208
- 209
- 210
- 211
- 212
- 213
- 214
- 215
- 216
- 217
- 218
- 219
- 220
- 221
- 222
- 223
- 224
- 225
- 226
- 227
- 228
- 229
- 230
- 231
- 232
- 233
- 234
- 235
- 236
- 237
- 238
- 239
- 240
- 241
- 242
- 243
- 244
- 245
- 246
- 247
- 248
- 249
- 250
- 251
- 252
- 253
- 254
- 255
- 256
- 257
- 258
- 259
- 260
- 261
- 262
- 263
- 264
- 265
- 266
- 267
- 268
- 269
- 270
- 271
- 272
- 273
- 274
- 275
- 276
- 277
- 278
- 279
- 280
- 281
- 282
- 283
- 284
- 285
- 286
- 287
- 288
- 289
- 290
- 291
- 292
- 293
- 294
- 295
- 296
- 297
- 298
- 299
- 300
- 301
- 302
- 303
- 304
- 305
- 306
- 307
- 308
- 309
- 310
- 311
- 312
- 313
- 314
- 315
- 316
- 317
- 318
- 319
- 320
- 321
- 322
- 323
- 324
- 325
- 326
- 327
- 328
- 329
- 330
- 331
- 332
- 333
- 334
- 335
- 336
- 337
- 338
- 339
- 340
- 341
- 342
- 343
- 344
- 345
- 346
- 347
- 348
- 349
- 350
- 351
- 352
- 353
- 354
- 355
- 356
- 357
- 358
- 359
- 360
- 361
- 362
- 363
- 364
- 365
- 366
- 367
- 368
- 369
- 370
- 371
- 372
- 373
- 374
- 375
- 376
- 377
- 378
- 379
- 380
- 381
- 382
- 383
- 384
- 385
- 386
- 387
- 388
- 389
- 390
- 391
- 392
- 393
- 394
- 395
- 396
- 397
- 398
- 399
- 400
- 401
- 402
- 403
- 404
- 405
- 406
- 407
- 408
- 409
- 410
- 411
- 412
- 413
- 414
- 415
- 416
- 417
- 418
- 419
- 420
- 421
- 422
- 423
- 424
- 425
- 426
- 427
- 428
- 429
- 430
- 431
- 432
- 433
- 434
- 435
- 436
- 437
- 438
- 439
- 440
- 441
- 442
- 443
- 444
- 445
- 446
- 447
- 448
- 449
- 450
- 451
- 452
- 453
- 454
- 455
- 456
- 457
- 458
- 459
- 460
- 461
- 462
- 463
- 464
- 465
- 466
- 1 - 50
- 51 - 100
- 101 - 150
- 151 - 200
- 201 - 250
- 251 - 300
- 301 - 350
- 351 - 400
- 401 - 450
- 451 - 466
Pages:
