emotional intelligence: a theoretical...

Chapter II

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: A THEORETICAL OVERVIEW

THEORIES OF EMOTIONS

THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE

THE CONCEPT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

THE CONCEPT OF EMOTIONAL COMPETENCE

EMOTIONAL

AND EMOTIONAL LITERACY

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND PRIMARY SCHOOL

STUDENTS

CONCLUSION

Theoretical Overview

16

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: A THEORETICAL OVERVIEW

In the preceding and the introductory chapter, the conceptual base

of the Emotional Intelligence (EI), the emerging significance of the same in

the process of school-education, a brief mention on the evolution of the

theoretical attempts from many, such as Thorndike, Gardner, Salovey-

Mayer and reaching into a culmination with the works of Daniel Goleman

were clarified. Though, the present research study belongs to the applied

research-category, rather than conceptual and theoretical, as the present

one attempt to develop and standardise a Package on how to enhance the

EI among the school-children, the thesis is well founded conceptually and

theoretically on the historic and popular contributions of Daniel Goleman.

Hence, before proceeding into the application of EI in our context, it

is highly appropriate to review and get exposed to the relevant literature

that dwell on the concept and theory of EI, especially the contributions of

Goleman, which makes the concept of EI more dynamic, rather than static,

as noted in the introductory chapter that Goleman prefers to call his model

of EI as the „theory of performance‟ instead of the „theory of personality‟.

Before examining the theories and their evolution on EI, an attempt

is made here to briefly review the concepts of „emotion‟ and „intelligence‟

separately.

2.1. THEORIES OF EMOTIONS

Our emotions play quite a significant role in guiding and directing our

behaviour. They play a key role in providing a particular direction to our

behaviour and thus shaping our personality according to their

development. Pert (1999) suggested that Emotions are the messengers in

our bodies. They are carrying the information in the system we call the

body-mind. The body-mind is the interconnected system of the physical

body and the brain.


17

Psychologists have propagated a number of theories on emotions.

The James-Lange theory states that our bodily responses stimulate our

perception of emotion. The body first responds physiologically to a

stimulus, and then cerebral cortex determines the emotional experience.

The Cannon –Bard theory states that impulses from the emotion provoking

stimulus are sent simultaneously to the cerebral cortex and the internal

organs of the body. Thus the emotional experience and the bodily

response occur simultaneously but independently. Schachter-Singer’s

Cognitive theory brings into the limelight the dominant role played by

cognitive factors stating that the emotions we experience and the

physiological responses we give are both determined by cognitive

functioning; the way in which our mind receives and interprets the stimuli.

The Activation theory developed by Lindsley focuses on the role played by

the reticular activating system for the arousal and display of emotions. All

of these four types of theories have tried to provide explanation for

emotional behaviour in human beings, their own ways. If the views

proposed by these theories are evaluated, it will be concluded that none of

these existing theories can be termed as a comprehensive theory of

emotional behaviour. However, to some extent it can be concluded, that

emotional behaviour is surely a product of the process of activation. The

biological structure of an individual influenced by emotional environmental

experiences, in one way or another, must activate the internal organs and

the cerebral cortex for the various physiological responses and affective

experiences that are undergone by an individual, while going through an

emotional behaviour,

2.1.1 Goleman’s View of Emotion

According to Goleman (1995) we have two minds – one that thinks

and one that feels. One, the rational mind, is the mode of comprehension

we are typically conscious of: more prominent in awareness, thoughtful,

able to ponder and reflect. But alongside that there is another system of

knowing: impulsive and powerful, if sometimes illogical- the emotional


18

mind. These two minds, the emotional and the rational, operate in tight

harmony for the most part, intertwining their very different ways of knowing

to guide as through the world. Ordinarily there is a balance between

emotional and rational minds, with emotion feeding into and informing the

operations of the rational mind, and the rational mind refining and

sometimes vetoing the inputs of the emotions. Still, the emotional and

rational minds are semi-independent faculties, each, as we shall see,

reflecting the operation of distinct, but interconnected circuitry in the brain.

The Power of Amygdale

In humans the amygdale (from the Greek word for ”almond”) is an

almond-shaped cluster of interconnected structures perched above the

brainstem, near the bottom of the limbic ring. There are two amygdalas,

one on each side of the brain, nestled toward the side of the head.

Neuroscientist Le Doux found that the amygdala can perceive things that

trigger strong emotions, such as fear or range, before the rational part of

the brain does (Goleman, 1995). This small, almond shaped structure

holds immense power. The amygdale is a sentinel. When it registers fear,

the body reacts physiologically. It responds to physical or emotional

triggers and drives the rest of the brain during an emergency. The

amygdale holds a privileged position in that, when aroused, it responds

before the neocortex does, which means before a more thoughtful

response can be generated. To this day these limbic structures do much

or most of the brain‟s learning and remembering; the amygdale is the

specialist for emotional matters. If the amygdala is severed from the rest of

the brain, the result is a striking inability to gauge emotional significance of

events; this condition is sometimes called “affective blindness”.

LeDoux (1996), a neuroscientist at the Centre for Neural science at

New York University, was the first to discover the key role of amygdale in

the emotional brain. His research explains how the amygdale can take

control over what we do even as the thinking brain, the neocortex is still

coming to a decision. As we shall see, the workings of the amygdale and


19

its interplay with the neocortex are at the heart of EI. In the brain‟s

architecture, the amygdale is poised something like an alarm company

where operators stand ready to send out emergency calls to the fire

department , police, and a neighbour where a home security system signal

trouble. When it sounds an alarm of, say, fear, it sends urgent messages

to every major part of the brain: it triggers the secretion of the body‟s fight-

or-flight hormones, mobilizes the centres for movement, and activates the

cardiovascular system, the muscles and the gut. Other circuits from the

amygdale signal the secretion of emergency dollops of the hormone to

heighten the reactivity of key brain areas, including those that make the

senses more alert. In this way amygdala‟s extensive web of neural

connections allows it, during emotional emergency, to capture and drive

much of the rest of the brain- including the rational mind.

In one of the most telling discoveries about emotions of last decade,

LeDoux‟s work revealed how the architecture of the brain gives the

amygdale a privileged position as an emotional sentinel. His research has

shown that sensory signals from eye or ear travels first in the brain to the

thalamus, and then- across a single synapse-to the amygdale; a second

signal from the thalamus is routed to the neocortex- the thinking brain.

This branching allows the amygdale to begin respond before the

neocortex, which mulls information through several levels of brain circuits

before it fully perceives and finally initiates its more finely tailored

response. Thus our emotions have a mind of their own, one which can

hold views quite independently of our rational mind.

Harmonizing Emotion and Thought

The connections between the amygdale and the neocortex are the

hub of the battles or cooperative treaties struck between head and heart,

thought and feeling. This circuitry explains why emotion is so crucial to

effective thought, both in making wise decisions and in simply allowing us

to think clearly. Antonio Damasio, a neurologist at the University of Iowa,

has made careful studies of just what is impaired in patients with damage


20

to the potential amygdale circuit. Their decision making is terribly flawed –

and yet they show no deterioration at all in IQ or any cognitive ability.

Despite their intact intelligence, they make disastrous choices in their

personal lives. Damasio argues that their decisions are so bad because

they have lost access to their emotional learning. As the meeting point

between thought and emotion, the prefrontal amygdale circuit is a crutial

doorway to the responsibility for the likes and dislikes we acquire over the

course of lifetime.

In this sense we have two brains, two minds- and two different

kinds of intelligence: rational and emotional. How we do in life is

determined by both-it is not just IQ, but EI that matters. Indeed, intellect

cannot work at its best without EI. Ordinarily the complementarily of limbic

system and neocortex, amygdale and prefrontal lobes, means each is a

full partner in mental life. When these partners interact well, EI rises- as

does intellectual ability. Emotions are thus the carrier of information, which

connect and influence all the different systems and levels of being and is

equally connected and influenced by all the other systems.

2.2 THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence may be understood to be a mental energy available

with an individual which enables him to cope with his environment in terms

of adaptation and dealing with novel situations as effectively as possible.

Wechsler (1944) defines, Intelligence is the aggregate or global

capacity of an individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal

effectively with his environment. Thus Intelligence is a sort of mental

energy, in the form of mental or cognitive abilities, available with an

individual which enables him to handle his environment in terms of

adaptation to face novel situations as effectively as possible.


21

2.2.1 Cognitive Theories of Intelligence

These theories of intelligence tried to analyse and describe

intelligence in terms of certain fundamental cognitive processes. To date,

numerous theories of human intelligence have been proposed, although

despite over a century of research, there is still considerable debate about

how best to describe intelligence and only limited understanding about its

biological basis. Roberts, Zeidner & Matthews (2001) have described

general intelligence as being indicative of “a persons overall capacity for

adaptation through effective cognition and information processing”.

However, different conception have viewed intelligence as general

“competence of the mind” or as a collection of higher order abilities. Efforts

to better understand the various psychometrically defined abilities that are

widely thought to contribute to general intelligence have resulted in the

division of such abilities into broad categories (Roberts et al., 2001). This

has given rise to three major classes of intelligence models: the two-factor

model (e.g., Spearman, 1927); the multiple abilities model (e.g., Gardner

1983; Guilford, 1958; Thurstone, 1938) and the hierarchical model (e.g.

Horn & Cattell, 1966; Carroll, 1993).

Carroll‟s (1993) three-stratum model of cognitive abilities, which

maps all known and hypothesised abilities, is widely accepted as being the

most of complete psychometric description of intelligence currently

available (Deary, 2000). The hierarchical nature of this model (in which

narrowly defined primary abilities are positioned on the lowest stratum with

broader abilities on the second level and an overarching general

intelligence on the upper level), typifies a trend in intelligence theories that

has suggested the prominence of a single general ability factor. This

general ability factor is typically referred to as g, following Spearman‟s lead

and has widely been accepted as representing an important mental ability,

which is involved in all forms of mental performance.

Nevertheless, although a hierarchical design has become the

most popular way of conceptualising human intelligence, an increasing


22

number of researchers have criticized such a structure, arguing that this

formation places too much emphasis on g and those abilities that are

crucial to academic performance (Pfeiffer, 2001). Furthermore, most

intelligence theories have typically focused on cognitive aspects, excluding

other processes, such as mood and emotion, based on the assumption

that emotions can be disruptive influences on rational, cognitive ways of

thinking (Salovey & Mayor, 1994). In doing so, such cognitive models

neglect other mental abilities that have also been found to be important to

behaving intelligently, such as the ability to read social cues (Pfeiffer,

2001). An emphasis on these types of skills has lead to the development

of a number of „non-cognitive‟ intelligences, as discussed in the following

sections.

2.2.2 Non-Cognitive Theories of Intelligence

Research interest in non-cognitive intelligence theories has been

sparked by the realization that academic intelligence as, operationalised

by IQ tests , cannot account for more that about 25% of variance in

educational achievement and accounts for even less of successful post-

school achievements. Researchers have often noted a disparity between

individuals who may be classified as academically bright, but whose skills

have not always conferred an advantage in non-academic situations, and

individuals who, although being less „academically gifted‟, have succeeded

in other areas in life beyond these expectations (Epstein, 1998; Salovey,

Mayer & Caruso, 2002).

To a large extent, the focus of intelligence theories has been

primarily on cognitive abilities, with only a minimal emphasis on non-

cognitive processes. However Thorndike (1920) was one of the first to

deviate from this theme with his theory of intelligence, which included a

„social intelligence‟ component. Wechsler (1940) also emphasised the

importance to significant life achievements of what he termed “non-

intellective factors”. He acknowledged that broad general intelligence


23

could be defined in terms beyond scores from IQ testes and suggested

that intelligent behaviour should be evaluated as something requiring more

than pure intellectual ability. Such views were based on observations that

individuals with identical IQs may differ in their ability to cope effectively

with their environment and also on the statistical finding that IQ tests

account for only a relatively small amounts of variance in outcome

measures for important real-world achievements. Wechsler‟s suggestion

was, therefore, that the remaining variance might be accounted for by

affective, personal and social influences, such as persistence, curiosity,

drive, will and conscientiousness, which facilitate „intelligent behaviour‟.

Conversely, Wechsler proposed that other affective characteristics, such

as anxiety, emotional insecurity and impulsivity, may inhibit such functions.

However, interest in the concept of social intelligence waned

considerably following these formative efforts, mainly due to difficulties in

accurately defining and measuring the construct (Cronbach, 1960).

Interest in non-cognitive intelligence was not renewed until the 1980s

when work by Gardner (1983) on multiple intelligences challenged the

predominant importance of conventional ideas about cognitive intelligence.

This attention led to speculation about intelligences with a greater focus on

emotional and personal components, such as personal intelligence,

practical intelligence, and EI, as well as renewed investigations into the

social intelligence constructs in order to provide a fuller understanding of

human intelligence. The conceptual base to these various constructs

appears to be similar, with prime focus being to discover “components of

effective living” (Jones & Day, 1997).

2.2.2.1 Social Intelligence

It is commonly, assumed that the term social intelligence was

introduced by Thorndike in 1920. In fact, it would appear that the concept

was actually mentioned earlier by Dewey (1909) and later by Lull (1911) in

their writings about morality and public education. However Dewey and


24

Lull‟s stance on social intelligence was more focused on revising school

curriculum and attempting to engage the student in socially current issues

and as such involved in the comprehension of social behaviour and norms.

This is in contrast to the proposition of social intelligence as an attribute

that was suggested by Thorndike in 1920.

Thorndike (1920) proposed the division of intelligence into three

components, with social intelligence, the third division, described as the

ability to understand and manage people and to act wisely in social

situations, based on one‟s own and other‟s perceived internal states,

motives and behaviours. Thorndike‟s definition suggests both knowledge

and behavioural components (i.e., „managing‟ and „acting‟), in the sense

that it is one thing to know what to do, but another thing to actually do it.

In the 1930s, research on social intelligence attempted to identify

the mechanisms and accuracy through which people made social

judgments. Vernon (1933), for example, saw social intelligence described

as an individual‟s ability to get along with others, to have knowledge of

social matters, to be at ease in society and to have insight into the moods

and personality of strangers. The 1950s, however, saw the domain of

social intelligence divide into two traditions: an intelligence perspective,

which investigated the skills involved in person‟s perception; and a social

psychological perspective, which was concerned with the social aspect of

this person perception (Mayer & Geher, 1996).

However, developments in the social intelligence field were (and

still are) impeded by difficulties in adequately defining and measuring the

construct. The problems in defining social intelligence research have been

due to the lack of consensus about how to define social constructs that

may be involved. The lack of progress in social intelligence research has

also been due to difficulties in constructing standardized measures of real-

life social situations that are able to assess actual social competencies

and also in determining suitable external criteria against which measures

of social intelligence may be validated (Jones & Day; 1997; Ford & Tisak,


25

1983). Additionally, social intelligence measures have been characterized

by an inability to be discriminated from assessments of general

intelligence, with most such measures loading heavily on indices of verbal

intelligence, all of which has led to poor measurement and interpretation

(Ford & Tisak, 1983; Jones & Day, 1997; Kihlstrom & Cantor, 2000;

Marlowe, 1986). One of the difficulties with using paper and pencil tests to

assess a construct such as social intelligence is that such items cannot

adequately assess the „behavioural‟ aspect of social intelligence. Faced

with such problems, interest in social intelligence waned considerably,

particularly following Cronbach‟s (1960) conclusion that the social

intelligence construct was moribund.

Consequently it has only been relatively recently that concerted

attempts to define and measure social intelligence more adequately, such

as those by Marlowe (1986), Cantor and Kihlstorm (1987) and Wong et al.

(1995), have been renewed. The common theme amongst social

intelligence theories appears to be the view that “people are reflective,

thinking beings and their behaviour can be understood in terms of the

ways that they actively seek to engage in their social environment and

pursue desired outcomes in the important domains of their lives” (Zirkel,

2000). Achieving this involves interpersonal connections with others in

order to socially interact with them effectively, which requires being

sensitive to and insightful of social cues in order to evaluate and utilize this

social information in some way. Furthermore, because individuals are

presumed to be knowledgeable about themselves and their social world,

most social intelligence theories assume that individuals actively use this

knowledge to manage their emotions and direct their behaviour toward

desired outcomes. It is therefore assumed that people can be best

understood by the evaluation of the adaptive and purposive aspects of

their behaviour, based on the assumption that individuals actively try to

understand the world around them and, in doing so, they modify their

behaviour to achieve this. Social intelligence theories also typically

assume that behaviour is socially contextualised, in that all behaviour


26

occurs within contexts that place socially defined meanings on actions

(Zirkel, 2000).

Nevertheless, despite the noted problems in defining and

measuring the social intelligence construct, the field has emphasized that

different environments require the use of different forms of mental ability

for success. Social intelligence has also helped define other forms of non-

cognitive intelligence, such as practical and EI, in the way in which these

later constructs are defined and assessed. These intelligences will be

discussed further in the following sections.

2.2.2.2 Personal Intelligence

Gardner includes within his theory of multiple intelligences two

non-cognitive intelligences that have been termed the „personal

intelligences‟. „Personal intelligences‟ is a collective term that refers to the

emotional aspects that influence an individual‟s mental functioning and

encompasses „intrapersonal‟ and „interpersonal‟ intelligences. Specifically,

intrapersonal intelligence refers to an individual‟s ability to access and

understand one‟s own thoughts and feelings and involves the labelling and

encoding of these feelings in order to guide behaviour. Interpersonal

intelligence, however, emphasises the ability to make distinctions about

the moods, temperaments, motivations and intentions of another person

and potentially to act upon such knowledge (1983). Knowledge gain in this

sense may be utilized in different ways in interpersonal situations, such as:

organizing groups in order to initiate and coordinate the efforts of a

number of people; negotiating solutions to prevent and resolve any arising

conflicts; analyzing social realms in order to detect and be insightful about

other people‟s feelings, motives and concerns; and personally connecting

with others in a way which allows the recognition of other‟s feelings and

concern such that an appropriate response can be made (Hatch,1997).


27

Gardner (1983) has emphasized the importance of the personal

intelligences, suggesting that they come into play with almost every

interaction, given that “it is the unusual individual who does not try to

deploy his understanding of the personal realm in order to improve his own

well-being or his relationship to the community”. Furthermore, despite the

slightly differing the focuses of these two intelligences, both are

inextricably combined because the ability to make inferences based on the

observation of other‟s behaviour is dependent on the understanding of

these factors in oneself. The concept behind the personal intelligence has

proven to be fundamental in defining Emotional Intelligence (EI).

2.2.2.3 Practical Intelligence

The notion of practical intelligence came into favour based on

observations that although g is a relatively consistent predicator of

performance, there are limitations to the reliability of such predictions,

particularly in practical situations outside of academic settings (Sternberg

& Hudlund, 2002). Although a concise definition has not yet been

achieved, it is commonly held that practical intelligence encompasses the

abilities one needs to deal successfully with and solve situations and

problems that are encountered in everyday life (Fredrickson, 1986;

Wagner, 2000). Such skills have been commonly characterised in the US

as „street smarts‟ and involve “knowing how” rather than knowing that”

(Sternberg et al., 1995; Sternberg & Hudland, 2002).

It has been claimed that much of this knowledge is tacit. Tacit

knowledge has been defined by Sternberg and his various colleagues as

“knowledge that is not explicitly taught or even verbalized, but is necessary

for an individual to thrive in an environment” (Sternberg, Okagaki &

Jackson, 1990). Tacit knowledge is often disorganised and context specific

and therefore is not usually directly taught or articulated but rather, is

learnt through experience (Wagner & Sternberg, 1986; Sternberg &

Hudland, 2002). Sternberg (1999) has, however, emphasised that,


28

although tacit knowledge is positively related to experience, it is the act of

profiting, from experience, rather than the experience that results in higher

levels of practical intelligence.

Tacit knowledge is primarily assessed by analyzing the responses

that individuals generate to deal with practical situation or problems. For

example, current tacit knowledge measures involve scenario-based

examples, in which the test taker rates the quality of various proposed

courses of action. The scoring of such measures is typically on the basis

of degree of conformity with experts in that particular field, which is in

contrast to traditional intelligence measures but similar to the way in which

some EI measures are assessed (Sternberg & Hudland, 2002). It has

been suggested that this form of measurement is less problematic for

practical intelligence than it is for EI given that there are more definite

criteria for establishing experts in the practical intelligence field (Austin &

Saklofske, 2005). Studies conducted using these measures have

determined that they are able to predict real-word criteria just as well, if not

better, than IQ measures. Practical intelligence measures have

furthermore been found to be relatively independent from intelligence and

other selection measures and therefore it is claimed they are able to

explain aspects of performance that are unable to be adequately explained

by measures of IQ (Bowman, Markham & Roberts, 2002; Sternberg et al.,

1995; Sternberg et al., 2000; Sternberg & Hudland, 2002). Nevertheless,

practical intelligence, as do the other forms of non-cognitive intelligence,

appears to be a useful construct for complementing analytical form of

intelligence in defining intelligent behaviour.

2.2.2.4 Emotional Intelligence

EI has recently emerged as another non-academic intelligence to

help explain life differences independent cognitive abilities. Previously it

was thought that emotions are disruptive to rational, cognitive ways of

thinking. It has only been relatively recently that there has been


29

recognition that emotions are not necessarily incompatible with cognitive

pursuits. It is now considered possible that moods and emotions have

important intellectual implications because they often influence the way in

which individuals interpret and react to information (Salovey & Mayer,

1994). Schwarz (1990) has even suggested that some sources of

information may actually be ignored if salient mood states are present.

Emotions stem from our evolutionary history where they acted as

an internal guidance system and were therefore important in survival

(LeDoux, 1996). Emotions are psychological and psychological events that

are experienced in relation to internal thoughts or to an object, person or

event, which invokes a general state of readiness of action for survival

(Masters & McShane, 2003; Frijda, 2000). As such, emotions are

considered responses to events, which coordinate perceptual, experiential,

cognitive and psychological subsystems into coherent experiences about

moods and emotions (Mayer, Caruso & Salovery, 1999; Salovey & Mayer,

1994; Frijda, 2000). On the assumption that emotions can fulfil some

psychological function to guide thought and action, Frijda (1998) has

described emotions as central to human functioning. Furthermore, Salovey

and Mayer (1994) have suggested that emotions may form an important

link between personality, which constitutes differences in the ways in

which people interact with the world, and intelligence, which shapes the

accuracy, efficiency and success of the processing mechanisms which

people interact with the world.

EI has been conceptualized as a broad, umbrella construct to

explain how emotions allow more „intelligent thinking‟ and the ways in

which individuals may think intelligently about emotions. The underlying

notion is that individuals monitor and discriminate emotions, within

themselves and in others, in order to solve problems. If emotions can act

as a source of information, it is likely that this information is processed in a

similar manner to all other forms of information (Schwarz, 1990). Salovey

and Mayer (1994) have therefore suggested that, analogous to other types


30

of mental information, individuals differ in the extent to which they are

skilled at processing emotional information, with some individuals being

“better” at these skills than others. Females, for example, have typically

been found to score higher on EI measures than do males (e.g., Brackett,

Mayer, & Warner, 2003; Ciarrochi, Chan, & Bajgar, 2001a; Kafetsios,

2004; Mayer et al., 1999; Schutte, et al. 1998). As such Mayer & Salovey

(1997) have suggested that EI may explain some of the discrepancies in

every day performance among individuals who are otherwise intellectually

equal.

Although the precursors to EI were conceptualized within the

theories of Social Intelligences and Personal Intelligences, the term was in

fact referenced as early as 1966 (Leuner, 1996) and one of the first

definitive references to EI was made in 1986 in an unpublished

dissertation by Wayne Payne. He distinguished EI form more cognitive

forms of intelligence, by describing EI as:

“The facts, meanings, truths, relationships etc., [of EI] are those not

exist in the realm of emotion. Thus feelings are facts… The

meanings are felt meanings; the truths are emotional truths; the

relationships are interpersonal relationships. And the problems we

solve are emotional problems, that is, problems in the way we feel”.

(Payne, 1986, as cited in Mayer, 2001).

However, according to Mayer (2001), this definition is not clear

because it does not adequately consider what is meant by a “felt

meaning”, nor does it explain what kind of a truth an “emotional truth”

might be, or sufficiently explain the statement that “feelings are facts”.

Salovey and Mayer (1990) were nevertheless the first to attempt to locate

EI within a sustainable scientific theory.

Although Mayer and Salovey have not generally credited

themselves with inventing the term „emotional intelligence‟, their


31

publication in the field have nevertheless been influential and have, for the

most part, formed the basis for much of the academic thought and

research conducted thus far. However, although Mayer and Salovey have

been leaders in EI research, Goleman (1995) has been largely responsible

for the widespread popularization of term “Emotional Intelligence” through

the publication of his books. (Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter

more than IQ [1995] and Emotional Intelligence in the workplace [1998]),

both of which written primarily for the „lay-educated‟ market. Although not a

scientific researcher himself at the time of these publications, Goleman

has moulded his own overarching theory of EI based on drawing together

his observations and conclusions from the work of other researchers.

Nevertheless, Goleman‟s work has been so captivating that since the

publication of these books, his views have been readily accepted in

community sectors (e.g., schools, business organizations, leadership

training etc.), which has subsequently helped to generate recent

academic-based research in the field.

While Goleman‟s theory of EI can hardly be considered „scientific‟

–nor indeed was it the first such theory of EI - it is nevertheless the most

popular and certainly the most widely known and therefore serves as a

useful basis for the examination of more scientific theories of EI.

2.3 THE CONCEPT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

EI, like general intelligence, is the product of one‟s heredity and its

interaction with his environmental forces. Until recently, we have been led

to believe that a person‟s general intelligence is measured as I.Q. or

intelligence quotient is the greatest predictor of success in any walks of

life-academic, social, vocational or professional. However, researches and

experiments conducted in the 90s onwards have tried to challenge such

over-dominance of the intelligence and its measurement I.Q., by replacing

it with the concept of EI and its measure, emotional quotient (E.Q.). These


32

have revealed that a person‟s EI measured through his E.Q. may be a

greater predictor of success than his or her I.Q.

Historically speaking, the term EI was introduced in 1990 by two

American University professors Mayer and Salovey in their attempts to

develop a scientific measure for knowing the differences in people‟s ability

in the areas of emotions. However, the credit for popularizing the concept

of EI goes to another American Psychologist Daniel Goleman (1995).

According to Mayer and Salovey (1995), EI may be defined as the

capacity to reason with emotions in four areas: to perceive emotion, to

integrate it in thought, to understand it and to manage it.

According to Goleman (1998), “Emotional intelligence is the

capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for

motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in

our relationships”.

2.3.1 Models of Emotional Intelligence

Since the publication of Goleman‟s (1995; 1998) influential books

on EI, interest in EI within the scientific community has substantially

increased. Cherniss and Goleman (2001) have since claimed that the “EI

model seems to be emerging as an influential framework in psychology”

and have further suggested that EI has relevance in the areas of

developmental, educational, clinical, social, industrial, organizational and

health psychology. Increased interest in EI has, however, somewhat

clouded research into the nature of the construct due to the influx of

numeric, scientific and popular components for proposed inclusion.


33

‘Ability’ versus ‘Mixed’ models of Emotional Intelligence’

Mayor, Salovey and colleagues have defined EI as an „ability‟,

emphasizing the cognitive processing of affective information and their EI

model is focused entirely on the specific interaction between emotion and

thought. In contrast, mixed models of EI , as characterised by Goleman

(1995); Bar on (1997 and Cooper and Sawaf (1997) have typically

included some aspects contained in „ability‟ models but have also

included personality, motivational factors and affective dispositions (Mayer

et al., 1999; Roberts et al.,2001). Mixed models of EI have been widely

criticized as over- inclusive because they incorporate multiple variables

that, while possibly being important to life success, extent conceptually

beyond what is typically invoked by the terms „emotion‟, „intelligence‟ and

„EI‟ (Mayer, 1999).

Early theorists such as Thorndike and Gardner paved the way for

the current experts in the field of EI. Each theoretical paradigm

conceptualizes EI from one of two perspectives: ability or mixed model.

Ability models regard EI as a pure form of mental ability and thus as a pure

intelligence. In contrast, mixed models of EI combine mental ability with

personality characteristics such as optimism and well-being (Mayer, 1999).

Currently, the only ability model of EI is that proposed by Mayer and

Salovey. Two mixed models of EI have been proposed, each within a

somewhat different conception. Bar-On has put forth a model based within

the context of personality theory, emphasizing the co-dependence of the

ability aspects of EI with personality traits and their application to personal

well-being. In contrast, Goleman proposed a mixed model in terms of

performance, integrating an individual's abilities and personality and

applying their corresponding effects on performance in the workplace

(Goleman, 2001).

2.3.1.1 Salovey and Mayer: An Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence

Salovey and Mayer first coined the term "emotional intelligence" in

1990 and have since continued to conduct research on the significance of


34

the construct. Their pure theory of EI integrates key ideas from the fields of

intelligence and emotion. From intelligence theory comes to the idea that

intelligence involves the capacity to carry out abstract reasoning. From

emotion research comes the notion that emotions are signals that convey

regular and discernable meanings about relationships and that at a

number of basic emotions are universal (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002).

They propose that individuals vary in their ability to process information of

an emotional nature and in their ability to relate emotional processing to a

wider cognition. They then posit that this ability is seen to manifest itself in

certain adaptive behaviours (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000).

Salovey and Mayer, who originally used the term "emotional

intelligence" in published writing, initially defined EI as “a form of

intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one's own and others'

feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this

information to guide one's thinking and actions” (1990).

Later, these authors revised their definition of EI, the current

characterization now being the most widely accepted. EI is thus defined as

“the ability to perceive emotion, integrate emotion to facilitate thought,

understand emotions, and to regulate emotions to promote personal

growth (Mayer & Salovey, 1997)”.

Mayer and Salovey's conception of EI is based within a model of

intelligence, that is, it strives to define EI within the confines of the

standard criteria for a new intelligence (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, &

Sitarenios, 2003). It proposes that EI is comprised of two areas:

experiential (ability to perceive, respond, and manipulate emotional

information without necessarily understanding it) and strategic (ability to

understand and manage emotions without necessarily perceiving feelings

well or fully experiencing them). Each area is further divided into two

branches that range from basic psychological processes to more complex

processes integrating emotion and cognition. The first branch, emotional

perception, is the ability to be self-aware of emotions and to express


35

emotions and emotional needs accurately to others. Emotional perception

also includes the ability to distinguish between honest and dishonest

expressions of emotion. The second branch, emotional assimilation, is the

ability to distinguish among the different emotions one is feeling and to

identify those that are influencing their thought processes. The third

branch, emotional understanding, is the ability to understand complex

emotions (such as feeling two emotions at once) and the ability to

recognize transitions from one to the other. Lastly, the fourth branch,

emotion management, is the ability to connect or disconnect from an

emotion depending on its usefulness in a given situation (Mayer &

Salovey, 1997).

(A) Perception of Emotion

The first branch of Mayer and Salovey‟s model is Perception of

emotions, which concerns the accuracy with which individuals are able to

attend, appraise and express their own emotional states. This involves the

individual being aware of their emotions in order to monitor them so as to

differentiate between them and then to express these emotions adequately

(1997). Furthermore, individuals who are more accurate at perceiving their

own emotions are better able to respond to these emotions, to their

surrounding environment and are also better able to express these

emotions to others (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Salovey et al., 2000).

Salovey and Mayer (1990) have stated that from an evolutionary

standpoint, it is important that people are able to perceive the emotions of

others. The identification of emotions in other individuals occurs largely

through the evaluation of non-verbal cues, which constitutes the majority

of interpersonal communication. The recognition of emotional content has

also been related to the concept of empathy, the ability to understand and

experience the feelings or emotions of a person in need. Empathy is thus

viewed as being fundamental in developing and maintaining social support

and positive interpersonal relationships. Expressing emotions is also an

integral part of interpersonal relationship because it stimulates and


36

enhances emotional connection and encourage a deeper understanding of

the other person. Ambivalence in the expression of emotions may

therefore be detrimental to the development of interpersonal relationships

(George, 2000).

(B) Utilization of Emotion

The second branch in the model, Utilization of emotions, describes

the way in which emotional events may assist with intellectual processing

(Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Once information about emotions has been

obtained through the accurate appraisal of emotions, it may be harnessed

for a number of means. Emotions or knowledge about emotions are

important for the generation of particular emotional states, which may be

relevant for certain situations or in directing one‟s attention to important

information. Emotions may also be generated in order for certain

situations to be better understand, a process which is fundamental to

empathy. Additionally, emotions may enhance motivation and may thus

assist individuals to persist in the face of challenges. For examples,

focusing on negative outcomes may induce a state of fear and a desire to

perform well in order to avoid this outcome eventuating. Conversely,

focusing on a positive outcome may enhance perseverance in order to

fulfil a particular challenge (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Salovey et al., 2000).

(C) Understanding of Emotion

The third branch of the model is Understanding (or Knowledge) of

emotions, which concern the ability to understand the causes and

determinants of emotions, to understand the relationships between

differing emotions, such as which emotions are similar and what message

they convey, to understand how emotions evolve over time and also

involves the ability to reason with these emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1990

& 1997).

Understanding emotions involves having an understanding of what

each emotion „signals‟ in order to determine what is the motivating


37

purpose behind that emotion. For example, feelings of „sadness‟ can

reflect a sense of „loss‟, which may motivate people to either grieve and

accept this loss or to try to reconnect or recapture the loss (Cobb & Mayer,

2000; Salovey et al., 2000). Understanding emotions also involves

recognizing the similarities between emotions. While there are six

identified universal emotions (i.e., happiness, anger, sadness, surprise,

fear and disgust ( Ekman, Friesen & Ellsworth, 1972), there are numerous

other emotions that constitute subgroups of these six, but which represent

degree of intensity. For example, „rage‟, „irritation‟ and „annoyance‟ are all

terms associated with anger. Understanding the associations between

emotions provides a greater understanding of emotions and the way in

which they work (Salovey et al., 2000).

(D) Management of Emotions

The fourth branch of the model is Management (or Regulation) of

emotion, which involves the conscious regulation of emotions for personal

growth and may involve the regulation of emotions in oneself (i.e., mood

management) and in others (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Such a skill is

dependant on being able to correctly monitor, discriminate and label one‟s

feelings, as well as believing and being able to modify and improve these

feelings (Brackett & Mayer, 2004). It has been suggested that skill at

regulating the emotions of oneself and others may assist in alleviating

stress and may be used in social adaptation and problem solving

(Matthews et al., 2002)

The regulation of emotions is an attempt to influence which

emotions are felt, at what particular time they are felt and how these

emotions are experienced or expressed (Gross, 1998). Therefore

management of emotions may be best thought of as allowing emotions,

both positive and negative, to be experienced although not necessarily

expressed. Further to this, Gross (1998) has suggested that the regulation

of emotions may be harmful if it means that emotions, which may be


38

construed as „negative‟, such as sadness or anger, are not expressed at

times when these emotions are in fact appropriate .

2.3.1.2 Bar-On: A Mixed Model of Emotional Intelligence

The director of the Institute of Applied Intelligences in Denmark and

consultant for a variety of institutions and organizations in Israel, Bar-On

developed one of the first measures of EI that used the term "Emotion

Quotient". Bar-On's model of EI relates to the potential for performance

and success, rather than performance or success itself, and is considered

process-oriented rather than outcome-oriented (2002). It focuses on an

array of emotional and social abilities, including the ability to be aware of,

understand, and express oneself, the ability to be aware of, understand,

and relate to others, the ability to deal with strong emotions, and the ability

to adapt to change and solve problems of a social or personal nature (Bar-

On, 1997). Bar-On‟s (1997) model of EI is based on work that he has

conducted since 1980 when he first questioned why some individuals were

more successful than others at obtaining and maintaining better

psychological well-being and life success. Interest in this idea prompted

Bar-On to study the factors that were thought to determine success and

his work has been promoted, since Goleman‟s (1995) EI publication, as a

theory of EI. Bar-On (1997) has defined EI as “an array of non-cognitive

capabilities, competencies and skills that influence one‟s ability to succeed

in copying with environmental demands and pressures”.

Bar-On‟s (1997) approach to EI is multi-factorial and extends the

number of emotional factors beyond those identified in Mayer and

Salovey‟s (1997) model to 15 facets. These components fit into five

subscales, namely: Intrapersonal (the extent to which individuals are in

touch with their own emotions, their self-confidence and their degree of

self-satisfaction), Interpersonal (how well individuals interact with and

understand other people), Adaptability (how well individuals successfully

solve problems and cope with demands), General Mood (an individual‟s

levels of happiness and optimism) and Stress Management (the extent to


39

which individuals are able to withstand stress). Within these components

are sub-components, Bar-On posits that EI develops over time and that it

can be improved through training, programming, and therapy (Bar-On,

2002).

Bar-On hypothesizes that those individuals with higher than

average E.Q.‟s are in general more successful in meeting environmental

demands and pressures. He also notes that a deficiency in EI can mean a

lack of success and the existence of emotional problems. Problems in

coping with one‟s environment is thought, by Bar-On, to be especially

common among those individuals lacking in the subscales of reality

testing, problem solving, stress tolerance, and impulse control. In general,

Bar-On considers EI and cognitive intelligence to contribute equally to a

person‟s general intelligence, which then offers an indication of one‟s

potential to succeed in life (Bar-On, 2002). Based on his model of EI, Bar-

On (1997) has developed a measure of EI, the EQ-i. Bar-On (1997)

Claims that EQ-i assesses the emotional, personal and social aspects of

non-cognitive intelligence, with the assumption that non-cognitive

intelligence is capable of predicating success in various aspects of life.

The EQ-i is a 133-item self-report inventory, based on the five subscales

defined in Bar-On‟s EI model. Participants indicate their level of

agreement with each statement based on a 5-point Likert scale.

2.3.1.3 Goleman: A Mixed Model of Emotional Intelligence

Goleman, a psychologist and science writer who has previously

written on brain and behaviour research for the New York Times,

discovered the work of Salovey and Mayer in the 1990's. Inspired by their

findings, he began to conduct his own research in the area and eventually

wrote Emotional Intelligence (1995), the landmark book which familiarized

both the public and private sectors with the idea of EI. The basis of

Goleman‟s EI model is his belief that omnibus IQ is ineffective at predicting

„life successes‟ after the effects of schooling, innate potential and

opportunity have been taken into account. In particular, Goleman has


40

argued that IQ contributes only approximately 20% of the variance

necessary to predict „life success‟, with the implication being that the

remaining 80% of variance in success is at least predominantly accounted

for by EI. Given this apparent disparity, Goleman reasons that the

presence of EI components is what explains why some individuals with

lower IQ may end up being as successful as individuals who have higher

IQ or, conversely, the absence of EI may explain why individuals with high

IQ do not reach the potential expected of them.

Goleman views EI as a „meta-ability‟ which may either facilitate or

interfere with one‟s capabilities in other areas. Goleman (1995) has

therefore argued that the extent to which individuals are motivated by their

feelings, and their ability to use emotions to enhance thinking, planning,

pursing goals and solving problems, is what enables individuals to extend

the limits of their innate mental abilities. However, whereas Salovey and

Mayer‟s EI model only emphasizes the cognitive aspect of emotions in the

ability to perceive, utilise, understand and manage emotions, Goleman‟s

definition includes not only these, but a number of personality and social

factors as well. Consequently, Goleman‟s view of EI is expansive and

appears to include just about all personal characteristics other than IQ

that constitute some form of „success‟.

Goleman‟s (1995) model of EI consists of five competencies: Self-

Awareness, Self-Regulation, Motivation, Empathy and Social Skills.

According to Goleman, Self-Awareness refers to an individual‟s

recognition of one‟s own emotions, self worth and capabilities. This is said

to encourage self-reflectiveness on the internal states, which is an

important precursor to developing further emotional competencies. Self-

Regulation involves managing one‟s emotions, being flexible and taking

responsibility for one‟s performance and behaviour. Goleman holds that

the path to emotional well-being is through the ability to manage emotions

in oneself in order to keep distressing emotions in check and also to

ensure that no emotion –whether positive or negative – is allowed to

become too „out of control‟ by being either too extreme or too persistent.


41

Motivation refers to applying initiative and maintaining optimism in order to

meet goals, which is considered to be an important part of academic and

occupational success. Empathy indicates personally connecting with the

emotions of others and requires appropriately reading, developing and

understanding another individual‟s feelings. Being aware of and open to

one‟s feelings may facilitate perceiving emotions in others. As the majority

of interpersonal communication is non-verbal, Goleman suggests that

emotional empathy towards others allows the detection of slight nuances

of non-verbal communication, which is intrinsically important in the

formation and maintenance of interpersonal relationships. Finally, Social

Skills, an area that is closely related to empathy, concerns the interaction

with others in order to induce desired responses, a factor which relies on

the skills of listening, conflict management, collaboration and leadership.

Goleman‟s view is that managing the emotions of others, which he

suggests is akin „people skills‟, or learnt ways of dealing with people,

occurs through the process of „mood transfer‟ from a „dominant‟ partner

(either through a power imbalance or through their more forceful

expression of emotion) to the more „passive‟ partner. Goleman suggests

that aligning moods in this way generates feelings of rapport and

influences the attunement of individuals to each other, which assists in the

formation and maintenance of interpersonal relationships.

2.3.1.4 Petrides and Furnham’s framework for EI

While Mayer et al. (1999) have distinguished between „mixed‟ and

„ability‟ models of EI, Petrides and Furnham (2000; 2001; 2002) have

advanced a conceptual differentiation for EI, based not on the models

themselves, but on the assessment of such models. In doing so they have

argued that regardless of the theory it is the type of measurement that

defined the outcome as this directly influences the conceptualisation of the

construct (even if the theoretically domains are similar), the hypotheses

that may be tested and thus the results and the conclusion that may be

drawn. Considering such differences, Petrides and Furnham have


42

suggested that the two main forms of measuring EI (currently ability and

self-report) should be seen as theoretically distinct and they have thus

proposed the division of EI into “ability EI” and “trait EI”.

„Ability EI (originally labelled “information processing” by Petrides &

Furnham, 2001) has been defined as the actual ability to recognize,

process and utilize emotion-laden information. Given the skill component

of this form of EI, it is suggested that this should be examined in relation to

psychometric intelligence. Alternatively, “Trait EI” has been defined as an

individual‟s behavioural dispositions and their self-perceptions about their

ability to recognize process and utilize emotion-landen information. This

definition included various dispositions that typically fall under the

personality domain and also under social and personal intelligences.

Consequently, Petrides and Furnham (2001) have placed the concepts

captured by „trait‟ EI on the lower levels of the personality hierarchy.

Based on the differing conceptualisation of each EI model, Petrides and

Furnham (2001; 2002) have suggested that „trait‟ EI models should be

assessed via „self-report‟ questionnaires, whereas „ability‟ EI models

should be assessed by maximum performance tests. Petrides and

Furnham (2002) have further warned that in light of these differences, it

should not be expected that both types of measurements will be related, or

will produce entirely similar results because each type of measurement

essentially assesses different constructs.

However, despite their labelling of these two constructs as „trait‟ and

„ability‟ EI, Petrides and Furnham (2001) have proposed a refinement in

naming based on the argument that the concept of an „ability emotional

intelligence‟ is redundant. More specifically, Petrides and Furnham (2001)

regard the term „trait‟ as akin to „dispositions‟, a concept which should

distinguish it from „cognitive ability‟ and therefore they view the labelling of

this type of EI as „trait EI‟ as a useful identifier. However, they view that

since intelligence is commonly seen as an „ability‟ and not a „trait‟, that the

pairing of the terms „ability‟ and „EI‟ to specify the more cognitive approach

to EI is unnecessary. Instead they have suggested that „emotional self-


43

efficacy‟ be used in place of „trait EI‟ and the term „cognitive emotional

ability‟ to be used instead of „ability EI‟. Nevertheless, Petrices and

Furnham (2001) have suggested that until this further clarification is

necessary the terms „trait‟ and „ability‟ EI should be retained for the present

in order to be consistent with previous literature. Petrides and Furnham

(2003) have also recently developed a trait measure of EI that they have

labelled the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). The full-

form version of this measure is a 144 item self-report questionnaire, based

on a 7-point Likert scale, although a short form of this test, containing only

3 items, has also been developed. The TEIQue is claimed to assess a

highly reliable global trait EI and consists of 9 subscales (Adaptability,

Assertiveness, Emotion Perception, Emotion Regulation, Empathy,

Impulsiveness, Relationship Skills, Social Competence and Stress

Management).

2.3.2. The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence

The way in which EI is conceptualised largely determines the way in

which it is evaluated. The three methods currently available for evaluating

EI are „ability‟ measures (an objective assessment), „self-report‟ measures

and „observer-rater‟ measures (both subjective assessments). There is

some contention over the appropriateness and effectiveness of each of

these methods, fuelled largely by differing opinions on what elements

should comprise EI and on a number of methodological difficulties in

determining the validity of the information obtained with each approach.

Questions over how effective any form of EI assessment can

actually be have also been raised. Gold and Concar (1996) have argued

that emotional skills, since they operate within dynamic environments, are

changeable and relative in a way that IQ is not. Consequently, they have

argued that since emotional response is largely embedded within the

social context in which it occurs, an individual‟s ability to be emotionally

intelligent will likely vary according to whether the situations involve people

with whom a close relationship has been formed versus those who are


44

strangers. They have therefore raised doubts about weather EI measures

can detect and adequately measure some of the more subtle components

postulated as comprising EI. Ciarrochi, Chan, Caputi and Roberts (2001b)

have also suggested that if EI cannot be adequately measured then it

might be necessary to “admit that it might not exist as a meaningful

scientific construct”.

2.3.2.1 Ability Emotional Intelligence Measures

The model of EI developed by Mayer, Salovey and colleagues

proposes that EI is a mental ability. As with other types of mental abilities,

they suggest that individuals differ in their effective level of emotional

processing. Ability models of EI are therefore typically assessed by

objective maximal performance measures, similar to the way in which

cognitive intelligence is evaluated. Such measures (e.g., multifactor

Emotional Intelligence Scale [MEIS] and Mayer, Salovey and Caruso

Emotional Intelligence Test [MSCEIT]) require solving emotional problems

for which there are defined „correct‟ and „incorrect‟ answers. This form of

testing putatively provides a quantifiable indication of an individual’s actual

EI abilities, as opposed to simply asking an individual what they believe

their emotional abilities to be. It has been argued that the name of such

measures reduces the likelihood of participants „faking‟ a good

performance and also eliminates the need for the individual to have insight

into their own EI. These two factors may impact on the quality of the

results that are obtained and have been identified as fundamental

problems in self-report measures (Ciarrochi, Chan & Caputi., 2000). In

light of these advantages, ability measures of EI are considered to be the

most reliable form of measurement because they appear to be more

empirically based than self-report EI measures (Mayer et al., 1999; Mayer

& Salovey, 1997; Roberts et al., 2001).

However, the problem with ability EI measures is the difficulty in

determining the „correctness‟ of answers to such problems so that these

measures can be scored. Measures of cognitive intelligence consist of


45

items which are based on a formal rule system which provides clear

justification for the „correctness‟ of a particular answer. Roberts et al.

(2001) have therefore argued that if EI is to be considered an „intelligence‟,

similar set of rules must be derived and upheld for the scoring of these

measures. Difficulties with this requirement arise because the correctness

emotional responses may be viewed as largely subjective and are

therefore dependent on individual judgement, something that makes

assessments by objective scoring criteria somewhat difficult (Furnham &

Petrides, 2003; Mayer et al., 1999). Roberts et al. (2001) have

consequently suggested that within the emotional domain it “may be

inappropriate to insist that the test items should have rigid unequivocal

right and wrong answers”.

Mayer et al. (1999) have suggested three alternative scoring

methods (consensus scoring, expert scoring and target scoring) for

establishing the correctness of answers for ability EI measures.

Consensus scoring works on the basis that observations obtained from a

large number of people can be combined and averaged in order to

produce a reliable measure of general opinion. In this sense the most

common answer endosed by a group is deemed to be the most

appropriate and is therefore dependent on how often the test-taker

endorses the group consensus.

Expert scoring relies on „emotions experts‟ (e.g., psychiatrists,

psychologists, philosophers, emotions researchers) to judge what they

believe to be the most appropriate response. It is presumed that such

experts will have more emotional and behavioural knowledge to assist

them in making their decisions than the typical layperson and will thus be

more likely to know the „correct‟ answer (Mayer et al., 1999). As with

consensus scoring, test-takers receive credit based on the level of

correspondence of their answers with those provided by these experts.

Finally, target scoring has been proposed whereby a target

individual is asked to describe their feelings about a particular experienced


46

event. An external observer (the test taker) must then attempt to determine

the emotions that the target individual was likely to have felt in that

scenario. These results are then compared in order to determine the level

of congruency between the two. It is assumed that the target individual will

have more information about their own mood states than will external

observers and therefore the responses provided by the target individuals

are deemed to be the „correct‟ answers (Mayer & Geher, 1996). This

assumption, however, is challenged by observations that target individuals

often alter their reports of emotional content in order to appear more

socially desirable or report incorrect emotion simply because they are

unable to determine accurately or express the complex emotions that they

are experiencing (Mayer & Geher, 1996). Additionally, target scoring has

only limited functionality within the field of EI because it is only relevant to

emotion-identification task, rather than to higher-level EI components and

has thus not been widely used (Roberts et al., 2001).

Mayer et al. (1999) have claimed that in general there is a great

deal of similarity between these three methods, reporting correlations

ranging between r = .16 and r = .95 between them, with at least half of all

correlations being above r = .52, based on the use of two experts. Mayer

et al. (2000a) have argued that the similarity between these three scoring

techniques enables the designation of some answers as more plausible

(i.e., „more correct‟) than others. Nevertheless, despite the similarity

between these three scoring techniques, Mayer et al. (1999) have

recommended the use of consensus scoring. This is based on evidence

that suggests that targets may sometimes minimize or inaccurately report

their feelings, or the possibility that experts may be merely providing an

estimate of what they believe to be group opinion anyway, while the

pooling of responses into large normative samples appears to produce

fairly reliable judgements and will eliminate individual biases.


47

2.3.2.2 Self-report Emotional Intelligence Measures

In contrast, mixed models of EI (e.g., Goleman, Bar-On), which are

typically regarded as comprising a dispositional tendency similar to

personality, are primarily assessed by self-report measures. Such

measures (e.g., Trait Meta Mood Scale [TMMS], Assessing Emotions

Scale [AES] and the Emotional Quotient Inventory [EQ-i] essentially seek

an assessment of an individual‟s typical level of functioning by asking

individuals to rate the extent to which a series of descriptive statements

are indicative of themselves.

Self-report measures assume that individuals are the best judges of

themselves and their own behaviour and therefore self-report

assessments provides appropriate evaluation. However, there are grounds

for challenging these assumptions. First, self-report measures assess an

individual‟s perception of their skill, rather than actual competency in those

domains. Mayer et al., (2000a) have suggested that such assessments of

EI are akin to asking someone how fast they think they can type rather

than quantifiably assessing this ability. Consequently, as with target-

scoring assessments, the accuracy of self-report measures is reliant on an

individual‟s level of insightfulness into their own behaviour and ability,

which may be distorted or even unavailable to conscious interpretation.

Petrides and Furnham (2000) for instance have suggested that self-

reported estimates of EI are often biased, with respondents typically rating

themselves as above average in ability. Secondly, such measures rely on

an individual‟s honesty when reporting their behaviours, and thus self-

report EI measures are susceptible to a social desirability bias (Mayer et

al., 2000a; Geher, Warner & Brown, 2001; Malouff & Schutte, 2001;

Roberts et al. 2001).

In fact, research has indicated that self-report assessments of

ability rarely reflect actual ability. For example, Mabe and West (1982), in

meta- analytic investigation of 55 studies, determined that correlations

between self-report evaluations of intelligence and actual intelligence


48

measures are only moderate (r = .34). Roberts et al. (2001) have also

reported that in relation to intelligence, self-report measures account for

less than 10% of actual intelligence score variance. Based on such

evidence, Roberts et al. (2001) and Wilhelm (2005) have considered it

reasonable to expect that correlation of a similar magnitude would exist

between self-report and ability measures of EI. Given this disparity,

Wilhelm (2005) has cautioned that it is not appropriate to use self-report

and ability measures of EI.

Self-report measures of EI have also been found to have moderate

to high correlations with a number of other well-established psychological

constructs, particularly with personality (e.g., Bar on 1997; Ciarrochi, et

al., 2000; Dawda & Hart, 2000; Newsome, Day, & Catano, 2000). It is

possible that these correlations may reflect the nature of self-report EI test

construction, which is similar to the way in which personality itself is

assessed, or, as is more generally thought, it may be due to the relative

reliance that mixed models of EI place on pre-established personality traits

(Palmer et al., 2003).

Given the relatively high correlations between self-report EI

measures and personality scales, questions have been raised as to

whether EI models relying on such measures are really assessing

anything beyond already heavily researched psychological constructs

(Davies, Stankov, & Roberts, 1998; Matthews et al., 2002). Consequently,

although substantial correlations have been found between self-report

measures of EI and theoretically relevant criteria, it is uncertain whether

these are substantive relationships or simply arise because these

measures trap personality traits known to predict these criteria (Matthews

et al., 2002; Newsome et al., 2000; Petrides & Furnham, 2000; Palmer,

Donaldson & Stough, 2002). Nevertheless, it has also been acknowledged

that self-report assessments have some benefit that they can provide

useful insight into internal processes and experience that are not

measurable by performance based assessment (Neubauer &

Freudenthaler, 2005).


49

2.3.2.3 Observer-rater Emotional Intelligence Measures

Attempts have been made to address some of the criticisms

concerning self-report EI tests with the use of observer ratings, obtained

from a close associate of the person, as a comparison to increase the

reliability of the obtained information (Malouff & Schutte, 2001). Observer

rating scales are typically structured in a similar way to self-report EI

measures but they provide information about how an individual is

perceived by others. Malouff & Schutte (2001) in a study of 45 individuals

have found self-report and observer rating assessments of EI (by an

acquaintance of at least three months duration) to be moderately

correlated (r = .31) suggesting that they are assessing similar constructs,

although this level of association is hardly strong.

Observer rating EI measures, however, suffer from similar problems

to self-report EI measures in that they rely on ratings of behaviour, which

may be incorrect due to corruption by the observer‟s own biases, or

insufficient knowledge about the other individual. This is particularly likely,

given that mental abilities are generally private and not always observable

and therefore external rates are likely to be less accurate at judging these

types of abilities in others, than individuals would with their own ratings

(Mayer et al., 2000a). Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2000c) have therefore

argued that such measures should really only be used for observable

behaviours and not for the evaluation of mental abilities.

2.4 THE CONCEPT OF EMOTIONAL COMPETENCE

Emotional competence is a learned capability that results in

outstanding performance at work. Our EI is what determines our potential

to learn practical skills. According to Singh (2003), the emotional

competency dimension of EI constitutes the capacity to respond to

emotional stimuli elicited by various situations and to have high self

esteem and optimism among others. Our emotional competence shows

how much of this potential is translated into on-the-job capabilities. For

instance, being good at serving customers is an emotional competence

based on empathy. Similarly, trustworthiness is a competence based on

self-regulation, or handling impulses and emotions well. Both customer


50

service and trustworthiness are competencies which can make people

outstanding in their work.

"Emotional Competence is a learned capability based on Emotional

Intelligence that results in outstanding performance at work. Our Emotional

Intelligence determines our potential for learning the practical skills based

on the five elements: self-awareness, motivation, self-regulation, empathy,

and adeptness in relationships. Our emotional competence shows how

much of that potential we have translated into on-the-job capabilities."

(Goleman, 1998)

2.4.1 Emotional Competence Framework

Emotional Competencies cluster into groups, each based on a

common underlying EI capacity. The underlying EI capacities are vital if

people are to successfully learn the competencies necessary to succeed

in the workplace. Below shows the relationship between the five

dimensions of EI and the twenty-five emotional competencies. These EI

capacities are

Independent: Each makes a unique contribution to performance

Interdependent: Each draws to some extent on certain others, with

many strong interactions.

Hierarchical: The EI capacities build upon one another. For

Example, self-awareness is crucial for self-regulation and empathy;

self-regulation and self-awareness contribute to motivation; all the

first four work in social skills.

Necessary, but not sufficient: Having an underlying EI ability does

not guarantee people will develop or display the associated

competencies, such as collaboration or leadership. Factors such a

climate of the organisation or a person‟s interest in his or her job will

also determine whether the competence manifests itself.

Generic: the general list is to some extent applicable to all jobs.

However different jobs make differing competence demands

The Figure 2.1 shows the block diagram of Goleman‟s Emotional

competence frame work and description of each competence was

described below.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Personal Competence

Social Competence

Self – Awareness

Self – Regulation

Motivation

Empathy Social Skills

Emotional awareness

Accurate self-assessment

Self confidence

Self - control

Trustworthiness

Conscientiousness

Adaptability

Innovation

Achievement Drive

Commitment

Initiative

Optimism

Understanding Others

Developing Others

Service Orientation

Leveraging Diversities

Political Awareness

Influence

Communication

Conflict Management

Leadership

Change Catalyst

Building Bonds

Collaboration & Co-operation

Team Capabilities

Fig.2.1: Goleman’s Emotional Competence Framework


52

The Emotional Competence Framework

Self-awareness, self-regulation and motivation are the personal

competencies that determine how we manage ourselves, while empathy

and social skill are the attributes of our social competencies that determine

our ability to manage with others. Both these categories of emotional

competencies of the person determine the level of emotional competence

of how we manage ourselves and others. The components of each are

briefly listed below:

Emotional Competence: -

(A) Personal Competence: -1. Self-Awareness, 2. Self- Regulation,

3. Motivation

(B) Social Competence: - 4. Empathy, 5. Social Skills

1. Self -awareness

It implies knowing one‟s internal state, preferences, resources and

intuitions. It is composed of the following personal elements.

Emotional awareness Recognizing one‟s emotions and their effects

Accurate self-

assessment

Knowing one‟s strength and limits.

Self confidence A strong sense of one‟s self-worth and

capabilities.

2. Self –regulation

It implies knowing one‟s ability to manage one‟s internal states,

impulses, and resources. It is composed of the following elements.

Self- control Keeping disruptive emotions and impulses, in

check

Trustworthiness Maintaining standard of honesty and integrity

Conscientiousness Taking responsibility for personal performance.

Adaptability` Flexibility in handling change.

Innovation Being comfortable with novel ideas, approaches

and information.


53

3. Motivation

It refers the emotional tendencies that guide or facilitate reaching

one‟s goals in life. This is consisted of:

Achievement drive Striving to improve or meet a standard of excellence.

Commitment Aligning with the goals of the group or organization

Initiative Readiness to act on opportunities.

Optimism Persistence in pursuing one‟s goals despite obstacles

and setbacks.

4. Empathy

It implies one‟s quality of awareness of other‟s feelings, needs and

concerns. This competence is composed of the following.

Understanding others Sensing others feelings and perspectives and taking an

active interest in their concerns.

Developing others Sensing others development needs and bolstering their

abilities

Service orientation Anticipating, recognizing and meeting others needs.

Leveraging diversities Cultivating opportunities through different kinds of

people.

Political awareness Reading a groups emotional currents and power

relationships.

5. Social Skills

This competence covers one‟s emotional ability of adeptness at

inducing awareness of other‟s feelings, needs and concerns. This

competence s composed of the followings.

Influence Wielding effective tactics for persuasion.

Communication Listening openly and sending convincing messages.

Conflict management Negotiating and resolving disagreements

Leadership Inspiring and guiding individuals and groups

Change catalyst Initiating or managing change

Building bonds Nurturing instrumental relationships

Collaboration and co-operation

Working with others towards shared goal

Team capabilities Creating groups synergy in pursuing collective goals.


54

The sub-components of each emotional competence are described below

1. Emotional awareness: Recognizing one‟s emotions and their effects.

People with this competence:

Know which emotions they are feeling and why

Realize the links between their feelings and what they think, do, and

say

Recognize how their feelings affect their performance

Have a guiding awareness of their values and goals

2. Accurate self-assessment: Knowing one‟s strengths and limits. People

with this competence are:

Aware of their strengths and weaknesses

Reflective, learning from experience

Open to candid feedback, new perspectives, continuous learning,

and self-development

Able to show a sense of humor and perspective about themselves

3. Self-confidence: Sureness about one‟s self-worth and capabilities.


Present themselves with self-assurance; have .presence.

Can voice views that are unpopular and go out on a limb for what is

right

Are decisive, able to make sound decisions despite uncertainties

and pressures

4. Self-control: Managing disruptive emotions and impulses. People with

this competence:

Manage their impulsive feelings and distressing emotions well

Stay composed, positive, and unflappable even in trying moments


55

Think clearly and stay focused under pressure

5. Trustworthiness: Maintaining standards of honesty and integrity. People

with this competence:

Act ethically and are above reproach

Build trust through their reliability and authenticity

Admit their own mistakes and confront unethical actions in others

Take tough, principled stands even if they are unpopular

6. Conscientiousness: Taking responsibility for personal performance.


Meet commitments and keep promises

Hold themselves accountable for meeting their objectives

Are organized and careful in their work

7. Adaptability: Flexibility in handling change. People with this

competence:

Smoothly handle multiple demands, shifting priorities, and rapid

change

Adapt their responses and tactics to fit fluid circumstances

Are flexible in how they see events

8. Innovativeness: Being comfortable with and open to novel ideas and

new information. People with this competence:

Seek out fresh ideas from a wide variety of sources

Entertain original solutions to problems

Generate new ideas

Take fresh perspectives and risks in their thinking

9. Achievement drive: Striving to improve or meet a standard of

excellence. People with this competence:


56

Are results-oriented, with a high drive to meet their objectives and

standards

Set challenging goals and take calculated risks

Pursue information to reduce uncertainty and find ways to do better

Learn how to improve their performance

10. Commitment: Aligning with the goals of the group or organization.


Readily make personal or group sacrifices to meet a larger

organizational goal

Find a sense of purpose in the larger mission

Use the group‟s core values in making decisions and clarifying

choices

Actively seek out opportunities to fulfill the group‟s mission

11. Initiative: Readiness to act on opportunities. People with this

competence:

Are ready to seize opportunities

Pursue goals beyond what‟s required or expected of them

Cut through red tape and bend the rules when necessary to get the

job done

Mobilize others through unusual, enterprising efforts

12. Optimism: Persistence in pursuing goals despite obstacles and

setbacks. People with this competence:

Persist in seeking goals despite obstacles and setbacks

Operate from hope of success rather than fear of failure

See setbacks as due to manageable circumstance rather than a

personal flaw


57

13. Understanding Others: Sensing other‟s Feelings and perspective, and

taking an active interest in their concerns. People with this competence:

Are attentive to emotional cues and listen well

Show sensitivity and understand others. perspectives

Help out based on understanding other people‟s needs and feelings

14. Developing others: Sensing what others need in order to develop, and

bolstering their abilities. People with this competence:

Acknowledge and reward people‟s strengths, accomplishments,

and development

Offer useful feedback and identify people‟s needs for development

Mentor, give timely coaching, and offer assignments that challenge

and grow a person‟s skills.

15. Service orientation: Anticipating, recognizing, and meeting customers

needs. People with this competence:

Understand customers. needs and match them to services or

products

Seek ways to increase customers. satisfaction and loyalty

Gladly offer appropriate assistance

Grasp a customer‟s perspective, acting as a trusted advisor

16. Leveraging diversity: Cultivating opportunities through diverse people.


Respect and relate well to people from varied backgrounds

Understand diverse worldviews and are sensitive to group

differences

See diversity as opportunity, creating an environment where diverse

people can thrive

Challenge bias and intolerance


58

17. Political awareness: Reading a group‟s emotional currents and power

relationships.People with this competence:

Accurately read key power relationships

Detect crucial social networks

Understand the forces that shape views and actions of clients,

customers, or competitors

Accurately read situations and organizational and external realities

18. Influence: Wielding effective tactics for persuasion. People with this

competence:

Are skilled at persuasion

Fine-tune presentations to appeal to the listener

Use complex strategies like indirect influence to build consensus

and support

Orchestrate dramatic events to effectively make a point

19. Communication: Sending clear and convincing messages. People with

this competence:

Are effective in give-and-take, registering emotional cues in attuning

their message

Deal with difficult issues straightforwardly

Listen well, seek mutual understanding, and welcome sharing of

information fully

Foster open communication and stay receptive to bad news as well

as good

20. Conflict management: Negotiating and resolving disagreements.


Handle difficult people and tense situations with diplomacy and tact


59

Spot potential conflict, bring disagreements into the open, and help

deescalate

Encourage debate and open discussion

Orchestrate win-win solutions

21. Leadership: Inspiring and guiding groups and people. People with this

competence:

Articulate and arouse enthusiasm for a shared vision and mission

Step forward to lead as needed, regardless of position

Guide the performance of others while holding them accountable

Lead by example

22. Change catalyst: Initiating or managing change. People with this

competence:

Recognize the need for change and remove barriers

Challenge the status quo to acknowledge the need for change

Champion the change and enlist others in its pursuit

Model the change expected of others

23. Building bonds: Nurturing instrumental relationships. People with this

competence:

Cultivate and maintain extensive informal networks

Seek out relationships that are mutually beneficial

Build rapport and keep others in the loop

Make and maintain personal friendships among work associates

24. Collaboration and cooperation: Working with others toward shared

goals. People with this competence:

Balance a focus on task with attention to relationships

Collaborate, sharing plans, information, and resources


60

Promote a friendly, cooperative climate

Spot and nurture opportunities for collaboration

25. Team capabilities: Creating group synergy in pursuing collective goals.


Model team qualities like respect, helpfulness, and cooperation

Draw all members into active and enthusiastic participation

Build team identity, esprit de corps, and commitment

Protect the group and its reputation; share credit

2.4.2 The Five Pathways to Emotional Intelligence

Salovey and Mayer (1990) identified five key areas of EI. These

formed the basis of Goleman's (1995) model of EI and are also significant

in Faupel's (2003) model of emotional literacy. They represent the five

developmental pathways of EI.

These dimensions have traditionally been seen as attributes of

personality. In emotional literacy they are seen as areas of skills,

competencies or areas to develop. When viewed as attributes of

personality they are often seen as dichotomous characteristics: a person

either has or does not have these characteristics. A child may be

described as 'not motivated', 'empathic' or as having 'no social skills'. In

EI these dimensions are not seen from this black or white perspective but

rather as areas of skills that exist along a continuum. These are areas that

continue to develop over the lifespan and in which one can achieve high

levels of expertise. High levels of EI might mean a very high degree of

insight into one's own emotional wellbeing and motivations, or to be a

highly effective and skilled communicator or negotiator. Personality, or

innate temperament, is influential in the development of EI and early

experience and attachment relationships also contribute significantly.

Another critical factor is the context in which one operates at any particular

time. The dimensions are related to each other; for example, self-


61

awareness influences one's ability to empathise with others. Yet they can

also develop independently of each other, such as, one may be very

empathic to others but have poor management of one's own feelings. This

chapter explores the fives domains of EI in detail and discusses some of

the influences of the development of EI in individuals.

2.4.2.1 Self-Awareness

This is to know one's own emotional state, to be able to recognise

what feelings are being experienced at any one time and being aware of

the thoughts that are involved in this. It is to know one‟s self and to have a

positive, integrated sense of self. We grow in sophistication in our ability to

do this. Self-awareness, or insight, is, 'being aware of our mood and aware

of our thoughts about why we have that mood' (Goleman, l995). We all

have a mood at any particular time and we develop in self- awareness

throughout life. However, there are differences in people's ability to be

aware of their own thought processes. Self-awareness involves attention

to our inner state and exists in degrees. We may have good insight into

some of our feelings, less so to other aspects of ourselves. Without

awareness of our emotional state we are less able to change our mood

and calm ourselves and are more likely to become engulfed by strong

emotions and to act on impulse. It is about being able to monitor one's own

emotional state. The ideal is to have developed a positive, integrated

sense of self.

A newborn child is only aware of emotion as bodily experiences of

comfort or discomfort. With time these experiences can be named. The

process of self-awareness is aided by developing a vocabulary of feelings.

To be able to recognize that you are feeling angry, humiliated or lonely you

need to know that such an emotion exists and that there is a word for that

experience. The child in his first year of life can only be aware of bodily

sensations. As he grows he is able to name his emotions as his emotional

vocabulary is constantly extending. This vocabulary is usually learnt in the

family and social environment and, as he grows older, school, friends and


62

the outside world are important influences. It is important for the child, at

an early stage, to experience that uncomfortable feelings can be soothed.

If a feeling is experienced as unacceptable, such as anger, then the child

may try to suppress the feeling that makes it harder to manage. Having an

emotional vocabulary that reflects one's emotional life is one of the

building blocks of emotional intelligence. However, some children may

have particular difficulties in learning the names of these basic emotions.

These children may be able in other areas but not able to be aware of their

own inner states or how they impact on others. Social or neuro-

developmental difficulties may also delay the development of self-

awareness and they may need additional help in developing skills in this

area. However, naming and acknowledging feelings and encouraging

children to reflect upon what they are thinking and feeling can facilitate the

development of self-awareness.

Adolescence can present particular problems with the development

of self-awareness. Teachers will be familiar with how limited some

teenagers can be in emotional expression, being able only to label their

experiences as good or bad, or their feelings as happy or sad. The

expression of anger is restricted if only swear words can convey the

strength of feeling. Some young people's emotional expression may be

limited to only being able to respond with saying, 'Alright,' when asked how

they are. Unusual or complex feelings may only be described as 'weird'.

Encouraging emotional expression can be enhanced across a wide range

of subjects, particularly the arts.

Self-awareness plays a part in decision making. Often a decision

can be made on our intuition or 'gut feeling' - a valuable source of

information - yet these decisions may be better helped by thinking why we

have these feelings in the first place. The highest degree of self-

awareness could be considered as reaching a spiritual or transcendental

quality. It is awareness of one's connectedness with a greater whole and

of what constitutes our sense of self.


63

2.4.2.2 Self-Regulation

This is to be able to manage one's emotions, to be able to respond

and handle strong feelings such as fear or anger appropriately rather than

to act them out. For instance, the angry child who hurts another or the

anxious child who avoids playing with others is not dealing well with his

strong feelings. The child has to learn effective ways of dealing with strong

feelings that may meet rather than deprive him of his needs. The critical

skill is being able to calm or soothe oneself and this develops throughout

life.

Being able to manage or self regulate one‟s own feelings is a critical

ability to develop. The ability to calm strong feelings rather than act on

impulse is a necessary skill to develop. For example, if a child is so angry

at another that he may hit that child or if a child who is so anxious at

having to talk in front of a whole class feigns or becomes ill to avoid the

situation, little is learnt about controlling aggression or overcoming the

fear. Unproductive ways of managing emotions can lead to avoiding or

disrupting both academic and social learning situations. Young people

without these skills are more likely to resort to excessive risk-taking,

alcohol and substance abuse as a way of managing feelings.

A necessary skill is to be able to calm ourselves when we

experience strong or disturbing feelings (self- soothing). The learning of

this skill begins in the primary attachment relationship. An infant learns to

soothe himself by treating himself as a caregiver treats him. The infant is

able to internalize these actions. In the classroom setting, being able to

settle one's self is necessary to be able to learn, to concentrate and focus.

We need to develop a sense of self-control, to recognize that strong

feelings will peak and pass and some actions are best not taken in the

heat of the moment. There are a number of ways to respond to any given

situation when one can think more calmly about the situation. It is this

sense of having an ability to respond to situations that lies behind the

meaning of being able to take responsibility – that one is able to choose


64

how to act. Central to impulse control is to wait, even for a few seconds

(while strong feelings pass and the rational mind can think more clearly)

before action.

Managing anxiety often involves evaluating the causes of anxiety

and, if appropriate, facing up to and mastering the fear rather than

avoiding anxiety provoking situations. Managing sadness may involve

being able to treat oneself kindly or to seek others who can give care.

Emotional regulation is helped by curiosity or an 'open mind' towards

situations rather than a fixed or dogged belief in what we think must be

true. It is mainly in our interactions with others that strong feelings are

evoked and we need to be able to calm ourselves before we can clearly

think and bring our problem-solving skills into focus.

Problems at home or at school, including working for examinations,

can contribute to stress. For some children this may develop into

emotional difficulties such as anxiety problems or depression. These

emotions can all contribute to stress, and we all face stresses in life so we

all need at least basic stress management skills. Many of these skills are

associated with promoting good learning skills and can be integrated into

the teaching of such skills. These skills may include identifying and

focusing on priorities, time management, being able to relax and enjoy

pleasurable activities.

2.4.2.3 Motivation

This is the ability to motivate oneself to achieve one's goals and is

essential for us all. Children may search out the approval of others, peers

or adults, or be motivated by internal drives or “willpower‟ to achieve

meaningful and desired outcomes. At some point there may be recognition

that greater rewards may come through delaying gratification. Motivation is

needed to work towards exams where the benefits of one's efforts may not

be reaped immediately. Some children are struggling to find the motivation

to get themselves out of bed.


65

Motivation is a familiar area for schools. A central task for teachers

is to encourage motivation for learning and this much-debated area could

fill many volumes in itself. For many teachers the problems of dealing with

motivation in children are so overwhelming the result maybe to feel de-

motivated themselves. Motivation is intertwined with emotion. The word

itself has the same root as the word 'emotion', that is, to move and to act.

Faupel (2003) identifies motivation as being concerned with our

choice of goals and our determination to reach those goals. Developing

and setting clear goals is a critical aspect of motivation and this involves

being able to conceptualise the gains involved in reaching that goal. What

motivates us may be the hope of success, anticipated rewards (both

internal or external), or it may be the removal of something undesired or

unpleasant. A young child may be motivated to learn to read through the

encouragement of adults. For the child to continue reading she needs to

discover the enjoyment through the act itself. Having a clear goal that is

seen as achievable brings an expectation of success that is essential for

motivation.

To be motivated towards something it has to be imagined. Children

can be helped to 'paint pictures, in their mind's eyes of the benefits of their

effort. It is important to be able to visualise the success of achieving goals

that can help this process. Creating visual images in the mind can also

help with dealing with change such as making transitions, changing

schools and so on. We are also motivated by our emotional states.

Emotions can be pleasant or unpleasant. We can be motivated to avoid

situations where we might experience unpleasant emotions such as

anxiety or fear. Alternatively we may be motivated towards feelings of

success, achievement or happiness. We may be motivated by a sense of

a fear of failure, and even a fear of success. Another key aspect of

motivation is to feel optimistic, and possess hope that effort will bring

benefits. Martin Seligman's (1995) work has demonstrated that optimism,

although influenced by temperament, is learnt and can therefore change.


66

Other aspects of motivation are the social process of competition

and cooperation. Competition can be both positive, through creating

motivation, and destructive. Those who see themselves as having a

chance of success may be motivated further but those that see

themselves as having no chance may lose motivation altogether.

Competition becomes positive when it is applied to oneself and not

encouraged with comparison with others. To 'beat your own best' is a goal

that is both achievable and motivating. The highest achievers in such

fields as the arts or sports are at the highest end of the motivational

pathway. They describe a state where learning and performance becomes

effortless. The state is known as 'flow'; the awe and engagement as

performance and concentration becomes almost unconscious. Using 'flow'

is the one of the healthiest ways of learning that exists and can be

experienced by learners at many levels. When you are really engaged in

an activity, learning comes without effort.

Motivation is a complex area but central both to the task of learning

and of EI. It is in this area, especially in working with poorly motivated

children in the classroom, that the fruits of developing emotional literacy in

schools can be most valuable.

2.4.2.4 Empathy

This is the ability to see how another person is feeling or seeing the

world, that is, social perceptiveness. To empathise is to understand

another person's frame of reference. Not only is this a critical skill in

helping others, it is fundamental for human relationships. As she grows,

the child can increasingly recognize that others think differently from how

she does and can develop the capacity for understanding what and why

other people are thinking and feeling. The child (or adult) who is aware of

how their actions affect others gains confidence in herself as well as being

better able to get on with others.

The ability to empathise lies at the heart of emotional literacy.

Empathy moves beyond one‟s awareness of one's own feelings to be able


67

to feel with and for others. It is about accurate insight into the motives and

feelings of others and being able to communicate that understanding.

Empathy also gives insight into how others see us - and they might see us

in a different way to how we see ourselves. Being able to empathise with

others is critical in communicating with others and thus building and

maintaining good relations. Empathy gives the ability to see another

person's point of view and is the basis of caring and compassion; to feel

for another is to care. Identifying distress in others leads to helping

behaviour. The roots of morality, kindness, compassion and generosity are

found in empathy. It also inhibits aggression. Girls tend to exhibit higher

levels of empathy than boys but empathy training has been found to

reduce this difference considerably (Cotton, 2000).

Empathy is social perceptiveness: to perceive the internal frame of

reference of another accurately and to be able to communicate it to the

person. An empathetic response acknowledges the way a person feels

and states it in a way that helps the person to see it differently perhaps

more clearly (Rogers, 1987). lt is at the heart of person and child centred

education with gains for both learning and behaviour. Cooperation is

gained when feelings are acknowledged and accepted, developing

positive relationships and communication.

Teachers and childcare workers develop empathy in children and

young people best by offering them empathy continuously. This is done

through 'reflective listening‟, going beyond the content of what is said and

'listening to the feelings' expressed both verbally and non-verbally. It is to

see the world through the child's eyes. To do this needs flexibility and

imagination. A child does not need to say what he is feeling in order to

receive empathy; he expresses his feelings through posture and

behaviour. Bringing feelings into words can enable them to be thought

about. Responding to the feeling underlying behaviour can mean the child

no longer needs that behaviour to express himself. This is critical in

dealing with many behaviour problems.


68

There are many advantages for schools in developing and valuing

empathy. Being empathic is a characteristic of being a good learner and is

also a prerequisite for pro-social behaviour. Cotton (2001) has found that

improved academic outcomes with greater levels of critical and creative

thinking followed programmes that aimed to develop empathy. Altruism

relies on empathy and having the ability to take the view of another

increases altruistic behaviour. Therefore developing empathy in schools is

a desirable goal. Our capacity for empathy is innate. Some evolutionary

theorists believe that the human ability to empathise evolved before the

development of language and was necessary for the development of

verbal communication. The ability to empathise increases with age and it

is not always seen as something that can be taught. However, the

development of empathy in individuals, as with the other domains of EI,

begins in the primary relationship of carer and child in early infancy. The

carer responds to the child‟s emotional state and lets the child know that

they know what the infant is feeling. This is known as attunement and is

vital for healthy child development. The carer is able to listen to the child‟s

feelings, accept them however destructive they may be and can offer

some understanding back that makes the emotions manageable.

2.4.2.5 Social Skills

Beyond empathy, there are interpersonal and social skills we need

to get along with others and this involves being able to manage strong

feelings in others and to manage relationships. Children need to know

when they have upset others or made them angry and how they can help

to rectify the situation: to be able to repair relationships. They also need to

know when things are going well and experience joy in relationships.

Children learn social skills in all their interactions but even well-skilled

children may benefit from learning high levels of assertion and conflict

resolution skills. Some children will have particular difficulties and need

additional help. These skills are critical for our self-esteem and wellbeing.

Good friends can be a great help in life and possible relationships the

source of great satisfaction.


69

We need social skills to be able to get along with others. This

involves being able to manage strong feelings in others and being able to

calm oneself rather than escalate situations. A child needs to be aware of

how he effects others, to stand up for himself assertively and to let others

know if he is being annoyed or hurt. The child needs to know how to do

these things without hurting others, feelings in acting in retaliation.

Growing up is about learning these interpersonal skills in the trial and

experience of relationships with siblings, peers and adults. If this goes well

he learns to get along with others, feel secure in friendships and to give

and receive care. These abilities enhance wellbeing. Some children will

have particular challenges in this area that may be linked with specific or

general learning difficulties such as Attention Deficit Disorder (Yet some

children with these difficulties may also excel in these areas). Some

children may become unpopular which, in turn, may lead to being

excluded from social groups or becoming victims of bullying. They then

miss valuable learning opportunities. These children may need additional

help but all children can benefit from experiences in thinking about how to

get along with others.

Social skills can be developed through positive interpersonal skills

on the part of the teacher and also through activities such as games and

circle time - indeed any situations, especially those involving cooperative

learning. Children will learn best from brief frequent comments that give

information about what to do rather than from comments about what not to

do. Brief cues and prompts are often all that is needed to help the child

work out for herself what to do. Teachers will be familiar with the continual

task of correcting children's behaviour and this is eased when the child

also hears recognition and feedback about when they are doing things

right. Feeding back appreciations strengthens positive behaviours and

constructive criticism is more likely to be received and respected when

children know they are getting things right as well. This helps the child feel

their actions are recognised and appreciated.


70

Highly socially skilled people understand that complex social rules

exist in any given situation. Learning that different situations have different

rules is an important step in helping children learns appropriate behaviour.

Effective teachers will make clear their expectations of how children

interact in the classroom and continually model these rules. If these

expectations are clear, positive and achievable they will not only develop

social skills but they will facilitate better behaviour.

That children develop high levels of social skills is increasingly

important for success in the workplace. Schools do not always prepare

young people to work in teams yet most workplace environments involve

teamwork. Effective teamwork needs good people skills and the ability to

relate and communicate effectively with others.

2.5 EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND EMOTIONAL LITERACY

„Fish swim, birds fly, and people feel,‟ was a statement of Haim

Ginott (1965), a teacher, therapist and writer. Ginott was a pioneer in the

area of effective communication between children and adults. He wrote in

the 1960s and 70s about how adults, both parents and teachers, could

attend to the emotional lives of children and help those children develop

confidence and self-esteem. This attention to feelings also aids children‟s

ability to listen, to cooperate with others and develop personal values. This

focus helps make young people more able to solve problems in their lives

and to be able, „to learn, to grow, to change‟. His work foresaw the

development of EI and his contribution to this area has been recognized

by Goleman (1995) and Gottman (1998).

That „people feel‟ is central to the concept of EI; our life is the heart

of human experience. Our moods and feelings influence how we think and

what we do, and are the core of our feelings of wellbeing. How children

mature emotionally and the skills they have in managing those feelings will

influence their abilities to fulfil their potential in school and in life; to be able

to learn, solve problems, and fundamentally, how they feel about

themselves. The child‟s journey from being newborn to becoming a


71

healthy adult, able to work and to love and to grow from life‟s many

challenges, is a perilous one. The concept of EI and emotional literacy can

help schools help children in many ways. Emotionally Literate children will

have greater resilience to emotional problems. Schools have an important

role to play in this development of emotional competence alongside that of

parents and the child‟s wider social network.

EI and emotional literacy are terms becoming increasingly used in

management, organisations, psychology, psychotherapy and education

and they have both been defined in different ways. These terms are

sometimes used interchangeably as if they refer to the same thing.

At the same time as EI was having such an impact the term

emotional literacy was also being increasingly used, particularly in the field

of education. Emotional literacy has been seen as being able to positively

impact upon academic performance, wellbeing and behaviour and drew on

a long tradition of child (or person) centred education. Claude Steiner first

used the term, „emotional literacy' in 1979. More recently, the writer and

psychotherapist, Susie Orbach, has promoted the importance of emotional

literacy in society. Her argument was that we live a culture that is

emotionally illiterate, afraid of what happens when emotions can get out of

control.

Orbach wrote in 1999 that emotional literacy was: “the capacity to

register our emotional responses to the situations we are in and to

acknowledge those responses to ourselves so that we recognise the ways

they influence our thoughts and actions. She also described it in much

more straightforward terms: Emotional literacy is making it possible to ask

the question, 'How are you?‟ and to be able to listen to the answer.

Antidote, an organisation promoting the need for emotional literacy,

was in part set up by Susie Orbach with the aim of encouraging emotional

literacy in all aspects of society including education. They offer a definition

of emotional literacy: “the practice of thinking individually and collectively


72

about how emotions shape our actions and of using emotional

understanding to enrich our thinking”.

The Southampton Local Education Authority, UK has developed a

strategy for the promotion of emotional literacy in schools across the area

and their work is attracting wide interest. Their model identifies similar

dimensions as that identified by Goleman. These are the personal

competencies of self-awareness, self-regulation and motivation and the

social competencies of empathy and social skills (Faupel, 2003). So, EI

and emotional literacy are terms functionally referring to the same general

idea. The distinction is that EI remains a scientific construct. Emotional

literacy, as Cohen (2003) wrote, is a metaphor and one that is both apt

and useful.

Emotional literary is becoming a worldwide movement in education,

promoting teaching in 'the Fourth R - Relationships'. Not only is there

evidence that focusing on emotional development improves academic

performance, but that it provides the basis for learning 'skills', rather than

of learning knowledge, and of improving 'people skills' - both of which are

essential in the workplace in the 21st century. All over the world there are

increasing numbers of programmes that focus on interpersonal skills and

mental health promotion. So, EI and emotional literacy both refer to the

same central idea. EI is used when referring specifically to thinking and

emotional literacy when referring to practices within schools. Both these

terms refer to: the capacity in individuals and groups to perceive,

understand and manage emotions in oneself and others.

Emotional literacy is „a bridge‟ between our thoughts and feelings

(Antidote, 2003). It works in relation with cognitive intelligence to enable us

to reach our full potential. This quality develops over time and changes

throughout life and grows with experience. As Goleman said, '... we need

to harmonise thought and feeling, not separate them. It is about using our

emotions intelligently' (1995). Emotional literacy is the key to mental health

and wellbeing. We can practice the skills and develop our potential in this


73

area in that same way that we can take steps to improve our physical

health.

Weare and Gray's report, What Works in Developing Children's

Emotional and Social Competence and Wellbeing (2003), summarized

their review of the available evidence of educational interventions to

promote emotional and social skills. Goleman (1995) included the results

of several projects focusing on social and emotional learning and found

evidence that children developed in the five key competency areas of EI:

Self-awareness, Self-regulation, Motivation, Empathy & Social Skills.

Emotional literacy programmes have also claimed other benefits.

Reductions in the number of suspensions and improvements in academic

achievement were found in some studies (Goleman, I995). Such evidence

supports the beliefs that such programmes go beyond raising levels of

emotional literacy and can also aid school improvement. A study by

Petrides et al. (2004a) on 650 secondary school students in the UK, found

those with higher levels of EI less likely to have unauthorized absences

and less likely to be excluded. High EI was associated with better

academic performance. This suggests that if schools can develop

interventions in improving EI there are potentially many benefits. There are

now more and more schools providing an emotional literacy curriculum

and there is also scepticism about the values of doing so. Yet if improving

emotional literacy can, as many believe, help young people deal with the

many obstacles they face in life relationship difficulties, abuse of alcohol

and drugs, vulnerability for mental health problems - then there is a need

for an education that values emotional development.

Emotional literacy in the context of the school

It is clear that raising levels of emotional literacy in schools, it is not

simply a manner of just teaching with the aim of changing the child. A

child's emotional life does not exist in a vacuum but is determined by the

relationships and environment in which she interacts with others. In

education, this means considering the context of the organisation - the


74

The child

The

Teacher

The School

school as a whole. We can teach a lot about emotions, and bring this into

the curriculum but it is the values of the school and the behaviour of the

teachers in which the values of emotional literacy are 'lived‟. They are

demonstrated and modelled and so they more 'caught rather than taught'.

The values of respect, cooperation and consideration of others need to

exist within the structure of the school. This means developing emotional

literacy on multiple levels. The relationship between the school, the

teacher and the child is illustrated in Figure 2.2

Fig. 2.2: The Relationship among the school, child and teacher on

emotional literary

Introducing emotional literacy into schools is about the whole-

school ethos, the school‟s relationship with the outside world and

relationships between staff. Just as the EI of an individual can be defined,

so can the EI of a group or a team. A team needs to be able to work


75

towards shared goals and to be able to reflect about its own process and

progress towards those goals. Change at the organizational level is often

difficult to achieve yet there are many examples of good practice.

Developing high-level interpersonal skills is a key starting point., it is how

the teacher communicates with students on a day-to-day level to build

thinking and emotional skills from which more profound changes

develop. Also small initiatives in working with this can begin to prepare the

ground for organizational change.

2.6 EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

The primary school child‟s age ranges between seven and twelve

years (Le Roux ad De Klerk, 2003; Mwamwenda, 1996). According to

them this age range depends up on the emotional maturity of a child.

Some children start to move over to adolescence during their eleventh or

twelfth year and others are still in their middle school age phase during

these years. Age is thus only a rough indication of the period in which a

child‟s next step in the developmental ladder may occur. This phase is a

little more mature that the previous developmental phase of late childhood.

The different components of the primary school child‟s self are interrelated,

and change in one part will have an influence on the others.

The middle school age phase during primary school is a time of

finding out about the development of a positive self-image and about the

meaning of work success in a very early stage, the latter relate to EI. If a

child in the primary school can be helped to improve the skills mentioned

in the above list of aspects of EI, he will be able to complete his current

developmental phase much more successful and satisfactory than without

it. This will surely have an influence later in his life, when the skills needed

for adulthood are properly rooted in his earlier years of growth.

Vermeulen (1999) also discuss the importance of improving EI

already during the primary school year. According to him our current

generation‟s children have a radically different childhood than their

previous generations. It is therefore very important to give our children the


76

freedom to become who they really are. Emotionally intelligent children

value who they are and learn from their own experiences.

Academic success is one of the important developmental

milestones in the primary school and emotionally intelligent children tend

to have more success with schoolwork. According to Vermeulen‟s,

emotionally intelligent children don‟t value academic success so high that

it can have a negative influence on their self-images. Their self-esteems

are more valuable than good grades. “Sure they‟ll need a certain level of

education as an entry into business; but with self-employment on the

increase your assistance will be more useful if you help them find their

passion. Encourage them in what they‟re good at and assist them in

accepting the areas where they don‟t excel” (Vermeulen, 1999). Higher EI

is thus not really about better grades in school, but wider than this. Better

grades might be an additional bonus, but reaching one‟s true potential is of

much higher value. Van Jaarsveld (2003) relates with this by saying that a

fine line exists between motivating a child and destroying his self-image.

Le Roux & De Klerk (2003) also states that children would find it much

easier to reach their full potential if they are emotionally intelligent. It also

goes along with the notion that the child (a human being) should be seen

as a holistic whole such as explained by Pert‟s (1999) concept of the body-

mind.

If a child‟s physiological and psychological needs are fulfilled, he

can also reach higher levels of self-actualisation. EI skills involve the

fulfilment of love, belonging and self-esteem needs. These are pre-

required for the fulfilment of self-actualisation needs, such as cognitive and

aesthetic growth. EI in middle –school will thus incorporate the important

developmental needs like self-esteem, interpersonal relationships (group

play) and task performance (including academic success). It will also go

higher than these skills to a level where the child can be at peace with

himself, other people and his environment and can thus fulfil his self-

actualisation needs by being aware of his dreams and already starting to


77

love it. Le Roux and De Klerk (2003) add the fact that effective control and

expression of emotions by children lead to less behaviour trouble and

greater acceptance of other people and their differences. If children

express their feelings in negative ways like slamming doors, swearing or

wining, they create negative attitudes in other people. Other people might

thus treat such children negatively and this might lead to a poor self-image

in the children. It will then come back to the influence of negative feelings

on learning and living. Such children might then experience feelings of

anxiety and tension and this will again have a negative influence on their

schoolwork. Such children will thus fail to reach heir developmental

milestones effectively. They will experience problems with fulfilling tasks

successfully, having a positive self-image and creating meaningful

relationships. The latter are all important milestones in the developmental

phase of the primary school child.

2.7 CONCLUSION

The theoretical overview enabled the Investigator to understand the

roots of the development of the concept of EI. The importance of emotions

and intelligence in our life is separately analysed and the new concept of

EI and its measurement in scientific way are discussed. Different models

of EI and the measured developed by each model are elaborately

explained. The emotional competence put forward by Goleman for the

development of EQ and the steps in the training programme for its

effective implementation are also discussed. Finally its important in the

primary school level is scientifically established. This theoretical

background provides a rich framework for examining the importance of EI

in schools.

emotional intelligence: a theoretical...

Documents