|




| 



 
|
 i





| 

O The ability to learn or understand or to deal
with new or trying situations : the skilled use
of reason

 The cognitive abilities of an individual to

learn from experience, to reason well, and to
cope effectively with the demands of daily
living.
 0


| 


ë ntelligence, as a hypothetical
construct, is the aggregate or global
capacity of the individual to act
purposefully, to think rationally, and to
deal effectively with his environment´

- Wechsler
 0


| 

Glthough experts differ on an exact definition of
intelligence most agree that intelligent behavior has
at least two components:

1. The ability to learn from experience.

2. The ability to adapt to the surrounding

environment.
 Π


| 






  






!
  




"
#  
 

$
 
 

%
& 


   


'
( 
#$  )
*











$
$


+
, 
  *




$

$$

$


$

 


 0
i
0
-.
&
|
 [redicts school grades relatively well
 Does not predict success in life
 [redicts 6% of job success
 [eaks in late teens
 Culture-bound, Gender Bias, SES
 Racial controversies
 Gets you in the door
[rofessional schools (medicine, dentistry, law)
Can help you get hired (Harvard MBG)
 Static
 0




| 

/

èon-Gbility Factors¶ Role:

ë
individuals with identical s may differ very

markedly in regard to their effective ability to cope with
their environment
t is not possible to account for more
than 50% to 70% of the intertest correlational variance
after all recognizable intellectual factors are eliminated.
This leaves any where from 30% to 50% of the total
factorial variance unaccounted for. t is suggested that
this residual variance is largely contributed by such
factors as drive, energy, impulsiveness, etc.ë

- Wechsler
 0
i
$





| 



Œ


     
  
 
›



 
 

 
 

    

  !

  
 


   

  !

 "  #
$%!

 &
  
 
  

  $ 

 '  (
 
)*
    
 
   &
!+
  

  
,$-++!

.   

   

 &
 

    

 £

 
 
| 
  
     
±
 
    

 
 

 

   
 


   
 



  
     
±
  

   
  





   


  

  
  


   !  
 

  
   

 





 
 



    
 
 
  "
 
      


  
 £

 
 
| 
  
     
ü  
    
  (

#

  

   
 %
  


&

$

  
  

  )
 
 
 
   




    


 




$
  
  
 




 
  
 

 


 
 


  


& 


  
'   

  & 



&








 |



| 

Social ntelligence
the know-how involved in comprehending social
situations and managing oneself successfully

Emotional ntelligence
ability to perceive, express, understand, and
regulate emotions
 0




| 


/

ntelligence Does èot = Behaviour

³ look upon intelligence as an effect rather

than a cause, that is, as a resultant of
interacting abilities - nonintellective included.
The problem confronting psychologists today
is how these abilities interact to give the
resultant effect we call intelligence.ë

- Wechsler
 0
|


| 

Mayer-Salovey Model

MSCE T
[erformance or ability measure

Bar-On Model

E-
Self-report measure

Goleman Model

EC - Self Report Measure

360 measure
 0
|


| 


Emotional intelligence involves the ³abilities

to perceive, appraise, and express emotion; to
access and/or generate feelings when they
facilitate thought; to understand emotion and
emotional knowledge; and to regulate
emotions to promote emotional and
intellectual growth´

- Mayer & Salovey (1997)

 
 #
$


 Social communications requires accurate
perception of content, as well as tone and non-
verbal signals such as posture and facial expression

 Emotions are complex, and people can experience

a combination of different emotions

Many theorists agree that basic emotions have

universal meaning - universal across cultures and
even across certain species.




| 


 How should you measure an

intelligence?

 With an ability test

Gsk person to solve problems
Gauge their ability to do so
accurately and/or quickly
,$


&




 Components [of emotional
intelligence]
are best tested by
sampling a person¶s actual ability
at the task ± for example, by
having them read a person¶s
feelings from a video of their facial
expressions.´ (Goleman, 1995).
 0
|


| 

Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Model (MSCE T)


$) 

 



 

  $





 $ 
 

 



 
 


   &  

  
 
   
     &
  





 

   & 

 $  

 
  






 


 0
|


| 

Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Model (MSCE T)

Scales

dentifying Emotions:   

 

Using Emotions to Facilitate Thought:   

  

Understanding Emotions:  


/ 
  0/1

Managing Emotions: 
/ 
 
›
  

  

EX[ER EèT G STRGTEG C

DEèT FY FGC  TGTE UèDERSTGèD MGèGGE

FGCES SEèSGT OèS CHGèGES EMOT. MGè.

[ CTURES FGC  TGTE BEèDS EMOT. REGT.

 #|
#  

 
      !"
 # $$  !"

  %%& "

      !"
    '  !"

&  


%  ()() !"
 * +(+( !"

›   
 ›     "
  , %   "

 

Gbility
 Gccurately identify emotions in people and
objects

uestion Types
 dentify emotions in faces, landscapes, and
designs.

How the Gbility May Be Used

 ëReadë peoples moods for feedback.
 0
|


| 

MSCE T

How much is each feeling below expressed by this face?

Extreme
1. èo Happiness 1 2 3 4 5 Happiness

Extreme
2. èo Fear 1 2 3 4 5 Fear

2(3"453
%2(67
 
   8
 " % '


0


#$

Gbility
Gccurately identify emotions in people and objects
How the Gbility May Be Used
ëReadë peoples moods for feedback.
  %%

Gbility
 Generate an emotion and solve problems with
that emotion

uestion Types
 How moods impact thinking; relating feelings
to thoughts

How the Gbility May Be Used

 Creating the right feeling to assist in problem
solving, communicating a vision, leading
people.
 1. What mood(s) might be helpful
to feel when meeting in-laws for
the very first time?
èot Useful Useful
a. tension 1 2 3 4 5

b. surprise 1 2 3 4 5

c. joy 1 2 3 4 5

Gbility
Generate an emotion and solve problems with that emotion
How the Gbility May Be Used
Creating the right feeling to assist in problem solving,
communicating a vision, leading people.
&  

Gbility
 Understand the causes of emotions

uestion Types
 Multiple choice emotion vocabulary questions.

How the Gbility May Be Used

 Being able to predict how people will
emotionally react.
 1. Tom felt anxious, and became a bit
stressed when he thought about all
the work he needed to do. When
his supervisor brought him an
additional project, he
felt_______________.
a. overwhelmed
b. depressed
c. ashamed
d. self-conscious
e. jittery

Gbility
Understand the causes of emotions
How the Gbility May Be Used
Being able to predict how people will emotionally react.
›   

Gbility
 Stay open to emotions and blend with
thinking.

uestion Types
 ndicate effectiveness of various solutions to
problems.

How the Gbility May Be Used

 ntegrate emotion and thought to make
effective decisions.
)

1. Debbie just came back from vacation. She

was feeling peaceful and content. How
well would each action preserve her
mood?

Gction 1: She started to make a list of things at

home that she needed to do.

Gction 2: She began thinking about where and when

she go on her next vacation.

Gction 3: She decided it was best ignore the feeling

since it wouldn¶t last anyway.

a) Very ineffective b) Somewhat neffective

c) èeutral d) Somewhat neffective
e) Very neffective
 #


&







| 

 Gn intelligence implies that there are better
and worse answers or responses.

 [roblem with the ability approach:

s there a right way to feel?

 ndeed, there are emotional issues that

cannot be measured this way!
What¶s the ³right´ response to someone
shouting?
#


&







| 

 #


#|
 Consensus scoring is used based on
the full standardization sample

 Expert scoring is used based on a

sample of 21 members of the
nternational Society for Research in
Emotions
   
#


 Consensus scoring has been used with

great success.

 t is based upon the agreement of a large

number of people.

 For example, if 70 percent of people felt

that a photo was of a very happy person,
then the best answer for the photo would
be ³happiness´.
 1
#

#
 9      

 "      : 

 
 . 

 & !
 :

  

5
  $
/ ;  
 ;

   
$
1
#


 

 Consensus and expert choices for the right

answers are in general agreement! The MSCE T r
for agreement ranges from .90 upward

 So, there are better and worse answers in

general. When there are enough experts, both
general and expert participants now mostly
agree.
0.
0

#|
# $$
2$?


#|
# $$
2$
 Standardized on 5000  Gges 17 to 79
[articipants Gcross  Reports matched
over 50 English- to United States
speaking data sites Census Data on
in: age, gender,
Gustralia ethnicity and
Canada education
ndia
South Gfrica
United Kingdom
United States
 #|
,



MSCE T .93

EX[ER EèCE .90 STRGTEG C .88

DEèT FY .91 FGC /USE .79 UèDERSTGèD .80 MGèGGE .83

Œaces .80 Synesthesia .64 Blends .66 Emtn Mangmt .69

Pictures .88 Œacilitation .65 Changes .70 Emtn Rltns .67

#
0
,






#|
#

34$$

5
!
6
78'9

34$$

% 
&
@
<=

&  
 "

?
?

<=+ <=

'   4 4 

 *


& & & &
<= <=> <=+ <=


* 

 
 +

 ,-../0  
|
.
: #
# $

3!
;
<==9


 
Π
& 
#.
$

Œ





$
%
Π
$

% 
&
@

&  
 "

?
?

'   4 4 

 *


& & & &
T #|


 

|$$



Œ.


3!>
;
==9?
ntelligence Tests r = .00 to .40
Õ
r = .00 to .35
Õ Big Five [ersonality Scales

r = .00 to .35
Õ Self-report Scales of E,
optimism, empathy

Sources: Bracket & Mayer, in press; Caruso, Mayer, & Salovey,

2002; Ciarrochi, Chan & Caputo, 2000; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey,
1999; Roberts, Zeidner, & Mathews, forthcoming; Salovey, Mayer,
Caruso,& opez, in press.
 :.
#


#|
($
 $

  ! 

& 

,
 
 ?

More fights, drug use r = .21 to .40,

Õ p < .05

More alcohol and tobacco use r = .15 to 24, p

Õ < .05

Higher ratings of aggression by peers r = .20 to .46,

Õ p < .001
at school

Sources: Brackett & Mayer, in press; Brackett, Mayer, & Warner, under review;
Formica, 1999; Trinidad & Johnson, 2001; Rubin, 2000; è = 48.
 #|>#




$

Criterion:

 Behavior
Self- mprovement -.16** 503
Rational Control -.39** 208
ife Enthusiasm .22** 208
Relatedness .30** 208
Destructive Behavior -.33** 208
 0
|


| 


Emotional intelligence is ³an array of

noncognitive capabilities, competencies, and
skills that influence one¶s ability to succeed in
coping with environmental demands and
pressures´

- Bar-On (1997)
 0
0

/4



/4


i$

To help answer a basic question:

Why do some people with high  fail in

life, while others with moderate 
succeed?
 i
/4
$



| 

 Dr. Reuven Bar-On began in 1980
 factors that were related to success in life
 why some people with moderate  do well
in life while others with high  fail
 Distinct from  (cognitive intelligence)
 components resemble personality factors,
but can change and can be altered
 x
# 



i

/4





i

/4


 dentified key determinants of success

 Clustered determinants of success into
factors
 Operationally defined the factors
 Constructed the E-ix
 Examined the factor structure, reliability, &
validity
x
 Validated the E-i across cultures
 Extensively normed (>10,000)
 Continued validation
 0.
i






0*
 133 brief items answered on a 5-point scale from
³èot True of Me´ to ³True of Me´
 30 minutes to complete
 Standard scores based on ³100´ as the average,
Standard Deviation of 15
 ncludes the following scales:
Total E
5 E Composite Scales
15 E Content Scales
4 Validity Scales
 x
/4@
Π
/4@
> ntra-[ersonal >Gdaptability
>Emotional Self- >[roblem Solving
Gwareness >Flexibility
>Gssertiveness >Reality Testing
>Self-Regard >Stress Management
>Self-Gctualization >Stress Tolerance
> ndependence > mpulse Control
> nter-[ersonal >General Mood
> nterpersonal >Optimism
Relationship
>Happiness
>Empathy
>Social Responsibility
 /4@

/4@
Sample Test tems:
have good relations with others
¶m fun to be with
like helping people

"
(
 6
<A ( 23 
,<A % 3 * 3 *


#&.
# 


#

|

| 
 
 
 





|
 
 


|  
  
 





 

|  
 
  
 |


|   

 






|  
 
 |





|!  
  

 

""|  
 

#
 



 |
#



  
1

2 3  










 

2 2 4 










  

22 224

5




  

4 2 4 &  

6 

  



4 .

7




  

 4 
.








  

7
   
.




  

 #
#
2
 8
 ....

9+
 /:/ 
 
 

;


 /. <=: : >

/. / >/ >.>
>. > >? > .
?.  
 >
# 
,  


Subgroup % of Sample
Caucasian 77%
Hispanic 3%
Asian 8%
Black 7%
Other 5%
 ,



$

$


 Good reliability
test-retest (>.6 @ 4mths)
Cronbach¶s alpha (.75 to .89)
 Good validity
construct (with other psych. tests)
Bvarying relationships (weak to strong)
Bcorrelation with coping, , and
occupational success
 

$
$

n 6
%'==




6
%'==



n
n 6
" ==
Œ







'
 
 



''
  
  


E |
$
& 
i

and Gge (n=3831)




A
#


&






 Recruiting high  Risk management

performers
 Self development
 Retaining high
performers  Change management
 Teambuilding  Merger integration &
re-shaping culture
 Managing diversity
 Restructuring &
 eadership realignment
development
 Stress management
 Coaching
 Career planning
 [erformance
management


#
#



1


$

E-i - Bar-On¶s test èEO [ -R - Costa & McCrae

ntrapersonal Extraversion
Emotional self-awareness, Warmth, gregariousness, optimism,
assertiveness, self-regard, self- assertiveness, high-energy
actualization, independence

nterpersonal
Empathy, interpersonal èeuroticism
relationship, social responsibility Stress tolerance, impulse control,
anger, depression, anxiety
Stress Management
[roblem solving, reality testing,
flexibility

Gdaptability
Stress tolerance, impulse control

General Mood
happiness, optimism
 

#
#



1




( 

$

 E-i and some personality test

correlations very high

Self-Regard x Borderline features

r = -.74

Happiness x Depression Scale r = -.77

0
|


| 

f these are measuring the same thing, there
should be a significant, positive correlation
amongst the measures.

[redicted r = + .50 or more

E-i

MSCE T
0
|


| 

However, the measures are not highly related.

Gctual r = .00 to .15

E-i

MSCE T
 0
|


| 


What Does This Mean?

E- and the MSCE T measure relatively

different things.

How can they both be predicting emotional

intelligence?

How do we use the E- and the MSCE T?

 0
|


| 


The answers lie in the intelligence / 

models of Wechsler:

- Bar-On influenced by Wechsler¶s

search for non-intellective factors.

- Mayer & Salovey working in an

intelligence ability framework.
0
|


| 


MSCE T measures fundamental abilities

of emotional intelligence as measured in
an objective manner.

E- measures the non-intellective

factors that impact emotionally-
intelligent behavior as reported by the
person.
 , 





| 

3|9


#

0
@10&
1 OW ³E ´

CGREER CGREER
GDVGèCEMEèT DERG MEèT
E & Work Success (n = 100)

Source: G scientific study of 100 university-educated

bank employees using the Bar-On E-i® conducted by
Joseph Hee-Woo Jae, Gteneo Manila University,
[hilippines.
 0


| 

|
!
 Cognitive ntelligence ( )
 is necessary but E allows the stars to
rise to the top
E and  are not highly correlated (about
r = .1)
estimated that 1% of the variance
accounting for occupational success can
be attributed to 
E is estimated to account for 3 to 27% of
occupational success