Abstract
This study investigated correlative, factorial, and structural relationships between scores for ability emotional intelligence in the workplace (measured with the Geneva Emotional Competence Test), as well as fluid and crystallized abilities (measured with the Intelligence Structure Battery), carried out by a 188-participant student sample. Confirming existing research, recognition, understanding, and management of emotions were related primarily to crystallized ability tests measuring general knowledge, verbal fluency, and knowledge of word meaning. Meanwhile, emotion regulation was the least correlated with any other cognitive or emotional ability. In line with research on the trainability of emotional intelligence, these results may support the notion that emotional abilities are subject to acquired knowledge, where situational (i.e., workplace-specific) emotional intelligence may depend on accumulating relevant experiences.
Highlights
Doing small talk about job entrance experiences, I recall hearing the sentiment rather often that education did prepare young people for the job, but it didn’t really prepare them for dealing with the people there
The Geneva Emotional Competence Test (GECo) scores of ten participants could not be matched to Intelligence Structure Battery (INSBAT) scores due to erroneous codes
Emotion recognition, understanding, and management showed significant correlations with some cognitive test scores, while emotion regulation showed a negative correlation with verbal fluency (p < 0.05)
Summary
Doing small talk about job entrance experiences, I recall hearing the sentiment rather often that education did prepare young people for the job, but it didn’t really prepare them for dealing with the people there (which was probably intended to sound more or less humorous in at least some instances). There exist three main streams in EI research (ability, trait, and mixed-model perspectives; Ashkanasy and Dasborough 2015). EI views emotional intelligence from the standard intelligence perspective, focusing on objective performance measures of the construct. Mixed-model EI constitutes the broadest approach, including behavioral markers such as capabilities, skills, and personal characteristics (Webb et al 2013). The differences of these models entail varied approaches to measurement and applications, which bears challenges in terms of validity and conceptual understanding of EI in general (O’Connor et al 2019; Van Rooy et al 2005); it offers multifaceted perspectives on interacting emotional capabilities and dispositions. Adopting the cognitive ability perspective, the present article focuses on the ability conception of EI
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call