Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence (EI) is the ability to recognizeone’s own and other people’s emotions, to discriminatebetween different feelings and label them appropriately,and to use emotional information to guide thinking andbehavior.[1] There are three models of EI. The abilitymodel, developed by Peter Salovey and John Mayer, fo-cuses on the individual’s ability to process emotionalinformation and use it to navigate the social environ-ment.[2] The trait model as developed by KonstantinVasily Petrides, “encompasses behavioral dispositionsand self perceived abilities and is measured through selfreport”.[3] The final model, the mixed model is a combi-nation of both ability and trait EI. It defines EI as an arrayof skills and characteristics that drive leadership perfor-mance, as proposed by Daniel Goleman.[4]

Studies have shown that people with high EI have greatermental health, exemplary job performance, and more po-tent leadership skills. For example, Goleman’s researchin his book, Working with Emotional Intelligence, indi-cated that EQ accounted for 67% of the abilities deemednecessary for superior performance in leaders, and mat-tered twice as much as technical expertise or IQ.[5]Mark-ers of EI and methods of developing it have becomemorewidely coveted in the past few decades. In addition, stud-ies have begun to provide evidence to help characterizethe neural mechanisms of emotional intelligence.[6][7][8]

Criticisms have centered on whether EI is a realintelligence and whether it has incremental validity overIQ and the Big Five personality traits.[9]

1 History

In 1983, Howard Gardner's Frames of Mind: The Theoryof Multiple Intelligences[10] introduced the idea that tradi-tional types of intelligence, such as IQ, fail to fully explaincognitive ability. He introduced the idea of multiple in-telligences which included both interpersonal intelligence(the capacity to understand the intentions, motivationsand desires of other people) and intrapersonal intelligence(the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one’sfeelings, fears and motivations).[11]

The first use of the term “emotional intelligence” isusually attributed to Wayne Payne’s doctoral thesis, AStudy of Emotion: Developing Emotional Intelligence from1985.[12] The first published use of 'EQ' (Emotional Quo-tient) seems to be by Keith Beasley in 1987 in an articlein the British Mensa magazine.[13] However, prior to this,

the term “emotional intelligence” had appeared in Bel-doch (1964),[14] Leuner (1966).[15] Stanley Greenspan(1989) also put forward an EI model, followed by PeterSalovey and John Mayer (1989).[16] The distinction be-tween trait emotional intelligence and ability emotionalintelligence was introduced in 2000.[17]

However, the term became widely known with the pub-lication of Goleman's Emotional Intelligence - Why itcan matter more than IQ[18] (1995). It is to thisbook’s best-selling status that the term can attribute itspopularity.[19][20] Goleman has followed up with severalfurther popular publications of a similar theme that rein-force use of the term.[21][22][23][24][25] To date, tests mea-suring EI have not replaced IQ tests as a standard metricof intelligence. Emotional Intelligence has also receivedcriticism on its role in leadership and business success.[26]

2 Definitions

Emotional intelligence can be defined as the ability tomonitor one’s own and other people’s emotions, to dis-criminate between different emotions and label them ap-propriately and to use emotional information to guidethinking and behavior.[1] However, substantial disagree-ment exists regarding the definition of EI, with respectto both terminology and operationalizations. Currently,there are three main models of EI:

1. Ability model

2. Mixed model (usually subsumed under traitEI)[27][28]

3. Trait model

Different models of EI have led to the development ofvarious instruments for the assessment of the construct.While some of these measures may overlap, most re-searchers agree that they tap different constructs.

3 Ability model

Salovey and Mayer’s conception of EI strives to defineEI within the confines of the standard criteria for a newintelligence.[29][30] Following their continuing research,their initial definition of EI was revised to “The abil-ity to perceive emotion, integrate emotion to facilitate

1

2 4 MIXED MODEL

thought, understand emotions and to regulate emotionsto promote personal growth.” However, after pursuingfurther research, their definition of EI evolved into “thecapacity to reason about emotions, and of emotions, toenhance thinking. It includes the abilities to accuratelyperceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so asto assist thought, to understand emotions and emotionalknowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as topromote emotional and intellectual growth.” [2]

The ability-based model views emotions as useful sourcesof information that help one to make sense of and navi-gate the social environment.[31][32] The model proposesthat individuals vary in their ability to process informa-tion of an emotional nature and in their ability to relateemotional processing to a wider cognition. This ability isseen to manifest itself in certain adaptive behaviors. Themodel claims that EI includes four types of abilities:

1. Perceiving emotions – the ability to detect and de-cipher emotions in faces, pictures, voices, and cul-tural artifacts—including the ability to identify one’sown emotions. Perceiving emotions represents a ba-sic aspect of emotional intelligence, as it makes allother processing of emotional information possible.

2. Using emotions – the ability to harness emotions tofacilitate various cognitive activities, such as think-ing and problem solving. The emotionally intelligentperson can capitalize fully upon his or her changingmoods in order to best fit the task at hand.

3. Understanding emotions – the ability to compre-hend emotion language and to appreciate compli-cated relationships among emotions. For example,understanding emotions encompasses the ability tobe sensitive to slight variations between emotions,and the ability to recognize and describe how emo-tions evolve over time.

4. Managing emotions – the ability to regulate emo-tions in both ourselves and in others. Therefore, theemotionally intelligent person can harness emotions,even negative ones, and manage them to achieve in-tended goals.

The ability EI model has been criticized in the re-search for lacking face and predictive validity in theworkplace.[33] However, in terms of construct validity,ability EI tests have great advantage over self-reportscales of EI because they compare individual maximalperformance to standard performance scales and do notrely on individuals’ endorsement of descriptive state-ments about themselves. [34]

3.1 Measurement

The current measure of Mayer and Salovey’s model ofEI, the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence

Test (MSCEIT) is based on a series of emotion-basedproblem-solving items.[32][35] Consistent with the model’sclaim of EI as a type of intelligence, the test is modeledon ability-based IQ tests. By testing a person’s abilitieson each of the four branches of emotional intelligence, itgenerates scores for each of the branches as well as a totalscore.Central to the four-branch model is the idea that EI re-quires attunement to social norms. Therefore, the MS-CEIT is scored in a consensus fashion, with higher scoresindicating higher overlap between an individual’s answersand those provided by a worldwide sample of respon-dents. TheMSCEIT can also be expert-scored, so that theamount of overlap is calculated between an individual’sanswers and those provided by a group of 21 emotion re-searchers.[32]

Although promoted as an ability test, the MSCEIT is un-like standard IQ tests in that its items do not have ob-jectively correct responses. Among other challenges, theconsensus scoring criterion means that it is impossibleto create items (questions) that only a minority of re-spondents can solve, because, by definition, responses aredeemed emotionally “intelligent” only if the majority ofthe sample has endorsed them. This and other similarproblems have led some cognitive ability experts to ques-tion the definition of EI as a genuine intelligence.In a study by Føllesdal,[36] theMSCEIT test results of 111business leaders were compared with how their employ-ees described their leader. It was found that there were nocorrelations between a leader’s test results and how he orshe was rated by the employees, with regard to empathy,ability to motivate, and leader effectiveness. Føllesdalalso criticized the Canadian company Multi-Health Sys-tems, which administers the MSCEIT test. The test con-tains 141 questions but it was found after publishing thetest that 19 of these did not give the expected answers.This has led Multi-Health Systems to remove answers tothese 19 questions before scoring but without stating thisofficially.

4 Mixed model

The model introduced by Daniel Goleman[37] focuses onEI as a wide array of competencies and skills that driveleadership performance. Goleman’s model outlines fivemain EI constructs (for more details see “What MakesA Leader” by Daniel Goleman, best of Harvard BusinessReview 1998):

1. Self-awareness – the ability to know one’s emotions,strengths, weaknesses, drives, values and goals andrecognize their impact on others while using gutfeelings to guide decisions.

2. Self-regulation – involves controlling or redirectingone’s disruptive emotions and impulses and adapting

5.1 Measurement 3

to changing circumstances.

3. Social skill – managing relationships to move peoplein the desired direction

4. Empathy - considering other people’s feelings espe-cially when making decision

5. Motivation - being driven to achieve for the sake ofachievement.

Goleman includes a set of emotional competencies withineach construct of EI. Emotional competencies are not in-nate talents, but rather learned capabilities that must beworked on and can be developed to achieve outstandingperformance. Goleman posits that individuals are bornwith a general emotional intelligence that determinestheir potential for learning emotional competencies.[38]Goleman’s model of EI has been criticized in the researchliterature as mere "pop psychology" (Mayer, Roberts, &Barsade, 2008).

4.1 Measurement

Twomeasurement tools are based on theGolemanmodel:

1. The Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI), whichwas created in 1999, and the Emotional and SocialCompetency Inventory (ESCI), a newer edition ofthe ECI was developed in 2007. The Emotional andSocial Competency - University Edition (ESCI-U)is also available. These tools developed by Golemanand Boyatzis provide a behavioral measure of theEmotional and Social competencies.

2. The Emotional Intelligence Appraisal, which wascreated in 2001 and which can be taken as a self-report or 360-degree assessment.[39]

5 Trait model

Konstantinos Vasilis Petrides (“K. V. Petrides”) proposeda conceptual distinction between the ability based modeland a trait based model of EI and has been developing thelatter over many years in numerous publications.[17][40]Trait EI is “a constellation of emotional self-perceptionslocated at the lower levels of personality.”[40] In lay terms,trait EI refers to an individual’s self-perceptions of theiremotional abilities. This definition of EI encompassesbehavioral dispositions and self-perceived abilities and ismeasured by self report, as opposed to the ability basedmodel which refers to actual abilities, which have provenhighly resistant to scientific measurement. Trait EI shouldbe investigated within a personality framework.[41] An al-ternative label for the same construct is trait emotionalself-efficacy.

The trait EI model is general and subsumes the Golemanmodel discussed above. The conceptualization of EI asa personality trait leads to a construct that lies outsidethe taxonomy of human cognitive ability. This is an im-portant distinction in as much as it bears directly on theoperationalization of the construct and the theories andhypotheses that are formulated about it.[17]

5.1 Measurement

There are many self-report measures of EI,[42] includ-ing the EQ-i, the Swinburne University Emotional Intel-ligence Test (SUEIT), and the Schutte EI model. Noneof these assess intelligence, abilities, or skills (as their au-thors often claim), but rather, they are limited measuresof trait emotional intelligence.[40] One of the more com-prehensive and widely researched measures of this con-struct is the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire(TEIQue), which was specifically designed to measurethe construct comprehensively and is available in manylanguages.The TEIQue provides an operationalization for the modelof Petrides and colleagues, that conceptualizes EI interms of personality.[43] The test encompasses 15 sub-scales organized under four factors: well-being, self-control, emotionality, and sociability. The psychometricproperties of the TEIQue were investigated in a study ona French-speaking population, where it was reported thatTEIQue scores were globally normally distributed andreliable.[44]

The researchers also found TEIQue scores were unre-lated to nonverbal reasoning (Raven’s matrices), whichthey interpreted as support for the personality trait viewof EI (as opposed to a form of intelligence). As expected,TEIQue scores were positively related to some of theBig Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness,openness, conscientiousness) as well as inversely relatedto others (alexithymia, neuroticism). A number of quan-titative genetic studies have been carried out within thetrait EI model, which have revealed significant geneticeffects and heritabilities for all trait EI scores.[45] Tworecent studies (one a meta-analysis) involving direct com-parisons of multiple EI tests yielded very favorable resultsfor the TEIQue.[28][46]

6 Criticisms of theoretical founda-tion

6.1 Cannot be recognized as form of intel-ligence

Goleman’s early work has been criticized for assumingfrom the beginning that EI is a type of intelligence.Eysenck (2000)[47] writes that Goleman’s description of

4 7 CRITICISMS OF MEASUREMENT

EI contains unsubstantiated assumptions about intelli-gence in general, and that it even runs contrary to whatresearchers have come to expect when studying types ofintelligence:

"[Goleman] exemplifies more clearly thanmost the fundamental absurdity of the ten-dency to class almost any type of behaviour asan 'intelligence'... If these five 'abilities’ define'emotional intelligence', we would expect someevidence that they are highly correlated; Gole-man admits that they might be quite uncorre-lated, and in any case if we cannot measurethem, how do we know they are related? Sothe whole theory is built on quicksand: there isno sound scientific basis.”

Similarly, Locke (2005)[48] claims that the concept ofEI is in itself a misinterpretation of the intelligence con-struct, and he offers an alternative interpretation: it is notanother form or type of intelligence, but intelligence—the ability to grasp abstractions—applied to a particularlife domain: emotions. He suggests the concept shouldbe re-labeled and referred to as a skill.The essence of this criticism is that scientific inquiry de-pends on valid and consistent construct utilization, andthat before the introduction of the term EI, psychologistshad established theoretical distinctions between factorssuch as abilities and achievements, skills and habits, at-titudes and values, and personality traits and emotionalstates.[49] Thus, some scholars believe that the term EImerges and conflates such accepted concepts and defini-tions.

6.2 Confusing SkillsWithMoral Qualities

Adam Grant warned of the common but mistaken per-ception of EI as a desirable moral quality rather than askill, Grant asserting that a well-developed EI is not onlyan instrumental tool for accomplishing goals, but has adark side as a weapon for manipulating others by robbingthem of their capacity to reason.[50]

6.3 Has little predictive value

Landy (2005)[51] claimed that the few incremental valid-ity studies conducted on EI have shown that it adds littleor nothing to the explanation or prediction of some com-mon outcomes (most notably academic and work suc-cess). Landy suggested that the reason why some stud-ies have found a small increase in predictive validity is amethodological fallacy, namely, that alternative explana-tions have not been completely considered:

“EI is compared and contrastedwith amea-sure of abstract intelligence but not with a per-

sonality measure, or with a personality mea-sure but not with a measure of academic in-telligence.” Landy (2005)

Similarly, other researchers have raised concerns aboutthe extent to which self-report EI measures correlatewith established personality dimensions. Generally, self-report EI measures and personality measures have beensaid to converge because they both purport to measurepersonality traits.[40] Specifically, there appear to be twodimensions of the Big Five that stand out as most relatedto self-report EI – neuroticism and extroversion. In par-ticular, neuroticism has been said to relate to negativeemotionality and anxiety. Intuitively, individuals scoringhigh on neuroticism are likely to score low on self-reportEI measures.The interpretations of the correlations between EI ques-tionnaires and personality have been varied. The promi-nent view in the scientific literature is the Trait EI view,which re-interprets EI as a collection of personalitytraits.[52][53][54]

7 Criticisms of measurement

7.1 Ability model

7.1.1 Measures conformity, not ability

One criticism of the works of Mayer and Salovey comesfrom a study by Roberts et al. (2001),[55] which suggeststhat the EI, as measured by the MSCEIT, may only bemeasuring conformity. This argument is rooted in theMSCEIT’s use of consensus-based assessment, and in thefact that scores on the MSCEIT are negatively distributed(meaning that its scores differentiate between people withlow EI better than people with high EI).

7.1.2 Measures knowledge, not ability

Further criticism has been leveled by Brody (2004),[56]who claimed that unlike tests of cognitive ability, theMS-CEIT “tests knowledge of emotions but not necessarilythe ability to perform tasks that are related to the knowl-edge that is assessed”. The main argument is that eventhough someone knows how he should behave in an emo-tionally laden situation, it doesn't necessarily follow thatthe person could actually carry out the reported behavior.

7.1.3 Measures personality and general intelligence

New research is surfacing that suggests that ability EImeasures might be measuring personality in addition togeneral intelligence. These studies examined the multi-variate effects of personality and intelligence on EI andalso corrected estimates for measurement error (which is

7.3 Predictive power unsubstantiated 5

often not done in some validation studies). For example,a study by Schulte, Ree, Carretta (2004),[57] showed thatgeneral intelligence (measured with the Wonderlic Per-sonnel Test), agreeableness (measured by the NEO-PI),as well as gender had a multiple R of .81 with the MS-CEIT. This result has been replicated by Fiori and An-tonakis (2011),;[58] they found a multiple R of .76 us-ing Cattell’s “Culture Fair” intelligence test and the BigFive Inventory (BFI); significant covariates were intel-ligence (standardized beta = .39), agreeableness (stan-dardized beta = .54), and openness (standardized beta =.46). Antonakis and Dietz (2011a),[59] who investigatedthe Ability Emotional Intelligence Measure found similarresults (Multiple R = .69), with significant predictors be-ing intelligence, standardized beta = .69 (using the SwapsTest and a Wechsler scales subtest, the 40-item Gen-eral Knowledge Task) and empathy, standardized beta= .26 (using the Questionnaire Measure of EmpathicTendency)--see also Antonakis and Dietz (2011b),[60]who show how including or excluding important controlsvariables can fundamentally change results—thus, it isimportant to always include important controls like per-sonality and intelligence when examining the predictivevalidity of ability and trait EI models. §

7.2 Self-report measures susceptible tofaking

More formally termed socially desirable responding(SDR), faking good is defined as a response patternin which test-takers systematically represent themselveswith an excessive positive bias (Paulhus, 2002). Thisbias has long been known to contaminate responses onpersonality inventories (Holtgraves, 2004; McFarland &Ryan, 2000; Peebles & Moore, 1998; Nichols & Greene,1997; Zerbe & Paulhus, 1987), acting as a mediator ofthe relationships between self-report measures (Nichols& Greene, 1997; Gangster et al., 1983).It has been suggested that responding in a desirable wayis a response set, which is a situational and temporaryresponse pattern (Pauls & Crost, 2004; Paulhus, 1991).This is contrasted with a response style, which is a morelong-term trait-like quality. Considering the contextssome self-report EI inventories are used in (e.g., employ-ment settings), the problems of response sets in high-stakes scenarios become clear (Paulhus & Reid, 2001).There are a few methods to prevent socially desirable re-sponding on behavior inventories. Some researchers be-lieve it is necessary to warn test-takers not to fake goodbefore taking a personality test (e.g., McFarland, 2003).Some inventories use validity scales in order to determinethe likelihood or consistency of the responses across allitems.

7.3 Predictive power unsubstantiated

Landy[51] distinguishes between the “commercial wing”and “the academic wing” of the EI movement, basingthis distinction on the alleged predictive power of EI asseen by the two currents. According to Landy, the formermakes expansive claims on the applied value of EI, whilethe latter is trying to warn users against these claims. Asan example, Goleman (1998) asserts that “the most ef-fective leaders are alike in one crucial way: they all havea high degree of what has come to be known as emo-tional intelligence. ...emotional intelligence is the sinequa non of leadership”. In contrast, Mayer (1999) cau-tions “the popular literature’s implication—that highlyemotionally intelligent people possess an unqualified ad-vantage in life—appears overly enthusiastic at presentand unsubstantiated by reasonable scientific standards.”Landy further reinforces this argument by noting thatthe data upon which these claims are based are held in“proprietary databases”, which means they are unavail-able to independent researchers for reanalysis, replica-tion, or verification.[51] Thus, the credibility of the find-ings cannot be substantiated in a scientific way, unlessthose datasets are made public and available for indepen-dent analysis.In an academic exchange, Antonakis andAshkanasy/Dasborough mostly agreed that researcherstesting whether EI matters for leadership have not doneso using robust research designs; therefore, currentlythere is no strong evidence showing that EI predictsleadership outcomes when accounting for personalityand IQ.[61] Antonakis argued that EI might not be neededfor leadership effectiveness (he referred to this as the“curse of emotion” phenomenon, because leaders whoare too sensitive to their and others’ emotional statesmight have difficulty making decisions that would resultin emotional labor for the leader or followers). A recentlypublished meta-analysis seems to support the Antonakisposition: In fact, Harms and Credé found that overall(and using data free from problems of common sourceand common methods), EI measures correlated only ρ= 0.11 with measures of transformational leadership.[62]Interestingly, ability-measures of EI fared worst (i.e., ρ =0.04); the WLEIS (Wong-Law measure) did a bit better(ρ = 0.08), and the Bar-On[63] measure better still (ρ =0.18). However, the validity of these estimates does notinclude the effects of IQ or the big five personality, whichcorrelate both with EI measures and leadership.[64] In asubsequent paper analyzing the impact of EI on both jobperformance and leadership, Harms and Credé[65] foundthat the meta-analytic validity estimates for EI droppedto zero when Big Five traits and IQ were controlled for.Joseph and Newman[66] meta-analytically showed thesame result for Ability EI.However, it is important to note that self-reported andTrait EI measures retain a fair amount of predictive va-lidity for job performance after controlling Big Five traits

6 8 INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER PHENOMENA

and IQ.[66] Newman, Joseph, and MacCann[67] contendthat the greater predictive validity of Trait EI measures isdue to their inclusion of content related to achievementmotivation, self efficacy, and self-rated performance.Meta-analytic evidence confirms that self-reported emo-tional intelligence predicts job performance well (as wellas any other personality measure), and this is due tomixed EI and trait EI measures’ tapping into self-efficacyand self-rated performance, in addition to the domainsof Neuroticism, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, andIQ.[68]

7.4 NICHD pushes for consensus

The National Institute of Child Health and Human De-velopment has recognised that because there are divi-sions about the topic of emotional intelligence, the men-tal health community needs to agree on some guidelinesto describe good mental health and positive mental liv-ing conditions. In their section, “Positive Psychology andthe Concept of Health,” they explain. “Currently thereare six competing models of positive health, which arebased on concepts such as being above normal, charac-ter strengths and core virtues, developmental maturity,social-emotional intelligence, subjective well-being, andresilience. But these concepts define health in philosoph-ical rather than empirical terms. Dr. [Lawrence] Beckersuggested the need for a consensus on the concept of pos-itive psychological health...”[69]

8 Interactions with other phenom-ena

8.1 Bullying

Main article: Bullying and emotional intelligence

Bullying is abusive social interaction between peers whichcan include aggression, harassment, and violence. Bully-ing is typically repetitive and enacted by those who arein a position of power over the victim. A growing bodyof research illustrates a significant relationship betweenbullying and emotional intelligence. Emotional intelli-gence (EI) is a set of abilities related to the understand-ing, use and management of emotion as it relates to one’sself and others. Mayer et al., (2008) defines the dimen-sions of overall EI as: “accurately perceiving emotion,using emotions to facilitate thought, understanding emo-tion, and managing emotion”.[70] The concept combinesemotional and intellectual processes.[71] Lower emotionalintelligence appears to be related to involvement in bully-ing, as the bully and/or the victim of bullying. EI seemsto play an important role in both bullying behavior andvictimization in bullying; given that EI is illustrated to bemalleable, EI education could greatly improve bullying

prevention and intervention initiatives.[72]

8.2 Job performance

Main article: Job performance and emotional intelligence

Research of EI and job performance shows mixed results:a positive relation has been found in some of the studies,in others there was no relation or an inconsistent one.[68]This led researchers Cote and Miners (2006)[73] to of-fer a compensatory model between EI and IQ, that positsthat the association between EI and job performance be-comes more positive as cognitive intelligence decreases,an idea first proposed in the context of academic perfor-mance (Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004). Theresults of the former study supported the compensatorymodel: employees with low IQ get higher task perfor-mance and organizational citizenship behavior directed atthe organization, the higher their EI. It has also been ob-served that there is no significant link between emotionalintelligence and work attitude behaviour.[74]

A meta-analytic review by Joseph and Newman[66] alsorevealed that both Ability EI and Trait EI tend to predictjob performance much better in jobs that require a highdegree of emotional labor (where 'emotional labor' wasdefined as jobs that require the effective display of pos-itive emotion). In contrast, EI shows little relationshipto job performance in jobs that do not require emotionallabor. In other words, emotional intelligence tends to pre-dict job performance for emotional jobs only.A more recent study suggests that EI is not necessarily auniversally positive trait.[75] They found a negative corre-lation between EI and managerial work demands; whileunder low levels of managerial work demands, they founda negative relationship between EI and teamwork effec-tiveness. An explanation for this may suggest gender dif-ferences in EI, as women tend to score higher levels thanmen.[66] This furthers the idea that job context plays a rolein the relationships between EI, teamwork effectiveness,and job performance.Another interesting find was discussed in a study that as-sessed a possible link between EI and entrepreneurial be-haviors and success.[76] In accordance with much of theother findings regarding EI and job performance, theyfound that levels of EI only predicted a small amount ofentrepreneurial behaviour.

8.3 Religiosity

Main article: Religiosity and emotional intelligence

A small 2004 study by Ellen Paek empirically exam-ined the extent to which religiosity, operationalized asreligious orientation and religious behaviour, is related tothe controversial[48][49][77] idea of emotional intelligence

7

(EI). The study examined the extent to which religiousorientation and behavior were related to self-reported(EI) in 148 church attending adult Christians.[78] (non-religious individuals were not part of the study). Thestudy found that the individuals’ self-reported religiousorientation was positively correlated with their perceivingthemselves to have greater EI. While the number of reli-gious group activities was positively associated with per-ceived EI, number of years of church attendance was un-related. Significant positive correlations were also foundbetween level of religious commitment and perceivedEI. Thus, the Christian volunteers were more likely toconsider themselves emotionally intelligent if they spentmore time in group activities and had more commitmentto their beliefs.Tischler, Biberman and McKeage warn that there is stillambiguity in the above concepts. In their 2002 article,entitled “Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality andworkplace performance: Definitions, models and ideasfor research”, they reviewed literature on both EI and var-ious aspect of spirituality. They found that both EI andspirituality appear to lead to similar attitudes, behaviorsand skills, and that there often seems to be confusion, in-tersection and linking between the two constructs.[79]

8.4 Self-esteem and drug use

A 2012 study cross examined emotional intelligence,self-esteem, andmarijuana dependence.[80] Out of a sam-ple of 200, 100 of which were dependent on cannabis andthe other 100 emotionally healthy, the dependent groupscored exceptionally low on EI when compared to thecontrol group. They also found that the dependent groupalso scored low on self-esteem when compared to thecontrol.Another study in 2010 examined whether or not low lev-els of EI had a relationship with the degree of drug andalcohol addiction.[81] In the assessment of 103 residentsin a drug rehabilitation center, they examined their EIalong with other psychosocial factors in a one-month in-terval of treatment. They found that participants’ EIscores improved as their levels of addiction lessened aspart of their treatment.

9 See also• Anabel Jensen

• Claude Steiner

• Coaching Crossroads

• Emotional Intelligence 2.0

• Emotional literacy

• Joshua Freedman

• Life skills

• Marc Brackett

• Outline of human intelligence

• People skills

• Positive psychology

• Psychological mindedness

• Six Seconds

• Social emotional learning

• Soft skills

• The Emotional Intelligence Appraisal

10 Further reading• Goleman, Daniel (1996). Emotional Intelligence:

Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.ISBN 978-0-553-38371-3.

11 References[1] Coleman, Andrew (2008). A Dictionary of Psychology (3

ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199534067.

[2] Salovey, Peter; Mayer, John; Caruso, David (2004),“Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Findings, and Implica-tions”, Psychological Inquiry: 197–215

[3] Petrides, Konstantin; Furnham, Adrian (2001), “TraitEmotional Intelligence: Psychometric Investigation withReference to Established Trait Taxonomies”, EuropeanJournal of Personality: 425–448

[4] Goleman, Daniel (1998),WhatMakes a Leader?, HarvardBusiness Review

[5] Goleman, D. (1998). Working With Emotional Intelli-gence. New York, NY. Bantum Books.

[6] Barbey, Aron K.; Colom, Roberto; Grafman, Jordan(2012). “Distributed neural system for emotional in-telligence revealed by lesion mapping”. Social Cog-nitive and Affective Neuroscience 9 (3): 265–272.doi:10.1093/scan/nss124. PMID 23171618.

[7] Yates, Diana. “Researchers Map Emotional Intelligencein the Brain”. University of Illinois News Bureau. Univer-sity of Illinois.

[8] “Scientists Complete 1st Map of 'Emotional Intelligence'in the Brain”. US News and World Report. 2013-01-28.

[9] Harms, P. D.; Credé, M. (2010). “Remaining Issuesin Emotional Intelligence Research: Construct Overlap,Method Artifacts, and Lack of Incremental Validity”. In-dustrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives onScience and Practice 3 (2): 154–158. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01217.x.

8 11 REFERENCES

[10] Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: BasicBooks.

[11] Smith, M.K. (2002) “Howard Gardner and multipleintelligences”, The Encyclopedia of Informal Educa-tion, downloaded from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm on October 31, 2005.

[12] Payne, W.L. (1983/1986). A study of emotion: devel-oping emotional intelligence; self integration; relating tofear, pain and desire. Dissertation Abstracts International,47, p. 203A (University microfilms No. AAC 8605928)

[13] Beasley, K. (1987). The Emotional Quotient. Mensa,May 1987, p25.

[14] Beldoch, M. (1964), Sensitivity to expression of emo-tional meaning in three modes of communication, in J. R.Davitz et al., The Communication of Emotional Meaning,McGraw-Hill, pp. 31-42

[15] Leuner, B (1966). “Emotional intelligence and emancipa-tion”. Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie15: 193–203.

[16] Salovey, P.; Mayer, J.D. (1989). “Emotional intelli-gence”. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality 9 (3):185–211. doi:10.2190/dugg-p24e-52wk-6cdg.

[17] Petrides, K.V.; Furnham, A. (2000a). “On the di-mensional structure of emotional intelligence”. Per-sonality and Individual Differences 29: 313–320.doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00195-6.

[18] Goleman, D., (1995) Emotional Intelligence, New York,NY, England: Bantam Books, Inc.

[19] “Dan Goleman”. Huffingtonpost.com. Retrieved 2014-03-07.

[20] Dan Schawbel. “Daniel Goleman on Leadershipand The Power of Emotional Intelligence - Forbes”.Web.archive.org. Retrieved 2014-03-07.

[21] Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelli-gence

[22] Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence: The New Sci-ence of Human Relationships

[23] Lantieri, L. and Goleman, D. (2008), Building EmotionalIntelligence: Techniques to Cultivate Inner Strength inChildren

[24] Goleman, D. (2011), The Brain and Emotional Intelli-gence: New Insights

[25] Goleman, D. (2011), Leadership: The Power of Emo-tional Intelligence

[26] February 13, 2012, 6:17 AM (2012-02-13). “Whyemotional intelligence is just a fad - CBS News”.Web.archive.org. Retrieved 2014-03-07.

[27] Kluemper, D.H. (2008). “Trait emotional intelligence:The impact of core-self evaluations and social desirabil-ity”. Personality and Individual Differences 44 (6): 1402–1412. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.12.008.

[28] Martins, A.; Ramalho, N.; Morin, E. (2010). “Acomprehensive meta-analysis of the relationship betweenemotional intelligence and health”. Journal of Per-sonality and Individual Differences 49 (6): 554–564.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.029.

[29] Mayer, J.D.; Salovey, P.; Caruso, D.L.; Sitarenios, G.(2001). “Emotional intelligence as a standard intel-ligence”. Emotion 1: 232–242. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.232.

[30] MacCann, C.; Joseph, D.L.; Newman, D.A.; Roberts,R.D. (2014). “Emotional intelligence is a second-stratum factor of intelligence: Evidence from hierar-chical and bifactor models”. Emotion 14: 358–374.doi:10.1037/a0034755.

[31] Mayer, J.D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotionalintelligence? In P. Salovey&D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotionaldevelopment and emotional intelligence: Implications foreducators (pp. 3-31). New York: Basic Books.

[32] Salovey, P; Grewal, D (2005). “The Science of EmotionalIntelligence”. Current directions in psychological science14: 6. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00381.x.

[33] Bradberry, T. and Su, L. (2003). “Ability-versus skill-based assessment of emotional intelligence” (PDF). Psi-cothema 18. pp. 59–66. Retrieved 2014-03-07.

[34] Brackett M.A. & J.D. Mayer, M.A. & J.D. (2003). “Con-vergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of com-peting measures of emotional intelligence”. Personalityand social psychology bulletin, 29(9), 1147-1158.

[35] Mayer, J.D.; Salovey, P.; Caruso, D.R.; Sitarenios, G.(2003). “Measuring emotional intelligence with the MS-CEIT V2.0”. Emotion 3: 97–105. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.97.

[36] “Hallvard Føllesdal - 'Emotional Intelligence as Abil-ity: Assessing the Construct Validity of Scores from theMayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MS-CEIT)' PhD Thesis and accompanying papers - Universityof Oslo 2008”.

[37] Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelli-gence. New York: Bantam Books

[38] Boyatzis, R., Goleman, D., &Rhee, K. (2000). Clusteringcompetence in emotional intelligence: insights from theemotional competence inventory (ECI). In R. Bar-On &J.D.A. Parker (eds.): Handbook of emotional intelligence(pp. 343-362). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[39] Bradberry, Travis and Greaves, Jean. (2009). EmotionalIntelligence 2.0. San Francisco: Publishers Group West.ISBN 978-0-9743206-2-5

[40] Petrides, K.V.; Pita, R.; Kokkinaki, F. (2007). “The lo-cation of trait emotional intelligence in personality fac-tor space”. British Journal of Psychology 98: 273–289.doi:10.1348/000712606x120618.

[41] Petrides, K.V.; Furnham, A. (2001). “Trait emotional in-telligence: Psychometric investigation with reference toestablished trait taxonomies”. European Journal of Per-sonality 15: 425–448. doi:10.1002/per.416.

9

[42] Pérez, J.C., Petrides, K.V., & Furnham, A. (2005). Mea-suring trait emotional intelligence. In R. Schulze and R.D.Roberts (Eds.), International Handbook of Emotional In-telligence (pp.181-201). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe &Hu-ber.

[43] Petrides, K.V.; Furnham, A. (2003). “Trait emotional in-telligence: behavioral validation in two studies of emotionrecognition and reactivity to mood induction”. EuropeanJournal of Personality 17: 39–75. doi:10.1002/per.466.

[44] Mikolajczak, Luminet; Leroy; Roy (2007). “Psycho-metric Properties of the Trait Emotional IntelligenceQuestionnaire: Factor Structure, Reliability, Construct,and Incremental Validity in a French-Speaking Popula-tion”. Journal of Personality Assessment 88 (3): 338–353.doi:10.1080/00223890701333431.

[45] Vernon, P.A.; Petrides, K.V.; Bratko, D.; Schermer,J.A. (2008). “A behavioral genetic study of traitemotional intelligence”. Emotion 8 (5): 635–642.doi:10.1037/a0013439. PMID 18837613.

[46] Gardner, J. K.; Qualter, P. (2010). “Concurrent andincremental validity of three trait emotional intelligencemeasures”. Australian Journal of Psychology 62: 5–12.doi:10.1080/00049530903312857.

[47] Eysenck, H.J. (2000). Intelligence: A New Look. ISBN0-7658-0707-6

[48] Locke, E.A. (2005). “Why emotional intelligence is aninvalid concept”. Journal of Organizational Behavior 26(4): 425–431. doi:10.1002/job.318.

[49] Mattiuzzi, P.G. (2008) Emotional Intelligence? I'm notfeeling it. everydaypsychology.com

[50] Grant, Adam (January 2, 2014). “The Dark Side of Emo-tional Intelligence”. The Atlantic. Archived from the orig-inal on January 24, 2014.

[51] Landy, F.J. (2005). “Some historical and scien-tific issues related to research on emotional intelli-gence”. Journal of Organizational Behavior 26: 411–424.doi:10.1002/job.317.

[52] Mikolajczak, M.; Luminet, O.; Leroy, C.; Roy, E. (2007).“Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelli-gence Questionnaire”. Journal of Personality Assessment88: 338–353. doi:10.1080/00223890701333431.

[53] Smith, L.; Ciarrochi, J.; Heaven, P. C. L. (2008).“The stability and change of trait emotional intel-ligence, conflict communication patterns, and rela-tionship satisfaction: A one-year longitudinal study”.Personality and Individual Differences 45: 738–743.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.023.

[54] Austin, E.J. (2008). “A reaction time study of re-sponses to trait and ability emotional intelligence testitems”. Personality and Individual Differences 46: 381–383. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.025.

[55] Roberts, R.D.; Zeidner, M.; Matthews, G. (2001). “Doesemotional intelligencemeet traditional standards for an in-telligence? Some new data and conclusions”. Emotion 1:196–231. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.196.

[56] Brody, N (2004). “What cognitive intelligence is andwhat emotional intelligence is not” (PDF). PsychologicalInquiry 15 (3): 234–238.

[57] Schulte, M. J.; Ree, M. J.; Carretta, T. R. (2004). “Emo-tional intelligence: Not much more than g and personal-ity”. Personality and Individual Differences 37: 1059–1068. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.11.014.

[58] Fiori, M.; Antonakis, J. (2011). “The ability model ofemotional intelligence: Searching for valid measures”.Personality and Individual Differences 50 (3): 329–334.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.010.

[59] Antonakis, J.; Dietz, J. (2011a). “Looking for Valid-ity or Testing It? The Perils of Stepwise Regression,Extreme-Scores Analysis, Heteroscedasticity, and Mea-surement Error”. Personality and Individual Differences50 (3): 409–415. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.014.

[60] Antonakis, J.; Dietz, J. (2011b). “More on Test-ing for Validity Instead of Looking for It”. Per-sonality and Individual Differences 50 (3): 418–421.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.008.

[61] Antonakis, J.; Ashkanasy, N. M.; Dasborough, M.(2009). “Does leadership need emotional intelli-gence?". The Leadership Quarterly 20 (2): 247–261.doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.006.

[62] Harms, P. D.; Credé, M. (2010). “Emotional Intelligenceand Transformational and Transactional Leadership: AMeta-Analysis”. Journal of Leadership & OrganizationalStudies 17 (1): 5–17. doi:10.1177/1548051809350894.

[63] Bar-On, R (2006). “The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI)". Psicothema 18: 13–25.

[64] Antonakis, J. (2009). “Emotional intelligence": Whatdoes it measure and does it matter for leadership?. In G.B. Graen (Ed). LMX leadership--Game-Changing De-signs: Research-Based Tools (Vol. VII) (pp. 163-192).Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Down-load article: , link to book: http://www.infoagepub.com/products/Predators-Game-Changing-Designs

[65] Harms, P. D.; Credé, M. (2010). “Remaining Issuesin Emotional Intelligence Research: Construct Overlap,Method Artifacts, and Lack of Incremental Validity”. In-dustrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives onScience and Practice 3 (2): 154–158. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01217.x.

[66] Joseph, D. L.; Newman, D. A. (2010). “Emotional In-telligence: An Integrative Meta-Analysis and CascadingModel”. Journal of Applied Psychology 95 (1): 54–78.doi:10.1037/a0017286.

[67] Newman, D. A.; Joseph, D. L.; MacCann, C. (2010).“Emotional Intelligence and Job Performance: The Im-portance of Emotion Regulation and Emotional LaborContext”. Industrial and Organizational Psychology:Perspectives on Science and Practice 3 (2): 159–164.doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01218.x.

10 11 REFERENCES

[68] Joseph, D.L.; Jin, J.; Newman, D.A.; O'Boyle, E.H.(2015). “Why Does Self-Reported Emotional Intelli-gence Predict Job Performance? A Meta-Analytic Inves-tigation ofMixed EI”. Journal of Applied Psychology 100:298–342. doi:10.1037/a0037681.

[69] Nitkin, Ralph. “National Advisory Board on Medical Re-habilitation Research: Meeting for Minutes for December2–3, 2004”. usa.gov. Retrieved 2006-08-29.

[70] Mayer, J.D.; Roberts, R.D; Barasade, S.G. (2008).“Human abilities: Emotional intelligence”. TheAnnual Review of Psychology 59: 507–536.doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093646.

[71] Tolegenova, A.A.; Jakupov, S.M.; Cheung Chung,Man; Saduova, S.; Jakupov, M.S (2012). “A the-oretical formation of emotional intelligence andchildhood trauma among adolescents”. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences 69: 1891–1894.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.142.

[72] Mckenna, J.; Webb, J. (2013). “Emotional intelligence”.British Journal of Occupational Therapy 76 (12): 560.

[73] Cote, S.; Miners, C.T.H. (2006). “Emotional intelligence,cognitive intelligence and job performance”. Administra-tive Science Quarterly 51 (1): 1–28.

[74] Relojo, D.; Pilao, S.J.; Dela Rosa, R. (2015). “From pas-sion to emotion: Emotional quotient as predictor of workattitude behaviour among faculty member”. Journal onEducational Psychology 8 (4): 1–10. Retrieved 27 July2015.

[75] Farh, C. C.; Seo, Tesluk (March 5, 2012). “EmotionalIntelligence, Teamwork Effectiveness, and Job Perfor-mance: The Moderating Role of Job Context”. Journalof Applied Psychology. Advance online publication: 890–900. doi:10.1037/a0027377.

[76] Ahmetoglu, Gorkan; Leutner, Franziska; Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas (December 2011). “EQ-nomics: Un-derstanding the relationship between individual differ-ences in trait emotional intelligence and entrepreneur-ship.” (PDF). Personality and Individual Differences 51(8): 1028–1033. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.08.016.

[77] Eysenck, H.J. (2000). Intelligence: A New Look. ISBN0-7658-0707-6

[78] Paek, Ellen (2006). “Religiosity and perceived emo-tional intelligence among Christians”. Personality andIndividual Differences (International Society for theStudy of Individual Differences) 41 (3): 479–490.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.016. ISSN 0191-8869.

[79] Tischler, L; Biberman, J.; McKeage, R. (2002).“Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality and work-place performance: Definitions, models and ideas forresearch”. Journal of Managerial Psychology (Emer-ald Group Publishing Limited) 17 (3): 203–218.doi:10.1108/02683940210423114. ISSN 0268-3946.Retrieved 2008-10-18.

[80] Nehra, D. K.; Sharma, Mushtaq, Sharma, Sharma, Nehra(July 2012). “Emotional intelligence and self esteem incannabis abusers”. Journal of the Indian Academy of Ap-plied Psychology 38 (2): 385–393.

[81] Brown, Chiu; Chiu, Edmond; Neill, Lloyd; Tobin, Juliet;Reid, John (16 Jan 2012). “Is low emotional intelligencea primary causal factor in drug and alcohol addiction?".Australian Academic Press (Bowen Hills, QLD, Australia):91–101.

11

12 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

12.1 Text• Emotional intelligence Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence?oldid=675833569 Contributors: Eloquence, TheAnome, Ed Poor, Gianfranco, Karen Johnson, R Lowry, Jose Icaza, Michael Hardy, Vaughan, MartinHarper, Ixfd64, Sannse, Skysmith,Jrauser, Ronz, Andres, Grin, Andrewman327, Pedant17, Populus, Stormie, Olathe, Jeffq, Shantavira, Jni, Robbot, Tomchiukc, Puckly,Nagelfar, Alan Liefting, AstroNox, Kenny sh, Jgritz, Mboverload, Pgan002, Alexf, Piotrus, SimonArlott, Rdsmith4, Pgreenfinch, Howardjp,DMG413, Discospinster, Wk muriithi, Autiger, Paul August, Dmr2, Rubicon, JoeSmack, Borofkin, Mwanner, Shanes, Bobo192, MikeSchwartz, Johnkarp, Smalljim, TDerz, Viriditas, NickSchweitzer, Gary, Thinktank1987, Arthena, The RedBurn, Sefard, L33th4x0rguy,Tycho, Dominic, Heida Maria, DrMel, Woohookitty, 2004-12-29T22:45Z, Mindmatrix, TigerShark, Borb, Benbest, Hbdragon88, Man-gojuice, Eras-mus, Stefanomione, Cryptess, BD2412, Imersion, Sjakkalle, Rjwilmsi, Mayumashu, Jweiss11, Geoffbutterfi, Ian Pitchford,Latka, Margosbot~enwiki, Winhunter, Gurch, Pete.Hurd, Bgwhite, Wasted Time R, YurikBot, Wavelength, Pburka, Bhny, Cswrye, Nawl-inWiki, Nutiketaiel, Aaron Brenneman, Stevenwmccrary58, Amakuha, T-rex, N. Harmonik, Tetracube, Bill.martin, Kompik, Paul Mag-nussen, ChrisGriswold, SFGiants, JLaTondre, Pred, Neurogeek, Jonathan.s.kt, GrinBot~enwiki, Saikiri, Bruce78, True Pagan Warrior,SmackBot, David Kernow, Vald, Ikip, Jtneill, Eskimbot, Kslays, Gilliam, TBP, Ohnoitsjamie, Fogster, Sjrsimac, Chris the speller, Karagou-niS, CrookedAsterisk, M1rtyn, CanyonMan, LFF, DoctorW, DHN-bot~enwiki, Colonies Chris, BrainDoc, Typofixer76, Xyzzyplugh, Ra-jShekhar, AgentFade2Black, Radagast83, Ghiraddje, “alyosha”, Hgilbert, Cyberevil, Tmchk, SashatoBot, Jfreed, Wings for kids, Kuru,Khazar, John, YayoB, Talentsmart, SandyGeorgia, Wwagner, Hu12, Maestlin, Timwarneka, Courcelles, AbsolutDan, Dia^, Foot Dragoon,Dozens, Pgr94, Penbat, MaxEnt, Cydebot, Mike2000~enwiki, Dr.enh, Mattisse, Headbomb, Tchannon, John254, James086, Justin Dillon,Simon Kilpin, Trevorl, Heroeswithmetaphors, Natalie Erin, Alphachimpbot, Eevensen, JAnDbot, Narssarssuaq, MER-C, The Transhuman-ist, Symode09, SiobhanHansa, Evening Breeze, Magioladitis, Swikid, JNW, Yandman, Janetblair, DerHexer, JaGa, Nevit, Sierra30, Hbent,Kbarchard, Hobblehobble, WotherspoonSmith, J.delanoy, Authenticity1, Athaenara, Siddu drdl, LordAnubisBOT, Victuallers, Naniwako,Christian Storm, RoboMaxCyberSem, HiLo48, Lbeaumont, Doob10163, LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs, CaptainMario, Fusioneer~enwiki,Stanto, Darkfrog24, Lynwater, CardinalDan, Foundby, VolkovBot, Mrh30, M. Elder, AlnoktaBOT, TXiKiBoT, Someguy1221, Nazgul02,Gchinkle, Sirkad, Krushia, Lova Falk, Jack of Sticks, EverGreg, Afish11, Biswadipgoswami, SieBot, StAnselm, Eriegz, Dizzyprizzy, Bot-Multichill, Oldag07, Caltas, Revent, Scarter323, Soulgany101, Flyer22, Cstough, JetLover, Aruton, Eburneas, Jdaloner, Oniscoid, Sanya3,Brendanrose, Wikimaster09, Reneeholle, Emmerling30, LeaBrov, Martarius, ClueBot, Victor Chmara, Kerrjac, The Thing That ShouldNot Be, Plastikspork, Wikikoo, Gregcaletta, Der Golem, Mild Bill Hiccup, StutSon, Anat Rafaeli, Jm266, Regereau-Eugenie, Nike787,Auntof6, Exiled Ambition, Dmfallis, Mrroi, Kddollie, Excirial, Vladliv~enwiki, Sun Creator, SchreiberBike, Ottawa4ever, Authority1458,Taranet, Thingg, Dsmurat, ForestDim, XLinkBot, Paulsheer, Chanakal, Lynch1000s, Little Mountain 5, Avoided, Madevisible, Silvonen-Bot, SlubGlub, Dodoïste, Addbot, Proofreader77, Some jerk on the Internet, Otisjimmy1, Jsanchezburks, Mynameispritch, CanadianLin-uxUser, A man liberated, MrOllie, Download, Jsalpietro, SpBot, Regereau, Verbal, Zorrobot, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Rhazs, THENWHO WAS PHONE?, Gingerk99, Backslash Forwardslash, AnomieBOT, Dryuap, Pgm8693, Jim1138, Keithbob, Bluerasberry, Lloyd-klein, Citation bot, ,נאוהמיכאל ArthurBot, Mediasresin, Cureden, Cmk581, Capricorn42, Bihco, Mioneka, Michael J. Czopek, Froghenge,Wrajan1980, Ufo karadagli, Dr. Trodat, WalterBuck, Crzer07, Usefulness, Frankie0607, RibotBOT, Wiki emma johnson, Ganesh J.Acharya, RCraig09, Shadowjams, Aaron Kauppi, FrescoBot, Irafromhungary, Lagelspeil, Delphinus1997, Misuchi, Jamesooders, Cita-tion bot 1, Machn, I dream of horses, Jonesey95, MastiBot, Hessamnia, PSY7, Abc518, TobeBot, Trappist the monk, Shawna.sheldon,Qwertywiki77, Lotje, Metadata Assistant, Claudesteiner, Mean as custard, FetchcommsAWB, Jowa fan, Letterwing, Semprecis5, Emaus-Bot, WikitanvirBot, Immunize, GoingBatty, Passionless, Slightsmile, Tommy2010, Lingmac, Riggr Mortis, Wikipelli, Ponydepression,ZéroBot, Susfele, GoodSpeedY*, WeijiBaikeBianji, Donner60, Io psych prof, AndyTheGrump, NTox, ZClum, DASHBotAV, Miradre,Woodsrock, ClueBot NG, Gareth Griffith-Jones, ConconJondor, Frietjes, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot, Martin of Sheffield, Yaz8, Corrector5,MusikAnimal, Smcg8374, Mark Arsten, Jamal johnson57, Nelsonoff, Bball4sammi, Harizotoh9, MrBill3, Mejoribus, Zedshort, RyanWee,MathewTownsend, Thumphrey05, BattyBot, Acadēmica Orientālis, Kenneth conti, Amberglow, ChrisGualtieri, Khazar2, Liza Freeman,Admumof2, Gordon Davy, Lugia2453, Elena Prazyan, Sriharsh1234, Twelvetime, KozacekFrantisek, Farukh.hr, I am One of Many, Natat-tack49, Nickknack00, Nadia.ben-ammar, PsicoFS, Puuska, Mrm7171, Quenhitran, Gendron uzan, Metouma, M4x9566, Keith Beasley,Monkbot, Sniper335, Ashli symone, Karmi1992, Jonathan C. Armstrong, Dan Paola, EQExpert, Glorious Beauty, Cnbr15, Erictheairplane,Dadquixote and Anonymous: 675

12.2 Images• File:Edit-clear.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Edit-clear.svg License: Public domain Contributors: The

Tango! Desktop Project. Original artist:The people from the Tango! project. And according to the meta-data in the file, specifically: “Andreas Nilsson, and Jakub Steiner (althoughminimally).”

• File:Plutchik-wheel.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Plutchik-wheel.svg License: Public domainContributors: Own work Original artist: Machine Elf 1735

12.3 Content license• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0