Construct · 3 fields · 8 citations
One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.
● jingle · one name, three models Nearest construct by meaningintelligencecompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to emotional intelligence is intelligence.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.
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, as Salovey and Mayer defined it in 1990 and then formalized with Mayer in 1997 into four branches: perceiving emotions, using emotions to facilitate thought, understanding emotions, and managing them. The claim is that emotional intelligence is a genuine intelligence, a capacity to reason about emotional information, and so it must be measured the way abilities are, by performance against a correct answer rather than by asking people how emotionally skilled they think they are. The MSCEIT operationalizes this: respondents solve emotion tasks scored against consensus or expert keys, and a high score means a person can do the reasoning, not that they believe they can.[1][2][3]
A blend of abilities, dispositions, motives, and learned competencies that predict success at work and in life, the version Goleman put into wide circulation in 1995 and Bar-On built into the Emotional Quotient Inventory in 1997 as a measure of emotional and social competence. The mixed model gathers self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, optimism, stress tolerance, and social skill under one label and scores them by self-report or informant rating. Its appeal is breadth and its cost is coherence: because the mixture includes traits and competencies that are separately studied elsewhere, its predictive power is hard to distinguish from the personality and ability variables it already contains. Joseph and Newman's meta-analysis found that mixed measures behave like a composite of conscientiousness, self-perceived ability, and general mental ability rather than a single new thing.[4][5][8]
A constellation of emotional self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies, which Petrides and Furnham distinguished in 2001 from the ability construct on purely measurement grounds: anything assessed by self-report cannot be a cognitive ability, because people report what they believe about themselves, not what they can do. Trait emotional intelligence, measured by the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire, is therefore defined as a personality trait rather than a competence, and its validity is judged by where it sits among established personality dimensions, not by any correct answer. Petrides, Pita, and Kokkinaki mapped it into Eysenckian and five-factor space in 2007 and found it a distinct but heavily oblique factor, which is the point: trait emotional intelligence is a personality variable, and calling it intelligence is a naming choice, not an empirical finding.[6][7]
Next
Combine items across the emotional intelligence scales to see whether the meanings separate empirically, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collisionCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct