Promoting individual resources: The challenge of trait emotional intelligence

Abstract

This study investigated the role of fluid intelligence, personality traits and different models of emotional intelligence in relation to core self-evaluation, resilience and life satisfaction. The Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM), the Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ), the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), the Bar-On Emotional Intelligence Inventory (Bar-On EQ-i), the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue), the Core Self-Evaluation Scale (CSES), the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), and the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) were administered to 164 Italian high school students. These results highlighted the role of emotional intelligence and in particular of trait emotional intelligence in promoting individual resources and offering new research and intervention opportunities.

Introduction

The importance of both a proactive and preventive perspective relative to psychological health and wellness has recently been described by the American Psychological Association (APA) (Hage et al., 2007). These proposed guidelines support the dual process of actions necessary to decrease problems on the one hand, and on the other, strengthening those factors that lead to positive development and outcomes (Kenny & Hage, 2009). Within this framework, emotional intelligence (EI) appears a promising variable because it can be increased through specific training (Di Fabio and Kenny, 2011, Vesely et al., 2014).

The current literature (Stough, Saklofske, & Parker, 2009) describes two principal models of emotional intelligence: ability EI (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) and trait (self-reported) EI (Bar-On, 1997, Petrides and Furnham, 2000, Petrides and Furnham, 2001). Ability-based models are related to abilities in processing emotional information and thus have a strong cognitive component (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000) in contrast to trait EI which refers to individual self-perception of emotional intelligence (Bar-On, 1997, Petrides and Furnham, 2000, Petrides and Furnham, 2001). One self-report EI model describes trait emotional intelligence as a constellation of emotion-related self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality (Petrides and Furnham, 2000, Petrides and Furnham, 2001). Ability-based emotional intelligence and self-reported emotional intelligence are not correlated (e.g., Saklofske, Austin, & Minski, 2003); however different models of self-reported emotional intelligence are correlated (Bracken & Mayer, 2003) indicating that they are describing similar but not identical constructs (Freudenthaler, Neubauer, Gabler, Scherl, & Rindermann, 2008). Thus it should be noted that, like intelligence tests, self-report trait EI scales are not identical. While they are based on a common theme of EI, the scales vary in the number of EI facets included and the depth that they are measured (Ferrándiz et al., 2012, Freudenthaler et al., 2008). Petrides and Furnham, 2000, Petrides and Furnham, 2001 published the first of their scales after the Bar-On model (1997) to further expand the emotional intelligence construct. An examination of the facets comprising both the EQ-i and TEIQue suggest that while there is certainly commonality in the models such that the total scores do correlate moderately, there is also considerable uniqueness in how EI is operationally defined and thus assessed by these two scales. Thus, it could expected that Trait EI scales may add additional or incremental variance when two or more scales are employed, the operational definition and description of EI are not identical and the correlation between then is moderate.

A growing research literature on EI, in particular trait EI intelligence, is linked to many ‘positive psychology’ variables including such individual resources as core self-evaluation (Ahmetoglu et al., 2011, Kluemper, 2008), resilience (Armstrong et al., 2011, Saklofske et al., 2013, Schneider et al., 2013), health (Austin, Saklofske, & Egan, 2005) and life satisfaction (Extremera and Fernández-Berrocal, 2005, Gannon and Ranzijn, 2005). EI has also shown a relationship with decision-making processes (Di Fabio and Blustein, 2010, Di Fabio and Kenny, 2012a, Di Fabio and Palazzeschi, 2008b, Di Fabio and Palazzeschi, 2009a, Di Fabio et al., 2013, Di Fabio et al., 2012), self-efficacy (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2008a), social support (Di Fabio & Kenny, 2012b), and scholastic success (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2009b).

The present study focuses on the role of both ability and trait EI models in relation to core self-evaluation, resilience, and life satisfaction, in relation to enhancing the promotion of individual resources in a preventive perspective.

The core self-evaluation construct is a fundamental part of self-evaluated values, efficacy and abilities (Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2003). It includes self-esteem, self-efficacy, internal locus of control and absence of pessimism. Studies have further linked core self-evaluation to emotional intelligence (Ahmetoglu et al., 2011, Kluemper, 2008).

Resilience is the ability to deal with negative experiences (Grotberg, 1995), to cope and continue to withstand adversity in an adaptive way (Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007) and to implement adaptive strategies to deal with the discomfort and adversity (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004). Resilience appears to be correlated with emotional intelligence (Armstrong et al., 2011, Saklofske et al., 2013, Schneider et al., 2013).

Life satisfaction is a component of subjective well-being and is a comprehensive cognitive judgment about a person’s life (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). It is the average of an individual’s satisfaction considering key and meaningful life areas (Diener et al., 1985). Also life satisfaction has been positively linked to emotional intelligence (Extremera and Fernández-Berrocal, 2005, Gannon and Ranzijn, 2005).

Although there is some research support for the role of self-reported emotional intelligence in relation to core self-evaluation (Ahmetoglu et al., 2011, Kluemper, 2008), resilience (Armstrong et al., 2011) and life satisfaction (Extremera and Fernández-Berrocal, 2005, Gannon and Ranzijn, 2005), this study will simultaneously analyse the role of ability-based emotional intelligence and of trait/self-reported emotional intelligence.

The present study examined the role of fluid intelligence, personality traits and three models of emotional intelligence; ability-based emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) and trait emotional intelligence assessed with the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i, Bar-On, 1997) and the Trait Emotional Intelligence Scale (TEIQue, Petrides and Furnham, 2000, Petrides and Furnham, 2001), in predicting core self-evaluation, resilience, and life satisfaction among Italian high school students. The hypotheses were:

(H1) Trait emotional intelligence assessed by the EQ-i will add significant incremental variance beyond that accounted for by fluid intelligence, personality traits and ability-based emotional intelligence in predicting core self-evaluation, resilience and life satisfaction.(H2) Trait emotional intelligence using the TEIQue (Petrides & Furnham, 2004) will add significant incremental variance beyond that accounted for by fluid intelligence, personality traits and ability-based emotional intelligence in relation to core self-evaluation, resilience and life satisfaction.(H3) Each of the trait scales together will add additional variance beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence, personality traits and ability-based emotional intelligence in relation to core self-evaluation, resilience and life satisfaction.