Is emotional IQ the same as regular IQ?
2144492#0
Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ is a 1995 book by Daniel Goleman. In this book, Goleman posits that emotional intelligence is as important as IQ for success, including in academic, professional, social, and interpersonal aspects of one's life. Goleman says that emotional intelligence is a skill that can be taught and cultivated, and outlines methods for incorporating emotional skills training in school curricula.
Emotional Intelligence
96009#10
However, the term became widely known with the publication of Goleman's book: "Emotional Intelligence – Why it can matter more than IQ" (1995). It is to this book's best-selling status that the term can attribute its popularity. Goleman has followed up with several further popular publications of a similar theme that reinforce use of the term.
To date, tests measuring EI have not replaced IQ tests as a standard metric of intelligence. Emotional Intelligence has also received criticism on its role in leadership and business success.
Emotional intelligence
37689507#7
Using MRI, researchers are able to acquire volumetric measurements of brain size. Some studies have tried to explain the relationship between brain size (meaning volume) and intelligence, specifically in terms of IQ. In general, it has been found that Full Scale IQ and Verbal IQ have a stronger correlation with brain size than Performance IQ. It is thought by some that grey and white matter specifically relate to different IQs (grey matter with Verbal IQ and white matter with Performance IQ), but the results have not been consistent. It has been found that within the cortex, the correlation with IQ was very influenced by the volume of prefrontal grey matter.
Neuroimaging intelligence testing
96009#46
In an academic exchange, Antonakis and Ashkanasy/Dasborough mostly agreed that researchers testing whether EI matters for leadership have not done so using robust research designs; therefore, currently there is no strong evidence showing that EI predicts leadership outcomes when accounting for personality and IQ. Antonakis argued that EI might not be needed for leadership effectiveness (he referred to this as the "curse of emotion" phenomenon, because leaders who are too sensitive to their and others' emotional states might have difficulty making decisions that would result in emotional labor for the leader or followers). A recently published meta-analysis seems to support the Antonakis position: In fact, Harms and Credé found that overall (and using data free from problems of common source and common methods), EI measures correlated only ρ = 0.11 with measures of transformational leadership. 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 measure better still (ρ = 0.18). However, the validity of these estimates does not include the effects of IQ or the big five personality, which correlate both with EI measures and leadership. In a subsequent paper analyzing the impact of EI on both job performance and leadership, Harms and Credé found that the meta-analytic validity estimates for EI dropped to zero when Big Five traits and IQ were controlled for. Joseph and Newman meta-analytically showed the same result for Ability EI.
Emotional intelligence
96009#51
Research of EI and job performance shows mixed results: a positive relation has been found in some of the studies, while in others there was no relation or an inconsistent one. This led researchers Cote and Miners (2006) to offer a compensatory model between EI and IQ, that posits that the association between EI and job performance becomes more positive as cognitive intelligence decreases, an idea first proposed in the context of academic performance (Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004). The results of the former study supported the compensatory model: employees with low IQ get higher task performance and organizational citizenship behavior directed at the organization, the higher their EI. It has also been observed that there is no significant link between emotional intelligence and work attitude behavior.
Emotional intelligence
14892#29
Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that – although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and although they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age – the scores generally agree with one another and across time. Like all statistical quantities, any particular estimate of IQ has an associated standard error that measures uncertainty about the estimate. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about three points . Clinical psychologists generally regard IQ scores as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes. In a survey of 661 randomly sampled psychologists and educational researchers, published in 1988, Mark Snyderman and Stanley Rothman reported a general consensus supporting the validity of IQ testing. "On the whole, scholars with any expertise in the area of intelligence and intelligence testing (defined very broadly) share a common view of the most important components of intelligence, and are convinced that it can be measured with some degree of accuracy." Almost all respondents picked out abstract reasoning, ability to solve problems and ability to acquire knowledge as the most important elements.
Since the early 20th century, raw scores on IQ tests have increased in most parts of the world. When a new version of an IQ test is normed, the standard scoring is set so performance at the population median results in a score of IQ 100. The phenomenon of rising raw score performance means if test-takers are scored by a constant standard scoring rule, IQ test scores have been rising at an average rate of around three IQ points per decade. This phenomenon was named the Flynn effect in the book "The Bell Curve" after James R. Flynn, the author who did the most to bring this phenomenon to the attention of psychologists.
Intelligence quotient
96009#47
However, it is important to note that self-reported and Trait EI measures retain a fair amount of predictive validity for job performance after controlling Big Five traits and IQ. Newman, Joseph, and MacCann contend that the greater predictive validity of Trait EI measures is due to their inclusion of content related to achievement motivation, self efficacy, and self-rated performance. Meta-analytic evidence confirms that self-reported emotional intelligence predicting job performance is due to mixed EI and trait EI measures' tapping into self-efficacy and self-rated performance, in addition to the domains of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and IQ. As such, the predictive ability of mixed EI to job performance drops to nil when controlling for these factors.
Emotional intelligence
398459#14
IQ classification varies from one publisher to another. IQ tests do not have validity for determining test-takers' rank order at higher IQ levels, and are perhaps only effective at determining whether a student is gifted rather than distinguishing among levels of giftedness. The Wechsler tests have a standard score ceiling of 160. Today, the Wechsler child and adult IQ tests are by far the most commonly used IQ tests in hospitals, schools, and private psychological practice. Older versions of the Stanford-Binet test, now obsolete, and the Cattell IQ test purport to yield IQ scores of 180 or higher, but those scores are not comparable to scores on currently normed tests. The Stanford-Binet Third Revision (Form L-M) yields consistently higher numerical scores for the same test-taker than scores obtained on current tests. This has prompted some authors on identification of gifted children to promote the Stanford-Binet form L-M, which has long been obsolete, as the only test with a sufficient ceiling to identify the exceptionally and profoundly gifted, despite the Stanford-Binet L-M never having been normed on a representative national sample. Because the instrument is outdated, current results derived from the Stanford-Binet L-M generate inflated and inaccurate scores. The IQ assessment of younger children remains debated.
Intellectual giftedness
176855#12
IQ tests purport to be measures of intelligence, while achievement tests are measures of the use and level of development of use of the ability. IQ (or cognitive) tests and achievement tests are common norm-referenced tests. In these types of tests, a series of tasks is presented to the person being evaluated, and the person's responses are graded according to carefully prescribed guidelines. After the test is completed, the results can be compiled and compared to the responses of a norm group, usually composed of people at the same age or grade level as the person being evaluated. IQ tests which contain a series of tasks typically divide the tasks into verbal (relying on the use of language) and performance, or non-verbal (relying on eye–hand types of tasks, or use of symbols or objects). Examples of verbal IQ test tasks are vocabulary and information (answering general knowledge questions). Non-verbal examples are timed completion of puzzles (object assembly) and identifying images which fit a pattern (matrix reasoning).
Psychological testing
11840996#9
IQ and educational attainment are strongly correlated (estimates range form .40 to over .60.) There is controversy, however, as to whether education affects intelligence – it may be both a dependent and independent variable with regard to IQ. A study by Ceci illustrates the numerous ways in which education can affect intelligence. It was found that; IQ decreases during summer breaks from schooling, children with delayed school entry have lower IQ's, those who drop out of education earlier have lower IQ's and children of the same age but of one years less schooling have lower IQ scores. Thus it is difficult to unravel the interconnected relationship of IQ and education where both seem to affect one another.
Environment and intelligence