Emotional Intelligence

Multiple Levels of EI

An overview of the research suggests that EI exists at multiple levels within a person. These are (a) the physiological level, in which EI is seen as based on an individual’s preferred neural networks or hormonal dispositions; (b) trait level; (c) self-schema or self-perception level; and (d) the behavioral level.

At the trait level, EI may be seen as a type of intelligence. A trait measure looks at EI as the ability to be aware of and manage one’s emotions and those of others. In 2005, Neal Ashkanasy and Catherine Daus categorized this approach to measurement as Stream 1 when this ability was measured directly and Stream 2 when it was measured through self-assessment built on the ability model. Mayer, Salovey, and David Caruso claimed that their approach to EI is a type of intelligence related to general intelligence (g). Their measure of this trait level is the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT).

At the self-perception level, EI is a set of characteristics that are best assessed by the person. Self-perception of EI would likely be different from but related to personality traits more than to general cognitive ability, referred to in psychology as g. Although measures such as the EQ-i, designed by Reuven Bar-On, have been shown to predict job performance in various meta-analyses, they also show a consistent and strong correlation with personality traits in these studies. These measures have been labeled mixed models by Mayer. Ashkanasy and Daus referred to the measures as Stream 2 if [Page 579]they are based on the MSCEIT model and Stream 3 if they are based on other models of EI.

The behavioral level of EI requires observation of behavioral expression of EI. Known as behavioral EI, it offers a closer link to job and life outcomes. Notably, it has been shown to predict job performance above and beyond g and personality.

Although some scholars have claimed that the competencies that are characteristic of EI are not a type of intelligence, others have claimed they can be considered part of naturally, neurologically driven capability and, therefore, are a form of intelligence. Behavioral measures of EI would include coding of audiotapes of critical incidents from work, as first documented by Richard Boyatzis in 1982 or videotapes of simulations or multisource observations as explained by Boyatzis in 2009.

...