Two Competing Models
Emotional intelligence (EI) has become one of the most discussed constructs in psychology, but the term encompasses substantially different theoretical frameworks with different measurement approaches and different claims about what "emotional intelligence" actually means. Understanding these differences is essential for evaluating claims about EI's importance and trainability.
The two primary models are Peter Salovey and John Mayer's ability model and Daniel Goleman's mixed model. While both use the term "emotional intelligence," they differ in fundamental ways that affect how EI should be measured and developed.
Mayer and Salovey's Ability Model
Mayer and Salovey (1990, 1997) defined emotional intelligence as the capacity to reason about emotions, and to use emotions to enhance thought. This narrow definition treats EI as a genuine form of intelligence—an information-processing capability that can be measured using performance-based tests.
The ability model encompasses four related abilities:
Perceiving emotions: The ability to detect and decode emotional expressions in faces, voices, and other visual displays. This is the most basic skill—without it, other emotional processing is impossible. Research shows that accuracy in emotion perception varies substantially across individuals and can be measured with standardized stimuli.
Using emotions to facilitate thought: The ability to generate emotions that facilitate creative thinking and effective problem-solving. Emotions provide information that can guide attention and reasoning. This dimension captures how emotional states can be harnessed to support cognitive performance.
Understanding emotions: The ability to comprehend the causes and consequences of emotional experiences. This includes understanding emotional chains (how one emotion leads to another), emotional vocabulary, and the likely trajectory of emotional responses. Sophisticated understanding enables better emotional forecasting and management.
Managing emotions: The capacity to regulate emotions in oneself and others. This involves both suppressing inappropriate emotions and evoking helpful ones. Effective emotional management enables goal-directed behavior despite emotional interference.
Goleman's Mixed Model
Goleman's 1995 book "Emotional Intelligence" popularized a substantially different construct. Rather than limiting EI to emotional processing abilities, Goleman's model includes both ability components and broader personality traits, motivation, and character elements.
Goleman's model includes:
Self-awareness: Knowing one's internal states, preferences, resources, and intuitions. This includes emotional self-awareness, accurate self-assessment, and self-confidence based on genuine self-knowledge.
Self-management: Managing one's internal states and impulses. This includes self-control, trustworthiness, conscientiousness, adaptability, and achievement orientation.
Social awareness: Understanding others' emotional states—empathy, organizational awareness, and service orientation.
Relationship management: Managing relationships and building networks—influence, communication, conflict management, leadership, collaboration, and teamwork.
This mixed model captures many valuable interpersonal and intrapersonal competencies, but critics note that it stretches "intelligence" to include constructs (like conscientiousness) that are traditionally considered personality traits rather than cognitive abilities.
Ability EI Versus Trait EI
The distinction between ability EI and trait EI represents a fundamental conceptual difference with measurement implications:
Ability EI (based on Mayer-Salovey model): Measured through performance tests where correct answers can be defined. Example: identifying which emotion is expressed in a face. These tests show moderate correlations with general intelligence (approximately r = 0.30) and demonstrate incremental validity in predicting some outcomes beyond general intelligence.
Trait EI (based on mixed models): Measured through self-report questionnaires assessing typical behavior. Examples: "I am aware of my emotions as I experience them." These measures show high correlations with personality traits (particularly extraversion and neuroticism) and may largely overlap with established personality dimensions rather than representing a distinct construct.
Research by Liber and colleagues (2016) used brain imaging to investigate whether ability EI represents a genuine intelligence. They found that higher ability EI was associated with more efficient processing in emotion-related brain regions—similar to how general intelligence shows neural efficiency markers. Trait EI did not show this pattern, suggesting it may be more about typical behavioral tendencies than information-processing capacity.
Measurement Challenges
Measuring EI faces challenges that affect both research and practical application:
Self-report validity: Trait EI measures rely on self-assessment, but self-awareness is precisely what trait EI is supposed to measure. People low in emotional competence may overestimate their abilities, inflating the correlation between trait EI and social desirability. Ability EI tests avoid this problem but may measure knowledge rather than applied capability.
Predictive validity: Meta-analyses show that both ability EI and trait EI predict some real-world outcomes, but effect sizes are typically modest. For job performance, the average correlation is approximately r = 0.24 for ability EI and r = 0.26 for trait EI—similar to personality trait correlations and smaller than general intelligence correlations (r = 0.50+).
Incremental validity: The key question is whether EI predicts outcomes beyond existing constructs like personality and general intelligence. Some studies show incremental validity for specific outcomes, but the evidence is mixed and outcome-specific.
Development and Practical Applications
Ability EI can be trained: Programs targeting specific emotional skills show measurable improvement. Kerr and colleagues found that emotion perception training improved accuracy by 20-30% in participants who completed 10-12 hours of training. Understanding and management skills also show training effects, though generalization to real-world situations remains variable.
Trait EI reflects stable tendencies: The personality-like aspects of trait EI are more resistant to change. Self-report measures may not capture capacity so much as typical behavior, which reflects stable dispositional tendencies. This doesn't mean trait EI is fixed, but meaningful change requires substantial behavioral practice rather than mere knowledge acquisition.
Balanced expectations: Popular claims about EI often exceed the empirical foundation. EI is neither a magic bullet predictor nor easily developed through simple interventions. However, targeting specific emotional skills—particularly emotion perception and emotion regulation strategies—can produce meaningful benefits for those who need improvement in specific areas.