Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
PIP - Applications of intelligence and emotional intelligence - Coggle…
PIP - Applications of intelligence and emotional intelligence
IQ and EI measures
Intelligence (cognitive ability) -
Hierarchial model with three strata (narrow -> broad -> g)
Typically assessed using either multi-domain tests or matrix reasoning test to give one overall IQ score and / or broad skills
Mean of 100 and SD of 15
Emotional intelligence -
Ability model - measured with supposedly objective test to give an overall EQ score
Trait model - self-report questionnaires to give scores on different aspects of emotion-related self perceptions and tendencies
Emotional intelligence measures -
Ability - MSCEIT - four capacities to think and reason about emotions (Mayer et al, 2002;2003)
-> Perceiving - perception, appraisal and emotion expression
-> Facilitating - emotional facilitation of thinking
-> Understanding - understanding and analysing emotions
-> Managing - reflective regulation of emotions
Trait - Emotional competence inventory (Goleman and Boyatzis, 2005)
-> Self-awareness, self regulation, social awareness and social skills
-> Mixed content of emotional intelligence and social competence
Importance of EI for work -
The more senior the role, the bigger the focus on managing people
Getting other people to give their best and perform well requires being able to understand them, inspire and motivate
Perception and understanding of emotions
Relevance of EI for academic achievement -
Academic achievement requires self-control, focus and good management of emotions e.g. dealing with set-backs, motivation etc
-> Facilitation and management of emotions
Issues with IQ testing
Some argument intelligence is culturally specific, such as knowledge being more useful in some cultures than others
This makes IQ tests WEIRD and potentially problematic, and when they have been used for eugenic purposes the reputation of their use is damaged
It can be used objectively to determine students who can be challenged and those who have difficulties, but it does not serve the average pupil
-> In the US, there are bias issues with ‘gifted’ programmes and teacher labelling based on IQ
-> However, using these tests has increased representation in the programmes for all students
-> IQ tests can also identify structural inequalities that have affected development, which can help change to policy
-> Interventions could be assessed on their effectiveness using IQ tests before and after to see if changes have helped educational achievement
Petrides, Frederickson and Furnham, 2002:
Role of trait emotional intelligence in academic performance and deviant behaviour in school
Trait EI moderated the relationship between cognitive ability and academic performance
Those with high trait EI were less likely to have unauthorised absences from school and be less likely to be excluded
Most of these trait EI effects persisted even after controlling for personality variance, with the emotion-related, self-perceived abilities that make up the construct of EI being implicated in academic performance and reduced deviant behaviour, with effects relevant to vulnerable or disadvantaged students
Trait EI is useful because of what it explains, not what it predicts - it is heavily related to scholastic achievement and deviant behaviour
-> However, has questionable incremental validity due to EI being measured at different factor points and small effect sizes
Targeting interventions at students to help with this could improve outcomes
Occupational settings
Ability testing -
Selection (recruitment) - job application process (75% of companies use psychometric testing although often not validated measures), chooose tests to match role, EI measures increasing in use but not as common as cognitive ability tests
Development - EI especially used to identify employees to develop and target training / coaching to their needs
Effect size is important
Issues with occupational ability testing -
Use of ability tests increases productivity (Hunter and Hunter, 1984)
Conceptualisation - abstract capacity v work sample or assessment centre
Validity -
-> Not all tests validated in same way / may over-rely on acquired knowledge
-> How to choose criterion level?
-> Different skills needed in different roles
Bias -
-> UK equality law - selection tests must not show gender / race differences
-> Second generation intelligence tests are fairer and more valid e.g. CAS, Kaufman Adult Intelligence test - but not accepted / adopted by employers yet (Scherbaum et al, 2015)
IQ and job performance -
According to the meta-analysis by Bertua et al (2005) - the correlation between intelligence and job performance is strong with r = .5-.6
However, personality also has an impact - Salgado, 2003
-> Of the Big Five personality traits, high conscientiousness and low neuroticism were consistently related to indicators of job performance
-> Of these two factors conscientiousness was a stronger predictor of job performance
-> Importantly, openness, agreeableness and extraversion were not related to job performance - they have occasionally have been associated, but much less often and not consistently (extraversion sometimes for marketing, but not all jobs)
EI and job performance -
Quantifiable performance - O'Boyle et al, 2011
-> IQ and Big 5, especially high conscientiousness, explained 42% of performance
-> Incremental validity of EI - ability (0.4%), self-reported ability (5.2%) and trait (6.8%)
Teamwork performance - Clarke, 2010
-> MSCEIT scores (ability) predicted team members' ratings of project analysis, goal setting, motivation and managing relationships (2-6%) over and above general cognitive ability
General cognitive ability is one of the strongest predictors of job performance, but other factors matter as well
-> Emotional intelligence, personality, motivation and attitude, self-efficacy, job-specific skills, job satisfaction and work engagement
Educational settings
Selection - school and university entrance exams
Evaluation - Assess individual attainment and assess schools/educational programmes
Issues -
-> Causality - intelligence -> educational performance or education -> intelligence
-> Validity - effects of practice and test anxiety
Application of IQ testing:
IQ is a strong predictor of academic achievement with r = .5 (Kaufman and Lichtenberg, 2005)
But intelligence is not the only individual difference that explains academic success - personality plays a role as well
-> According to a meta-analysis by O'Connor and Paunonen (2007), conscientiousness is consistently associated with academic success - overall correlation across the studies is r = .2
Remaining Big 5 factors had small contributors
Conscientiousness is the most consistent predictor of academic achievement (Bratko et al, 2006) and explains academic performance independent of intelligence (Poropat, 2009)
Diagnosis -
Identify children with different learning needs (e.g. gifted, dyslexia, learning difficulties)
Second generation tests advance identification / understanding of learning disability (e.g. CAS profiles typically developing v LD; Huang et al, 2010; better at differentiating specific difficulties; Naglieri and Otero, 2018)
Issues -
-> Stigma of labelling
-> Do not tell us how to help low scorers / low achievers
Academic achievement - MacCann et al, 2020:
EI predicts academic achievement in students with r = .2
Association is significantly stronger for ability EI compared with self-rated or mixed
Ability (1.7%), self-reported (.7%), or mixed EI (2.3%) explained additional variance after controlling for intelligence and Big Five
EI is the third most important predictor for academic achievement, after intelligence and conscientiousness
General intelligence is strongly related to academic achievement: - Jenks (1979) - 0.4-.63 correlation between the two
Deary et al (2007) - 70,000 English children were examined over 5 years, and found a strong correlation between intelligence and achievement
However, Chamorro-Premuzic and Furnham (2006) suggested that intelligence factors are not alone in predicting achievement
Conscientiousness is the most consistent predictor of academic achievement (Bratko et al, 2006) - more organised, disciplined and motivated to succeed
Neuroticism is inconsistently associated, as those who are more nervous may perform badly in exams, but they would work harder beforehand, making them perform slightly better
Extraversion also has the same issue, as these individuals may be more calm and optimistic and therefore better under pressure, but they may have spent less time studying as a result
Application of EI -
Development -
-> Social/emotional learning (Goleman) incorporated into whole school curriculum
-> SEL increases (Durlak et al, 2011) -
--> EI skills (r = .57)
--> Social behaviour (r = .24)
--> Academic achievement (r = .27)
-> However, it is not always implemeneted effectively
Example of Social, Emotional Learning programme - Second Step:
Focuses on self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills and responsible decision making
Weekly lessons (30 mins) delivered by teacher over 20-25 weeks - videos and interactive activities, group discussions and role-playing, reflection exercises
Efficacy (Low et al, 2015)
-> Randomised controlled trial (N = 7,300 children)
-> Improvements in social-emotional competences (g = .13) and reductions in emotional problems (g = -.10)
-> Small effects but stronger in children with low baseline
Educational settings - other factors:
General cognitive ability is a stronger predictor of academic achievement
However, other factors matter as well (Richardson et al, 2012)
-> Self-efficacy
-> Emotional intelligence (self-regulation)
-> Achievement motivation and attitude (engagement and grit)
-> Personality - conscientiousness
-> Socioeconomic status
-> Female gender
-> Learning environment
Critical discussion
IQ testing -
People living in adverse conditions tend to score lower on a variety of social and cognitive tests for various reasons (poor nutrition, lack of stimulation)
However, evolutionary psychology suggests that certain mental abilities may be enhanced by adversity (process of adaptation)
Hidden talents - Frankenhuis et al, 2020
-> The hidden talents approach investigates social and cognitive abilities that are enhanced through adversity
-> But these may only emerge when measured in an ecologically relevant manner
Young et al, 2022 -
-> Tested cognitive performance with abstract (i.e. traditional) v ecologically relevant stimuli among 618 adversity exposed youth in the USA
-> Adversity exposed youth did worse with standard version but did equally well with the ecological version
Eugenics -
Eugenics - attempt to improve the genetic quality of the human population - exclude people judged to be inferior (e.g. forced sterilisation)
-> Promote those judged to be superior
IQ test results have been used to judge certain groups and races as inferior due to them scoring lower
This involved various renowned scientists from leading universities
Summary -
IQ scores predict educational attainment and job performance
Ability EI and trait EI predict social / wellbeing outcomes
Trait EI may have better incremental validity than ability EI in job outcomes
Ability testing (increasingly including EI) is used widely in occupational and to an extent educational settings, and has both strengths, limitations and ethical issues
EI has been used to inform social-emotional learning educational programs with some positive evidence
Difficulties with using established measures of personality and intelligence in education and work:
The relationships between personality, intelligence, education and workplace variables are not as straightforward as they first seem
-> Many dimensions to school and work - personality and intelligence are therefore not adaptive constructs within which to assess educational and workplace factors
-> Conscientiousness is the only strong contender (Robertson, 2001)
--> However, a person with these traits is cautious and careful, and so they may not be suited to a job with creativity, risk or innovation?
--> The world of work is constantly changing also, requiring adaptability and flexibility - are conscientious people able to do this?
--> There is therefore debate over the relevance of personality traits to general job performance, and tests may be better placed to assess specific traits for specific jobs
Established measures of personality and intelligence are not a first consideration by educators and employers:
Workplaces do not go to these resources first, but rather the tasks of the job the individual is applying for
Equally, modern job descriptions and application forms mean that skills and intelligence are already indicated without the need for testing to take place
In schools, there are also difficulties - IQ scores are kept secret to avoid bias and labelling, but this makes them redundant for all students apart from those with learning difficulties
There is some predictive strength, but the context of modern education and work means there is little use for this information
Modern education reflects the workplace, and so psychology has moved to create theories about successful learning, leadership and self-development:
They concentrate on developing skills once an individual is in education or work, rather than selecting and assessing on potential - the focus is improvement not assessment