Emotional Intelligence and English Reading Comprehension Ability: A Case Study from Iran
©2015
Textbook
82 Pages
Summary
The emotional intelligence (EI) construct is a relatively new concept with little empirical research. This study was an attempt to find the relationship between EI, gender, major, and reading comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners. For this purpose, 268 students completed the Bar-On EQ inventory (1997) which included 133 items and took a reading comprehension test. It was found that females outperformed males in the reading comprehension test. However, no significant relationship was found between gender and major on one hand and reading comprehensions ability on the other hand. Subsequent data analysis revealed that the relationship between four EI scales (interpersonal, stress management, adaptability, and general mood) and reading comprehension ability was significant. However, no significant relationship was found between intrapersonal scale and reading comprehension ability. Furthermore, significant correlations were found between EI subscales and reading comprehension positive except for independence and assertiveness. The implications of the study and suggestions for further research are discussed.
Excerpt
Table Of Contents
List of Tables
Table 1 Bar-On's Model of Emotional Intelligence Components ... 13
Table 2 Goleman's Emotional Intelligence Competencies... 17
Table 3 Commonly Used Measures of Emotional Intelligence ... 17
Table 4 Participant Information ... 24
Table 5 EQ-i Competencies Components Items ... 25
Table 6 Gender Frequency Distribution Table ... 29
Table 7 The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test ... 31
Table 8 The Mean and Standard Deviation of Reading Comprehension Scores ... 32
Table 9 Two-way ANOVA: Gender, Major and Reading Comprehension Ability ... 34
Table 10 Bonferroni Post-Hoc Test Results ... 34
Table 11 Mean and SD of EI Main Scales ... 35
Table 12 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on EI ... 36
Table13 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on Intrapersonal Intelligence ... 37
Table 14 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on Interpersonal Intelligence ... 38
Table 15 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on Stress Management ... 40
Table 16 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on Adaptability... 41
Table 17 Two-way ANOVA for the Interaction of Gender and Major on General Mood ... 41
Table 18 The Mean and Standard Deviation of Fifteen Subscale of EI ... 43
Table 19 T-test Results for Comparing the Means of EI Subscales for Male and Female Students ... 44
Table 20 One-way ANOVA Result for the Relationship between Major and 15 Subscale of EI ... 46
Table 21 Multi-Variate Regression Analysis ... 47
Table 22 Regression Analysif For the Relationship between Gender, Major, and Five EL Sclaes on One
Hand and Reading Comprehention Ability on the Other Hand ... 48
Table 23 Pearson correlation Coefficient for the Relationship between EI Subscales and Reading
Comprehension Ability ... 49
1
Abstract
The emotional intelligence (EI) construct is a relatively new concept with little
empirical research. This study was an attempt to find the relationship between EI, gender,
major, and reading comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners. For this purpose, 268
students completed the Bar-On EQ inventory (1997) which included 133 items and took a
reading comprehension test.
It was found that females outperformed males in the reading
comprehension test. However, no significant relationship was found between gender and
major on one hand and reading comprehensions ability on the other hand. Subsequent data
analysis revealed that the relationship between four EI scales (interpersonal, stress
management, adaptability, and general mood) and reading comprehension ability was
significant. However, no significant relationship was found between intrapersonal scale and
reading comprehension ability.
Furthermore, significant correlations were found between EI
subscales and reading comprehension positive except for independence and assertiveness.
The implications of the study and suggestions for further research are discussed.
Introduction
3
Psychology in the 20th century has been dominated by the importance given to
cognitive intelligence. It has become increasingly clear however, that IQ-scores are not
always good predictors of academic or professional success (Goleman, 1995). The apparent
inability of traditional measures of cognitive intelligence (e.g. IQ) to predict success in life,
led to the development of the concept of emotional intelligence (EI), first labeled as such by
Salovey and Mayer (1990). The idea itself however was not new.
In order to find an answer to the question "why do some people succeed in possessing
better emotional well-being than others?", and expanding into "why are some individuals
more able to succeed in life than others?", Bar-On started his research in 1980 with a
systematic review of variables (i.e. abilities, competencies, skills) which he believed to be
responsible for success in general (Bar-On, 1997). He defined the concept of EI as "an array
of personal, emotional and social competencies and skills that influence one's ability to
succeed in coping with environmental demands and pressures" (Bar-On, 1997, p14). The
general idea is that a large part of success seems to be determined by non-IQ factors and that
emotional intelligence can be seen as a meta-ability, comprising an important set of those
factors (such as motivation, impulse control, mood-regulation, empathy, ...), which
determine how well we use other abilities, such as cognitive intelligence.
1.1.
Statement of the Problem
Since the publication of the best-selling book Emotional Intelligence by Daniel
Goleman (1995), the topic of EI has witnessed unparalleled interest. Programs seeking to
increase EI have been implemented in numerous settings, and courses on developing one's
emotional intelligence have been introduced in universities and even in elementary schools
throughout the world. But what exactly is EI? As is the case with all constructs (i.e.
intelligence or personality), several schools of thought exist which aim to most accurately
describe and measure the notion of EI. At the most general level, EI refers to the ability to
4
recognize and regulate emotions in ourselves and others (Goleman, 2001). Peter Salovey and
John Mayer, who originally used the term "emotional intelligence" in published writing,
initially defined it as:
A form of intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one's own and others'
feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one's
thinking and actions (Salovey & Mayer, 1990).
Later, these authors revised their definition of EI, the current characterization now
being the most widely accepted. EI is thus defined as:
The ability to perceive emotion, integrate emotion to facilitate thought, understand
emotions, and to regulate emotions to promote personal growth (Mayer & Salovey, 1997).
Another prominent researcher of the EI construct is Reuven Bar-On, the originator of
the term "emotion quotient". Possessing a slightly different outlook, he defined EI as being
concerned with understanding oneself and others, relating to people, and adapting to and
coping with the immediate surroundings to be more successful in dealing with environmental
demands (Bar-On, 1997).
However, there are arguments that the concept of EI is not clearly defined, that
different definitions and tests are being used - not always including the same aspects, and that
many of the measures are neither reliable nor valid (Ciarrochi, Chan & Caputi, 2000). In
essence there are two views on EI (Hedlund & Sternberg, 2000): some argue that EI includes
everything that is not measured by IQ but instead is related to success (Bar-On, 1997;
Goleman, 1995); others advocate an ability model of EI that measures the ability to perceive
and understand emotional information (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000). According to
Petrides and Furham (2001), it would be more beneficial to describe trait EI and ability EI as
5
two separate constructs instead of one being measured in two different ways. Some
researchers even questioned whether EI is anything more than a set of personality variables
for which adequate measures already exist (Davies, Stankov & Roberts, 1998). Although the
definitions of EI may differ among the many researchers, instead of being contradictory to
one another, they appear to be complementary and they all share a common purpose which is
to extend the traditional view of intelligence by underlining the importance of social,
emotional and personal factors regarding intelligent behavior (Dawda & Hart, 2000).
1.2.
Significance of the Study
The topic of EI is controversial. Debates rage on and critical questions continue to
arise as to the concept of EI, as well as its definition, nature, measurement, and application.
As noted by Van Rooy and Viswesvaran (2004), the difficulty to provide an operational
definition of EI that is accepted by all has been largely due to the differing names given to
emotional intelligence. The reason EI models differ has to do with the fact that these models
were developed by different people for different purposes. Chernis (2000) cites an example of
Salovey and Mayer's model, which was developed deductively to Goleman's and Bar-On's
models that were developed inductively. Other proponents of EI, such as Cherniss, Extein,
Goleman, & Weissberg (2006), agree that although differences between several major models
do exist, there is considerable overlap among them. They further argue that, in fact,
Goleman's dimensions of self-awareness and social awareness are similar to Salovey and
Mayer's perception of emotion and understanding of emotions, as well as to Bar-On's self-
awareness and empathy subscales. Similarly, Bar-On's interpersonal, stress management, and
adaptability dimensions relate to Mayer and Salovey's emotional facilitation of thinking and
managing emotions, as well as Goleman's self- management and relationship management
dimensions. Thus, according to both these academic and practitioner emotional intelligence
researchers, although differences in these models exist, there are also many similarities that
6
cannot be ignored. Regardless of the models used, EI researchers agree that in addition to
emotional management, EI encompasses emotional awareness in relation to self and others,
that EI is important in predicting successful life outcomes, and that it has the potential to be
learned and developed with proper training (Ciarrochi, Chan, & Caputi, 2002; Goleman,
1998).
While EI has been popularized by Goleman (1995, 1998); the concept is derived from
social intelligence (Johnson & Indvik, 1999). Unlike abstract intelligence, which refers to the
ability to understand and manipulate symbols, or concrete intelligence, social intelligence
refers to the ability to understand and relate to people. EI is defined as an individual's ability
to accurately perceive reality so as to understand and regulate their own emotional responses
as well as adapt and respond to others (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Pellitteri, 2002). This
emerges as four interrelated social skills, grouped around knowledge, perception, regulation
and general intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997).
Leaving aside general intelligence, the other components relate to the individual's
ability to manage their emotional response (Goleman, 1998; Mayer & Salovey, 1997).
Emotional perception allows individuals to respond congruently, as they recognize their own
and others' emotional responses. Emotional regulation means individuals self-monitor the
intensity and direction of their own and others'emotional responses, as Pelliteri (2002)
highlights, allowing them to moderate negative emotional reactions and remain positive.
Regulation, the third component, allows individuals to utilize their emotional knowledge to
promote creativity and flexibility, social relations and maintain motivation.
The EI construct is a relatively new concept with little empirical research, particularly
related to the link between five specific sub-components of emotional intelligence, major and
gender on the one hand and reading comprehension ability on the other hand.
7
1.3.
Research Questions
This study attempted to answer the following questions:
Research question 1: Is there a significant relationship between gender, major and
reading comprehension ability?
Research question 2: Is there a singnificant relationship between gender, major, and
EI?
Research question 3: Is there a significant relationship between gender, major and five
scales of EI?
Research question 4: Is there a significant relationship between gender and 15
subscale of EI?
Research question 5: Is there a signifincant relationship between major and 15
subscale of EI?
Research question 6: Is there a signifincant relationship between EI and its 5 scales
and reading comprehension ability?
Research question 7: Is there a significant relationship between gender, major, five EL
sclaes on one hand and reading comprehention ability on the other hand?
Research question 8: Is there a significant relationship between EI subscales and
reading comprehension ability?
1.4.
Research Hypotheses
The current research was an attempt to investigate the relationship between EI and
reading comprehension ability of Sama Technical and Vocational Training College students
8
in Tehran. The above-mentioned research questions are changed into the following null
hypotheses.
Null hypothesis 1: There is no significant relationship between gender, major and
reading comprehension ability.
Null hypothesis 2: There is no singnificant relationship between gender, major, and
EI.
Null hypothesis 3: There is no significant relationship between gender, major and five
scales of EI.
Null hypothesis 4: There is no significant relationship between gender and 15
subscale of EI.
Null hypothesis 5: There is no signifincant relationship between major and 15
subscale of EI.
Null hypothesis 6: There is no signifincant relationship between EI and its 5 scales
and reading comprehension ability.
Null hypothesis 7: There is no significant relationship between gender, major, five EL
sclaes on one hand and reading comprehention ability on the other hand.
Null hypothesis 8: There is no significant relationship between EI subscales and
reading comprehension ability.
1.5.
Key Words:
Emotional intelligence, gender, major, English reading comprehension ability,
Iranian EFL learners, Bar-On EQ-i, EI scales, EI subscales
Chapter 1:
Review of the Related
Literature
10
2.1. Introduction
EI is a relatively new concept based on the tradition of multiple intelligences. EI can
be traced back to the work of Thorndike (1920) who introduced the concept of Social
Intelligence in his Multi-Factor theory of intelligence (Thorndike, 1920).Recently, as a
behavioral model, rising to prominence with Danial Goleman's 1995 book by the name of
"Emotional Intelligence". However, the early Emotional Intelligence theory was originally
developed during the 1970's and 80's by the work and writings of psychologist in Harvard,
Yale, and New Hampshire universities (Kingsland, 2007). The basic principles of EI are
identifying, managing, understanding, and regulating emotions (Goleman, 1995).
2.2. EI Models
Early theorists such as Thorndike and Gardner paved the way for the current experts
in the field of emotional intelligence. Each theoretical paradigm conceptualizes emotional
intelligence from one of two perspectives: ability or mixed model. Ability models regard
emotional intelligence as a pure form of mental ability and thus as a pure intelligence. In
contrast, mixed models of emotional intelligence combine mental ability with personality
characteristics such as optimism and well-being (Mayer, 1999). Currently, the only ability
model of EI is that proposed by John Mayer and Peter Salovey. Two mixed models of EI
have been proposed, each within a somewhat different conception. Reuven Bar-On has put
forth a model based within the context of personality theory, emphasizing the co-dependence
of the ability aspects of emotional intelligence with personality traits and their application to
personal well-being. In contrast, Daniel Goleman proposed a mixed model in terms of
performance, integrating an individual's abilities and personality and applying their
corresponding effects on performance in the workplace (Goleman, 2001).
11
2.2.1. Salovey and Mayer: An Ability Model of EI
Peter Salovey and John Mayer first coined the term "emotional intelligence" in 1990
(Salovey & Mayer, 1990) and have since continued to conduct research on the significance of
the construct. Their pure theory of EI integrates key ideas from the fields of intelligence and
emotion. From intelligence theory comes the idea that intelligence involves the capacity to
carry out abstract reasoning. From emotion research comes the notion that emotions are
signals that convey regular and discernable meanings about relationships and that at a number
of basic emotions are universal (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002). They propose that
individuals vary in their ability to process information of an emotional nature and in their
ability to relate emotional processing to a wider cognition. They then posit that this ability is
seen to manifest itself in certain adaptive behaviors (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000).
Mayer and Salovey's conception of emotional intelligence is based within a model of
intelligence, that is, it strives to define EI within the confines of the standard criteria for a
new intelligence (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). It proposes that EI is
comprised of two areas: experiential (ability to perceive, respond, and manipulate emotional
information without necessarily understanding it) and strategic (ability to understand and
manage emotions without necessarily perceiving feelings well or fully experiencing them).
Each area is further divided into two branches that range from basic psychological processes
to more complex processes integrating emotion and cognition. The first branch, emotional
perception, is the ability to be self-aware of emotions and to express emotions and emotional
needs accurately to others. Emotional perception also includes the ability to distinguish
between honest and dishonest expressions of emotion. The second branch, emotional
assimilation, is the ability to distinguish among the different emotions one is feeling and to
identify those that are influencing their thought processes.
12
The third branch, emotional understanding, is the ability to understand complex
emotions (such as feeling two emotions at once) and the ability to recognize transitions from
one to the other. Lastly, the fourth branch, emotion management, is the ability to connect or
disconnect from an emotion depending on its usefulness in a given situation (Mayer &
Salovey, 1997).
2.2.2. Bar-On: A Mixed Model of EI
The director of the Institute of Applied Intelligences in Denmark, Reuven Bar-On
developed one of the first measures of emotional intelligence that used the term "Emotion
Quotient". Bar-On's model of emotional intelligence relates to the potential for performance
and success, rather than performance or success itself, and is considered process-oriented
rather than outcome-oriented (Bar-On, 1997). It focuses on an array of emotional and social
abilities, including the ability to be aware of, understand, and express oneself, the ability to
be aware of, understand, and relate to others, the ability to deal with strong emotions, and the
ability to adapt to change and solve problems of a social or personal nature (Bar-On, 1997).
In his model, Bar-On outlines 5 components of emotional intelligence: intrapersonal,
interpersonal, adaptability, stress management, and general mood. Within these components
are sub-components, all of which are outlined in Table 1. Bar-On posits that EI develops over
time and that it can be improved through training, programming, and therapy (Bar-On, 1997).
Bar-On hypothesizes that those individuals with higher than average E.Q.'s are in
general more successful in meeting environmental demands and pressures. He also notes that
a deficiency in EI can mean a lack of success and the existence of emotional problems.
Problems in coping with one's environment is thought, by Bar-On, to be especially common
among those individuals lacking in the subscales of reality testing, problem solving, stress
tolerance, and impulse control. In general, Bar-On considers EI and cognitive intelligence to
13
contribute equally to a person's general intelligence, which then offers an indication of one's
potential to succeed in life (Bar-On, 1997).
Table 1 Bar-On's Model of Emotional Intelligence Components
EI scales
EI subscales
Intrapersonal
Self Regard
Emotional Self-Awareness
Assertiveness
Independence
Self-Actualization
Interpersonal
Empathy
Social Responsibility
Interpersonal Relationship
Adaptability
Reality Testing
Flexibility
Problem Solving
Stress Management
Stress Tolerance
Impulse Control
General Mood Components
Optimism
Happiness
2.2.2.1. Measures of Bar-On's Model
Reuven Bar-On's measure of EI, the Bar-On Emotion Quotient Inventory (EQ-i), is a
self-report measure of EI for individuals sixteen years of age and over. Developed as a
measure of emotionally and socially competent behavior that provides an estimate of one's
emotional and social intelligence, the EQ-i is not meant to measure of personality traits or
cognitive capacity, but rather to measure one's ability to be successful in dealing with
environmental demands and pressures (Dawda & Hart, 2000; Bar-On, 1997). One hundred
and thirty three items are used to obtain a Total EQ (Total Emotion Quotient) and to produce
five composite scales corresponding to the 5 main components of the Bar-On model:
Intrapersonal EQ, Interpersonal EQ, Adaptability EQ, Stress Management EQ, and General
Mood EQ. Items are measured on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 (very seldom/not true for
me) to 5 (very often/often true of me). Total raw scores are converted into standard scores
with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15, similar to that of IQ scores (Bar-On, 1997).
14
Bar-On has developed several versions of the Emotion Quotient Inventory to be used
with various populations and in varying situations. Among these are the EQ-interview (to be
completed after the self-report), the EQ-i Short Version (a 52 item version of the original),
the EQ-i:125 (a 125 item version of the original which excludes the negative impression
scale), the EQ-i Youth Version (for children and adolescents 7- 15 years of age), and the EQ-
360 Assessment (a multi-rater instrument used in conjunction with the regular self-report EQ-
i to give a more complete assessment). In addition, the original EQ-i is available in several
languages, including Spanish, French, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, and
Hebrew (Bar-On, 1997).
2.2.2.2. Bar-On Emotion Quotient Inventory: Reliability and Validity
The EQ-i was normed on approximately 4000 respondents from the United States and
Canada. Earlier versions of the EQ-i (which relied on 12 sub-scales rather than the current
15) were normed internationally. These norms are presented in the technical manual for use
with non-North American participants. The majority of the North American normative
sample were white (79%) and under the age of 30 years, with equal representation of males
and females (Bar-On, 1997). Stability estimates of the EQ-i (in the form of test-retest
reliability after 1 and 4 months, respectively) were reported as .85 (N = 44) and .75 (N = 27).
It should be noted that no stability estimates were reported for the North American sample;
these figures reflect the South African sample. Based on seven population samples, the
authors report internal consistency (in the form of Cronbach's alpha) as ranging from .69 to
.86 for the 15 subscales and an overall average internal consistency of .76 (Bar-On, 1997).
The Bar-On EQ-i is a complete test in that it can classify each respondent within the
range of EQ scores and can be used in a multitude of settings and situations, including
corporate, educational, clinical, medical, research, and preventative settings. Content validity
is reported by the authors as being adequate in that items for each sub-component were
15
generated and selected in a systematic approach. Additionally, item analyses were conducted
in an effort to extract items unrelated to the definitions, and feedback was provided by
subjects who were interviewed in the early stages of test development. Structural validity was
established through factor analysis to test the hierarchical structure of Bar-On's model of EI.
Analyses supported the five components of emotional intelligence (GFI = .971), however,
exploratory factor analyses found support for a 13-factor model of sub-components rather
than Bar-On's proposed 15 factor model (Bar-On, 1997).
Measures of criterion validity found that EI as measured with the EQ-i could
accurately differentiate between those who were successful and those who were unsuccessful
in business and industry settings. It could also differentiate between those with high or low
self-perceived success in military school, between those U.S. Air Force Recruiters who were
the most successful in their work, and between academically successful and unsuccessful
university students. Likewise, those individuals who were suspected to intuitively have
higher levels of EI (i.e. psychologists) were found to have EQ-i scores significantly higher
than the mean (Bar-On, 1997; Handley, 1997; Swart, 1996).
Construct validity was illustrated through measures of convergent and divergent
validity. No significant correlations were found between the EQ-i and several measures of
standard intelligence (Bar-On, 1997; Brackett & Mayer, 2003), although the EQ-i has been
found to be significantly correlated to measures of psychological and subjective well-being (r
= .54 and r = .35) and to all of the Big Five personality factors as measured by the NEO-PI-R
(r's = .16 to -.57; Brackett & Mayer, 2003). Likewise, research has found that the Total EQ
scale was positively correlated with three of the best indicators of emotional functioning in a
measure of personality, with acculturation (r = .34), and with sense of competence (r = .51),
while being negatively correlated with other indicators of abnormal emotional functioning
(Bar-On, 1997).
16
Comparisons with other measures of emotional intelligence indicated that the EQ-i
correlates only minimally with the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (r =
.21) but more significantly with another self-report measure of EI, the Self Report Emotional
Intelligence Test (Schutte et al., 1998). Tests of incremental validity of the EQ-i found that
when personality and intelligence (IQ) were held constant, EI as measured by the EQ-i was
still predictive of alcohol use (Brackett & Mayer, 2003).
2.2.3. Goleman: A Mixed Model of Emotional Intelligence
Daniel Goleman, a psychologist and science writer who has previously written on
brain and behavior research for the New York Times, discovered the work of Salovey and
Mayer in the 1990's. Inspired by their findings, he began to conduct his own research in the
area and eventually wrote Emotional Intelligence (1995), the landmark book which
familiarized both the public and private sectors with the idea of EI. Goleman's model outlines
four main EI constructs. The first, self-awareness, is the ability to read one's emotions and
recognize their impact while using gut feelings to guide decisions. Self-management, the
second construct, involves controlling one's emotions and impulses and adapting to changing
circumstances. The third construct, social awareness, includes the ability to sense,
understand, and react to other's emotions while comprehending social networks. Finally,
relationship management, the fourth construct, entails the ability to inspire, influence, and
develop others while managing conflict (Goleman, 1998).
Goleman includes a set of emotional competencies within each construct of EI.
Emotional competencies are not innate talents, but rather learned capabilities that must be
worked on and developed to achieve outstanding performance. Goleman posits that
individuals are born with a general EI that determines their potential for learning emotional
competencies. The organization of the competencies under the various constructs is not
random; they appear in synergistic clusters or groupings that support and facilitate each other
Details
- Pages
- Type of Edition
- Erstausgabe
- Year
- 2015
- ISBN (PDF)
- 9783954899265
- ISBN (Softcover)
- 9783954894260
- File size
- 425 KB
- Language
- English
- Publication date
- 2015 (May)
- Keywords
- Emotional Intelligence English Reading Comprehension Ability Bar-On EQ-i Iranian EFL learners Gender
