AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ABILITY MODEL

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF

ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERS AND ENTREPRENEURS

by

Jim A. McCleskey

JANET SALMONS, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

GARY ROBINSON, PhD, Committee Member

PATRICIA GARCIA, PhD, Committee Member

Barbara Butts Williams, PhD, Dean, School of Business and Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

July, 2015
 ProQuest Number: 3722219

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 3722219

Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 Jim A. McCleskey, 2015
 Abstract

Leadership is an important aspect of individual and organizational success. In short,

leadership matters, however, the organizational environment encountered by leaders is

undergoing dynamic changes. New leaders will require skills that allow them to deal

with the issues of increased diversity, heterogeneous work teams, high levels of

ambiguity, and the need for more personalized approaches. The skills that modern leaders

require may be exactly those related to emotional intelligence (EI). The purpose of this

quantitative non-experimental, research study was to examine the relationship between

the EI and leadership practices in a sample of 302 organizational leaders. The

independent variable is EI while the dependent variable is leadership practices as defined

by Kouzes and Posner. Pearson correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis are

conducted to address the research questions and hypotheses. This study provides support

for the existence of a relationship between a leaders ability to understand and manage

emotions and the leaders ability to engage in effective leadership practices. This

relationship exists after controlling for the effect of the leaders age, gender, personality,

and years of leadership experience.

 Dedication

This work is dedicated to my wife and three sons. To my wife Yvonne, you supported

my goals in this and in every area of my life for the past 20 years. Thank you! To my sons

Logan, Shane, and Reilly, you are my proudest accomplishments. As you mature into young

men, please remember the examples of emotional intelligence and leadership that I tried to set

for you. Education is a journey and not a destination, but this degree has been a difficult and

demanding trial for all of us. We all made sacrifices along the way and I celebrate its completion

with each of you.

iii
 Acknowledgments

A project of this magnitude is never completed by one person alone with no help or

support. Therefore I gratefully acknowledge those who participated in and supported this effort.

I am grateful to God for providing me His strength and blessing on my life. I recognize and

appreciate the hard work of Dr. Tiffany Green, my first mentor, Dr. Janet Salmons, my last

mentor, and Drs. Gary Robinson and Patricia Garcia from my committee. I also acknowledge

the help and support of the entire faculty and administration at Capella University. In addition, I

recognize the members of The Tribe- my classmates and friends at Capella for their continued

support and encouragement throughput this process. I also wish to thank a handful of good

friends and family who kept up the support and belief in this journey even when I doubted

myself. Your words of encouragement carried me over many rough spots. Thank you to

Bronson, Bill, John, and Joel. I also appreciate the staff at Starbucks #376 where I ferretted

away many hours writing and revising manuscripts and consuming copious amounts of coffee.

In case I missed anyone, thanks to everyone else who ever supported me in prayer, thought,

word, or deed. Lastly, thank you Mom and Dad. I miss you and I hope you can see this and that

youre proud of me.

iv
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgments iv

List of Tables ix

List of Figures x

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM 1

Background of the Study 3

Leadership Practices 5

Emotional Intelligence 6

Three Stream so EI Research 10

Statement of the Problem 12

Purpose of the Study 13

Rationale 14

EI and Leadership Practices 14

Need for Greater Psychometric Rigor 20

Research Questions 21

Significance of the Study 22

Definition of the Terms 23

Assumptions and Limitations 25

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework of the Study 27

Organization of the Remainder of the Study 27

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 29

Emotion in Organizations 29

Affective Events Theory (AET) and the study of affect 42

v
 Emotional Labor 46

Intelligence 51

Multiple Intelligences 52

Social Intelligence 55

Emotional Intelligence 60

The Definitions of EI 61

The Models of EI 64

Three Streams of Research 67

Measures of Emotional Intelligence 69

SOAM test instruments 69

Recent studies utilizing the MSCEIT 70

Criticisms of the MSCEIT 73

Emotion recognition task measures 75

Situational judgment tests (SJTs) 77

STAM test instruments 81

STMM test instruments 83

Leadership 85

Measures of leadership 88

MLQ and MLQ-Form 5x 88

Leadership practices inventory (LPI) 88

Kouzes and Posners five practices 88

Emotional intelligence and leadership 90

EI and leadership effectiveness 91

vi
 Summary 101

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 102

Significance 103

Research Design 104

Sample 107

Instrumentation, Measures, and Validity 108

Data Collection 111

Data Analysis 112

Ethical Considerations 115

Summary 116

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS 117

Introduction 117

Description of the Population and Sample 119

Descriptive Statistics of Scores of Measures of EI and Leadership Practices 125

Details of the Analysis and Results 125

Normality Testing of the Data of Study Variables 126

Cronbachs Alpha Measure of Internal Consistency Analysis 137

Pearson Correlation Results of Correlation between EI and Leadership Practices 140

Regression Results of Effect of EI on Leadership Practices 148

Conclusion 159

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 161

Introduction 161

Summary of the Results 161

vii
 Purpose and Research Questions 161

Significance of the Study 163

Literature Review 164

Methodology of the Study 168

The Results 170

Discussion of the Results 173

Discussion of the Previous EI and LPI Research 175

Implications of the Study Results 176

Practitioner Implications 176

Scholar Implications 179

Limitations 180

Same Source Bias 181

Additional Limitations 181

Failure to Control for Cognitive Ability 182

Recommendations for Further Research 183

New Sample Populations 183

The Measurement of Cognitive Ability 184

Experimental Designs Featuring Training Interventions 186

A Three Streams Approach to the Question 186

EI and Gender Differences 187

Conclusion 188

REFERENCES 191

APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK 241

viii
 List of Tables

Table 1. Previous Studies on EI and Leadership Practices 17

Table 2. Recent studies utilizing the MSCEIT v2.0 instrument to measure SOAM EI 72

Table 3. Instruments Used to Measure the SOAM of EI 80

Table 4. Instruments Used to Measure the STAM of EI 84

Table 5. Instruments Used to Measure the STMM of EI 85

Table 6. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (SOAM of EI) 93

Table 7. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STAM of EI) 94

Table 8. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STMM of EI) 97

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics of Age and Leadership Experience 123

Table 10. Frequency and Percentage Summaries of Demographic Information 124

Table 11. Descriptive Statistics of Personality Characteristics 124

Table 12. Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables 125

Table 13. Results of Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests of Normality 127

Table 14. Cronbachs alpha measures of internal reliabilities 139

Table 15. Split-half reliability coefficients for MSCEIT measure of EI 140

Table 16. Pearson Correlation Results between EI and Leadership Practices 143

Table 17. Regression results of effects of EI branch scores on leadership practices 151

Table 18. Regression results of effects of EI area scores on leadership practices 155

Table 19. Regression Results of Effects of Total EI Score on Leadership Practices 158

ix
 List of Figures

Figure 1. Relationship between the variables 13

Figure 2. Histogram of perceiving emotions branch 128

Figure 3. Histogram of using emotions branch 128

Figure 4. Histogram of understanding emotions branch 129

Figure 5. Histogram of managing emotions branch 129

Figure 6. Histogram of experiential area score 130

Figure 7. Histogram of strategic area score 130

Figure 8. Histogram of total EI score 131

Figure 9. Histogram of modelling the way 131

Figure 10. Histogram of inspiring a shared vision 132

Figure 11. Histogram of challenging the process 132

Figure 12. Histogram of enabling others to act 133

Figure 13. Histogram of encouraging the heart 133

Figure 14. Histogram of LPI total 134

Figure 15. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for perceiving 135

Figure 16. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for using 135

Figure 17. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for understanding 136

Figure 18. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for managing 136

Figure 19. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for strategic area score 137

Figure 20. Correlations between Independent Variables and Leadership Practices 147

x
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

Leadership is an important aspect of individual and organizational success. In short,

leadership matters (Humphrey, 2014, p. 17), however, the organizational environment

encountered by leaders is undergoing dynamic changes. The impact of globalization, increased

diversity of various kinds, and new work arrangement such as flexible scheduling and tele

working applications have all combined to substantially increase the challenge faced by leaders

at every level. This results in the need for organizational leaders with a new set of skills. One of

the most compelling changes in the workplace is dramatically increased diversity.

In one example Burns, Barton, and Kerby (2012) noted that the workplace is becoming

increasingly diverse. The workforce minority composition reached 36% in 2012 and by 2050 the

US will no longer have an ethnic majority group at all. The representation of women in the

workplace reached 47% in 2012 and is projected to 53.2% by 2020. Gay and transgendered

adults comprised 6.3% of the workplace in 2012 and this number is projected to increase as well.

People with disabilities constituted 3.6% of the work force and flexible work arrangements along

with improved assistance technology mean this number will increase as well. Along with these

developments, as the baby boomers age, medical technology and wellness efforts make it

possible for older workers to stay employed longer and they prefer to do so (Burns et al., 2012).

In addition to these trends, Solari (2012) argued that globalization, increased levels of ambiguity,

and the move toward greater levels of personalization in the workplace affected organizational

leaders as well.

Globalization created the need for increased sensibilities for political and cultural issues.

Further, higher levels of ambiguity in the workplace force leaders to abandon standardized

approaches in favor of greater personalization. Age diversity also contributes to greater

1
ambiguity with five generations now employed in the organization simultaneously. New

techniques in teamwork and crowdsourcing are pushing aside the old reliance on executive

power centralization. Despite these developments, many organizations continue to rely on

organizational forms and techniques that are primarily rooted in models and concepts that

originated in scientific management and engineering approaches (Solari, 2012). New leaders

will require skills that allow them to deal with these issues of increased diversity, heterogeneous

work teams, high levels of ambiguity, and the need for more personalized approaches. The skills

that modern leaders require may be exactly those related to emotional intelligence (EI).

EI is the ability to monitor ones own and others feelings and emotions, to discriminate

among them and to use this information to guide ones thinking and actions (Salovey & Mayer,

1990, p. 190). EI comprises a four-branch model that includes perceiving emotions, using

emotions, understanding emotions, and managing emotions (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 1997).

An increasing body of literature links EI to effective organizational performance (for a review

see OBoyle et al., 2011).

Effective leaders must contribute to positive organizational outcomes and EI has been

found to predict leader emergence, behavior, and effectiveness (Walter, Cole, & Humphrey,

2011). Leadership matters for organizational success (Humphrey, 2014). Examining studies of

leadership effectiveness, Humphrey found that leadership behaviors, skills, and likeability are

important determinants of group effectiveness over and above the presence of environmental and

organizational factors that reduce leader effectiveness. Accordingly, understanding the specific

abilities and skills that contribute to effectiveness has practical implications for leader selection,

training, development, and succession (Humphrey, 2014).

2
 In the past, leadership scholars attempted to discover the antecedent attributes of effective

leaders. This became known as the great man theory and later evolved into the trait theory of

leadership (Glynn & De Jordy, 2010). The trait theory of leadership informed scholarship in the

field until the mid-20th century. Antonakis, Day, and Schyns (2012) argued that the study of

individual differences for leadership (traits) declined sharply in the mid-20th century due to the

misinterpretation of several key reviews (Mann, 1959; Stodgill, 1948). Both studies were widely

interpreted as condemnations of trait theory. Beginning in the 1980s, a new line of scholarship

evolved to reevaluate the importance of leader traits and behaviors (Antonakis et al., 2012;

Zaccaro, 2007). This new line of scholarship reexamined previous studies (Lord, de Vader, &

Alliger, 1986) or examined the role of certain individual characteristics that do matter for

leadership (Judge, Colbert, & Illies, 2004; Van Rooy & Viswesveran, 2004). One of the

individual person-level characteristics that matter for leadership is emotional intelligence (EI),

Before going into detail about EI, I provide a closer examination of the study of individual

leadership traits.

Background of the Study

In 1948, Stogdill conducted a review that included more than one hundred studies

attempting to identify relevant traits of leaders. Stodgill concluded that although some traits were

common to leadership, it might be more appropriate for leadership to "be considered in terms of

the interaction of variables which are in constant flux and change" (p. 64). Stodgills findings

were widely interpreted as a condemnation of trait theory. Mann (1959) examined 103 different

studies concerning the relationship between various aspects of personality and leadership.

These personality characteristics included intelligence, adjustment, extraversion, dominance,

3
masculinity, conservatism, and interpersonal sensitivity (Mann, 1959). Interestingly despite the

fact that a number of significant relationships were noted in Manns study, the author chose to

emphasize certain negative aspects of the results. These two articles (Mann, 1959; Stodgill,

1948) influenced the field of leadership powerfully over the years as each was cited extensively

and often misunderstood. For example, both looked at leadership emergence but were often

cited as evidence in the field of leadership effectiveness (Landy, 1985; Muchinsky, 1983)

Stodgill (1948) and Mann (1959) supported the incorrect conclusion that there were no

"measurable individual differences that could predict leader outcomes" (Antonakis et al., 2012,

p. 644). This conception largely dominated the field of leadership for three decades. In a special

edition of The Leadership Quarterly, Antonakis et al. (2012) argued that during the 50s, 60s and

70s many scholars and even some textbooks began to declare that the study of individual

differences for leadership simply did not matter (for a review, see Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader,

2004). Responding to these and other issues, Lord et al. (1986) reanalyzed the data from both

Stodgill (1948) and Mann (1959). Lord et al. (1986) concluded that these articles were widely

misinterpreted and that when reanalyzed using more sophisticated statistical methods, a new

story emerged. Subsequent findings and developments in the study of leadership began

questioning these assertions.

Later studies began to erode this opinion by identifying individual person-level

characteristics that do matter for leadership such as intelligence (Judge et al., 2004) and

emotional intelligence (Van Roy & Viswesveran, 2004). Additionally, Jones and Olken (2005)

studied 50 years of economic data at the country level and compared leadership changes to

economic success at the country level. The results strongly suggested that leaders matter. The

authors concluded that leaders do matter, and they matter to something as significant as national

4
economic growth (p. 862). Thanks to the results of these scholars, the study of leadership and

individual differences is at the cusp of a renaissance (Antonakis et al., 2012, p. 643). Or as

one author described it, leadership scholarship has reached a new tipping point (Zaccaro, 2012,

p. 718). In keeping with the idea that individual differences affect leadership, Kouzes and

Posner (2012) raised serious concerns about the need to increase leader competency, including

social emotional skills such as emotional intelligence (EI) and leadership skills in order to lead

organizations more effectively.

Leadership Practices

Leadership is defined according to the various definitions offered by Kouzes and Posner

(2012) who proposed the idea that leaders are everywhere and leadership is about relationship,

credibility, and what you do every day (Kouzes & Posner, 2012, p. 329). Kouzes and Posner

identified five practices of effective leaders including modeling the way, inspiring a shared

vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart. Each

individual practice includes two factors that further describe the behaviors that distinguish

effective leadership. Model the way includes finding ones voice, and setting the example.

Inspire a shared vision includes: envisioning the future, and enlisting others. Challenge the

process includes searching for opportunities, and experimenting and taking risks. Enable

others to act includes fostering collaboration, and strengthening others. Encourage the heart

includes recognizing contributions, and celebrating the values and victories (Alston, 2009).

Kouzes and Posner (2002) identified specific studies demonstrating the previous research on the

five practices and effective leadership. These included studies on motivation and employee

commitment (McNeese-Smith, 1999; Lowe, 2000), effectiveness and credibility of school

principals and superintendents (Larson 1992, Sweeney, 2000), high and low-performing schools

5
(Floyd, 1999; Knab, 1998), effective college presidents (Long, 1994), college presidents

(Burkhard, 1999), academic deans impact on department chairperson satisfaction (Dauffenbach,

1995; Xu, 1991), college coaches (Coffman, 1999), the impact of an academic collegiate

leadership development program (Pugh, 2000, Mendez-Grant, 2001), and leader self-esteem

(Endress, 2000). The dependent variables in these studies represented the wide range of

leadership effectiveness linked to the five practices of the LPI. Therefore, this study utilized the

LPI as a measure of leadership effectiveness. The other major construct of interest addressed in

this study was EI.

Emotional Intelligence

Salovey and Mayer (1990) first published a framework for the construct called Emotional

Intelligence (EI). Mayer and his colleagues also published the first research study to apply the

construct to a specific research question (Mayer, Salovey, & Di Paolo, 1990). However, neither

the concept of EI nor the term was new. Some early intelligence researchers knew that

intelligence was more than the mental abilities represented in the standard intelligence tests of

the day (Boring, 1923; Riggio, 2002). In 1983, seven years before Salovey and Mayers article,

Gardner (1983) argued that individuals possessed at least seven distinct intelligences including

an interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. Sternberg (1985) advocated for the existence of

multiple domains of intelligence including fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and

practical intelligence. Later, EI achieved popular notoriety when Goleman (1995) wrote the

bestseller Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ and citing the prior work of

Salovey and Mayer (1990). Golemans work landed EI (also called EQ in the early days) on the

cover of Time Magazine (Gibbs & Epperson, 1995).

6
 This study examines the relationship between EI and specific leadership practices of

organizational and entrepreneurial leaders. EI is defined as the ability to perceive accurately,

appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate

thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate

emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth (Mayer, Roberts, & Barsade, 2008, p.

511). EI in particular has become the subject of considerable interest to scholars and

practitioners alike as an important antecedent to a variety of leadership and organizational

outcomes. Considerable interest in the study of individual differences in general and (EI)

specifically exists in the field of leadership.

The study of individual differences or traits in the leadership field has come full circle

and EI has been identified as a key individual difference in the field of leadership. George

(2000) argued that leadership is an emotion- laden process (p. 1046) and more recently when

explaining their multi-level view of emotion and leadership, Ashkanasy and Humphrey (2011)

argued that leaders must utilize emotions at all levels. The work of Ashkanasy and Humphrey

(2011) findings harmonized with the general idea that emotions are an important aspect of the

modern workplace (Barsade, Brief, & Spataro, 2003). The key premise involves the need for

organizational leaders to motivate employees using emotional responses (Dasborough, 2006;

Humphrey 2002). Leading researchers describe this concept as EI. Caruso, Mayer, and Salovey

(2002) demonstrated theoretically how EI abilities encompass the skills needed by todays

leaders.

Caruso et al. (2002) argued that leaders with higher levels of emotional self-awareness

achieve higher levels of organizational performance. Citing the work of Church (1997) who

studied high performing (N=134) and average performing managers (N=470), the authors argued

7
that high performing managers demonstrated higher levels of self-awareness than their average

counter-parts based on the congruence between self and observer ratings. Self-awareness was

related to greater performance and self-monitoring behaviors contributed to self-awareness

(Caruso et al., 2002). Sheldon, Dunning, and Ames (2014) examined self-awareness of EI skills

in a sample of 364 graduate students (across 3 studies) and found that those with the highest EI

scores as measured using the MSCEITv2.0 were also the most aware of their skills although

some evidence of the Dunning-Kruger effect surfaced as well, meaning that while those low in

EI overestimated their ability, some of those high in EI also underestimated their ability (Sheldon

et al., 2014). These studies demonstrated the value of the perceiving emotions branch of EI.

Caruso et al. (2002) also considered the effect of the using emotions branch of EI.

Leaders use emotions in several specific ways. These include multiple perspective

taking, emotion contagion, positive affect in teams, and symbolic management (Caruso et al.,

2002). Gregory, Moates, and Gregory (2011) examined perspective taking in a sample of 106

supervisor/supervisee dyads in a healthcare organization. Their results suggested that leaders

should improve their perspective taking with their followers in order to increase their

transformational behaviors (Gregory et al., 2011). Increased levels of organizational diversity

like those predicted by Burns et al. (2012) could be effectively mitigated my engaging in

multiple perspective taking. Emotion contagion involves the spreading of an emotion throughout

a work group (Barsade & Gibson, 1998; Barsade, 2002). In a study of 94 undergraduate students

in a 2x2 experimental design using confederates, Barsade found that the use emotion contagion

of positive affect in teams led to increased cooperation, decreased conflict, and increased

perceived task performance (2002). The implication for leaders is that the deliberate creation of

positive affect through emotion contagion creates positive organizational outcomes. Symbolic

8
management involves the use of stories, rituals, myths, and fables to motivate followers. Caruso

et al. (2002) also considered the effect of the understanding emotions branch of EI.

Caruso et al. (2002) argue that understanding emotions involves recognizing relationships

between emotions, determining emotional meanings, understanding complex feelings, and

recognizing the changing states of emotions. This EI skill provides leaders with the information

on what makes people tick (p. 64). This leads to better communication between leaders and

followers. In a study of 622 managers with more than 10 years of experience, Johnson (2013)

found significant relationships between a number of EI competencies and skills and several

dimensions of leader-follower dyadic relationship. This study adds support to the idea that

improved communication and stronger relational bonds between leaders and followers result

from higher EI. Caruso et al. (2002) also considered the effect of the managing emotions branch

of EI.

Managing emotions effectively involves handing stress effectively, problem solving, and

more effective coping strategies (Caruso et al., 2002). Batool (2013) examined EI and various

aspects of effective leadership in a sample of 50 organizational leaders drawn from various

industries and found a relationship between stress and emotion regulation that contributed to

leadership performance. Schlaerth, Ensari, and Christian (2013) meta-analyzed 20 studies

covering 5,175 participants and discovered that conflict management and EI were related for

both leaders and followers. The relationship was actually stronger for followers prompting the

authors to offer the explanation that conflict management requires higher skill levels for

followers than managers. Saklofske, Austin, Galloway, and Davidson (2007) studied the

relationship between EI and coping in Canadian university students (N=364). The study

included an examination of personality factors and health locus of control as well. The authors

9
found that EI, coping, and health were intercorrelated and a superordinate Coping/EI factor

emerged under factor analysis (Saklofske et al., 2007, p. 491). A later study by Saklofske,

Austin, Mastoras, Beaton, and Osborne (2012) demonstrated a relationship between trait EI and

coping style with stress performance. Emotion regulation in particular emerged as a relevant EI

dimension (Saklofske et al., 2012). In another example, EI also emerged as a boundary

condition with regard to coping. In two studies involving 159 undergraduate and 293 middle

school students, MacCann, Fogarty, Zeidner, and Roberts (2011) demonstrated that coping skills

mediated the relationship between EI and academic performance using a variety of EI

instruments including the MSCEIT. These studies demonstrated the relationship between

aspects of the managing emotions branch and relevant organizational outcomes effective leaders

may generate. AS noted above, all four branches of EI correlate with important skills needed for

effective management of todays organizations. Since 1990, the study of EI has progressed

along three distinct streams of research.

Three Streams of EI Research

Ashkanasy and Daus (2005) categorized EI research into three streams of research. The

first stream is sometimes referred to as the Stream One Ability Model or SOAM (McCleskey,

2015). The SOAM includes studies based on the ability model and using ability based measures.

This stream is based on the original characterization of EI as a form of intelligence and

consisting of four distinct branches (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Later, Mayer et al. defined EI as,

the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or

generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional

knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth

(Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). Ability based test instruments characterize the SOAM. Additional

10
detail about these instruments is provided later in this manuscript. The second stream of EI

research is sometimes called the Stream Two Ability Model or STAM (McCleskey, 2015).

The STAM of EI research includes studies that conceptualize EI based on the ability

model, but use test instruments utilizing self-report of observer reporting rather than instruments

designed to test specific abilities. Stream three includes studies based on different conceptions

of EI and includes both mixed model and trait EI approaches. This stream is sometimes called

the Stream Three Mixed Models or STMM (McCleskey, 2015). STAM and STMM models have

shown considerable overlap with personality measures in some instances. This difference and

others led Cherniss (2010b) to argue that SOAM and STAM EI be called Emotional Intelligence

while STMM models that addressed emotional and social competencies and skills (which

overlapped significantly with personality) be called Emotional and Social Competence (ESC)

instead in an effort to clarify the distinctions between these two distinct constructs. Antonakis,

Ashkanasy, and Dasborough (2009) argued that the SOAM approach holds the most promise for

the future direction of EI. Antonakis also specifically called for holding the effects of

personality and other factors (i.e. age, gender, and leadership experience) constant when

examining the incremental effects of SOAM EI in order to clearly delineate between the effects

of these other individual differences and the effects of EI. In keeping with the recommendations

of these and other scholars (Antonakis & Dietz, 2011; Harms & Cred, 2010; Matthews, Zeidner,

& Roberts, 2012; OBoyle et al., 2011) this study will hold personality constant (based on the

FFM model of personality) while examining the incremental effects of EI on leadership

practices.

EI has been studied in the context of various leadership roles. For example, Hui-Wen,

Mu-Shang, and Nelson (2010) explored EI and leadership styles of school leaders. The results

11
showed that high EI school leaders improved positive teacher attitude and students' academic

performances. These findings supported the work of previous studies on school leadership

(Heiken, 2007). Jin, Seo, and Shapiro (2008) also examined the relationship between EI and

transformational leadership in a sample of MBA students and found support for the relationship.

Leban and Zulauf (2004) examined EI and a variety of leadership behaviors and found support

for several positive organizational outcomes in a small sample of Project Managers.

Although the relationship between EI and effective leadership continues to grow in the

literature, few studies to date have explored the links between these two constructs based on

SOAM measures and maintaining sufficient psychometric and design rigor. Furthermore, gaps

in the literature still exist relating to the relationship between EI and organizational leadership

practices as measured by the SOAM This study examined the SOAM approach to EI, leadership

practices, and the links between the two constructs while holding constant the effects of age,

gender, personality, and leadership experience. The problem being addressed is ineffective

practices by organizational and entrepreneurial leaders.

Statement of the Problem

Despite the fact that a large amount of research exists on leadership and EI separately, a

relative paucity of studies exist examining EI and leadership effectiveness. In addition to the

small number of studies, a number of scholars recommend the SOAM of EI as the preferred

model of the construct (Antonakis & Dietz, 2010; Matthews et al., 2012) and even fewer studies

took the SOAM approach (Byron, 2007). Finally authors in the field argued for greater

psychometric rigor in the form of controlling for known variables that impact the independent

variable, larger sample sizes, and utilizing samples from organizational settings rather than

12
student samples in academic settings (Walter et al., 2011). Based on those recommendations,

this study helps fill a gap in the extant literature by examining the relationship between effective

leadership practices and EI using an ability measure of EI and controlling for the effects of age,

gender, personality, and leadership experience. This study was conducted for a specific purpose.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this research study is to examine the relationship between the SOAM of

EI and leadership practices in order to refine the existing knowledge of EI and leadership and to

contribute to a more robust understanding of the antecedents of effective leadership. In this

study, EI is defined as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the

ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand

emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional

and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., p. 511). Leadership practices is the dependent variable

and consists of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling

others to act, and encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). The following diagram

depicts the relationship among the variables.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Emotional Intelligence Leadership Practices

Perceiving Emotions Modeling the way

Using Emotions Inspiring a vision
Understanding Emotions Challenging the process
Managing Emotions Enabling others to act
Encouraging the heart

Figure 1. Relationship between the Variables

13
 Rationale

This study follows the previous literature examining EI and leadership practices. Caruso,

Salovey, and Mayer (2003) described the connection between EI and leadership. The authors

argued that effective leaders need to be able to identify emotions accurately, must use emotions

to motivate others and engage in multiple perspective taking, invoke the use of emotion through

symbolic management, understand emotion in order to understand employee motivation and

point of view, regulate and manage their own emotions in order to avoid stress and poor

decision-making, and utilize emotions to create and enhance effective working relationships

(Caruso et al., 2002). Subsequent research literature has employed a variety of measures and

designs in order to validate these early claims.

EI and Leadership Practices

Previous studies have examined this relationship from the Stream Two Ability Model

(STAM) perspective (Awadzi Calloway, 2010; Kautzman, 2011; Stratton, 2011) as well as the

Stream Three Mixed-Model (STMM) perspective (Cutbirth, 2010; Jones, 2012; Osborne, 2012).

However, the SOAM is the preferred model for this study and a relative paucity of studies exist

in this area. For example, Purkable (2003) examined EI (using the MSCEIT), leadership style,

and coping mechanisms of executives in a sample of 50 high level organizational leaders. The

results showed a correlation between total EI and modeling the way as well as a correlation

between managing emotions and both modeling the way and encouraging the heart. Additional

relationships with coping were also uncovered. Hall (2007) followed Purkables work and also

examined EI, leadership practices, and coping in a sample of 65 public school principals.

However in contrast to Purkables findings, Hall found a negative non-significant relationship

between total EI and leadership practices as well as significant negative correlations between

14
perceiving emotions and both enabling others to act and the total LPI score. The only positive

significant relationship involved understanding emotion and modeling the way. These results

failed to confirm Purkables findings. In 2008, Packard picked up the research thread and once

again examined EI, leadership practices, and coping in a sample of 55 female entrepreneurs.

Experiential EI (one of the two area scores for the MSCEIT comprised of both perceiving

emotions and using emotions) correlated with enabling others to act and the total LPI score.

Additionally, the strategic EI score (combination of understanding and managing emotions)

correlated negatively with encouraging others to act (Packard, 2008). Once again, these results

failed to confirm the work of either Purkable (2003) or Hall (2007). While it is clear that the

work on EI, leadership practices, and coping needs additional research, perhaps other lines of

inquiry fared better.

In 2008, Diaz examined EI and leadership practices in a sample of 60 school nurses. The

subjects underwent a leadership training module and their leadership was tested using the LPI

and the Grossman and Valiga Leadership Characteristics Skills Assessment (GVLA) while their

EI was tested using the MSCEIT. Tests were administered before and after the leadership

training and a control group were also tested without being given the training intervention.

Interestingly, this study attempted to show that leadership training would increase EI and

leadership practices between time one and time two, rather than showing that EI relates to

leadership practices (Diaz, 2008). This strange decision on the author's part is hard to understand

unless the leadership intervention was specifically designed to improve an emotional skill that

was not clear from the research. The results showed no significant improvement in EI as a result

of the training intervention (Diaz, 2008).

15
 Childers (2009) examined the relationship between EI and leadership practices in a

sample of seven educational leaders and their subordinates. The subordinates completed the LPI

Observer Instrument (LPIO). Childers found no relationship between total EI and total LPIO

however, relationships were discovered between perceiving emotions and both encouraging the

heart and modeling the way. Additionally, Childers discovered relationships between

understanding emotions an overall LPIO, inspiring a shared vision, encouraging the heart, and

modeling the way. Relationships also existed between managing emotions and overall LPIO,

inspiring a shared vision, encouraging the heart, and modeling the way. While these results were

encouraging, this study utilizes a very small (N=7) sample of organizational leaders and in

contrast to the previous studies, utilizes the LPIO rather than the LPI Self. One additional recent

study examined EI and leadership practices but applied a different measure of SOAM EI.

Dillon (2013) examined EI using the Trait Mood Meta Scale (TMMS). The TMMS is an

ability test that precedes the MEIS and MSCEIT and was developed as a more limited construct

measure by the same authors (Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey, & Palfai, 1995). The TMMS

measures three factors including attention to feelings, clarity of feelings, and mood repair

(Salovey et al., 1995). In a sample of 99 organizational leaders, Dillon (2013) found a

correlation between clarity of feelings and mood repair with the total LPI score. All of the

studies discussed above suffer from several important psychometric weaknesses. Table 1

summarizes the previous research results examining the relationship between EI and leadership

practices as measured using the Kouzes and Posner Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI).

16
Table 1. Previous Studies on EI and Leadership Practices

Other
Author Date EI Measure Stream Subscale Relationships Result
Measures
Condren 2002 EIQ STAM LPI Supported relationship Support for
(Jerabek, (Kouzes & between total EI and total relationship between
1998) Posner, leadership practices score EI and leadership
2001) but mediated by gender
(proprietary
instrument)
Purkable 2003 MSCEITv2.0 SOAM LPI Support for a relationship Support for subscale
(Mayer, (Kouzes & between total EI and relationships between
Salovey, & Posner, modeling the way, total EI EI and leadership
Caruso, 2001), and emotional discharge, the practices, and EI and
2002) CRI using emotions branch and Coping, no gender
(Moos, modeling the way and the differences noted,
1993) emotion regulation branch only total EI score
and modeling the way, the relationship was with
emotion regulation branch modeling the way
and encouraging the heart,
using emotions branch and
emotional discharge,
understanding emotions
branch and cognitive
avoidance as well as
emotional discharge, emotion
regulation branch and
problem solving as well as
logical analysis

Cavins 2005 EQ-I (Bar- STMM S-LPI Modeling the Way, Enabling Supported the
ON, 1997) (Kouzes & Others to Act, and Inspiring a relationship between
Posner, Shared Vision correlated EI and 3/5 leadership
2002), most frequently with the ESI practices
proprietary construct
360-
degree
assessment
Baumann 2006 ECI STAM LPI Found support for a Found support for a
(Boyatzis & (Kouzes & relationship between total EI relationship between
Goleman, Posner, and all 5 leadership practices total EI and all 5
2001) 2001) leadership practices
Danehy 2006 EIA-MR STMM LPIO Moderate relationship Strong support for EI
(Bradberry & (Kouzes & between self and observer relationship with
Greaves, Posner, ratings, relationship between leadership practices
2004) 2003) EI and leadership practices, among coaches, some
no relationship between other gender differences
perceptions of EI and self- found
perception of EI

Tanomsingh 2006 ECI STAM S-LPI Support for relationship Support found for
(Boyatzis & (Kouzes & between total EI and both self and other
Goleman, Posner, leadership practices reports with some
2001) 2002) gender differences

17
Table 1 (continued). Previous Studies on EI and Leadership Practices

Other
Author Date EI Measure Stream Subscale Relationships Result
Measures
Hall 2007 MSCEITv2.0 SOAM LPI Negative relationship EI and Coping combined
(Mayer, (Kouzes between total EI and total predict leadership
Salovey, & & LPI, support for relationship effectiveness as defined by
Caruso, Posner, between Coping & EI with leadership practices
2002) 2001), Model the Way, Inspire a
MCRI Shared Vision, Challenge the
(Moos, Process
2003)
Heiken 2007 ECI STAM LPI Support for moderate Considered the relationship
(Boyatzis & (Kouzes relationship between EI and between self and observer
Goleman, & Leadership Practices scores, found moderate
2001) Posner, relationship between EI and
2001) Leadership practices, very
small sample size

Diaz 2008 MSCEITv2.0 SOAM LPI Training intervention Lack of increase in measured
(Mayer, (Kouzes affected leadership practices EI after training intervention
Salovey, & & but did not affect EI makes sense assuming ability
Caruso, Posner, measured model vs. competence model
2002) 2001) measure

Packard 2008 MSCEITv2.0 SOAM LPI Support for a relationship While the relationship
(Mayer, (Kouzes between Experiential EI between EI and leadership
Salovey, & & subscale and three leadership practices was supported for
Caruso, Posner, practices including enabling some subscales, previous
2002) 2001), others, challenging the results involving coping
MCRI process, and encouraging the response could not be
(Moos, heart duplicated
2003)
Alston 2009 SSEIT STAM LPI The appraisal of emotion in One dimension of EI
(Schutte et (Kouzes self or others related to total measured in the SSEIT relates
al, 1998) & LPI score to Leadership Practices in
Posner, total
2001)
Childers 2009 MSCEITv2.0 SOAM LPIO No relationship for total EI Strong support for a
(Mayer, (Kouzes and total LPIO, support for relationship between the
Salovey, & & relationship in perceiving SOAM of EI and Leadership
Caruso, Posner, emotions and Enable Others Practices
2002) 2003) to Act and Encourage the
Heart; support for
relationship in Understanding
Emotions and the total LPI,
as well as branch scores for
Inspire a Shared Vision,
Encourage the Heart, and
Model the Way; support for
relationship in Managing
Emotions and the total LPI

18
Table 1 (continued). Previous Studies on EI and Leadership Practices

EI Other
Author Date Stream Subscale Relationships Result
Measure Measures
Helweg 2009 EQ-I STMM LPI Some support for EQ-1 scales Supported moderate
(Bar-ON, (Kouzes & but not for total EI, some relationships between EI
1997) Posner, differences by years of and IEC, found differences
2001); experience but no differences by years of experience and
MLQ by gender gender
(Bass &
Avolio,
1990); IEC
(Phipps &
Claxton,
1997)
Huang 2009 SSEIT STAM S-LPI Strong support for relationship Relationship between EI
(Schutte (Kouzes & between total EI and total and Leadership holds even
et al, Posner, Leadership practices among a after examining a variety of
1998) 2005) group of Chinese students demographic factors
Jordan 2009 EQ-I STMM LPI Support for relationship Overall support for
(Bar-ON, (Kouzes & between total EI scores and all relationship between
1997) Posner, five leadership practices female middle managers EI
2001) and leadership practices
and support for the efficacy
of training for EI in
organizations
Stang 2009 TEIQue- STMM S-LPI Support for a relationship While this study showed a
SF (Kouzes & between subscales of trait EI relationship between trait
(Petrides Posner, including well-being, EI and leadership practices
& 2002) emotionality, and sociability among a sample of student
Furnham, with four of the five leadership leaders, the study revealed
2001) practices including inspiring a no impact from training
shared vision, modeling the interventions
way, challenging the process,
and encouraging the heart
Awadzi 2010 WLEIS STAM LPI Total EI related to LPI, Use of Provides good support for a
Calloway (Wong & (Kouzes & Emotion (UOE) related to relationship between
Law, Posner, Inspire a Shared Vision, UOE Stream Two Ability Model
2002) 2001), also relates with Challenge the (STAM) EI and Leadership
GPSS Process, Enable Others to Act, Practices
(Schwarzer and Encourage the Heart
&
Jerusalem,
1995)
Cutbirth 2010 SECLB STMM SECLB Supported relationship between Supported relationship
(Cutbirth, (Cutbirth, EI and leadership behaviors on between EI and Leadership
2010) - 2010) total and branch scores Practices but no link to
based on based on student performance
Bar-On LPI outcomes
model

19
Table 1 (continued). Previous Studies on EI and Leadership Practices

EI Other
Author Date Stream Subscale Relationships Result
Measure Measures
Kautzman 2011 WLEIS STAM LPI Support for a relationship A stronger relationship was
(Wong & (Kouzes & between observer-rated EI and found between observer
Law, Posner, Leadership Practices and a rated EI and leadership
2002) 2001) relationship between the EI practices than with self-
branch Using Emotion and rated EI and leadership
Modelling the Way, Inspiring a practices
Shared Vision and Challenging
the Process

Stratton 2011 SSEIT STAM S-LPI Support for a relationship This study reveals that
(Schutte (Kouzes & between total EI and student emotional intelligence
et al, Posner, leadership practices, some predicts leadership
1998) 2002) gender effects were also practices and leadership
discovered acts in first-year college
students
Jones 2012 EQ-I STMM LPI Support for relationship Relationship between EI
(Bar-ON, (Kouzes & between total EI and total and Leadership Practices
1997) Posner, Leadership Practices, further supported but small sample
2001) strongest relationship between size and no other variables
subscales of EI and Enabling controlled
Others to Act
Osborne 2012 EQ-I:S STMM LPI-S Support for a relationship In a sample of hospital
(Bar-On, (Kouzes & between the interpersonal employees, support was
2002) Posner, subscale of EI and enabling found for some subscales,
2003) others to act and no gender differences
were noted

SSEIT - Schutte Self-Report of Emotional Intelligence Test, WLEIS - Wong Law Emotional Intelligence Scale, ECI -
Emotional Competence Inventory, LPI - Leadership Practices Inventory, GPSS - General Perceived Self-Efficacy Scale,
S-LPI - student leadership practices inventory, STAM - Stream Two Ability Model, STMM - Stream Three Mixed
Models, SOAM - Stream One Ability Model, LPIO - Leadership Practices Inventory Observer, EIQ - QueenDom's
Emotional Intelligence Test, SECLB - Self-Assessment of Emotion-Based Competencies and Leadership Behaviors,
EIA-MR - Emotional Intelligence Appraisal Multi-Rater, MCRI - Moos' Coping Response Inventory, MLQ - Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire, IEC - Instructor Effectiveness Check Sheet, EQ-i - Emotional Quotient Inventory, EQ-i:S -
Emotional Quotient Inventory Short Form, LPI-S - Leadership practices Inventory Self only, CRI - Coping Responses
Inventory

Need for Greater Psychometric Rigor

A number of scholars critical of EI research called for increased psychometric rigor and

better instrument and construct selection in the study of EI (Antonakis et al., 2009; Matthews et

al., 2012). Their recommendations include following the SOAM of EI, larger sample sizes, and

controlling for other variables known or suspected to impact leadership practices including

20
personality, age, gender, leadership tenure, and cognitive ability. While all of the studies

described above follow the SOAM of EI, none control for important variables and all but one

(Dillon, 2013) fail to achieve adequate sample sizes. Perhaps this explains while all fail to verify

or accurately recreate the results of the previous studies. Accordingly, a gap exists in the

research examining the relationship between EI and leadership practices. This study attempts to

clarify these relationships and begin filling this gap.

Research Questions

The research examines EI and its relationship to the practices of organizational leaders

and entrepreneurs dawn from a research panel. The study seeks to answer the following:

ResQ1: To what extent does a relationship exist between emotional intelligence (IV) and

leadership practices (DV) of organizational leaders?

ResQ1.a: To what extent does a relationship exist between emotional intelligence and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of age?

ResQ1.bTo what extent does a relationship exist between emotional intelligence and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender?

ResQ1.c: To what extent does a significant relationship exist between emotional

intelligence and leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

personality (FFM)?

ResQ1.d: To what extent does a significant relationship exist between emotional

intelligence and leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

leadership experience?

21
 The MSCEITv2.0 responses determine the level of EI among the leaders and the LPI

responses evaluate the leadership practices of those leaders. This study contributes to the body

of knowledge on these subjects in several important ways. Therefore, the study is significant.

Significance of the Study

The proposed study has significance in two key aspects. First, it will investigate a less

understood and explored issue of the relationship between SOAM EI and leadership practices.

Previous studies examined this relationship using a STAM approach (Alston, 2009) or a STMM

approach (Osborne, 2012). Further, previous studies failed to hold constant for the effects of

personality, age, gender, and leadership experience. Walter et al. (2011) noted that, despite the

admonition of scholars to hold personality and other factors constant when examining EI and

leadership, only one published article examining leadership criteria has simultaneously

controlled for both cognitive ability and personality despite the previous evidence of overlapping

correlations among these and other factors that are salient for the relationship to leadership

outcomes (see Ct, Lopes, Salovey, & Miners, 2010). In fact, a relative paucity of studies

utilize the SOAM, examine the relationship with effective leadership, define effectiveness in

terms of leadership practices, and hold constant the effects of age, gender, personality, and

leadership experience. Walter et al. (2011) found virtually no studies following this design

despite the recommendations of numerous experts in the field (Antonakis et al., 2009; Joseph &

Newman, 2010; Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004, Walter et al., 2011;

Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2009).

Second, findings of the study will contribute to a better understanding of the antecedents

and conditions required for improved leadership effectiveness in the field of organization and

22
management as well as in the practice of organizational leadership. It is anticipated that the

study will show that modern organizational leadership competence involves more than technical

skill and subject matter expertise. Organizational leaders must understand how to regulate their

own and their followers emotions (Dasborough, 2006; Humphrey 2002). Salovey and Mayer

noted that emotions rise as responses to a situation that contains positive or negative valence to

an individual (1990). Research approaches disagree as to the number and classification of

emotions; however, Ekman (1992) listed the basic emotions as anger, disgust, fear, happiness,

sadness, and surprise. George (2000) suggested that leaders must understand both their own and

their followers' emotions, and should be able to evoke strong feelings. The actions of the leader

are instrumental in this process of creating and directing the motivation and sense making of

their followers (George, 2000). More specifically, leaders may evoke follower emotions

through the allocation of work activities, by making requests of followers, by providing feedback

on task performance, or by displaying emotions themselves (Dasborough, 2006, p. 165).

Research suggests that employee attitudes and job performance are influenced by leader

feedback and employees emotional responses to that feedback. Accordingly, leadership

practices in the workplace can produce both positive and negative emotions in followers (Gaddis,

Connelly, & Mumford, 2004) and effective leaders should understand this aspect of leadership.

In order to understand the issues this study addressed, it is necessary to understand the exact

concepts and definitions employed in the research.

Definition of the Terms

Emotional Intelligence (EI) is the independent variable (IV) and is defined as the ability

to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate

23
feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional

knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth

(Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT)

is an ability-based test designed to measure the four branches of the EI model. MSCEIT consists

of 141 items and typically requires 20 to 45 minutes to complete (Mayer et al., 2002). The

MSCEIT measures the respondent's ability to perceive, use, understand, and regulate

emotions.

Leadership experience is the cumulative number of years that the subject has held or

acted in a leadership or entrepreneurial leadership role. Some studies indicated a relationship

between leadership experience and EI (Cook et al., 2011). Certain assumptions are made and

certain limitations exist in this study.

Leadership Practices is the dependent variable and is defined in terms of the leaders

self-report of specific practices using the Leadership Performance Inventory (LPI) developed by

Kouzes and Posner (2012). Leadership Practices consists of five specific practices found to

indicate transformational leadership and overall leadership effectiveness. The practices include

modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and

encouraging the heart (Alston, 2009; Alston, Dastoor, & Sosa-Fey, 2010; Kouzes & Posner,

2012). These five subscales as well as an overall Leadership Practices score will be treated as

individual quantitative numerical continuous variables. For this study, an organizational leader

is a person in a leadership role (supervisor of at least three employees) or an owner of a business

who supervises at least three employees or others.

Personality is defined using the Five Factor personality Model (FFM) developed by

Costa & McCrae (1992) established a taxonomy that systematically combined a broad-based set

24
of personality characteristics under the umbrella traits of extraversion, agreeableness,

conscientiousness, openness to experiences and neuroticism (Goldberg, 1990; 1992). The five

factor scores are quantitative, numerical, continuous variables.

Assumptions and Limitations

This research operates under the assumption that multiple intelligences exist. Because

scholars have posited the existence of multiple forms of intelligence (Gardner, 1983; 1993; 1999)

and specifically the idea that a type of social-emotional intelligence exists in varying degrees in

all individuals (Bar-On, 1988; Sternberg, 1985) and that emotional-social intelligence may be

part of a more holistic, systems approach to understanding human intelligence and capability

(Sternberg, 1990); it is assumed that multiple human intelligence exist and that EI is one such

example.

This research operates under the assumption that emotional skills and abilities are

necessary for effective organizational leadership and that modern organizational leadership

competence involves more than technical skill and subject matter expertise. Organizational

leaders must understand how to regulate their own and their followers emotions (Dasborough,

2006; Humphrey 2002). More specifically, leaders may evoke follower emotions through the

allocation of work activities, by making requests of followers, by providing feedback on task

performance, or by displaying emotions themselves (Dasborough, 2006, p. 165). Research

suggests that employee attitudes and job performance are influenced by leader feedback and

employees emotional responses to that feedback. Accordingly, leadership practices in the

workplace can produce both positive and negative emotions in followers (Gaddis et al., 2004)

and effective leaders should understand this aspect of leadership.

25
 This research operates under the assumption that certain aspects of a study increase its

reliability and validity. Because this study avoids many of the limitations described by critics of

EI research (Antonakis et al., 2009) including small sample sizes, holding personality constant,

considering the effect of age, gender, and other factors, poor validity, poor reliability, etc.; it is

assumed that this study exhibits more psychometric rigor than a large portion of preexisting EI

research. Further, Cooper and Schindler (2011) argued that the use of probability sampling

allows for precise estimates. Additionally, only probability samples offer an opportunity for

generalization to the general population of interest. Moreover, the use of stratified random

sampling increases statistical efficiency. Multiple regressions are an effective statistical tool to

analyze the impact of multiple independent variables on the dependent variable. Stepwise

regression combines the effectiveness of both backward elimination and forward selection

regression techniques and is the most popular form of multiple regressions. The use of this

technique requires that the data be evaluated for issues of collinearity (Cooper & Schindler,

2011).

A few additional assumptions may be added as well. One fascinating and important

aspect of leadership scholarship is the ongoing attempt to uncover the traits and attributes

common to successful organizational leaders (Alston, 2009). Accordingly, research aimed at

adding to this body of knowledge is both significant and practical. It is assumed this study will

provide additional reliability evidence for the MSCEITv2.0, the LPI, and the IPIP-NEO test

instruments. Because the target sample size (N=300) is large enough to test the hypotheses in

this study and large enough to avoid many shortcomings associated with statistical testing of

insufficient sample sizes (Field, 2009), it is assumed that the results of this study will be

statistically significant and meaningful. A specific theoretical framework underpins this study.

26
 Theoretical/Conceptual Framework of the Study

This study is based on a conceptual framework of EI as a form of intelligence in keeping

with the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983; Sternberg, 1997) and leadership

practices according to the model proposed by Kouzes and Posner (2012) that indicate the relative

effectiveness of organizational leaders. This study is based on Salovey and Mayers (1990)

stream one ability model approach to EI and the constructs of leadership practices as defined by

Kouzes and Posners (1995) leadership practices inventory (LPI). The sample is drawn from

existing leaders and entrepreneurs across a variety of disciplines drawn from a national panel

using questionnaire responses. Based on the results of each of these mechanisms, a significant

relationship between the level of EI and leadership practices is established. This situates this

study in the realm of individual differences that matter for effective leadership and is part of the

renaissance of interest in the study of leadership and individual differences (Antonakis et al.,

2012, p. 643). The results of the MSCEITv2.0 administered to the leadership sample, and the

subsequent results of the LPI provide empirical data to address any correlation between the two

factors.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The remainder of this manuscript consists of four additional chapters including the

literature review; study methodology; the statistical results; and the discussion, implications, and

recommendations. Chapter 2 provides a thorough review of literature addressing EI, leadership,

and the relationship between the two concepts. Chapter 3 describes the methodology behind the

study and provides a description of the research design, sampling, setting, measurements, data

27
collection and data analysis, and the ethical considerations supporting the research. Chapter 4

provides a detailed statistics and analysis of the data collected. Chapter 5 provides a summary of

the research findings, draws conclusions, presents implications of the research, and provides

recommendations for future research.

28
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this research study is to examine the relationship between the SOAM of

EI and leadership practices in order to refine the existing knowledge of EI and leadership and to

contribute to a more robust understanding of the antecedents of effective leadership. In this

study, EI is defined as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the

ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand

emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional

and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). Leadership practices is the dependent

variable and consists of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process,

enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). Despite a growing

body of literature examining the relationship between EI and leadership, few studies have

followed the recommendations of scholars to examine the ability model and to control for the

effects of other important variables. Before evaluating the significance of this study, it is first

necessary to juxtapose it against the extant literature in the field. The literature is presented in

the following order: emotion in organizations, intelligence, multiple intelligences, social

intelligence, EI, measures of EI, leadership, measures of leadership, Kouzes and Posners five

practices, and EI and leadership. I begin with the history of emotion research noting a

resurgence of interest in emotion in organizations in recent years.

Emotion in Organizations

The discussion of emotions in organizations and workplaces has evolved during the

period from 1997 to 2012 from a position of nearly undiscussable to a mainstream topic in

organizational behavior, management, and leadership (Ashkanasy, Hrtel, & Zerbe, 2012, p. 1).

Indeed, most modern textbooks in these areas include a mention of emotions and /or EI if not an

29
entire chapter on these topics. The study of emotion originates in the field of psychology and

begins over 125 years ago.

The nature of man and his moods has been studied and pondered throughout much of

human history. However, the study of emotion really begins in earnest with Darwins The

Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals (1872) and William James influential book

Principles of Psychology (1890). Darwin attempted to trace certain facial expressions in man to

precursors found in the animal kingdom. He also enlisted the help of preeminent scientists of his

day who had extensively studied primitive tribes to show that certain expressions and therefore

emotions were common to all peoples (Darwin, 1872). This was one of the earliest attempts to

characterize emotion and emotional expression. Darwins view of emotional expression was a

functional one and was based on observations rather than experiments. Darwin observed animals

in zoos and domestic settings, and interviewed zookeepers, explorers, and missionaries (Darwin,

1872). Darwins work has been a major source of ideas and a stimulus for research for

scientists in a variety of disciplines who are interested in the study of emotions (Plutchik, 1980,

p. 3). In Plutchiks substantial history of the theoretical thinking on emotion titled Emotion: A

Psychoevolutionary Synthesis, he argues that Darwins work was the beginning of one of four

major traditions in the study of emotions, the evolutionary tradition, the psychophysiological

tradition, the neurological tradition, and the dynamic tradition. Each of these traditions will be

considered briefly here. The psychophysiological tradition is represented by the work of

William James.

William James along with Carl Lange (working simultaneously but separately) developed

the first general theory of emotion that became known as the James-Lange theory. James-Lange

postulates that physiological arousal creates the experience of a specific emotion rather than the

30
act of feeling an emotion creating the physiological response (James, 1890). This theory is

widely regarded as the earliest theory of emotion in modern psychology (Plutchik, 1980).

James ideas were a radical departure from the common sense of the day however; James did

little to provide a scientific underpinning for his ideas. Despite unanswered questions about the

nature of perception, arousal, and the more visceral emotions vs. the more subtle ones, James-

Lange gradually spawned a substantial literature on autonomic physiology, lie detection, and

physiological measures of arousal that continues to be important today (Plutchik, 1980). James

foundational theories were substantially modified by later scholars ushering in the neurological

tradition.

The neurological tradition in the study of emotions begins with the work of Walter

Cannon (Plutchik, 1980). Cannon substantially criticized and modified James work and

introduced alternative theories of emotion (1915/1929). Cannon raised five specific criticisms of

Lames-Lange (1927). First, experiments carried out on animals by Cannon (1915/1929) and

Sherrington (1919) showed that animals with removed sympathetic divisions of their autonomic

nervous systems could still demonstrate typical emotional reactions including anger, fear, and

pleasure. This was the opposite outcome from that predicted by James-Lange. Second, Canon

(1927) noted that the physiological reactions produced by fear, rage, fever, exposure to cold, and

asphyxia are virtually identical. Therefore, how could these uniform physiological symptoms

produce diverse emotional reactions? Lames-Lange did not have an answer for this problem.

Third, the physical viscera that James-Lange claimed were associated with emotional reactions

were easily damaged without producing mental discomfort in anesthetized patients. Fourth,

viscera tissues often exhibited slow reaction to stimuli while emotional reactions were often

much faster. Therefore, it was unlikely that these tissues were the precursors of those reactions.

31
Finally, experiments designed to produce feelings by inducing visceral changes were

unsuccessful (1927). Cannons criticism effectively discredited James-Lange but Cannon went

further by using experiments on animals to develop a new alternative theory of emotion and

bodily changes (1929).

Cannon experimented extensively on the relationship between the brain and emotion by

removing portions of the brain and observing an animals capacity to show emotional responses.

Cannon was able to locate many of the precursors to emotional responses in the hypothalamus.

He is also credited with discovery of the fight or flight response. Cannon argued that the

experience of emotion depends on the hypothalamus and that rather than a linear sequence of

events (like that described by James-Lange). The hypothalamus simultaneously produces an

emotional response and a series of physiological changes in the body (1915/1929). Cannons

work was instrumental in the later development of cognitive appraisal theories of emotion (Smith

& Kirby, 2001). Another key theoretical contribution to the study of emotions was the work of

Sigmund Freud.

Freuds book Studies on Hysteria simultaneously described a theory of illness and laid

the groundwork for a new theory of emotion. Freuds work was primarily concerned with the

repression of strong emotions by patients that led to physical symptoms called neuroses (Breuer

& Freud, 1895/2000). Freud described two types of instincts or drives, ego and sexual. The ego

drives contained the concepts of hunger, thirst, aggression, control, anger, attack, and the drive to

flee from danger. The sexual drives involved the desire to have sex and repression of this drive

gave rise to anxiety. Anxiety in turn gave rise to phobias, obsessions, compulsions, and

neuroses. Freuds work was based on case studies of his various patients over a period of many

years and his work with both hypnosis and free association techniques, many of which continue

32
to be used in clinical psychology to the present day (Breuer & Freud, 1895/2000). Plutchik

argues that while Freuds concept of drives was not a complete theory of emotion, it provided

the basis for the interpretation of two major affects, anxiety and depression (1980, p. 18).

Freuds psychoanalytic view of emotion had three important implications for future application

and research. First, while the evaluation of an event may be unconscious, the emotional response

is not. There are no unconscious emotions. Second, even if the subject can repress emotions, the

indirect signs of emotion response are always noticeable. These include dreams, free

associations, posture, facial expression, slips of the tongue, and voice qualities. Third, emotions

are not found in pure states but have complex histories and must be interpreted to determine the

specific elements of their complex states. This is the role of psychoanalysis (Plutchik, 1980).

These three implications and their corresponding techniques informed a tremendous literature on

nonverbal and indirect emotional response clues (Sletvold, 2013). Freuds work rounds out the

fourth and final historical tradition described by Plutchik.

Plutchik summarized the four historical traditions this way. The Darwinian approach

considered the survival value of emotional expressions. The Jamesian approach concerned the

relationship between emotions and internal bodily changes. The Cannon tradition was concerned

with the relationship between emotions and brain structures and activities. The Freudian

dynamic approach involved emotions that people were not aware they have and the mixed

emotions people had (Plutchik, 1980). All modern models and conceptions of emotion drew for

their inspiration and research precedent on one of these four traditions. As research developed

around each of these four traditions, the field of emotions research suffered from a lack of agreed

upon definitions and adequate theories for much of its early history. Eventually that began to

change. While describing their theory of emotional intelligence (EI), Salovey and Mayer

33
recounted the extant literature and conceptual ground work that led to their conception of EI

(1990).

In their theoretical article, Salovey and Mayer (1990) recounted how early scholars

viewed emotion as disorganized responses or acute disturbances. For example, following the

work of Cannon (1915/1929), both Angier (1927) and Clarapde (1928) published theoretical

articles describing emotion as the result of a state of tension or conflict. Clarapde (1928)

conceptualized emotion as a form of conflict. Clarapdes conflict theory of emotion inspired

the work of Darrow (1935) and Young (1936). Darrow conducted experiments on a variety of

adult subjects measuring their blood pressure before and after they were presented with

disturbing events. Darrow concluded that the changes in blood pressure originated in accordance

with "confusion, dissociation, blur, disruption of behavior, destruction of equilibrium, and the

competition between impulses typical of excited emotion (1935, p. 572). This view of emotion

as disruption was common to Youngs work as well. Young conducted research throughout the

30s, 40s, and 50s, primarily on animals. Young took a behavioral approach to the study of

emotions and defined the concept of emotional behavior as a total process on a continuum of

organization and stated that "the adjective emotional implies that the behavior is to some extent

disorganized, this integrated, upset, disturbed" (1949, p. 186). Plutchik (1980) noted that these

views were intuitively appealing because they are consistent with experiences of the unpleasant

aspects of some emotional states such as anger and sadness. In 1962, Schachter and Singer

described emotion as a label applied to physiological arousal. This conception followed the

work of Cannon (1929) and Young (1949) and viewed emotion through the lens of disruption as

well. Schachter and Singer studied a group of college students by secretly injecting them with

adrenaline (the students were told they were receiving vitamins) and then exposing them to

34
various external emotional stimuli and measuring both their physiological changes and their self-

report of emotional states (1962). Schachters work fully introduced the concept of cognition in

emotion by emphasizing that a persons interpretation of stimuli is important in determining their

emotional states (1962). This idea opened the door for the work of Mandler (1975). The major

assumption of Mandlers book, Mind and Emotion (1975), is that autonomic arousal signals the

mind for attention, alertness, and environmental scanning. Further, the book stated that

emotional response might be triggered either by an appraisal of stimulation or by an

interpretation of a situation. The evidence presented for this theoretical construction came from

studies of false feedback of autonomic stimulation, emotional states in the absence of arousal,

and the ability of certain pharmaceuticals to produce emotional responses without effecting

autonomic arousal (Mandler, 1975). Based on this evidence, it was unlikely that variations in the

level of autonomic nervous system arousal played a role in emotional responses. While this

conclusion was important for the study of emotions, Mandlers work has been criticized for its

speculative nature (Plutchik, 1980). Starting in the 1980s an alternative view of emotions began

growing in the social science research community. This view originated in the contrasting view

of emotions as a force that promotes intelligent response by interrupting current processes and

redirecting attention toward more important objectives. In this sense, strong emotions act to

prioritize our cognition (Mandler, 1984). Mandlers theoretical view employed cognitive

processes along with autonomic nervous system activity to predict emotional responses and

behavior. Later scholars evolved their views to position emotion as organizing responses

capable of directing cognitive activities and doing so adaptively.

In contrast to the ideas of emotion as disorganizing and disruptive presented by previous

scholars (Cannon, 1929; Young, 1949), the researchers in the late 70s and early 80s took a

35
different view of emotion and cognition. Isen, Shalker, Calark, and Karpo (1978) conducted two

studies. In the first, 148 adult men and women were intercepted at a mall and were told they

would participate in a consumer study. A portion of the participants were given a product

sample gift in order to induce a good mood and all participants rated the performance and service

records of their automobiles and televisions. A relationship existed between overall mood and

positive judgments. The second study included 47 undergraduate students. The students played

a computer game twice and then took a memory test. The students who won the game were

more capable in the memory test and a relationship existed between positive mood (based on the

outcome of the game) and recall ability. These two studies showed a relationship between

emotion (mood) and performance that suggested links between emotion and cognition rather than

a disruptive influence (Isen et al., 1978). In similar fashion, Zajonc (1980) viewed emotion and

cognition as separate systems that influence each other in a variety of ways. Zajoncs previous

work confirmed the prevalent empirical finding that preferences for objects do not require prior

cognitions and that familiarity by itself is sufficient to produce positive feelings (Kunst-Wilson

& Zajonc, 1980). Zajonc concluded that it was still too early for an accurate model of the role of

emotion in cognition (1980). In a series of experiments on college students using hypnosis,

Bower (1981) found that participants exhibited mood-state-dependent memory when recalling

word lists, experiences recorded in a diary, and specific childhood experiences (p. 129)

Interestingly, subjects demonstrated greater recall for those experiences that were congruent with

the emotion they experienced during the attempted recall. In a surprisingly frank commentary,

Bower stated that psychologists have been criticizedperhaps rightlyfor ignoring the role of

emotion and motivation when they study the operation of some cognitive function like attention,

or memory, or thinking but after these studies, he could see the value of studying emotion and

36
that theories developed in one field could help explain phenomena of interest in another (Bower,

1981, p. 129). Then in 1983, a major work introduced the new concept of emotional labor

(Hochschild). Hochschilds work involved a highly detailed case study of employees in the

airline industry working as flight attendants. Hochschild chronicled the phenomena in the

service industries where employers expected employees to display and even feel specific

emotions on behalf of their employer. They were paid for their emotional labor. The theory of

emotional labor continues to spawn a large body of research (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2013; Beal &

Trougakos, 2013; Ct, Van Kleef, & Sy, 2013; Dahling & Johnson, 2013; Erickson & Stacey,

2013; Gross, 2013; Groth, Hennig-Thurau, & Wang, 2013; Lively, 2013; Mesquita & Delvaux,

2013; Niven, Totterdell, Holeman, & Cameron, 2013; Pugh, Diefendorff, & Moran, 2013;

Rafaeli, 2013; Van Jaarsveld & Poster, 2013; Wharton, 2013) and will be presented in greater

detail later in this chapter. The published work described above (Bower, 1981; Hochschild,

1983; Isen et al., 1978, Zajonc, 1980) paved the way for a new view of the study of both emotion

and cognition.

In 1986, Bandura ushered in the so-called affective revolution with the publication of his

book, Social Foundations of Thought & Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Banduras work on

social learning theory in particular made him the fourth most cited author in the social sciences

and the most cited social scientist alive today (Haggbloom et al., 2002). Banduras theoretical

work reset the relationship between emotion and cognition within the framework of learning and

viewed human beings as able to learn from their experience, the experience of others, and their

own mental representations or models (1986). Bandura pioneered the concept of self-efficacy as

well (1997). Around the same time when Bandura was writing his groundbreaking 1986 work,

Cantor and Kihlstrom were tackling the concept of social intelligence with a new dynamic

37
energy (1987). Cantor and Kihlstroms work specifically deals with social intelligence, the

precursor to EI, and appears later in this chapter. About same time, a new interest in emotion

arrived with the work of Ekman and colleagues (1987).

Support for the existence of universal governing principles of emotion came from the

work of Ekman et al. (1987). Ekman studied facial expressions and emotion recognition in a

sample of 525 college students from ten different countries. The specific countries in the sample

included Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Scotland, Sumatra, Turkey, and

the United States (Ekman et al., 1987, p. 714). The study results supported the idea of universal

emotion expressions with some culturally based differences. Frijda (1988) provided additional

support for the idea of universal principles of emotion. Frijda offered a new view of emotions

designed to set a new agenda for emotion research. Frijda argued that emotional response

behaved according to predictable organizing principles or laws. Frijda stated that, contrary to

most of the scholarship of the previous 100 years, simple, universal, moving forces operate

behind the complex, idiosyncratic movements of feeling (1988, p. 549). However, Frijda freely

admitted that the proposed emotional laws were not yet fully supported by research and

described the laws as an agenda for future research (1988). The work of Bandura (1986), Cantor

and Kihlstrom (1987), Ekman et al. (1987), and Frijda (1988) set the stage for a new conception

of the relationship between emotion and intelligence. This new conception arrived with the work

of Mayer et al. (1990).

Mayer et al. (1990) examined the relationship between emotion recognition and empathy

as measured using 18 images from the Ekman and Friesen (1975) images and a 33-item empathy

scale developed by Mehrabian and Epstein (1972). The study sample included 139 adults taken

from undergraduate classes, graduate classes, and an engineering firm. The participants also

38
completed tests of alexithymia (Taylor, Ryan, & Bagby, 1985) and neuroticism and extraversion

(Eysenck, 1973). This was the first attempt to create a battery of tests specifically aimed at the

measurement of an emotional intelligence. The authors found that negative internal experiences

related to higher levels of negative perception of ambiguous external stimuli. Further, they

found that emotional perception extended to colors and pictures and that a more general ability to

perceive emotion supported these three skills. Finally the authors concluded that EI comprised a

set of traditional abilities and that it could be measured using tasks like those included in this

study and that the results supported the presence of a general ability called emotional intelligence

(EI). Following this study, Salovey and Mayer (1990) wrote their landmark conceptual article

describing the full construct of ability model emotional intelligence. I return to the subject of EI

later in this chapter.

After the advent of EI (Salovey & Mayer, 1990), Mayer and Salovey sought to clarify the

theoretical construct and argued that EI involved accurate and efficient emotional information

processing capacity and that this emotional information helps to convey personal self-awareness

(1995). This description helps to place EI within the general trend in emotion and affect toward

greater integration with cognition and intelligence. With the increased emphasis on emotion and

cognition, researchers turned their attention toward the study of emotion in organizations and

workplaces with greater fervor. Emotion in organization had long been a taboo subject for most

research agendas in organizational behavior, management, and leadership. Now with a new

conception of emotion as able to influence cognition and therefore decision-making and

performance, an affective revolution began to take place.

Jennifer George has often been cited for her insightful comment that leadership is an

emotion- laden process, both from a leader and a follower perspective (2000, p. 1046).

39
Georges conclusions were based on her work in the field in the late 80s and early 90s. George

(1989) examined the relationship between mood including positive and negative affectivity with

absenteeism and overall disposition at work in a sample of 210 sales people. George found a

relationship between mood and absenteeism, an important aspect of organizational performance

(1989). In another study, George (1990) examined affectivity, personality, and group level

behavior in 26 work groups, finding a correlation to group affective tone and prosocial group

behaviors including attendance and mood. Additionally, George (1991) examined the impact of

positive mood and positive role-oriented behavior on customer-service and sales performance in

a sample professional salespeople (N=221). All three of these studies supported the role of

affect and mood at work on positive organizational outcomes.

In 2000 as an introduction to a special issue of the Journal of Organizational Behavior,

Fisher and Ashkanasy presented 6 articles on various aspects of emotion in the workplace

(2000). Fisher (2000) studied the relationship between emotion and job satisfaction in a sample

of 121 employees who were questioned at numerous points over a two-week period. Fisher

found that both positive and negative emotions predicted job satisfaction independently and that

the frequency of net positive emotion strongly predicted overall job satisfaction (2000). Fox and

Spector (2000) examined the relationship between EI, trait affectivity, and cognitive ability on

interview outcomes for a sample of 116 undergraduate students using a quasi-experimental

design. The results indicated a relationship between both EI and affect beyond any effects

associated with cognitive ability. Saavedra and Kwun (2000) studied the relationship between

employee perceptions and self-reported mood measured using two different approaches in a

sample of 370 managers across 26 different organizations. The authors discovered that

autonomy and task significance correlated with positive affect. Variety of skill related positively

40
negative affect. Task identity and task feedback related negatively to negative affect. This study

claimed implications for future work design considerations (Saavedra & Kwun, 2000). In a

study of 217 employees across all job categories in one research company, Schaubroeck and

Jones (2000) examined positive emotional demands, display rules, and employer demands to

suppress negative emotions. These affectations constitute a portion of the work roles of many

employees. The authors found that positive emotional demands related to health symptoms

among those employees who reported low organizational identification, low emotional

adaptability, and low job involvement (Schaubroeck & Jones, 2000). The research trends during

this period led Fineman (2000) to argue that organizations are emotional arenas that divide and

bond their members (p. 1). All the human passions including love, fear, guilt, embarrassment,

anger, boredom, infatuation, nostalgia, anxiety, and envy impact role initiation and education,

organizational power, trust, and organizational commitment (p. 1). In concert with Fineman's

observations, George (2000) suggested that leaders must understand both their own and their

followers' emotions, and should be able to evoke strong feelings. The actions of the leader are

instrumental in this process of creating and directing the motivation and sense making of their

followers (George, 2000). The group of articles presented by the Journal of Organizational

Behavior and the proximate comments of both Fineman and George illustrated the growing

diversity in the study of emotion in organizations that developed between 1990 and 2000. The

research into emotions in organizations continues to grow along three distinct paths: the study of

affect, the construct of emotional labor, and EI. While the emotional focus of this study is EI, a

brief description of the research on affect and emotional labor is included here for the readers

benefit.

41
 Affective Events Theory (AET) and the study of affect. In 1996, Weiss and

Cropanzano introduced their theoretical construct called Affective Events Theory (AET). They

based their theory on a set of simple premises. Affect is not job satisfaction. They are separate

constructs. Emotions and moods are important aspects of work experience. Affective states

influence job satisfaction and performance independently. Affective states can, and do fluctuate

over time. These observations changed the way organizations viewed affect (Humphrey, 2014).

Before continuing with a description of the research on AET, it is useful to offer a few

definitions and clarify the terms involved. Humphrey (2014) defined moods as emotional states

or conditions that are longer lasting, generally weaker in intensity, indirectly caused or not

caused by events or people, usually classified along the dimensions of either positive or negative.

Emotions are shorter lived, more intensely felt, directed at or caused by specific objects, events,

or people, and consisting of specific finite classifications such as anger, fear, sadness, and

happiness, rather than simply classified along a dichotomous continuum. There are hundreds of

words to describe more complex emotions. Affect is a broader term to describe both emotions

and mood and used interchangeably with each of those terms by some researchers (Humphrey,

2014). AET spawned a large body of research on affect in organizations.

Weiss, Nicholas, and Daus (1999) examined both mood and cognitive appraisal as

determinants of job satisfaction in a sample of 24 managers using diaries maintained over 16

workdays. The results showed a relationship between affect and job satisfaction as well as a

cyclical relationship between individual affective state and mood in the workplace. This finding

might be called a managerial mood swing that effected workplace outcomes. As noted above,

Fisher (2000) studied the relationship between emotion and job satisfaction in a sample of 121

employees who were questioned at numerous points over a two-week period using the model

42
suggested by Weiss and Cropanzano (1996). Fisher found that both positive and negative

emotions predicted job satisfaction independently and that the frequency of net positive emotion

strongly predicted overall job satisfaction (2000). Following the AET model, Basch and Fisher

(2000) attempted to create an events-emotions matrix to classify affective events into categories

along with discrete positive and negative emotions. In a study of 101 Australian hotel

employees, they examined 736 workplace events. The resulting matrices included 14 positive

categories of positive events, 13 categories of negative events, 8 positive emotions, and 12

negative emotions. Categories included goal achievement, acts of customers, making mistakes,

and receiving recognition. Emotions included pride relief, frustration, and bitterness (Basch &

Fisher, 2000, pp. 44-45). The results helped complete the AET conception and definition of both

workplace events and workplace emotions. Erez and Isen (2002) conducted two studies

examining the relationship between positive affect and motivation in samples of 97 and 230

undergraduate students respectively. In the first study, they found a relationship between

positive affect and performance as well as a relationship with motivation. The second study also

found relationships between positive affect and both performance and motivation. Erez and Isen

argued that positive affect interacts with task conditions in influencing motivation through

affects influence on cognitive processes involved with motivation (2002, p. 1055). Providing

additional support for AET, Fisher (2002) studied the antecedents and consequences of both

positive and negative affective reactions in the workplace in a sample of 124 employed adults

from 65 different organizations. The data collected consisted in 2-week diary collections with

each participant recording an average of 50 observations. Fisher found that job characteristics

and positive affect predicted various positive affective reactions; while levels of role conflict and

negative affect predicted negative affective reactions. Further, positive affective reactions

43
predicted employee commitment and helping behavior (Fisher, 2002). Grandy, Tam, and

Brauburger (2002) studied AET in a sample of 41 employed undergraduates using two survey

administrations along with an event-contingent diary over a 2-week period and examined

intention to leave as the dependent variable. This mixed-methods approach produced partial

support for AET but the authors argued that studying just positive versus negative affectivity was

misleading. Anger, sadness, and anxiety had different patterns and strengths of relationships

with turnover intention in the study and additional data was needed in order to understand the

efficacy of AET (Grandy et al., 2002, p. 51). Pirola-Merlo, Hrtel, Mann, and Hirst (2002)

conducted a longitudinal study of 54 Research and Development (R&D) teams from four large

Australian R&D organizations. The authors examined the relationship among team climates,

performance, and negative workplace events. The authors discovered an important role for team

leadership within negative workplace events.

Gaddis et al. (2004) experimented with 258 undergraduate students placed into 87

groups. In their design the group leaders (confederates) delivered negative feedback about a

group task in one of two ways, personalized or task focused. The authors discovered that

negative leader affect displayed during feedback produced lower leader effectiveness perceptions

among the group members and lower levels of performance on the group task. In contrast,

positive leader affect displayed during feedback produced higher leader effectiveness perceptions

among the group members and higher levels of performance on the group task. Accordingly,

leadership practices in the workplace can produce both positive and negative emotions in

followers and effective leaders should understand this aspect of leadership (Gaddis et al., 2004).

Mignonac and Herrbach (2004) studied AET in a sample of 203 French managers and

found relationships between affective states and work attitudes as well as a relationship between

44
work events and affective states. The authors also found partial support for a mediating role for

affective events. Inspired by AET, Judge, Ilies, and Scott proposed a model of the dynamic

nature of emotions at work, work attitudes, and workplace deviance (2006, p. 126). They

conducted a study of 64 employees involving completion of daily surveys over a 3-week period

involving their affective state, level job satisfaction, interpersonal treatment received, and

instances of workplace deviance. Judge et al. (2006) found support for an interactional effect of

affective events and individual differences on the outcome of workplace deviant behaviors.

Bono, Foldes, Vinson, and Muros (2007) studied the organizational leaders role in the

emotional experiences of followers. The authors examined a sample of 57 non-management

health care workers. The participants were surveyed as well as entering their experiences four

times a day for two weeks using a hand held computer data entry device. The participants were

asked about momentary stress, job satisfaction, and affective experiences. The authors also

conducted an organization wide survey on leadership behaviors of supervisors. The results

showed that participants experienced fewer positive emotional interactions with supervisors than

with customers or peers. Bono et al. (2007) also found that participants with leaders high in

transformational leadership behaviors reported positive emotional experiences more frequently,

including interactions with customers and their peers. Further, active self-regulation of emotions

increased stress and decreased job satisfaction. Participants with transformational leaders

experienced fewer negative outcomes (Bono et al., 2007). George and Zhou (2007) studied

positive and negative affectivity and supervisor support context as antecedents of employee

creativity in a sample of 161 dyadic pairs of supervisor-employee relationships in an oil-field

services company. George and Zhou found that both positive and negative affectivity influenced

creativity along with supportive context (2007). Carlson, Kacmar, Zivnuska, Ferguson, and

45
Whitten (2011) conducted two studies; one in a sample of 240 employed adults and a second in

189 supervisor-employee dyads. Based on AET, Carlson et al. presented a model of the impact

of job satisfaction and positive affect on the relationship between family life and work

performance. The study showed mixed support for their theoretical model (2011). Responding

to criticisms about its measurement, Thompson and Phua (2012) conducted a large number of

both qualitative and quantitative studies on affect (N=28 and N=901 respectively). The authors

developed a short affective job satisfaction measure derived from the previous measure by

Brayfield and Rothes (1951). The authors described the new measure as overtly affective,

minimally cognitive, and optimally brief and recommended additional research to confirm its

validity (Thompson & Phua, 2012, p. 275). They called it the Brief Index of Affective Job

Satisfaction.

Dong, Seo, and Bartol (2014) studied affect and the relationship between developmental

job experiences (DJE) and advancement potential and turnover intention in a sample of new

managers (N=214). The authors hypothesized and confirmed a buffering role for EI in the

affective process. Dong et al. (2014) showed that DJE related positively to turnover intention

but only for low EI managers. Affective Events Theory (AET) and the study of affect continue

to generate interesting research in the study of emotion in organizations. Next, I present a brief

history of the construct of emotional labor.

Emotional labor. In the United States, the idea of emotional labor has been embraced

by business advice gurus as an undiscovered resource and means of competitive advantage, and

by labor unions as a cause of burnout deserving of financial compensation. And it surely is

both (Hochschild, 2013, p. xv). This comment by the original author of the research study and

popular book about emotional labor (Hochschild, 1979; 1983) points to the widespread

46
popularity and application of the construct of emotional labor. Following the work of

Hochschild (1979), Rafaeli and Sutton studied the relationship between emotional displays at

work and a measure of employee stress (busyness and customer demands). The results supported

the relationship between busyness and cashiers' positive emotional displays and the hypothesis

that customer demand related positively to positive emotional displays (Rafaeli & Sutton, 1990).

In 1991, Rafaeli and Sutton published two qualitative studies designed to generate a model of

how social influence through emotional displays can bring about compliance in organizational

members. One study involved semi-structured interviews with 20 criminal interrogators in

Israel. The other included observations, interviews, supervisor interviews, and collection of

written materials related to 15 experienced bill collectors at a US collections agency. These

studies revealed five categories of emotional contrast strategies used in the workplace and

intended to generate compliance. This study was the precursor to the concept of display rules.

The term display rule was first used to refer to appropriate emotional expression norms by

Ekman (1973). However, the term is most closely associated with emotional labor by modern

researchers (Morris & Feldman, 1996). Ashforth and Humphrey (1993) discussed the theoretical

implications of emotional labor and argue that the act of displaying the appropriate emotion

(i.e., conforming with a display rule) is emotional labor (p. 90). Further, the authors noted that

since display rules referred to employee behavior rather than to emotional or affective state, it is

relatively easy for managers and customers to notice employee compliance with these rules

(Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993, p. 90). Wharton (1993) studied emotional labor and its effect on

work-related well-being and overall job satisfaction in a sample of 117 bank employees and 555

hospital employees (total N=622). The study results suggested that that emotional labor does not

always lead to negative consequences for workers. Wharton found that the effects of emotional

47
labor depend upon the level of job economy, job involvement, and self-monitoring abilities

(1993). In a theoretical article, Morris and Feldman (1996) proposed that emotional labor should

be considered in light of four specific dimensions including: frequency of appropriate emotional

display, attentiveness to required display rules, variety of emotions to be displayed, and

emotional dissonance generated by having to express organizationally desired emotions not

genuinely felt (p. 986). Zerbe (2000) conducted two studies to examine the relationship

between organizational demands for emotional displays and the psychological and physical well-

being of employees in a sample of 408 Canadian nurses and a sample of 452 Canadian airline

service employees. Interestingly, these two studies did not support the idea that employee well-

being is associated with emotive dissonance, emotional deviance, or faking emotion. These

results starkly contrast the theoretical notions proposed by Hochschild (1979; 1983) as the

foundation of emotional labor. Diefendorff and Richard (2003) examined employee perception

of emotional labor display rules in a sample of 152 full-time working adults from a variety of

occupations. The authors found that job-based interpersonal requirements, supervisor display

rule perceptions, and employee extraversion and neuroticism were predictive of employee

display rule perceptions (Diefendorff & Richard, 2003, p. 284). Additionally, employee

perception of display rules related to emotional displays in the workplace and job satisfaction.

Neuroticism also had a direct negative correlation with job satisfaction and emotional displays in

the workplace.

Gosserand and Diefendorff (2005) used structural equation modeling to examine

emotional display rule commitment as an antecedent the impact of emotional display rules on

workplace behavior in a sample of 318 full-time working adults. The authors studied employee

perception of display rules, employee commitment to display rules, positive and negative affect

48
as related to surface acting and deep acting, and how each determines positive affectivity. The

results indicated that commitment to display rules moderated the relationship between surface

acting, deep acting, positive affectivity, and display rule perceptions within the workplace.

Strong positive correlations were discovered when commitment to display rules was high. Weak

correlations were found if low-level commitment to display rules existed. The results indicated

that motivation plays a role in emotional labor and employees must experience commitment to

display rules before these rules can affect employee behavior (Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005).

Goldberg and Grandey (2007) experimented with self-regulation of emotion, energy

depletion, and attentional resources in a sample of 89 upper-level undergraduate students. The

results of the experiment showed that participants directed toward positive display rules reported

more exhaustion and committed more errors than those with freedom of display. Further,

customer hostility increased exhaustion and error rate. Surface acting was associated with

greater levels of exhaustion than deep acting (Goldberg & Grandey, 2007).

Diefendorff, Erickson, Grandey, and Dahling (2011) demonstrated that display rules are

also shared group level beliefs, rather than just individual phenomena, in sample of 1,169

registered nurses. The authors found that group level display rules related to individual job

satisfaction, related to burnout indirectly through display rule perceptions and emotion regulation

strategies, and that display rules interacted with affectivity to predict employees use of emotion

regulation strategies (Diefendorff et al., 2011). By 2011, enough research had been accumulated

that a couple of authors conducted an ambitious meta-analysis of the previous studies.

Hlsheger and Schewe (2011) provided a quantitative review of 494 relationships drawn from 95

studies. The results showed a link between emotional labor and well-being and other

performance outcomes. Specifically, the results revealed relationships between emotional

49
dissonance and surface acting with lower levels of well-being and poor job attitudes.

Additionally the analysis detected a small negative relationship with performance outcomes.

This study supported the maturity and efficacy of quantitative research into emotional labor in

organizations. Grandey, Diefendorff, and Rupp (2013b) published an edited volume on

emotional labor that included 12 chapters and opened with a thorough review of the literature by

Grandey, Diefendorff, and Rupp (2013a). Each chapter offers a specific conceptual viewpoint

on previous emotional labor literature. While a complete discussion of this work is beyond the

scope of this chapter, the text is recommended for those seeking additional conceptual

knowledge and understanding of the current state of emotional labor research (Grandey et al.,

2013b). Lee and Ok (2014) studied emotional labor (particularly emotional dissonance), service

sabotage behaviors, burnout, and EI in a sample of 309 hotel customer contact service

employees. The authors found that participants emotional labor, specifically, emotional

dissonance, was a source of service sabotage. They also discovered that burnout had a mediating

effect on the relationship while EI had a buffering effect on the relationship between emotional

dissonance and service sabotage via burnout (Lee & Ok, 2014). Yang and Guy (2015)

investigated gender, emotional labor, turnover, and job satisfaction in a sample of Korean

government employees (N=219). The authors argued that both gender and cultural influence

were misunderstood aspects of emotional labor. The results showed that for both genders,

authentic emotional expression is related to job satisfaction; however, when participants

expressed an inauthentic emotion, the level of job satisfaction varies by gender. Specifically,

women experienced lower levels of job satisfaction while men did not (Yang & Guy, 2015). The

studies and publications mentioned above provide an adequate review of the extant literature on

emotional labor since its introduction in 1979. As previously mentioned, the research into

50
emotions in organizations continues to grow along three distinct paths: the study of affect, the

construct of emotional labor, and EI. While the subject of emotion in organizations continues to

be studied from the standpoint of affect (for a review, see Seo, Barrett, & Jin, 2008), and

emotional labor (for a review, see Grandy et al., 2013b), EI is a dynamic and growing field of

inquiry into emotion and cognition in organizations. EI stands on two columns of research:

emotion and intelligence. Before reviewing EI further, it is beneficial to examine the subject of

intelligence more closely.

Intelligence

The conception of intelligence as a distinct human ability dates back to the writings of

Homer, Plato, and Aristotle and may even predate these ancient scholars (Sternberg, 1990).

Later, Galton (1869) studied individual differences of students and others using a series of

measurements of discrimination as a precursor to modern tests of intelligence. Both Cattell

(1890) and Binet (Binet & Henri, 1896) developed early intelligence theories and instruments in

the 1800s. However, the formal study of intelligence originates in the 20th century with the work

of Spearman (Sternberg, 2012). Spearmans work led to the concept of a general factor of

intelligence or g. Mackintosh (2011) argues that most modern intelligence researchers except

the idea of a general factor of intelligence, although they remain sharply divided on its

explanation. Early development of intelligence test continued and supported the growth of the

intelligence arena in psychology. Despite widespread acceptance of intelligence testing, scholars

disagree about the specific definition and construct of intelligence; however, Wechsler offers one

generally accepted definition. Wechsler stated that intelligence is the aggregate or global

capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his

environment (1958, p. 7). Wechsler developed tests designed to measure the general construct

51
of intelligence and today his tests are the most widely used in the world (Sternberg, 2012).

Although the general theory is widely accepted and statistically supported by evidence of a

pervasive positive manifold emerging from the factor analysis of most cognitive tests

(Mackintosh, 2011, p. 11), two general schools of thought for intelligence exist (Sternberg,

1997). The first view is that intelligence is a cognitive capacity, based on cognitive performance

when dealing with a specific task, and that it is a single, fixed, inheritable entity (Davis,

Christdoulou, Seidner, & Gardner, 2011; Gardner, 1999). This is the view of the general theory.

The second viewpoint is the concept of multiple intelligences.

Multiple intelligences. A group of scholars maintain that an individual may not only

possess analytic or cognitive intelligence, but other types of intelligence as well, and that as one

learns, their intelligence increases (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987; Gardner, 1999; Salovey & Mayer,

1990; Sternberg, 2012). This is the theory of multiple intelligences. The theory of multiple

intelligences originates not long after the general theory of intelligence arrives. Thurstone

(1938) argued for the existence of a variety of primary mental abilities rather than a single

general factor, noting that human intellect was far too complex to be determined by any single

factor. Thurstone was a psychometrician and argued that g itself was created by the procedures

utilized in its study. The author c0oncluded that intelligence does not originate as a general

factor, but instead from seven relatively independent factors called primary mental abilities

(PMAs): These included verbal comprehension, number facility, word fluency, associative

memory, spatial visualization, perceptual speed, and reasoning (Thurstone, 1938). Rather than

conducting new studies, Thurstone re-analyzed data from large samples of people with similar

IQ scores. Using a pioneering approach to factor analysis, he discovered distinct profiles of

PMAs. These findings supported the multiple intelligences model and cast early doubt on the

52
general intelligence theory proposed by Spearman (1904). Later, Thurstones work evolved to

make room for both a general factor and multiple intelligences (Ruzgis, 1994). Thurstones

work inspired the work of Guilford (1967) and later Gardner (1983).

Guilford (1967) described as many as 150 separate factors of intelligence including a

factor for social intelligence. Guilford reviewed the empirical studies conducted between 1950

and 1965 used statistical factor analysis and varimax rotation to identify and verify multiple

factors of intelligence. The specific studies are too numerous to mention here (for a complete

list, see Guildford, 1967). Guilford also called on the observational work of Piaget (1950; 1952;

1953) in child and adult development of intelligent behaviors for inspiration for his Structure-of-

Intelligence (SI) theory. Like Thurstone, Guilford was a psychometrician and like Thurstone, his

work was critical of Spearmans g and inspired the work of later multiple intelligence theorists

including Gardner (1983; 1993; 1999).

Howard Gardner first proposed his theory of multiple intelligences in 1983 although he

published books about intelligence and mental abilities ten years earlier (1973b). By Gardners

own admission, his evidence for the existence of seven (initially) distinct intelligences comes

from studies of prodigies, gifted individuals, brain-damaged patients, idiot savants, normal

children, normal adults, experts in different lines of work, and individuals from diverse cultures

(Gardner, 1983, p. 9). Much of Gardners prior research dealt with studies of children (Gardner,

1970a; 1974a; 1974b; Gardner, Kircher, Winner, & Perkins, 1975; Gardner & Lohman, 1975;

Gardner, Winner, & Kircher, 1975), patients with Aphasia disorders (Caramazza, Zurif, &

Gardner, 1978; Cicone, Wapner, Foldi, Zurif, & Gardner, 1979; Davis, Foldi, Gardner & Zurif,

1978; Gardner, 1973a; 1974c; Gardner, Albert, & Weintraub, 1975; Gardner & Denes, 1973;

Gardner, Denes, & Zurif, 1975; Gardner, Silverman, Wapner, & Zurif, 1978; Gardner &

53
Winner, 1978; Gardner & Zurif, 1975; 1976; Gardner, Zurif, Berry, & Baker, 1976; Wapner &

Gardner, 1979a; 1979b; Zurif, Caramazza, Foldi, & Gardner, 1979), and various types of brain

damage or perceptual difficulties (Albert, Yamadori, Gardner, & Howes, 1973; Benson, Gardner,

& Meadows, 1976; Cicone, Wapner, & Gardner, 1980; Gardner, 1970b; Gardner, Boller,

Moreines, & Butters, 1973; Gardner & Denes, 1973; Gardner, Strub, & Albert, 1975; Grossman,

Shapiro, & Gardner, 1981; Shapiro, Grossman, & Gardner, 1981; Wapner, Judd, & Gardner,

1978; Winner, Engel, & Gardner, 1980; Winner, Rosenstiel, & Gardner, 1976; Winner,

Rosenstiel, & Gardner, 1977). Gardner (1983; 1993) argued that a general factor of intelligence

did not exist. Further, he disagreed that what modern intelligence tests measure is actually

intelligence. At most, these tests measure only one or two types of intelligence among the types

that existed. While he conceived of seven types of intelligence including linguistic intelligence,

musical intelligence, logical-mathematical intelligence, spatial intelligence, bodily kinesthetic

intelligence, and the personal intelligences (interpersonal and intrapersonal), Gardner conceded

that this may not be an exhaustive list and that other intelligences could and probably would be

discovered (1983). Both interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence were forerunners of the

concept of EI. Like Gardner, Sternberg believed in the existence of multiple kinds of

intelligence.

In a recent review of the history of intelligence, Mackintosh (2011) stated that Gardner

was right about the limitations of intelligence tests, however, Gardner overreached with his claim

that a general factor does not exist. A variety of research evidence continues to build support for

both the general factor and multiple intelligences. Matthews et al. (2012) argued that the three-

stratum model is now the state-of-the-art in intelligence research (p. 88). This theory allows

for the existence of multiple intelligences and a general factor simultaneously and may settle the

54
debate once and for all. The theory of multiple intelligences is a building block concept for

understanding the constructs of social intelligence and EI.

Social Intelligence

Early researchers into intelligence argued that there was more to human intelligence than

the abilities measured by currently available tests of intelligence (Riggio, 2002). The study of a

social intelligence dates back almost as far as the study of intelligence itself (Thorndike, 1920).

Thorndike theorized about the existence of multiple intelligences and argued that while many

possibilities, it suffices to examine for three intelligences, which he called mechanical

intelligence, social intelligence, and abstract intelligence (Thorndike, 1920, p. 228). Thorndike

is credited with first defining social intelligence as the ability to understand and manage men

and women, boys and girls - to act wisely in human relations" (1920, p. 228). However, after

nearly two decades of work on the construct, Thorndike (R.L.) and Stein pessimistically argued

that the construct might not exist or at least that the current forms of measurement were

inadequate (1937). Despite this challenge, the construct persisted. As noted earlier, Guilford

(1967) described as many as 150 separate factors of intelligence including a factor for social

intelligence. Later in a 1973 review of social intelligence, Walker and Foley defined it as the

ability to understand others and act wisely and social situations" for (p. 839). They noted that the

popularity of social intelligence as a research construct had waxed and waned over the years,

although it did enjoy resurgence in the 1960s and early 70s (Gough, 1965; Hoepfner &

OSullivan, 1968; Shanley, Walker, & Foley, 1971).

Gough (1965) specifically addressed the measurement of the social intelligence construct.

The first attempt to measure social intelligence was the Moss Test of Social Intelligence (see

Moss, Hunt, & Omwake, 1949), later renamed the George Washington Social Intelligence Test

55
(GWSIT). By 1937, substantial evidence suggested that the instrument was a poor assessment

(Thorndike & Stein, 1937). Kerr and Speroff (1947) published a later scale called the Empathy

Test. However, a review in the Mental Measurements Yearbook by Thorndike (1959)

questioned the rationale and practical value of the instrument. Another attempt to measure social

intelligence came from Sargent in 1953. Sargents Test of Insight into Human Nature offered a

series of incidents involving conflict and asked participants to predict the actions and feelings of

the protagonists in the incident. This assessment was an early attempt at a Situational Judgment

Test (SJT). SJTs are used to test EI and are addressed in detail late r in this chapter. Although

promising, the test drew criticism for an inadequate research background (Anastasi, 1961).

Based on these shortcomings, Gough (1965) argued for the efficacy of the Chapin Social Insight

Test (1942). The Chapin Test is a forced-choice SJT composed of 45 vignettes. Gough

conducted a series of validational studies across 14 separate samples for a total sample size of

1,330 and found significant correlations with several indices of social sensitivity and social

acuity. The test successfully predicted creativity, academic persistence, and academic progress

(Gough, 1965).

Tenopyr (1967) compared scores on two tests of academic intelligence with social

intelligence scores using the test designed by OSullivan, Guilford, and de Mille (1965) in

sample of 266 tenth graders. Tenopyr admitted that the results indicated that social intelligence

might add relatively little to the criterion-related variance provided by the two academic

intelligence measures and advocated for additional research to strengthen the empirical support

for the construct of social intelligence and its test instruments (Tenopyr, 1967, p. 964).

Hoepfner and OSullivan (1968) studied six different measures of behavioral cognition,

IQ, and social intelligence in a sample of 229 high school juniors. The authorized hypothesized

56
that giftedness as a term may be applied to social intelligence rather than just traditional IQ

measures and that giftedness in one area might be distinct from giftedness in the other.

Unfortunately, the authors found only partial support for their ideas. While some low IQ

participants exhibited high social intelligence, high IQ participants also scored high on social

intelligence measures. It was unclear whether they exhibited high social intelligence or whether

their high IQ allowed them to compensate for other deficits during testing (Hoepfner &

OSullivan, 1968).

Shanley et al. (1971) tested the IQ and social intelligence of 300 male and female grade

school students from grades 6, 9, and 12. The results indicated that social intelligence rises

through the life span, is higher among females than males, and the high correlation between

cognitive ability and social intelligence cast some doubt on the construct validity of the social

intelligence test used. Keating (1978) administered three measures of academic intelligence and

three measures of social intelligence to a sample of 117 undergraduate students. Statistical

analysis revealed the lack of a coherent social factor and Keating concluded that either one does

not exist or the measures currently used were inadequate to capture the construct (Keating,

1978). Arguing in agreement with Keating (1978), Ford and Tisak (1983) argued that previous

research has failed to identify and empirically coherent domain of social intelligence (p. 196).

There answer was a study examining four measures of academic intelligence and six measures of

social intelligence using three separate correlational procedures in a sample that included 620

ninth and 12th grade adolescents. The results revealed a distinct factor of social intelligence

providing incremental and superior predictive efficacy over and above academic intelligence for

a behavioral assessment of social involving observation of competence in an interview situation

(Ford & Tisak, 1983). The authors argued that social intelligence represented a domain of

57
relevant skills that go beyond those suggested by traditional conceptions of human abilities (p.

205).

In 1987, Cantor and Kihlstrom proposed social intelligence as an overarching construct

for understanding human personality. Cantor and Kihlstroms book placed social intelligence at

the center of personality theory and defined it in terms of concepts, memories, and rules that

individuals bring to bear in their efforts to solve personal life challenges. Citing the work of

Gardner (1983), the authors argued that social intelligence was an appropriate centerpiece for the

study of personality because it was construed as multifaceted and well suited to the examination

of multiple intelligences (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987; Kihlstrom, 1987). The authors adopted the

view that the adaptiveness of goals and strategies largely is determined by the extent and nature

of people's knowledge in task-relevant domains, i.e., their social intelligence expertise (Cantor

& Kihlstrom, 1987, p. 5). Cantor and Kihlstrom helped solidify social intelligence by

positioning it within the realm of individual difference psychology (1987).

Then in 1990, citing both Gardner (1983) and Cantor and Kihlstrom (1987), Salovey and

Mayer launched the construct of EI, noting that we define emotional intelligence as a subset of

social 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" (1990, p. 189). Subsequent work by Mayer and his colleagues no longer referred to EI

as a subset of social intelligence and the EI construct stood on its own from 1990 forward.

Salovey, Brackett, and Mayer (2007) argued that EI was one of the emerging group of cognitive

abilities alongside social, practical, and personal intelligence that were conceptually distinct from

general intelligence and its cold cognitive processes (p. i). While their 1990 article and an

empirical study published the same year (Mayer et al., 1990) marked the beginning of EI

58
research, social intelligence continued to be a research topic of interest in its own right. As

evidence, a number of studies continued to examine the construct.

Juchniewicz (2010) investigated social intelligence and teaching in the music field in a

sample of 40 teachers, 20 of whom were judged to be exemplary, and 20 of whom were judged

to be from more challenging programs (para. 10). Unfortunately, Juchniewicz (2010) found no

relationship between a measure of the ability to interpret others' behaviors and the rating of

music teachers. Jeloudar and Yunus (2011) studied social intelligence, age, and classroom

disciplinary strategies in a sample of 203 Malaysian secondary school teachers. The authors

found that social intelligence increased with age and that social intelligence was related to choice

of classroom disciplinary strategy (2011).

In 2011, Kihlstrom and Cantor wrote a substantial review of social intelligence for the

Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. That review discussed some of the difficulties noted in

the studies above including the disappointing empirical results and theoretical criticisms of social

intelligence. In an earlier review, Landy (2006) argued that the search for social intelligence had

been long, frustrating, and fruitless (p. 82). Despite these issues, Kihlstrom and Cantor

pointed out three potential ways forward for social intelligence research. The authors suggest

that either social intelligence has outlived its usefulness and will be replaced completely by EI,

or that it will be revitalized by new developments in social neuroscience developments, or that

the ability model of social intelligence should be abandoned in favor of a purely personality

driven approach to the construct (2011). This last recommendation is intuitive given the

previous theoretical preferences expressed by the authors when they called for social intelligence

as an overarching construct for human personality (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987). Research into

social intelligence has continued.

59
 Conzelmann, Weis, and S (2013) developed a new revised test of social intelligence

called the Magdeburg Test of Social Intelligence (MTSI-2) comprised of 22 tasks covering social

understanding, social memory, and social perception. The authors administered the test to two

samples of 127 German university students and 190 adult participants recruited from various

sources respectively. The authors also measured academic intelligence, perceptual speed, and

personality. Unfortunately, the new test failed to reveal a distinct construct of social intelligence

and instead revealed results based on unique constructs of both social memory and social

perception. The authors were able to show that these constructs were distinct from personality

and academic intelligence (Conzelmann et al., 2013). The concepts of social intelligence and EI

are inexorably linked and researchers agree that social intelligence predated EI (Salovey &

Mayer, 1990).

Emotional Intelligence (EI)

The term emotional intelligence first appeared in Leuner (1966). Later, the term appears

in Paynes unpublished dissertation, A study of emotion: developing emotional intelligence;

self-integration; relating to fear, pain, and desire (1986). However, these early instances of the

term differed conceptually from the modern meaning. Salovey and Mayers 1990 theoretical

article created the current conception of EI and the authors have been instrumental in the last 25

years of research and theory in EI. Salovey and Mayer defined EI as the ability to monitor

ones own and others feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this

information to guide ones thinking and actions (p. 190). After the advent of EI (Salovey &

Mayer, 1990), Mayer and Salovey sought to clarify the theoretical construct and argued that EI

involved accurately and efficiently processing emotional information and that this emotional

information involves personal self-awareness (1995). This description helps to place EI within

60
the general trend in emotion and affect toward greater integration with cognition and

intelligence. The authors revised the definition in 1997, 2000, and again in 2008 as the construct

evolved. Those definitions along with other conceptions of EI appear later in this chapter.

EI gained sudden popularity in 1995 with the publication of Golemans book Emotional

intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. Citing the earlier work of Salovey and Mayer,

Golemans book made claims that most researchers acknowledge far outstripped the efficacy of

the concept including the cinder box claim that EI (or EQ) as it was popularly known was more

important for success in life than IQ. This comment and the surrounding issues generated by the

initial work on EI led some researchers (Spector & Johnson, 2006) to state that "there is perhaps

no construct in the social sciences that has produced more controversy in recent years (p. 325).

Spector described an ongoing debate about the definitions, uses, measurement, and nature of the

construct (2005). Perhaps the foremost issue involves the correct or preferred definition of EI.

The definitions of EI. A number of researchers developed competing definitions of

emotional intelligence (EI) and several examples follow. Salovey and Mayer originally defined

EI as the subset of social 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, p.189). In 1997, Mayer and his colleagues

revised the definition to the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the

ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand

emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional

and intellectual growth (Mayer & Salovey, 1997, p. 10). The definition further evolves to

simply the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought,

to understand emotions and emotional meanings, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to

61
promote both better emotion and thought (p. 22). Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2000) further

simplify the construct as "the ability to perceive and express emotion, assimilate emotion and

thought, understand and reason with emotion, and regulate emotion in the self and others (p.

82). The final definition emerged in 2008 as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and

express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the

ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to

promote emotional and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). This latest definition

and the corresponding ability model of EI is the most commonly accepted definition and model

(Antonakis & Dietz, 2010; Cherniss, 2010b; Ct & Miners, 2006; Jordan, Dasborough, Daus, &

Ashkanasy, 2010; Lopes, Grewal, Kadis, Gall, & Salovey, 2006; Roset & Ciarrochi, 2005).

Other researchers offered alternative definitions of EI corresponding to other models.

As noted above and as I argued in a previous review (McCleskey, 2014a), competing

models and conceptions of EI exist. The definitions associated with several of those are

presented here for reference. The first group of researchers presented here defines EI as an

ability and conceptually agrees with Mayer and his colleagues. Gignac (2010) argued for a

seven-factor model and defines EI as the ability to purposively adapt, shape, and select

environments through the use of emotionally relevant processes (Gignac, 2010, p. 131).

Ciarrochi and Godsell (2005) defined EI as the ability to act effectively in the context of

emotions and emotionally charged thoughts, and use emotions as information (p. 71) and refer

to their construct of EI as internally-focused EI (p. 72).

Other researchers defined EI as emotional/social competencies rather than as an ability.

Bar-On (2006), viewed EI as an array of competencies and skills and defined emotional-social

intelligence (ESI) as a cross section of interrelated emotional and social competencies, skills

62
and facilitators that determine how effectively we understand and express ourselves, understand

others and relate with them, and cope with daily demands (Bar-On, 2006, p. 14). Boyatzis

(2009) also characterized EI as a set of competencies and skills offering two relevant definitions.

Boyatzis (2009) defined an EI as the ability to recognize, understand, and use emotional

information about oneself that leads to or causes effective or superior performance (p. 757).

Boyatzis (2009) defined a social intelligence competency as the ability to recognize,

understand, and use emotional information about others that leads to or causes effective or

superior performance (p. 757). Other researchers also offered a definition of EI based on a

competence model. EI is a generic competence in perceiving emotions (both in oneself in

another's) which also helps us regulate emotions and cope effectively with emotive situations

(Zeidner et al., 2009, p. 3).

While the previous definitions offer a variety of distinct approaches to the study of EI,

Kaplan, Cortina and Ruark (2010) rejected all the current definitions of EI and calling for a new

direction of research aimed at revealing the socio-emotional variables (p. 175). The authors

argued that these variables might be operationalized as knowledge, skills, abilities, and other

factors (KSAOs) that allowed organizational leaders to facilitate relevant outcomes (Kaplan et

al., 2010. p. 175).

In stark contrast to the approaches described above, Petrides, Pita, and Kokkinaki (2007)

conceptualized EI as a personality trait. Petrides (2010b) identified EI within the various

personality factors, defining it as a constellation of emotional self-perceptions located at the

lower levels of personality hierarchies and measured via the trait emotional intelligence

questionnaire (p. 137). The multifaceted and inconsistent definitions of EI led researchers to

call for coalescence around one definition, model, and construct (Cherniss, 2010a; 2010b; Jordan

63
et al, 2010; Matthews et al., 2006; Roberts, MacCann, Matthews, & Zeidner, 2010). McCleskey

(2014a) argued that the multitude of definitions of EI and the sincere academic disagreement

about what the construct does or should represent have contributed to an environment of

criticism and controversy that swirls around the academic field of emotional intelligence

research (p. 79). One factor that helps clarify EI is an examination of the various models of the

construct.

The models of EI. As noted above, a variety of approaches to EI exist including ability

models, mixed-models, trait EI, and other alternative conceptions. I argued previously that the

ability model is the most widely accepted EI model (McCleskey, 2014a). It consists of four

branches and includes perceiving emotions; facilitating emotions; understanding emotions; and

regulating emotions (Caruso & Salovey, 2004). Jordan et al. (2010) described the ability model

as the "gold standard" definition (p. 145). The most reliable and valid test of the Mayer ability

model is the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) instrument. EI

assessment and instrumentation are addressed later in this chapter. Testing constitutes a major

portion of EI research and "it is worth noting all of the major theoretical models of EI include the

use of a test instrument that was developed in conjunction with the model (McCleskey, 2014a,

p. 79).

Jordan, Ashkanasy, Hrtel, and Hooper (2002) developed the Workgroup Emotional

Intelligence Profile (WEIP) to fill the need for a context specific instrument designed for use to

measure EI in the workplace. The instrument follows the concept of the ability model and uses a

self-report administration. WEIP demonstrated adequate reliability and convergent validity as

compared to existing scales related to the measurement of EI (Jordan et al., 2002). Results

64
indicated that team EI correlated with team performance and that higher EI teams achieved

higher levels of performance (Jordan et al., 2002).

The Cascading Model of EI is another example of a conception of EI based on the ability

model. The Cascading Model of EI starts with the four-branch ability model, ranks the abilities

in a hierarchical structure, and then describes the abilities as a cascading model (Newman,

Joseph, & MacCann, 2010, p. 161). Newman et al. (2010) refer to their model as a facet-level

process model of EI and job performance (p. 160). The authors utilized evidence from research

studies and performed a meta-analysis in order to develop the cascading model. Evidence

suggests both strong statistical support and construct validity of the cascading model (Joseph &

Newman, 2010).

Mixed-models are the second major category of EI models. Mixed models are sometimes

known as emotional and social competence models (ESCs: Cherniss, 2010b). This manuscript

uses the two terms interchangeably. Bar-Ons described the first mixed-model conception of EI

in his 1988 unpublished doctoral dissertation. Bar-Ons model of competencies and skills

included the ability to be aware of, to understand, and to express oneself; the ability to be aware

of, to understand and relate to others; the ability to deal with strong emotions and control one's

impulses; and the ability to adapt to change and to solve problems of a personal or social nature

(Bar-On, 2006, p. 14). Bar-Ons model, later renamed the Bar-On Model of Emotional-Social

Intelligence (ESI), consists of five factors including interpersonal skills, interpersonal skills,

adaptability, stress management, and general mood (Bar-On, 2006, p. 14). Some scholars

critical of the ESI model noted that Bar-Ons earlier work focused on emotional well-being, and

was only later conceptualized as EI (Jordan et al., 2002). The author may have been capitalizing

on the popularity of the construct. Bar-Ons unpublished dissertation has been offered as

65
evidence of this idea. The paper entitled the development of the concept of psychological well-

being does not mention either EI or social intelligence and instead focuses on personality and an

overarching theory of psychological well-being (Bar-On, 1988). Despite this little publicized

fact, Bar-On is considered an early EI pioneer (Cherniss, 2010b).

Goleman and Boyatzis developed another mixed model approach (Boyatzis, Goleman, &

Rhee, 2000). Goleman's book, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ began

the both the storm of popularity and controversy surrounding the study of EI (1995). The book

receives additional treatment later in the manuscript. Goleman and Boyatzis loosely based their

EI model on the ability model; however, Goleman and his colleagues expanded the model to

include numerous emotional and social competencies. Then the authors sorted these

competencies into four "clusters" including self-awareness, self-management, social awareness,

and relationship management (Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee, 2002, pp. 253-256). Some

scholars have criticized the Goleman-Boyatzis model and other mixed models based on the

inclusion of a wide range of factors and their overlap with preexisting personality dimensions

(Antonakis et al., 2009; Cherniss, 2010b; Jordan et al., 2010).

Trait models are the third category of EI models. Petrides developed the first true trait

model of EI (2010a). Trait EI is comprised of four components including: well-being (self-

confidence, happiness, and optimism); sociability (social competence, assertiveness, and emotion

management of others); self-control (stress management, emotion regulation, and low impulses

in this); and emotionality (emotional perception of self and others, emotion expression, and

empathy) (Petrides et al., 2007, pp. 274-275). Petrides previously argues that Trait EI was the

only operational definition in the field that recognizes the inherent subjectivity of emotional

experience (2010b, p. 137). The trait model includes numerous characteristics such as

66
adaptability, assertiveness, emotion expression, emotion management, emotion regulation,

impulsiveness, relationships, self-esteem, self-motivation, social awareness, stress management,

trait empathy, trait happiness, and trait optimism (Petrides, 2010b, p. 137). The trait model

completely removes EI from the discussion of an ability and places it firmly in the realm of

personality.

By way of clarification, Cherniss argued for the establishment of a clear distinction

between EI and ESCs (2010b). EI ability models and ESC models represent distinct constructs

and debates on the efficacy of either approach were unnecessary. Therefore, some of the heated

and unproductive controversies in the field of EI can be eliminated (Cherniss, 2010b, p. 122).

Cherniss (2010a) stated that the truth surrounding the EI construct is complicated. EI suffers

from the same form of theoretical pluralism that the field of leadership frequently exhibits

(Glynn & Raffaelli, 2010). Cherniss (2010b) argued that the concept of EI rests on three

fundamental premises. As McCleskey (2014a) pointed out, emotions play an important role in

daily life; people may vary in their ability to perceive, understand, use, and manage emotions;

and these variances may affect individual adaptation in a variety of different contexts, including

the workplace (p. 88). Although these basic premises are both intuitive and somewhat difficult

to dispute, the concept of EI requires further clarification. While Cherniss (2010b) advocated for

an EI verses ESC approach, other scholars have attempted to clarify EI in a different way, by

classifying the current research along three streams.

Three streams of research. Ashkanasy and Daus (2005) categorized emotional

intelligence research into three streams of research. These three streams include a four-branch

abilities test based on the model of emotional intelligence defined in Mayer and Salovey (1997),

self-report assessments based on the ability model and, conceptions, models, and approaches that

67
expand the EI construct passed the MayerSalovey definition (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005, p. 441).

The first stream is referred to as the Stream One Ability Model or SOAM (McCleskey, 2015).

The SOAM includes studies based on the ability model and using ability based measures. This

stream is based on the original characterization of EI as a form of intelligence and consisting of

four distinct branches (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). In 2008, Mayer et al. defined EI as, the ability

to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate

feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional

knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth (p.

511). The SOAM utilizes ability based test instruments rather than self-report scales. The

second stream of EI research is called the Stream Two Ability Model or STAM (McCleskey,

2015).

The STAM of EI research includes studies that conceptualize EI based on the ability

model, but use test instruments utilizing self-report of observer reporting rather than instruments

designed to test specific abilities. STAM instruments include the Wong & Law Emotional

Intelligence Scale (WLEIS: Wong & Law, 2002), the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence

Test (SSEIT: Schutte et al., 1998), the Workgroup Emotional Intelligence Profile (WEIP: Jordan

et al., 2002), and others. While these first two streams endorse the same model of EI, stream

three encompasses a variety of different approaches to EI.

Stream three includes studies based on different conceptions of EI and includes both

mixed model and trait EI approaches. This stream is called the Stream Three Mixed Models or

STMM (McCleskey, 2015). STAM and STMM models have shown considerable overlap with

personality measures in some instances. This difference and others led Cherniss (2010b) to

argue that SOAM and STAM EI be called Emotional Intelligence while STMM models that

68
addressed emotional and social competencies and skills (which overlapped significantly with

personality) be called Emotional and Social Competence (ESCs) in an effort to clarify the

distinctions between these two distinct constructs. Antonakis et al. (2009) argued that the

SOAM approach holds the most promise for the future direction of EI and Jordan et al. (2010)

described the SOAM as the "gold standard" for defining EI (p. 145). The three streams approach

allows for an easy sorting of current EI research into understandable categories. Therefore, the

literature on EI and Leadership will be categorized using the three streams approach.

Measures of Emotional Intelligence (EI). Following the work of Ashkanasy and Daus

(2005), EI measures are classified according to the three streams approach described earlier in

this manuscript. The most commonly used instruments are presented here, however, a large

number of proprietary, informal, or rarely used instruments also exist for the measurement of EI.

A complete description of all of them is beyond the scope of this manuscript. As the preferred

conceptual model, special attention is paid to the SOAM instruments.

SOAM test instruments. SOAM instruments include ability tests, emotion recognition

tests, and situational judgment tests. The most commonly used SOAM instrument is the Mayer-

Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT v2.0; Mayer et al., 2002). The MSCEIT

is an ability test of EI composed of four branches or scales. The test includes 141 items and has

adequate internal consistency and reliability (Conte & Dean, 2006, p. 62). Other studies

supported the validity of the MSCEIT (Brackett & Salovey, 2006; Mayer et al., 2003). In spite

of the growing psychometric evidence, some controversy continued to emerge regarding the

validity and factorial composition of the MSCEIT. As one example, Maul (2012a:2012b)

questioned the construct validity of the MSCEIT and challenged its factorial structure. Although

69
these challenges existed, Mayer and his colleagues addressed them in the literature (Mayer,

Salovey, & Caruso, 2012) and the MSCEIT remains the primary measure of the SOAM of EI.

Recent studies utilizing the MSCEIT. The MSCEIT remains the primary SOAM EI test

instrument. A number of studies utilized the MSCEIT to examine a variety of individual, group,

and organizational variables. Cherry, Fletcher, and OSullivan (2013) examined EI, clinical

communication, and attachment styles in a sample of medical students. The authors found

finding incremental variance tied to EI. Doherty, Cronin, and Offiah (2013) examined graduate

medical school professional development using both a SOAM EI and STAM (Stream Two

Ability Model) instrument and concluded that the two measures (MSCEIT and ECI) may be

measuring distinct constructs. This added further support to the argument presented by Cherniss

(2010b) that scholars separate EI and ESCs .

Fllesdal and Hagvet (2013) studied EI and transformational leadership. DiFabio and

Kenny (2012) studied SOAM and STAM EI using the MSCEIT and EIS in a sample of Italian

students and found support for a relationship between EI and perceived social support after

controlling for personality. Fernndez-Berrocal, Cabello, Castillo, and Extremera (2012)

examined the relationship between SOAM EI and gender using the MSCEIT and specifically

uncovered the mediating effect of age on the relationship. Abe (2011) found that SOAM EI

contributed to successful experiential learning by fostering student reflective capabilities in a

sample of college students. Fox, Bergquist, Casey, Hong, and Sinha (2011) compared cocaine

dependent and healthy individuals along lines of SOAM EI, cognitive ability, perceived stress,

and impulse control. Montgomery, Stoesz, and McCrimmon (2013) studied the relationship

between SOAM EI and self-report interpersonal relations for young adults with Aspergers

Syndrome. Kee et al. (2009) discovered that schizophrenia patients performed significantly

70
worse than control groups at identifying, understanding, and managing emotions as measured

using the MSCEIT. Additionally, the amount of the deficit correlated with the severity of their

symptoms (Kee et al., 2009). Ct et al. (2011) utilized the emotion regulation portion of the

MSCEIT in a SOAM EI study of emotion regulation and personality across organization rank.

The study found that level of Agreeableness influenced the relationship between Emotion

Regulation and organizational rank (Ct et al., 2011). Barbey, Colom, and Grafman (2014)

examined a neurological basis of SOAM EI in patients with brain injuries. The authors found

that scores for IQ and personality predicted SOAM EI and suggested the need for an integrative

framework for understanding the architecture of executive, social and emotional processes

(Barbey et al., 2014, p. 265). Grunes, Gudmundsson, and Irmer (2014) failed to find a

significant relationship between SOAM EI and leadership styles in a sample of educational

leaders. Karim (2010) looked for support for the cross-cultural validity of the MSCEIT.

Leopold et al. (2012) extended earlier findings showing that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex is

associated with abilities in affective Theory of Mind and that this deficit is associated with EI.

MacCann et al. (2011) demonstrated that coping skills mediate the relationship between SOAM

EI and academic performance using a variety of instruments including the MSCEIT. MacCann,

Lipnevich, and Roberts (2012) included the MSCEIT in a study incorporating SJTs to study

SOAM EI and emotional competencies. Margaret Hayes and Reilly (2013) conducted a

comparative study of youth detainees along the dimensions of psychiatric disorder, cognitive

ability, and SOAM EI. Dong et al. (2014) examined the relationship between developmental job

experience (DJE) and positive and negative individual outcomes (advancement potential and

turnover intention) and found that EI (as measured using the MSCEITv2.0) moderated the

relationship. These studies represent a non-exhaustive sample of recent articles featuring the

71
MSCEIT as the SOAM EI test instrument. Additional research specifically addressing SOAM of

EI and leadership is presented later in this chapter. Table 2 summarizes this discussion of recent

literature including the MSCEITv2.0. Despite this growing list of peer-reviewed literature,

criticism of the MSCEIT also continues to accumulate.

Table 2. Recent studies utilizing the MSCEIT v2.0 instrument to measure SOAM EI

Author(s) Instrument Results

Abe (2011) MSCEIT v2.0 Relationship between EI and experiential learning
Barbey, Colom, and MSCEIT v2.0 Examined neurological basis of SOAM EI in patients with focal
Grafman (2014) brain injuries

Cherry, Fletcher, and MSCEIT v2.0 Supported relationship between EI and clinical communication
OSullivan (2013)
Ct, Kraus, Cheng, Oveis, MSCEIT v2.0 Examined emotion regulation and personality across
van der Lowe, Lian, & emotion organization rank
Keltner, (2011) regulation
DiFabio and Kenny (2011) MSCEIT v2.0 Relationship between EI and perceived social support
and EIS
Doherty, Cronin, & Offiah MSCEIT v2.0 Relationship exists between EI and professional development, 2
(2013) and ECI instruments measure distinct constructs
Fernandez-Berrocal, MSCEIT v2.0 Found relationship between EI and gender mediated by age
Cabello, Castillo, and
Extremera (2012)
Fllesdal and Hagvet (2013) MSCEIT v2.0 Supported relationship between EI and Transformational
Leadership

Fox, Bergquist, Casey, MSCEIT v2.0 Compared dependent vs. healthy individuals on EI, cognitive
Hong, and Sinha (2011) ability, perceived stress, & impulse control

Grunes (2014) MSCEIT v2.0 Failed to find a significant relationship between EI and
leadership styles

Karim (2010) MSCEIT v2.0 Support for the cross-cultural validity of the MSCEIT
Kee et al. (2009) MSCEIT v2.0 Schizophrenia patients performed worse at identifying,
understanding, and managing emotions

Leopold et al. (2012) MSCEIT v2.0 Ventromedial prefrontal cortex is associated with abilities and is
associated with EI
MacCann, Fogarty, Zeidner, MSCEIT v2.0 Coping skills mediate the relationship between EI and academic
& Roberts (2011) & various performance
MacCann, Lipnevich, and MSCEIT v2.0 Studied EI and emotional competencies in students
Roberts (2012) & SJTs
Margaret Hayes & Reilly MSCEIT v2.0 Studied youth detainees and compared psychiatric disorder,
(2013) cognitive ability, and EI

72
Table 2 (continued). Recent studies utilizing the MSCEIT v2.0 instrument to measure SOAM EI

Author(s) Instrument Results

Montgomery, Stoesz, and MSCEIT v2.0 Relationship between SOAM EI and self-report
McCrimmon (2013) interpersonal relations for young adults with Aspergers
Syndrome
Note: MSCEIT v2.0 = Mayer-Salovey-Caruso-Emotional-Intelligence-Text version 2.0, ECI=Emotional
Competence Inventory, ESI=Emotional and Social Intelligence, SJTs=Situational Judgement Tests
Note: Adapted from Research on Emotion in Organizations Volume XI (p. 279), by Hrtel, Zerbe, & Ashkanasy,
2015, West Yorkshire, UK: Emerald. Copyright 2015 by Jim A. McCleskey. Adapted with permission.

Criticisms of the MSCEIT. Authors critical of the MSCEIT include Roberts et al. (2006),

Fiori and Antonakis (2011, 2012), Antonakis and Dietz (2010; 2011), Fllesdal and Hagtvet

(2009; 2013), Matthews et al. (2007), Maul (2012a; 2012b) and others. Some of the critics of the

MSCEIT have questioned its construct validity based on the fact that it does not correlate closely

enough with some other tests of emotion recognition or perception including the Vocal-1 (r-.45),

the STEU (r=.48), and the Eyes of the Mind (r=.68). For a discussion of these issues, see Mayer

et al. (2012). Additionally, Maul (2012a; 2012b) openly questioned the validity of the MSCEIT

and in a point counter-point edition of Emotion Review, criticism of and support for the MSCEIT

were provided by some of the SOAM models supporters (Mayer et al., 2012; MacCann,

Matthews, & Roberts, 2012). Ultimately, while the MSCEIT is not a perfect instrument, it is

currently the only established standardized test of SOAM EI (Fiori & Antonakis, 2011, p.

329). These authors suggested that the MSCEIT is a valuable research tool despite its

shortcomings and provided scholars and practitioners follow a few simple suggestions (Fiori &

Antonakis, 2011). Fiori and Antonakis (2011) argued that researchers use branch scores rather

than looking at the total score on the MSCEIT, control for the effects of personality and general

73
mental ability (GMA), and account for measurement error when using the MSCEIT. An

additional issue involves the factorial structure of the MSCEIT.

A number of studies reached the conclusion that the Using Emotions to Facilitate

Thought branch of the SOAM could not be identified using a variety of statistical analyses

(Keele & Bell, 2008; Maul, 2012a; Maul, 2012b; Roberts et al., 2006; Rode et al., 2007; Rossen

et al., 2008). Matthews et al. (2007) previously raised this argument as well. Other scholars also

demonstrated that unlike the Using Emotions branch, the remaining three branches possess

adequate structural and incremental validity, and generalizability (Fan, Jackson, Yang, Tang, &

Zhang, 2010; Joseph & Newman, 2010; Mayer et al., 2008). Gardner and Qualter (2011)

conducted a factorial analysis of the MSCEIT and found support for a three branch model

including the Experiential EI area score (Perceiving Emotions and Using Emotions),

Understanding Emotions and Management Emotions. These findings supported the meta-

analytical work of Fan et al. (2010). Despite these findings, Fllesdal and Hagtvet (2013)

created a new factorial structure of the MSCEIT using alternative subscales in the Perceiving

Emotions Branch and found significant results in their study for the Managing Emotions branch,

total EI score, and one of their new branches labelled APE/NE. The work of Fllesdal and

Hagtvet confirmed that the controversies surrounding the validity of the MSCEIT remain

unsettled (2013). Another issue with the MSCEIT involves its cost. It is currently the most

expensive option for studying the SOAM of EI. The MSCEIT is not the only performance based

ability test instrument used to measure part or all of the SOAM of EI.

Matthews et al. (2012) describe a variety of alternative tests and methodologies useful in

the measurement of SOAM. These include emotion recognition tasks measures and situational

judgment tests (SJTs). While few studies to date have utilized these alternative SOAM

74
measures, each shows some promise in helping to close the psychometric gaps left open by the

MSCEIT. The study of emotion recognition tasks represents a well-established facet of

psychological research methodology.

Emotion recognition task measures. Emotion recognition includes facial recognition,

body language or nonverbal recognition, and vocal recognition. The study of facial recognition

dates back to the work of Charles Darwin (1872/1955). Beginning in the 1950s, Ekman

conducted pioneering work in the field of facial recognition. Ekman developed the Facial Action

Coding System (FACS) and this system set the precedent for the field (Ekman, 1992; Ekman &

Friesen, 1975). Indeed, Salovey and Mayers seminal 1990 article cited Ekmans work when

discussing the formation of their initial theory of emotional intelligence. Instruments commonly

used to measure facial recognition include the Japanese Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test

(JACBART) and the Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy in Adult Facial Expressions

(DANVA2-AF), part of the DANVA suite of test instruments developed by Nowicki and Duke

(2001). The JACBART respondents view posed facial expressions for short durations showing

either happiness, contempt, disgust, sadness, anger, surprise, or fear. This assessment is similar

to the Faces and Pictures tasks of the Perceiving Emotions branch of the MSCEITv2.0 (Mayer et

al., 2002). Unfortunately and in contradiction to intuition, Roberts et al. (2006) found a nearly

zero correlation between the JACBART and the Faces task of the MSCEIT. MacCann et al.

(2003) found validity evidence in support of the JACBART as a measure of emotion perception.

However, very few if any recent studies employed the JACBART to examine the SOAM.

Similarly, few studies utilized the DANVA to examine EI relationships (Byron, 2007; Rubin,

Munz, & Bommer, 2005) or examined an aspect of the SOAM individually such as Emotion

Regulation (Schmid Mast & Darioly, 2014). The Communication of Affect Receiving Ability

75
Test (CARAT), the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS), and the Interpersonal Perception

Task (IPT) also include recognition of facial expressions however these instruments include

overall nonverbal expression and are addressed later in the chapter. The study of vocal

recognition is another avenue that researchers use to examine emotion recognition.

The common tests of verbal recognition include the Scherers (2007) Vocal Expression

Recognition Index (Vocal-I) and the DANVA2-AP (Roberts et al., 2010). The Vocal-I uses

emotions heard in a foreign language to elicit respondent judgments about expressions of joy,

sadness, fear, anger, and neutral feelings (Roberts et al., 2010). The DANVA2-AP uses audio

files to elicit respondents to classify sentences into happy, sad, angry, or fearful categories

(Roberts et al., 2010). While various emotion recognition tests focus on faces, voices, and body

gestures, Bnziger, Grandjean, and Scherer (2009) developed a test that combines all three

categories. The Multimodal Emotion Recognition Test (MERT) represents a logical step

forward in the science of emotion recognition testing. These tests represent the most common

measurements of emotion recognition in use today. For a more thorough review of these tests

and additional emotion recognition instruments, see Hall, Andrzejewski, and Yopchick (2009).

The results from the meta-analysis conducted by Hall et al. (2009) led the researchers to

conclude that there is no doubt that accurate emotion recognition is connected to healthy

functioning and this applies in a variety of domains including workplace settings. While the

efficacy of emotion recognition instruments is indicated, a relative paucity of studies exist

linking these tests to SOAM EI. This has led some researchers to continue to search for

alternatives to the MSCEIT. Recently McCleskey (2014a) joined a group of scholars who

recommended expanded use of SJTs in the study of SOAM EI.

76
 Situational judgment tests (SJTs). SJTs are not a novel approach to the measurement of

emotional constructs. The first scale ever used to measure emotional expression was the Beth

Israel Hospital Psychosomatic Questionnaire (Sifneos, 1973). This instrument presented verbal

situations to patients and hospital personnel recorded the patients verbal responses (Salovey &

Mayer, 1990). It was an early SJT. The MSCEIT also functions as an SJT in two sections, the

emotions management task, and the emotional relations task (Mayer et al., 2002). Several

scholars developed new SOAM of EI tests utilizing situational judgment (MacCann & Roberts,

2008; Roberts et al., 2010). MacCann and Roberts (2008) argued that most of the research in

Stream One comes from one assessment, the MSCEIT v2.0 (and its predecessors, MSCEIT and

the MEIS). This creates a psychometric issue because test effects are indistinguishable from

construct effects. Further, the authors suggest that MSCEIT is empirically rather than

theoretically keyed, such that EI scores do not have a strong theoretical background (MacCann

& Roberts, 2008, p. 540). MacCann and Roberts developed two new assessments: the

Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU) and the Situational Test of Emotion

Management (STEM). The authors presented promising initial data on the validity and

reliability of these instruments. Further, the authors argued that the characteristics of the STEM

were experimentally manipulated to disentangle test effects from construct effects (MacCann

& Roberts, 2008, p. 540). The STEU corresponds with the understanding emotions branch of the

SOAM. In 2014, Allen, Weissman, Hellwig, MacCann, and Roberts also developed a short form

of the STEU called the STEU-B. Other SJTs also measure the SOAM of EI.

The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS) solicits responses along the

dimensions of anger, fear, sadness, and happiness. The respondents describe their feelings as

reaction to various scenes (Lane, Quinlan, Schwartz, Walker, & Zeitlin, 1990). The LEAS

77
correlates with emotion recognition and the ability to respond to aversive moods (Lane, 2000).

Lane, Sechrest, and Riedel (1998) found that both the LEAS and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale

(TAS-20) showed similar correlations along the characteristics of age, sex, socioeconomic status,

and years of school providing further evidence of construct validity for the LEAS. LEAS scores

also correlate with Positron Emission Topography, which adds neuro-scientific support for its

construct validity (Lane et al., 1998). Another version of the LEAS was developed for children

(LEAS-C) ages 9-12 (Bajgar, Ciarrochi, Lane, & Dean, 2005). A more recent study conducted

by Parling, Mortazavi, and Ghaderi (2010) utilized the LEAS to examine emotional self-

awareness in alexithymics and a control group among individuals suffering with an eating

disorder. Another study revealed that those patients experiencing somatoform disorders

manifested deficits in emotional awareness as measured using the LEAS (Subic-Wrana, Beutel,

Knebel, & Lane, 2010). Begeer et al. (2011) studied individuals with Autism disorders that

undertook Theory of Mind training to assess improvements in emotional awareness using the

LEAS and found none.

Another less well-known SJT measures emotion recognition. The Emotion Recognition

Profile (ERP-Q: Quoidbach, Nelis, Mikolajczak, & Hansenne, 2007) consists of 16 scenarios and

the respondent chooses among eight outcomes for each. The ERP-Q is available in both English

and French and is available in a more recent revised version called the ERP-R (Nelis,

Quoidbach, Hansenne, & Mikolajczak, 2011). The revised ERP shows good evidence of

validity, independence of nonverbal reasoning and verbal skills, and relates positively to EI

(Trait EI) and relevant personality dimensions (Nelis et al., 2011). The validity evidence

mentioned here compares the ERP-R to a Stream Three Mixed Model (STMM) of EI.

Additional studies should address validity evidence when compared with SOAM measures.

78
Schmidt-Atzert & Buhner (2002) developed The Test of Emotional Intelligence (TEMINT) as

another SJT aimed at measuring the ability to understand emotions. The TEMINT requires

respondents to rate the feelings of aversion, anger, fear, etc. experienced in various situations.

The test scores relative to the emotions reported by the target participants themselves. Therefore,

objectively correct answers exist based on the self-report of the targets (Schmidt-Atzert &

Buhner, 2002). Blickle et al. (2009) utilized TEMINT and found a relationship between

emotional reasoning and emotion recognition ability over and above the effects of personality

and cognitive ability. Blickle, Momm, Liu, Witzki, and Steinmayr (2011) provided further

support for TEMINT. However, Amelang and Steinmayr (2006) previously found contradictory

results. DeBusk and Austin (2011) incorporated TEMINT to study the relationship between

SOAM and facial recognition but failed to show a significant connection. Two common SJT

measures exist in the area of Managing Emotions as well.

The two common SJT measures used to measure emotional management are the

Emotional Management Test (EMT) and the Situational Judgment Test for Management

(STEM). Several recent studies utilized the STEM including Burrus et al. (2012), which

demonstrated a link between SOAM and emotional well-being. MacCann (2010) examined both

the STEU and the STEM and compared consensus versus dichotomous scoring methods.

MacCann et al. (2011) examined the mediating role of coping between SOAM EI and academic

performance using sample groups from the STEM youth version and the MSCEIT. While these

represent the commonly used SJTs to date, development of SJTs continues. The STEU, STEM,

TEMINT, and LEAS each address a subset of the SOAM EI branches. Other researchers

attempted to create more robust SJTs.

79
 One such SJT is the Situational Judgment Test of Emotional Abilities (SJTEA) developed

by Roberts, Betancourt, Burrus, et al. (in press). The SJTEA consists of 16 items and

participants are presented a series of short video clips establishing the context of a scenario or

emotionally-laden situation (Fallon, et al., 2014). While still relatively new, the SJTEA has

demonstrated internal reliability, and moderate to high relationships with the SOAM EI

branches. The SJTEA also appears to encompass both emotional and intellectual components,

and has demonstrated some evidence of predictive validity (Matthews et al., 2012, p. 120). In

addition to the SJTEA, Sharma, Gangopadhyay, Austin, and Mandal (2013) developed another

new SJT for EI. Initial results show good reliability and validity and additional studies using this

instrument may prove promising. Table 3 summarizes the list of instruments discussed here.

SJTs represent an exciting development in the study of the SOAM EI construct.

Table 3. Instruments Used to Measure the SOAM of EI

Name Commonly Measures Author & Date

Mayer-Salovey-Caruso-Emotional- MSCEIT Emotional Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso (2002)
Intelligence-Test version 2.0 v2.0 Intelligence
Japanese Caucasian Brief Affect JACBART Facial Expressions Matsumoto (2000)
Recognition Test
Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal DANVA2- Facial Expressions Nowicki & Duke (2001)
Accuracy in Adult Facial Expressions AF
Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal DANVA2- Vocal Expressions Nowicki & Duke (2001)
Accuracy in Adult Prosody AP
Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal DANVA2 Nonverbal Nowicki & Duke (2001)
Accuracy Expression
Vocal Expression Recognition Index Vocal-I Vocal Expressions Scherer (2007)
(Vocal-I)
The Multimodal Emotion Recognition MERT Multi-Modal Bnziger, Grandjean, & Scherer (2009)
Test
Beth Israel Hospital Psychosomatic N/A Situational Sifneos (1973)
Questionnaire Judgment
MSCEIT v2.0 (emotions management MSCEIT Situational Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso (2002)
& emotions relation tasks) v2.0 Judgment
The Situational Test of Emotional STEU Situational MacCann & Roberts (2008)
Understanding Judgment
The Situational Test of Emotion STEM Situational MacCann & Roberts (2008)
Management Judgment

80
Table 3 (continued). Instruments Used to Measure the SOAM of EI

Name Commonly Measures Author & Date

The Situational Test of Emotional STEU-B Situational Allen et al. (2014)
Understanding Short Form Judgment
The Levels of Emotional Awareness LEAS Situational Lane et al. (1990)
Scale Judgment
The Levels of Emotional Awareness LEAS-C Situational Bajgar, Ciarrochi, Lane, & Deane
Scale for Children Judgment (2005)
The Emotion Regulation Profile- ERP-P Situational Quoidbach, Mikolajczak, &
Revised Judgment Hansenne, 2007
The Test of Emotional Intelligence TEMINT Situational Schmidt-Atzert & Buhner (2002)
Judgment
The Emotional Management Test EMT Situational Burrus et al. (2012)
Judgment
The Situational Judgment Test for STEM Situational Judgment
Management
Situational Judgment Test of SJTEA Situational Roberts, Betancourt, Burrus, et al.
Emotional Abilities Judgment (2011)
Situational Judgement Test for EI N/A Situational Sharma et al. (2013)
Judgment

STAM test instruments. Recall that the Stream Two Ability Model (STAM) follows

the conceptual framework of Mayers four-branch model of EI but utilizes self-report and

multirater instruments rather than ability based tests. The Schutte Self-Report Emotional

Intelligence Scale (SSEIT) is one of the oldest and most popular emotional intelligence tests.

Alternatively referred to in the literature as the assessing emotions scale, the emotional

intelligence scale, or the Schutte emotional intelligence scale, the SSEIT appears in more than

200 published articles. The instrument has a 33 item self-report inventory focusing on typical

emotional intelligence (Schutte, Malouff, & Bhullar, 2010). Developed in 1998 (Schutte et al.),

the scale shows strong evidence of reliability and validity and has been translated into at least

four additional languages for use in a variety of populations (Schutte et al., 2010).

The Swinburne Emotional Intelligence Test (SUEIT) was the predecessor to the Genos

Emotional Intelligence Inventory. The names of the two instruments are used interchangeably in

the literature. The Genos Emotional Intelligence Inventory (Genos EI) is a self-report assessment

81
derived for the seven-factor model of EI. A significant study using multifactor statistical

analysis revealed good reliability and validity for the test (Gignac, 2010). Palmer, Stough,

Harmer, and Gignac (2010) demonstrated that the Genos EI does not measure EI itself. Instead,

it measures how often participants demonstrate emotionally intelligent behaviors in the

workplace (p. 103).

The Trait Meta Mood Scale (TMMS) actually measures mood regulation rather EI but is

frequently classified as an EI measure (Walter et al., 2011). Zeidner et al. (2009) noted that

mood regulation is a branch of emotion research that precedes EI research. Essentially, EI is

concerned with the internal regulation of mood specifically. The TMMS measures strategies for

working with moods including paying attention to feelings, discriminating clearly among

feelings, and adaptive regulation of negative feelings. The instrument has generally sound

psychometric properties and less overlap with personality than many EI questionnaires (Zeidner

et al., 2009, p. 128). Although, in keeping with the STAM of EI, mood regulation is partially

but not entirely overlapping with standard personality traits (p. 129).

The Workgroup Emotional Intelligence Profile (WEIP) contains 27 items and factor

analysis supports seven factors (Jordan et al., 2002). These include emotional self-awareness,

the use of ones emotions to facilitate thought, the ability to discuss ones emotions, the ability to

recognize emotion in others, the ability to detect others surface displays of emotion, empathy,

and emotional management. The subscales are labeled ability to deal with own emotions, and

ability to deal with others' emotions. The WEIP-3 conforms to the revised Mayer ability model

(Mayer et al., 1997) and demonstrates adequate reliability, consistency, and validity (Jordan et

al., 2002).

82
 Wong and Law (2002) developed another self-report measure of EI called the Wong Law

Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS). The WLEIS includes 16 scale items and demonstrated

adequate reliability along with some construct validity. It shows evidence of incremental

validity beyond the FFM of personality (Conte & Dean, 2006). An example of item is I have

good understanding of my own emotions. Wong, Wong, and Peng (2010) reported internal

consistent reliability (coefficient alpha) of an N=3866 sample at 0.92, with mean and standard

deviation of 3.55 and 0.43, respectively. The test has also been used successfully in a variety of

different cultural samples, has been cross-validated against competing measures, and is available

for use as either self or peer rating (Huang, Law, & Wong, 2006). The third stream of EI

research includes the mixed model and trait approaches to EI.

Recently a group of researchers (Anguiano-Carrasco, MacCann, Geiger, Seybert, &

Roberts, 2015) developed a new instrument designed to measure EI called the Three-Branch

Emotional Intelligence Test. The test uses both a forced choice and a standard rating scale

approach. The test was designed to answer some of the criticisms of EI instruments including

the factorial structure of the four-branch model (Fllesdal & Hagtvet, 2013) and the

susceptibility to faking in some instruments (Grubb & McDaniel, 2007). While initial results are

somewhat problematic, the test may gain support as additional validity evidence is acquired

(Anguiano-Carrasco et al., 2015). Table 4 presents the STAM test instruments.

STMM test instruments. Wood, Parker, and Keefer pointed out that the Emotional

Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) was the first published and peer reviewed EI measure and remains one

of the most widely used (2010). The test includes 133 scale items and demonstrates adequate

reliability. However, studies revealed some problems with the discriminant validity of the EQ-i

(Conte & Dean, 2006). Bar-On developed the EQ-i self-report questionnaire. It is also available

83
as a multirater instrument (EQ360). The EQ-i received considerable negative scrutiny when

research revealed some test-retest reliability and susceptibility to faking issues (Grubb &

McDaniel, 2007; Whitman, Van Rooy, Viswesvaran, & Alonso, 2008). The EQ-i is also

available in a long, short, and youth version.

Table 4. Instruments Used to Measure the STAM of EI

Name Commonly Measures Author & Date

Wong and Law Emotional WLEIS Self-report, Wong & Law (2002)
Intelligence Scale other
Workgroup Emotional Intelligence WEIP Self-report Jordan, Ashkanasy, Hartel, & Hooper
Profile (2002)
Swinburne University Emotional SUEIT Self-report Palmer & Stough (2002)
Intelligence Test (aka Genos EI)
Schutte Self-report Emotional SSEIT Self-report Schutte et al. (1998)
Intelligence Test
Assessment of Emotions Scale AES Self-report Schutte, Malouff, & Bhullar (2010)
Self-Rated Emotional Intelligence SREIS Self-report Brackett et al. (2006)
Scale

The Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) is another very popular EI instruments.

Developed for use with the Boyatzis-Goleman mixed-model, the instrument includes 72 scale

items and can be utilized as either a self-report or multirater instrument. The ECI demonstrated

moderate predictive and discriminant validity in use (Conte & Dean, 2006). Several researchers

criticized the ECI for overlap with personality, limited validity evidence, and marginal reliability

and argued that the ECI is psychometrically weaker than both the EQ-i and the SSEIT (Zeidner

et al., 2009).

The Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) comes is a self-report

questionnaire comprised of 153 scale items. It is also available as a 30-scale item short version.

The TEIQue demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of emotional reactivity over

and above social desirability, alexithymia, and the Big 5 model of personality measures

(Mikolajczak, Luminet, Leroy, & Roy, 2007). Petrides (2010b) claimed that Trait EI is not tied

84
to specific proprietary tests describing it as suitable for the interpretation of data from any EI

test (p. 138). Zeidner et al. (2009) argued that although the TEIQue is an improvement over the

SSEIT, EQ-I, and the ECI in several ways, they still see uncomfortably high correlation with Big

5 personality measures. This should not be surprising since trait EI is defined as a personality

factor. Overlap with personality measures is one common criticism of EI instruments, especially

those in the STMM. Table 5 displays a summary of the STMM test instruments.

Table 5. Instruments Used to Measure the STMM of EI

Name Commonly Measures Author & Date

Emotional Quotient Inventory EQ-i Self-report Bar-On (2000)
Emotional Quotient 360 degree EQ360 Multi-rater Bar-On (2000)

Emotional Competence Inventory ECI Self-report Wolff (2007)

Emotional Competence Inventory ECI-2 Self-report Wolff (2007)

version 2
Emotional Competence Inventory - ECI-U Self-report Wolff (2006)
University
Leadership Dimensions LDQ Self-report Dulewicz & Higgs (2004)
Questionnaire
Emotional Intelligence Appraisal EIA Self-report Bradberry & Greaves (2003)

Emotional Self-Awareness ESQ Self-report Killian (2012)

Questionnaire
Trait Emotional Intelligence TEIQue Self-report Petrides (2010)
Questionnaire
Cyberia & Shrink Emotional N/A Self-report Cyberia & Shrink, 1996;
Intelligence Questionnaire Mansouri, 2001

Now that a more comprehensive view of EI has been provided, the key dependent

variable in the study is discussed. The next section includes an overview of the field of

leadership beginning with its history, then moving on to its measurement, and finally returning to

the subject of EI and leadership specifically.

Leadership

The study of any construct benefits from a knowledge of its history and a definition of the

construct itself. Leadership evolved over time. The study of leadership dates back to Galtons

85
(1869) Hereditary Genius. Galton introduced two foundational concepts that survived to inform

the modern popular conception of leadership. First, leadership is an ability of extraordinary

individuals whose very actions could alter the course of human history. Secondly, the unique

attributes of leaders were tied to or derived from their genetic code. They were born to be great

leaders. Zaccaro (2007) described this as the great man theory of leadership. Galton assumed

that the qualities of great leaders passed from generation to generation genetically (Zaccaro,

2007). Kaiser, Hogan and Craig (2008) argued that the study of leadership spans more than 100

years and the resulting pool of literature is enormous. Podolny, Khurana and Besharov (2010)

described the history of leadership scholarship and noted and its progression. The field moves

from the study of individual traits (Weber, 1946/1964), to the complete marginalization of

leaderships importance, to a greater emphasis on contextual situations and constraints (Rost,

1993; Pfeffer, 1993), to the concepts of meaning making, transformational leadership, and

charisma (Bass, 2008).

Antonakis et al. (2012) argued that the study of individual differences for leadership, or

traits, declined sharply in the mid-20th century due to the misinterpretation of several key

reviews (Mann, 1959; Stodgill, 1948). This led to an incorrect conclusion that there were no

"measurable individual differences that could predict leader outcomes" (Antonakis et al., 2012,

p. 644). During that time, many scholars and even some textbooks began to declare that the

study of individual differences for leadership simply did not matter. More recently, studies

began to erode this claim by identifying individual person-level characteristics that do matter for

leadership such as intelligence (Judge et al., 2004) and EI (OBoyle et al., 2011). Today, the

study of leadership and individual differences is at the cusp of a renaissance (Antonakis et al.,

86
2012, p. 643). While the history of leadership is well documented, the definition is more

problematic.

Hackman (2010) characterized leadership as being domain, criteria, function, context,

and organizationally specific as well as including what he called a mysterious it factor (pp.

107-115). Humphrey (2002) defined leadership as a process of social interaction where

performance outcomes are strongly influenced by the leaders ability to influence the behavior of

their followers (p. 493). It is clear that no one accepted definition of leadership exists. In fact,

Rost (1993) discovered 221 different definitions and conceptions of leadership across 587

different publications. This varied and pluralistic approach to the study of leadership led Bass

(2008) to proclaim that the search for the one and only proper in true definition of leadership

seems to be fruitless" and that "the choice of an appropriate definition should depend on the

methodological and substantive aspects of leadership in which one is interested" (p. 23). The

definition of leadership used here comes from Kouzes and Posner. Kouzes and Posner (2012)

defined leadership as a set of observable behaviors that those in leadership positions could be

trained to perform. Leadership involves five categories of behaviors called practices that leaders

engage in and which can be measured. These five practices include modeling the way,

inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the

heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012, p. 15). Kouzes and Posner (2012) raised serious concerns about

how to broaden leaders competencies, including emotional skills and leadership skills in order

to lead effectively in the nations organizations. In this theoretical conception of practical

leadership, leaders are everywhere and leadership is about relationship, credibility, and what

you do every day (Kouzes & Posner, 2012, p. 329). Once leadership is defined, it must be

measured.

87
 Measures of leadership. A variety of measures exist to capture the construct of

leadership. Two of the most popular are the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and

the Leadership practices Inventory (LPI).

MLQ and MLQ-Form 5x. Bass (1985) developed the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire (MLQ). The MLQ includes nine scales. The first five are transformational scales,

the next three are transactional scales, and the final scale is a laissez-faire scale. The results of

the test are typically referred to as leadership style. The current version is the MLQ 5x (Bass &

Avolio, 1995). The instrument is comprised of 45 scale items and includes 3 bonus scales: extra

effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction with the leader. The MLQ is available as either a

individual self-report or a 360-degree instrument (Bass & Avolio, 1995).

Leadership practices inventory (LPI). Kouzes and Posner (2012) set out to identify the

practices of successful leaders. Their research revealed 225 characteristics. These were

evaluated and placed into categories based on 20 attributes. These attributes revealed five

specific higher order factors that represented practices typical of successful leaders. Each of the

five leadership practices contained two basic lower order behavioral strategies (Kouzes &

Posner, 2012). This research and analysis led to the development of a five-dimension theory of

leadership called the Five Practices of Leadership. Kouzes and Posner (2012) argued that

leadership can be learned and that anyone can participate in organizational leadership at any

level through these practices.

Kouzes and Posners five practices. Kouzes and Posner generated the conceptual

framework of five practices for exemplary leaders: Modeling the Way, Inspiring a Shared

Vision, Challenging the Process, Enabling Others to Act, Encouraging the Heart (Kouzes and

Posner, 2012). Kouzes and Posner (2002) identified a large number of studies demonstrating the

88
relationship between these five practices and a variety of effective leadership outcomes. These

included studies on motivation and employee commitment (Crnkovich & Hesterly, 1993;

McNeese-Smith, 1999; Lowe, 2000), work group performance (Stoner-Zemel, 1988; Ridgway,

1998), professional burnout (Webster & Hackett, 1999), effectiveness of bank managers and

their work groups (Carless & Allwood, 1997), commitment, satisfaction and productivity of

hospital employees (McNeese-Smith, 1993, 1995, 1996), recruitment and retention of nursing

managers and quality of patient care (Cardin, 1995), satisfaction, commitment and productivity

of nurses (Foong, 1999; Taylor, 1996), effectiveness and credibility of school principals and

superintendents (Larson 1992, Sweeney, 2000), high and low-performing schools (Aubrey, 1992;

Floyd, 1999; Griffen, 1996; Groves, 1996; Hickey, 1995; Knab, 1998), leadership of Christian

schools (Koehler, 1992), principals in effective and ineffective schools (Brice, 1992), the ethical

philosophy of middle-school administrators (Nolan, 1993), effective college presidents (Long,

1994), college presidents (Plowman, 1991; Bauer, 1993; Burkhard, 1999), academic deans

impact on department chairperson satisfaction (Dauffenbach, 1995; Xu, 1991), college coaches

(Coffman, 1999), the impact of an academic collegiate leadership development program

(Brungardt, 1997; Faulkner, 1998; Jensen, 1998; Matsos, 1997; McKimmy, 1996; Pugh, 2000,

Mendez-Grant, 2001), organizational identification and commitment among non-profit

employees (Bennington, 2000), church leaders (Zook, 1993; Patterson, 1997), pastors involved

in establishing new churches (Fulks, 1994), church congregational growth (Bridges, 1995;

Robertson, 1999), Myers-Briggs type indicators (Anderson, 1992; Rasor, 1995), thinking styles

(Scott, 1989), conflict styles (Lipton, 1990; Ezerioha, 2000), learning styles (Brown & Posner,

2001), optimism (Wunderley, 1996), proactive personality (Posner & Harder, 2002), and leader

self-esteem (Whatley, 1991; Endress, 2000). The dependent variables in these studies represent

89
the wide range of leadership effectiveness linked to the five practices of the LPI. Next, the

relationship between EI and leadership is examined more closely.

Emotional Intelligence and Leadership

George argued that leadership is an emotion laden process (2000, p. 1046) and that

accordingly, EI matters for effective leadership. Other scholars argued for correlational effects

between leadership outcomes and EI in a variety of populations and settings. Researchers

studied EI in connection with Transformational Leadership (Bass, 2002; Mula, 2013);

organizational leadership (Zaccaro, 2002); Leader-Member Exchange (Ct & Miners, 2006);

Emotional Leadership theory (Caruso et al., 2002); and leadership emergence in small groups

(Ct et al., 2010b). A number of studies indicate correlations between EI and leadership

emergence (Ct et al., 2010b; Kellett, Humphrey, & Sleeth, 2002; 2006; Wolff, Pescosolido, &

Druskatt, 2002), leadership effectiveness (Abraham, 2005; Gardner & Stough, 2003a; 2003b;

Lopes et al., 2006; Roset & Ciarrochi, 2005; Wolff et al., 2002; Wong & Law, 2002), and

leadership behaviors (Barbuto & Burbach, 2006; Barling et al., 2000; Brown, Bryant, & Reilly,

2006; Cartwright & Pappas, 2008; Gardner & Stough, 2002; Groves, 2005; Jin et al., 2008;

Leban & Zulauf, 2004; Lindebaum & Cartwright, 2010; Mandell & Pherwani, 2003; Middleton,

2005; Moss, Ritossa, & Ngu, 2006; Palmer, Walls, Burgess, & Stough, 2001; Rubin et al., 2005;

Sosik & Megerian, 1999: Walter & Bruch, 2007; Weinberger, 2009). In their review of EI and

leadership, Walter et al. (2011) described evidence suggesting that EI may help us understand

leadership emergence, specific leadership behaviors, and leader effectiveness (p. 55). For this

study, leadership effectiveness is viewed through the lens of Kouzes and Posners five practices.

A large body of literature examined the relationship between EI and leadership effectiveness.

90
 EI and leadership effectiveness. As noted previously, leadership is an emotion-laden

process and leaders must be able to create emotional responses in their subordinates

(Dasborough, 2006; Humphrey 2002). This revelation led researchers to the study of the about

the relationship between EI and effective leadership. Several scholars showed how EI assists in

the creation of team goals and objectives, helps create a shared sense of value, fosters

adaptability to change, generates enthusiasm and cooperation, and sustains a group identity

(Abraham, 2005; George, 2000; Goleman; 1998). Another scholar approached the role of EI in

leadership by suggesting that leadership development programs include an emphasis on

interpersonal competencies (Day, 2011). Without mentioning EI directly, Day called for

development of EI competency and skills for all organizational leaders (2011). While Day

implicitly connected EI and effective leadership, others connected EI and leadership explicitly.

A variety of studies correlated EI with various leadership outcomes including

transformational leadership (Cavazotte, Moreno, Hickman, 2012; Cred & Harms, 2010),

extraversion (Rubin et al., 2005), emotional intensity (Jin et al., 2008), and team leadership

(Koman & Wolff, 2008; Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Buckley, & Ammeter, 2003). Additionally,

scholars examined EI and leadership emergence (Ct et al., 2010b; Gruda, McCleskey, &

Tumel, in press; Kellett et al., 2002, 2006; Offerman et al., 2004; Walter, Cole, van der Vegt,

Rubin, & Bommer, 2012). Still others studied effectiveness based on objective performance

outcomes (Boyatzis, 2006; Boyatzis, Good, & Massa, 2012; Hopkins & Bilimoria, 2008),

customer satisfaction (Langhorn, 2004), perceived leader effectiveness (Brown et al., 2006;

Byron, 2007; Kerr, Garvin, Heaton, & Boyle, 2006; Kotz & Venter, 2011), and employee job

satisfaction (Brown et al., 2006; Byron, 2007; Kerr et al., 2006; Wong & Law, 2002; Wong et

al., 2010). Other studies discussed EIs relationship to supervisor self-evaluations of

91
effectiveness (Carmeli, 2003; Kotz & Venter, 2011), supervisors formal appraisal ratings

(Byron, 2007; Hopkins & Bilimoria, 2008; Langhorn, 2004; Roset & Ciarrochi, 2005; Sy et al.,

2006; Wong & Law, 2002; Young & Dulewicz, 2007), employee extra effort (Brown et al.,

2006), subordinate organizational commitment (Wong & Law, 2002), and self-reported turnover

intentions (Brown et al., 2006; Langhorn, 2004; Wong & Law, 2002). Most studies looked at an

entire EI construct (whether stream one, two, or three), while a others studied individual EI

competencies such as emotional awareness (Young & Dulewicz, 2007), emotion recognition

(Walter et al., 2012), or perception of non-verbal emotion (Byron, 2007). Taking a three streams

classification approach to the body of literature described above results in a cross-sectional

snapshot of the current state of research into EI and leadership. See Table 6, 7, and 8 for a

presentation of recent studies of EI and leadership categorized according to the three steams

approach.

92
Table 6. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (SOAM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Instrument(s) Variables Results

Emery (2012) Three month MSCEITv2.0 EI, leadership emergence, gender, EI is related to leadership emergence; the
longitudinal study of personality, cognitive intelligence, abilities to perceive and manage emotions
one group of initial network relate to the emergence of relationship leaders,
undergraduates the abilities to use and understand them related
studying abroad (N=41 to the emergence of task leaders
members)
Foster & Roche Irish supervisor- MSCEITV2.0, Trait EI, ability EI, personality, gender, Trait EI moderates the relationship between
(2014) subordinate dyads TEIQue, EQ-i age, education, length of service, ability EI and transformational leadership after
(N=208) transformational leadership controlling for covariants

Grunes, Educational leaders MSCEITv2.0 EI, personality, general mental ability, EI was not a useful predictor
Gudmundsson, (N=144) and integrity, leadership styles, and of leadership style and perceived leadership
& Irmer (2014) nominated peers perceived leadership outcomes outcomes after controlling for other predictors
(N=432)
Lopes-Zafra, Spanish undergraduate TMMS (Salovey et EI, leadership style, gender, gender EI and gender roles predict transformational
Garcia- students (N=431) al., 1995; Spanish roles leadership
Retamero, & version by
Martos (2012) Fernandez-
Berrocal,
Extremera, &
Ramos, 2004)
Schlaerth, Meta-analytic study MSCEITv2.0, EQ- EI, conflict management, constructive EI is positively related to constructive conflict
Ensari, & combined 20 studies I, ECI, WEIP (all conflict management, leadership management, however, contrary to our
Christian (2013) (N=5175) three streams) position, age predictions, age was not a significant
moderator of the relationship
Walter et al. Dutch undergraduate DANVA Emotions Recognition (EI), Emotion recognition and extraversion
(2012) business students work Extraversion, task coordination, leader interactively relate to leader emergence
teams (N=22 groups). emergence, cognitive ability,
Midwest US university personality, self-monitoring
undergraduates
(N=280)
Note: SOAM=Stream One Ability Model; MSCEIT v2.0=Mayer-Salovey-Caruso-Emotional-Intelligence-Text version 2.0; TEIQue=Trait Emotional
Intelligence Questionnaire; EQ-i=Emotional Quotient Inventory; TMMS=Trait Meta-Mood Scale; ECI=Emotional Competence Inventory; WEIP=Workgroup
Emotional Intelligence Profile; DANVA=Diagnostic Assessment of Nonverbal Accuracy

93
Table 7. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STAM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Affandi & Raza Pakistani medical doctors WLEIS EI, burnout, quality of work life, EI positively related to quality of work life and
(2013) (N=92) employee performance employee performance
Cavazotte, Brazilian energy sector mid- WLEIS EI, personality, intelligence, Leadership effectiveness is related to
Moreno, & level managers (N=134) transformational leadership, manager transformational behaviors, and is an indirect
Hickmann performance, gender, management function of management experience,
(2012) experience, team size intelligence and conscientiousness; EI related to
transformational leadership only before the
control variables were considered
Gregory & Levy Multi-level study of Fortune WLEIS EI, leadership style, empathy, implicit Supervisors individual consideration, empathy,
(2011) 500 global manufacturing person theory, trust, feedback trust, and the feedback environment all related
organization supervisors environment, employee perception of to employees perceptions of coaching
and employees (N=155, coaching relationship relationships, EI did not relate to employee
N=729) perception of coaching relationships
Hong, Catano, Canadian undergraduate WLEIS EI, motivation to lead, leadership EI related to motivation to lead and indirectly
& Liao (2011) students (N=309) emergence related to leadership emergence
Hur, van de South Korean public sector WLEIS EI, transformational leadership, leader EI related to leader effectiveness, team
Berg, & organization leaders, effectiveness, team effectiveness, effectiveness, and service climate;
Wilderom employees, and teams service climate transformational leadership mediates the
(2011) (N=859 employees, N=55 relationship between EI and both leader
teams) effectiveness and service climate
Hwang, Feltz, & High school basketball head SSEIT EI, coaching efficacy, leadership style EI relates to leadership style and the
Lee (2013) coaches (N=323) relationship is mediated by coaching efficacy
Irshad & Pakistan banking sector WLEIS EL, Transformational Leadership, EI plays a role as a mediator between
Hashmis (2014) employees (N=300) Organizational Commitment Behavior Transformational Leadership and
Organizational Commitment Behavior
Jain, Srivasta, & Indian managers (N=352) WLEIS EI, tolerance of ambiguity, leaders EI and tolerance of ambiguity relate to leader
Sullivan (2013) effectiveness, gender, age, marital effectiveness after controlling for age, gender,
status, job tenure, work experience etc.; EI moderated the relationship between
tolerance for ambiguity and effectiveness

94
Table 7 (continued). Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STAM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Jordan & Troth Australian pathology WEIP-short EI, leader member exchange (LMX), EI relates to both turnover intention and job
(2011) company employees turnover intention, job satisfaction, satisfaction, LMX quality mediates the
(N=579) age, gender, negative affect relationships

Kafetsios, Multi-level study of Greek WLEIS EI, job satisfaction, positive and Supervisor EI related to follower affect, job
Nezlek, & school directors and negative affect at work, burnout satisfaction, and burnout; individual EI related
Vassiou (2011) educators (N=33 to individual affect, job satisfaction, and burnout
supervisors, N=179
teachers)
Kiyani, Saher, Pakistan software company SSEIT EI, authentic leadership, organizational EI related to OCB and job performance,
Saleem, & Iqbal manager and non-manager commitment behavior, job relationship mediated by authentic leadership
(2013) employees (N=283) performance
Lam & Chinese construction WLEIS EI, transformational leadership, Transformational leadership mediates the
O'Higgins company employees and employee performance, job relationship between managers' EI and employee
(2012) managers (N=323 satisfaction, organizational job satisfaction, EI relates to employee
employees, N=54 teams) commitment, job stress performance, commitment, and job stress
Lam & Chinese construction WLEIS EI, transformational leadership style EI was related to Transformational Leadership
O'Higgins company, N=50 managers, behaviors in both self and observer reports
(2013) 273 employees, 54 teams
Ramchunder & South African police AES EI, self-efficacy, transformational EI is positively related to transformational
Martins (2014) management personnel leadership leadership, self-efficacy is positively related to
(N=107) transformational leadership, EI is positively
related to self-efficacy

Rashid Rehman Pakistani banking sector SUEIT EI, leadership styles, decision-making EI moderates the relationship between
& Waheed employees (N=153) (Genos EI) styles leadership style and decision-making style,
(2012) transformational leadership positively predicts
rational, intuitive, dependent and spontaneous
decision making styles
Seyal & Afzaal Nation of Brunei academic SUEIT EI, organizational commitment, job EI and organizational commitment predict job
(2013) university staff (N=90) (Genos EI) satisfaction satisfaction

95
Table 7 (continued). Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STAM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Troth & Australian public sector WLEIS EI, general mental ability, problem- EI related to engagement, career aspirations,
Gvetvey (2014) employees (N=166) and solving skill, employee engagement, performance and leadership potential (self-
managers (N=149) career aspiration, leadership potential report)

Wallis & Five teams of five members SSEIT Training programs included leadership Teams are most effective with constructive
Kennedy (2013) each representing medical practices (LPI-360) and emotional internal and external environments
organizations competencies (EI, life orientation,
emotional resilience), nursing retention
Xiao-Yu & Liu Chinese corporate WLEIS EI, team emotional climate, job Team negative emotional climate has negative
(2013) organizations teams, team satisfaction, gender, tenure, education effect on job satisfaction, and team emotional
leaders, and employees level, team developmental stage, team climate moderates the relationship between
(N=148 teams, N=840 size, team effectiveness leader EI and job satisfaction; leader EI has
employees) stronger effect on member job satisfaction as
team emotional climate becomes more negative

Yuan, Hsu, Longitudinal study of WLEIS EI, transformational leadership, task Transformational leadership relates to EI
Shieh, & Li Taiwanese information performance, organizational citizenship behavior development which relates to task
(2012) technology firm employees behaviors (OCB) performance and OCB
(N=342)
Yunus & Anuar Malaysian banking sector WLEIS EI, transformational leadership, trust EI relates to transformational leadership, trust
(2012) employees (N=147) partially moderates the relationship

Note: STAM=Stream Two Ability Model; WLEIS=Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale; WEIP-short=Workgroup Emotional Intelligence Profile
short version; AES=Assessing Emotions Scale; SUEIT (Genos EI)=Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test, aka Genos EI; SSEIT=Schutte Self-
Report Emotional Intelligence Test

96
Table 8. Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STMM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Ahmed & Qazi Pakistan university Cyberia & EI, transformational leadership, Teachers transformational style relates to
(2011) undergraduate students Shrink academic performance academic performance but EI does not
(N=212) emotional moderate the relationship
intelligence
questionnaire
(Mansouri,
2001)

Barbuto, Civic Leaders (N=75) and Proprietary EI, locus of control, servant leadership EI predicts servant-leader ideology but not
Gottfredson, & their followers (N=401) instrument follower ratings of servant-leader behavior
Searle (2014) from Carson,
Carson, &
Birkenmeier
(2000)
Boyatzis, Good, & Financial services ECI EI, leader performance, cognitive EI predicted leader performance measure,
Massa (2012) company executives intelligence, and personality cognitive ability did not predict leader
(N=60) performance measure
Bratton, Dodd, & North American EQ-i (self EI, self-other agreement, EI relates to leader performance strongly for
Brown (2011) manufacturing facility and transformational leadership, leader leaders who underestimate their EI, negative
leaders and followers observer) performance relationship between EI and leader performance
(N=146, N=1314) exists for leaders who overestimate their EI
Brinia,Zimianiti & Principles (N=36) and EQ-i EI, leadership role The relationships are unclear
Panagiotopoulos teachers (N=301)
(2014)
Castro, Gomes, & European healthcare Proprietary EI, follower creativity, climate Leader EI relates to follower creativity
de Sousa (2012) organizational leader- from Rego et regardless of climate
follower dyads (N=66) al (2005)
Farahani, Iranian insurance industry EQ-i EI, transformational leadership, Transformational leadership relates to
Taghadosi, & employees (N=214) organizational commitment organizational commitment and EI moderates
Behboudi (2011) the relationship
Khan, Khan, Pakistan banking, EQ-i EI, transformational leadership EI related to transformational leadership
Saeed, Khan, & telecom, and education behaviors of managers
Sanaullah (2011) managers (N=197)

97
Table 8 (continued). Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STMM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Killian (2012) Canadian undergraduate SSEIT; ESQ, EI, age, income, GPA, cognitive ability, The new ESQ demonstrated incremental
psychology students a new personality, alexithymia, affect, life predictivity in life satisfaction, GPA, and
(N=1406) instrument satisfaction, leadership aspirations, leadership aspirations
(Killian, social desirability, self-esteem
2012)
Kotze & Venter South African public sector EQ-i (self EI, leadership effectiveness EI related to leadership effectiveness, especially
(2011) middle managers and and for Interpersonal EQ and Stress EQ
subordinates (N=114, observer)
N=456)
Kruml & longitudinal study of MBA EQ-i EI, leadership development EI increases in response to a specific leadership
Yockey (2011) students involved in development course
leadership development
course (N=78)
Labbaf, Ansari, Iranian university officials Cyberia & EI, dimensions of learning organizations EI related to clarity of mission and vision,
& Masoudi and library assistants Shrink (clarity of mission and vision, effective transfer of knowledge, and teamwork
(2011) (N=86) emotional leadership commitment and and group problem solving
intelligence empowerment, experimentation and
questionnaire rewards, effective transfer of
(Mansouri, knowledge, teamwork and group
2001) problem solving)

Labby, Texas school principals Proprietary EI, gender, years of administrative EI differs significantly by gender with female
Lunenburg, & (N=157) by Nelson & experience EI higher than male EI
Slate (2013) Low (1999)
Lee, Park, & Two project manager ECI EI, cognitive ability, team social capital, EI relates to team performance over and above
Lee (2013) samples (N=165, N=133) project performance cognitive ability, the relationship is moderated
by team social capital
Malik, Danish, Pakistan banking sector EQ-i, ECI EI, organizational effectiveness EI related to organizational effectiveness
& Munir (2011) employees (N=250)
McKeown & Northern Irish library ECI EI awareness, ranking of EI skills While mostly unaware of EI, the participants
Bates (2013) branch managers (N=47) importance did rank several EI skills as important to their
workplace performance

98
Table 8 (continued). Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STMM of EI)
Author(s) Participants
Nazari & Iranian bank managers and
Madani (2013) their employees (N=126
managers)
Olannye (2014) Nigerian government
officials (N=13)
Pillay, Viviers, South African
& Mayer (2013) petrochemical company
managers (N=161)
Rockstuhl et al. Swiss military officers and
(2011) their peers at military
academy (N=126)
Rosch, Joseph, University leadership
& Newman program students (N=276)
(2011)
Schlatter & UK mining organization
McDowall managers (N=100)
(2014)
Sharma (2012) Indian manufacturing and
service sector mid-level
managers (N=400)
EI Variables Results
Instrument(s)
EQ-i EI, transformational leadership, EI strongly relates to transformational
leadership behaviors by managers
Proprietary EI (4 branches) and leadership EI predicted leadership performance (16% of
25 item performance variance)
instrument
from the
author
EQ-i EI, leadership styles EI relates positively to transformational
leadership, EI relates negatively to laissez-faire
leadership
SREIS EI, personality, general intelligence, General intelligence predicted both domestic
(Brackett et cultural intelligence, previous leadership and cross-border leadership effectiveness; EI
al., 2006) experience, international experience, predicted domestic leadership effectiveness,
age cultural intelligence predicted cross-border
leadership effectiveness.
ECI- EI, socially responsible leadership EI and socially responsible leadership practices
University practices are related but distinct constructs, the ECI-U is
better fitted to a single factor model rather than
a four factor model
EQ-i and EI, EI observer ratings, leader EI assessment used in a case study of the
EQ360 performance implementation of a Cognitive Behavioural
Coaching program (evidence-based)
ECI-2 EI, validity of a revised instrument The overall scale ECI-2 has high reliability with
Cronbach's value of 0.93 on the Indian
sample. Cultural similarities and differences
between the Indian sample and typical North
American samples are described in detail.
99
Table 8 (continued). Recent studies of EI and Leadership (STMM of EI)

Author(s) Participants EI Variables Results

Instrument(s)
Siegling, European manager and TEIQue Trait EI, intelligence, gender, age Trait EI was predictive of manager employment
Nielsen, & nonmanager employees in a European multinational corporation
Petrides (2014) (N=96)
Sunindijo Australian construction EIA EI, political skill, transformational The hypothesis that EI relates to
(2012) organization employees (Bradberry leadership transformational leadership and political skill
(N=273) & Greaves, mediates this relationship was partially
2003) supported
Van Genderen Russian managers of multi- LDQ EI, IQ, leadership style, and managerial EI, IQ, and managerial competence were highly
(2011) national corporations competence correlated, EI related to transformational
(N=152) leadership style was partially supported

Van Genderen Russian Managers, N=152 LDQ EI, IQ, and managerial competence Both EI and IQ are correlated with managerial
(2015) competence
Zammuner, Italian company employees ECI EI, age, gender, life satisfaction, job Leaders perceive themselves as higher in EI
Dionisio, and leaders (N=68, N=29) involvement than subordinates perceive them; training
Prandi, & improves the gap between self-scores and
Agnoli (2013) observer scores in EI; employee job
involvement and satisfaction positively relate to
leader EI
Note: STMM=Stream Three Mixed Models; EQ-i=Emotional Quotient Inventory; SSEIT=Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test; ESQ=Emotional
Self-Awareness Inventory; ECI=Emotional Competence Inventory; SREIS=Self-Rated Emotional Intelligence Scale; EQ360 Emotional Quotient multi-rater
instrument; ECI-2=Emotional Competence Inventory version 2; TEIQue=Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire; EIA=Emotional Intelligence
Assessment; LDQ=Leadership Dimensions Questionnaire

100
 Summary

EI is an ability to perceive emotions, appraise their meanings, and express ones own

emotions. It is also an ability to access our feelings when they help facilitate thoughts and focus

our priorities. EI encompasses the ability to understand emotion and emotional cues. Finally, EI

is the ability to self-regulate emotions to promote beneficial outcomes (Mayer et al., 2008). This

study examines the relationship between the SOAM of EI and leadership practices in order to

better understand both EI and leadership. Leadership practices consists of modeling the way,

inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the

heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). Despite the growing body of published literature on EI and

leadership, few studies have followed the recommendations of scholars to examine the ability

model and to control for the effects known covariates such as age, gender, leadership tenure, and

personality. In the this chapter, I presented the literature on emotion in organizations,

intelligence, multiple intelligences, social intelligence, EI, measures of EI, leadership, measures

of leadership, Kouzes and Posners five practices, and EI and leadership. In the next chapter, I

present the methodology for the present study.

101
 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Leadership is an important aspect of individual and organizational success. In short,

leadership matters (Humphrey, 2014, p. 17), however, the organizational environment

encountered by leaders is undergoing dynamic changes. The impact of globalization, increased

diversity of various kinds, and new work arrangement such as flexible scheduling and tele

working applications have all combined to substantially increase the challenge faced by leaders

at every level. This creates a need for organizational leaders with a new set of skills. One of the

most compelling changes in the workplace is increased levels and types of diversity. For

example Burns et al. (2012) noted that the workplace is becoming increasingly diverse. The

percentage of the workforce classified as minority reached 36% in 2012 and by 2050 the US will

no longer have an ethnic majority group at all. Additional changes include the growth of women

in the workforce along with increasing numbers of LGTB employees. Additionally, as the baby

boomers age, medical technology and wellness efforts make it possible for older workers to stay

employed longer and they prefer to do so (Burns et al., 2012). In addition to these trends, Solari

(2012) argued that globalization, increased levels of workplace ambiguity, and the move toward

greater levels of personalization influenced organizational leaders. Despite these developments,

many organizations continue to rely on organizational forms that originated in the concepts of

scientific management and engineering approaches (Solari, 2012). Leaders require skills to deal

with these issues of increased diversity, heterogeneous work teams, high levels of ambiguity, and

the need for more personalized approaches. The skills that leaders require are those related to

emotional intelligence (EI). EI is defined as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and

express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the

ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to

102
promote emotional and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). An increasing body of

literature links EI to effective organizational performance (for a review see OBoyle et al., 2011).

EI offers organizational leaders and entrepreneurs access to the new skill set demanded by the

modern workplace in order to achieve performance objectives in a dynamically diverse

environment. This challenge directly relates the significance of this study.

Significance

This proposed study has significance in two key aspects. First, it will investigate a less

understood and explored issue of the relationship between EI and leadership practices. Previous

studies examined this relationship using a self-report measure of EI (Alston, 2009). Further,

previous studies failed to hold constant for the effects of personality, age, gender, and leadership

experience. Walter et al. (2011) noted that despite the admonition of scholars to hold personality

and other relevant factors constant when examining EI and leadership, only one published article

examining leadership criteria has simultaneously controlled for both cognitive ability and

personality (see Ct et al., 2010b). In fact, a relative paucity of studies utilize the SOAM,

examine the relationship with effective leadership, define effectiveness in terms of leadership

practices, and hold constant the effects of age, gender, personality, and leadership experience. A

2011 examination of top journals by Walter et al. found virtually no studies following these

recommendations despite the opinion of numerous scholars (Antonakis et al., 2009; Joseph &

Newman, 2010; Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004, Walter et al., 2011;

Zeidner et al., 2009). Addressing these issues is not the only source of significance for this

study.

103
 The findings of this study have the potential to contribute to a better understanding of the

antecedents and conditions required for improved leadership effectiveness in the field of

organization and management as well as in the practice of organizational leadership. It is

anticipated that the study will show that leadership effectiveness requires more than simply

technical skills and expertise (George, 2000). Effective organizational leaders must know how

to evoke emotional responses in their followers (Dasborough, 2006; Humphrey 2002). Salovey

and Mayer noted that emotions rise as responses to an event that contains positive or negative

valence for the individual (1990). Research approaches disagree as to the number and

classification of emotions; however, Ekman listed the basic emotions as anger, disgust, fear,

happiness, sadness, and surprise (1992). George (2000) suggested that leaders must understand

both their own and their followers' emotions, and should be able to evoke strong feelings. The

actions of the leader are instrumental in this process of creating and directing the motivation and

sense making of their followers (George, 2000). More specifically, leaders may evoke follower

emotions through the allocation of work activities, by making requests of followers, by providing

feedback on task performance, or by displaying emotions themselves (Dasborough, 2006, p.

165). Research by Gaddis et al. (2004) suggested that leader feedback and employees emotional

responses to that feedback influenced employee attitudes and job performance. Accordingly,

leadership practices in the workplace can produce both positive and negative emotions in

followers and effective leaders should understand this aspect of leadership (Gaddis et al., 2004).

The design of this study contributes to its usefulness.

Research Design

The study uses a quantitative, non-experimental, survey-based design to answer the

research questions. The study is cross-sectional and conducted in the field via an online

104
administration. The test instruments include both self-report surveys on leadership practices and

personality, and ability tests of EI. The sample will be a randomly selected group of

organizational leaders drawn from a national panel in cooperation with Qualtrics

(www.qualtrics.com). Administration will take place online using computerized versions of all

test instruments. This study attempts to verify a hypothesis using relationships between

variables, includes standards for reliability and validity, measures information numerically, and

employs statistical analysis. Survey based approaches are preferred in those instances (Creswell,

2009). The two primary constructs in the study are EI and leadership practices.

EI, as conceptualized in this study, originated with the work of Salovey and Mayer

(1990). EI is defined as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the

ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand

emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional

and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511).

The dependent variable in the study is leadership practices as conceptualized by Kouzes

and Posner. Kouzes and Posner research on leadership development considers five practices:

Model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, and

encourage the heart (Alston, 2009; Alston et al., 2010; Kouzes & Posner, 2012). Previous

research suggests that these leadership practices relate to EI. Specifically, the expression of

emotion, the regulation of emotion, and the use of emotion relate to the five leadership practices

described above (Alston, 2009). This study also measures the construct of personality.

Personality is defined as the organized, developing system within the individual that

represents the collective action of that individuals major psychological subsystems (Mayer,

2007, p.14). The Five Factor personality Model (FFM) developed by Costa & McCrae (1992)

105
established a taxonomy that systematically combined a broad-based set of personality

characteristics under the umbrella traits of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness,

openness to experiences and neuroticism (Goldberg, 1990). The five factor scores are each

treated as quantitative, numerical, continuous variables. The commonly used five-factor model

(FFM) delineates five traits (extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and

openness to experience) that capture most of the differences in personality across individuals

(Costa & McCrae, 1992).

In this study, leader is defined as a person in a leadership role (supervisor of at least three

employees) or an owner of a business who supervises at least three employees or others. This

definition of leader is consistent with Kouzes and Posners view that the definition of leadership

roles is much wider than simply C-level or Director level individuals. Leaders are everywhere

and leadership is about relationship, credibility, and what you do every day (Kouzes & Posner,

2012, p. 329).

Leadership experience is the cumulative number of years that an individual has held or

acted in a leadership or entrepreneurial role. Some studies showed a positive relationship

between leadership experience and EI (Cook, Bay, Visser, Myburgh, & Njoroge, 2011).

From a practical perspective, this study is designed to demonstrate research that will

include best practices for leaders who seek to energize and mobilize their followers. The key

premise is that great leaders engage in the work of inspiring their followers to do things

differently, to struggle against uncertain odds, and to persevere toward a misty image of a better

future (Kouzes & Posner, 2012, p. 1). The level of analysis is the individual, a person in a

leadership role or an owner of a business who supervises at least three employees or others. This

study includes a specific sample drawn to examine these variables and relationships.

106
 Sample

The sample for this study is organizational leaders, defined as business owners with three

or more direct reports or managers who supervise three or more employees. The United States

Census Bureau publishes Statistics of US Businesses (SUSB). The 2011 data is the most recent

available data. According to those records, there are 28 million small businesses however, 22

million are non-employer businesses, and therefore their owners do not qualify as members of

this population. Additionally, medium sized and large employers employ 114.6 million people

(SUSB, 2011). Assuming a conservative figure of one organizational leader for every 10

employees, an additional population of 11.5 million managers exists. Therefore, the total

population for the study is approximately 17.5 million leaders. This somewhat arbitrary

assignment of leaders is consistent with the definition discussed previously. Borrowing from the

concepts of Kouzes and Posner (2012), the definition of leadership roles is much wider than

simply C-level or Director level individuals. Leaders are everywhere and leadership is about

relationship, credibility, and what you do every day (Kouzes & Posner, 2012, p. 329).

The sample for this study was generated using Qualtrics software, Version 1.15s of the

Qualtrics Research Suite. Copyright 2015 Qualtrics. Qualtrics and all other Qualtrics product

or service names are registered trademarks or trademarks of Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA,

http://www.qualtrics.com. The participants are selected using a gender stratified random sample

from the Qualtrics panel. A difference between male and female EI is noted in a number of

studies. Specifically, female participants scored higher on EI tests (Ciarrochi, Chan, & Caputi,

2000: Jorfi, Bin Yacco, & Shah, 2012; Khalili, 2011; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999).

Stratification along gender helps avoid an unrepresentative sample with higher than average EI

scores. A prescreening study will be conducted in order to establish the feasibility of the

107
sampling plan, with emphasis on selecting leaders using the study definition of business owners

and managers who supervise or used to supervise at least three employees. Cooper and

Schindler argued that stratification is useful when attempting to create a group that is more

representative of the general population (2011). Further, Cooper and Schindler (2011) argued

that only probability sampling provides precise estimates and accordingly that only probability

samples offer the researcher the opportunity to generalize their findings. Random number

generation will be used to divide the males and females in the Qualtrics panel into target groups

and successive waves of e-mail solicitations will be issued until the desired sample size of 300

with approximately 150 males and 150 females is acquired.

The target sample size is 300. The target sample size can be calculated a number of

different ways. Field (2009) explains a variety of different rules of thumb and formulas for

determining required sample sizes, however, he argues that a sample size of 300 or greater

provides a stable factor solution and avoids issues related to unstable test parameters and various

errors in most cases. Vogt (2007) also argued that beginning at sample sizes of 300, many

statistical concerns related to sample size fall away. Additionally, small sample size is one of the

criticisms traditionally aimed at EI research (Antonakis et al., 2009; Walter et al., 2011). Based

on the need for greater scientific rigor and a more robust EI study, I acquired a sample size of

over 300. Care was taken in selecting the instrumentation for this study as well.

Instrumentation, Measures and Validity

The most commonly used ability based instrument is the Mayer Salovey Caruso

Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEITv2.0). Like the prior versions from the same authors

including the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS) and the original MSCEIT, the

108
MSCEITv2.0 utilizes four scales. Each corresponds to one branch of the ability model. The

MSCEITv2.0 is discussed at length in the literature including discussion of its scales, subscales,

factor structure, reliability, and validity (Fan et al., 2010; Fiori & Antonakis, 2011; Leung,

Meier, & Cook, 2002; Mayer et al., 2003; Rossen & Kranzler, 2009; Rossen, Kranzler, &

Algina, 2008). The instrument includes 141 scale items. In their review, Conte and Dean argued

that the MSCEIT demonstrates adequate internal consistency and reliability (2006, p. 62).

Additional support for the validity of the MSCEIT comes from Mayer et al. (2003) and Brackett

and Salovey (2006). In addition, adequate split-half reliability scores for the overall MSCEIT at

r=.93 and branch scores ranging from .80 to .92 have been reported (Mayer et al., 2012).

Further, Brackett and Mayer (2003) reported the testretest reliability estimate for the MSCEIT

at r=.86. Further support for the MACEITv2.0 comes from Papadogiannis, Logan, and

Sitarenios (2010). Several studies employed the MSCEITv2.0 to study performance and

leadership (Ct, Gyurak, & Levenson, 2010; Ct et al., 2010b; Jin et al., 2008; Kerr et al.,

2006; Leban & Zulauf, 2004; Rode et al., 2007; Roset & Ciarrochi, 2005; Weinberger, 2009).

Kouzes and Posner developed the 30 scale item Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI).

The LPI measures successful leadership practices. According to Kouzes and Posner, the LPI is

used to assess effective and transformational leadership behaviors (1995). Other researchers

discovered that the LPI can be used to measure transformational and transactional leadership

alike and that both are important dimensions of leadership style (Fields & Herold, 1997). The

authors derived the LPI after completing over 1,000 case studies followed by 38 in-depth

interviews (1995). Using findings from these studies, Kouzes and Posner (1995) developed the

30 LPI scale items. The authors reported adequate internal reliability, correlation between the

six statements pertaining to each leadership practice, high test-retest reliability, general

109
independence of the five practices, and adequate face and predictive validity of the LPI (1995).

The authors argued that general independence of the five practices indicates that these leadership

practices do not measure an identical aspect of leadership; rather that each measures a different

and independent leadership practice (Kouzes & Posner, 1995). More recently, Kouzes and

Posner (2000) reported internal reliability, as measured by Cronbachs Alpha, continues to be

strong for the LPI, with all scales above the .75 level. Leong (1995), a Professor of Psychology

at The Ohio State University in Columbus reviewed the LPI for the Mental Measurement

Yearbook. Leong agreed there was good evidence to support the reliability and validity of the

LPI when used to measure leader effectiveness.

Personality (FFM) will be measured using the public domain International Personality

Item Pool (IPIP) developed by Goldberg (1999). The 50 item IPIP-NEO is similar to the revised

Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) developed by McCrae &

Costa (1987). The NEO-PI-R is a ubiquitous and well-validated measure of the five factor

model (or Big 5) personality scale. Goldberg et al. (2006) argue that because the items selected

for IPIP proxies of commercial scales are based on empirical correlations with the original

scales, the correlations between the proxy and parent scales tend to be high (p. 92). In the case

of the NEO-PI-R, the mean correlation between the 30 facet scales (Costa & McCrae, 1992) and

the corresponding IPIP scales is .73 (.94 after correcting for attenuation due to unreliability

(Goldberg, 1999). The substantial overlap between IPIP-NEO and the NEO-PI-R commercially

available scale leads to the conclusion that these two scales are measuring the same constructs,

i.e. point to the IPIP-NEOs construct validity (Goldberg et al., 2006). The IPIP-NEO is

available as a 50, 100, or full 240-item questionnaire. The 50-item version is utilized in this

study. The associations between the proprietary instruments and the IPIP versions have been

110
recorded and are encouraging. In the short form of the IPIP-NEO, correlations range from 0.70

to 0.82 (0.85 to 0.92 when corrected for unreliability) with the corresponding NEO PI-R factors

(Goldberg et al., 2006). In a study comparing the NEO-PI-R to the IPIP-NEO, Gow, Whiteman,

Pattie, and Deary (2005) found that the 5-factor structure proposed by Goldberg was confirmed,

with only minor deviations from the expected item loadings (p. 325). Further, Gow et al.

(2005) argued that the 5 IPIP scales have high internal consistencies comparable to those

previously cited by Goldberg (2001). Gow et al. (2005) argued for both the validity and the

reliability of the IPIP-NEO short version personality instrument.

Demographic variables were assessed using a set of questions presented during the online

survey. These included gender, age, leadership experience, race, and education. Age was

assessed using a simple demographics section of the combined test instrument. Example,

Please enter your current age in years. Gender was assessed using a simple demographics

section of the combined test instrument. Example, Which of the following best describes your

gender? Leadership experience was assessed using the demographics portion of the study with

a question about the participants years of experience. For example, Please enter your total

years of management/leadership experience. After constructing and combining all required

scale items including demographics, data collection commenced.

Data Collection

The data collection began by contacting Qualtrics and describing the appropriate sample

required for the study. After the desired sample was established, the specific survey instruments

were combined into an online survey using the Qualtrics Research Suite and a link to the active

online survey link at Multihealth Systems for the MSCEITv2.0. Recruitment of participants

111
involved using an incentive and successive rounds of recruitment e- mails were sent until the

desired sample size of 300 was reached. All participants received an informed consent message

and signified by clicking Yes there agreement to participate in the survey. The data from the

Qualtrics and Multihealth systems sites were downloaded and combined into a single data file

using Microsoft Excel. The data were then labelled, coded, and entered into IBM Statistical

Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) statistical software package for the data analysis.

Data Analysis

Appropriate statistical analysis was conducted using IBMs SPSS. All data were entered

into the data editor and placed in the appropriate categories according to variable type. Missing

data were coded in order to allow the researcher to consider its impact on the results (Field,

2009). Once all data were entered and all missing data were coded, statistical analysis began.

Initial analysis included the use of histograms and P-P plots in order to examine the normalcy,

kurtosis, and skew of the data. These charts allow the researcher a simple, convenient way to

visually examine the data for signs of obvious problems with skew, kurtosis, or other forms of

non-normalcy (Field, 2009).

Additionally, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests to examine normality of

the data and the Levene Statistic were computed to examine these issues as well as violation of

the homogeneity of variance (Field, 2009). If any of these problems exist, Field suggests a

number of different strategies to normalize the data or alternative statistical tests to use with non-

normal data. One strategy involves transformation of the data using log transformation, square

root transformation, reciprocal transformation, or reverse score transformation (Field, 2009, p.

155). Once these issues were addressed, descriptive statistics were calculated.

112
 Next, descriptive statistics were created for all variables including mean, median, mode,

standard deviation, variance, range, and standard error of the mean. Assuming that normal data

or correctable to normal data exists, the researcher moves on to correlational measures to

examine each hypothesis.

H01: No positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders.

HA1: A positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders.

Correlation coefficients (Pearsons r) will be computed for these two constructs and

examined at the total score and subscale level. P-value scores will be evaluated for significance

at the alpha level .05 (5%). Additionally, regression analysis will be conducted on the data to

examine the relationship between EI and leadership practices. Significant scores will be

discussed.

H02: No positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of age.

HA2: A positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders even after controlling for the effects of age.

In order to examine the relationship between EI and leadership practices while holding contact

the effect of age, a stepwise regression model will be used where age is entered first and only the

incremental effect of EI on leadership practices will be examined.

H03: No positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender.

113
 HA3: A positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders even after controlling for the effects of gender.

In order to examine the relationship between EI and leadership practices while holding

contact the effect of gender, a stepwise regression model will be used where gender is entered

first and only the incremental effect of EI on leadership practices will be examined.

Additionally, the data will be split (stratified) along gender lines and all correlational

relationships will be examined for males and females separately and as a total group.

H04: No positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of personality (FFM).

HA4: A positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders even after controlling for the effects of personality

(FFM).

Once again, a stepwise regression model will be created and personality will be examined

first so that only the incremental effects of EI on leadership practices are examined.

H05: No positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of leadership

experience.

HA5: A positive correlation exists between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of leadership

experience.

A stepwise regression model will be created and control variables will be entered first,

allowing the researcher to examine the effect of EI on leadership practices beyond the effects of

the control variables. Successive rounds of stepwise regression modeling will be created in order

114
to view the effects of each of these variables, in order of size of impact, using EI as the final

variable each time in order to examine the incremental impact of EI on leadership practices

above and beyond these other factors. Once all the stepwise regression models are created,

goodness of fit indices will be run and examined in order to evaluate each version of the model

including sum of squares, Mahalanobis Distance, and Cooks Distance. Additionally, the

Durbin-Watson statistic allows the researcher to verify the independence of errors assumption

(Filed, 2009). The statistics described above, including the analysis of each, should be sufficient

to determine if the hypotheses in this study are supported and to answer the research questions.

Ethical Considerations

This study included an informed consent of all participants that includes an explanation

of the benefits to the participant, the participants rights, and procedures to protection the identity

of the participants. Cooper and Schindler (2011) recommend that these three guidelines be

strictly followed. An incentive of $15 will be offered for participation in the study. Based on the

length of time required to complete the survey and previous incentives offered to Qualtrics

participants, this amount is appropriate. No potential conflicts of interests exist in this study

since the researcher is not affiliated with the participants in any way and the participants come

from a large variety of organizations and back grounds. Additionally, an online administration

of all instruments helps avoid the potential of researcher bias. The online administration also

creates the need for a privacy policy, disclosure, and debriefing of participants, and adequate

security measures for the privacy and accuracy of all data collected (Cooper & Schindler, 2011,

p. 34). Data collected will be stored for seven years on an external drive at the authors

residence and destroyed at the end of that time.

115
 Summary

This chapter described the methodology used in this study. It included descriptions of the

research design, sample, instrumentation and validity, data collection, data analysis, and ethical

considerations of this study. In the next chapter, I present the results of the statistical analysis for

this study.

116
 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

The purpose of this quantitative non-experimental research study was the examination of

the relationship between EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders. The independent

variable is EI while the dependent variable is leadership practices as defined by Kouzes and

Posner (2012). Pearson correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis are conducted to

address the objectives of the research.

This study follows the previous literature examining EI and leadership practices. Caruso

et al. (2003) described the connection between EI and leadership. The authors argued that

effective leaders need to be able to identify emotions accurately, must use emotions to motivate

others and engage in multiple perspective taking, invoke the use of emotion through symbolic

management, understand emotion in order to understand employee motivation and point of view,

regulate and manage their own emotions in order to avoid stress and poor decision-making, and

utilize emotions to create and enhance effective working relationships (Caruso et al., 2003).

Kouzes and Posner (2012) raised serious concerns about the need to increase leader competency,

including social emotional skills such as emotional intelligence (EI) and leadership skills in order

to lead organizations more effectively. In line with this, this study and the statistical analyses

here are guided by the following research questions and hypotheses:

RQ1. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI (IV) and leadership practices

(DV) of organizational leaders?

H01: No positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders.

117
 Ha1: A positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders.

RQ1a. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership practices of

organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of age?

H02: No positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders after controlling for the effects of age.

Ha2: A positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders even after controlling for the effects of age.

RQ1b. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership practices of

organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender?

H03: No positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders after controlling for the effects of gender.

Ha3: A positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders even after controlling for the effects of gender.

RQ1c. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of personality (FFM)?

H04: No positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders after controlling for the effects of personality (FFM).

Ha4: A positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders even after controlling for the effects of personality (FFM).

RQ1d. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of leadership experience?

118
 H05: No positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders after controlling for the effects of leadership experience.

Ha5: A positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational

leaders after controlling for the effects of leadership experience.

The focus of this chapter is to present the results of the analysis that was used to test the

different research questions and hypotheses. The study outcomes are presented in tables and

graphs with descriptive narratives. First, the summaries of the demographic information of the

sample were presented. This chapter also includes descriptive summaries of the information on

the study variables. Tests of normality were conducted. This is followed by the results of the

Pearson correlation test and multiple regression analysis to address the research hypotheses of

the study.

Description of the Population and Sample

The sample for this study was organizational leaders, defined as business owners with

three or more direct reports or managers who supervise three or more employees. The United

States Census Bureau publishes Statistics of US Businesses (SUSB). The 2011 data is the most

recent available data. According to those records, there are 28 million small businesses however,

22 million are non-employer businesses, and therefore their owners did not qualify as members

of this population. Additionally, medium sized and large employers employ 114.6 million

people (SUSB, 2011). Assuming a conservative figure of one organizational leader for every 10

employees, an additional population of 11.5 million managers exists. Therefore, the total

population for the study is approximately 17.5 million leaders. This population approximates

total organizational leaders based in the US and in keeping with the definition utilized in this

119
study. Borrowing from the concepts of Kouzes and Posner (2012), the definition of leadership

roles is much wider than simply C-level or Director level individuals. Leaders are everywhere

and leadership is about relationship, credibility, and what you do every day (Kouzes & Posner,

2012, p. 329).

The sample for this study was surveyed using Qualtrics software, Version 1.15s of the

Qualtrics Research Suite. Qualtrics and all other Qualtrics product or service names are

registered trademarks or trademarks of Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA, http://www.qualtrics.com.

Qualtrics uses sourcing from multiple panels and takes steps to ensure a representative sample of

the target population. Qualtrics panel partners randomly select respondents for surveys where

respondents are highly likely to qualify. Certain exclusions took place including category

exclusions, participation frequency and so on. Each sample from the panel base was

proportioned to the general population and then randomized before the survey was deployed

(ESOMAR World Research, n.d.). Potential respondents were sent an email invitation informing

them that the survey was for research purposes only, how long the survey was expected to take

and what incentives were available. As an additional assurance of quality and validity, in order

to avoid self-selection bias, the survey invitation did not include specific details about the

contents of the survey (ESOMAR World Research, n.d., p. 5). Self-selection bias is the

tendency for those who agree to participate in a study to vary significantly from those who do

not participate (Shadish, Cook, and Campbell, 2002). Masking the subject matter of the study

from potential participants helps avoid this issue.

The participants were selected using a gender stratified random sample from the Qualtrics

panel providers. A difference between male and female EI is noted in a number of research

studies. Specifically, female participants scored higher on various EI tests (Ciarrochi et al.,

120
2000: Jorfi et al., 2012; Khalili, 2011; Mayer et al., 1999). Stratification along gender helps

avoid an unrepresentative sample with higher than average EI scores. Cooper and Schindler

argued that stratification is useful when attempting to create a group that is more representative

of the general population (2011). Further, Cooper and Schindler (2011) argued that only

probability sampling provides precise estimates and accordingly that only probability samples

offer the researcher the opportunity to generalize their findings.

The qualifying questions for the survey included asking the respondents age (respondents

must be over 18), gender (for stratification purposes), and Which one of the following best

describes your level of management/leadership experience? The options in the answer were I

currently (or previously) supervise(d) 3 or more employees, I currently (or previously)

own(ed) a business with 3 or more employees or I have never supervised 3 or more

employees. The last choice was a disqualifying response.

A prescreening study was conducted in order to establish the feasibility of the sampling

plan, with emphasis on selecting leaders using the study definition of business owners and

managers who supervise or used to supervise at least three employees. After the successful

prescreening, successive waves of e-mail solicitations were issued until the final sample of 302

organizational leaders (164 female, 138 male) was acquired.

The administration of the survey online required the completion of two parts. If both

parts were not fully completed then the attempt was discarded. The first part included a link

from the Qualtrics website to the Multi-Health Systems (MHS) website to complete the

MSCEITv2.0 and then the participants had to complete the remainder of the instruments online

back at the Qualtrics site. A number of participants completed the MSCEITv2.0 without

completing the remaining questions at the Qualtrics site (N=74) and these responses were

121
unusable. Additionally, an undisclosed number of those recruited for participation were screened

out by Qualtrics based on their inattentive survey attempt. For example, Qualtrics disqualifies

respondents who straight-line through surveys or finish in less than 1/3 of the average survey

completion length (ESOMAR World Research, n.d., p. 6). The final sample also included one

participant whose answers indicated a lack of attentiveness (all responses on the same Likert

scale options) and this data set was also removed, resulting in the final usable data (N=302).

The following discussion summarizes the demographic information for the sample of 302

organizational leaders. The demographic information included age, leadership experience,

gender, role, race/ethnicity, and education level. The data were summarized in Tables 9 to 11.

The mean age of the samples of organizational leaders was 48.61 years old (SD = 12.66) with the

oldest age at 84 years old and the youngest age at 21 years old. The mean years of leadership

experience of the samples of organizational leaders was 16.69 years (SD = 10.83) with the

highest number of years of leadership experience of 52 years and the lowest of less than one

year.

For gender, there were slightly more female (164; 54.3%) organizational leaders than

male (138; 45.7%) organizational leaders. In terms of the race/ethnicity, the majority or 237

(78.5%) out of the 302 business owners were white/Caucasians, 27 (8.9%) were African

American, 21 (7.0%) were Hispanic, nine (3.0%) were Asian, and three (1.0%) were Native

American. In terms of education level, 108 (35.8%) of the 302 organizational leaders have a

four-year college degree, 55 (18.2%) have a Masters degree, 53 (17.5%) only have some college

education level, 40 (13.2%) have a two-year college degree, 26 (8.6%) have only a high

school/GED, and there were only 18 (6%) that have a doctoral degree/professional degree (JD,

122
MD). In terms of role in the organization, the majority or 266 (88.1%) out of the 302

organizational leaders were managers/leaders and there were only 36 (11.9%) entrepreneurs.

Personality in this study is based on the big five personality construct, also known as the

Five Factor Model (FFM) and includes the subscale measures of openness, conscientiousness,

extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism as measured using the IPI-NEO instrument

(Goldberg 1999; 2001). In terms of the personality among the 302 organizational leaders, the

highest scores were for agreeableness (M = 41.27) and conscientiousness (M = 40.08). These

mean that most of the 302 organizational leaders exhibit this personality. On the other hand, the

lowest score was for extraversion (M = 35.82). The organizational leaders sampled least

exhibited this trait.

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics of Age and Leadership Experience

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

Deviation
Age 302 21 84 48.61 12.66
Leadership experience 302 0 52 16.69 10.83

Table 12 summarized the different measures of the independent variable of EI and the

dependent variable of leadership practices of the organizational leaders. The measures of the

independent variable of EI include the four branches of EI of perceiving emotions branch, using

emotions branch, understanding emotions branch, and managing emotions branch; EI area scores

of experiential area score and strategic area score; and the EI total score.

The measures of the dependent variable of leadership practices include the leadership

practices of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others

to act, and encouraging the heart, and leadership practices total score. For leadership practice, in

terms of mean comparison, it can be observed that 302 organizational leaders have the highest

scores in enabling others to act (M = 30.01), encouraging the heart (M = 29.74), and inspiring a

123
shared vision (M = 27.29). This indicated that they frequently practiced these items while the

lowest score was in inspiring a shared vision (M = 27.29) and challenging the process (M =

27.51) indicating they least practiced these items. The mean total score for leadership practice of

organization leaders was 143.86.

Table 10. Frequency and Percentage Summaries of Demographic Information (n = 302)

Frequency Percent
Gender
Male 138 45.7
Female 164 54.3

Role
Manager/Leader 266 88.1
Entrepreneur 36 11.9

Race/Ethnicity
White/Caucasian 237 78.5
African American 27 8.9
Hispanic 21 7.0
Asian 9 3.0
Native American 3 1.0
Other 3 1.0
Prefer not to answer 2 0.7

Education Level
Less than high school 2 0.7
High school / GED 26 8.6
Some college 53 17.5
Two-year college degree 40 13.2
Four-year college degree 108 35.8
Masters degree 55 18.2
Doctoral degree/professional degree (JD, MD) 18 6.0

Table 11. Descriptive Statistics of Personality Characteristics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Extraversion 302 10 50 35.82 7.72
Agreeableness 302 23 50 41.27 5.83
Conscientiousness 302 19 50 40.08 6.26
Neuroticism 302 16 50 37.67 7.47
Openness 302 18 50 39.42 5.81

124
Descriptive Statistics of Scores of Measures of EI and Leadership Practices

Table 12. Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Leadership Practice
Modeling the Way 302 10 36 29.30 4.51
Inspiring a Shared Vision 302 6 36 27.29 5.59
Challenging the Process 302 6 36 27.51 5.13
Enabling Others to Act 302 16 36 30.01 4.28
Encouraging the Heart 302 12 36 29.74 4.72
LPI Total 302 59 180 143.86 21.91

Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Perceiving Emotions Branch 302 28.5 134.3 94.46 18.80
Using Emotions Branch 302 37.6 129.1 92.20 17.46
Understanding Emotions Branch 302 50.8 122.1 92.52 14.31
Managing Emotions Branch 302 58.2 119.0 93.26 13.52
Experiential Area Score 302 31.7 128.7 91.41 19.23
Strategic Area Score 302 43.5 122.1 92.88 13.97
Total EI Score 302 36.6 124.7 91.25 16.93

In terms of mean comparison for the four branches of EI, it can be observed that 302

organizational leaders have the highest scores in perceiving emotions branch (M = 94.46) and

managing emotions branch (M = 93.26) while the lowest score was in using emotions branch (M

= 92.20) and understanding emotions branch (M = 92.52). For EI, in terms of mean comparison

on the EI area, there were higher scores for strategic area (M = 92.88) than experiential area (M =

91.41). The mean total score for EI of organization leaders was 91.25.

Details of the Analysis and Results

Following the creation of the descriptive statistics presented above, detailed analysis

continued with statistical and graphical examinations of normality, examination of internal

reliability of the three major test instruments used in this study, Pearson correlation tests to

examine the relationship between EI and leadership practices, and regression analyses designed

125
to test the remaining hypotheses incorporating age, gender, personality, and leadership

experience as control variables.

Normality Testing of the Data of Study Variables

Prior to conducting the statistical analysis of Pearson correlation analysis and regression

analysis to address the research questions and hypotheses of the study, normality testing of the

study variables was conducted to ensure that the data of the study variables follows normal

distribution. This is because one of the required assumptions of a parametric statistical test such

as a t-test is that the data should be normally distributed (Field, 2009). The Kolmogorov-

Smirnov and the Shapiro-Wilk tests for normality were conducted. In addition, normality was

examined by visually reviewing both histograms and q-q plots of the study variables of EI (IV)

and leadership practices (DV) of organizational leaders. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-

Wilk statistic is presented in Table 13.

The resulting Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics showed that these variables may differ from

normal distributions. However, Field (2009) argues that this information cannot be viewed in a

vacuum and that especially with large samples like the one in this study (N=302), small

variances from normal result in statistically significant K-S and S-W test statistics. Therefore,

the normality of these variables will be investigated in the graphical analysis. This information

is presented below as Figures 2 through 14.

The histograms in Figures 2 to 14 showed that the different measures of the independent

variable of EI of perceiving emotions branch, using emotions branch, understanding emotions

branch, managing emotions branch, experiential area score, strategic area score, and total EI

score; and the different measures of the dependent variable of leadership practices of modeling

the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, encouraging

126
the heart, and the LPI total score were normally distributed. This was because the figures showed

that the spread of data formed a bell-shaped curve, although the representation was not a perfect

bell-shaped curved. However, it was also observed that most of the data of the measures of the

independent variable of EI of using emotions branch, managing emotions branch, strategic area

score, and total EI score, and the different measures of the dependent variable of leadership

practices of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others

to act, encouraging the heart, and the LPI total score was low relative to the maximum value.

These variables were positively skewed. The authors of the MSCEITv2.0 noted that positive

skew is expected in MSCEIT scores. This is the reason the standardize scores for the measures

of EI were used in the analysis since as recommended by the MSCEIT technical manual (Mayer

et al., 2002). Figure 2 below shows some outliers to the left and some higher than unusual scores

around the central distribution but acceptably normal distribution of the perceiving emotions

branch of EI scores.

Table 13. Results of Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Extraversion .052 302 .048 .984 302 .002
Agreeableness .080 302 .000 .966 302 .000
Conscientiousness .078 302 .000 .966 302 .000
Neuroticism .058 302 .017 .978 302 .000
Openness .049 302 .072 .983 302 .001
LPI Total .069 302 .001 .968 302 .000
Perceiving Emotions Branch .072 302 .001 .965 302 .000
Using Emotions Branch .087 302 .000 .964 302 .000
Understanding Emotions Branch
.087 302 .000 .955 302 .000

Managing Emotions Branch .102 302 .000 .950 302 .000

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

127
Figure 2. Histogram of perceiving emotions branch.

Figure 3 below shows one outlier to the left and a dual peak at the central distribution, but

acceptably normal distribution of the using emotions branch of EI scores.

Figure 3. Histogram of using emotions branch.

128
 Figure 4 below shows several larger than expected scores to the left and a dual peak at

the central distribution, but acceptably normal distribution of the understanding emotions branch

of EI scores.

Figure 4. Histogram of understanding emotions branch.

Figure 5 below shows several larger than expected scores to the left and a pronounced

positive skew, but an acceptably normal distribution of the managing emotions branch of EI

scores.

Figure 5. Histogram of managing emotions branch.

129
 Figure 6 below shows several outlier scores to the left and larger than expected scores

around the central distribution, but an acceptably normal distribution of the experiential area of

EI scores.

Figure 6. Histogram of experiental area score.

Figure 7 below shows several outlier scores to the left and larger than expected scores

around the central distribution as well as some positive skew, but an acceptably normal

distribution of the strategic area of EI scores.

Figure 7. Histogram of strategic area score.

130
 Figure 8 below shows several outlier scores to the left and larger than expected scores

around the central distribution along with a positive skew, but an acceptably normal distribution

of the total EI scores.

Figure 8. Histogram of total EI score.

Figure 9 below shows one outlier on the left and evidence of some positive skew, but an

acceptably normal distribution of the modeling the way leadership practices scores. Positive

skew of leadership practices is not unexpected in a sample of experienced organizational leaders.

Figure 9. Histogram of modelling the way.

131
 Figure 10 below shows outliers and larger than expected scores on the left and evidence

of some positive skew, but an acceptably normal distribution of the inspiring a shared vision

leadership practices scores. Positive skew of leadership practices is not unexpected in a sample

of experienced organizational leaders.

Figure 10. Histogram of inspiring a shared vision.

Figure 11 below shows some outliers on the left and one unexpectedly high score, but an

acceptably normal distribution of the challenging the process leadership practices scores.

Figure 11. Histogram of challenging the process.

132
 Figure 12 below shows outliers on the left and some positive skew, but an acceptably

normal distribution of the enabling others to act leadership practices scores. Positive skew of

leadership practices is not unexpected in a sample of experienced organizational leaders.

Figure 12. Histogram of enabling others to act.

Figure 13 below shows an outlier on the left and evidence of positive skew, but an

acceptably normal distribution of the encouraging the heart leadership practices scores. Positive

skew of leadership practices is not unexpected in a sample of experienced organizational leaders.

Figure 13. Histogram of encouraging the heart.

133
 Figure 14 below shows an outlier on the left and some positive skew, but an acceptably

normal distribution of the total leadership practices scores.

Figure 14. Histogram of LPI total.

The q-q plots in Figures 15 to 19, showed that the measure of the dependent variable of

leadership practices of LPI total score were normally distributed across the different measures of

the independent variable of EI of perceiving emotions branch, using emotions branch,

understanding emotions branch, managing emotions branch, experiential area score, strategic

area score, and total EI score.

This was because the q-q plots showed that the plots for each of the six measures of EI

were forming a linear line representing the normal distribution. With these results, the data for

the dependent variable of leadership practices and independent variable of EI were all normally

distributed (Field, 2009). Thus, the Pearson correlation test and regression analysis can be

conducted.

134
Figure 15. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for perceiving.

Figure 16. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for using.

135
Figure 17. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for understanding.

Figure 18. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for managing.

136
Figure 19. Normal Q-Q plot of LPI total for strategic area score.

Cronbachs Alpha Measure of Internal Consistency Analysis

Internal consistency analyses were run to determine if the responses in the five personality

dimensions, LPI total scores; and MSCEIT measures of four branches of EI of perceiving

emotions branch, using emotions branch, understanding emotions branch, and managing

emotions branch; EI area scores of experiential area score and strategic area score; and the EI

total score were reliable measures by investigating the internally consistency. According to

Bonnett (2010), internal consistency analysis allows for the study the properties of measurement

scales and the individual scale items. Cronbachs alpha calculates a reliability coefficient that

ranging between 1 and 0. The coefficient is based on average inter-item correlation. The

Cronbachs alpha measures are displayed in Table 14. Bonnett (2010) argued that adequate

internal consistency of the scale is assumed if the coefficient is greater than 0.70. Results from

the test found that each of the measures of personality traits of extraversion (0.91), agreeableness

(0.87), conscientiousness (0.86), neuroticism (0.91), and openness (0.84); leadership practice

total score (0.96); EI measures of perceiving emotions branch (0.94), using emotions branch

137
(0.79), experiential area score (0.94), and EI total score (0.88) were measured internally

consistently since the overall Cronbachs alpha values for these measures were greater than 0.70.

These measures exhibited high levels of internal consistency since the Cronbachs alpha values

were very higher than the acceptable value of 0.70. This means that the current measure for

personality traits of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness;

leadership practice total score; and EI measures of perceiving emotions branch, using emotions

branch, experiential area score, and EI total score were internally consistent. The different items

were correlated implying that the question items measure the same constructs and produced

similar score. However, the EI measures of understanding emotions branch (0.30), managing

emotions branch (0.68), strategic area score (0.6) have Cronbachs value less than the minimum

acceptable value of 0.7 indicating that these measures of EI have poor internally consistency.

According to its authors, this has been an issue of the MSCEIT instrument, the measure of EI,

which shows poor reliabilities because the respondents enter various responses for each item in

the questionnaire. These raw responses are not scored responses, and so standard Cronbach

alpha reliability scores and typical split-half software analysis should not be calculated on the

MSCEIT measures. Any reliability possessed would reflect individual differences in the use of

continuous response scales on different branches of EI, and would not reflect the reliability of

measured EI. Accordingly, the authors of the MSCEIT argued that SPSS uses a default split-

half approach that takes the first half of all the test items (based on the order of variables entered)

and compares them with the second half of the test items and this methodology results in spilt-

halves that are non-equivalent (Mayer et al., 2012, p. 405). The appropriate reliability

coefficient to be used to assess the internal consistency of the MSCEIT is the split-half reliability

138
coefficient using equivalent split halves taken at the task level of the instrument (Mayer et al.,

2002). This internal consistency measure is presented in Table 15.

Table 14. Cronbachs alpha measures of internal reliabilities

Cronbach's
N of Items
Alpha
Personality Extraversion 0.91 10
Agreeableness 0.87 10
Conscientiousness 0.86 10
Neuroticism 0.91 10
Openness 0.84 10
Leadership Practice LPI Total 0.96 30
Emotional Intelligence Perceiving Emotions Branch 0.94 50
Using Emotions Branch 0.79 30
Understanding Emotions Branch 0.30 32
Managing Emotions Branch 0.68 29
Experiential Area Score 0.94 80
Strategic Area Score 0.60 61
Total EI Score 0.88 141

Table 15 summarized the split-half reliability coefficients for the MSCEIT instrument to

measure EI including the four branches of EI of perceiving emotions branch, using emotions

branch, understanding emotions branch, and managing emotions branch; EI area scores of

experiential area score and strategic area score; and the EI total score. The resulting statistics

showed that the all four EI branch scores of perceiving emotions branch (0.96), using emotions

branch (0.90), understanding emotions branch (0.87), and managing emotions branch (0.86); two

area score of experiential area score (0.96) and strategic area score (90); and the total EI score

(0.96) demonstrated more than acceptable split-half reliabilities since the two sets of scores for

each of the measures of EI were highly correlated. These means that the items measuring these

EI measures were consistent or measuring the same thing. There were no issues in the

reliabilities in the MSCEI instrument measuring EI.

139
Table 15. Split-half reliability coefficients for MSCEIT measure of EI

Spearman-
N of Spilt-Half Brown
Items Reliability Prophesy
Formula
Perceiving Emotions Branch 50 0.96 0.98
Using Emotions Branch 30 0.90 0.95
Understanding Emotions Branch 32 0.87 0.93
Managing Emotions Branch 29 0.86 0.92
Experiential Area Score 80 0.96 0.98
Strategic Area Score 61 0.90 0.95
Total Emotional Intelligence Score 141 0.96 0.98

Pearson Correlation Results of Correlation between EI and Leadership Practices

The Pearson correlation coefficient was conducted to examine the correlations between

EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders at the total score and subscale level scores.

The Pearson correlation test is a statistical test that determines correlation between two

continuous measured variables (Nikoli, Muresan, Feng, & Singer, 2012). A Pearson correlation

coefficient was calculated to index the strength and direction of the relationships among the

stated variables (Pearson, 1895). A level of significance of 0.05 was also used in the correlation

test. Significant correlation between variables is observed if the p-value of the r statistics of the

Pearson correlation test is less than the critical value of the level of significance set at 0.05.

Table 16 summarized the results of the correlation test.

The branch scores for EI are presented first. The results of the correlation test showed

that perceiving emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated with leadership

practices of modeling the way (r (300) = .12, p = .03), enabling others to act (r (300) = .23, p <

.001), and encouraging the heart (r (300) = .13, p = .03). The using emotions branch of EI was

significantly and positively correlated with leadership practices of modeling the way (r(300) =

.29, p < .001), inspiring a shared vision (r(300) = 0.17, p < .001), challenging the process (r(300)

140
= .13, p < .001), enabling others to act (r(300) = .38, p < .001), and encouraging the heart (r(300)

= 0.31, p < 0.001); and the total leadership practice score (r(300) = .27, p < .001). The

understanding emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated with leadership

practices of enabling others to act (r (300) = .28, p < .001) and encouraging the heart (r (300) =

.15, p = .01). The managing emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated

with leadership practices of modeling the way (r (300) = .33, p < .001), inspiring a shared vision

(r (300) = .16, p = .01), challenging the process (r (300) = .20, p < .001), enabling others to act (r

(300) = 0.44, p < .001), and encouraging the heart (r (300) = 0.34, p < .001); and the total

leadership practice score (r (300) = .31, p < .001).

The area scores for EI are presented next. The experiential area of EI was significantly

and positively correlated with leadership practices of modeling the way (r (300) = .24, p < .001),

inspiring a shared vision (r (300) = .11, p = .05), enabling others to act (r (300) = .37, p < .001),

and encouraging the heart (r (300) = .25, p < .001); and the total leadership practice score (r

(300) = .23, p < .001). The strategic area of EI was significantly and positively correlated with

leadership practices of modeling the way (r (300) = .23, p < .001), enabling others to act (r (300)

= .39, p < .001) and encouraging the heart (r (300) = .26, p < .001); and the total leadership

practice score (r (300) = .22, p < .001).

Lastly, the total score of EI was significantly and positively correlated with leadership

practices of modeling the way (r (300) = .25, p < .001), enabling others to act (r (300) = .39, p <

.001) and encouraging the heart (r (300) = .26, p < .001); and the total leadership practice score

(r (300) = .23, p < .001).

The positive correlation means that as the EI of the organizational leaders becomes

higher their leadership practice in modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the

141
process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart becomes higher. With this result, the

null hypothesis for hypothesis one that no positive correlation exists between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders is rejected. The alternative hypothesis that A positive

correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders was supported

in the correlation analysis.

142
Table 16. Pearson Correlation Results between EI and Leadership Practices

Inspiring a
Modeling the Challenging Enabling Encouraging
Shared LPI Total
Way the Process Others to Act the Heart
Vision
Perceiving Pearson Correlation .12* .01 .01 .23* .13* .10
Emotions
Sig. (2-tailed) .03 .92 .94 .00 .03 .08
Branch
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Using Pearson Correlation .29* .17* .13* .38* .31* .27*
Emotions
Sig. (2-tailed) .00 .00 .03 .00 .00 .00
Branch
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Understanding Pearson Correlation .11 -.03 -.01 .28* .15* .10
Emotions
Sig. (2-tailed) .05 .64 .86 .00 .01 .08
Branch
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Managing Pearson Correlation .33* .16* .20* .44* .34* .31*
Emotions
Sig. (2-tailed) .00 .01 .00 .00 .00 .00
Branch
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Experiential Pearson Correlation .24* .11* .09 .37* .25* .23*
Area Score
Sig. (2-tailed) .00 .05 .13 .00 .00 .00
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Strategic Pearson Correlation .23* .06 .10 .39* .26* .22*
Area Score
Sig. (2-tailed) .00 .27 .10 .00 .00 .00
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
Total EI Score Pearson Correlation .25* .08 .09 .39* .26* .23*
Sig. (2-tailed) .00 .15 .14 .00 .00 .00
N 302 302 302 302 302 302
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

143
 Figure 20 graphically depicts the significant relationship shown in Table 16

above. Dotted lines from EI to leadership practices denote the significant correlations in

support of alternate hypothesis one.

Emotional Intelligence Leadership Practices

Perceiving Emotions Modeling the Way

Branch

Using Emotions Inspiring a Shared

Branch Vision

Understanding Challenging the

Emotions Branch Process

Managing Emotions Enabling Others to

Branch Act

Experiential EI Area Encouraging the Heart

Strategic EI Area Total Leadership

Practices

Total EI Score

Figure 20. Significant Correlations between Independent Variables and Leadership

Practices

147
Regression Results of Effect of EI on Leadership Practices

Research Questions 1a to 1d were addressed using a stepwise regression model.

The stepwise multiple regression model was used to determine the individual effects of

each of the different measures of the independent variable of EI of perceiving emotions

branch, using emotions branch, understanding emotions branch, managing emotions

branch, experiential area score, strategic area score, and total EI score on the total score

of dependent variable of leadership practices of organizational leaders while controlling

the effects of age, gender, personality, and leadership experience. A backward method

was used in the stepwise regression mode. Field (2009) argues that when using stepwise

regression, backward is preferable to forward method because of suppressor effects

which occur when a predictor has a significant effect but only when another variable is

held constant (Field, 2009). Therefore, forward methods run a higher risk of making a

Type II error (missing a relevant predictor). Each of these effects was investigated using

one regression model in order to compare the effects of different predictors. In the

regression analysis using backward approach, all variables are entered into the equation

and then sequentially removed. At each step, the largest probability of F is removed. A

level of significance value of 0.05 is used in order to determine the statistical significance

of relationships in the regression analysis.

The dependent variable for this analysis is the total Leadership Practices

Inventory score. The rationale for the use of the total score comes from Carless (2001)

who analyzed the factorial structure of the LPI. In a large sample (N=1400) Carless

148
found support for a higher-order factor of leadership practices using the total LPI rather

than the five individual factors which were highly intercorrelated (2001). Additionally,

Sandbaaken (2004) failed to verify the five factor structure of the LPI using a sample of

357 Norwegian leaders and instead advocated for a better fitting three-factor solution.

Therefore, the total LPI score was used in the regression analysis presented here.

A statistically significant effect by the independent variables to the dependent

variable is determined if the probability value of significance (p-value) of the regression

is less than or equal to the level of significance value (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). If the

parameter estimate is significant at the 0.05 significance level, the beta coefficients of the

predictors are investigated to determine how strongly the independent variables affect the

dependent variable of leadership practices of organizational leaders (Tabachnick &

Fidell, 2013).

Table 17 summarized the results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis

conducted to determine the separate individual effects of the four branches of EI of

perceiving emotions branch, using emotions branch, understanding emotions branch,

managing emotions branch on the total score of leadership practices of organizational

leaders while controlling the effect of age, gender, personality, and leadership experience.

Seven regressions were generated. The final model only included the personality traits of

agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness; leadership experience, the EI branch

scores of understanding emotions branch and managing emotions branch. The model fit

in terms of R2 of the final generated stepwise linear regression model using the backward

method was 0.40, which indicated that these variables included in the final regression

149
model accounted for 40% of the variance in the prediction of leadership practices. The

model prediction has a low variance indicating a low combined effect size on leadership

practices.

Looking at model 7, in terms of the significance of the individual effects of each of

the four branch scores of EI, only the two EI out of the four which are the scores of

understanding emotions branch (t (300) = -2.42, p = 0.02) and managing emotions branch

(t (300) = 2.58, p = 0.01) were significant predictors or have significant effects to the

leadership practices of organizational leaders while controlling the effects of their age,

gender, personality, and leadership experience. These were the only p-values less than

the level of significance value of 0.05.

The unstandardized beta coefficient was analyzed to determine the independent

contribution and the relative importance of these two branch scores of EI to the

leadership practices of organizational leaders. The unstandardized coefficient value

(beta) of the managing emotion branch (0.26) was positive indicating positive

contribution while understanding emotion branch (-0.22) was negative indicating

negative contribution in predicting leadership practices of organization leaders. These

suggested that leadership practices of organizational leaders would increase if there is

more managing emotion branch while the leadership practices of organizational leaders

would decrease if there is more understanding emotion branch. For every one increase in

the score of managing emotion branch, the total scores in leadership practice of

organizational leaders each will increase by 0.26. For every one increase in the score of

understanding emotion branch, the total scores in leadership practice of organizational

150
leaders each will decrease by 0.22. The regression equation is written as total score of

leadership practices = 36.81 + 0.26 * Managing emotions branch - 0.26 * Understanding

emotions branch

Table 17. Regression results of effects of EI branch scores on leadership practices

Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 36.81 10.95 3.36 .00
Age -0.01 0.11 -0.01 -0.12 .90
Gender -2.85 2.23 -0.07 -1.28 .20
Extraversion 0.20 0.15 0.07 1.27 .21
Agreeableness 0.48 0.24 0.13 1.97 .05
Conscientiousness 0.81 0.20 0.23 3.99 .00
Neuroticism 0.05 0.17 0.02 0.32 .75
Openness 1.01 0.21 0.27 4.78 .00
Leadership Experience 0.29 0.13 0.15 2.27 .02
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.13 0.07 -0.11 -1.88 .06
Using Emotions Branch 0.10 0.08 0.08 1.16 .25
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.16 0.10 -0.11 -1.63 .11
Managing Emotions Branch 0.26 0.11 0.16 2.42 .02
2 (Constant) 36.41 10.43 3.49 .00
Gender -2.84 2.22 -0.07 -1.28 .20
Extraversion 0.20 0.15 0.07 1.32 .19
Agreeableness 0.47 0.24 0.13 1.98 .05
Conscientiousness 0.81 0.20 0.23 4.00 .00
Neuroticism 0.05 0.17 0.02 0.31 .76
Openness 1.02 0.21 0.27 4.88 .00
Leadership Experience 0.28 0.10 0.14 2.91 .00
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.13 0.07 -0.11 -1.88 .06
Using Emotions Branch 0.10 0.08 0.08 1.15 .25
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.17 0.10 -0.11 -1.69 .09
Managing Emotions Branch 0.26 0.11 0.16 2.46 .01
3 (Constant) 36.45 10.41 3.50 .00
Gender -2.93 2.20 -0.07 -1.33 .18
Extraversion 0.21 0.15 0.07 1.37 .17
Agreeableness 0.48 0.24 0.13 2.03 .04
Conscientiousness 0.83 0.19 0.24 4.38 .00
Openness 1.02 0.21 0.27 4.93 .00
151
Table 17 (continued). Regression results of effects of EI branch scores on leadership

practices

Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
3 Leadership Experience 0.29 0.10 0.14 2.98 .00
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.12 0.07 -0.11 -1.87 .06
Using Emotions Branch 0.10 0.08 0.08 1.17 .24
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.17 0.10 -0.11 -1.70 .09
Managing Emotions Branch 0.26 0.11 0.16 2.49 .01
4 (Constant) 32.54 10.00 3.25 .00
Extraversion 0.20 0.15 0.07 1.32 .19
Agreeableness 0.40 0.23 0.11 1.75 .08
Conscientiousness 0.89 0.19 0.25 4.76 .00
Openness 1.08 0.20 0.29 5.30 .00
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.09 0.16 3.35 .00
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.13 0.07 -0.11 -1.95 .05
Using Emotions Branch 0.10 0.08 0.08 1.16 .25
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.16 0.10 -0.10 -1.62 .11
Managing Emotions Branch 0.24 0.11 0.15 2.31 .02
5 (Constant) 35.06 9.83 3.57 .00
Agreeableness 0.50 0.22 0.13 2.29 .02
Conscientiousness 0.87 0.19 0.25 4.69 .00
Openness 1.15 0.20 0.30 5.82 .00
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.09 0.16 3.40 .00
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.13 0.07 -0.11 -1.89 .06
Using Emotions Branch 0.10 0.08 0.08 1.17 .24
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.18 0.10 -0.12 -1.87 .06
Managing Emotions Branch 0.24 0.11 0.15 2.30 .02
6 (Constant) 33.56 9.75 3.44 .00
Agreeableness 0.56 0.21 0.15 2.66 .01
Conscientiousness 0.91 0.18 0.26 4.99 .00
Openness 1.13 0.20 0.30 5.75 .00
Leadership Experience 0.30 0.09 0.15 3.25 .00
Perceiving Emotions Branch -0.10 0.06 -0.09 -1.60 .11
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.16 0.10 -0.11 -1.70 .09
Managing Emotions Branch 0.27 0.10 0.17 2.70 .01
7 (Constant) 33.06 9.77 3.38 .00
Agreeableness 0.51 0.21 0.14 2.45 .02*

152
Table 17 (continued). Regression results of effects of EI branch scores on leadership

practices

Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
7 Conscientiousness 0.87 0.18 0.25 4.81 .00*
Openness 1.14 0.20 0.30 5.80 .00*
Leadership Experience 0.31 0.09 0.16 3.37 .00*
Understanding Emotions Branch -0.22 0.09 -0.14 -2.42 .02*
Managing Emotions Branch 0.26 0.10 0.16 2.58 .01*
Model 1
Note. F (12, 289) = 16.85, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.41, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (Constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Extraversion, Age, Gender, Conscientiousness,
Perceiving Emotions Branch, Openness, Neuroticism, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding
Emotions Branch, Using Emotions Branch
Model 2
Note. F (11, 290) = 18.44, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.41, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Extraversion, Gender, Conscientiousness, Perceiving
Emotions Branch, Openness, Neuroticism, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions
Branch, Using Emotions Branch
Model 3
Note. F (10, 291) = 20.34, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.41, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Extraversion, Gender, Conscientiousness, Perceiving
Emotions Branch, Openness, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions Branch, Using
Emotions Branch
Model 4
Note. F (9, 292) = 22.34, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.41, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Perceiving Emotions
Branch, Openness, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions Branch, Using Emotions
Branch
Model 5
Note. F (8, 293) = 24.86, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.40, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Conscientiousness, Perceiving Emotions Branch,
Openness, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions Branch, Using Emotions Branch

153
Table 17 (continued). Regression results of effects of EI branch scores on leadership

practices

Model 6
Note. F (7, 294) = 28.17, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.40, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Conscientiousness, Perceiving Emotions Branch,
Openness, Leadership Experience, Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions Branch
Model 7
Note. F (6, 295) = 32.28, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.40, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Managing Emotions Branch, Conscientiousness, Openness, Leadership Experience,
Agreeableness, Understanding Emotions Branch

Table 18 summarized the results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis

conducted to determine the individual effects of the two EI area scores of experiential

area score and strategic area score on the total score of leadership practices of

organizational leaders while controlling the effect of age, gender, personality, and

leadership experience. Seven regressions were generated. The final model only included

the personality traits of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness; and leadership

experience. None of the two EI area scores were included. These means that the two

area scores of EI of experimental area score and strategic area score were not significant

predictors or have insignificant effects to the leadership practices of organizational

leaders while controlling the effects of their age, gender, personality, and leadership

experience. It can be observed that the experiential area score and strategic area score

were excluded in the backward iteration method in model 7 and 6, respectively.

154
Table 18. Regression results of effects of EI area scores on leadership practices

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 33.44 10.81 3.09 .00
Age -0.06 0.11 -0.03 -0.51 .61
Gender -2.22 2.24 -0.05 -0.99 .32
Extraversion 0.20 0.16 0.07 1.27 .21
Agreeableness 0.63 0.24 0.17 2.60 .01
Conscientiousness 0.91 0.20 0.26 4.45 .00
Neuroticism 0.09 0.17 0.03 0.50 .62
Openness 0.97 0.21 0.26 4.55 .00
Leadership Experience 0.33 0.13 0.16 2.51 .01
Experiential Area Score -0.04 0.07 -0.04 -0.56 .57
Strategic Area Score 0.04 0.10 0.03 0.45 .65
2 (Constant) 33.43 10.79 3.10 .00
Age -0.05 0.11 -0.03 -0.47 .64
Gender -2.34 2.22 -0.05 -1.06 .29
Extraversion 0.21 0.15 0.07 1.36 .18
Agreeableness 0.64 0.24 0.17 2.66 .01
Conscientiousness 0.94 0.19 0.27 4.96 .00
Openness 0.98 0.21 0.26 4.62 .00
Leadership Experience 0.33 0.13 0.16 2.54 .01
Experiential Area Score -0.04 0.07 -0.03 -0.53 .60
Strategic Area Score 0.05 0.10 0.03 0.47 .64
3 (Constant) 31.72 10.14 3.13 .00
Gender -2.29 2.21 -0.05 -1.03 .30
Extraversion 0.22 0.15 0.08 1.48 .14
Agreeableness 0.62 0.24 0.16 2.62 .01
Conscientiousness 0.94 0.19 0.27 4.95 .00
Openness 1.00 0.21 0.27 4.75 .00
Leadership Experience 0.29 0.10 0.14 2.97 .00
Experiential Area Score -0.04 0.07 -0.04 -0.55 .59
Strategic Area Score 0.04 0.10 0.03 0.44 .66
4 (Constant) 28.65 9.69 2.96 .00
Extraversion 0.21 0.15 0.08 1.42 .16
Agreeableness 0.55 0.23 0.15 2.43 .02
Conscientiousness 0.98 0.19 0.28 5.24 .00
Openness 1.05 0.21 0.28 5.08 .00
Leadership Experience 0.31 0.10 0.15 3.27 .00

155
Table 18 (continued). Regression results of effects of EI area scores on leadership

practices

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
4 Experiential Area Score -0.04 0.07 -0.04 -0.56 .58
Strategic Area Score 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.34 .74
5 (Constant) 31.11 9.56 3.26 .00
Agreeableness 0.66 0.21 0.18 3.12 .00
Conscientiousness 0.96 0.19 0.28 5.17 .00
Openness 1.12 0.20 0.30 5.60 .00
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.10 0.16 3.33 .00
Experiential Area Score -0.04 0.07 -0.03 -0.49 .62
Strategic Area Score 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.08 .94
6 (Constant) 31.40 8.83 3.56 .00
Agreeableness 0.66 0.21 0.18 3.13 .00
Conscientiousness 0.96 0.19 0.28 5.19 .00
Openness 1.12 0.20 0.30 5.70 .00
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.10 0.16 3.35 .00
Experiential Area Score -0.03 0.06 -0.03 -0.54 .59
7 (Constant) 30.89 8.77 3.52 .00
Agreeableness 0.63 0.20 0.17 3.12 .00*
Conscientiousness 0.94 0.18 0.27 5.19 .00*
Openness 1.11 0.20 0.30 5.69 .00*
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.09 0.16 3.44 .00*
Model 1
Note. F (10, 291) = 18.46, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Gender,
Conscientiousness, Openness, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score, Age
Model 2
Note. F (9, 292) = 20.54, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Gender,
Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score, Age
Model 3
Note. F (8, 293) = 23.14, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Gender,
Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score

156
Table 18 (continued). Regression results of effects of EI area scores on leadership

practices

Model 4
Note. F (7, 294) = 26.29, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness,
Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score
Model 5
Note. F (6, 295) = 30.23, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.38, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness,
Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score
Model 6
Note. F (5, 296) = 36.39, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.38, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential
Area Score
Model 7
Note. F (4, 297) = 45.53, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.38, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness

Table 19 summarized the results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis

conducted to determine the individual effect of the total EI score on the total score of

leadership practices of organizational leaders while controlling the effect of age, gender,

personality, and leadership experience. Six regressions were generated. The final model

only included the personality traits of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness;

and leadership experience. The total EI score was not included. This means that the total

EI score was not a significant predictor or has insignificant effects to the leadership

practices of organizational leaders while controlling the effects of their age, gender,

personality, and leadership experience. It can be observed that the total EI score was

excluded in the backward iteration method in model 6.

157
Table 19. Regression Results of Effects of Total EI Score on Leadership Practices

Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 35.07 10.31 3.40 0.00
Age -0.06 0.11 -0.03 -0.49 0.63
Gender -2.08 2.24 -0.05 -0.93 0.36
Extraversion 0.18 0.16 0.07 1.19 0.24
Agreeableness 0.63 0.24 0.17 2.62 0.01
Conscientiousness 0.90 0.20 0.26 4.44 0.00
Neuroticism 0.09 0.17 0.03 0.51 0.61
Openness 1.00 0.21 0.27 4.74 0.00
Leadership Experience 0.33 0.13 0.16 2.56 0.01
Total EI Score -0.02 0.07 -0.02 -0.30 0.77
2 (Constant) 33.22 9.58 3.47 0.00
Gender -2.03 2.24 -0.05 -0.91 0.37
Extraversion 0.20 0.15 0.07 1.32 0.19
Agreeableness 0.61 0.24 0.16 2.58 0.01
Conscientiousness 0.89 0.20 0.26 4.44 0.00
Neuroticism 0.08 0.17 0.03 0.47 0.64
Openness 1.01 0.21 0.27 4.87 0.00
Leadership Experience 0.29 0.10 0.14 2.96 0.00
Total EI Score -0.02 0.07 -0.02 -0.34 0.74
3 (Constant) 33.37 9.56 3.49 0.00
Gender -2.16 2.22 -0.05 -0.97 0.33
Extraversion 0.21 0.15 0.07 1.40 0.16
Agreeableness 0.62 0.23 0.17 2.65 0.01
Conscientiousness 0.93 0.19 0.27 4.95 0.00
Openness 1.02 0.21 0.27 4.94 0.00
Leadership Experience 0.30 0.10 0.15 3.06 0.00
Total EI Score -0.02 0.07 -0.02 -0.28 0.78
4 (Constant) 30.25 9.00 3.36 0.00
Extraversion 0.20 0.15 0.07 1.35 0.18
Agreeableness 0.56 0.23 0.15 2.48 0.01
Conscientiousness 0.97 0.18 0.28 5.26 0.00
Openness 1.06 0.20 0.28 5.25 0.00
Leadership Experience 0.31 0.09 0.16 3.34 0.00
Total EI Score -0.03 0.07 -0.02 -0.43 0.67
5 (Constant) 31.90 8.93 3.57 0.00
Agreeableness 0.67 0.21 0.18 3.16 0.00
Conscientiousness 0.96 0.18 0.27 5.22 0.00
Openness 1.13 0.20 0.30 5.71 0.00
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.09 0.16 3.37 0.00
Total EI Score -0.04 0.07 -0.03 -0.62 0.54
6 (Constant) 30.89 8.77 3.52 0.00
Agreeableness 0.63 0.20 0.17 3.12 0.00*
Conscientiousness 0.94 0.18 0.27 5.19 0.00*
Openness 1.11 0.20 0.30 5.69 0.00*
Leadership Experience 0.32 0.09 0.16 3.44 0.00*

158
Table 19 (continued). Regression Results of Effects of Total EI Score on Leadership

Practices

Model 1
Note. F (9, 292) = 20.54, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Gender,
Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score, Age
Model 2
Note. F (8, 293) = 23.13, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Gender,
Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score
Model 3
Note. F (7, 294) = 26.48, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Extraversion, Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness,
Openness, Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score
Model 4
Note. F (6, 295) = 30.73, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.39, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Strategic Area Score, Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness,
Agreeableness, Experiential Area Score
Model 5
Note. F (5, 296) = 36.42, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.38, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness,
Experiential Area Score
Model 6
Note. F (4, 297) = 45.53, p < 0.001, R Square (R2) = 0.38, N =301
a. Dependent Variable: Total LPI Score
b. Predictors: (constant), Leadership Experience, Conscientiousness, Openness, Agreeableness

Conclusion

The objective of this quantitative research was to determine the relationship

between the EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders. This chapter presented

the results and the calculations of the results Pearson correlation test and stepwise

regression analysis using a backward method to address the research questions and

hypotheses of this study. The results were generated through the SPSSS statistical

software.

159
 The results of the correlation test showed that there is a positive correlation existing

between EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders. The results of the stepwise

regression analysis that there is a positive correlation exists between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender, age,

personality, and leadership experience. The organizational leaders will exhibit effective

leadership practice if they possess higher-level abilities in understanding emotions and

managing emotion. These abilities represent two of the four branches of the SOAM four

branch model of EI.

Chapter Five concludes this study. Chapter Five contains discussion of the findings

from the study, findings as they relate to literature, implications for action, and

recommendations for future research.

160
 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

The conclusions of this study are presented in Chapter 5. The chapter includes an

introduction, summary of the results from chapter 4, discussion of the results,

implications of the study results for both practice and scholarship, limitations of the

study, recommendations for future research, and a conclusion.

Summary of the Results

Leadership is an important aspect of individual and organizational success. In

short, leadership matters (Humphrey, 2014, p. 17), however, the organizational

environment encountered by leaders is undergoing dynamic changes. As argued

previously, the impact of globalization, increased diversity, and new work arrangement

have combined to substantially increase the challenges faced by leaders. This creates a

need for organizational leaders with a new set of skills. The skills that leaders require are

those related to emotional intelligence (EI). The objective of this study was to discover a

positive relationship between organizational leaders EI and their leadership practices.

The section begins with a review of purpose and research questions.

Purpose and Research Questions

The purpose of this quantitative non-experimental, research study research study

was to examine the relationship between the Stream One Ability Model (SOAM) of

Emotional Intelligence (EI) and leadership practices in order to refine the existing

knowledge of EI and leadership and to contribute to a more robust understanding of the

161
antecedents of effective leadership. In this study, EI was defined as the ability to

perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate

feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional

knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual

growth (Mayer et al., p. 511). Leadership practices was the dependent variable and

consists of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling

others to act, and encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012).

The objective of this study was to discover empirically if there was a positive

relationship between organizational leaders EI and their leadership practices. The

research questions examined this issue both with and without controlling for the effects

of known covariates including age, gender, personality, and leadership experience. The

specific research questions are presented below.

RQ1a. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of age?

RQ1b. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender?

RQ1c. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

personality (FFM)?

RQ1d. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

162
leadership experience? The next section includes a discussion of the significance of the

study

Significance of the Study

This study was significant in two ways. First, it investigated a less understood

and explored issue of the relationship between SOAM EI and leadership practices.

Previous studies examined this relationship using a Stream Two (Alston, 2009) or Stream

Three approach (Osborne, 2012) and previous studies failed to hold constant for the

effects of personality, age, gender, and leadership experience despite the

recommendations of numerous scholars in the field (Antonakis et al., 2009; Joseph &

Newman, 2010; Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004, Walter et al.,

2011; Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2009). Second, the findings of the study contribute

to a better understanding of the antecedents and conditions required for improved

leadership effectiveness in the field of organization and management as well as in the

practice of organizational leadership. Modern organizational leadership competence

involves more than technical skill and subject matter expertise. Organizational leaders

must understand how to regulate their own and their followers emotions (Dasborough,

2006; Humphrey 2002). Kouzes and Posners (2012) leadership practices model includes

transformational aspects of leadership, operationalized through the practices of modeling

the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and

encouraging the heart. These practices represent the skills that leaders need that go

beyond technical skill and subject matter expertise. George (2000) suggested that leaders

must understand both their own and their followers' emotions, and should be able to

163
evoke strong feelings. The actions of the leader are instrumental in this process of

creating and directing the motivation and sense making of their followers (George, 2000).

Dasborough argued that leaders may evoke follower emotions through the allocation of

work activities, by making requests of followers, by providing feedback on task

performance, or by displaying emotions themselves (2006, p. 165). Research suggests

that employee attitudes and job performance are influenced by leader feedback and

employees emotional responses to that feedback (Gaddis, Connelly, & Mumford).

Accordingly, leadership practices in the workplace can produce both positive and

negative emotions in followers and effective leaders should understand this aspect of

leadership. A brief review of the literature reviewed in connection with this study is

presented in the next section

Literature Review

In order to appreciate the contributions of this study, it is first necessary to

juxtapose it against the extant literature in the field. EI is defined as the ability to

perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate

feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional

knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual

growth (Mayer et al., 2008, p. 511). EI originates at the intersection of the study of

emotion in organizations and the concept of multiple intelligences and was preceded by

the concept of social intelligence. This study supported the results of previous research

indicating a correlation between EI and various measures of leadership effectiveness

(Abraham, 2005; Bratton, Dodd, & Brown, 2011; Cavazotte et al., 2012; Foster & Roche,

164
2014; Gardner & Stough, 2003a; 2003b; Hur, van de Berg, & Wilderom, 2011; Kotze &

Venter, 2011; Lopes et al., 2006; Malik, Danish, & Munir, 2011; Rockstuhl, Seiler, Ang,

Van Dyne, & Annen, 2011; Roset & Ciarrochi, 2005; Wolff et al., 2002; Van

Genderen, 2011; 2015; Wong & Law, 2002; Zammuner, Dionisio, Prandi, & Agnoli,

2013). The present study along with those mentioned above continue to add evidence to

the idea that leader EI impacts various outcomes including leadership practices,

leadership style, team effectiveness, organizational effectiveness, leader appraisal ratings,

leader emergence, managerial competence, employee job involvement, employee job

satisfaction, and other positive organizational outcomes.

This study also helped clarify the specific relationship between SOAM EI and

leadership practices that previous scholars have examined (Childers, 2009; Packard,

2008; Purkable, 2003). Previous research on the SOAM relationship between EI and

leadership practices produced mixed results. Purkable (2003) found a correlation

between total EI and modeling the way as well as a correlation between managing

emotions and both modeling the way and encouraging the heart in sample of 50

organizational leaders. In support of Purkables work, this study revealed a correlation

between managing emotions and total leadership practices after controlling for the effects

of known covariates. However, the relationship with total EI disappeared when the

control variables were included. Halls (2007) study revealed primarily negative

correlations in a sample of 65 school principals. Hall did discover one positive

significant relationship involved understanding emotion and modeling the way. This

study partially replicates Halls finding with a positive correlation between the

165
understanding emotions branch and total leadership practices after controlling for known

covariates. Diaz (2008) failed to find significant correlations between EI and leadership

practices after a training intervention. While the results were aimed at training, smaller

sample sizes and failure to control for age, gender, personality, or experience may have

limited the generalizability of Diazs findings. Packard (2008) attempted to replicate the

finding of Purkable (2003) in a sample of 55 female entrepreneurs. Experiential EI (one

of the two area scores for the MSCEIT comprised of both perceiving emotions and using

emotions) correlated with enabling others to act and the total LPI score. Additionally, the

strategic EI score (combination of understanding and managing emotions) correlated

negatively with encouraging others to act (Packard, 2008). Packard was unable to

replicate the results for coping but did find significant relationships. The results here cast

a different light on EI finding almost the opposite outcome for understanding and

managing emotions after controlling for known covariates. Childers (2009) studied only

7 leaders but also collected data from their subordinates using the LPI as a multirater

instrument. Childers results supported a relationship between perceiving emotions,

understanding emotions, and managing emotions with leadership practices at either the

total or subscale level (2009).

This study also joins a short list of studies that examined EI and leadership

effectiveness while controlling for some of the known covariates such as cognitive

ability, age, gender, personality, and leadership experience (Cavazotte et al., 2012; Foster

& Roche, 2014; Grunes et al., 2014; Jain, Srivasta, & Sullivan, 2013). These studies

follow the recommendations of prominent scholars in the field to examine the

166
incremental effects of EI on leadership rather than running the risk of confounding

variables and effects discovered when EI is not studied independently of the effects of

known covariates (Antonakis & Dietz, 2011; Harms & Cred, 2010; Matthews et el.,

2012; OBoyle, Humphrey, Pollack, Hawver, & Story, 2011).

As it relates to the broader leadership field, this study continues the recent work

examining the antecedents of leadership effectiveness in the form of traits or behaviors.

For example, the results agree with the findings of Bono and Judge (2004) that

personality (FFM) is an antecedent of transformational leadership style and with the

findings of Judge et al. (2004), that intelligence predicts leadership outcomes. The study

supports the findings of OBoyle et al. (2011) that EI predicts performance outcomes and

those of Schlaerth et al. (2013) that linked EI and specific leadership abilities. Each of

these studies as well as the study presented here support the general idea of the

importance of leader traits and behaviors for organizational outcomes (Antonakis et al.,

2012; Zaccaro, 2007).

In keeping with the majority of the previous research on EI, this study was a

quantitative, non-experimental, explanatory research study design. A relative paucity of

studies exist examining EI using qualitative methods. Perhaps this reflects the early

conception of EI as a variable of interest in the determination of ones level of

psychological adjustment for living (Mayer, DiPaolo, & Salovey, 1990). Despite its

positioning firmly in the world of quantitative methodology, some scholars examined EI

using a qualitative approach. Wilkinson (2015) conducted a constructivist qualitative

study of ten Disaster Response Assistance Team (DRAT) members at two academic

167
libraries using thematic analysis of interviews, documents, and artifacts. The author

found a thematic link between EI competencies and team leadership, effectiveness, and

communication. Singh and Dali (2014) explored whether EI and other work-integrated

learning competencies (WILCs) could be developed in an effort to promote leadership

practices in a sample of 60 school principals using five focus groups of ten members each

along with ten in-depth semi-structured interviews. The findings suggested that EI was

closely interconnected to WILCs and that these competencies could be developed using

the Advanced Certificate in Education (ACE) school leadership (SL) program (Singh &

Dali, 2014). Leggat and Balding (2013) conducted a qualitative study using focus groups

among 28 clinicians and clinician managers from medical, nursing and allied health

specializations. Thematic analysis was used to interpret the results and four individual

factors were conceptualized to encompass effective clinical leadership: EI, resilience,

self-awareness and understanding of other clinical disciplines (Leggat & Balding, 2013).

In addition to these published articles, several recent dissertations examined EI and

leadership issues using qualitative methods (Adewoye, 2013; Bryant, 2013; Forte, 2014;

Hakes, 2013; Heely, 2013; McGill, 2014; ODell, 2014; Rude, 2013). Despite these

forays into qualitative examinations of EI, the majority of EI research continues to use

quantitative approaches as did this study.

Methodology of the Study

The study used a quantitative, non-experimental, survey-based design to answer

the research questions. The study was cross-sectional and conducted in the field via an

online administration. The test instruments included both self-report surveys on

168
leadership practices and personality, and ability tests of EI. The sample was 302

randomly selected organizational leaders drawn from a national panel in cooperation with

Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com). Administration took place online using computerized

versions of all test instruments. This study attempted to verify a hypothesis using

relationships between variables, includes standards for reliability and validity, measures

information numerically, and employs statistical analysis. The two primary constructs in

the study were EI and leadership practices. Correlations were explored between EI and

leadership practices while examining the effects of known covariates including age,

gender, personality, and leadership experience. The sample participants completed the

MSCEIT assessment producing the EI data, the LPI assessment producing the leadership

practices data, the IPIP-NEO producing the personality data, and a demographic survey

providing responses on age, gender, and leadership experience.

Each major assessment produced a number of scores including totals and

subscales in most cases. The MSCEIT presents seven scores of EI which include the

total, two areas, and four branches. The total EI score encompasses two area scores of

experiential EI and strategic EI. The four branch scores include perceiving emotions,

using emotions, understanding emotions, and managing emotions (Mayer et al., 2002).

The LPI presents five scores including total leadership practices, modeling the way,

inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging

the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). The IPIP-NEO presents the big five personality

factors of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism

(Goldberg, 1999). This chapter continues with a summary of the evidence from chapter

169
four, continues with a discussion of that evidence, reviews the implications of the study,

discusses the limitations of this current study, and makes recommendations for additional

research in this area.

The Results

The results of this study supported each of the hypotheses. The first hypothesis

was that a significant relationship exists between EI as measured using the MSCEITv2.0

and leadership practices as measured using the LPI. This relationship was examined at

the subscale levels as well as at the total score level. The results of the correlation test

showed that perceiving emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated

with leadership practices of modeling the way, enabling others to act, and encouraging

the heart. A near significant relationship also exists between perceiving emotions and

total leadership practices (r (300) = .10, p = .08).

The using emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated with

leadership practices of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the

process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart, and the total leadership

practice score. Using emotions was significantly correlated with all measures of

leadership practices.

The understanding emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively

correlated with leadership practices of enabling others to act and encouraging the heart.

A near significant relationship also exists between understanding emotions and modeling

the way (r (300) = .11, p = .05) and total leadership practices (r (300) = .10, p = .08).

170
 The managing emotions branch of EI was significantly and positively correlated

with leadership practices of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the

process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart, and the total leadership

practice score. Like using emotion, managing emotion was significantly correlated with

every leadership practices score.

The area scores for EI are presented next. Experiential EI is a combination of the

perceiving emotion and using emotion branches. The experiential area of EI was

significantly and positively correlated with leadership practices of modeling the way,

inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart, and the total

leadership practice score. Only challenging the process was not related to experiential

EI.

Strategic EI is a combination of understanding emotion and managing emotion.

The strategic area of EI was significantly and positively correlated with leadership

practices of modeling the way, enabling others to act, encouraging the heart, and the total

leadership practice score. Challenging the process and inspiring a shared vision were not

related to strategic EI.

Lastly, the total score of EI is presented. Total EI is a combination of both

experiential EI and strategic EI and includes all four branches: perceiving emotion, using

emotion, understanding emotion, and managing emotion. Total EI was significantly and

positively correlated with leadership practices of modeling the way, enabling others to

act, encouraging the heart, and the total leadership practice score. Challenging the

process and inspiring a shared vision were not related to total EI.

171
 These positive correlations mean that as the EI of the organizational leaders

becomes higher their leadership practice in modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision,

challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart becomes

higher. With this result, the null hypothesis for hypothesis one that no positive

correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders is

rejected. The alternative hypothesis that A positive correlation exists between EI and

leadership practices of organizational leaders was supported in the correlation analysis.

The relationship between EI and leadership practices while controlling for age,

gender, personality, and leadership practices was addressed using a regression analysis.

In the first regression, age, gender, personality, and leadership experience were added as

the first step in the regression and the four branches of EI are added as a second step in

the regression. The results show that the remaining significant independent variables are

personality (agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness), leadership experience, and

EI (understanding emotions and managing emotions). These variables account for 40%

of the variance in leadership practices. Therefore, three aspects of personality, years of

leadership experience, and two branches of EI were found to be the primary determinants

of leadership practices. The fact that these variables account for 40% of the variance

means that other significant determinants of leadership practice exist.

Next, the regression was repeated using the area scores for EI (experiential and

strategic). Using this approach, EI was not a significant predictor and the only significant

predictors were personality (agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness), and

leadership experience. Finally, a third regression was run using total EI scores and once

172
again, the result showed no significant role for EI in the final regression model. The

predictors were personality (agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness), and

leadership experience.

Based on this outcome, Hypotheses 2, 3, 4, and 5 are partially supported. While

EI continued to be a relevant predictor in the model when examined at the branch level

for the specific subscales of understanding emotions and managing emotions, the impact

at the area and total score area was not significant in the model. This outcome is not

without precedent. Previous research suggests that some psychometric weaknesses may

exist in the MSCEIT area and total scores and that the branch level is the preferred level

of analysis for the MSCEIT (Fiori & Antonakis, 2011; 2012; Fllesdal & Hagtvet, 2009;

2013; Matthews et al., 2007). The next section offers a more in-depth discussion of these

results.

Discussion of the Results

Further discussion of the results requires an understanding of the definition of the

branch scores of EI and personality, and the leadership practices construct. The

understanding emotions branch contains the ability to understand emotional language and

to appreciate relationships between emotions. Understanding emotions also encompasses

the ability to be sensitive to differences between similar emotions, and the ability to

detect and articulate the ways our emotions typically evolve over time (Mayer et al.,

2002). Managing emotions is the ability to regulate our own, as well as the emotions of

others. Therefore, the high EI individual can utilize emotions and control them tin order

173
to accomplish their objectives (Mayer et al., 2002). Those two branches shared the

greatest correlation with leadership practices. Based on the results of the correlations

analysis, the greatest connections to leadership practices involved the practices of

modeling the way, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart. Kouzes and Posner

(2012) provide a rationale for the theoretical linkages between these areas in their

descriptions of each.

Modeling the way involves both clarifying your personal values and aligning your

actions with the shared values of your group as you set an example for others to follow

(Kouzes & Posner, 2012). In order to clarify your values align your actions with the

values of the group effectively, it is necessary to understand and manage your own

emotions as well as to perceive, understand, and manage the emotions of your followers.

This creates a clear linkage between the EI branches of perceiving, understanding, and

managing emotions and the leadership practice of modeling the way. The next leadership

practice that showed a significant and multiple correlations with EI was enabling others

to act.

Enabling others to act fosters increased collaboration by building trust and

facilitating strong relationships with followers as well as strengthening others by

increasing their self-determination and developing their levels of competence (Kouzes &

Posner, 2012). Clearly, building trust and facilitating strong relationships may involve

perceiving emotions and our followers, using emotions and emotional appeals in order to

gain commitment to our values, understanding the emotion of others as well as our own

emotions, and managing those emotions. This first aspect of enabling others to act shows

174
clear conceptual linkages to EI. The second part of enabling others to act, increasing

self-determination and developing competence, requires more of a social competence

approach to EI and might be better suited to STAM and STMM approaches the construct.

The third leadership practice that showed significant and multiple correlations with EI

branches was encouraging the heart.

Encouraging the heart includes recognizing others contributions and showing

appreciation for individual excellence as well as exalting and acknowledging the values

and victories by creating a sense community among followers (Kouzes & Posner, 2012).

Perceiving emotions of followers and using the emotions of followers and our own

emotions to facilitate thoughts aimed at exaltation and recognition are theoretically linked

to encouraging the heart. Creating a spirit of community is theoretically linked once

again to understanding and managing our emotions and the emotions of our followers.

The previous discussion draws theoretical links between the four branches of SOAM EI

and the five practices of effective leaders, particularly modeling the way, enabling others

to act, and encouraging the heart. The next section includes a more detailed discussion of

previous research on EI and leadership practices.

Discussion of the Previous EI and LPI Research

This study supports the relationships between understanding emotions and

managing emptions with leadership practices. Reviewing the previous SOAM research

into EI and leadership practices in light of this study, a significant relationship appears to

exist between both the understanding emotion branch and the managing emotions branch

of EI as measured using the MSCEITV2.0 and leadership practices at either the total

175
score or subscale level (or at both levels). Purkable found a similar relationship with the

managing emotions branch (2003). Hall found a similar relationship with the

understanding emotions branch (2007). Packard (2008) found a relationship at the area

score in contrast to this study but the relationship was evident in the strategic EI area

score (composed of managing emotion and understanding emotion branches). The

implications of these findings are considered in detail in the next section.

Implications of the Study Results

The results presented here suggest that EI is related to leadership practices and

that this relationship still exists after controlling for the effects of age, gender,

personality, and leadership experience. The results of this study demonstrate a positive

relationship between EI and leadership practices. The study also reveals a relationship

between certain aspects of personality and leadership practices. These results have

implication for both practitioners and scholars.

Practitioner Implications

This study suggests that higher levels of EI may help strengthen leadership

performance. For practitioners, previous scholarship suggested that EI could be

improved through training and development (Cherniss & Caplan, 2001; Clark, Callister,

& Wallace, 2003; Kerr et al., 2006; Kruml & Yockey, 2011; Sosik & Megerian, 1999; Sy

& Cote, 2004; Wallis & Kennedy, 2013; Zammuner et al., 2013). EI manifests as

emotional knowledge and previous studies suggest that knowledge may be increased and

developed within individuals, improving leader EI in the process (Mayer et al., 2004).

Accordingly, training programs may further increase leadership practices and leadership
176
performance. Alston (2009) argued that these programs allow team members to learn

shared leadership skills on the job, gain emotion-based skills to enhance and improve

self-learning, develop leaders as mentors, and assess and develop emotional

competencies throughout the organization (p. 74). For example, Wallis and Kennedy

conducted pre and post training intervention studies designed to measure team

effectiveness among nurse managers and found that EI increased due to the Leadership

for Resilience training programme (p. 631). Using an experimental design Zammuner et

al. (2013) found that training utilizing the Tremints program improves the gap between

EI self-scores and observer scores and that corresponding increases in leader EI correlate

with higher employee job involvement and satisfaction. However, Groves, McEnrue, and

Shen (2008) argued that evidence of EI improvement due to training intervention has

been elusive and attempts to prove their efficacy have suffered from methodological and

theoretical limitations. The Zammuner et al. (2013) study is a noted exception based on a

true experimental design. These studies (Wallis & Kennedy, 2013; Zammuner et al.,

2013) provide two good examples of how leader oriented EI training interventions may

improve organizational outcomes. Another highly recommended EI training program is

the Emotional Competence Training program developed by American Express Financial

Advisors in 1992 (Matthews et al., 2012). For current organizational leaders, companies

can create training and development programs designed to improve the existing leaders

EI.

In addition to training, EI may be an important element to consider in high-stakes

applications such as hiring and promotions. Matthews et al. (2012) argued that the

177
workplace has become the most popular context for applications of EI (p. 180). The

strongest support the idea that EI should be considered when recruiting for or promoting

for leadership positions comes from the study of transformational leadership. Over the

past 30 years, transformational leadership has been the single most studied and debated idea

with the field of leadership (Diaz-Saenz, 2011, p. 299). McCleskey (2014b) recently

reviewed the construct and noted that studies on transformational leadership revealed

linkages to military leadership (Eid, Johnsen, Bartone, & Nissestad, 2008), top leader

performance (Jung, Wu, & Chow, 2008), cross-cultural leaders (Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen,

& Lowe, 2009), middle manager performance (Singh & Krishnan, 2008), and virtual teams

(Hambley, ONeill, & Kline, 2007). Further, a large number of previous studies showed a

relationship between EI and transformational leadership style (Awadzi Calloway, 2010;

Barbuto & Burbach, 2006; Bono & Judge, 2004; Brown et al., 2006; Cavazotte et al.,

2012; Cred & Harms, 2010; Farahani et al., 2011; Fllesdal & Hagtvet, 2013; Foster &

Roche, 2014; Hur, et al., 2011; Irshad & Hashmi, 2014; Jin et al., 2008; Khan et al.,

2011; Lam & O'Higgins, 2012; 2013; Leban & Zulauf, 2004; Lopez-Zafra et al., 2012;

Mandell & Pherwani, 2003; Ramchunder & Martins, 2014; Rubin et al., 2005; Sosik &

Megerian, 1999; Sunindijo, 2012; Yunus & Anuar, 2012). A growing body of research

links transformational leadership to positive organizational outcomes including followers

viewing their leaders as more effective, exerting additional effort for transformational

leaders, performing beyond social expectations, expending greater effort, being more

committed and involved, feeling their work was more important and more rewarding,

performing at higher levels, and having both higher levels of job satisfaction and lower

levels of burnout and stress (Bass, 2008). Since leader effectiveness and positive
178
organizational outcomes are related to transformational leadership and since

transformational leadership is related to EI, organizations should consider testing for EI

when hiring and promoting for leader positions.

For the recruitment of future organizational leaders, testing designed to identify

candidates EI, personality, and cognitive ability are strongly recommended as this study

and others have shown that these indicators are correlated with leadership practices and

other important organizational performance outcomes (Bono & Judge, 2004; Judge et al.,

2004; OBoyle et al., 2011; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004). These implications should

be of interest to human resource professionals, hiring managers, and personnel managers

at every level and across countless industries. This information can help design strategies

for improvement in a multitude of positive organizational outcomes such as increased

organizational citizenship behavior, lower employee turnover, increased job satisfaction,

and higher employee commitment. This study also has implications for scholars.

Scholar Implications

EI continues to be a source of controversy within the academy of scholars. Null

findings, small effects, and weak correlations plague the research in the field and scholars

have routinely questioned the validity of the construct and the instruments of EI (Maul

2102a; 2012b). In keeping with the recommendations of previous scholars, this study

measured EI using a SOAM measure and held constant for the effects of age, gender,

personality and leadership experience (Antonakis et al., 2009; Joseph & Newman, 2010;

Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004, Walter et al., 2011; Zeidner et

al., 2009). The findings presented here suggest that EI does demonstrate a relevant

179
incremental predictor of effective leadership practices. However, the finding that only

the understanding emotions and managing emotions branches were significantly related

to total leadership practices after controlling for known covariates combined with the

previous criticisms by other scholars about the factor structure of the four-branch model

suggests that there may be issues with the MSCEITv2.0, the four branch model of EI, or

both. As this author previously argued, in an earnest effort to move the research field

forward, the MSCEITv2.0 should be reexamined in an attempt to resolve any underlying

dimensional and factorial confusions (Matthews et al., 2012). It might be time for Mayer

and his colleagues to publish a MSCEITv3.0 (McCleskey, 2015). The work of Fllesdal

and Hagtvet (2013) could be a starting point for that project. Perhaps Mayer et al. can

join the Norwegians in the creation of a more psychometrically convincing MSCEIT and

silence many critics of the SOAM (McCleskey, 2015). This study adds to the growing

body of evidence that EI does relate to leadership and helps identify additional variables

that relate to leadership as well. Additional studies may help illuminate these antecedents

of effective leadership practices further. Certain limitations apply to this study and its

findings.

Limitations

No study is perfectly designed to avoid all limitations and this present study is no

different in that regard. Limitations of this study include the potential for common

method variance, cross-sectional administration, the potential for fatigue due to length of

the instruments, and the use of crowdsourcing. This study may have been susceptible to

180
issues associated with same source bias (leaders are surveyed and tested but follower and

peer feedback is not included).

Same Source Bias

Spector and Brannick (2010) defined same source bias, stating that, if two

variables are assessed with the same method, they will share variance that resides in the

common method, resulting in common method variance (also called monomethod bias or

same source bias) (p. 403). However, scholars disagree about the extent of the problem

caused by same source bias and Brannick, Chan, Conway, Lance, and Spector (2010)

argued that common method does not always equal common method bias. These issues

are addressed by careful statistical analysis in this study. Further, the use of an ability

test in this design (MSCEITv2.0) reduces the problem of common method variance since

an ability test is not the same method as a self-report survey. Additional limitations of

this study include cross sectional administration, length of instruments and scales, and the

use of crowdsourcing. These limitations are addressed in the next section.

Additional Limitations

This study involves a cross sectional administration and does not include any

longitudinal data. Longitudinal studies are preferred in order to increase generalizability

of the findings (Cooper & Schindler, 2011). Further, because of the instrumentation and

the number of constructs of interest, this study was long (approximately 226 questions)

and participants may have been susceptible to test fatigue and abandonment.

Accordingly, data were carefully analyzed and some responses were deemed unsuitable

for inclusion in the final study results. This study utilized crowdsourcing of participants.

181
The term crowdsourcing first appeared in 2006 and is a combination of the terms crowd

and outsourcing. Crowdsourcing is the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or

content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the

online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers (Crowdsourcing,

2015). An issue with crowdsourcing occurs if the voluntary participants in a national

research panel differ in significant ways from non-participants and this limits the

generalizability of the findings. Further and similarly, the use of monetary incentives has

been questioned as a recruitment strategy. However, in a study of the M-Turk

crowdsourcing panel, Goodman, Cryder, and Cheema (2013) found that crowdsourcing

for paid participants resulted in samples that were highly similar to workplace and other

types of samples and produced few if any significant differences. This study helps

address any questions about generalization of these findings in connection with these

concerns. One further limitation of this study was the failure to control for the effects of

cognitive ability.

Failure to control for cognitive ability. While controlling for known covariates,

this study did not measure or control for general cognitive ability. The author considered

this issue carefully and in an attempt to avoid additional issues related to test fatigue, the

decision was made not to test for cognitive ability, thus eliminating 50 additional

questions from the administration and 18-20 minutes from its length. This runs contrary

to the recommendations of scholars (Antonakis et al., 2009; Joseph & Newman, 2010;

Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004, Walter et al., 2011; Zeidner et

al., 2009) and may have a bearing on the conclusions. Roberts, Schulze, and MacCann

182
found that the MSCEIT correlated moderately with crystallized cognitive ability and

weakly with fluid cognitive ability. Since previous research suggests that the

MSCEITv2.0 correlates moderately with measures of cognitive ability (Kong, 2014;

Mayer et al., 2002) and since previous research suggests that cognitive ability relates to

leadership practices (Blickle et al., 2011; Fallon et al., 2014; Killian, 2012; Lee et al.,

2013; OBoyle et al., 2011). Each of these limitations potentially inhibits the

generalizability of the findings as well as pointing to potential future research

opportunities.

Recommendations for Further Research

The majority of the literature on leadership and EI involves cross sectional,

quantitative, non-experimental studies that do not include an intervention (see Chapter 2

and Walter et al., 2011 for reviews). However, these studies assume that the existing

conceptions of the variables are appropriate and that the construct is fully understood.

Some scholars have called for Additional research into the relationship between EI and

leadership practices might examine different sample populations, should include a

measure of cognitive ability, might include a training intervention, may consider a

comparison of all three streams of EI research, and may reexamine the question of EI and

gender.

New Sample Populations

The research discussed in this manuscript that specifically examines the

relationship between EI and leadership practices reveals a relative paucity of studies into

183
this area. Additional studies should examine the relationship in new and varied

populations. For example, this study included a sample of leaders from multiple

organizations. Future studies could examine specific industries or specific job titles

instead. For example, Lindebaum and Jordan (2012) examined EI and job performance

in a sample of 55 project managers in the construction industry. The results supported

the idea that while EI contributed to some outcomes, the effect of EI may be less relevant

in some industries or job titles than others. For example, Joseph and Newman (2010)

found that for jobs high in emotional labor demands, EI was a stronger predictor of job

performance. This study sample was 78.5% Caucasian. Additional samples could be

examined within different cultural groups. Another avenue might be an examination of

samples of leaders and non-leaders in order to make a more meaningful comparison

between the two. It might also be constructive to study a larger sample of entrepreneurs.

This study identified entrepreneurs but did not achieve a large enough sample to compare

the entrepreneurs with the organizational leaders.

The Measurement of Cognitive Ability

As described above, a number of authors recommend that cognitive ability be

included as a variable in studies examining EI and leadership (Antonakis et al., 2009;

Joseph & Newman, 2010; Matthews et al., 2012; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004,

Walter et al., 2011; Zeidner et al., 2009). Therefore, additional research should examine

the relationship between EI and leadership practices while including a measure of

cognitive ability and controlling for its effects. Antonakis et al. (2009) argued that

general mental ability (or IQ) is the single best predictor of work success, with meta-

184
analytic correlations that are high (.51.62) and that increase with job complexity (p.

249). Further, Antonakis argued that incremental validity required that EI predict

practically-useful outcomes after controlling for cognitive ability and personality

(Antonakis et al., 2009, p. 249). Roberts et al. (2008) also found that the MSCEIT

correlated moderately with crystallized cognitive ability and weakly with fluid cognitive

ability. Two possibilities exist for expanding this research to incorporate cognitive

ability.

First, an additional study could be conducted adding a test for and statistical

control for cognitive ability. In a 2014 meta-analytic study of the MSCEIT and various

measures of cognitive ability, Kong demonstrated a statistically significant correlation

between the MSCEIT and verbal intelligence of .26 and between the MSCEIT and

nonverbal intelligence of .27. These findings differed from previous findings on the

MSCEIT (Mayer et al., 2008) however, some correlation with general intelligence is

expected and is one of the criteria that Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey postulated as

evidence that EI is a form of intelligence (1999). Despite that conceptualization, scholars

have argued that EI does not predict much beyond general intelligence and personality

(Fiori & Antonakis, 2012; Landy, 2005; Locke, 2005; Schulte, Ree, & Carretta, 2004)

Second, it may be possible for the author to reanalyze the data using a statistical

method to approximate the effects of cognitive ability in this sample. This novel

technique was utilized in 2013 by Fllesdal and Hagtvet. Following the work of

Fllesdal and Hagtvet (2013), in order to control for cognitive ability, a two-level Monte

Carlo study could be run using the Monte Carlo facility in Mplus 7.0 (p. 754). The

185
values needed to perform the Monte Carlo study could be obtained from recent meta-

analyses assessing the correlations between cognitive ability on the one hand, and

personality, EI, and leadership outcomes on the other (Fllesdal & Hagtvet, 2013). This

unusual statistical analysis was beyond the scope of this manuscript but may be

appropriate for a future treatment of the study data.

Experimental Designs Featuring Training Interventions

Future research on EI and leadership practices might include an experimental

design and a training intervention designed to increase EI and longitudinal measures of

EI and leadership practices. To date, very few studies have examined this aspect of EI

(Cherniss & Caplan, 2001; Clark, Callister, & Wallace, 2003; Kerr et al., 2006; Kruml &

Yockey, 2011; Sosik & Megerian, 1999; Stang, 2009; Sy & Cote, 2004; Wallis &

Kennedy, 2013; Zammuner et al., 2013). Because the relationship between EI and

leadership practices impacts organizational success, a logical research agenda includes

studies designed to show how EI abilities and skills can be improved through training.

Further, longitudinal measures exhibit obvious advantages over cross sectional research

due to the ability to track changes over time and more accurately examine the effect of

the independent variable on the dependent variable (Cooper & Schindler). Finally,

experimental designs are preferred for their greater scientific merit and more rigorous

psychometric capabilities (Cooper & Schindler, 2011; Creswell, 2009).

A Three Streams Approach to the Question

This study design emphasized the SOAM of EI approach to the measurement of

EI. However, some scholars demonstrated that all three streams of EI research show

186
relevant impacts on performance outcome variables (OBoyle et al., 2011). Accordingly,

future studies may aim at replicating the results of this study using one or more of the

three streams of EI research described by Ashkanasy and Daus (2005). These studies

improve the construct validity portion of the argument as well. Specific approaches

could include another SOAM measure such as an SJT. Potential SJTs include the STEM

(MacCann & Roberts, 2008) or the SJTEA (Roberts et al., in press). Another specific

approach might include the use of both a SOAM measure and a STAM measure such as

the WLEIS (Wong & Law, 2002). Finally, measures representing the STMM approach

may be used in combination with either SOAM or STAM measures. Appropriate

candidates include the EQ-i (Bar-On, 2000) and the ECI (Wolff, 2007). While

consideration of these instruments helps address construct validity and examines the

efficacy of all three streams of research, these instruments have one additional advantage

as well. These instruments (along with several others) are available in both a self and

other administration. This allows future studies to incorporate a multirater design to the

data collection. This also addresses the same source bias issue discussed in the

limitations section if this chapter.

EI and Gender Differences

This study found no significant gender differences in EI and leadership practices.

Therefore, this study contradicts a large body of findings that suggested that EI is

generally higher in women than in men (Ciarrochi et al., 2000; Condren, 2002; Danehy,

2006; Helweg, 2009; Jorfi et al., 2012; Khalili, 2011; Labby et al., 2013; Lopez-Zafra et

al., 2012; Mayer et al., 1999; Stratton, 2011; Tanomsingh, 2006). Indeed, the authors of

187
the MSCEIT and key researchers of the SOAM of EI (Mayer et al., 2002) reported a

tendency for women to score higher on the MSCEIT accounting for 5.3% of the variance

in scores. However, for each study demonstrating a gender difference in EI scores,

another exists that found no difference (Cavazotte et al., 2012; Emery, 2012; Fernndez-

Berrocal et al., 2012; Foster & Roche, 2014; Jain et al., 2013; Jordan & Troth, 2011;

Osbourne, 2012; Purkable, 2003; Siegling et al., 2014; Xiao-Yu & Liu, 2013). It is clear

that this issue deserves additional scrutiny to understand these contradictory findings.

Perhaps a carefully designed meta-analytic study could shed some light on this issue.

The next section presents a general conclusion of the study findings.

Conclusion

This study examined the relationship between EI and leadership practices in a

sample of organizational leaders and entrepreneurs. The analysis of the data generated

for this study indicated that the EI was related to leadership practices and that the EI

branches of understanding emotions and managing emotions were significantly related to

leadership practices of organizational leaders even after controlling for the effects of age,

gender, personality, and leadership experience. The results of the correlation test showed

that there is a positive correlation existing between EI and leadership practices of

organizational leaders. The results of the stepwise regression analysis that there is a

positive correlation exists between EI and leadership practices of organizational leaders

after controlling for the effects of gender, age, personality, and leadership experience.

The organizational leaders will exhibit effective leadership practice if they possess

188
higher-level abilities in understanding emotions and managing emotion. These abilities

represent two of the four branches of the SOAM four branch model of EI. The findings

answered the following research questions:

RQ1a. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of age?

RQ1b. To what extent does a relationship exist between EI and leadership

practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of gender?

RQ1c. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

personality (FFM)?

RQ1d. To what extent does a significant relationship exist between EI and

leadership practices of organizational leaders after controlling for the effects of

leadership experience? The next section includes a discussion of the significance of the

study.

A variety of authors have conceptualized leadership as a process of social

influence and have argued that leaders effect subordinates feelings, perceptions and

behaviors (George, 2000; Humphrey, 2002; Kafetsios, Athanasiadou, & Dimou, 2014;

Pirola-Merlo et al., 2002). The results of this study support this view of leadership by

revealing a relationship between understanding and managing emotions and leadership

practices. Future research in new sample populations, utilizing experimental designs

with interventions, controlling for cognitive ability, and more closely examining the role

189
of gender may help cast additional light on this relationship and its implications for both

practitioners and scholars.

This chapter presented the discussion of the study results. The chapter included

an introduction, summary of the results from chapter 4, discussion of the results,

implications of the study results, limitations of the study, recommendations for future

research, and a brief conclusion. This study provided support for the existence of a

relationship between a leaders ability to understand and manage emotions and the

leaders ability to engage in effective leadership practices. This relationship exists even

after controlling for the effect of the leaders age, gender, personality, and years of

leadership experience.

190
 REFERENCES

Abe, J. A. A. (2011). Positive emotions, Emotional Intelligence, and successful

experiential learning. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(7), 817-822.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.07.004

Abraham, R. (2005). Emotional intelligence in the workplace: A review and synthesis. In

R. Schulze, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: An international
handbook (pp. 255-270). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe.

Adewoye, A. (2013). Unique competencies required for female leadership success in the
21st century (D.B.A.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(1469609727).

Affandi, H., & Raza, N. (2013). Leaders' emotional intelligence and its outcomes, A
study of medical professionals in Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 5(7), 279.

Ahmed, I., & Qazi, T. F. (2011). Do students' personality traits moderate relationship of
teacher's leadership style and students' academic performance? empirical evidence
from institute of higher learning. International Journal of Academic
Research, 3(4), 393-400.

Albert, M. L., Yamadori, A., Gardner, H., & Howes, D. (1973). Comprehension in
Alexia. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 96(2), 317-328.
doi:10.1093/brain/96.2.317

Allen, V. D., Weissman, A., Hellwig, S., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2014).
Development of the situational test of emotional understanding brief (STEU-B)
using item response theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 65(July), 3-7.
doi:doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.051

Alston, B. A. (2009). An examination of the relationship between Emotional Intelligence

and leadership practices (Business Administration (DBA)). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT).

Alston, B. A., Dastoor, B. R., & Sosa-Fey, J. (2010). Emotional Intelligence and
leadership: A study of human resource managers. International Journal of
Business & Public Administration, 7(2), 61-75.

Amelang, M., & Steinmayr, R. (2006). Is there a validity increment for tests of emotional
intelligence in explaining the variance of performance
criteria? Intelligence, 34(5), 459-468. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.03.003

Anastasi, A. (1961). Psychological testing (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

191
Anderson, S. J. (1992). Psychological type and leadership. (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation). University of Calgary.

Angier, R. P. (1927). The conflict theory of emotion. The American Journal of

Psychology, 39(1/4), 390-401.

Anguiano-Carrasco, C., MacCann, C., Geiger, M., Seybert, J. M., & Roberts, R. D.
(2015). Development of a forced-choice measure of typical-performance
emotional intelligence. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,33(1), 83-97.
doi:10.1177/0734282914550387

Antonakis, J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2009). Does leadership need
emotional intelligence? The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 247-261.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.006

Antonakis, J., Day, D. V., & Schyns, B. (2012). Leadership and individual differences:
At the cusp of a renaissance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 643-650.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.002

Antonakis, J., & Dietz, J. (2010). Emotional intelligence: On definitions, neuroscience,

and marshmallows. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 165-170.
doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01219.x

Antonakis, J., & Dietz, J. (2011). Looking for validity or testing it? the perils of stepwise
regression, extreme-scores analysis, heteroscedasticity, and measurement
error. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(3), 409-415.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.014

Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1993). Emotional labor in service roles: The
influence of identity. The Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 88-88.

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2005). Rumors of the death of emotional intelligence
in organizational behavior are vastly exaggerated. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26(4), 441-452. doi:10.1002/job.320

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2013). Emotional Labor across five levels of analysis:
Past, present, future. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp
(Eds.), Emotional Labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. 282-287). New York, NY: Routledge.

Ashkanasy, N. M., Hrtel, C. E. J., & Zerbe, W. J. (2012). Overview: Experiencing and
managing emotions in the workplace. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hrtel & W. J.
Zerbe (Eds.), Research on emotions in organizations, volume 8: Experiencing and
managing emotions in the workplace (pp. 1-12). Bingley, West Yorkshire, UK:
Emerald.

192
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). A multi-level view of leadership and
emotion: Leading with emotional labor. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B.
Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 365-379).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Aubrey, J. V. (1992). The principal's leadership role in effective site-based managed

elementary schools. (Unpublished Doctoral). University of Bridgeport.

Awadzi Calloway, J. D. (2010). Performance implications of emotional intelligence and

transformational leadership: Toward the development of a self-efficacious
military leader (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full
Text. (746606144).

Bajgar, J., Ciarrochi, J., Lane, R. D., & Deane, F. P. (2005). Development of the levels of
emotional awareness scale for children (LEAS-C). British Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 23(4), 569-586. doi:10.1348/026151005X35417

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought & action: A social cognitive theory.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Bnziger, T., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2009). Emotion recognition from
expressions in face, voice, and body: The multimodal emotion recognition test
(MERT). Emotion, 9(5), 691-704. doi:10.1037/a0017088

Barbey, A. K., Colom, R., & Grafman, J. (2014). Distributed neural system for Emotional
Intelligence revealed by lesion mapping. Social Cognitive and Affective
Neuroscience, 9(3), 265-272. doi:10.1093/scan/nss124

Barbuto, J. E., & Burbach, M. E. (2006). The Emotional Intelligence of transformational

leaders: A field study of elected officials. Journal of Social Psychology, 146(1),
51-64.

Barbuto, J. E., Gottfredson, R. K., & Searle, T. P. (2014). An examination of Emotional

Intelligence as an antecedent of servant leadership. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 21(3), 315-323. doi:10.1177/1548051814531826

Bar-On, R. (1988). The development of a concept of psychological well-

being. (Unpublished Doctorate). Rhodes University, Johannesberg, South Africa.

Bar-On, R. (2000). Emotional and social intelligence: Insights from the emotional
quotient inventory. In R. Bar-On, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of
Emotional Intelligence: Theory, development, assessment, and application at
home, school, and in the workplace (pp. 363-388). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
193
Bar-On, R. (2002). Emotional quotient inventory: Short Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of Emotional-Social Intelligence

(ESI). Psicothema, 18, 13-25.

Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group
behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644-675.

Barsade, S. G., Brief, A. P., & Spataro, S. E. (2003). The affective revolution in
organizational behavior: The emergence of a paradigm. In J. Greenberg
(Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 3-52). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.

Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (1998). Group emotion: A view from the top and bottom.
In M. A. Neale, E. A. Mannix & D. H. Gruenfeld (Eds.), Research on managing
groups and teams (Volume I ed., pp. 81-102). Westport, CT: JAI Press.

Basch, J., & Fisher, C. D. (2000). Affective events-emotions matrix: A classification of

work events and associated emotions. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hrtel & W. J.
Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace (pp. 36-48). Westport, CT: Quorum
Books.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics, 13(3), 26-
40. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(85)90028-2

Bass, B. M. (2000). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 7(3), 18-40.
doi:10.1177/107179190000700302

Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, & managerial
applications (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Manual for the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). MLQ 5X Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.

Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.

Batool, B. F. (2013). Emotional Intelligence and effective leadership. Journal of Business

Studies Quarterly, 4(3), 84-94.

Bauer, M. (1993). Are the leadership practices of college presidents in the northeast
distinct from those of leaders of business and industry? (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation). University of New Haven.

194
Baumann, D. M. (2006). The relationship between the emotional competence and the
leadership effectiveness of hall directors (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (305317055).

Beal, D. J., & Trougakos, J. P. (2013). Episodic intrapersonal emotion regulation: Or,
dealing with life as it happens. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp
(Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. 31-56). New York, NY: Routledge.

Begeer, S., Gevers, C., Clifford, P., Verhoeve, M., Kat, K., Hoddenbach, E., & Boer, F.
(2011). Theory of mind training in children with autism: A randomized controlled
trial. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,41(8), 997-1006.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s10803-010-1121-9

Bennington, A. J. (2000). A case study exploration of leadership, communication, and

organizational identification. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
Texas at Austin.

Benson, D. F., Gardner, H., & Meadows, J. C. (1976). Reduplicative

Paramnesia. Neurology, 26(2), 147-151.

Binet, A., & Henri, V. (1896). La psychologie individuelle. L'Annee Psychologique, 2,

411-465.

Blickle, G., Momm, T. S., Kramer, J., Mierke, J., Liu, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (2009).
Construct and criterion-related validation of a measure of emotional reasoning
skills: A two-study investigation. International Journal of Selection &
Assessment, 17(1), 101-118. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00455.x

Blickle, G., Momm, T., Liu, Y., Witzki, A., & Steinmayr, R. (2011). Construct validation
of the test of Emotional Intelligence (TEMINT): A two-study
investigation. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 282-289.
doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000075

Bonnett, D. G. (2010). Varying coefficient meta-analytic methods for alpha

reliability. Psychological Methods, 15, 368-385.

Bono, J. E., Foldes, H. J., Vinson, G., & Muros, J. P. (2007). Workplace emotions: The
role of supervision and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1357-
1367. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1357

Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional
leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901-910.

Boring, E. G. (1923). Intelligence as the tests test it. New Republic, (June 6), 35-37.

195
Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36(2), 129-148.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.129

Boyatzis, R. E. (2006). Using tipping points of Emotional Intelligence and cognitive

competencies to predict financial performance of leaders. Psicothema, 18 Suppl,
124.

Boyatzis, R. E. (2009). Competencies as a behavioral approach to Emotional

Intelligence. The Journal of Management Development, 28(9), 749-770.
doi:10.1108/02621710910987647

Boyatzis, R. E., Goleman, D., & Rhee, K. S. (2000). Clustering competence in Emotional
Intelligence: Insights from the emotional competence inventory. In R. Bar-On, &
J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory,
development, assessment, and application at home, school, and in the
workplace (pp. 343-362). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Boyatzis, R. E., Good, D., & Massa, R. (2012). Emotional, social, and cognitive
intelligence and personality as predictors of sales leadership performance. Journal
of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 191-201.
doi:10.1177/1548051811435793

Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., Lerner, N., Salovey, P., & Shiffman, S. (2006). Relating
emotional abilities to social functioning: A comparison of self-report and
performance measures of emotional intelligence. Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology, 91(4), 780-795.

Brackett, M. A., & Salovey, P. (2006). Measuring Emotional Intelligence with the
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test
(MSCEIT). Psicothema, 18(special), 34-41.

Bradberry, T. B., & Greaves, J. M. (2003). The Emotional Intelligence Appraisal

technical manual. San Diego, CA: TalentSmart, Inc.

Brannick, M. T., Chan, D., Conway, J. M., Lance, C. E., & Spector, P. E. (2010). What is
method variance and how can we cope with it? A panel
discussion. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 407-420.
doi:10.1177/1094428109360993

Bratton, V. K., Dodd, N. G., & Brown, F. W. (2011). The impact of Emotional
Intelligence on accuracy of self-awareness and leadership
performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(2), 127-127-
149. doi:10.1108/01437731111112971

Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 35, 307-311.
196
Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (2000). Studies on hysteria. New York: Basic Books.

Brice, R. W. (1992). Principals in Saskatchewan rural schools: Their leadership

behaviors and school effectiveness. (Unpublished Doctoral). University of San
Diego,

Bridges, R. J. (1995). The relationship of leadership practices of senior pastors and

church growth. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Biola University.

Brinia, V., Zimianiti, L., & Panagiotopoulos, K. (2014). The role of the principals
Emotional Intelligence in primary education leadership. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership,doi:10.1177/1741143213513183

Brown, L. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2001). Exploring the relationship between learning and
leadership. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 22(6), 274-280.

Brown, F. W., Bryant, S. E., & Reilly, M. D. (2006). Does Emotional Intelligence - as
measured by the EQI - influence transformational leadership and/or desirable
outcomes? Leadership & Organization Development Journal,27(5), 330-330-351.
doi:10.1108/01437730610677954

Brungardt, C. L. (1997). Evaluation of the outcomes of an academic collegiate leadership

program. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Kansas State University,

Bryant, N. (2013). Leadership development as a relational process: A grounded theory

investigation of leader experiences (Psy.D.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1352008659).

Burkhard, M. B. (1999). A comparison of leadership styles and organizational cultures of

women in two and four year colleges and universities. (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation). University of Sarasota,

Burns, C., Barton, K., & Kerby, S. (2012). The state of diversity in Todays workforce: As
our nation becomes more diverse so too does our workforce. (online).
Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.

Burrus, J., Betancourt, A., Holtzman, S., Minsky, J., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D.
(2012). Emotional Intelligence relates to well-being: Evidence from the
Situational Judgment Test of Emotional Management. Applied Psychology:
Health and Well-being, 4(2), 151-166. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2012.01066.x

Byron, K. (2007). Male and female managers' ability to read emotions: Relationships
with supervisor's performance ratings and subordinates' satisfaction
ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(4), 713.

197
Cannon, W. B. (1929). Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear, and rage. New York:
Appleton.

Cannon, W. B. (1927). The James-Lange theory of emotions: A critical examination and

an alternative theory. The American Journal of Psychology, 39(1/4), 106-124.

Cantor, N., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). Personality and social intelligence. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall.

Caramazza, A., Zurif, E. B., & Gardner, H. (1978). Sentence memory in

Aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 16(6), 661-669. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(78)90001-5

Cardin, S. (1995). Outcomes of unit effectiveness in relation to the leadership role of

nurse managers in critical care nursing (D.N.Sc.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (prod.academic_MSTAR_304161891).

Carless, S. A. (2001). Assessing the discriminant validity of the leadership practices

inventory. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 233-240.

Carless, S. A., & Allwood, V. E. (1997). Managerial Assessment Centres: What is being
rated? Australian Psychologist, 32(2), 101-105. doi:10.1080/00050069708257361

Carlson, D., Kacmar, K. M., Zivnuska, S., Ferguson, M., & Whitten, D. (2011). Work-
family enrichment and job performance: A constructive replication of affective
events theory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,16(3), 297-312.
doi:10.1037/a0022880

Carmeli, A. (2003). The relationship between Emotional Intelligence and work attitudes,
behavior and outcomes: An examination among senior managers. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 18(7), 788-788-813.

Carson, K. D., Carson, P. P., & Birkenmeier, B. J. (2000). Measuring Emotional

Intelligence: Development and validation of an instrument . The Journal of
Behavioral and Applied Management, 2(1), 32-45.

Cartwright, S., & Pappas, C. (2008). Emotional Intelligence, its measurement and
implications for the workplace. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 10(2), 149-171. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00220.x

Caruso, D. R., Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (2002). Emotional Intelligence and emotional
leadership. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple
intelligences and leadership (pp. 55-74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

198
Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2004). The emotionally intelligent manager: How to
develop and use the four key emotional skills of leadership. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Castro, F., Gomes, J., & de Sousa, F. C. (2012). Do intelligent leaders make a difference?
the effect of a leader's Emotional Intelligence on followers' creativity. Creativity
and Innovation Management, 21(2), 171-182. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8691.2012.00636.x

Cattell, J. S. (1890). Mental tests and measurements. Mind, 15, 373-381.

Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of leader intelligence,
personality and Emotional Intelligence on transformational leadership and
managerial performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 443-455.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.10.003

Cavins, B. J. (2005). The relationship between Emotional-Social Intelligence and

leadership practices among college student leaders (Ed.D.). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (305029007).

Cherniss, C. (2010a). Emotional Intelligence: New insights and further

clarifications. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 183-191.

Cherniss, C. (2010b). Emotional Intelligence: Toward clarification of a

concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 110-126.

Cherniss, C., & Caplan, R. D. (2001). A case study in implementing Emotional

Intelligence programs in organization. Journal of Organizational
Excellence, 21(1), 73-85.

Cherry, M. G., Fletcher, I., & O'Sullivan, H. (2013). Exploring the relationships among
attachment, Emotional Intelligence and communication. Medical
Education, 47(3), 317-325. doi:10.1111/medu.12115

Childers, S. W. (2009). Emotional Intelligence and its relationship to academic

leadership: An analysis of Brevard Community College (School of Business).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT).

Church, A. H. (1997). Managerial self-awareness in high-performing individuals in

organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 281-292. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.82.2.281

Ciarrochi, J., Chan, A. Y. C., & Caputi, P. (2000). A critical evaluation of the Emotional
Intelligence construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(3), 539-561.
doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00119-1

199
Ciarrochi, J., & Godsell, C. (2005). Mindfulness-based emotional intelligence: A theory
and review of the literature. In R. Schulze, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional
Intelligence: An international handbook (pp. 69-90). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe.

Cicone, M., Wapner, W., Foldi, N., Zurif, E., & Gardner, H. (1979). The relation between
gesture and language in aphasic communication. Brain and Language, 8(3), 324-
349. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(79)90060-9

Cicone, M., Wapner, W., & Gardner, H. (1980). Sensitivity to emotional expressions and
situations in organic patients. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the
Nervous System and Behavior, 16(1), 145-158.

Clarapde, E. (1928). Feelings and emotions. In C. Murchison, & M. L. Reymert

(Eds.), Wittenberg symposium on feelings and emotions (pp. xvi-454). Worcester,
MA: Clark University Press.

Clark, S. C., Callister, R., & Wallace, R. (2003). Undergraduate management skills
courses and students' Emotional Intelligence. Journal of Management
Education, 27(1), 3-23. doi:10.1177/1052562902239246

Coffman, J. P. (1999). The community college coach: Leadership practices and athlete
satisfaction. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of San Diego,

Condren, T. D. (2002). The relationship between principals' Emotional Intelligence and

leadership effectiveness (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
(PQDT). (305522894).

Conte, J. M., & Dean, M. A. (2006). Can Emotional Intelligence be measured? In K. R.

Murphy (Ed.), A critique of Emotional Intelligence: What are the problems and
how can they be fixed? (pp. 59-78). New York: Routledge.

Conzelmann, K., Weis, S., & S, H. (2013). New findings about social intelligence:
Development and application of the Magdeburg Test of Social Intelligence
(MTSI). Journal of Individual Differences, 34(3), 119-137. doi:10.1027/1614-
0001/a000106

Cook, G. L., Bay, D., Visser, B., Myburgh, J. E., & Njoroge, J. (2011). Emotional
Intelligence: The role of accounting education and work experience. Issues in
Accounting Education, 26(2), 267-286. doi:10.2308/iace-10001

Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2011). Business research methods (11th ed.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)
and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
200
Ct, S., Gyurak, A., & Levenson, R. W. (2010). The ability to regulate emotion is
associated with greater well-being, income, and socioeconomic
status. Emotion, 10(6), 923-933. doi:10.1037/a0021156

Ct, S., Kraus, M. W., Cheng, B. H., Oveis, C., van, d. L., Lian, H., & Keltner, D.
(2011). Social power facilitates the effect of prosocial orientation on empathic
accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 217-232.
doi:10.1037/a0023171

Ct, S., Lopes, P., Salovey, P., & Miners, C. T. H. (2010). Emotional Intelligence and
leadership emergence in small groups. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 496-508.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.012

Ct, S., & Miners, C. T. H. (2006). Emotional Intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and
job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1), 1-28.

Ct, S., Van Kleef, G. A., & Sy, T. (2013). The social effects of emotion regulation in
organizations. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp
(Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. 79-100). New York, NY: Routledge.

Cred, M., & Harms, P. D. (2010). Emotional Intelligence and transformational and
transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 17(1), 5.

Creswell, J. H. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Crnkovich, P. J., & Hesterly, W. S. (1993). Leadership impact: An empirical test of a

predictive framework. Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute, (March)

Crowdsourcing. (May 10, 2015). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/crowdsourcing

Cutbirth, S. (2010). An examination of the relationship of emotional intelligence levels to

balanced leadership responsibilities and leadership effectiveness in high school
principals (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT).
(912377101).

Dahling, J. J., & Johnson, H. M. (2013). Motivation, fit, confidence, and skills: How do
individual differences influence emotional labor? In A. A. Grandey, J. M.
Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse
perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 57-78). New York, NY:
Routledge.

201
Danehy, L. S. (2006). The relationship between Emotional Intelligence and leadership in
NCAA division III college coaches (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses (PQDT). (304910760).

Darrow, C. W. (1935). Emotion as relative functional decortication: The role of

conflict. Psychological Review, 42(6), 566-578. doi:10.1037/h0060355

Darwin, C. (1872/1955). Expression of the emotions in man and animals. New York:
Philosophical Library.

Dasborough, M. T. (2006). Cognitive asymmetry in employee emotional reactions to

leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(2), 163-178.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.12.004

Dauffenbach, V. K. (1995). Leadership practices and job satisfaction: An examination of

the relationship between academic deans and department
chairpersons. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Western Michigan University.

Davis, K., Christodoulou, J., Seider, S., & Gardner, H. (2011). The theory of multiple
intelligences. In R. J. Sternberg, & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge
handbook of intelligence (pp. 485-503). New York: Cambridge University.

Davis, L., Foldi, N. S., Gardner, H., & Zurif, E. B. (1978). Repetition in the transcortical
Aphasias. Brain and Language, 6(2), 226-238. doi:10.1016/0093-
934X(78)90060-3

Day, D. V. (2011). Leadership development. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B.

Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 37-50).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

DeBusk, K. P. A., & Austin, E. J. (2011). Emotional Intelligence and social

perception. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(6), 764-768.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.026

Diaz, A. L. (2008). Leadership training and emotional intelligence in school

nurses (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.
(304391330).

Diefendorff, J. M., Erickson, R. J., Grandey, A. A., & Dahling, J. J. (2011). Emotional
display rules as work unit norms: A multilevel analysis of emotional labor among
nurses. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(2), 170-186.
doi:10.1037/a0021725

Diefendorff, J. M., & Richard, E. M. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of emotional

display rule perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 284-294.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.284
202
DiFabio, A., & Kenny, M. E. (2012). Emotional Intelligence and perceived social support
among Italian high school students. Journal of Career Development, 39(5), 461-
475. doi:10.1177/0894845311421005

Dillon, N. E. (2013). The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices of human services administrators (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1468723032).

Doherty, E. M., Cronin, P. A., & Offiah, G. (2013). Emotional Intelligence assessment in
a graduate entry medical school curriculum. BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 38-
38. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-13-38

Dong, Y., Seo, M., & Bartol, K. (2014). No pain, no gain: An affect-based model of
developmental job experience and the buffering effects of Emotional
Intelligence. Academy of Management Journal, 57(4), 1056-1077.
doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0687.

Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. J. (2004). Design of a new instrument to assess leadership
dimensions and styles. Selection and Development Review, 20(2), 7-12.

Eid, J., Johnsen, B. H., Bartone, P. T., & Nissestad, O. A. (2008). Growing
transformational leaders: Exploring the role of personality hardiness. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, 29(1), 4-23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730810845270

Ekman, P. (1973). Cross-culture studies of facial expression. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Darwin

and facial expression: A century of research in review (pp. 169-222). New York:
Academic Press.

Ekman, P. (1992). Are there basic emotions? Psychological Review, 99(3), 550-553.
doi:10.1037/0033-295X.99.3.550

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1975). Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing the
emotions from facial clues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., O'Sullivan, M., Chan, A., Diacoyanni-Tarlatzis, I., Heider, K.,
. . . Tzavaras, A. (1987). Universals and cultural differences in the judgments of
facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 53(4), 712-717. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.4.712

Emery, C. (2012). Uncovering the role of emotional abilities in leadership emergence. A

longitudinal analysis of leadership networks. Social Networks, 34(4), 429-437.
doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2012.02.001

Endress, W. L. (2000). An exploratory study of college student self-efficacy for relational

leadership: The influence of leadership education, cocurricular involvement, and
203
 on-campus employment. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
Maryland.

Erez, A., & Isen, A. M. (2002). The influence of positive affect on the components of
expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1055-1067.
doi:10.1037//0021-9010.87.6.1055

Erickson, R. J., & Stacey, C. L. (2013). Attending to mind and body: Engaging the
complexity of emotion practice among caring professionals. In A. A. Grandey, J.
M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse
perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 175-196). New York, NY:
Routledge.

ESOMAR World Research. (n.d.) 28 questions to help research buyers of online samples.
Retrieved from https://www.esomar.org/knowledge-and-standards/research-
resources/28-questions-on-onlinesampling.

Eysenck, H. J. (1973). On extraversion. New York: Wiley.

Ezerioha, K. K. I. (2000). Leadership style and conflict management. (Unpublished

Master's Thesis). University of East London,

Fallon, C. K., Panganiban, A. R., Wohleber, R., Matthews, G., Kustubayeva, A. M., &
Roberts, R. D. (2014). Emotional Intelligence, cognitive ability and information
search in tactical decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 65,
24-29. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.029

Fan, H., Jackson, T., Yang, X., Tang, W., & Zhang, J. (2010). The factor structure of the
MayerSaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test V 2.0 (MSCEIT): A meta-
analytic structural equation modeling approach. Personality and Individual
Differences, 48(7), 781-785. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.004

Farahani, M., Taghadosi, M., & Behboudi, M. (2011). An exploration of the relationship
between transformational leadership and organizational commitment: The
moderating effect of Emotional Intelligence: Case study in Iran. International
Business Research, 4(4), 211-217. doi:10.5539/ibr.v4n4p211

Faulkner, W. O. (1998). The effects of various leadership development interventions on

student organizations. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Georgia State,

Fernndez-Berrocal, P., Cabello, R., Castillo, R., & Extremera, N. (2012). Gender
differences in emotional intelligence: The mediating effect of age. Behavioral
Psychology/Psicologia Conductual, 20(1), 77.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

204
Fields, D., & Herold, D. (1997). Using the leadership practices inventory to measure
transformational and transnational leadership. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 57(4), 569-579.

Fineman, S. (2000). Emotional arenas revisited. In S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotion in

organizations (2nd ed., pp. 1-24). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fiori, M., & Antonakis, J. (2011). The ability model of Emotional Intelligence: Searching
for valid measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(3), 329-334.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.010

Fiori, M., & Antonakis, J. (2012). Selective attention to emotional stimuli: What IQ and
openness do, and Emotional Intelligence does not. Intelligence, 40(3), 245-254.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.intell.2012.02.004

Fisher, C. D. (2000). Mood and emotions while working: Missing pieces of job
satisfaction? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 185-202.

Fisher, C. D. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of real-time affective reactions at

work. Motivation and Emotion, 26(1), 3-30. http://dx.doi.org
/10.1023/A:1015190007468

Fisher, C. D., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2000). The emerging role of emotions in work life:
An introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 123-129.

Floyd, J. E. (1999). An investigation of the leadership style of principals and its relation
to teachers perceptions of school mission and student achievement. (Unpublished
Doctoral). North Carolina State,

Fllesdal, H., & Hagtvet, K. (2013). Does Emotional Intelligence as ability predict
transformational leadership? A multilevel approach. The Leadership
Quarterly, 24(5), 747-762. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.004

Fllesdal, H., & Hagtvet, K. A. (2009). Emotional intelligence: The MSCEIT from the
perspective of generalizability theory. Intelligence, 37(1), 94-105.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.intell.2008.08.005

Foong, J. L. C. (1999). Leadership behaviors: Effects on job satisfaction, productivity

and organizational commitment. (Unpublished Master's). Leicester University,
England.

Ford, M. E., & Tisak, M. S. (1983). A further search for social intelligence. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 75(2), 196-206. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.75.2.196

205
Foster, C., & Roche, F. (2014). Integrating trait and ability EI in predicting
transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 35(4), 316-334.

Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (2000). Relations of Emotional Intelligence, practical

intelligence, general intelligence, and trait affectivity with interview outcomes:
It's not all just 'G'. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 203-220.

Fox, H. C., Bergquist, K. L., Casey, J., Hong, K. A., & Sinha, R. (2011). Selective
cocaine-related difficulties in Emotional Intelligence: Relationship to stress and
impulse control. The American Journal on Addictions, 20(2), 151-160.
doi:10.1111/j.1521-0391.2010.00108.x

Frijda, N. H. (1988). The laws of emotion. American Psychologist, 43(5), 349-358.

doi:10.1037/0003-066X.43.5.349

Fulks, J. L. (1994). Transformational leadership and its relationship to success in

development of new churches. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
Texas at Arlington,

Gaddis, B., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). Failure feedback as an affective
event: Influences of leader affect on subordinate attitudes and performance. The
Leadership Quarterly, 15(5), 663-686.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.05.011

Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London:
MacMillan and Company.

Gardner, L., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and
Emotional Intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 23(1/2), 68.

Gardner, H. (1970a). Children's sensitivity to painting styles. Child Development, 41(3),

813-821. doi:10.2307/1127226

Gardner, H. (1970b). Effects of stimulus rearrangement on the development of sensitivity

to painting styles. Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the American
Psychological Association, 5, 495-496.

Gardner, H. (1973a). The contribution of operativity to naming capacity in aphasic

patients. Neuropsychologia, 11(2), 213-220. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(73)90010-9

Gardner, H. (1973b). The quest for mind: Piaget, Levi-strauss, and the structuralist
movement. New York: Knopf.

206
Gardner, H. (1974a). Metaphors and modalities: How children project polar adjectives
onto diverse domains. Child Development, 45(1), 84-91. doi:10.2307/1127753

Gardner, H. (1974b). The naming and recognition of written symbols in aphasic and
alexic patients. Journal of Communication Disorders, 7(2), 141-153.
doi:10.1016/0021-9924(74)90027-6

Gardner, H. (1974c). The naming of objects and symbols by children and aphasic
patients. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 3(2), 133-149.
doi:10.1007/BF01067572

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gardner, H., Albert, M. L., & Weintraub, S. (1975). Comprehending a word: The
influence of speed and redundancy on auditory comprehension in Aphasia.
Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior,
11(2), 155-162.

Gardner, H., Boller, F., Moreines, J., & Butters, N. (1973). Retrieving information from
Korsakoff patients: Effects of categorical cues and reference to the task. Cortex: A
Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 9(2), 165-175.

Gardner, H., & Denes, G. (1973). Connotative judgments by aphasic patients on a

pictorial adaptation of the semantic differential. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the
Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 9(2), 183-196.

Gardner, H., Denes, G., & Zurif, E. (1975). Critical reading at the sentence level in
Aphasia. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and
Behavior, 11(1), 60-72.

Gardner, H., Kircher, M., Winner, E., & Perkins, D. (1975). Children's metaphoric
productions and preferences. Journal of Child Language, 2(1), 125-141.
doi:10.1017/S0305000900000921

Gardner, H., & Lohman, W. (1975). Children's sensitivity to literary styles. Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 21(2), 113-126.

Gardner, H., Silverman, J., Wapner, W., & Zurif, E. (1978). The appreciation of
antonymic contrasts in Aphasia. Brain and Language, 6(3), 301-317.
doi:10.1016/0093-934X(78)90064-0

207
Gardner, H., Strub, R., & Albert, M. L. (1975). A unimodal deficit in operational
thinking. Brain and Language, 2(3), 333-344. doi:10.1016/S0093-
934X(75)80074-5

Gardner, H., & Winner, E. (1978). A study of repetition in aphasic patients. Brain and
Language, 6(2), 168-178. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(78)90056-1

Gardner, H., Winner, E., & Kircher, M. (1975). Children's conceptions of the arts.
Journal of Aesthetic Education, 9(3), 60-77. doi:10.2307/3331905

Gardner, H., & Zurif, E. (1975). Bee but not be: Oral reading of single words in Aphasia
and alexia. Neuropsychologia, 13(2), 181-190. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(75)90027-
5

Gardner, H., & Zurif, E. (1976). Critical reading of words and phrases in Aphasia. Brain
and Language, 3(2), 173-190. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(76)90015-8

Gardner, H., Zurif, E. B., Berry, T., & Baker, E. (1976). Visual communication in
Aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 14(3), 275-292. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(76)90023-3

Gardner, K. J., & Qualter, P. (2011). Factor structure, measurement invariance and
structural invariance of the MSCEIT V2.0. Personality and Individual
Differences, 51(4), 492-496. http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.paid.2011.05.004

George, J. M. (1989). Mood and absence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 317.

George, J. M. (1990). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 75(2), 107-116.

George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at

work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 299.

George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional

intelligence. Human Relations, 53(8), 1027.

George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions
of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee
creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 605-622.
doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.25525934

Gibbs, N., & Epperson, S. E. (1995). The EQ factor. (cover story). Time, 146(14), 60.

Gignac, G. E. (2010). On a nomenclature for emotional intelligence research. Industrial

& Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 131-135. doi:10.1111/j.1754-
9434.2010.01212.x

208
Glynn, M. A., & DeJordy, R. (2010). Leadership through an organizational behavior lens:
A look at the last half-century of research. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana
(Eds.), Handbook of leadership and practice (pp. 119-158). Boston, MA: Harvard
Business Press.

Glynn, M. A., & Raffaelli, R. (2010). Uncovering mechanisms of theory development in

an academic field: Lessons from leadership research. The Academy of
Management Annals, 4, 359-401.

Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative 'description of personality': The big-five factor

structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216-1229.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216

Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor

structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.

Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory

measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I.
J. Deary, F. de Fruyt & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe:
Volume 7 (pp. 7-28). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.

Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R.,
& Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of
public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(1),
84-96. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007

Goldberg, L. S., & Grandey, A. A. (2007). Display rules versus display autonomy:
Emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and task performance in a call center
simulation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,12(3), 301-318.
doi:10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.301

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York,
NY: Bantam Dell.

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Dell.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the
power of emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The
strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral
Decision Making, 26(3), 213-224. doi:10.1002/bdm.1753

Gosserand, R. H., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2005). Emotional display rules and emotional
labor: The moderating role of commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6),
1256-1264. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1256
209
Gough, H. G. (1965). A validation study of the Chapin Social Insight Test. Psychological
Reports, 17(2), 355-368.

Gow, A. J., Whiteman, M. C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I. J. (2005). Goldbergs IPIP big-five
factor markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in
Scotland. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(2), 317-329.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.011

Grandey, A. A., Diefendorff, J. M., & Rupp, D. E. (2013a). Bringing emotional labor into
focus: A review and integration of three research lenses. In A. A. Grandey, J. M.
Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse
perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 3-28). New York, NY:
Routledge.

Grandey, A. A., Diefendorff, J. M., & Rupp, D. E. (Eds.). (2013b). Emotional labor in
the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work. New York:
Routledge.

Gregory, B. T., Moates, K. N., & Gregory, S. T. (2011). An exploration of perspective

taking as an antecedent of transformational leadership behavior. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 32(8), 807-816.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437731111183748

Gregory, J. B., & Levy, P. E. (2011). It's not me, it's you: A multilevel examination of
variables that impact employee coaching relationships. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 63(2), 67-88. doi:10.1037/a0024152

Griffen, G. D. (1996). An examination of factors contributing to exemplary schools in an

urban public school district in the Midwest. (Unpublished Doctoral). Western
Michigan University,

Gross, J. (2013). Conceptualizing emotional labor: An emotion regulation perspective. In

A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the
21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 288-293).
New York, NY: Routledge.

Grossman, M., Shapiro, B. E., & Gardner, H. (1981). Dissociable musical processing
strategies after localized brain damage. Neuropsychologia, 19(3), 425-433.
doi:10.1016/0028-3932(81)90072-5

Groth, M., Hennig-Thurau, T., & Wang, K. (2013). The customer experience of
emotional labor. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp
(Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. 127-152). New York, NY: Routledge.

210
Groves, D. E. (1996). The effects of transformational leadership behavior of principals of
national blue ribbon secondary schools in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. (Unpublished
Doctoral). University of Akron,

Groves, K. S., McEnrue, M. P., & Shen, W. (2008). Developing and measuring the
emotional intelligence of leaders. The Journal of Management
Development, 27(2), 225-250. http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/02621710810849353

Groves, K. S. (2005). Linking leader skills, follower attitudes, and contextual variables
via an integrated model of charismatic leadership. Journal of Management, 31(2),
255-277. doi:10.1177/0149206304271765

Grubb, W. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The fakability of Bar-On's Emotional Quotient
inventory short form: Catch me if you can. Human Performance, 20(1), 43-59.
doi:10.1207/s15327043hup2001_3

Gruda, J., McCleskey, J. M., & Tumel, F. (in press). My way on the highway: Impact of
emotional intelligence on leadership emergence and justice.

Grunes, P., Gudmundsson, A., & Irmer, B. (2014). To what extent is the Mayer and
Salovey (1997) model of emotional intelligence a useful predictor of leadership
style and perceived leadership outcomes in Australian educational
institutions? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(1), 112-
135. doi:10.1177/1741143213499255

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hackman, R. J. (2010). What is this thing called leadership? In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana
(Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 107-118). Boston, MA:
Harvard Business Press.

Haggbloom, S. J., Warnick, R., Warnick, J. E., Jones, V. K., Yarbrough, G. L., Russell,
T. M., . . . Monte, E. (2002). The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th
century. Review of General Psychology, 6(2), 139-152. doi:10.1037/1089-
2680.6.2.139

Hakes, J. J. (2013). Insider experimentation with leadership development in a healthcare

setting (D.Ed.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(1447010363).

Hall, C. A. (2007). Examining the relationship between leadership effectiveness,

emotional intelligence, and coping mechanisms for stress of school
administrators (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT).
(304849508).

211
Hall, J. A., Andrzejewski, S. A., & Yopchick, J. E. (2009). Psychosocial correlates of
interpersonal sensitivity: A meta-analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33(3),
149-180. http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s10919-009-0070-5

Hambley, L. A., ONeill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2007). Virtual team leadership: The
effects of leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles
and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1),
1-20. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.004

Harms, P. D., & Cred, M. (2010). Remaining issues in emotional intelligence research:
Construct overlap, method artifacts, and lack of incremental validity. Industrial &
Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 154-158. doi:10.1111/j.1754-
9434.2010.01217.x

Heely, L. N. (2013). A phenomenological study: Leadership strategy for the dentist in a

private dental practice setting (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (1511446683).

Heiken, S. E. (2007). The perceived relationship between emotional intelligence and

leadership effectiveness in school leaders: A comparison of self ratings with those
of superiors and reports (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Full Text. (304720402).

Helweg, N. (2009). An exploratory study of wilderness trip leaders' transformational

leadership abilities, emotional intelligence, and perceived effectiveness (Ph.D.).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT). (305098030).

Hickey, R. J. (1995). The identification of leadership characteristics and their perceived

correlation to performance as demonstrated by principals of nationally
recognized schools of excellence. (Unpublished Doctoral). University of Sarasota,

Hochschild, A. R. (1979). Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure. American
Journal of Sociology, 85(3), 551-575.

Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling.

Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Hochschild, A. R. (2013). Foreword. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp

(Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. xiii-xv). New York, NY: Routledge.

Hoepfner, R., & O'Sullivan, M. (1968). Social intelligence and IQ. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 28(2), 339-344. doi:10.1177/001316446802800211

212
Hong, Y., Catano, V. M., & Liao, H. (2011). Leader emergence: The role of emotional
intelligence and motivation to lead. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 32(4), 320-343. http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/01437731111134625

Hopkins, M. M., & Bilimoria, D. (2008). Social and emotional competencies predicting
success for male and female executives. The Journal of Management
Development, 27(1), 13-35. http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/02621710810840749

Huang, C. (2007). Emotional intelligence and leadership in Taiwanese university

students (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.
(304702174).

Huang, G., Law, K. S., & Wong, C. (2006). Emotional intelligence: A critical review. In
L. V. Wesley (Ed.), Intelligence: New research (pp. 95-114). New York: Nova
Science Publishers.

Hui-Wen, V. T., Mu-Shang, Y., & Nelson, D. B. (2010). The relationship between
emotional intelligence and leadership practices. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 25(8), 899-926. doi:10.1108/02683941011089143

Hlsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor:
A meta-analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 16(3), 361-389. doi:10.1037/a0022876; 10.1037/a0022876.supp
(Supplemental)

Humphrey, R. H. (1985). How work roles influence perceptions: Structural-cognitive

processes and organizational behavior. American Sociological Review, 50, 242-
252.

Humphrey, R. H. (2002). The many faces of emotional leadership. The Leadership

Quarterly, 13(5), 493-504. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00140-6

Humphrey, R. H. (2014). Effective leadership: Theory, cases, and applications.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hur, Y., van den Berg, P. T., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2011). Transformational leadership
as a mediator between emotional intelligence and team outcomes. The Leadership
Quarterly, 22(4), 591-603. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.05.002

Irshad, R., & Hashmi, M. S. (2014). How transformational leadership is related to

organizational citizenship behavior? The mediating role of emotional
intelligence. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 8(2), 413-425.

Isen, A. M., Shalker, T. E., Clark, M. S., & Karp, L. (1978). Affect, accessibility of
material in memory, and behavior: A cognitive loop? Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 36(1), 1-12. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.1.1
213
Jain, A. K., Srivastava, S., & Sullivan, S. E. (2013). Leader effectiveness in emerging
markets: An empirical study of the managers in India. Journal of Technology
Management in China, 8(2), 105-119. http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/JTMC-06-2013-
0026

James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Boston, MA: Harvard University.

Jeloudar, S. Y., & Yunus, A. S. M. (2011). Exploring the relationship between teachers'
social intelligence and classroom discipline strategies. International Journal of
Psychological Studies, 3(2), 149-155. doi:10.5539/ijps.v3n2p149

Jensen, K. H. (1998). Cornerstones of the excellence in leadership program and their

effectiveness. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Grand Valley State
University,

Jerabek, I. (1998). Emotional IQ test-body-mind Queendom. Retrieved from

http://www.queendom.com/tests/iq/emotionalq.html

Jin, S., Seo, M., & Shapiro, D. L. (2008). Revisiting the link between leaders' emotional
intelligence and transformational leadership: The moderating role of emotional
intensity. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, , 1 1-6.
doi:doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2008.33662502

Johnson, L. M. (2013). Emotional intelligence and leader-member exchange: Do

emotional competencies matter?(Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (1468678674).

Jones, V. D. (2012). The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership

effectiveness among sponsored research administrators (Ph.D.). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT). (1021724396).

Jones, B. F., & Olken, B. A. (2005). Do leaders matter?: National leadership and growth
since world war II. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(3), 835-864.
doi:10.1162/003355305774268165

Jordan, C. D. (2009). An examination of emotional intelligence and leadership

competencies among black and white female middle managers (D.M.). Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1348160490).

Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., Hrtel, C. E. J., & Hooper, G. S. (2002). Workgroup
emotional intelligence: Scale development and relationship to team process
effectiveness and goal focus. Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 195.

214
Jordan, P. J., Dasborough, M. T., Daus, C. S., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2010). A call to
context. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 145-148.
doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01215.x

Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. (2011). Emotional intelligence and leader member
exchange. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(3), 260-260-280.
doi:10.1108/01437731111123915

Jorfi, H., Bin Yacco, H. F., & Shah, I. M. (2012). Role of gender in emotional
intelligence: Relationship among emotional intelligence, communication
effectiveness and job satisfaction. International Journal of Management,29(4),
590.

Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-

analysis and cascading model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 54-78.
doi:10.1037/a0017286

Juchniewicz, J. (2010). The influence of social intelligence on effective music

teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(3), 276-293.
doi:10.1177/0022429410378368

Judge, T. A., Colbert, A. E., & Ilies, R. (2004). Intelligence and leadership: A
quantitative review and test of theoretical propositions: A quantitative review and
test of theoretical propositions. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 542-
552. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.542

Judge, T. A., Ilies, R., & Scott, B. A. (2006). Workfamily conflict and emotions: Effects
at work and at home. Personnel Psychology, 59(4), 779-814. doi:10.1111/j.1744-
6570.2006.00054.x

Jung, D. I., Wu, A., & Chow, C. W. (2008). Towards understanding the direct and
indirect effects of CEOs' transformational leadership on firm innovation. The
Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 582-594. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.007

Kafetsios, K., Athanasiadou, M., & Dimou, N. (2014). Leaders' and subordinates'
attachment orientations, emotion regulation capabilities and affect at work: A
multilevel analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 512-527.

Kafetsios, K., Nezlek, J. B., & Vassiou, A. (2011). A multilevel analysis of relationships
between leaders' and subordinates' emotional intelligence and emotional
outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(5), 1121-1144.
doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00750.x

Kaiser, R. B., Hogan, R., & Craig, S. B. (2008). Leadership and the fate of
organizations. American Psychologist, 63(2), 96-110. doi:10.103710003-
066X.63.2 96.
215
Kaplan, S., Cortina, J., & Ruark, G. A. (2010). Oops...we did it again: Industrial-
Organizational s focus on emotional intelligence instead of on its relationships to
work outcomes. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 171-177.
doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01220.x

Karim, J. (2010). Cross-cultural research on the reliability and validity of the Mayer-
Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Cross-Cultural
Research, 44(4), 374-404. doi:10.1177/1069397110377603

Kautzman, R. W. (2011). An examination of the relationship between emotional

intelligence and leadership practices in a healthcare organization (Ed.D.).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (897969876).

Keating, D. P. (1978). A search for social intelligence. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 70(2), 218-223. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.70.2.218

Kee, K. S., Horan, W. P., Salovey, P., Kern, R. S., Sergi, M. J., Fiske, A. P., . . . Green,
M. F. (2009). Emotional intelligence in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia
Research, 107(1), 61-68. http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.schres.2008.08.016

Keele, S. M., & Bell, R. C. (2008). The factorial validity of emotional intelligence: An
unresolved issue. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(2), 487-500.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.013

Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2002). Empathy and complex task
performance: Two routes to leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 523-
544. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00142-X

Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2006). Empathy and the emergence of
task and relations leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(2), 146-162.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.12.003

Kerr, R., Garvin, J., Heaton, N., & Boyle, E. (2006). Emotional intelligence and
leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(4),
265-279. doi:10.1108/01437730610666028

Kerr, W. A., & Speroff, B. J. (1947). The empathy test. Chicago, IL: Psychometric
Affiliates.

Khalili, A. (2011). Gender differences in emotional intelligence among employees of

small and medium enterprise: An empirical study. Journal of International
Management Studies, 6(2), 1-10.

Khan, M. I., Khan, M. A., Saeed, T., Khan, M. S., & Sanaullah. (2011). Linking
emotional intelligence and transformational leadership: Services sector of
Pakistan. Review of Management Innovation & Creativity, 4(13), 43-53.
216
Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). The cognitive unconscious. Science, 237(4821), 1445.

Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (2011). Social intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg, & S. B.

Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 564-581). New
York: Cambridge University.

Killian, K. D. (2012). Development and validation of the emotional self-awareness

questionnaire: A measure of emotional intelligence. Journal of Marital & Family
Therapy, 38(3), 502-514. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2011.00233.x

Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J. -., Chen, Z., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power
distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-
level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 744-
764. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971

Kiyani, K., Saher, N., Saleem, S., & Iqbal, M. (2013). Emotional intelligence (EI) and
employee outcomes: The mediating effect of authentic leadership
style. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business,5(1), 394-
405.

Knab, D. K. (1998). Comparison of the leadership practices of principals of blue ribbon

schools with principals of randomly selected schools. (Unpublished Doctoral).
American University,

Koehler, C. D. (1992). Personality traits associated with transformational leadership

styles of secondary principals in Christian schools. (Unpublished Doctoral). Kent
State University,

Koman, E. S., & Wolff, S. B. (2008). Emotional intelligence competencies in the team
and team leader. The Journal of Management Development, 27(1), 55.

Kong, D. T. (2014). MayerSaloveyCaruso emotional intelligence test (MSCEIT/MEIS)

and overall, verbal, and nonverbal intelligence: Meta-analytic evidence and
critical contingencies. Personality and Individual Differences,66, 171-175.

Kotz, M., & Venter, I. (2011). Differences in emotional intelligence between effective
and ineffective leaders in the public sector: An empirical study. International
Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(2), 397-427.
doi:10.1177/0020852311399857

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2000). Leadership practices inventory: Psychometric

properties (June 2000). New York: Wiley.
217
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership practices inventory: Theory and
evidence behind the five practices of exemplary leaders. San Francisco, CA:
Pfeiffer.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The leadership challenge: How to make
extraordinary things happen in organizations (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Kruml, S. M., & Yockey, M. D. (2011). Developing the emotionally intelligent leader:
Instructional issues. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(2), 207-
215. doi:10.1177/1548051810372220

Kunst-Wilson, W. R., & Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Affective discrimination of stimuli that

cannot be recognized. Science, 207(4430), 551-558.

Labbaf, H., Ansari, M. E., & Masoudi, M. (2011). The impact of the emotional
intelligence on dimensions of learning organization : The case of Isfahan
University. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in
Business, 3(5), 536-545.

Labby, S., Lunenburg, F. C., & Slate, J. R. (2013). Emotional intelligence skills and
principal characteristics. Journal of Education Research, 7(4), 257-268.

Lam, C. S., & O'Higgins, E. R. E. (2012). Enhancing employee outcomes. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 33(2), 149-174.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437731211203465

Lam, C. S., & O'Higgins, E. (2013). Emotional intelligence and leadership styles in
china. Asia Pacific Management Review, 18(4), 441-468.
doi:10.6126/APMR.2013.18.4.06

Landy, F. J. (1985). Psychology of work behavior. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Landy, F. J. (2005). Some historical and scientific issues related to research on emotional
intelligence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 411-424.
doi:10.1002/job.317

Landy, F. J. (2006). The long, frustrating, and fruitless search for social intelligence: A
cautionary tale. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), A critique of emotional intelligence: What
are the problems and how can they be fixed? (pp. 81-124). New York: Routledge.

Lane, R. D. (2000). Levels of emotion awareness: Neurological, psychological, and

social perspectives. In R. Bar-On, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of
emotional intelligence: Theory, development, assessment, and application at
home, school, and in the workplace (pp. 171-191). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
218
Lane, R. D., Quinlan, D. M., Schwartz, G. E., Walker, P. A., & Zeitlin, S. B. (1990). The
levels of emotional awareness scale: A cognitive-developmental measure of
emotion. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55(1), 124.

Lane, R. D., Sechrest, L., & Riedel, R. (1998). Sociodemographic correlates of

alexithymia. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 39(6), 377-385.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-440X(98)90051-7

Langhorn, S. (2004). How emotional intelligence can improve management

performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 16(4/5), 220-230.

Larson, T. A. (1992). Secondary educational leadership: A study of three high

schools. (Unpublished Doctoral). University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.

Leban, W., & Zulauf, C. (2004). Linking emotional intelligence abilities and
transformational leadership styles. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 25(7/8), 554.

Lee, H., Park, J., & Lee, J. (2013). Role of leadership competencies and team social
capital in it services. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 53(4), 1-11.

Lee, J., & Ok, C. (2014). Understanding hotel employees service sabotage: Emotional
labor perspective based on conservation of resources theory. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 36(0), 176-187.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.014

Leggat, S. G., & Balding, C. (2013). Achieving organisational competence for clinical
leadership. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 27(3), 312-329.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/JHOM-Jul-2012-0132

Leong, F. T. L. (1995). Leadership practices inventory - A review. In J. C. Conoley, & J.

C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. (pp. 555-556).
Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Leopold, A., Krueger, F., dal Monte, O., Pardini, M., Pulaski, S. J., Solomon, J., &
Grafman, J. (2012). Damage to the left ventromedial prefrontal cortex impacts
affective theory of mind. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(8), 871-
880. doi:10.1093/scan/nsr071

Leuner, B. (1966). Emotional intelligence and emancipation. Praxis Der

Kinderpsychologie Und Kinderpsychiatrie, 15, 196-203.

Leung, S., Meier, S., & Cook, C. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence
Test v2.0 (MSCEIT) Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

219
Lindebaum, D., & Cartwright, S. (2010). A critical examination of the relationship
between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership. Journal of
Management Studies, 47(7), 1317-1342. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00933.x

Lindebaum, D., & Jordan, P. J. (2012). Relevant but exaggerated: The effects of
emotional intelligence on project manager performance in
construction. Construction Management & Economics, 30(7), 575-583.
doi:10.1080/01446193.2011.593184

Lipton, M. (1990). Leadership characteristics of CDC executive directors: Preliminary

findings. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Urban Affairs Associate

Lively, K. (2013). Social and cultural influencers: Gender effects on emotional labor at
work and at home. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp
(Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion
regulation at work (pp. 223-250). New York, NY: Routledge.

Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 425-431. doi:10.1002/job.318

Long, J. (1994). Leadership practices of elementary principals and parental involvement

in their schools. (Unpublished Doctoral). Eastern Michigan University,

Lopes, P., Grewal, D., Kadis, J., Gall, M., & Salovey, P. (2006). Evidence that emotional
intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at
work. Psicothema, 18(special), 132-138.

Lopez-Zafra, E., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Martos, M. P. B. (2012). The relationship

between transformational leadership and emotional intelligence from a gendered
approach. Psychological Record, 62(1), 97-114.

Lord, R. G., de Vader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation
between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity
generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology,71(3), 402-410.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.402

Lowe, W. A. (2000). An examination of the relationship between leadership practices

and organizational commitment in the fire service. (Unpublished Doctoral). Nova
Southeastern University,

MacCann, C., Fogarty, G. J., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2011). Coping mediates the
relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and academic
achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 60-70.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.11.002

220
MacCann, C., Lipnevich, A. A., & Roberts, R. D. (2012). New directions in assessing
emotional competencies from kindergarten to college. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(4), 315-319. doi:10.1177/0734282912449438

MacCann, C., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2012). Casting the first stone of validity
standards: A less critical perspective of the MSCEIT. Emotion Review, 4(4), 409-
410. doi:10.1177/1754073912445817

MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2008). New paradigms for assessing emotional
intelligence: Theory and data. Emotion, 8(4), 540-551. doi:10.1037/a0012746;
10.1037/a0012746.supp (Supplemental)

Mackintosh, N. J. (2011). History of theories and measurement of intelligence. In R. J.

Sternberg, & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp.
3-19). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Malik, M. E., Danish, R. Q., & Munir, Y. (2011). The impact of leader's emotional
quotient on organizational effectiveness: Evidence from industrial and banking
sectors of Pakistan. International Journal of Business & Social Science, 2(18),
114-118.

Mandell, B., & Pherwani, S. (2003). Relationship between emotional intelligence and
transformational leadership style: A gender comparison. Journal of Business &
Psychology, 17(3), 387-404.

Mandler, G. (1975). Mind and emotion. New York: Wiley.

Mandler, G. (1984). Mind and body: Psychology of emotion and stress. New York:
Norton.

Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationships between personality and performance

in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56(4), 241-270. doi:10.1037/h0044587

Mansouri, B. (2001). Normalization of Cyberia and Shrink Emotional Intelligence

Questionnaire. (Unpublished Master's). Allameh University, Tehran, Iran.

Margaret Hayes, J., & Reilly, G. O. (2013). Psychiatric disorder, IQ, and emotional
intelligence among adolescent detainees: A comparative study. Legal and
Criminological Psychology, 18(1), 30-47. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02027.x

Matsos, C. T. (1997). Student leadership development as a supplement to college

fraternity pledge programs. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
Alabama.

221
Matsumoto, D., LeRoux, J., Wilson-Cohn, C., Raroque, J., & et al. (2000). A new test to
measure emotion recognition ability: Matsumoto and Ekman's Japanese and
Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART). Journal of Nonverbal
Behavior, 24(3), 179-209.

Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2012). Emotional Intelligence 101. New
York: Springer.

Maul, A. (2012a). Higher standards of validity evidence are needed in the measurement
of emotional intelligence. Emotion Review, 4(4), 411-412.
doi:10.1177/1754073912446357

Maul, A. (2012b). The validity of the MayerSaloveyCaruso emotional intelligence test

(MSCEIT) as a measure of emotional intelligence. Emotion Review, 4(4), 394-
402. doi:10.1177/1754073912445811

Mayer, J. D. (2007). Personality function and personality change. In J. Ciarrochi, & J. D.

Mayer (Eds.), Applying emotional intelligence: A practitioner's guide (pp. 125-
143). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets
traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267-298.

Mayer, J. D., DiPaolo, M., & Salovey, P. (1990). Perceiving affective content in
ambiguous visual stimuli: A component of emotional intelligence. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 54(3), 772.

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional
intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 507-536.
doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093646

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction and
regulation of feelings. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 4(3), 197-208.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/S0962-1849(05)80058-7

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey, & D.
Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications
for educators (pp. 3-31). New York: Basic Books.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In
R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The handbook of intelligence (pp. 396-420). New York:
Cambridge University press.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional

Intelligence Test Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

222
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2012). The validity of the MSCEIT:
Additional analyses and evidence. Emotion Review, 4(4), 403-408.
doi:10.1177/1754073912445815

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional
intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, (3), 97-105.

McCleskey, J. A. (2014a). Emotional intelligence and leadership: A review of the

progress, controversy, and criticism. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, 22(1), 76-93. doi:10.1108/IJOA-03-2012-0568

McCleskey, J. A. (2014b). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and

leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117-130.

McCleskey, J. A. (2015). The current state of the stream one ability model (SOAM) of
emotional intelligence and the future of emotional intelligence. In C. E. J. Hrtel,
N. M. Ashkanasy & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Research on emotion in organizations:
Volume 11, (pp. 271-293). Cambridge, MA: Emerald.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality
across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52(1), 81-90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81

McGill, R. L. (2014). Navigating the hazardous terrain and the tranquil waters: A
grounded theory study of the leadership development of nurse managers (Ed.D.).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1520011397).

McKeown, A., & Bates, J. (2013). Emotional intelligent leadership: Findings from a
study of public library branch managers in northern Ireland. Library
Management, 34(6/7), 462. doi:10.1108/LM-10-2012-0072

McKimmy, P. B. (1996). A study of students involved in a leadership development

program, Excellence in leadership, at grand valley state
university. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Western Michigan University,

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1993). Leadership behavior and employee effectiveness. Nursing

Management, 24(5), 38-39.

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1995). Job satisfaction, productivity, and organizational

commitment: The result of leadership. Journal of Nursing Administration, 25(9),
17-26.

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1996). Increasing employee productivity, job satisfaction, and

organizational commitment. Hospital & Health Services Administration, 41(2),
160-175.

223
McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1999). The relationship between managerial motivation,
leadership, nurse outcomes and patient satisfaction. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 20, 243-259.

Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of

Personality, 40(4), 525-543. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.ep8970028

Mendez-Grant, M. (2001). A study of freshman interest groups and leadership practices

at Texas Womans university. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
North Texas,

Mesquita, B., & Delvaux, E. (2013). A cultural perspective on emotion labor. In A. A.

Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st
century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work(pp. 251-272). New
York, NY: Routledge.

Middleton, K. L. (2005). The service-learning project as a supportive context for

charismatic leadership emergence in nascent leaders. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 4(3), 295-308.

Mignonac, K., & Herrbach, O. (2004). Linking work events, affective states, and
attitudes: An empirical study of managers' emotions. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 19(2), 221-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-004-0549-3

Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Leroy, C., & Roy, E. (2007). Psychometric properties of
the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire: Factor structure, reliability,
construct, and incremental validity in a French-speaking population. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 88(3), 338-353. doi:10.1080/00223890701333431

Montgomery, J. M., Stoesz, B. M., & McCrimmon, A. W. (2013). Emotional

intelligence, theory of mind, and executive functions as predictors of social
outcomes in young adults with Asperger Syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other
Developmental Disabilities, 28(1), 4-13. doi:10.1177/1088357612461525

Moos, R. H. (1993). Coping responses inventory: Adult form manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.

Morris, J. A., & Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences
of emotional labor. Academy of Management. the Academy of Management
Review, 21(4), 986.

Moss, F. A., Hunt, T., & Omwake, K. T. (1949). Manual for the social intelligence test:
Revised form. Washington, D.C.: George Washington University.

224
Moss, S., Ritossa, D., & Ngu, S. (2006). The effect of follower regulatory focus and
extraversion on leadership behavior: The role of emotional intelligence. Journal
of Individual Differences [PsycARTICLES], 27(2), 93. doi:10.1027/1614-
0001.27.2.93

Muchinsky, P. M. (1983). Psychology applied to work. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Mula, D. M. (2013). Examining emotional intelligence and transformational leadership

within U.S. army national guard leaders (D.B.A.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1416422122).

Nazari, H., & Madani, S. J. (2013). Emotional intelligence and the transformation-
centered leadership of the organizations' managers: Case study of the
governmental banks' managers of the fifth zone of Tehran
municipality. Information Management and Business Review, 5(9), 441-455.

Nelis, D., Quoidbach, J., Hansenne, M., & Mikolajczak, M. (2011). Measuring individual
differences in emotion regulation: The emotion regulation profile-revised (ERP-
R). Psychologica Belgica, 51(1), 49-91.

Newman, D. A., Joseph, D. L., & MacCann, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence and job
performance: The importance of emotion regulation and emotional labor
context. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 159-164.
doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01218.x

Nikoli, D., Muresan, R. C., Feng, W., & Singer, W. (2012). Scaled correlation analysis:
A better way to compute a cross-correlogram. European Journal of
Neuroscience, 35(5), 742-762.

Niven, K., Totterdell, P., Holman, D., & Cameron, D. (2013). Emotional labor at the unit
level. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor
in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 101-
124). New York, NY: Routledge.

Nolan, F. L. (1993). Ethical leadership and school culture: An exploratory study of nine
middle level schools (Doctoral Dissertation).

Nowicki, S., & Duke, M. P. (2001). Nonverbal receptivity: The diagnostic analysis of
nonverbal accuracy (DANVA). In J. A. Hall, & F. J. Bernieri
(Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 183-200).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

O'Boyle, E. H., Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., Hawver, T. H., & Story, P. A. (2011).
The relation between emotional intelligence
and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32,
788-818.
225
O'Dell, L. (2014). Leadership in higher education through the lens of the performing
arts (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(1553857650).

Olannye, A. P. (2014). An assessment of the effect of emotional intelligence on

leadership performance in local government administration. Journal of Emerging
Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, 5(1), 44-50.

Osborne, A. M. (2012). The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices among physicians (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Full Text. (1037988243).

Packard, J. A. (2008). Analyzing the intersection of leadership practices, emotional

intelligence, and coping responses in women-owned small businesses (Ph.D.).

Palmer, B. R., & Stough, C. (2002). Workplace SUEIT: Swinburne university emotional
intelligence test - interim technical manual version 2. . Melbourne: Melbourne:
Organisational Psychology Research Unit, Swinburne University.

Palmer, B. R., Stough, C., Harmer, R., & Gignac, G. E. (2010). The Genos Emotional
Intelligence Inventory: A measure designed specifically for workplace
applications. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing
emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 103-117). New
York: Springer.

Palmer, B. R., Walls, M., Burgess, Z., & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence and
effective leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(1), 5.

Papadogiannis, P. K., Logan, D., & Sitarenios, G. (2010). An ability model of emotional
intelligence: A rationale, description, and application of the Mayer Salovey
Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske &
J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and
applications (pp. 43-66). New York: Springer.

Parling, T., Mortazavi, M., & Ghaderi, A. (2010). Alexithymia and emotional awareness
in anorexia nervosa: Time for a shift in the measurement of the concept? Eating
Behaviors, 11(4), 205-210. http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.eatbeh.2010.04.001

Patterson, D. R. (1997). A study of the relationship between leadership behaviors of

pastors and the job satisfaction of the church staff in Southern Baptist churches
with resident membership over 1500. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation).
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,

226
Payne, W. L. (1986). A study of emotion: Developing emotional intelligence; self-
integration; relating to fear, pain and desire (theory, structure of reality,
problem-solving, contraction/expansion, tuning in/coming out/letting go) (Ph.D.).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT). (303382427).

Pearson, K. (1895). Notes on regression and inheritance in the case of two

parents. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, , 58 240-242.

Petrides, K. V. (2010a). Psychometric properties of the trait emotional intelligence

questionnaire (TEIQue). In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske & J. D. A. Parker
(Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp.
85-102). New York: Springer.

Petrides, K. V. (2010b). Trait emotional intelligence theory. Industrial & Organizational

Psychology, 3(2), 136-139. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01213.x

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric

investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of
Personality, 15(6), 425-448. doi:10.1002/per.416

Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., & Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional
intelligence in personality factor space. British Journal of Psychology, 98(2), 273-
289. doi:10.1348/000712606X120618

Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm

development as a dependable variable. Academy of Management Review, 18(4),
599-620. doi:10.5465/AMR.1993.9402210152

Phipps, M. L., & Claxton, D. B. (1997). An investigation into instructor

effectiveness. Journal of Experiential Education, 20(1), 40-46.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.

Piaget, J. (1952). The child's conception of number. London: Routledge.

Piaget, J. (1953). Logic and psychology. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Pillay, M., Viviers, R., & Mayer, C. (2013). The relationship between emotional
intelligence and leadership styles in the South African petrochemical
industry. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (Online First), 39(1), 1-
12.

Pirola-Merlo, A., Hrtel, C. E. J., Mann, L., & Hirst, G. (2002). How leaders influence
the impact of affective events on team climate and performance in R&D
teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 561-581. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(02)00144-3
227
Plowman, R. J. (1991). Perceptions of presidential leadership behavior and institutional
environment by presidents and vice presidents of selected four-year colleges and
universities in Florida. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of
Mississippi,

Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion: A Psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper &

Row.

Podolny, J. M., Khurana, R., & Besharov, M. L. (2010). Revisiting the meaning of
leadership. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana (Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory
and practice (pp. 65-106). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Posner, B. Z., & Harder, J. W. (2002). The proactive personality, leadership, gender and
national culture. Paper Presented at the Annual Conference of the Western
Academy of Management, Santa Fe, NM.

Posner, B. Z., & Kouzes, J. M. (1993). Psychometric properties of the leadership

practices inventory-updated. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(1),
191-199. doi:10.1177/0013164493053001021

Prati, L. M., Douglas, C., Ferris, G. R., Buckley, M. R., & Ammeter, A. P. (2003).
Emotional intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team
outcomes. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(1), 21-40.
doi:10.1108/eb028961

Pugh, D. J. (2000). College student leadership development: Program impact on student

participants. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Georgia,

Pugh, S. D., Diefendorff, J. M., & Moran, C. M. (2013). Emotional labor: Organization-
level influences, strategies, and outcomes. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff &
D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on
emotion regulation at work (pp. 199-222). New York, NY: Routledge.

Purkable, T. L. (2003). Emotional intelligence, leadership style and coping mechanisms

of executives (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.
(305346465).

Quoidbach, J., Nelis, D., Mikolajczak, M., & Hansenne, M. (2007). Development and
validation of a typical performance emotional regulation profile (ERP-Q). Paper
Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Belgian Association for Psychological
Science, Louvain-Al-Neuve, Belgium, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.

Rafaeli, A. (2013). Reflecting on emotional labor as a social meme. In A. A. Grandey, J.

M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse
perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 294-299). New York, NY:
Routledge.
228
Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1990). Research notes. busy stores and demanding
customers: How do they affect the display of positive emotion? Academy of
Management Journal, 33(3), 623-637. doi:10.2307/256584

Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1991). Emotional contrast strategies as means of social
influence: Lessons from criminal interrogators and bill collectors. Academy of
Management Journal, 34(4), 749-775. doi:10.2307/256388

Ramchunder, Y., & Martins, N. (2014). The role of self-efficacy, emotional intelligence
and leadership style as attributes of leadership effectiveness. SA Journal of
Industrial Psychology, 40(1), 1-11.

Rashid Rehman, R., & Waheed, A. (2012). Individual's leadership and decision making
styles: A study of banking sector of Pakistan. Journal of Behavioural
Sciences, 22(3), 70-89.

Rasor, C. E. (1995). An analysis of the relationship between personality preference traits

of executive level and mid-level law Enforcement/Corrections leaders and
exemplary leadership practices. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University
of South Florida,

Rego, A., & Fernandes, C. (2005). Inteligncia Emocional: Contributos adicionais para a
validao de um instrumento de medida. Psicologia, 19, 139-167.

Ridgway, K. A. (1998). The relationship of leadership practices and cultural values to

organizational effectiveness in small organizations. (Unpublished Doctoral). Kent
State University.

Riggio, R. E. (2002). Multiple intelligences and leadership: An overview. In R. E.

Riggio, S. E. Murphy & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple intelligences and
leadership (pp. 1-6). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Roberts, R. D., Burrus, J., Betancourt, A. C., Holtzman, S., Libbrecht, N., MacCann, C., .
. . Schulze, R. (in press). Multimedia assessment of emotional abilities:
Development and validation. ( No. Educational Testing Service Research Report
No: RR-13-xx). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Roberts, R. D., MacCann, C., Matthews, G., & Zeidner, M. (2010). Emotional
intelligence: Toward a consensus of models and measures. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 4(10), 821-840.

Roberts, R. D., Schulze, R., & MacCann, C. (2008). The measurement of emotional
intelligence: A decade pf progress? In G. Boyle, G. Matthews & D. H. Saklofske
(Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment (pp. 461-482).
New York: Sage.

229
Robertson, W. D. (1999). The role of servant leadership in church growth. (Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation). Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary,

Rockstuhl, T., Seiler, S., Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Annen, H. (2011). Beyond general
intelligence (IQ) and emotional intelligence (EQ): The role of cultural intelligence
(CQ) on cross-border leadership effectiveness in a globalized world. Journal of
Social Issues, 67(4), 825-840. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01730.x

Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., Arthaud-Day, M., Near, J. P., Baldwin, T. T., Rubin, R. S., &
Bommer, W. H. (2007). Emotional intelligence and individual performance:
Evidence of direct and moderated effects. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 28(4), 399-421.

Rosch, D. M., Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2011). The overlap between emotional
intelligence and post-industrial leadership capacity: A construct validity
analysis. Journal of Leadership Education, 10(1), 83-102.

Roset, D., & Ciarrochi, J. (2005). Emotional intelligence and its relationship to
workplace performance outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 26(5/6), 388-399.

Rossen, E., & Kranzler, J. H. (2009). Incremental validity of the MayerSaloveyCaruso

emotional intelligence test version 2.0 (MSCEIT) after controlling for personality
and intelligence. Journal of Research in Personality,43(1), 60-65.
doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.002

Rossen, E., Kranzler, J. H., & Algina, J. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis of the
MayerSaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test V 2.0
(MSCEIT). Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1258-1269.
Doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.11.020

Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millennium. Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1(1), 91-110.
doi:10.1177/107179199300100109

Rubin, R. S., Munz, D. C., & Bommer, W. H. (2005). Leading from within: The effects
of emotion recognition and personality on transformational leadership
behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 845-858.
doi:10.5465/AMJ.2005.18803926

Rude, D. A. (2013). Leadership and emotional intelligence: A phenomenological study

on developmental experiences of effective federal government leaders (Ed.D.).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1346226922).

Ruzgis, P. (1994). Thurstone, L.L. (1887-1955). In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

human intelligence (pp. 1081-1084). New York: Macmillan.
230
Saavedra, R., & Kwun, S. K. (2000). Affective states in job characteristics
theory[dagger]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 131-146.

Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., Galloway, J., & Davidson, K. (2007). Individual
difference correlates of health-related behaviours: Preliminary evidence for links
between emotional intelligence and coping. Personality and Individual
Differences, 42(3), 491-502. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.08.006

Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., Mastoras, S. M., Beaton, L., & Osborne, S. E. (2012).
Relationships of personality, affect, emotional intelligence and coping with
student stress and academic success: Different patterns of association for stress
and success. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(2), 251-257.
http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.lindif.2011.02.010

Salovey, P., Brackett, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2007). Introduction. In P. Salovey, M. A.

Brackett & J. D. Mayer (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: Key readings on the
Mayer and Salovey model (2nd ed., pp. i-v). Port Chester, NY: Dude Publishing.

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and
Personality, 9, 185-211.

Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Goldman, S. L., Turvey, C., & Palfai, T. P. (1995). Emotional
attention, clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the trait
meta-mood scale. Emotion, Disclosure, and Health,125-154.

Sandbaaken, D. A. (2004). The factor structure of the Kouzes and Posner leadership
practices inventory (LPI) revisited in a Norwegian context. (White Paper No.
HWP0407). Oxon: Henley Management College.

Sargent, H. D. (1953). The insight test: A verbal projective test for personality. New
York: Grune & Stratton.

Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of
emotional state. Psychological Review, 69(5), 379-399. doi:10.1037/h0046234

Schaubroeck, J., & Jones, J. R. (2000). Antecedents of workplace emotional labor

dimensions and moderators of their effects on physical symptoms. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 21, 163-183.

Scherer, K. R. (2007). Componential emotion theory can inform models of emotional

competence. In G. Matthews, M. Zeidner & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of
emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 101-126). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.

231
Schlaerth, A., Ensari, N., & Christian, J. (2013). A meta-analytical review of the
relationship between emotional intelligence and leaders constructive conflict
management. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(1), 126-136.
doi:10.1177/1368430212439907

Schlatter, N., & McDowall, A. (2014). Evidence-based EI coaching: A case study in the
mining industry. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and
Practice, 7(2), 144-151.

Schmid Mast, M., & Darioly, A. (2014). Emotion recognition accuracy in hierarchical
relationships. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 73(2), 69-75. doi:10.1024/1421-
0185/a000124

Schmidt-Atzert, L., & Buhner, M. (2002). Entwicklung eines leistungstests zur

emotionalen intelligenz. Kongress Der Deutschen Gesellschaft Fur
Psychologie, 43, 22-26.

Schulte, M. J., Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Not much
more than g and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(5), 1059-
1068. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.11.014

Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J., Hall, L., Haggerty, D., Golden, C., Cooper, J., & Dornheim,
L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional
intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 167-177.
doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00001-4

Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., & Bhullar, N. (2010). The assessing emotions scale. In C.
Stough, D. H. Saklofske & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional
intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 119-136). New York, NY:
Springer.

Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman,

S. Wright & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A users
portfolio. causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.

Scott, M. E. (1989). The labyrinth of challenge to change: An analysis of community

college leaders' thinking styles and behavioral practices in the current
environment. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of San Diego,

Seo, M., Barrett, L. F., & Jin, S. (2008). The structure of affect: History, theory, and
implications for emotion research in organizations. In N. M. Ashkanasy, & C. L.
Cooper (Eds.), Research companion to emotion in organizations (pp. 17-44).
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

232
Seyal, A. H., & Afzaal, T. (2013). An investigation of relationship among emotional
intelligence, organizational commitment and job satisfaction: Evidence from
academics in Brunei Darussalam. International Business Research, 6(3), 217-228.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-
experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,
Cengage Learning.

Shanley, L. A., Walker, R. E., & Foley, J. M. (1971). Social intelligence: A concept in
search of data. Psychological Reports, 29(3f), 1123-1132.
doi:10.2466/pr0.1971.29.3f.1123

Shapiro, B. E., Grossman, M., & Gardner, H. (1981). Selective musical processing
deficits in brain damaged populations. Neuropsychologia, 19(2), 161-169.
doi:10.1016/0028-3932(81)90101-9

Sharma, R. R. (2012). Measuring social and emotional intelligence competencies in the

Indian context. Cross Cultural Management, 19(1), 30-47.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13527601211195619

Sharma, S., Gangopadhyay, M., Austin, E., & Mandal, M. K. (2013). Development and
validation of a situational judgment test of emotional intelligence. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21(1), 57-73. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12017

Sheldon, O. J., Dunning, D., & Ames, D. R. (2014). Emotionally unskilled, unaware, and
uninterested in learning more: Reactions to feedback about deficits in emotional
intelligence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 125-137.
doi:10.1037/a0034138

Sherrington, C. S. (1919). Mammalian physiology: A course of practical exercises.

London: Oxford at the Clarendon Press.

Siegling, A. B., Nielsen, C., & Petrides, K. V. (2014). Trait emotional intelligence and
leadership in a European multinational company. Personality and Individual
Differences, 65, 65-68.

Sifneos, P. E. (1973). The prevalence of "alexithymic" characteristics in psychosomatic

patients. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 22, 225-262.

Singh, N., & Krishnan, V. R. (2008). Self-sacrifice and transformational leadership:

Mediating role of altruism. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 29(3), 261-274. http://dx.doi.org /10.1108/01437730810861317

Singh, P., & Dali, C. M. (2014). Relevance of A leadership development programme to

develop the leaders' work-integrated learning competencies. The International
Business & Economics Research Journal (Online), 13(6), 1213.
233
Sletvold, J. (2013). The ego and the id revisited Freud and Damasio on the body
ego/self. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 94(5), 1019-32.

Solari, L. (2012). Globalization will make us all more different. People &
Strategy, 35(2), 30-35.

Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, L. E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and
performance: The role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership
perceptions. Group & Organization Management, 24(3), 367-390.

Spector, P. E. (2005). Introduction: Emotional intelligence. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 26(4), 409-410. doi:10.1002/job.316

Spector, P. E., & Brannick, M. T. (2010). Common method issues: An introduction to the
feature topic in organizational research methods. Organizational Research
Methods, 13(3), 403-406. doi:10.1177/1094428110366303

Spector, P. E., & Johnson, H. M. (2006). Improving the definition, measurement, and
application of emotional intelligence. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), A critique of
emotional intelligence: What are the problems and how can they be fixed? (pp.
325-344). New York: Routledge.

Stang, M. (2009). A study of the relationship between the leadership styles and emotional
intelligence of residential student leaders (Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (305184726).

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York: Plume.

Sternberg, R. J. (2012). Contemporary theories of intelligence. Handbook of psychology,

second edition () John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
doi:10.1002/9781118133880.hop207002

Stodgill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the

literature. The Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35-71.
doi:10.1080/00223980.1948.9917362

Stoner-Zemel, M. J. (1988). Visionary leadership, management and high performing

work units: An analysis of workers perceptions. (Unpublished Doctoral).
Amherst, MA.

234
Stratton, J. A. (2011). The relationship among emotional intelligence, leadership
practices and leadership act in first-year college students (Ph.D.). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (902003538).

Subic-Wrana, C., Beutel, M. E., Knebel, A., & Lane, R. D. (2010). Theory of mind and
emotional awareness deficits in patients with somatoform
disorders. Psychosomatic Medicine, 72(4), 404-411.
doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181d35e83

Sunindijo, R. Y. (2012). Integrating emotional intelligence, political skill, and

transformational leadership in construction. Civil Engineering Dimension, 14(3),
182-189. doi:10.9744/CED.14.3.182-189

Sweeney, P. J. (2000). The leadership practices of exemplary superintendents that

influence principals to lead school-based improvement. (Unpublished Doctoral).
University of La Verne,

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.).
Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

Tanomsingh, S. (2006). The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership

practices among Thai health executives (D.P.H.). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (996270971).

Taylor, C. D. (1996). An investigation of the relationships between perceived leadership

behaviors, and staff nurse job satisfaction, and organizational
commitment. (Unpublished Master's). Bellarmine College, Louisville, KY.

Taylor, G. J., Ryan, D., & Bagby, R. M. (1985). Toward the development of a new self-
report alexithymia scale. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 44, 191-199.

Tenopyr, M. L. (1967). Social intelligence and academic success. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 27, 961-965.

Thompson, E. R., & Phua, F. T. T. (2012). A brief index of affective job

satisfaction. Group and Organization Management, 37(3), 275-307.
doi:10.1177/1059601111434201

Thorndike, E. L. (1920, Intelligence and its uses. Harper's Magazine, , 227-235.

Thorndike, R. L. (1959). The empathy test. In O. K. Buros (Ed.), Fifth mental

measurements yearbook (pp. 120-121). Highland Park, N.J.: Gryphon Press.

Thorndike, R. L., & Stein, S. (1937). An evaluation of the attempts to measure social
intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 34(5), 275-285. doi:10.1037/h0053850

235
Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago IL: University of Chicago
Press.

Troth, A. C., & Gyetvey, C. (2014). Identifying leadership potential in an Australian

context. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 52(3), 333-350.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Statistics of US businesses (SUSB). (). Washington, D.C.:
The United States Census Bureau.

Van Genderen, E. (2011). Russian business leadership: A study of managers working

within MNCs. Euro Asia Journal of Management, 21(40), 51-67.

Van Genderen, E. (2015). Russian business leadership: A study of managers working

within MNCs. Middle East Journal of Business, 10(1), 3-11.

Van Jaarsveld, D., & Poster, W. R. (2013). Call centers: Emotional labor over the phone.
In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the
21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 153-174).
New York, NY: Routledge.

Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic

investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 65(1), 71-95.

Vogt, W. P. (2007). Quantitative research methods for professionals (Custom ed.). New
York, NY: Learning Solutions.

Walker, R. E., & Foley, J. M. (1973). Social intelligence: Its history and
measurement. Psychological Reports, 33(3), 839-864.
doi:10.2466/pr0.1973.33.3.839

Wallis, A., & Kennedy, K. I. (2013). Leadership training to improve nurse

retention. Journal of Nursing Management, 21(4), 624-632.

Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2007). Investigating the emotional basis of charismatic
leadership: The role of leaders' positive mood and emotional intelligence. In C. E.
J. Hrtel, N. M. Ashkanasy & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Research on emotion in
organizations volume 3: Functionality, intentionality and morality (pp. 55-86).
New York: Elsevier.

Walter, F., Cole, M. S., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Sine qua non
of leadership or folderol? Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 45-59.

236
Walter, F., Cole, M. S., van der Vegt, G. S., Rubin, R. S., & Bommer, W. H. (2012).
Emotion recognition and emergent leadership: Unraveling mediating mechanisms
and boundary conditions. The Leadership Quarterly,23(5), 977-991.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.06.007

Wapner, W., & Gardner, H. (1979a). A note on patterns of comprehension and recovery
in global Aphasia. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 22(4), 765-772.

Wapner, W., & Gardner, H. (1979b). A study of spelling in Aphasia. Brain and
Language, 7(3), 363-374. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(79)90029-4

Wapner, W., Judd, T., & Gardner, H. (1978). Visual agnosia in an artist. Cortex: A
Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 14(3), 343-
364.

Weber, M. (1946/1964). The theory of social and economic organization (T. Parsons
Trans.). New York: Free Press.

Webster, L., & Hackett, R. K. (1999). Burnout and leadership in community mental
health systems. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health
Services Research, 26(6), 387-399.

Wechsler, D. (1958). The measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence (4th ed.).
Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company.

Weinberger, L. A. (2009). Emotional intelligence, leadership style, and perceived

leadership effectiveness. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(6), 747-
772. doi:10.1177/1523422309360811

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical

discussion of the structure, causes, and consequences of affective experiences at
work. In B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior, 18 (pp. 1-74). Greenwich, CT: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects
of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in
affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 78(1), 1-24. http://dx.doi.org /10.1006/obhd.1999.2824

Wharton, A. S. (1993). The affective consequences of service work: Managing emotions

on the job. Work and Occupations, 20(2), 205-232.
doi:10.1177/0730888493020002004

Wharton, A. S. (2013). Back to the future. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff & D. E.

Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on
emotion regulation at work (pp. 300-305). New York, NY: Routledge.
237
Whatley, L. (1991). The relation of vocational administrator's self-esteem to their
leadership styles and practices. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Whitman, D. S., Van Rooy, D. L., Viswesvaran, C., & Alonso, A. (2008). The
susceptibility of a mixed model measure of emotional intelligence to faking: A
Solomon four-group design. Psychology Science, 50(1), 44-63.

Wilkinson, F. C. (2015). Emotional intelligence in library disaster response assistance

teams: Which competencies emerged? College & Research Libraries, 76(2), 188-
204. doi:10.5860/crl.76.2.188

Winner, E., Engel, M., & Gardner, H. (1980). Misunderstanding metaphor: What's the
problem? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30(1), 22-32.
doi:10.1016/0022-0965(80)90072-7

Winner, E., Rosenstiel, A. K., & Gardner, H. (1976). The development of metaphoric
understanding. Developmental Psychology, 12(4), 289-297. doi:10.1037/0012-
1649.12.4.289

Winner, E., Rosenstiel, A. K., & Gardner, H. (1977). Language development: Metaphoric
understanding. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10(3), 147-149.
doi:10.1177/002221947701000303

Wolff, S. B. (2007). Emotional and social competency inventory technical manual.

Boston, MA: Hay Group.

Wolff, S. B., Pescosolido, A. T., & Druskat, V. U. (2002). Emotional intelligence as the
basis of leadership emergence in self-managing teams. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(5), 505-522. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00141-8

Wong, C., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence
on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(3), 243-274. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00099-1

Wong, P., Wong, C., & Peng, K. Z. (2010). Effect of middle-level leader and teacher
emotional intelligence on school teachers job satisfaction: The case of Hong
Kong. Educational Management Administration & Leadership,38(1), 59-70.
doi:10.1177/1741143209351831

Wood, L. M., Parker, J. D. A., & Keefer, K. V. (2010). Assessing emotional intelligence
using the emotional quotient inventory (EQ-i) and related instruments. In C.
Stough, D. H. Saklofske & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Assessing emotional
intelligence: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 67-84). New York: Springer.

238
Wunderley, L. J. (1996). The relationships among optimism, pessimism, vision and
effective leadership practices. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). University of
Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

Xiao-Yu Liu, & Jun Liu. (2013). Effects of team leader emotional intelligence and team
emotional climate on team member job satisfaction. Nankai Business Review
International, 4(3), 180-198. doi:10.1108/NBRI-07-2013-0023

Xu, Z. L. (1991). The relationship between leadership behavior of academic deans in

public universities and job satisfaction of department chairpersons. (Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation). East Tennessee State University,

Yang, S., & Guy, M. E. (2015). Gender effects on emotional labor in Seoul metropolitan
area. Public Personnel Management, 44(1), 3-24.
doi:10.1177/0091026014550491

Young, M., & Dulewicz, V. (2007). Relationships between emotional and congruent self-
awareness and performance in the British royal navy. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 22(5), 465-478. doi:10.1108/02683940710757191

Young, P. T. (1936). Motivation of behavior. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Young, P. T. (1949). Emotion as disorganized responsea reply to Professor

Leeper. Psychological Review, 56(4), 184-191. doi:10.1037/h0054176

Yuan, B. J. C., Hsu, W., Shieh, J., & Li, K. (2012). Increasing emotional intelligence of
employees: Evidence from research and development teams in Taiwan. Social
Behavior and Personality, 40(10), 1713-1724.

Yunus, N. H., & Anuar, S. R. (2012). Trust as moderating effect between emotional
intelligence and transformational leadership styles. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 3(10), 650-663.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). Organizational leadership and social intelligence. In R. E. Riggio,

S. E. Murphy & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple intelligences and leadership (pp.
29-54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American

Psychologist, 62(1), 6-16. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.6

Zaccaro, S. J. (2012). Individual differences and leadership: Contributions to a third

tipping point. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 718-728.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.001

239
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis,
A. T. Cianciolo & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 101-124).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American

Psychologist, 35(2), 151-175. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151

Zammuner, V. L., Dionisio, D., Prandi, K., & Agnoli, S. (2013). Assessing and training
leaders' emotional intelligence, and testing its influence on leaders'
employees. Journal of Management & Change, 30/31(1), 145-165.

Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2009). What we know about emotional
intelligence: How it affects learning, work, relationships, and our mental health.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Zerbe, W. J. (2000). Emotional dissonance and employee well-being. In N. M.

Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hrtel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace:
Research, theory, and practice (pp. 189-214). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Zook, T. D. (1993). An examination of leadership practices in large, protestant

congregations. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Pennsylvania,

Zurif, E. B., Caramazza, A., Foldi, N. S., & Gardner, H. (1979). Lexical semantics and
memory for words in Aphasia. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 22(3),
456-467.

240
 APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella Universitys Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for
the integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion
postings, assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.
Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy,
definition of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary
consequences of academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that
learners will follow APA rules for citing another persons ideas or works.
The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in
the Policy:
Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the
authorship of others work through proper citation and reference. Use of another
persons ideas, including another learners, without proper reference or citation
constitutes plagiarism and academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)
Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting
someone elses ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying
verbatim or rephrasing ideas without properly acknowledging the source by author,
date, and publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella Universitys Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for
research integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:
Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication,
plagiarism, misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those
that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing,
conducting, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not
limited to dismissal or revocation of the degree.

241
 Statement of Original Work and Signature

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella Universitys Academic Honesty Policy
(3.01.01) and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including the Policy Statements,
Rationale, and Definitions.
I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the
ideas or words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following
the guidelines set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name
and date Jim A. McCleskey 6-1-15

Mentor name Dr. Janet Salmons, Capella University - School of Business and
and school Technology

242