This chapter is seeks to verify the limited studies into the relationship between EI and OP amongst librarians. There appears to be very little research, or study investigating the areas synthesizing library administration issues and the study of EI in information works. Although researchers allude to the need to be able to understand and manage their own emotions as an information provider, the lack of research combining the areas of EI of librarians in Malaysian public libraries suggests a large gap in a very important research area (Quinn, 2002; Hernon, 2008 and Singer, 2005).
Consequently, a study that focuses on a public librarian’s perceived need for EI would fill this gap and therefore contribute to the existing EI literature. The following information is provided as a literature review encompassing an overview of the different constructs and theories of EI, as researched by several authors. The historical context and development of Malaysian Public Libraries will also be explored in this literature review. The topics of EI, and the area of information works, are reviewed individually within, as there is very little research on issues pertaining to the combination of these topics.
This chapter furnishes an encompassing review on past literature, which covers a richness of information on EI research in general. There are 8 parts itemized as follows: Part 1 contains the introduction; Part 2 gives the description of EI history, theory, models and development; Part 3 discusses EI and applications in the workplace EI; Part 4 discusses librarians standard skills and capabilities; Part 5 shows clearly occupational performance; Part 6 examines the relationship between EI and performance, and finally, Part 7 summarizes all elements of this review.
2.2 EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
Twenty years ago, researchers didn’t much pay attention the topic of emotions in the workplace, perhaps because emotions were viewed too difficult to be measured and were thought of as illogical, unstable, and not fit for decision making tool; they were therefore less popular and largely unexplored among researchers (Arvey et al., 1998 and Muchinsky, 2000). Early 1990 however, researchers have begun to recognize that emotions should not be excluded from skill and competency of organizational, because it can be used in ways that contribute constructively to organizations (Arvey et al., 1998 and Fredman, Ghini and Dijk, 2008).
In relation to this, it is motivating researchers to study the emotions in organizations. For instance, study on occupational performance has adopted a more affective focus. Additionally, new interest in the people feeling on work behavior has been influential in turning attention to the more emotional side of workplace experiences (e.g., Brief, Butcher, & Roberson, 1995; Fisher & Ashkanasy, 2000). Fisher and Ashkanasy (2000) and Ryback & Wenny (2007) also claim the popularity of EI as a mechanism for new research in the workplace. The information below was derived from the previous empirical studies and multiple formats of resources.
There is no definitive definition of EI. Many authors define EI as the ability to understand feelings, either internally or externally. Numerous studies indicate that, knowledge, cognitive skills and abilities are usually blended with performance. The term and concepts of EI were coined by Golemen (1995; 1998) in his two books, EI and Working with EI and developed a dimension and attribute of EI as self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. However different authors have defined EI to some extent differently from Goleman. Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) meaning is a kind of intelligence in that it emphasizes thinking, perceiving, understanding, appraising, discriminating, and identifying emotion. Goleman’s concept of EI, in distinction, relates to the way people function emotionally if their functioning is at its potential or at least is not problematic.
From the viewpoint of Weisinger’s (1998) gives descriptions and definition of EI is comparatively close to Goleman’s when he described EI is the intelligent use of emotions. It in comparison to Goleman’s, Cooper and Sawaf’s (1997) delimitation gives greater attention to the higher directions of human behavior, mainly aspects correlated with leadership. Their concept comprehends factors such as intuition, integrity, personal purpose, and creativity which is not emphasized by Goleman. In contrast, Simmons and Simmons’ (1997) approach to EI are very different from Goleman’s when they relate EI to multiple relatively invariant character traits.
These theorists and many others defined and explained the concept of EI. There is no single definition in defining EI. Here I will include the five most popular ones. EI can be defined as:
1. “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and action” (Mayer & Salovey,1993).
2. “ability to recognize and express emotions in yourself, your ability to understand the emotions of colleagues.” (Gardner, 1983).
3. “the intelligent use of emotions: you intentionally make your emotions work for you by using them to help guide your behaviour and thinking in ways that enhance your results.” (Weisinger, 1998).
4. “the ability to: 1) be aware of, to understand, and to express oneself; 2) be aware of, to understand, and to relate to others; 3) deal with strong emotions and control one’s impulses; and 4) adapt to change and to solve problems of a personal or a social nature (Reuven Bar-On, 1998).
5. “the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.(Goleman, 1998)
Based on the profusion of definitions, there seems to be no major differences among the definition of EI throughout the years. In consequence, EI generally entails the ability to understand and recognize feeling internally or intrapersonal and externally or interpersonal to make good decision. More timely, for this study, the researcher adopts the comprehensive of EI articulated by Goleman (1998) “a learned capability based on EI that resulted in outstanding performance at work”. EI echoes how an individual’s possible for mastering the skills of Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social Awareness, and Relationship Management translates into work performance. Having defined EI, the following sections will highlight the literature related to EI and performance in library works.
2.1.2 Evolution of EI
In 1920, Thordike described the concept of EI as a form of social intelligence. He has divided intelligence into three facets; understanding and managing ideas (abstract intelligence), concrete objects (mechanical intelligence), and people (social intelligence). In his expression: “By social intelligence is meant the ability to understand and manage men and women, boys and girls to act wisely in human relations”.
Further, in 1940, Wechsler, viewed intelligence as an effect and conceived that assessments of general intelligence are not adequate and consider that non-intellectual factors, such as personality, will influence the development of an individual’s intelligence. Additionally, attention in social intelligence or other intelligence was reinvigorated in 1983 when Gardner introduced the theory of multiple intelligence (Brualdi, 1996; Gardner, 1995) and proposed an extensive field of differing intelligences.
In relation to this, Mayer and Salovey, (1990) coined the term EI in their article “EI,” from the journal “Imagination, Cognition and Personality” while Goleman, (1995) brought EI to the characteristic and developed his own model of EI. Ultimately, the concept of EI has been expanded and applied to numerous disciplines including services (e.g. Sales, Hospitality, banking, and school and information services etc). The evolving of EI as described in 2.1 below.
18.104.22.168 Social Intelligence
Social intelligence can be defined differently. Social intelligence can be defined as “the ability to understand and manage people to act wisely in human relations” (Thorndike, 1920, p. 228). Nevertheless, in the late 1930’s, Thorndike and Stein (1937) altered the earlier definition of social intelligence to read, the “ability to understand and manage people” while a few years later, Gardner (1983) outlined his theory of multiple intelligences and he described in detail seven “relatively autonomous” of human intellectual competences (eg; linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, personal, interpersonal, and intrapersonal). Likewise, Moss and Hunt (1927) described social intelligence as the “ability to get along with others” (p. 108). Six years later as Vernon (1933), defined the social intelligence as the person’s “ability to get along with people in general, social technique or ease in society, knowledge of social matters, susceptibility to stimuli from other members of a group, as well as insight into the temporary moods or underlying personality traits of strangers” (p. 44).
It was recognised by Maulding (2002) that EI was closely related to personal intelligence and was further qualified by Gardner with is employment of two personal intelligence aspects; intrapersonal and interpersonal. Intrapersonal intelligence was further depicted by Gardner as the capacity to be discriminating among one’s feelings; to label them, and use them in ways to understand and guide one’s behavior and interpersonal intelligence as “turns outward, to other individuals”. This focal point examined “the ability to notice and make distinctions among other individuals, and in particular, among their moods, temperaments, motivations, and intentions”. Thus “Personal Intelligence” covers the close relationship of both intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence because, as Gardner noted, “these two forms of knowledge are intimately intermingled”.
There were numerous outstanding theorists were asked to define intelligence; unfortunate some definitions were obtained (Sternberg & Detterman, 1986) differently. White (2002) clarification, ‘In philosophical works we can find discussions of consciousness, perception and sensation, thought, action, memory, emotion and imagination, but rarely anything on intelligence’ (White, 2002, p.78). In other words, Hand (2004) discussed the concept of Intelligence that is in general as stipulating technical senses and attempting to describe the ordinary sense. In contrast (Neisser et al., 1996) described intelligence are attempts to clarify and organize a vast array of phenomena that include: “the ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to environments, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought”. Even when experts in intelligence discuss the definition there appears more controversy than consensus (Matthews et al., 2002).
Unlike other definitions of intelligence, Wechsler (1958) described intelligence as “the aggregate or the global capacity of the individual to act purposely, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment”. Although many definitions were given by different authors, however, many studies of intelligence, in particular the psychometric approach, have provided a “predictor” of success (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000).
Emotion can be categorized as part of Social Intelligence was introduced by Gardner in 1930. The science of emotion has been problematic and is impeded with the complexities of linking tangible realities to the elusive, subjective, and experiential nature of emotions (Matthews et al., 2002). In the context of psychology, Salovey and Mayer provided a definition of emotions as:
Organized responses crossing boundaries of many psychological subsystems, including physiological, cognitive, motivational and experiential systems. Emotions typically arise in response to an event, either internal or external, that has a positively or negatively balanced meaning for an individual. Emotions can be distinguished from the closely related concept of mood in that emotions are shorter and generally more intense (1990, p. 186).
22.214.171.124 Emotional Intelligence
Mayer and Salovey (1990) wrote an article and outlining their EI framework. EI was listed by them at that time as a division of social intelligence. Elements of Gardner’s personal intelligence study were employed when Mayer and Salovey defined EI as “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings, to discriminate amongst them and to use this information to guide ones’ thinking and actions” (p. 189). The book entitled EI (1995) was published as a way of coping with the pointless acts that were taking place, (Salopek, 1998) and became the best seller status.
After that the interest in EI took place (Mandell & Pherwani, 2003). Goleman persistent on this success in 1998 with a book entitled Working with EI where he reviewed 18 EI competencies usable in the workplace. Mayer and Salovey’s (1990) definition of EI were modified by Goleman (1998c) with his revised definition of EI, “ ‘EI’ refers to the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships” p317). Goleman listed 5 social and emotional groups – self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. This was subsequently reduced to just 4 after the arrival and review of new information.
He continues to refine his model and emphasize a mixture of interpersonal intelligence and intrapersonal intelligence in defining EI and employed the four clusters (Maulding, 2002). The 4 new groups were labelled as self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002). Self-awareness and self-management were merged into a “personal competence” category which included the capabilities that “determine how we manage ourselves” (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002, p. 39). The capabilities that “determine how we manage relationships” define the Social Competency category (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002, p. 39) and include the social awareness and relationship management groups. In the context of thois study, researcher will use the Golemans’Model as baseline or guideline to develop EI measurement for librarians. Yet a few competencies related to Malaysian public librarian nature will be considered (eg, spiritual, information literacy, Islamic values ect.) in the new model.
Table 2.1 Five Periods of Development in Emotions and Intelligence in the Past Century Period
The Emergence of The EI Concept
1900-1969 (Thorndike, 1920)
Intelligence and Emotions as Separate Narrow Fields
Psychometric approach to intelligence is developed and refined.
· Movement from Darwin’s theory for heritability and evolution of emotional responses to now being viewed as culturally determined.
· Social Intelligence (Thorndike, 1920) as the concept is introduced.
1970-1989 (David Wechsler, 1940)
Non-intellective aspects of general intelligence
The field of cognition and affect emerged to examine how emotions interacted with thoughts.
· Gardner (1983) theory of multiple intelligences described an intrapersonal and an interpersonal intelligence.
· Empirical work on social intelligence developed four components: social skills, empathy skills, pro-social attitudes, and emotionality (sensitivity).
1990-1993 (Gardner, 1983)
Multiple intelligences; interpersonal intelligence-people smart; intrapersonal intelligence-self-smart
Mayer and Salovey publish a series of articles on EI.
· First ability measure of EI published.
· Editor of the journal Intelligence argued for an existence of EI.
· Further developments for EI in the brain sciences.
1994-1997 (Goleman 1995)
The Popularization and Broadening EQ
· Goleman (1995) publishes EI which becomes worldwide best-seller.
· Time magazine used the term “EQ” on its cover (Gibbs, 1995, October 2).
· Measures of EI using mixed model theories were published.
1998-Present (Peter Salovey & Jack Mayer, 1990
· Refinements to the concept of EI.
· New measures of EI introduced.
· Appearance of peer-reviewed articles on the subject.
2.2 Model of EI
There are many researchers that exist within the area of intelligences developed several models and theories to address EI (Gardner, 1990; Bar-On, 2008; Bernet, 1996; Brown, 1999; Brualdi, 1996; Burgess, Palmer, Stough & Walls, 2001; Caruso, Mayer, Perkins & Salovey, 1999; Cherniss, 2007; Ciarrochi, Chan, Caputi, & Roberts, 2001; Dulewicz & Higgs, 2000; Finegan, 1998; Gardner, 1995; Goleman, 1995; Goleman, 1998; Goleman, 2008; Langley, 2000; Mayer & Geher, 2007; Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2003; Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000; Mayer, 2001; Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2001; Mayer, Perkins, Caruso & Salovey, 2001; McDowelle & Bell, 2000; Pfeiffer, 2001; Reiff, Hates, & Bramel, 2001; Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Salovey & Sluyter, 1997; Weiss, 2000).
The model of EI is comprised into two types; the ability model and mixed model.
a) Ability model can be defined, EI as a set of mental abilities and constructs claims about the importance of emotional information and the potential uses of reasoning well with that information. Representatives of this model are Mayer and Salovey (1997) with four-branch model of EI.
b) mixed model, whereas more commonly orienting and mixes mental abilities with personality attributes. Model from Goleman (2001), Cooper & Sawaf (1997) and Bar-on (1997) are representatives for mixed model, but they expanded the meaning of EI by explicitly mixing the ability to understand and process emotion with other diverse parts of personality or skills, hence creating mixed approaches to EI. On the other word, the mixed model is defined as a combination of non cognitive abilities, personality traits and competencies (Goldsmith, 2008).
2.2.2 Models Assessing Emotional Intelligence
2.1.2 Bar-On’s Model of EI
Bar-On reports that the EQ-i “was originally constructed as an experimental instrument designed to examine the concept of emotional and social functioning in the early 1980’s (Bar-On, 2001, p.363). He created the term emotional quotient (EQ) to describe his mixed approach to the evaluation of an individual’s general intelligence. He explained that the emotional quotient reflects our ability to operate successfully with other people and with our feelings (Bar-On, 2001).
Bar-On developed the Bar-On EQ-i and instrument has been translated into twenty-two languages and normative data has been collected in more than fifteen countries (Bar-On, 2001). This EI inventory is the first scientifically developed and validated measure of EI that reflects one’s ability to deal with environmental challenges and helps to predict one’s success in life, including professional and personal pursuits (AbiSamra, 2000 and Bar-on, 2001).
This model is separated into five different scales with fifteen subscales as detailed in Table 2.3. The first of these scales assess an individual’s Intrapersonal EQ which consists of self-regard, emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, independence and self- actualization. The second scale assesses the individual’s Interpersonal EQ consisting of empathy, social responsibility, and interpersonal relationships. Adaptability EQ is the third measure of Bar-On’s scale. This scale focuses on reality testing, flexibility and problem solving or how an individual handles emotion in the moment. The fourth scale assesses an individual’s Stress Management EQ. This scale is comprised of stress tolerance and impulse control. The fifth and final scale of the EQ-i measures an individual’s General Mood EQ, consisting of optimism and happiness.
Bar-On reports that the research “findings obtained to date suggest that the EQ-i is measuring emotional and social intelligence…more specifically, the EQ-i is tapping the ability to be aware of, understand, control, and express emotions” (Bar-On, 2001, pp.372 -373). This ability model created by Bar-On is a selection of emotional, personal and social abilities that affect an individual’s overall ability to manage the daily pressures and demands of life. Bar-On further reports that the ability is “apparently based on a core capacity to be aware of, understand, control and express emotions effectively” (p.374). Although Bar-On’s early research focused on the emotional quotient, it was not until the 1990’s that EI truly began to receive recognition as a distinct form of intelligence (Geher, Warner & Brown, 2001; Salovey & Sluyter, 1997). The concept of an individual’s EI (EI) was explained and expanded upon by Mayer and Salovey in 1990 (Mayer, Perkins, Caruso & Salovey, 2001), and popularized by Daniel Goleman in 1995 (Goleman, 1995).
In 1995, Goleman elaborated on the original Salovey & Mayer definition of EI to suggest five major EI domains as reported in Table 4.
Table 4: Goleman’s original model of EI.
Goleman’s Model of EI
1. Assessment of emotions
2. Regulation of emotions
3. Motivating and emotional self control
4. Understanding and recognizing emotions
5. Relationships and emotions
The first of Goleman’s EI domains includes knowing one’s emotions. This domain involves assessing and knowing what the emotion is as it occurs. The second domain of managing emotions is described as handling those emotions in an appropriate manner that builds on self-awareness. Motivating oneself or emotional self-control is the third domain. The fourth domain involves recognizing emotions in others. This domain involves empathy and Goleman considers it to be a “people skill” (Goleman, 1995, p.43). The last domain in Goleman’s original model consists of handling relationships. Goleman states that the ability of handling a relationship is in part the ability of managing emotions in others. Goleman contends that capacities for EI each have a distinctive involvement to form our lives. To some extent, these capacities build upon one another to formulate social skills. These abilities do not guarantee that people will develop or display emotional competencies. Goleman suggests that individual’s use competencies in many areas across many spectrums.
Goleman has currently revised his original theory of EI as shown in Table 5. He now suggests that there are four domains rather than his original five domains (Goleman, 2001B).
Table 5: Goleman’s current model of EI.
Goleman’s Current Model of EI
1. Emotional Self Awareness
2. Emotional Self Management
3. Social Awareness
4. Relationship Management
The first component or cluster of EI is that of Emotional Self- Awareness, or knowing what one feels. Recognizing one’s own feelings, how they affect one’s performance, and the realization of our own strengths as well as our weaknesses, is an important part of the self-awareness cluster.
The second component of EI is Emotional Self-Management. This component reflects the ability to regulate stressful affects such as anxiety or anger, as well as how to deal with those situations. This component is reflected when an individual seems to keep their cool during a stressful situation. Self-management also reflects the abilities of an individual to be flexible and adaptable, looking at different perspectives of a situation.
Social-Awareness, the third component, encompasses the competency of empathy. The Social-Awareness cluster is described as the cluster where an individual is aware of others emotions, concerns, and needs. Being aware of this information and internally processing it, allows the individual to read situations and act accordingly.
The Relationship Management component makes up the fourth segment of Goleman’s current model. This component relates to how we interact with others in emotional situations. Goleman believes that if we cannot control our emotional outbursts and impulses, and we lack the necessary skill of empathy, there is less chance that we will be effective in our relationships. The Relationship Management cluster includes many of the skills necessary for being successful in social situations. Communication is also an essential element in the relationship management cluster (Goleman, 2001b).
According to Goleman (2001a), EI at its most general rating, refers to the abilities to identify, reflect and adjust emotions in ourselves as well as to be aware of the emotions of others. Currently, Goleman relates the capacities for each domain in his EI model are: makes a unique contribution to job performance; strong communications; capacities build upon one another; does not guarantee people will develop or display the associated competencies; The general list is to some extent applicable to all jobs.
Although Goleman explains that these capacities are hierarchical, meaning that one cannot fully pass on to the next phase or tier without accomplishing the previous stage with some degree of success. These capacities are not fixed and an individual can experience many levels at the same time. Goleman (1998) also states that EI determines our potential for learning the practical skills that underlie the four EI clusters. He maintains that emotional competence illustrates how much of that potential we have realized by learning and mastering skills and translating EI into on the job capabilities.
According to Hall & Torrance (1980), empathy and super-awareness to the needs of others is a trait that lies outside the realm of human abilities that can be measured. Hall & Torrance report that many attempts have been made to measure these abilities, but with very little success. In their view, if empathy and awareness to others needs were accessed in a way that was based on reasoning, those qualities may reflect a measurable intellectual ability that would be associated with friendliness, compassion and happiness; all traits reported to be representative characteristics of emotionally intelligent individuals (Goleman, 1995; Pfeiffer, 2001).
The information reported in 1980 by Hall and Torrance was prescient in that these traits are currently being measured as traits of EI. The traits of flexibility and freedom of thoughts as well as a high rating of motivation, either intrinsic or extrinsic, the ability to express emotion, the ability to manage stress, self confidence, and the ability to cope with tension are also valued characteristics of EI (Caruso, Mayer, Perkins, & Salovey, 1999; Cherniss, 1998; Goleman, 1995, 1997; Levinson, 1997; Olszewski-Kubilius, 2000; Pfeiffer, 2001; Reiff, Hates & Bramel, 2001).
Currently, Goleman emphasizes that EI at its most general rating, refers to the abilities to identify, reflect and adjust emotions in ourselves as well as to be aware of the emotions of others (Cherniss & Goleman, 2001; Goleman, 2001A). According to Goleman, EI refers to the ability to recognize our own feelings and those of others, to motivate ourselves, and to manage emotions in ourselves and in our relationships. (Clawson 1999; Dulewicz & Higgs 2000; Goleman 1998; Burgess, Palmer, Stough & Walls 2001). In another cognitive research study conducted by Sternberg, Wagner, Williams, and Horvath (cited in McDowelle & Bell, 1998) it is reported that these differences in IQ and success at work accounted for between 4% and 25% variance of job performance. This leads us to the conclusion that a major part of what enhances our job performance is affected by non-IQ factors. McDowelle & Bell (1998) state “emotionality and rationality complement each other in the work world. They can be viewed as inseparable parts of the life of the organization.
2.1.4 Salovey and Mayer’s
Since the origination of the theory of EI in 1990, Mayer and Salovey have worked diligently to refine their academic and scientific model of EI model. Their current model, developed in 1997, is decidedly cognitive in focus and revolves around four tiers or ratings that are not genetically fixed or set in early childhood. As people grow and develop, they also seem to develop a greater sense of EI suggesting that these traits of EI can be developed over time (Epstein, 1999; Ford-Martin, 2001; Goleman, 2001A; Weiss, 2000).
According to Mayer, Perkins, Caruso & Salovey (2001), the emotionally intelligent person is skilled in four distinct branches: identifying, using, understanding, and regulating emotions. These four distinct areas are outlined in Mayer and Salovey’s current model. The newest model begins with the idea that emotions contain information about relationships (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, and Sitarenios (2001). (See Table 6). The recognition, the evaluation and the communication of emotions initiate the first branch of Mayer and Salovey’s model. The second branch involves using emotions to think constructively such as utilizing those emotions to make judgments, the consideration of an alternative viewpoint, and an appreciation that a change in emotional state and point of view can promote various types of solutions to problems. The third branch combines the abilities of classifying and differentiating between emotions to help integrate different feelings. This rating also works toward helping us to form rules about the feelings we experience. The fourth and final branch involves the ability to take the emotions we experience and use them in support of a social goal (Finegan, 1998; Cherniss & Goleman, 2001). The four hierarchical developmental branches established by Mayer and Salovey in 1997, although different from Goleman’s ratings of EI, seem to incorporate several fundamental principles of personal development theory. These developmental stages discussed by Salovey and Mayer are reported to be hierarchical. The Mayer and Salovey model frames the complexity of emotional skills that develop from the first tier and continue through the fourth, whereas Goleman’s competencies, in contrast, can be viewed along a continuum of mastery.
Caruso, Mayer, Perkins, & Salovey (2001), expected individuals need to be able to identify their emotions as well as the emotions of others. Using those emotions, understanding those emotions, and having the ability to manage those emotions is also required to be successful. Caruso et al. (2001) relate that when an individual works in an administrative or work environment that requires the cooperation and collaboration, the skills of EI become even more essential.
Caruso et al. (2001) also report that EI can assist in facilitating this work in helping to generate new and creative ideas and solutions to problems. At times, some of the problems that are challenging an individual can be very complex, while at other times the problem-solving task may be effortless. According to Caruso et al. (2001), problem solving requires creative thought to generate ideal solutions. Caruso et al. (2001) deduce that EI can help the individual to think creatively in many ways such as, viewing the problem from multiple perspectives, brainstorming or generating new and creative ideas, being inventive, generating original ideas and solutions to the problem, and defining and recognizing new solutions.
Table 2.3: Characteristics of Selected EI Model
Mayer, Caruso and Salovey (1990)
Intrapersonal Assertiveness, EQ Self-Regard,