I dagens samhälle riktas fokus på individens välbefinnande och olika metoder för att uppnå detta såväl privat som inom yrkeslivet. Emotionell intelligens (EI) har genom tidigare forskningsresultat visat sig ha ett positivt samband med livstillfredställelse, vilket är en komponent i individens subjektiva välbefinnande (SWB). Denna studie syftade till att utforska relationen mellan EI och livstillfredställelse med hänsyn till demografiska bakgrundsvariabler som ålder, kön, etnicitet, studietid och civilstånd. Deltagare var 101 högskolestudenter inom vårdande, pedagogiska, sociologiska och psykologiska studieinriktningar. Deltagarna besvarade självskattningsskalor utifrån instrument om EI (TMMS) och livstillfredställelse (SWLS). Resultatet visade ett positivt samband mellan EI och livstillfredställelse, särskilt vad gäller EI-förmågorna tydlighet och hantering av emotioner, emellertid kunde inte demografiska bakgrundsvariabler visa något betydande samband med livstillfredställelse. Fortsatt framtida forskning är viktig för att vinna djupare kunskaper om hur välmående kan uppnås för människor i olika livssituationer.

This research is about how important emotional intelligence and cross cultural inteligence are to entrepreneurship, and also how global leadership will affect entrepreneauship in subsidiary.

This research tests the relationship of playfulness, emotional intelligence, and creativity of employees.Questionnaire data from 1213 employees who work for 30 companies, 8 industries. Including high-tech manufacturing, private other service industry, private financiaI service industry, private traditional manufacturing industry, public and private hospital, public service industry, public and private school, others.The data was analyzed major by linear regression analysis. The results of this thesis are summarized as below: 1. In general, the positive influence of playfulness on employee creativity is significant. 2. The positive influence of emotional intelligence on employee creativity is significant. 3. Emotional intelligence development mediates the influences of playfulness on employee creativity.

College is an opportunity for students to engage in meaningful leadership opportunities. Being a Resident Assistant presents one opportunity for students to engage in leadership. Resident Assistants (RAs) are an essential component of the undergraduate housing experience. Resident Assistants work with students during their best and most challenging collegiate moments. The college student population changes every year, but Resident Assistants are not being trained to meet the needs of a changing population. This qualitative, phenomenological study was designed to explore what influence, if any, a course grounded in emotional intelligence has on an RA’s enactment of leadership. This study was conducted at a highly selective, highly residential higher education institution in the Western United States. The site was chosen because of its highly residential nature and its offering of a course grounded in emotional intelligence offered to first year RAs. Review of literature on emotional intelligence emphasizes the important nature of the construct as well as its importance and promise for utilization by leaders (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Lam & O”Higgins, 2012; Nelson & Low, 2003). While there is some literature surrounding emotional intelligence and its use and application for RAs, it primarily explores the subject via a quantitative methodology (Jaegar & Caison, 2006; Liptak, 2005; . Through this research, I addressed this gap, utilizing a qualitative methodology, to provide accounts of the lived experiences of participants. This study also expanded the literature by providing an analysis of a course based in emotional intelligence as a possible way of incorporating emotional intelligence skills into RAs’ leadership experiences. Three findings emerged from this study. Those finding are as follows. First, that there is a perceived difference in RAs’ leadership as a result of knowledge gained in an emotional intelligence course. Second, RAs are able to apply emotional intelligence constructs into their role after reflecting and adjusting their personal leadership styles. Finally, RAs perceive certain emotional intelligence constructs as essential to their role. / text

Can only a subset of individuals – those higher on the ability to understand the sources of emotions – determine whether to disregard or allow the effects of emotions when making decisions? I test two central predictions. First, I test whether individuals high on emotion understanding ability (EUA), one of the key dimensions of emotional intelligence, are less affected by incidental anxiety when making decisions involving risk than their lower ability counterparts. The rationale for this prediction is that individuals who have high EUA are able to correctly identify their source of anxiety and, based on perceived irrelevance, disregard incidental anxiety when making risky decisions, whereas individuals who have low EUA are confused about the source of anxiety and are more influenced by incidental anxiety when making risky decisions. Second, I test whether individuals high on EUA are more affected by integral anxiety when making risky decisions than their lower ability counterparts. The rationale for this prediction is that individuals who have high EUA are able to correctly identify their source of anxiety and, based on perceived relevance, use their integral anxiety to inform their risky decision making whereas those who have low EUA misattribute their anxiety and are less likely to incorporate their integral anxiety into their decision making. In Experiment 1, incidental anxiety reduced risk-taking among individuals with low EUA, but not among their higher ability counterparts. In Experiment 2, the interactive effect of EUA and incidental anxiety on risk-taking was eliminated when I identified the irrelevance of anxiety to the present decision, but it remained when the irrelevance was not identified. To explore the role of EUA in using the adaptive function of emotion in decision making, Experiment 3 assessed whether emotionally intelligent individuals who have high EUA incorporate integral anxiety, as measured by skin conductance responses, into their risk-taking, compared to those with low EUA. Contrary to expectations, the results of Experiment 3 showed that, when EUA was high, there was a negative effect of integral anxiety on risk-taking that was not significant. When EUA was low, there was a significant positive effect of integral anxiety on risk-taking.

Can only a subset of individuals – those higher on the ability to understand the sources of emotions – determine whether to disregard or allow the effects of emotions when making decisions? I test two central predictions. First, I test whether individuals high on emotion understanding ability (EUA), one of the key dimensions of emotional intelligence, are less affected by incidental anxiety when making decisions involving risk than their lower ability counterparts. The rationale for this prediction is that individuals who have high EUA are able to correctly identify their source of anxiety and, based on perceived irrelevance, disregard incidental anxiety when making risky decisions, whereas individuals who have low EUA are confused about the source of anxiety and are more influenced by incidental anxiety when making risky decisions. Second, I test whether individuals high on EUA are more affected by integral anxiety when making risky decisions than their lower ability counterparts. The rationale for this prediction is that individuals who have high EUA are able to correctly identify their source of anxiety and, based on perceived relevance, use their integral anxiety to inform their risky decision making whereas those who have low EUA misattribute their anxiety and are less likely to incorporate their integral anxiety into their decision making. In Experiment 1, incidental anxiety reduced risk-taking among individuals with low EUA, but not among their higher ability counterparts. In Experiment 2, the interactive effect of EUA and incidental anxiety on risk-taking was eliminated when I identified the irrelevance of anxiety to the present decision, but it remained when the irrelevance was not identified. To explore the role of EUA in using the adaptive function of emotion in decision making, Experiment 3 assessed whether emotionally intelligent individuals who have high EUA incorporate integral anxiety, as measured by skin conductance responses, into their risk-taking, compared to those with low EUA. Contrary to expectations, the results of Experiment 3 showed that, when EUA was high, there was a negative effect of integral anxiety on risk-taking that was not significant. When EUA was low, there was a significant positive effect of integral anxiety on risk-taking.

Title page, table of contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University of Adelaide Library. / The purpose of this thesis has been to develop new trait-based and abilities-based measures of "emotional intelligence" (EI), and evaluate their psychometric properties. A popular construct, some have claimed that EI is more important than IQ in predicting life success (Goleman, 1995). But developments in the definition and measurement of EI have not kept pace with these assertions. A review of current conceptualisations of EI in chapter I indicated that there is no consensually agreed upon definition of the construct (Van Rooy &Viswesvaran, 2004). In addition, an examination of EI instruments in chapter 2 indicated a number of limitations with respect to their psychometric properties. In particular, self-report measures of EI typically lack discriminant validity in relation to existing personality domains, and comparatively few studies have examined the incremental validity of these measures. A comparison of outcomes both before and after personality is controlled for is also of interest to obtain a more complete picture of the total and unique variance that EI is able to account for. A further limitation of existent performance-based measures relates to scoring methods and ultimately reliability outcomes. Nevertheless, the construct has the potential to be able to account for additional variance in test scores, and has implications for the definition and diagnosis of mental health problems and, where relevant, for the treatment and prevention of such problems. But before such assertions can be made, self-report and performance-based measures of EI need to be developed that demonstrate appropriate psychometric properties. As a result of limitations with existing EI measures, chapter 3 began by focusing on the development of a new self-report, and peer-report measure of EI. The two new measures were developed based on the Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of EI as the best definition at present on conceptual and empirical grounds. A "domain-referenced" approach to the development of affective test items was adopted to generate questions (Anderson, 1981). Following the development of the new self-report and peer-report instruments, the psychometric properties of both measures were evaluated. In the first pilot study, the reliability, factorial validity, and convergent validity of the two instruments were investigated. The results revealed that the internal reliability levels for both the self-report, and peer-report measure of EI were good. However, an evaluation of the construct validity revealed a factor structure for the two EI measures that was somewhat inconsistent with the theorized factor structure. For the convergent validity, both the self-report, and peer-report measures of EI were significantly correlated with the theoretically related construct of empathy. Both EI measures were only minimally intercorrelated, and the results of paired samples t-tests revealed that self-reported EI scores were (in the main) higher than peer-report estimates. There was also evidence of gender differences in EI in favour of both males, and females. Chapter 3 continued with a second pilot study to investigate test-retest reliability levels, and the convergent validity of the two EI measures in relation to an alternative trait EI measure, the Assessing Emotions Scale (AES). Test-retest reliability levels were good, and there was higher correlation between the self-report, and peer-report measures. Paired samples t-tests again revealed that self-reported EI scores were markedly higher than peer-report estimates. Next, an analysis of the convergent validity of the new selfreport and peer-report measure in relation to a self-report and peer-report AES indicated some support, with modest correlation between the new self-report measure and the self report AES. The modest correlation was attributed to the presence of response bias in the first instrument but not the latter. In contrast, there was good convergence between the new peer-report measure and the peer-report version of the AES. One objective of chapter 4 was to refine the new self-report measure of EI. A second aim was to develop a new performance-based measure of EI scored according to consensus protocols but with improvements to response options and instructions to participants. As part of the development of the new performance-based measure of EI, a new scoring approach was devised termed confidence scoring. The final objective of chapter 4 was to conduct a third study that was designed to comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties of both the self-report and performance-based measure of EI. The validation process included an assessment of: (l) internal reliability, (2) factorial validity, (3) convergent validity, (4) discriminant validity, and (5) incremental validity (before and after personality was controlled for). Individual differences in gender were also examined. For the self-report measure of EI, there was good evidence for internal reliability, and factorial validity. Likewise, the instrument converged with a measure of empathy, was distinguishable (in the main) from the Big Five personality domains, and was incrementally predictive of grade point average, stress, and loneliness but not general well-being. The incremental validity of the self-report measure ofEI was further supported in relation to low and high scoring EI subgroups for stress, and loneliness. Additional variance accounted for ranged from 5% to 23% prior to the inclusion of personality in the regression equation but decreased to 3% to 12% after the Big Five were controlled for. Results were also indicative of individual differences in EI in favour of males or females, depending upon the ability being tested. With respect to the performance-based measure of EI, consensually scored results exhibited poor to good internal reliability levels, and a good factor structure but only once redundant test items were deleted. The results indicated that consensually derived answers converged with two measures of cognitive ability, was distinguishable from the Big Five, and incrementally predicted grade point average, stress, loneliness, and general well-being in the order of 29% prior to controlling for personality but decreased to between 2% and 7% of variance when the Big Five were entered into the analysis. Where the performance-based measure of EI was scored according to confidence levels, the results revealed an instrument that had excellent reliability, and reasonable factorial validity. Confidence scores were significantly correlated with empathy; both measures of cognitive ability; and exhibited discriminant validity in relation to the Big Five. In addition, confidence scores of low and high scoring individuals were incrementally predictive of loneliness and general well-being in the order of 14% before and 4% to 5% of variance after the Big Five were partialled out. Chapter 5 concluded this thesis by first revisiting the initial aims and reviewing the findings in light of the aforementioned objectives. Based on the above outcomes it was concluded that measures of the EI construct were generally reliable and valid, but there is still a long way to go to evaluate the full utility of the construct. Additionally, contributions of this thesis to an understanding of the field of EI were discussed along with limitations relating to this research. Finally, a number of recommendations were made for future research. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1241858 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2006

Title page, table of contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University of Adelaide Library. / The purpose of this thesis has been to develop new trait-based and abilities-based measures of "emotional intelligence" (EI), and evaluate their psychometric properties. A popular construct, some have claimed that EI is more important than IQ in predicting life success (Goleman, 1995). But developments in the definition and measurement of EI have not kept pace with these assertions. A review of current conceptualisations of EI in chapter I indicated that there is no consensually agreed upon definition of the construct (Van Rooy &Viswesvaran, 2004). In addition, an examination of EI instruments in chapter 2 indicated a number of limitations with respect to their psychometric properties. In particular, self-report measures of EI typically lack discriminant validity in relation to existing personality domains, and comparatively few studies have examined the incremental validity of these measures. A comparison of outcomes both before and after personality is controlled for is also of interest to obtain a more complete picture of the total and unique variance that EI is able to account for. A further limitation of existent performance-based measures relates to scoring methods and ultimately reliability outcomes. Nevertheless, the construct has the potential to be able to account for additional variance in test scores, and has implications for the definition and diagnosis of mental health problems and, where relevant, for the treatment and prevention of such problems. But before such assertions can be made, self-report and performance-based measures of EI need to be developed that demonstrate appropriate psychometric properties. As a result of limitations with existing EI measures, chapter 3 began by focusing on the development of a new self-report, and peer-report measure of EI. The two new measures were developed based on the Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of EI as the best definition at present on conceptual and empirical grounds. A "domain-referenced" approach to the development of affective test items was adopted to generate questions (Anderson, 1981). Following the development of the new self-report and peer-report instruments, the psychometric properties of both measures were evaluated. In the first pilot study, the reliability, factorial validity, and convergent validity of the two instruments were investigated. The results revealed that the internal reliability levels for both the self-report, and peer-report measure of EI were good. However, an evaluation of the construct validity revealed a factor structure for the two EI measures that was somewhat inconsistent with the theorized factor structure. For the convergent validity, both the self-report, and peer-report measures of EI were significantly correlated with the theoretically related construct of empathy. Both EI measures were only minimally intercorrelated, and the results of paired samples t-tests revealed that self-reported EI scores were (in the main) higher than peer-report estimates. There was also evidence of gender differences in EI in favour of both males, and females. Chapter 3 continued with a second pilot study to investigate test-retest reliability levels, and the convergent validity of the two EI measures in relation to an alternative trait EI measure, the Assessing Emotions Scale (AES). Test-retest reliability levels were good, and there was higher correlation between the self-report, and peer-report measures. Paired samples t-tests again revealed that self-reported EI scores were markedly higher than peer-report estimates. Next, an analysis of the convergent validity of the new selfreport and peer-report measure in relation to a self-report and peer-report AES indicated some support, with modest correlation between the new self-report measure and the self report AES. The modest correlation was attributed to the presence of response bias in the first instrument but not the latter. In contrast, there was good convergence between the new peer-report measure and the peer-report version of the AES. One objective of chapter 4 was to refine the new self-report measure of EI. A second aim was to develop a new performance-based measure of EI scored according to consensus protocols but with improvements to response options and instructions to participants. As part of the development of the new performance-based measure of EI, a new scoring approach was devised termed confidence scoring. The final objective of chapter 4 was to conduct a third study that was designed to comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties of both the self-report and performance-based measure of EI. The validation process included an assessment of: (l) internal reliability, (2) factorial validity, (3) convergent validity, (4) discriminant validity, and (5) incremental validity (before and after personality was controlled for). Individual differences in gender were also examined. For the self-report measure of EI, there was good evidence for internal reliability, and factorial validity. Likewise, the instrument converged with a measure of empathy, was distinguishable (in the main) from the Big Five personality domains, and was incrementally predictive of grade point average, stress, and loneliness but not general well-being. The incremental validity of the self-report measure ofEI was further supported in relation to low and high scoring EI subgroups for stress, and loneliness. Additional variance accounted for ranged from 5% to 23% prior to the inclusion of personality in the regression equation but decreased to 3% to 12% after the Big Five were controlled for. Results were also indicative of individual differences in EI in favour of males or females, depending upon the ability being tested. With respect to the performance-based measure of EI, consensually scored results exhibited poor to good internal reliability levels, and a good factor structure but only once redundant test items were deleted. The results indicated that consensually derived answers converged with two measures of cognitive ability, was distinguishable from the Big Five, and incrementally predicted grade point average, stress, loneliness, and general well-being in the order of 29% prior to controlling for personality but decreased to between 2% and 7% of variance when the Big Five were entered into the analysis. Where the performance-based measure of EI was scored according to confidence levels, the results revealed an instrument that had excellent reliability, and reasonable factorial validity. Confidence scores were significantly correlated with empathy; both measures of cognitive ability; and exhibited discriminant validity in relation to the Big Five. In addition, confidence scores of low and high scoring individuals were incrementally predictive of loneliness and general well-being in the order of 14% before and 4% to 5% of variance after the Big Five were partialled out. Chapter 5 concluded this thesis by first revisiting the initial aims and reviewing the findings in light of the aforementioned objectives. Based on the above outcomes it was concluded that measures of the EI construct were generally reliable and valid, but there is still a long way to go to evaluate the full utility of the construct. Additionally, contributions of this thesis to an understanding of the field of EI were discussed along with limitations relating to this research. Finally, a number of recommendations were made for future research. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1241858 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2006

Thesis (BA(Hons) (Psychology)) - Faculty of Life and Social Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, 2006. / "July 2006". A thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Bachelor of Social Science with Honours in Psychology, [Faculty of Life and Social Sciences], Swinburne University of Technology - 2006. Typescript.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of the Incarnate Word, 2007. / Adviser: Absael Antelo. Includes bibliographical references.