Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T05:03:40.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remaining Issues in Emotional Intelligence Research: Construct Overlap, Method Artifacts, and Lack of Incremental Validity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

P.D. Harms and
Marcus Credé
P.D. Harms*
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Marcus Credé
Affiliation:
State University of New York at Albany
*
E-mail: pharms2@unl.edu, Address: Department of Management, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, 114 CBA, 1240 R St, Lincoln, NE 68588
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 2010, pp. 154 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Footnotes

*

Department of Management, University of Nebraska at Lincoln

**

Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Albany.

References

Ackermann, P. L., & Heggested, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219–245.10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.219Google Scholar
Antonakis, J. (2004). On why “emotional intelligence” will not predict leadership effectiveness beyond IQ or the “Big Five”: An extension and rejoinder. Organizational Analysis, 12, 171–182.10.1108/eb028991Google Scholar
Barchard, K. A. (2003). Does emotional intelligence assist in the prediction of academic success? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 840–858.10.1177/0013164403251333Google Scholar
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.xGoogle Scholar
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9–30.10.1111/1468-2389.00160Google Scholar
Becker, B. J., & Schram, C. M. (1994). Examining explanatory models through research synthesis. In Copper, H. & Hedges, L. V. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 357–377). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Bono, J., & Judge, T. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901–910.Google Scholar
Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification of a concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 110–126.Google Scholar
Harms, P. D. & Credé, M. (2010). Emotional intelligence and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 17, 5–17.10.1177/1548051809350894Google Scholar
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1992). Hogan personality inventory manual. Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment Systems.Google Scholar
Landy, F. J. (2005). Some historical and scientific issues related to research on emotional intelligence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 411–424.Google Scholar
Lievens, F., Coetsier, P., De Fruyt, F., & De Maeseneer, J. (2002). Medical students' personality characteristics and academic performance: A five-factor model perspective. Medical Education, 36, 1050–1056.10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01328.xGoogle Scholar
Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 425–431.10.1002/job.318Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist, 63, 503–517.10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.503Google Scholar
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, 338–353.10.1080/00223890701333431Google Scholar
Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. P., Scullen, S. M., & Rounds, J. (2005). Higher-order dimensions of the Big Five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types. Personnel Psychology, 58, 447–478.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00468.xGoogle Scholar
Newsome, S., Day, A. L., & Catano, V. M. (2000). Assessing the predictive validity of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 1005–1016.10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00250-0Google Scholar
O’Connor, R. M. Jr., & Little, I. S. (2003). Revisiting the predictive validity of emotional intelligence: Self-report versus ability-based measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1893–1902.10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00038-2Google Scholar
Roberts, B., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., & Goldberg, L. (2005). The construct of conscientiousness: The convergence between lexical models and scales drawn from six major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology, 58, 103–139.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00301.xGoogle Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Harms, P. D., Smith, J., Wood, D., & Webb, M. (2006). Methods in personality psychology. In Eid, M. & Diener, E. (Eds.), Handbook of psychological assessment: A multimethod perspective (chap. 22, pp. 321–335). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.10.1037/11383-022Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Jackson, J. J., Fayard, J. V., Edmonds, G., & Meints, J. (2009). Conscientiousness. In Leary, M. & Hoyle, R. (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (chap. 25, pp. 369–381). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Rode, J. C., Arthaud-Day, M. L., Mooney, C. H., Near, J. P., & Baldwin, T. T. (2008). Ability and personality predictors of salary, perceived job success, and perceived career success in the initial career stage. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 292–299.10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00435.xGoogle Scholar
Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., Arthaud-Day, M. L., Near, J. P., Baldwin, T. T., Rubin, R. S., et al. (2007). Emotional intelligence and individual performance: Evidence of direct and moderated effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 399–421.10.1002/job.429Google Scholar
Rossen, E., & Kranzler, J. H. (2009). Incremental validity of the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso emotional intelligence test version 2.0 (MSCEIT) after controlling for personality and intelligence. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 60–65.10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.002Google Scholar
Schulte, M. J., Ree, M. R., & Carretta, T. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence, not much more than g and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1059–1068.10.1016/j.paid.2003.11.014Google Scholar
Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. (2008). Exploring personality through test construction: Development of the multidimensional personality questionnaire. In Boyle, G., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Personality and testing. (Vol. 2, pp. 251–292). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 71–95.10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00076-9Google Scholar
Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). An evaluation of construct validity: What is this thing called emotional intelligence? Human Performance, 18, 445–462.10.1207/s15327043hup1804_9Google Scholar