Relating Emotional Abilities to Social Functioning: A Comparison of Self-Report and Performance Measures of Emotional Intelligence

Abstract

Three studies used J. D. Mayer and P. Salovey's (1997) theory of emotional intelligence (EI) as a framework to examine the role of emotional abilities (assessed with both self-report and performance measures) in social functioning. Self-ratings were assessed in ways that mapped onto the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), a validated performance measure of EI. In Study 1, self-ratings and MSCEIT scores were not strongly correlated. In Study 2, men's MSCEIT scores, but not self-ratings, correlated with perceived social competence after personality measures were held constant. In Study 3, only the MSCEIT predicted real-time social competence, again, just for men. Implications for analyzing how emotional abilities contribute to social behavior are discussed, as is the importance of incorporating gender into theoretical frameworks and study designs.

Full text

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Relating Emotional Abilities to Social Functioning: A Comparison
of Self-Report and Performance Measures of Emotional Intelligence
Marc A. Brackett and Susan E. Rivers
Yale University Sara Shiffman
Skidmore College
Nicole Lerner and Peter Salovey
Yale University
Three studies used J. D. Mayer and P. Salovey’s (1997) theory of emotional intelligence (EI) as a
framework to examine the role of emotional abilities (assessed with both self-report and performance
measures) in social functioning. Self-ratings were assessed in ways that mapped onto the Mayer–
Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), a validated performance measure of EI. In
Study 1, self-ratings and MSCEIT scores were not strongly correlated. In Study 2, men’s MSCEIT
scores, but not self-ratings, correlated with perceived social competence after personality measures were
held constant. In Study 3, only the MSCEIT predicted real-time social competence, again, just for men.
Implications for analyzing how emotional abilities contribute to social behavior are discussed, as is the
importance of incorporating gender into theoretical frameworks and study designs.
Keywords: emotion, emotional intelligence, MSCEIT, gender, social competence
Emotions contain information about a person’s relationship with
the environment and can be triggered when the person–
environment relationship changes (Lazarus, 1991). During social
interactions, verbal and nonverbal emotional expressions convey
information about one’s own and others’ thoughts, intentions, and
behaviors (Buck, 1984; Ekman, 1973; Keltner & Haidt, 2001).
Emotional abilities, including the ability to perceive, use, under-
stand, and manage emotion, contribute to optimal social function-
ing (Denham et al., 2003; Eisenberg, Fabes, Guthrie, & Reiser,
2000; Feldman, Philippot, & Custrini, 1991; Nowicki & Duke,
1994; Savage, 2002). For example, accurately perceiving a per-
son’s emotions (type and intensity) facilitates the prediction and
understanding of that person’s subsequent actions (Elfenbein,
Marsh, & Ambady, 2002). Understanding the significance of emo-
tional states regarding the person–environment relationship guides
attention, decision making, and behavioral responses (Damasio,
1994). Managing emotions effectively also is critical to optimal
social functioning as this skill enables one to express socially
appropriate emotions and behave in socially acceptable ways
(Gross, 1998). Intelligent processing and effective management of
emotional information are necessary to navigate the social world
(Keltner & Kring, 1998).
Emotional intelligence (EI) theory, which explicates the cogni-
tive and emotional mechanisms that process emotional informa-
tion, provides a unified framework to study the role of emotional
abilities in social functioning (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey &
Mayer, 1990). Mayer and Salovey’s model of EI identifies four
interrelated emotional abilities, including the perception, use, un-
derstanding, and management of emotion. The purpose of the
research described here is to examine the relationship between EI
and social functioning. Demonstrating that EI is related to social
functioning would support the emerging literature on the impor-
tance of emotional abilities for building better quality relation-
ships. Different approaches to measuring EI can influence the
validity of the construct, however. Thus, we now present an
overview of the theory of EI and the two primary approaches to
measuring EI: performance-based tests and self-report inventories.
EI: Theory and Measurement
Two areas of psychological research informed the conceptual-
ization of EI. The first pertains to how emotions and thinking
interact (e.g., Bower, 1981; Clark & Fiske, 1982; Isen, Shalker,
Clark, & Karp, 1978; Zajonc, 1980). Whereas intelligence and
emotion often were considered in opposition (De Sousa, 1987),
accumulating research in the 1980s documented how cognition
and affect were integrated processes; affect influences many as-
pects of cognitive functioning, including memory, attention, and
decision making (e.g., Damasio, 1994; Forgas & Moylan, 1987;
Mayer & Bremer, 1985; Salovey & Birnbaum, 1989; Singer &
Salovey, 1988). Accordingly, the theory of EI postulates that the
information value of emotions can make thinking more intelligent.
Marc A. Brackett, Susan E. Rivers, Nicole Lerner, and Peter Salovey,
Department of Psychology, Yale University; Sara Shiffman, Department of
Psychology, Skidmore College.
Research reported in this article was funded in part by National Cancer
Institute Grant R01-CA68427. The third study was supported in part by the
Student Opportunity Funds, Skidmore College. We are grateful for the help
provided by Jack Mayer, Rebecca Warner, Paulo Lopes, Zorana Ivcevic,
Nicole Katulak, Amy Latimer, Tanja Wranik, Elizabeth Mobayed, Aaron
Kamholtz, and many research assistants who helped us with the data
collection and coding.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Marc A.
Brackett, Department of Psychology, Yale University, P.O. Box 208205,
New Haven, CT 06520-8205. E-mail: marc.brackett@yale.edu
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 2006 by the American Psychological Association
2006, Vol. 91, No. 4, 780–795 0022-3514/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.780
780