Editing Emotional intelligence (section)

==== Criticism ====
Critics argue that the popularity of EI studies is due to media advertising, rather than objective scientific findings.<ref name="Côté 2006">{{cite journal| vauthors = Côté S, Miners CT |year=2006|title=Emotional Intelligence, Cognitive Intelligence, and Job Performance|jstor=20109857|journal=Administrative Science Quarterly|volume=51|issue=1|pages=1–28|doi=10.2189/asqu.51.1.1|s2cid=142971341}}</ref> FJ Landy argues that while the commercial discussion of emotional intelligence makes expansive claims on the applied value of EI, academic discussion of EI cautions against wide claims of EI's predictive power.<ref name="landy">{{cite journal |vauthors=Landy FJ |year=2005 |title=Some historical and scientific issues related to research on emotional intelligence |journal=Journal of Organizational Behavior |volume=26 |issue=4 |pages=411–424 |doi=10.1002/job.317}}</ref> Landy cites the data upon which commercial claims are based are held in databases unavailable to independent researchers for reanalysis, replication, or verification.<ref name="landy" /> Goleman has stated that "emotional intelligence is the ''[[sine qua non]]'' of leadership."<ref name="hbr98" /> On the other hand, Mayer (1999){{full citation needed|date=July 2023}} warns that the notion " that highly emotionally intelligent people possess an unqualified advantage in life... is unsubstantiated by reasonable scientific standards."

It is difficult to create objective measures of emotional intelligence and demonstrate its influence on leadership as many scales are self-report measures.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Murensky CL |year=2000 |title=The relationships between emotional intelligence, personality, critical thinking ability and organizational leadership performance at upper levels of management |url=https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2000-95016-143 |journal=Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering |via=PsyNET}}</ref> In review of EI constructs, ability-measures of EI fared worst (ρ=0.04); the WLEIS (Wong-Law measure) did a bit better (ρ=0.08); and the [[Reuven Bar-On|Bar-On]] measure slightly better (ρ=0.18). However, the validity of these estimates does not include the effects of IQ or the big five personality, which correlate both with EI measures and leadership.<ref name="leadership_ei">{{cite book |title=LMX leadership—Game-Changing Designs: Research-Based Tools |vauthors=Antonakis J |publisher=Information Age Publishing |year=2009 |veditors=Graen GB |volume=VII |location=Greenwich, CT |pages=163–192 |chapter="Emotional intelligence": What does it measure and does it matter for leadership? |chapter-url=https://serval.unil.ch/resource/serval:BIB_B0C0967A2E4D.P001/REF.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181120055213/https://serval.unil.ch/resource/serval:BIB_B0C0967A2E4D.P001/REF.pdf |archive-date=2018-11-20 |url-status=live}}</ref> A 2010 study analyzing the impact of EI on both job performance and leadership found that the meta-analytic validity estimates for EI dropped to zero when Big Five traits and IQ were controlled for.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Harms PD, Credé M |year=2010 |title=Remaining Issues in Emotional Intelligence Research: Construct Overlap, Method Artifacts, and Lack of Incremental Validity |journal=Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=154–158 |doi=10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01217.x |s2cid=144371039}}</ref> A separate 2010 meta-analysis showed the same result for ability EI, while finding that self-reported and trait EI measures retain a fair amount of predictive validity for job performance after controlling Big Five traits and IQ.<ref name="ReferenceB" />

However, the greater predictive validity of trait EI and mixed EI measures has been attributed to their inclusion of content related to constructs of [[Need for achievement|achievement motivation]], [[Self-efficacy|self efficacy]], and self-rated performance, in addition to IQ and the personality domains of neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Newman DA, Joseph DL, MacCann C |year=2010 |title=Emotional Intelligence and Job Performance: The Importance of Emotion Regulation and Emotional Labor Context |journal=Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=159–164 |doi=10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01218.x |s2cid=145567449}}</ref> A 2015 meta-analysis has found that the predictive ability of mixed EI to job performance is non-existent when controlling for these factors.<ref name="ReferenceC" />

In a 2009 review, [[John Antonakis]] and other authors agreed that researchers who test the relationship between EI and leadership have generally not done so using robust research designs, and that there is no strong evidence showing that EI predicts leadership outcomes when accounting for personality and IQ.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Antonakis J, Ashkanasy NM, Dasborough MT |year=2009 |title=Does leadership need emotional intelligence? |url=https://serval.unil.ch/notice/serval:BIB_F989E68B6F71 |journal=The Leadership Quarterly |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=247–261 |doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.006}}</ref> A 2010 meta-analysis found that, if using data free from problems of [[Common source bias|common source]] and [[Common-method variance|common methods]], EI measures correlated only [[Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient|ρ]]=0.11 with measures of [[transformational leadership]].<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Harms PD, Credé M |year=2010 |title=Emotional Intelligence and Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A Meta-Analysis |url=https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=leadershipfacpub |url-status=live |journal=[[Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies]] |volume=17 |issue=1 |pages=5–17 |doi=10.1177/1548051809350894 |s2cid=2247881 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110612083022/http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=leadershipfacpub |archive-date=2011-06-12}}</ref> Barling, Slater, and Kelloway also support this position on transformational leadership.<ref name="Barling_2000">{{cite journal |vauthors=Barling J, Slater F, Kelloway EK |date=May 2000 |title=Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: an exploratory study |journal=Leadership & Organization Development Journal |volume=21 |issue=3 |pages=157–161 |doi=10.1108/01437730010325040}}</ref> Antonakis has proposed an alternative "curse of emotion" argument, which asserts that leaders who are too sensitive to emotional states might have difficulty making decisions that would result in [[emotional labor]].

There is evidence that emotional intelligence tests are subject to the [[social-desirability bias]], resulting in inaccurate measurement, with several studies showing people can distort their responses on both self-rated and informant-rated emotional intelligence measures when instructed to.<ref>Choi, S., Kluemper, D. H., & Sauley, K. S. (2011). What if we fake emotional intelligence? A test of criterion validity attenuation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(3), 270277. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.558870</ref><ref> Day, A. L., & Carroll, S. A. (2008). Faking emotional intelligence (EI): Comparing response distortion on ability and trait-based EI measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 29(6), 761–784. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.485 </ref><ref>Tett, R. P., Freund, K. A., Christiansen, N. D., Fox, K. E., & Coaster, J. (2012). Faking on self-report emotional intelligence and personality tests: Effects of faking opportunity, cognitive ability, and job type. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(2), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid. 2011.10.017</ref><ref>Walker, S. A., & MacCann, C. (2023). Faking Good on Self-Reports Versus Informant-Reports of Emotional Intelligence. Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911231203960</ref>

Some studies have found that despite a positive correlation between EI and leadership effectiveness, leadership effectiveness is more heavily dependent on other factors such as their leadership activities and self-management skills.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Dabke D |year=2016 |title=Impact of Leader's Emotional Intelligence and Transformational Behavior on Perceived Leadership Effectiveness: A Multiple Source View |journal=Business Perspectives and Research |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=27–40 |doi=10.1177/2278533715605433 |s2cid=147415251}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Ahiauzu A, Nwokah NC |year=2010 |title=Marketing in governance: emotional intelligence leadership for effective corporate governance |journal=Corporate Governance |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=150–162 |doi=10.1108/14720701011035675}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Mullen PR, Gutierrez D, Newhart S |year=2018 |title=School Counselors' Emotional Intelligence and Its Relationship to Leadership |journal=Professional School Counseling |volume=32 |issue=1b |pages=2156759X1877298 |doi=10.1177/2156759X18772989 |s2cid=149709509}}</ref>

[[Adam Grant]] warned of the common but mistaken perception of EI as a desirable moral quality rather than a skill.<ref name=TheAtlantic20140102/> Grant asserted that a well-developed EI is not only an instrumental tool for accomplishing goals, but can function as a weapon for manipulating others by robbing them of their capacity to reason.<ref name=TheAtlantic20140102>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/the-dark-side-of-emotional-intelligence/282720/ |title=The Dark Side of Emotional Intelligence | last1=Grant |first1=Adam |name-list-style=vanc|date=January 2, 2014 |magazine=The Atlantic |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140103210524/http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/the-dark-side-of-emotional-intelligence/282720/ |archive-date=January 3, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref>