The Three Models of Emotional Intelligence and Performance in a Hot and Cool go/no-go Task in Undergraduate Students
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemEditorial
Frontiers Media
Materia
Emotional intelligence Cognitive control Go/no-go tasks Hot tasks Cool tasks
Fecha
2017Referencia bibliográfica
Gutiérrez-Cobo, M.J.; Cabello González, R.; Fernández-Berrocal, P. The Three Models of Emotional Intelligence and Performance in a Hot and Cool go/no-go Task in Undergraduate Students. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 11: 33 (2017). [http://hdl.handle.net/10481/45611]
Patrocinador
This research was supported in part by the projects Innovation and Development Agency of Andalusia, Spain (SEJ-07325), and the Spanish Ministry of Economy (PSI2012-37490).Resumen
Emotional intelligence (EI), or the ability to perceive, use, understand and regulate emotions, appears to be helpful in the performance of “hot” (i.e., emotionally laden) cognitive tasks when using performance-based ability models, but not when using self-report EI models. The aim of this study is to analyze the relationship between EI (as measured through a performance-based ability test, a self-report mixed test and a self-report ability test) and cognitive control ability during the performance of hot and “cool” (i.e., non-emotionally laden) “go/no-go” tasks. An experimental design was used for this study in which 187 undergraduate students (25% men) with a mean age of 21.93 years (standard deviation [SD] = 3.8) completed the three EI tests of interest (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test [MSCEIT], Trait Meta-Mood Scale [TMMS] and Emotional Quotient Inventory–Short Form [EQi:S]) as well as go/no-go tasks using faces and geometric figures as stimuli. The results provide evidence for negative associations between the “managing” branch of EI measured through the performance-based ability test of EI and the cognitive control index of the hot go/no-go task, although similar evidence was not found when using the cool task. Further, the present study failed to observe consistent results when using the self-report EI instruments. These findings are discussed in terms of both the validity and implications of the various EI models.