History of the Debate
“The person with the glasses is smart, but the redhead is dumb!” This is a subjective comment (and rude!), yet if heard, we would all understand what the speaker is conveying, namely, that the first person has a high level of intelligence as described by Cambridge Dictionary as, “The ability to learn, understand, and make judgments or have opinions that are based on reason,” while the redhead is weak in these qualities. The idea of intelligence is so widely accepted and familiar to us that we immediately form opinions and judgments around the notion without running to a dictionary. Indeed, it seems intuitive to draw a conclusion about a person’s intelligence based on their abilities to read, function, communicate, or succeed in life.
IQ Testing
But what exactly are the “objective” criteria used in defining intelligence? The common WISC-V IQ Test includes five indices which are: (1) Verbal Comprehension, (2) Visual Spatial, (3) Fluid Reasoning, (4) Working Memory, and (5) Processing Speed. Even though this test is standard and generally accepted, it is far from perfect, and many researchers have written as to why.
The accuracy and value of IQ tests and even the definition of intelligence has been debated for over a century. It is now confirmed that IQ is not genetic but learned and plastic, that is changeable (Valle, 2024). A similar controversy heated up in the 1990’s concerning Emotional Intelligence. John D. Mayer, David R. Caruso, and Peter Salovey when they “Proposed the existence of a new intelligence, called “emotional intelligence.” Drawing on research findings in the areas of emotion, intelligence, psychotherapy, and cognition, we suggested that some people might be more intelligent about emotions than others” (Salovey & Mayer, 1990, p. 189). Defining Emotional Intelligence (EI) as the ability to recognize, use, understand, and manage emotions, they developed the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS) which later became the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT).
Emotional Intelligence (EI / EQ)
In their ability model, EI is an innate intelligence made up of several dimensions that influence how people understand and manage their own emotions and those of others. These include: (1) perception, evaluation and expression of emotions, (2) emotional facilitation of thought, (3) understanding and analysis of emotions, and (4) reflective regulation of emotions (Bru-Luna LM, 2021). They agree that intelligence can be regarded as a system of mental abilities, and EI is how people reason about emotions specifically, stating that emotionally intelligent people are strong in these 4 skills (Mayer, et al., 2016).
Mayer, et al., posits seven principles of emotional intelligence which are: (1) emotional intelligence is a mental ability, (2) emotional intelligence is best measured as an ability, (3) intelligent problem solving does not correspond neatly to intelligent behavior, (4) a test’s content—the problem solving area involved—must be clearly specified as a precondition for the measurement of human mental abilities, (5) valid tests have well-defined subject matter that draws out relevant human mental abilities, (6) emotional intelligence is a broad intelligence, and (7) emotional intelligence is a member of the class of broad intelligences focused on hot information processing. They state that, “Emotional intelligence could turn out to be a part of a larger personal or social intelligence. We further know that emotional intelligence predicts important outcomes. If emotional intelligence is a discrete intelligence, we need to make the case that there has evolved a separate reasoning capacity to understand emotions” (Mayer, et al., 2016).
Richard D. Roberts of University of Haifa, Israel and others have challenged the validity of Emotional Intelligence, not the possibility of its existence, but the methods by which it is tested. Furthermore, they point out that, “Despite the flourishing research programs and broad popular interest, scientific evidence for a clearly identified construct of EI is sparse. It remains to be seen whether there is anything to EI that researchers in the fields of personality, intelligence, and applied psychology do not already know” (Roberts, et al., 2004).
Some of the difficulties with the MEIS, according to Roberts, are the multitude of qualities covered, many overlapping with established constructs in personality analysis. Also, there are many discrepancies in the patterns associated with individual factors. He questions the appropriateness of rigid, right and wrong answers on a test for emotional evaluation due to the subjectivity of emotions and cultural influences. Roberts does credit Mayer, et al., with the admirable effort to reveal the quality of a person, distinct from personality and intelligence, and he concedes that the problems he outlines are likely solvable.
EQ Today
Unlike the 1990s, the current body of research generally accepts that Emotional Intelligence exists, though the testing, analysis, and improvement of it still inspires much debate in the philosophical and psychological fields. Even Roberts, et al., published an updated response that acquiesces the existence of EI, though they still push that, “Research should explore which elements of known personality models (e.g., the underlying facets of the Big Five, HEXACO, or the Dark Triad) are involved in emotion regulation, and how these interact with EI. Enacting any regulation strategies logically requires both knowing what to do (EI) and the will or tendency to actually do it (personality). As such, emotion knowledge and emotional tendencies should be studied in tandem” (Roberts, et al., 2016).
As to the question of whether Emotional Intelligence is really a form of intelligence, I have concluded it is. Given the definition of intelligence being the ability to learn, understand, and make judgments based on reason, EI (or EQ as it is often referred to), fits that definition. Humans do have the ability to learn emotional perception, facilitation, and regulation, and make judgments based on reason (once they calm down!).
Moreover, we have all experienced the “really smart” person who is socially awkward, apparently not able to discern when others are bored or upset. Body language, cues, and other clues don’t register in their mind while they continue doing what everyone else has moved on from. Just from an observational standpoint, there is clearly some aptitude beyond standard intelligence that makes us able to manage the emotional side of life. Without it, how would we relate to the opposite sex, get over a breakup, work through depression, navigate a transition, make life’s messy decisions, or even manage money?
Just as with IQ, we intuitively observe those who have higher or lower levels of EQ; we innately understand others’ ability to perceive and regulate emotions. While EQ does overlap with personality and cognitive intelligence, I think the nuance warrants distinctiveness with its own terminology.
Most people would agree that the remark, “The person with the glasses is smart, but the redhead is dumb!” would only be said aloud by a person who is “dumb” emotionally. But of course, we would never say it.
