Cited by 446Emotional Intelligence and PerformanceSocial Skills and EducationEgo Development and Educational Practices

The case for the ability‐based model of emotional intelligence in organizational behavior

Daus, Catherine S., Ashkanasy, Neal M.·2005·Journal of Organizational Behavior

Abstract

In this second counterpoint article, we refute the claims of Landy, Locke, and Conte, and make the more specific case for our perspective, which is that ability‐based models of emotional intelligence have value to add in the domain of organizational psychology. In this article, we address remaining issues, such as general concerns about the tenor and tone of the debates on this topic, a tendency for detractors to collapse across emotional intelligence models when reviewing the evidence and making judgments, and subsequent penchant to thereby discount all models, including the ability‐based one, as lacking validity. We specifically refute the following three claims from our critics with the most recent empirically based evidence: (1) emotional intelligence is dominated by opportunistic ‘academics‐turned‐consultants’ who have amassed much fame and fortune based on a concept that is shabby science at best; (2) the measurement of emotional intelligence is grounded in unstable, psychometrically flawed instruments, which have not demonstrated appropriate discriminant and predictive validity to warrant/justify their use; and (3) there is weak empirical evidence that emotional intelligence is related to anything of importance in organizations. We thus end with an overview of the empirical evidence supporting the role of emotional intelligence in organizational and social behavior. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/job.321

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ability and trait EI are associated with job performance and occupational success, especially for jobs involving high levels of interpersonal contacts.

    “ability and trait EI has been found to be associated with job performance and occupational success, especially for jobs involving high levels of interpersonal contacts”

    From Increasing emotional intelligence: (How) is it possible? (2009) · cites this paper as Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Daus, C. S., & Ashkanasy, N. M.
Affiliations
  • Southern Illinois University Edwardsville (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Daus, Catherine S.
Venue
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-04-14
Volume
26
Issue
4
Pages
453-466
ISSN
  • 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1379
OpenAlex
W2156940752
Cited by
441
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 29
FWCI
24.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Organizational Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotional Intelligence and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Education › Social Skills and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Ego Development and Educational Practices
Keywords
emotional intelligence, emotional intelligence assessment, psychometric validity, discriminant validity, predictive validity, organizational behavior, social behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review