CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Emotional Intelligence and PerformanceSocial Skills and EducationCognitive Abilities and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ability emotional intelligence profiles and real-life outcomes: a latent profile analysis of a large adult sample

Open access
Haag, Christophe, Bellinghausen, Lisa, Poirier, Clément·2025·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1465774PMC PMC11841456
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Few studies have examined emotional intelligence (EI) following a person-centered approach to identify different types of EI profiles and their relationship to everyday life outcomes. Even rarer are those using an “ability” approach of EI (AEI) and related “performance-based” tests, which are considered promising. This study fills this gap by identifying AEI profiles and linking them to everyday outcomes such as health, wellbeing, and decision-making. The QEg (“QE” for Emotional Quotient - Quotient Emotional in French - and “g” for the general population), an ability-based measure of EI, along with other measures, was administered to 2,877 French adults. We then ran latent profile analysis (LPA) and identified three latent profiles within a heterogeneous population. The full emotion processing (FEP) profile outperforms the two others on key domains of life such as stress perception, home-work interaction, gratitude and satisfaction with life, emotional burnout prevention, and decision-making. Our research reveals the need for individualized AEI training programs tailored to three distinct profiles, addressing foundational skills for those with minimal or partial emotional processing while refining existing strengths for those with full emotional processing. Targeting interventions to specific profile characteristics could enhance the effectiveness of AEI training and promote improved wellbeing and life outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1465774

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Individuals with high emotional intelligence are better equipped to modulate both the valence and intensity of shared emotions and can function as buffers preventing unchecked escalation of collective affect.

    “Individuals with high EI are better equipped to modulate both the valence (positive or negative) and intensity of shared emotions. They can function as buffers, preventing the unchecked escalation of collective affect and promoting more balanced group dynamics and decision-making (Haag et al., 2025).”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Haag et al., 2025

    The QEg model section (page unavailable) describes abilities to assess emotional intensity and regulate one's emotional state. The Implications section (page unavailable) suggests that people with strong emotional-processing profiles could develop emotional leadership and improve decision-making. Neither passage establishes that high-EI individuals modulate shared emotions or buffer groups against escalating collective affect. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Emotionally intelligent individuals-able to regulate both their own and others' emotions-act as buffers against escalating affect and promote more balanced decision-making.

    “Emotionally intelligent individuals-able to regulate both their own and others' emotions-act as buffers against escalating affect and promote more balanced decision-making (Mayer and Salovey, 1997; Haag et al., 2025; Haag and Getz, 2016).”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Haag et al., 2025

    The QEg model section describes emotion regulation as an emotional-intelligence ability, and the Results and Discussion associate full emotional processing with lower perceived stress and more future-oriented decision-making (pages not provided). The paper does not establish that emotionally intelligent people regulate others’ emotions, buffer escalating affect, or cause more balanced decisions; its reported outcomes are associations. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 2013, Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5™
  2. Bar-On, 1997, BarOn emotional quotient inventory
  3. Camus, 2014, 2012 et étude de sa structure, Rev.Int. Psychol. Soc., 27, 35
  4. Flick, 2018, An introduction to qualitative research
  5. Goleman, 1995, Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ for character, health and lifelong achievement
  6. Greenberg, 2020, La thérapie centrée sur les émotions
  7. Mayer, 1997, What is emotional intelligence?, 3
  8. Nunnally, 1994, Psychometric theory

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Haag, C., Bellinghausen, L., & Poirier, C.
Affiliations
  • École de management de Lyon (FR)
  • Université Paris Descartes (FR)
Corresponding author
Haag, Christophe
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2025-02-07
Volume
16
Issue
16
Pages
1465774-1465774
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1465774
PMC
PMC11841456
OpenAlex
W4407261987
Cited by
12
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 2
FWCI
13.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotional Intelligence and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Education › Social Skills and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
emotional intelligence, perceived stress, work-life interaction, gratitude, life satisfaction, burnout, decision-making, well-being, emotional intelligence training, adults

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