Archive for the ‘Emotional Intelligence’ Category

Emotion and personality

Friday, June 17th, 2011

Phineas Gage

Some weeks ago I attended the last Advanced Research Seminar of the Leadership Development Research Centre (GLEAD) at ESADE. The issue presented was the Antonio Damasio’s Somatic Marker Hypotheses (SMH). The presentation started with the well known case of Phineas Gage

I was intrigued by the story so I began to read about reaching to some interesting points.

Phineas Gage is probably the most famous case of a person who has survived severe damage to the brain. On September 13, 1848, he was working on the construction of the railroad outside the town of Cavendish, Vermont. He was using a tamping iron to compact the sand that covered explosives put into the holes made on the rocks. Perhaps because the sand was forgotten he provoked an explosion that projected the instrument through his head entering on the side of his face, passing back of the left eye, and going out at the top of the head through the frontal lobe (See video).

Phineas not only survived to the accident but also from the beginning he seemed to maintain intact his intellectual capabilities and no feel pain. He recovered both mentally and physically but his personality was changed. His character became irregular, irreverent and rude, showing little respect for their fellow human beings. Also he had become impatient and stubborn, but capricious and hesitant at once.

Linking emotions, personality, and areas of the brain:

  • The mentioned Somatic Marker Hypothesis of Damasio is argued under the assumption that somatic markers provide a signal delineating which current events have had emotion-related consequences in the past. As a consequence they guide the decision making process in complex and unpredictable environments. It belongs to the field of the Affective Neuroscience, a discipline concern with the underlying neural substrates of emotion and mood. In this area, the Limbic System is one of the anatomic models more broadly supported. It was proposed by Paul McLean in 1949 and even though it has been criticized on both empirical and theoretical grounds, remains the dominant conceptualization of the “emotional brain” today. MacLean viewed the brain as a triune architecture consisting of three interacting systems. The reptilian brain, the most ancient and responsible of primitive emotions such as aggression and fear. The “old” mammalian brain which elaborates the social emotions. And the “new” mammalian brain or neocortex, which represents the interface of emotion with cognition and is the seat of top-down control over emotional responses originating within other systems (Dalgleish, Dunn, and Mobbs 2009).
  • Cases as the Phineas Gage where the ventromedial region of the frontal lobe is damaged show that even though the intellectual capabilities remain there are consequences that produce emotional inability and inappropriate social behaviour.
    There is an interdisciplinary field of research between the Affective Neuroscience and Social Psychology called Social Affective Neuroscience that seeks to understand phenomena in terms of interactions between three levels of analysis: the social level which is concerned with the motivational and social factors that influence behaviour and experience; the cognitive level, which is concerned to with the information-processing mechanisms; and the neural level, which is concerned with the brain mechanisms (Ochsner and Lieberman 2001).
  • Following the present line of arguments we have to differentiate between emotions and feelings, being the first, body states related to non rational processes generated in the subcortical structures. They would be basic mechanisms that respond to stimulus in an innate way. The feelings will relate the emotion with the object that excites it gaining consciousness of the emotion through rational processes at cortical level. Thus we have primary emotions, innate and preorganiced, that depends of the limbic system and secondary emotions which occur once we begin experiencing feelings and forming systematic connections between categories of objects and situations, on one hand, and primary emotions, on the other (Damasio 2006).
  • At this point we should distinguish between the basic emotions and those nonbasic emotions built using the first as if they were building blocks. Even though there is the assumption that there exist a small set of basic emotions, theorists disagree on how many or which they are. Nevertheless nearly everybody includes anger, happiness, sadness and fear (Ortony and Turner 1990).

Finally we see why Phineas Gage despite having recovered physically was never the same again. The damage caused prevented him basic emotions needed to evaluate daily situations and to relate with others. The personality changed forever.

 

References

Dalgleish, Tim, Barnaby D. Dunn, and Dean Mobbs. 2009. «Affective Neuroscience: Past, Present, and Future». Emotion Review 1(4): 355-368.

Damasio, Antonio. 2006. Descartes’ error : emotion, reason and the human brain. London: Vintage.

Ochsner, Kevin N., and Matthew D. Lieberman. 2001. «The emergence of social cognitive neuroscience.» American Psychologist 56(9): 717-734.

Ortony, Andrew, and Terence J. Turner. 1990. «What’s basic about basic emotions». Psychological Review 97(3): 315-331.

Emotional Intelligence

Saturday, July 10th, 2010

Howard Gardner publishes in 1983 Frames of Mind establishing by first time its theory of the multiple intelligences. In a later work he summarizes them in the following way (Gardner, 1993): Linguistic Intelligence, Logical-mathematical Intelligence, Spatial Intelligence, Musical Intelligence, Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence, Interpersonal Intelligence and Intrapersonal Intelligence.

Of the seven, we are concerned the last two. He defined as Interpersonal Intelligence the ability to understand other people: what motivates them, how they work, how to work cooperatively with them. It is the ability to identify their moods, temperament, motivations and intentions. It enables you to read the intentions and desires of others even when not shown.

The Intrapersonal Intelligence refers to the internal aspects of a person, access to one’s own feeling live, one’s range of emotions. It is the ability to discriminate between these emotions, providing and guiding one’s own behaviour. A person with good intrapersonal intelligence has a viable effective model of himself or herself.

Earlier other authors related emotional content with the concept of intelligence. Edward Lee Thorndike introduced the concept of Social Intelligence toward the years 20 but at that time the definition of IQ and their corresponding test to measure monopolized all the attention.

It was in 1990 when Peter Salovey and John D Mayer introduced the concept of Emotional Intelligence (Salovey & Mayer, 1990) organizing the Gardner personal intelligences (interpersonal and intrapersonal) in five major competences:

  • The knowledge of one’s own emotions
  • The ability to control the emotions
  • The ability to motivate oneself
  • The knowledge of other people emotions
  • The control of relationships

But it is not until the appearance of the book Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman when popularizes the term. In the words of Goleman, is in these other characteristics that we have been called emotional intelligence, features such as the ability to motivate ourselves, to persevere in the effort despite the possible frustrations, to control impulses, to postpone the bonuses, to regulate our own moods, to prevent the anguish interfere with our thinking skills and, finally, but not least important, the ability of emphasize and rely on the other (Goleman, 1995).

On the basis different frames of generic competencies (MOSAIC, Spencer & Spencer, Boyatzis and Rosier), Goleman relates twenty-five competences with five dimensions of the emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998).

At present are being very used two tests nof the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. The Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) created in 1999 as a variant of the dictionary of Goleman and the Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI), an evolution in the ECI created in 2007 and that is becoming de facto in the standard of measurement of the socio-emotional competences. The ESCI offers a way to assess the strengths and weaknesses of individuals, giving them precise, focused information on exactly which competencies they will want to improve on in order to meet their career goals. (Boyatzis, 2007).

The ESCI measures 12 competencies organized into four clusters:

Self Awareness

  • Emotional Self-Awareness (Emotional Awareness)

Self Management

  • Emotional Self-Control
  • Adaptability
  • Achievement Orientation (Achievement)
  • Positive Outlook (Optimism)

Social Awareness

  • Empathy:
  • Organizational Awareness

Relationship Management

  • Coach and Mentor (Developing Others)
  • Inspirational Leadership
  • Influence
  • Conflict Management
  • Teamwork (Teamwork & Collaboration)

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences. The Theory in Practice. New York: BasicBooks.

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality (9), 185-211.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury.

Boyatzis, R. (2007). The Creation of the Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI). Boston: Hay Group.