Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

An investigation of the relationship between trait

emotional intelligence and emotional task performance
Elizabeth J. Austin *

Department of Psychology, School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences,

University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK
Received 16 March 2003; received in revised form 19 June 2003; accepted 25 July 2003

Abstract

This study examined the relationships between trait emotional intelligence (EI) and tasks involving the
recognition of facial expressions of emotion. Two facial expression recognition tasks using the inspection
time (IT) paradigm assessed speed of emotional information processing. An unspeeded emotion recognition
task was also included, and a symbol IT task was used to assess speed of processing of non-emotional
information. It was found that scores on all three emotion-related tasks were strongly intercorrelated, as
were scores on the three IT tasks. The two emotional IT scores remained significantly correlated when
symbol IT performance was partialled out. This finding, together with the associations between the speeded
(IT) and unspeeded face tasks suggests that the association between the emotional IT tasks is not entirely
accounted for by general processing speed, and that a general emotion-processing ability also contributes to
performance on these tasks. An EI subscale assessing Appraisal of Emotions was significantly correlated
with performance on the emotional IT tasks, suggesting that self-reports of emotional perception ability do
relate to performance measures.

2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Emotional intelligence; Inspection time; Psychometrics; Validity

1. Introduction

Emotional intelligence (EI) is a topic of considerable current interest both amongst individual
differences researchers and the general public. The EI concept provides a psychometric framework
for the intuitive and appealing idea that people differ in their Ôemotional skillsÕ and that these

*
Tel.: +44-131-651-1305; fax: +44-131-650-34561.
E-mail address: elizabeth.austin@ed.ac.uk (E.J. Austin).

0191-8869/$ - see front matter
2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.07.006
1856 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

differences would be expected to relate to real-life outcomes such as career and relationship
success. A personÕs overall EI score is expected to provide a general measure of their emotional
competence, whilst a number of sub-domains of EI involving the perception, control and use of
emotions in the self and in others have also been characterised (see for example Bar-On, 2000;
Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000). Although EI measures have been found to associate as pre-
dicted with outcomes such as life satisfaction and social network size and quality (Ciarrochi,
Chan, & Bajgar, 2001; Palmer, Donaldson, & Stough, 2002; Saklofske, Austin, & Minski, 2003),
there are unresolved problems associated both with the measurement of EI and with the under-
lying causes of observed EI differences between individuals.

1.1. EI measurement

The most appropriate method of measuring EI is currently an area of controversy. EI is

characterised by some researchers as an ability, involving the cognitive processing of emotional
information, which is accordingly most appropriately measured by performance tests. An alter-
native proposal is that EI should be regarded as a dispositional tendency like personality which
can be assessed by self-report questionnaire. A detailed discussion of EI measurement and
problematic features of both approaches is given by Roberts, Zeidner, and Matthews (2001) and
Matthews, Zeidner, and Roberts (2002). It is not currently clear if the two measurement methods
actually assess the same construct, and in this context Petrides and Furnham (2001) have sug-
gested the terminology Ôability EIÕ and Ôtrait EIÕ to distinguish the two measurement approaches.
A common feature of both conceptualisations of EI is that it is considered, like psychometric
intelligence, to have a hierarchical structure. Thus all EI models include a range of subcompo-
nents covering inter- and intra-personal emotional skills such as mood regulation and emotion
perception, with overall EI playing an analogous role to general ability in providing a broad
measure of emotional capabilities.
The trait approach to EI measurement raises the issue of whether people can self-report on their
emotional skills without actually demonstrating them in the same way as it is known they can on
their personality traits, i.e. does a personÕs response to an item such as ÔI find it easy to read
peopleÕs facial expressionsÕ bear any relation to their actual ability to read facial expressions
during social interactions with others. If there is a relationship, this would lead to the expectation
of an association between scores on ability and trait EI measures. Investigating the validity of trait
EI by relating it to emotional task performance is an important practical issue because ques-
tionnaire EI measures are quicker to administer than task-based EI measures and require less
supervision (meaning that they can be used, for example, in postal surveys) and are hence likely to
be widely used.

1.2. EI mechanisms

EI is a complex construct which almost certainly operates at a number of levels ranging from
biological to social. In a recent conceptualisation Matthews et al. (2002) have proposed a
framework involving biological, cognitive architecture and knowledge components. At the lower
(biological) level, it seems plausible to suggest that individual differences in EI could be in part
underpinned by individual differences in the speed of processing of emotional information. The
 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864 1857

idea of a possibly biologically based information-processing component to EI links to results from

the study of psychometric intelligence. It has been consistently found that performance on visual
inspection time (IT) tasks is significantly correlated with psychometric intelligence. In an IT task a
stimulus is displayed for a brief interval and then masked. A personÕs IT is the shortest stimulus
duration for which they can reliably discriminate between two (or more) possible stimuli; the
correlation indicates that more intelligent individuals tend to have shorter ITs and this has in turn
been linked to the idea that higher intelligence is related to faster information processing. Per-
formance on reaction time (RT) tasks is also positively linked to psychometric intelligence. The IT
paradigm differs from RT in not requiring the response to a stimulus to be made as quickly as
possible; speed of processing is assessed via the participantÕs ability to take in information as a
function of stimulus duration, not by their time to respond. A detailed account of associations
between performance on IT and RT tasks and psychometric intelligence is given by Deary (2000);
there is also a recent meta-analysis for IT/intelligence associations (Grudnik & Kranzler, 2001). In
the present context, consistent findings of IT/intelligence associations raise the possibility of an
analogous relationship between EI and the speed of processing of emotional stimuli.
The existence of individual differences in emotion processing speed and potential links to EI
have not yet been widely investigated. A study by Bates (1999) found performance on a facial
emotion recognition task using the IT paradigm was positively associated with scores on the Trait
Meta Mood Scale, a trait EI measure (Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey, & Palfai, 1995). A
recent study by Petrides and Furnham (2003) showed that high EI scorers were faster at identi-
fying facial expressions of emotion in an experiment using an RT paradigm. There are also
findings relating to alexithymia. This is a construct linked to low EI (Parker, Taylor, & Bagby,
2001; Taylor & Bagby, 2000); high scorers on alexithymia display difficulties in describing and
identifying feelings and a concrete, externally oriented thinking style. High alexithymia scorers
have been found to show slower performance than low scorers on an emotional Stroop task in-
volving arousal-related words (Parker, Taylor, & Bagby, 1993a). This is an interesting finding, but
detailed interpretation is complicated by the nature of the emotional Stroop task, in which the
emotional content of the words to be colour-named acts as a distracter rather than the main focus
of the task. For emotion recognition tasks which do not have a speed component (stimulus
displays of several seconds or no time limit, speeded response not required), better performance
has been found to be associated with low alexithymia scores in a number of studies (e.g. Parker,
Taylor, & Bagby, 1993b) and superior performance has been found in high trait EI scorers on an
unspeeded face recognition task (Ciarrochi et al., 2001).

1.3. The present study

The main objective of the present study was to examine the associations between scores on a
trait EI measure and performance on tasks involving the recognition of facial expressions of
emotion. Two facial expression tasks using the IT paradigm were devised to assess speed of facial
emotion information processing. An essentially unspeeded task in which faces were displayed for
several seconds was also included. Positive associations between overall trait EI scores or relevant
trait EI subcomponent scores (i.e. those assessing emotion perception), and task performance
would provide evidence for the validity of the trait EI measure, in terms of it being related to
performance on tasks requiring emotion perception skills; a lack of association would suggest that
1858 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

trait EI scores do not relate to emotional task performance, i.e. people cannot self-report on their
abilities in this domain.
A second objective was to investigate the extent to which the speed of emotional information-
processing (as measured by the IT tasks) relates to the speed of processing of non-emotional
information and to psychometric intelligence. For this purpose a third IT task involving the
recognition of emotionally neutral symbols and a brief intelligence test were also included. Pos-
sible findings here would be correlations between all the IT tasks, indicating the existence of an
underlying Ôspeed of processingÕ factor independent of stimulus content, or a lack of association
between the emotional and neutral IT tasks, which might suggest that emotional information is
processed by a separate cognitive module from non-emotional information. In addition, the
possibility that emotional task performance might be linked to personality was investigated by
including a personality questionnaire in the study.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

The participants were 35 members of the departmental adult volunteer panel and 57 under-
graduate (mainly Psychology) students. Nationality of the participants was not formally recorded,
but the majority of both groups were British nationals. There were 21 males and 71 females; the
mean age was 32.7 years (standard deviation 17.4 years).

2.2. Materials

2.2.1. Facial emotion inspection time tasks

The stimuli for the IT tasks were selected from the Ekman and Friesen (1976) stimulus set. For
the happy face task, two male and two female examples were selected. Happy and neutral ex-
pressions were used for each example, giving a total of eight stimuli; the same mask, a neutral
female face different from any of the stimuli, was used in all trials. The on-screen size for the
stimuli and mask was 55 · 85 mm. After the appearance of the mask, which was displayed for 500
ms, participants were instructed to press a key to indicate whether they thought that the stimulus
face was happy or neutral. The task began with a practice session with each stimulus being
presented twice, once at a duration of 500 ms and once at a duration of 800 ms; stimulus type/
duration combinations were presented in a random order. Participants were able to repeat the
practice session as many times as they wished. The data collection phase involved each stimulus
being presented once at each of the following durations: 17, 25, 33, 42, 50, 58, 67, 75, 83 100, 150,
200, 250, 350 ms with stimulus type/duration combinations again presented in a random order.
Thus each participant performed eight trials at each duration and 112 trials in total. The sad face
task had the same structure as the happy face task.

2.2.2. Symbol inspection time task

The symbol task was similar in structure to the facial emotion IT task but involved a dis-
crimination between two symbols, a+ and an · and was based on a task developed by Lomas
 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864 1859

(2002). The image size for the stimuli and mask was 20 · 20 mm. The mask consisted of a set of
broadened lines radiating out from a central point, including angles of 0, 90, 45 and 135 which
would overlay the lines defining the stimuli. Each stimulus was presented five times at each du-
ration, using the same set of durations as for the face tasks, with randomisation of the order of
stimulus/duration combinations. Thus each participant performed 10 trials at each duration and
140 trials in total.

2.2.3. Ekman-60 faces test

This computer-based test is one of the components of the Facial Expressions of Emotion––
Stimuli and Tests (FEEST; Young, Perrett, Calder, Sprengelmeyer, & Ekman, 2002). Sixty facial
expressions were presented in a random order on a computer screen and participants indicated,
using the mouse to click on the appropriate button, whether the emotion expressed was happiness,
sadness, anger, fear, disgust or surprise. Each image remained on the screen for a maximum of 5 s;
presentation of the next image was triggered by the participant responding to the previous one, so
there was no time pressure.

2.2.4. Verbal ability

Verbal ability was assessed using the National Adult Reading Test (NART; Nelson & Willison,
1991). In this test participants are asked to pronounce a set of 50 irregular words of increasing
difficulty; total score is the total number of words pronounced correctly. NART scores are highly
correlated with WAIS full-scale IQ (Crawford, 1992).

2.2.5. Emotional intelligence

Trait EI was assessed using a modified version of a scale devised by Schutte et al. (1998)
(Austin, Saklofske, Huang, & McKenney, in press). This scale contains 41-items which are re-
sponded to on a five-point scale with anchors Ôstrongly agreeÕ, Ôstrongly disagreeÕ and can be used
to assess overall EI and also three sub-factors of Optimism/Mood Regulation, Utilisation of
Emotions and Appraisal of Emotions. Example items for the three subscales are: ÔI use good
moods to help myself keep trying in the face of obstaclesÕ, ÔWhen my mood changes I see new
possibilitiesÕ, ÔI am aware of the non-verbal messages other people sendÕ. Reliabilities for these
scales were: overall EI 0.86, Optimism/Mood Regulation 0.71, Utilisation of Emotions 0.67,
Appraisal of Emotions 0.81.

2.2.6. Personality mini-markers

This 40-item scale of trait-descriptive adjectives provides scores (eight items per dimension) on
the personality dimensions of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability
(reverse scored in this study to give a neuroticism measure) and openness/intellect/imagination
(Saucier, 1994). A five-point response scale, as for the EI items, was used. The reliabilities of these
scales were 0.82, 0.82, 0.82, 0.82, 0.65.

2.3. Procedure

Each participant was randomly assigned to start the session with either the happy or sad face IT
task; the other face IT task was performed next, followed by the symbol IT task and then the
1860 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

NART if this was included (NART scores were obtained for 72 participants, 41 students and 31
volunteer panel members). Finally, student participants completed the EI and personality mea-
sures (the volunteer panel participants had already completed these as part of a postal survey). All
the computer tasks were presented on a 1700 colour monitor with screen refresh rate set to 120 Hz
and screen resolution 640 · 480 and were performed in a quiet cubicle with subdued lighting.

3. Results

Examination of the results from the IT tasks showed that response characteristics were ap-
propriate, with participants performing at around chance levels at the shortest durations and with
close to 100% accuracy at the longest duration for all three tasks. Means and standard deviations
for all tasks and tests are shown in Table 1.
Table 2 shows the correlations amongst the computer-based tasks and the NART. It can be
seen that there are large significant correlations amongst scores on the three IT tasks. Both
emotional IT tasks are also significantly correlated with the Ekman-60 task, whereas the symbol
IT task is not. NART scores are not correlated with any of the computer task scores.
Table 3 shows correlations between the EI scales and the computer tasks. It can be seen that
overall EI and the EI sub factors of Utilisation of Emotions and Optimism/Mood Regulation are
uncorrelated with performance on any of the tasks but that the Appraisal of Emotions sub-factor
is significantly correlated with performance on the two IT tasks involving emotional stimuli.

Table 1
Descriptive statistics for tasks and tests
N Mean Standard deviation
NART 72 34.93 6.21
Happy IT 92 88.50 8.40
Sad IT 92 82.66 8.23
Symbol IT 92 115.30 11.91
Ekman-60 87 50.49 4.04
EI 84 152.02 14.75
Appraisal 87 44.69 6.14
Utilisation 90 26.18 4.44
Optimism/MR 89 37.15 4.66
E 88 26.74 5.37
A 90 32.82 4.42
N 89 22.19 5.90
C 90 30.00 5.23
O 90 31.17 4.24
NART ¼ National Adult Reading Test (total correct), Happy IT ¼ happy face inspection time score (total correct), Sad
IT ¼ sad face inspection time score (total correct), Symbol IT ¼ symbol inspection time score (total correct),
EI ¼ emotional intelligence, Appraisal ¼ Appraisal of Emotions, Utilisation ¼ Utilisation of Emotions, Optimism/
MR ¼ Optimism/Mood Regulation, E ¼ extraversion, A ¼ agreeableness, N ¼ neuroticism, C ¼ conscientiousness,
O ¼ openness/intellect/imagination. Only 72 participants completed the NART; five participants did not complete the
Ekman-60 test due to computer failure; EI and personality scores were not obtained for all participants due to
questionnaire items being omitted.
 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864 1861

Table 2
Correlations amongst computer tasks and the NART
NART Happy IT Sad IT Symbol IT
Happy IT )0.09 (72)
Sad IT 0.07 (72) 0.42 (92)
Symbol IT 0.06 (72) 0.48 (92) 0.46 (92)
Ekman-60 )0.06 (67) 0.40 (87) 0.33 (87) 0.18 (87)
NART ¼ National Adult Reading Test (total correct), Happy IT ¼ happy face inspection time score (total correct), Sad
IT ¼ sad face inspection time score (total correct), Symbol IT ¼ symbol inspection time score (total correct). N for each
correlation is given in brackets.

p < 0:001.

Table 3
Correlations between EI scales and computer task scores
Happy IT Sad IT Symbol IT Ekman-60 NART
EI 0.11 (84) 0.09 (84) 0.15 (84) 0.17 (80) )0.19 (64)
Appraisal 0.22 (87) 0.25 (87) 0.19 (87) 0.22 (82) )0.13 (67)
Utilisation 0.03 (90) 0.07 (90) 0.10 (90) 0.13 (85) )0.03 (70)
Optimism/MR )0.01 (89) )0.14 (89) 0.04 (89) 0.05 (85) )0.14 (69)
NART ¼ National Adult Reading Test (total correct), Happy IT ¼ happy face inspection time score (total correct), Sad
IT ¼ sad face inspection time score (total correct), Symbol IT ¼ symbol inspection time score (total correct),
EI ¼ emotional intelligence, Appraisal ¼ Appraisal of Emotions, Utilisation ¼ Utilisation of Emotions, Optimism/
MR ¼ Optimism/Mood Regulation. N for each correlation is given in brackets.

p < 0:05.

Table 4
Partial correlations amongst the emotion task measures and self-reported emotional appraisal controlling for symbol
inspection time performance
Happy IT Sad IT Ekman-60

Sad IT 0.28
Ekman-60 0.40 0.28
Appraisal 0.11 0.27 0.20
N ¼ 79, NART ¼ National Adult Reading Test (total correct), Happy IT ¼ happy face inspection time score (total
correct), Sad IT ¼ sad face inspection time score (total correct), Appraisal ¼ Appraisal of Emotions.

p < 0:05,  p < 0:001.

Correlations between personality and the computer tasks were also examined; only one sig-
nificant correlation was found (conscientiousness/symbol IT r ¼
0:23, p ¼ 0:027, N ¼ 90). There
were no significant correlations between NART score and the personality scales.
Since performance on the symbol IT task can be regarded as a measure of general processing
speed, the effect of partialling out symbol task performance on the correlations amongst the
emotion task performance measures and the Appraisal of Emotions factor were examined. These
partial correlations are shown in Table 4. The correlation between the happy and sad face IT tasks
1862 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

remained significant when performance on the symbol task was partialled out, suggesting a
contribution to the correlation related to the specific emotional content of the two tasks when
general speed of processing is controlled for. Correlations between the Ekman-60 task and the two
emotional IT tasks also remained significant, as did the correlation between Appraisal of Emo-
tions score and the sad face IT task.
In order to examine the multivariate associations in the data in more detail, a regression model
was constructed with a composite measure of emotional IT task performance (combined score for
the happy and sad IT tasks) as the dependent variable and EI subscales, symbol IT performance,
Ekman-60 task performance, NART and personality traits as independent variables. The sig-
nificant predictors were found to be Appraisal of Emotion, symbol IT performance and Ekman-
60 performance.

4. Discussion

The findings of this study on the correlations amongst performance on speeded and unspeeded
emotional tasks, an IT task using neutral symbols and a trait EI measure provide both interesting
information and suggestions for further work. Large significant correlations were found between
all three IT tasks, suggesting that a common processing speed factor accounts in part for per-
formance on all of them. However the two emotional IT tasks remain significantly correlated
when processing speed (as assessed by the symbol IT task) is controlled for, and performance on
these tasks is also strongly correlated with performance on the Ekman-60 unspeeded task; these
results suggest that an underlying emotion-processing factor also contributes to emotional IT
performance. The regression model for combined emotional IT task performance supports the
idea of two underlying factors with general processing speed (symbol task performance), mea-
sured emotion recognition ability (Ekman-60) and self-reported interpersonal ability all acting as
predictors.
Turning to the associations with trait EI, overall EI score and scores on the two EI factors
related to the intrapersonal EI aspects of mood regulation and emotional utilisation were not
significantly associated with performance on any of the emotional tasks, but scores on the in-
terpersonal factor relating to emotion perception were significantly associated with performance
on the two emotional IT tasks, although the correlation with the Ekman-60 task failed to reach
significance. This patterning of correlations provides support for the validity of the trait EI
measure, in that self-reports of interpersonal emotion perception ability are related to (interper-
sonal) emotion task performance, whilst self-reports of intrapersonal aspects of emotion man-
agement are unrelated to performance on these tasks.
Two null findings are a lack of association of NART scores and personality with task per-
formance. The results for the NART are surprising, as psychometric intelligence is well-known to
be associated with performance on IT tasks, although the use of a verbal measure could explain
the result, since intelligence/IT associations are stronger for performance IQ measures (Deary,
2000). For this particular sample there may also have been problems of restriction of range in
cognitive ability as it was drawn from university undergraduates and volunteer panel members
who were mainly of above-average educational level. The finding of no associations between
emotion task performance and personality trait scores is an interesting one. Given that the traits
 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864 1863

of extraversion and agreeableness have a substantial interpersonal component, it would appear

plausible that high scorers might also have better emotion perception skills, but this appears not
to be the case.
The findings from this study suggest a number of directions for further work. In order to assess
the associations between performance on emotion related tasks in more detail, the study of
speeded and unspeeded tasks which tap into a wider range of emotional perception is clearly of
interest; aspects of emotion perception which could be studied in a similar way to facial expression
perception with IT or RT paradigms include recognition of the emotional content of words and of
social situations. Establishing associations between performance on such tasks and fluid ability is
also of interest, as is the examination of associations between a wider range of trait EI measures
and emotion task performance.

Acknowledgements

Tim Bates and Peter Caryl contributed valuable advice on the design of the inspection time
tasks. Support from the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland and the Edinburgh
University Moray Endowment Fund is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H., Huang, S. H. S., & McKenney, D. (in press). Measurement of trait EI: testing and cross-
validating a modified version of Schutte et al.Õs (1998) measure. Personality and Individual Differences.
Bar-On, R. (2000). Emotional and social intelligence: insights from the Emotional Quotient Inventory. In R. Bar-On &
J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 363–388). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bates, T. (1999, July). Domain-specific information-processing speed model of emotional intelligence (IQ e). Paper
presented at the 9th Biennial Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences,
Vancouver, Canada.
Ciarrochi, J. V., Chan, A. Y. C., & Bajgar, J. (2001). Measuring emotional intelligence in adolescents. Personality and
Individual Differences, 31, 1105–1119.
Crawford, J. R. (1992). Current and premorbid intelligence measures in neuropsychological assessment. In J. R.
Crawford, D. M. Parker, & W. W. MacKinlay (Eds.), A handbook of neuropsychological assessment (pp. 21–49).
Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Deary, I. J. (2000). Looking down on human intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1976). Pictures of facial affect. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Grudnik, J. L., & Kranzler, J. H. (2001). Meta-analysis of the relationships between intelligence and inspection time.
Intelligence, 29, 523–535.
Lomas, T. (2002). Inspection time: is it mediated by knowledge-based differences? Unpublished undergraduate
dissertation, University of Edinburgh, UK.
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2002). Emotional intelligence. Science and myth. Cambridge, MA:
Bradford.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: the case for ability
scales. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 320–342). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Nelson, H. E., & Willison, J. (1991). National adult reading test (2nd ed.). Windsor: NFER Nelson.
Palmer, B., Donaldson, C., & Stough, C. (2002). Emotional intelligence and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual
Differences, 33, 1091–1100.
1864 E.J. Austin / Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1855–1864

Parker, J., Taylor, G., & Bagby, M. (1993a). Alexithymia and the processing of emotional stimuli: an experimental
study. New Trends in Experimental Clinical Psychiatry, IX, 9–14.
Parker, J., Taylor, G., & Bagby, M. (1993b). Alexithymia and the recognition of facial expressions of emotion.
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 59, 197–202.
Parker, J., Taylor, G., & Bagby, M. (2001). The relationship between emotional intelligence and alexithymia.
Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 107–115.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: psychometric investigation with reference to
established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15, 425–448.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: behavioural validation in two studies of emotion
recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of Personality, 17, 39–57.
Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2001). Does emotional intelligence meet traditional standards for an
intelligence? Some new data and conclusions. Emotion, 1, 196–231.
Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., & Minski, P. S. (2003). Factor structure and validity of a trait emotional intelligence
measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1091–1100.
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Goldman, S., Turvey, C., & Palfai, T. (1995). Emotional attention, clarity and repair:
exploring emotional intelligence using the Trait Meta Mood Scale. In J. W. Pennebaker (Ed.), Emotion disclosure
and health (pp. 633–683). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-markers: a brief version of GoldbergÕs unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 63, 506–516.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. (1998).
Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–
177.
Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2000). An overview of the alexithymia construct. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.),
The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 40–67). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Young, A., Perrett, D., Calder, A., Sprengelmeyer, R., & Ekman, P. (2002). Facial expressions of emotion-stimuli and
tests (FEEST). Bury St. Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company.