Parameters as Trait Indicators: Exploring a Complementary Neurocomputational Approach to Conceptualizing and Measuring Trait Differences in Emotional Intelligence
AffiliationUniv Arizona, Dept Psychiat
Keywordstrait emotional intelligence
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherFRONTIERS MEDIA SA
CitationSmith R, Alkozei A and Killgore WDS (2019) Parameters as Trait Indicators: Exploring a Complementary Neurocomputational Approach to Conceptualizing and Measuring Trait Differences in Emotional Intelligence. Front. Psychol. 10:848. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00848
JournalFRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
Rights© 2019 Smith, Alkozei and Killgore. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Collection InformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
AbstractCurrent assessments of trait emotional intelligence (EI) rely on self-report inventories. While this approach has seen considerable success, a complementary approach allowing objective assessment of EI-relevant traits would provide some potential advantages. Among others, one potential advantage is that it would aid in emerging efforts to assess the brain basis of trait EI, where self-reported competency levels do not always match real-world behavior. In this paper, we review recent experimental paradigms in computational cognitive neuroscience (CCN), which allow behavioral estimates of individual differences in range of parameter values within computational models of neurocognitive processes. Based on this review, we illustrate how several of these parameters appear to correspond well to EI-relevant traits (i.e., differences in mood stability, stress vulnerability, self-control, and flexibility, among others). In contrast, although estimated objectively, these parameters do not correspond well to the optimal performance abilities assessed within competing "ability models" of EI. We suggest that adapting this approach from CCN-by treating parameter value estimates as objective trait EI measures-could (1) provide novel research directions, (2) aid in characterizing the neural basis of trait EI, and (3) offer a promising complementary assessment method.
NoteOpen access journal.
VersionFinal published version