2 results
9 - Emotion Regulation and Well-Being
-
- By Marja Kokkonen, University of Jyväskylä, Finland, Marja-Liisa Kinnunen, University of Jyväskylä, Finland
- Edited by Lea Pulkkinen, University of Jyväskylä, Finland, Jaakko Kaprio, University of Helsinki, Richard J. Rose, Indiana University, Bloomington
-
- Book:
- Socioemotional Development and Health from Adolescence to Adulthood
- Published online:
- 07 December 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 July 2006, pp 197-208
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
After decades of neglect, psychology rediscovered emotion in the 1980s (Gross, 1999a). Although there is still controversy about how emotions should be defined, the current definitions emphasize their dynamic, functional, and adaptive nature. However, profiting from the adaptive features of emotion requires effective emotion regulation (Paivio & Laurent, 2001). Given the lack of consensus on the definition of emotion, it is unsurprising that emotion regulation, grown out of the earlier lines of research into stress, coping, and temperament, and out of psychoanalytic research (Eisenberg, 1998; Gross, 1999b), also has been defined in various ways.
The concept of emotion regulation has sometimes been used when emotions have been regarded as inherently regulatory, influencing, for example, physiological and social processes. Probably more often, however, emotions have been seen as the targets of regulation, and emotion regulation has referred to the processes of initiating, maintaining, modulating, or changing the occurrence, intensity, or duration of emotion-related physiological processes and internal feeling states, which often serve the attainment of one's goals (Eisenberg, Fabes, Guthrie, & Reiser, 2000). This dynamic view of emotion regulation emphasizes the fact that emotions can be regulated.
The lack of clarity in the definition has been due in part to the large number of similar concepts. For instance, some researchers have considered emotion regulation a synonym for coping (Brenner & Salovey, 1997, p. 170) or a type of coping (Eisenberg, Fabes, & Losoya, 1997), notably emotion-focused coping (e.g., Eisenberg, 1998).
19 - Emotional Intelligence
-
- By Peter Salovey, Yale University, Marja Kokkonen, University of Jyväskylä, Paulo N. Lopes, Yale University, John D. Mayer, University of New Hampshire
- Edited by Antony S. R. Manstead, University of Cambridge, Nico Frijda, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Agneta Fischer, Universiteit van Amsterdam
-
- Book:
- Feelings and Emotions
- Published online:
- 05 June 2012
- Print publication:
- 05 April 2004, pp 321-340
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
ABSTRACT
This chapter describes recent advances in the scientific study of emotional intelligence. Setting the idea of an emotional intelligence in a historical context, the authors' four-branch model of these competencies is then described. Research on the measurement of emotional intelligence, especially as a set of abilities rather than as self-reported personality traits, is described. The psychometric properties of a new measure of emotional intelligence, the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), are presented, as are preliminary findings concerning the predictive validity of this construct in the domains of family, school, and workplace.
The starting point for the idea that there could be an emotional intelligence is that, rather than “hijacking” one's thoughts and behaviors (Goleman, 1995, p. 13), emotions often serve adaptive, purposeful, and helpful functions (Leeper, 1948). It is the emotional system, in this view, that focuses attention, organizes memory, helps us to interpret social situations, and motivates relevant behavior. Accordingly, it makes little sense to place emotions in opposition to reason and rationality (de Sousa, 1987). The concept of emotional intelligence, which elsewhere (e.g., Mayer & Salovey, 1997) we have defined as the ability to perceive, understand, manage, and use emotional information, simply takes this functionalist perspective one step further by calling attention to the need for research on individual differences in the ability to reason about emotions and to use emotions in reasoning.