↓ Skip to main content

Implicit theories and ability emotional intelligence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Implicit theories and ability emotional intelligence
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00700
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal

Abstract

Previous research has shown that people differ in their implicit theories about the essential characteristics of intelligence and emotions. Some people believe these characteristics to be predetermined and immutable (entity theorists), whereas others believe that these characteristics can be changed through learning and behavior training (incremental theorists). The present study provides evidence that in healthy adults (N = 688), implicit beliefs about emotions and emotional intelligence (EI) may influence performance on the ability-based Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Adults in our sample with incremental theories about emotions and EI scored higher on the MSCEIT than entity theorists, with implicit theories about EI showing a stronger relationship to scores than theories about emotions. Although our participants perceived both emotion and EI as malleable, they viewed emotions as more malleable than EI. Women and young adults in general were more likely to be incremental theorists than men and older adults. Furthermore, we found that emotion and EI theories mediated the relationship of gender and age with ability EI. Our findings suggest that people's implicit theories about EI may influence their emotional abilities, which may have important consequences for personal and professional EI training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 168 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 18%
Student > Master 28 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Researcher 8 5%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 30 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 73 43%
Business, Management and Accounting 22 13%
Social Sciences 13 8%
Arts and Humanities 7 4%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 35 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2015.
All research outputs
#7,414,879
of 23,342,232 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,712
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,966
of 268,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#232
of 527 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,232 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 527 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.