Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

Associations of Personality and Emotional

Intelligence with Learning styles

Prof. Anju Kamal Deepa H


Department of Management Department of Management
Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University
Kerala, 690525 India Kerala, 690525 India
kamal.anju@gmail.com hdeepa1234@gmail.com

Abstract—The importance of learning in the field of management differ from one person to other depending on the learner’s
arises out of individual approaches we adopt towards the process ability and willingness to undergo the process. In order to
of learning. Different individuals adopt different methods to enhance knowledge, a learner must be receptive. The openness
learn. Personality can be considered as the high level trait that a learner has towards the process describes the way in
associated with the way an individual interacts with other
individuals and groups. Learning can be defined as the processes
which he perceives learning. This has a lot to do with the
by which a person acquires new skills, knowledge, behaviors, or psychological aspects associated with the person and his
understandings, often in a formal setting called education. immediate environment. Different people have different styles
Personality can be considered as an element that affects of learning which they undergo depending not only on their
individuals’ interest, feelings and motivation towards learning. personality type but also on the level of emotional
The willingness to try new approaches in learning is determined intelligence. The outcome of learning could be expressed as
by the different Personality types of the individual. Emotional the knowledge, skills and abilities possessed by each
Intelligence can be considered as the capacity to be aware of, individual based on his style of learning.
control, and express one's emotions, and to handle interpersonal
relationships judiciously and empathetically. The emotions of a II. LITERATURE REVIEW
learner are considered valuable as it determines not only the
extent to which one is ready to take risks but also the ability to A. Personality
portray creative expressions. Emotional Intelligence is critical in The five-factor model of personality is generally referred to as
scenarios where learners are required to exhibit excellent
extraversion, agreeableness, emotional stability,
decision making skills especially in the core fields of
management. The objective of the study is focused on examining conscientiousness, and openness to experience [1]. This model
the associations of different Personality types and Emotional could be explained as follows:
Intelligence on the Learning styles of the individual. The study Openness - People who like to learn new things and enjoy new
has been conducted on 208 students of Business Management experiences are usually high in openness. It includes traits like
studies. being insightful and imaginative and has a wide range of
The subjects were assessed on Personality, Emotional interests.
Intelligence, and Learning styles. Pearson correlation and Conscientiousness - People who have a high degree of
hierarchical multiple regression were used to analyze the data. conscientiousness are reliable and prompt. Common traits
Results revealed that Personality and Emotional Intelligence
include being organized, methodic, rigorous and thorough.
emerged as strong predictors of Learning Style. This study
highlights the need for understanding Learning styles as an Extraversion - Extraverts derive energy from interacting with
important potential variable for enhancing the learning abilities others, while introverts get their energy from within
among the learners. The present study contributes to an themselves. Extraversion includes the traits like being
understanding of the associations of Personality traits and energetic, talkative, and assertive.
Emotional Intelligence on Learning styles. Thus, this work Agreeableness - These individuals are generally friendly,
attempts to make a small contribution to theory and research in cooperative, and compassionate. People with low
Learning. agreeableness may be more distant. Traits include being kind,
affectionate, and sympathetic.
Keywords—Emotional Intelligence; Learning styles; Neuroticism -This dimension relates to one’s emotional
Personality; stability and degree of negative emotions. Neuroticism can
also be referred in terms of Emotional Stability. People who
I. INTRODUCTION score high on neuroticism often experience emotional
Learning is an important cognitive function which is a instability and negative emotions. Traits include being moody
continuous process. It is an art which facilitates further and tense.
probing into imbibing in-depth knowledge. Learning styles
B. Emotional Intelligence D. Personality and Emotional Intelligence
Emotional Intelligence refers to the ability of an individual to The nature of emotional intelligence appears to focus
recognize his own feelings as well as those of others along predominantly on the emotion based aspects of interpersonal
with the capacity to manage emotions while interacting with effectiveness, influence, and control. EI plays a great role
people [2]. This could be assessed on the basis of four with regard to quality and problem solving conflict
dimensions namely, self awareness, self management, social resolution ,on individual performance, and Management
awareness, and relationship management. The different performance [5], [6], [7]. Considering the five factor model of
dimensions of Emotional Intelligence are as follows [3]: personality traits it has become empirically established fact
Appraisal and expression of emotion in the self (self emotional that the Emotional Intelligence measures have significant
appraisal) - This relates to the individual’s ability to correlations with extraversion and neuroticism with positive
understand their deep emotions and be able to express these and negative sign respectively, and have positive correlation
emotions naturally. with agreeableness, openness to experience and
Appraisal and recognition of emotion in others (others’ conscientiousness [8].
emotional appraisal) - This relates to peoples’ ability to
perceive and understand the emotions of those people around
E. Learning and Emotional Intelligence
them.
Regulation of emotion in the self (regulation of emotion) - The modern method of teaching and learning encourages
This relates to the ability of people to regulate their emotions, students to be divided into groups for the purpose of sharing
which will enable a more rapid recovery from psychological knowledge. This gives high importance to the concept of
distress. emotional intelligence while undergoing the learning process
Use of emotion to facilitate performance (use of emotion) - [9]. A student is considered to be emotionally intelligent when
This relates to the ability of individuals to make use of their he has the ability to think constructively and behave wisely.
emotions by directing them towards constructive activities and Wise and effective behavior requires the ability to regulate and
personal performance. express emotions in healthy ways. EI skills synchronize the
cognitive and emotional minds and are essential to effective
behavior which helps students to deal with stressful and
C. Learning Styles conflict situations. Emotionally healthy students are happier,
The individual learning styles helps us understand the best more cooperative and learn more effectively [10]. EI prepares
way in which information is processed by human brains. The a person to start learning in a specific style depending on his
Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory, based on a comprehensive ability to recognize his own feelings as well as those of others
theory of learning and development is used to help individuals along with the capacity to manage emotions while interacting
identify the way in which they learn. According to Kolb, with people involved in the learning process. The learner with
experience is the source of learning. This concept was further a good EI (social awareness) is expected to realize the learning
developed as Experiential Learning Theory(ELT) which environment based on which he reacts and interacts with
focuses on engaging the learners while undergoing the various aspects associated with the entire learning process. A
learning process. It is said that knowledge results from the student might prefer studying in a group but if he is low on EI,
combination of grasping and transforming experience [4]. it would be difficult to convert his preference into a natural
Experiential learning is a process of constructing knowledge ability. Thus, EI alone cannot be considered as a predictor of
that involves a creative tension among the four learning modes learning styles, as there is a possibility of contradiction
namely, Concrete Experience(CE), Abstract Conceptualization between his preference and ability to learn. This could be
(AC), Reflective Observation(RO), and Active sorted out possible by mapping it with another variable,
Experimentation(AE), that is responsive to contextual namely personality.
demands. Individual learning styles may vary from one person
to another depending on the learner’s preference as well as his
F. Learning and Personality
ability to learn. A learner may be considered as Divergent
when his learning style falls between CE and RO; Assimilator The academic performance of students is highly dependent on
when his learning style falls between RO and AC; Convergent the relationship between personality of the individual as well
when his learning style falls between AC and AE; as his learning style. A student’s thought process could be
Accommodating when his learning style falls between AE and determined by finding out which personality type he fits in.
CE. A Divergent learner is likely to feel and watch while This further helps to determine how does the individual
learning with an open mind. An Assimilator is likely to think process given information and to what extent does he uses the
and watch, thus learn by giving more importance to secondary cognitive ability in order to enhance the learning process. [11].
views. A Convergent learner is likely to think rationally and do Studies say that relative to shallow processors, deep
the appropriate action. An Accommodative learner is likely to processors are more likely to use appropriate methods of
feel and do based on personal experiences. study, draw conclusions effectively, and thus have a stronger
internal locus of control. Deep processors are also more likely
to have conscientiousness, are intellectually curious,
extraverted and emotionally stable [12]. Students who prefer a well-established Big Five Inventory consisting of ten of the 44
structured learning environment and intuitive processing are standard BFI items. It assesses the Big Five with two items per
prone to anxiety and worry, whereas those preferring an factor, one keyed in the positive and one in the negative
activist and pragmatist style are more extraverted [13]. The direction. It has a five-point Likert-type response options
big five personality type could be used as a key indicator to ranging from fully agree to fully disagree. All ten items were
study the four types of learning styles possessed by different re-coded for the present analyses so that fully disagree was
individuals. scored as 1 and fully agree as 5.
C. Measuring Learning styles
III. CONCEPTUAL MODEL For measuring Learning, the Kolb’s learning inventory was
The model helps to examine the associations of individual used. Kolb's experiential learning theory works on two
personality and emotional intelligence by mapping it with the levels: a four stage cycle of learning and four separate
appropriate learning styles. It depicts the relationship between learning styles. The four separate styles are ranked by
the two independent variables, namely Personality and individuals based on their preferred choice and the set of
Emotional Intelligence, with the dependent variable, Learning
12 questions are evaluated based on individual
style
preferences. This is further mapped to fit into the four
stage learning cycle. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale is
0.93.
Personality
Personality
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Learning
Learning A. Correlation Analysis
styles
styles The correlation among the three variables namely Emotional
Intelligence, Personality and Learning styles was checked the
Emotional results of which are reported in the correlation matrix. All the
Emotional
Intelligence three variables in the study are found to be highly correlated
Intelligence
with each other. Throughout the analysis, Emotional
Intelligence is denoted by EI, The different Learning styles are
denoted by AC, CE, RO and AE which stands for Abstract
Conceptualization, Concrete Experience, Reflective
IV. METHODOLOGY Observation and Active Experimentation respectively.
The mean and Standard deviations of Concrete Experience,
A quantitative, cross-sectional field study was conducted. The
Abstract Conceptualization, Active Experimentation, and
participants were 208 students who were doing their Post
Reflective Observation are 32.1(5.78), 29.4(6.3), 31.4(5.1),
Graduate studies in Business. The students belonged to First
28.7(6.0) respectively. Among the predictor variables the
year and Second year batch of Business Management Studies.
highest mean value is of Emotional Intelligence 125(12.8)
The participants included 59 Females and Males with age
followed by Agreeableness 7.7(1.39), Extraversion 6.9 (1.8)
ranging from 21 to 32 years.
Conscientiousness 6.6(1.5) Openness 6.6 (1.4) and
Three Instruments were used for data collection:
Neuroticism 5.5 (1.8). Normality of the collected data is
A. Measuring Emotional Intelligence established through skewness and kurtosis. These values
The Emotional Intelligence Scale used in this study developed indicate that the study variables are reasonably close to normal
by Schutte et al. is a 33-item scale with a five-point Likert- as its skewness and kurtosis have values between –1.0 and
type scale [14]. As suggested in Salovey and Mayer’s theory +1.0.
of emotional intelligence, the instrument has three categories: B. Regression Analysis
(a) the appraisal and expression of emotion assessed by 13
From the output of the hierarchical Regression Analysis in
items; (b) the regulation of emotion assessed by 10 items; and
Table 3 for model 1 the value of R2 of control variables is .04
(c) the utilisation of emotion assessed by 10 items.
which indicates that control variables accounted for four
Participants read each statement and decide whether they
percent of the variance in Concrete Experience which is a
‘strongly disagree’, ‘disagree’, are ‘undecided’, ‘agree’, or
learning style. The data also reported that when control
‘strongly agree’ with the statement. Schutte et al. reported a
variables were entered in the equation together with
Cronbach alpha (a) of 0.88.
personality dimensions in the second model the value of R2
B. Measuring Personality secured more variance 0.071.This indicated that when the
The Instrument used for measuring Personality used in this personality dimensions were entered the change in R2 was
study was developed by Rammstedt, B. & John, O.P [15]. The 0.038. In the third model with the inclusion of Emotional
ten-item Big Five Inventory is an abbreviated version of the Intelligence the value of R2 has increased to 0.074. This
implies that the control variables along with the predictor learning styles. This suggests that students who are organized,
variables accounted for 19% variance in the Concrete disciplined, determined, and intellectually curious are more
Experience. From table 3.1 we can see that the Model 2 and likely to use all four learning styles in maximizing their
Model 3 is statistically significant at p <.05. From Table 3.2 learning. Such students are likely to be very thorough, relate
The beta value show that Openness to experience has a what they are learning to previous knowledge and to their own
positive significant effect on Concrete Experience (β =.14; p lives, and to study in a systematic way, thus, excelling on
<.05) followed by Extraversion (β = .13; p <.05). exams. On the other hand, the negative relationships between
In Table 4 for model 1 the value of R2 of control variables is neuroticism and all four learning styles suggest that students
0.2 which indicates that control variables accounted for two who are given to worry and anxiety are likely to disengage
percent of the variance in Abstract Conceptualization. The from the learning process and fail to organize and categorize
data also reported that when control variables were entered in what they are learning into meaningful units.
the equation together with personality dimensions in the
second model the value of R2 secured more variance 0.26.This
indicated that when the personality dimensions were entered
the change in R2 was 0.071. In the third model with the
inclusion of Emotional Intelligence, the value of change in R2
0.271. This implies that the control variables along with the
predictor variables accounted for 73% variance in the Abstract
Conceptualization. From table 4.1 we can see that the Model 2
and Model 3 is statistically significant at p <.05. From Table
3.2 The beta value show that Conscientiousness has a positive
significant effect on Abstract Conceptualization (β = .548; p
<.01) in Model 3.
In Table 5 for model 1 the value of R2 of control variables is .
010which indicates that control variables accounted for one
percent of the variance in Active Experimentation which is a
learning style. The data also reported that when control
variables were entered in the equation together with
personality dimensions in the second model the value of R2
secured more variance 0.038.This indicated that when the
personality dimensions were entered the change in R2 was
0.039. This implies that the control variables along with the
predictor variables accounted for 17 percent variance in Active
Experimentation. From table 5.1 we can see that the Model 2
and Model 3 is statistically significant at p <.05. From Table
5.2 The beta value show that Openness to Experience has a
positive significant effect on Active Experimentation (β = .
025; p <.05)
In Table 6 for model 1 the value of R2 of control variables is .
001 which indicates that control variables accounted for .01
percent of the variance in Reflective Observation which is one
of the learning style. The data also reported that when control
variables were entered in the equation together with
personality dimensions in the second model the value of R2
secured more variance ie 0.068.This indicated that when the
personality dimensions were entered the change in R2 was
0.036. In the third model with the inclusion of Emotional
Intelligence the value of R2 is 0.070 and change in R2 is
0.032.This implies that the control variables along with the
predictor variables accounted for 13 % variance in the
Reflective Observation. From table 6.1 we can see that the
Model 2 and Model 3 is statistically significant at p<.05. From
Table 3.2 the beta value show that Openness to Experience
and Agreeableness has a positive significant effect on RO with
(β = .151; p <.01) and (β = .104; p <.01)
From our Analysis out of the five personality styles
conscientiousness and openness predicted each of the four
C. and Figures Tables

TABLE 1
Op Co Ex Ag Ne EI CE AC AE RO
N Valid 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 6.68 6.65 6.95 7.80 5.55 125.19 32.12 29.41 31.40 28.74
Median 7.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 5.00 125.50 33.00 29.00 31.00 29.00
a
Mode 6 7 7 8 5 117 35 32 29 28a
Std. Deviation 1.423 1.509 1.898 1.389 1.875 12.860 5.781 6.316 5.141 6.079
Skewness .046 -.417 -.192 -.386 .439 -.228 -.346 .148 -.088 .028
Std. Error of Skewness .169 .169 .169 .169 .169 .169 .169 .169 .169 .169
Kurtosis .397 .578 -.550 .169 -.428 -.203 -.505 -.077 .068 -.505
Std. Error of Kurtosis .336 .336 .336 .336 .336 .336 .336 .336 .336 .336
Minimum 2 2 2 3 2 90 16 13 15 16
Maximum 10 10 10 10 10 156 44 46 45 45
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown

TABLE 2

Op Co Ex Ag Ne EI CE AC AE RO
Op Pearson Correlation 1 .064 .051 .082 .066 .182** -.061 -.016 .003 .160*
Sig. (2-tailed) .358 .460 .240 .340 .008 .384 .821 .962 .021
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
Co Pearson Correlation .064 1 .095 .247** -.181** .276** .109 -.010 -.112 .150*
Sig. (2-tailed) .358 .171 .000 .009 .000 .118 .891 .108 .031
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
Ex Pearson Correlation .051 .095 1 .187** -.363** .339** -.022 -.089 -.110 .130
Sig. (2-tailed) .460 .171 .007 .000 .000 .753 .199 .112 .060
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
Ag Pearson Correlation .082 .247** .187** 1 -.234** .271** -.024 .033 -.099 .157*
Sig. (2-tailed) .240 .000 .007 .001 .000 .736 .634 .156 .023
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
Ne Pearson Correlation .066 -.181** -.363** -.234** 1 -.232** -.033 -.002 .035 -.099
Sig. (2-tailed) .340 .009 .000 .001 .001 .640 .981 .620 .155
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
EI Pearson Correlation .182** .276** .339** .271** -.232** 1 -.038 .097 -.055 .087
Sig. (2-tailed) .008 .000 .000 .000 .001 .581 .165 .430 .209
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 TABLE 3
CE Pearson Correlation -.061 .109 -.022 -.024 -.033 -.038 1 -.379** -.259** -.287**
Model R Change Statistics
Sig. (2-tailed) .384 .118 .753 .736 .640 .581 .000 .000 .000
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
AC Pearson Correlation -.016 -.010 -.089 .033 -.002 .097 -.379** 1 -.005 -.109
Sig. (2-tailed) .821 .891 .199 .634 .981 .165 .000 .943 .116
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
AE Pearson Correlation .003 -.112 -.110 -.099 .035 -.055 -.259** -.005 1 -.153*
Sig. (2-tailed) .962 .108 .112 .156 .620 .430 .000 .943 .027
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
RO Pearson Correlation .160* .150* .130 .157* -.099 .087 -.287** -.109 -.153* 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .021 .031 .060 .023 .155 .209 .000 .116 .027
N 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208 208
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Std.
Error of R
R Adjusted the Square F Sig. F
Square R Square Estimate Change Change df1 df2 Change
1 .200a .040 .031 5.691 .040 4.277 2 205 .015
2 .266b .071 .038 5.669 .031 1.320 5 200 .257
c
3 .271 .074 .036 5.675 .003 .624 1 199 .431
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age
b. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne
c. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne, EI

TABLE 4

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients


Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 42.024 3.905 10.761 .000
Age -.433 .190 -.156 -2.282 .023
Gender -1.650 .880 -.128 -1.875 .062
2 (Constant) 46.441 5.730 8.106 .000
Age -.487 .191 -.176 -2.548 .012
Gender -2.061 .922 -.160 -2.235 .027
Op -.314 .281 -.077 -1.117 .265
Co .496 .273 .130 1.820 .070
Ex -.043 .226 -.014 -.191 .849
Ag -.317 .303 -.076 -1.045 .297
Ne -.265 .242 -.086 -1.091 .277
3 (Constant) 48.859 6.501 7.516 .000
Age -.489 .191 -.176 -2.556 .011
Gender -2.070 .923 -.161 -2.243 .026
Op -.277 .285 -.068 -.971 .333
Co .541 .279 .141 1.942 .054
Ex .005 .234 .002 .022 .983
Ag -.281 .307 -.067 -.915 .362
Ne -.280 .244 -.091 -1.152 .251
EI -.028 .035 -.061 -.790 .431
a. Dependent Variable: CE

TABLE 5
Change Statistics
Std. Error
R Adjusted R of the R Square Sig. F
Model R Square Square Estimate Change F Change df1 df2 Change
1 .036a .001 -.008 6.105 .001 .132 2 205 .877
2 .262b .068 .036 5.969 .067 2.884 5 200 .015
c
3 .264 .070 .032 5.981 .001 .234 1 199 .629
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age
b. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne

c. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne, EI

TABLE 6

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients


Model B Std. Error Beta T Sig.
1 (Constant) 28.019 4.189 6.689 .000
Age .019 .203 .006 .092 .927
Gender .479 .944 .035 .507 .613
2 (Constant) 16.647 6.033 2.759 .006
Age .017 .201 .006 .083 .934
Gender .352 .971 .026 .362 .718
Op .620 .296 .145 2.099 .037
Co .411 .287 .102 1.432 .154
Ex .258 .238 .081 1.087 .278
Ag .432 .319 .099 1.353 .178
Ne -.097 .255 -.030 -.378 .706
3 (Constant) 18.206 6.852 2.657 .009
Age .015 .201 .005 .076 .939
Gender .346 .973 .026 .355 .723
Op .644 .300 .151 2.146 .033
Co .440 .294 .109 1.498 .136
Ex .289 .247 .090 1.173 .242
Ag .455 .323 .104 1.407 .161
Ne -.107 .257 -.033 -.416 .678
EI -.018 .037 -.038 -.483 .629
a. Dependent Variable: RO

TABLE 7
Change Statistics

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change
1 .098a .010 .000 5.141 .010 .987 2 205 .374
2 .196b .038 .005 5.128 .029 1.201 5 200 .310
3 .196c .039 .000 5.141 .000 .042 1 199 .838
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age
b. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne
c. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, Age, Ag, Op, Ex, Co, Ne, EI

TABLE 8

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients


Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 31.147 3.527 8.830 .000
Age -.027 .171 -.011 -.157 .875
Gender 1.107 .795 .097 1.393 .165
2 (Constant) 35.568 5.183 6.862 .000
Age .004 .173 .002 .022 .982
Gender 1.267 .834 .111 1.519 .130
Op .098 .254 .027 .384 .701
Co -.312 .247 -.092 -1.267 .207
Ex -.286 .204 -.105 -1.399 .163
Ag -.217 .274 -.059 -.792 .429
Ne -.009 .219 -.003 -.040 .968
3 (Constant) 34.999 5.889 5.943 .000
Age .004 .173 .002 .025 .980
Gender 1.269 .836 .111 1.518 .131
Op .089 .258 .025 .344 .731
Co -.323 .253 -.095 -1.279 .202
Ex -.297 .212 -.110 -1.401 .163
Ag -.226 .278 -.061 -.812 .418
Ne -.005 .221 -.002 -.023 .982
EI .006 .032 .016 .205 .838
a. Dependent Variable: AE

References
[1] Digman, J.M., 1990. Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor
model. Annual review of psychology, 41(1), pp.417-440.
[2] Doe, R., Ndinguri, E. and Phipps, S.T., 2015. Emotional Intelligence: The
Link to Success and Failure of Leadership. Academy of Educational
Leadership Journal, 19(3), p.105.
[3] Salovey, P. and Mayer, J.D., 1990. Emotional intelligence. Imagination,
cognition and personality, 9(3), pp.185-211.
[4] Kolb, D.A., Boyatzis, R.E. and Mainemelis, C., 2001. Experiential learning
theory: Previous research and new directions. Perspectives on thinking,
learning, and cognitive styles, 1(2001), pp.227-247.
[5] Jordan, P.J. and Troth, A.C., 2004. Managing emotions during team
problem solving: Emotional intelligence and conflict resolution. Human
performance, 17(2), pp.195-218.
[6] Lam, L.T. and Kirby, S.L., 2002. Is emotional intelligence an advantage?
An exploration of the impact of emotional and general intelligence on
individual performance. The journal of social Psychology, 142(1), pp.133-
143.
[7] Langhorn, S., 2004. How emotional intelligence can improve management
performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 16(4), pp.220-230.
[8] Petrides, K.V. and Furnham, A., 2001. Trait emotional intelligence:
Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies.
European journal of personality, 15(6), pp.425-448.
[9] Hasanzadeh, R. and Shahmohamadi, F., 2011. Study of emotional
intelligence and learning strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 29, pp.1824-1829.
[10] Shatalebi, B., Sharifi, S., Saeedian, N. and Javadi, H., 2012. Examining the
relationship between emotional intelligence and learning styles. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, pp.95-99.
[11] Komarraju, M., Karau, S.J., Schmeck, R.R. and Avdic, A., 2011. The Big
Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic
achievement. Personality and individual differences, 51(4), pp.472-477.
[12] Zhang, L.F., 2003. Does the big five predict learning approaches?.
Personality and individual differences, 34(8), pp.1431-1446.
[13] Zhang, W.X., 2003. Nanoscale iron particles for environmental
remediation: an overview. Journal of nanoparticle Research, 5(3), pp.323-
332.
[14] Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Hall, L.E., Haggerty, D.J., Cooper, J.T.,
Golden, C.J. and Dornheim, L., 1998. Development and validation of a
measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and individual
differences, 25(2), pp.167-177.
[15] Rammstedt, B. and John, O.P., 2007. Measuring personality in one minute
or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and
German. Journal of research in Personality, 41(1), pp.203-212.