Advances in Business Research 2010 Volume 1.pdf 133 Advances in Business Research !"#$%""&'()*$+,)-"(#"$./0&",/#1$23!/4!,(5$+,/"5546",)"7 Barbara Burgess-Wilkerson, Winthrop University Keith Benson, Winthrop University Steven Frankforter, Winthrop University !"#$#%&'($")*+#%",-%+#$%!+$+.%+)%$%/$0!"1!$+2/%"/)-3$")%+33",+)1+$1-)$4+$#&11+##5&33($'+*+3/6+'$%!7/&,!$-$#+2+#%+78 3/),$13-##7//2$")%+7*+)%"/)$-)'$#+358'"7+1%+'$3+-7)"),$67/1+##$-2/),$#%&'+)%#$")$-$1/33+,+$/5$4&#")+##$-'2")"#%7-%"/)9$ We found that with emotional intelligence training, all students experienced improvement between the administrations /5$ 67+8%+#%#$ -)'$ 6/#%8%+#%#9$ !"#$ 7+#&3%$ -3#/$ !+3'$ 7+,-7'3+##$ /5$2-%&7"%($ 3+*+3$ :&)'+7,7-'&-%+$ /7$ ,7-'&-%+$ #%&'+)%$ #%-%&#;<$/7$,+)'+79 !"#$!%&#!'#&()#*+%&#,)-&."/0#&()#1-&)2213)-,)#4.!&1)-ᘮ#&)% +%#&()#*"1$+"/#$)&(!:#&!#3+.3)#1-&)2213)-,)# and was often used as a predictor for success in the corporate world. Many human resource managers correlated 3"+:)#*!1-&#+;)"+3)#91&(#670#9(1,(#)<*2+1-%#9(/#3"+:)#*!1-&#+;)"+3)#9+%#!'&)-#+#")4.1")$)--#&()#=!>#+**21,+&1!-# process. However, research in the 1980’s found that cognitive ability, as demonstrated on IQ tests, did not represent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is critical for effective work performance. A national survey found four in ten workers were not able to work ,!!*)"+&1;)2/#91&(#')22!9O)$*2!/))%#+-:#!-2/#AB#*)",)-&#!'#)-&"/O2);)2#+**21,+-&%#(+;)#%.'S,1)-&#%)2'O:1%,1*21-)#1-# 9!"P#(+>1&%#5@+""1%#Q:.,+&1!-#U)%)+",(#T!.-,120#ABBA8?#T!-%1:)"1-3#%.,(#S-:1-3%0#*)"(+*%#>.%1-)%%#%,(!!2%#%(!.2:# consider incorporating emotional intelligence development into their curriculums. In this study, we examine whether emotional intelligence feedback can increase students’ emotional intelligence. 829+2:$;%$<+=28>=?82 J(!"-:1P)#+-:#G&)1-#5ABVW8#%&+&):#&(+&#%!,1+2#1-&)2213)-,)#1%#&()#+>121&/#&!#.-:)"%&+-:#!&()"%#+-:#+,[%)2/#1-# (.$+-#")2+&1!-%?#Q$!&1!-+2#1-&)2213)-,)#>.12:%#!-#&(1%#,!-,)*&?#X,,!":1-3#&!#G+2!;)/#+-:#M+/)"#5ABBI8#Q$!&1!-+2# intelligence is “a form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and other’s feelings and )$!&1!-%0#&!#:1%,"1$1-+&)#+$!-3#&()$0#+-:#&!#.%)#&(1%#1-'!"$+&1!-#&!#3.1:)#!-)N%#&(1-P1-3#+-:#+,&1!-Y#5ABBIKACF8?# R!2)$+-# 5ABBF8# '!.-:# &(+&# )$!&1!-+2# 1-&)2213)-,)# 1%# +#$!")# 1$*!"&+-&#:)&)"$1-+-&#!'#$+-+3)$)-&# %.,,)%%# &(+-# technical expertise or cognitive ability. There is recognition among researchers and practitioners that emotions play a large role in organizational life. For example, emotional intelligence is a key area to help accountants perform better 5XP)"%#Z#[!"&)"0#EIIV8?#X::1&1!-+22/0#R!2)$+-0#\!/+&]1%0#+-:#M,^))#5EIIE8#'!.-:#&(+&#*+"&-)"%#1-#+#2+"3)#*.>21,# +,,!.-&1-3#S"$#91&(# %&"!-3# %)2'O$+-+3)$)-&# +-:# %!,1+2# %P122%# +,(1);):#+#VBI#*)",)-&# 1-,")$)-&+2# +--.+2#*"!S&# versus a 50 percent increase for partners with strong analytical skills. ## 6-#+#%&.:/#!'#M\X#%&.:)-&%0#\!/+&]1%0#G&.>>%0#+-:#J+/2!"0#5EIIE8#,!-,2.:):#&(+&#M\X#*"!3"+$%#%(!.2:#*.&# forth a concerted effort to integrate emotional intelligence training using a more non-traditional holistic approach to positively impact employment outcomes. Research indicates a positive correlation between emotional intelligence +-:# ,!3-1&1;)O>+%):#*)"'!"$+-,)# +$!-3#,!22)3)# %&.:)-&%?#_+$#+-:#^1">/# 5EIIE8# +%,)"&+1-):# &()# 2);)2# &!#9(1,(# emotional intelligence accounts for increases in individual cognitive-based performance above the level attributable to general intelligence. They found a positive correlation existed in three of the four emotional intelligence subscales; overall EI, perceiving emotions, and regulating emotions. X#%.";)/#!'#)$*2!/)"%#,!-:.,&):#>/#&()#`+&1!-+2#X%%!,1+&1!-#!'#T!22)3)%#+-:#Q$*2!/)"%#'!.-:#&(+&#)$*2!/)"%# "+&):#1-&)"*)"%!-+2#%P122%#+%#&()#$!%&#:)%1"):#%P122#!'#"),)-"+:.+&)%#5G(1;*."1#Z#̂ 1$0#EIID8?#6-#+#%&.:/#!'#+,,!.-&1-3# %&.:)-&%0#\+/#+-:#M,^)+3)#5EIIH8#'!.-:#&()#+;)"+3)#+,,!.-&1-3#%&.:)-&%#:1:#-!&#(+;)#+#(13(#2);)2#!'#)$!&1!-+2# intelligence, and given the critical role of emotional intelligence in career success, those students were ill-prepared 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 134 Advances in Business Research for their futures. They argue that emotional intelligence has relevance for accountants in the areas of decision-making and also suggests that emotional intelligence is a variable that may explain the gap between ethical understanding and ethical behavior in the workplace. While graduates of business programs may be technically prepared for their disciplines, they are not necessarily prepared for the emotional aspects of work. Esmond-Kiger, Tucker, and Yost 5EIIH8#");)+2):#&(+&#+2&(!.3(#+,,!.-&1-3#%&.:)-&%#!-#+;)"+3)#(+;)#(13()"#R[X%#&(+-#-!-O+,,!.-&1-3#,!.-&)"*+"&%0# they reported lower levels of emotional intelligence. They recommend the incorporation of emotional intelligence training into the accounting. J()#X$)"1,+-#T!22)3)#[)"%!--)2#X%%!,1+&1!-#,+22):#'!"#+#")%*!-%)#&!#&()#$!.-&1-3#);1:)-,)#!'#&()#1$*!"&+-,)#!'# emotional intelligence in academic and career success and advocated the promotion of a student development model of learning that incorporates emotional intelligence competencies, through engagement in applied research efforts to promote holistic learning through an integrated learning community commonly referred to as Student Learning 6$*)"+&1;)0#9(1,(#*2+,)%#%&.:)-&#:);)2!*$)-&#!-#*+"#91&(#%&.:)-)+"-1-3#5_!90#_!$+<0#a+,P%!-#Z#`)2%!-0#EIID8? @AB!/C"#"# Business schools are creatively infusing emotional intelligence into the business curriculum as a holistic approach to promote student professional development. In one instance emotional intelligence theory was infused into a school’s business communication curriculum as a strategy for developing interpersonal and intrapersonal communications $!")#)''),&1;)2/#5M/)"%#Z#J.,P)"0#EIIF8?#b+-:)";!!"EIIH8#+:;!,+&)%#1$*"!;1-3#%&.:)-&#)$!&1!-+2#1-&)2213)-,)# >),+.%)# &(!%)# 91&(# (13()"# %)2'OP-!92):3)# &)-:# &!# $+P)# >)&&)"# ,+"))"# ,(!1,)%0# (+;)# 2)%%# >)(+;1!"+2c)$!&1!-+2# problems, and have higher scores on standardized achievement tests. The purpose of this study is to investigate the extent to which emotional intelligence can be developed through +#%)$)%&)"O2!-3#,2+%%"!!$#1-&)";)-&1!-#+-:#%)2'O:1"),&):#2)+"-1-3#*"!,)%%#+$!-3#%)2),&):#%&.:)-&%#1-#+#T!22)3)#!'# Business Administration. We predict that emotional intelligence feedback will increase student scores on EI tests. We also predict that both graduate and undergraduate students will improve their EI scores. Finally, we predict that both $+2)#+-:#')$+2)#%&.:)-&%#9122#1$*"!;)#&()1"#Q6#%,!")%?#X,,!":1-32/0#9)#!'')"#&()#'!22!91-3#(/*!&()%)%K @AK## Q$!&1!-+2#1-&)2213)-,)#')):>+,P#9122#")%.2-#1-,")+%)%#1-#%&.:)-&#)$!&1!-+2#1-&)2213)-,)#%,!")%? @EK# Q$!&1!-+2# 1-&)2213)-,)# ')):>+,P#9122# ")%.2&# 1-# 1-,")+%)%# '!"# >!&(# 3"+:.+&)# +-:# .-:)"3"+:.+&)# %&.:)-&# emotional intelligence scores. @VK## Q$!&1!-+2# 1-&)2213)-,)# ')):>+,P# 9122# ")%.2&# 1-# 1-,")+%)%# '!"# >!&(# $+2)# +-:# ')$+2)# %&.:)-&# )$!&1!-+2# intelligence scores. 2.+DE$;%$=@2$.=? F Participants and Assessment Tool Students in two graduate and one undergraduate course at a university in the southeastern United States during the fall semester of 2009 were informed of the opportunity to participate in an emotional intellegence project. The study included 121 students. There were 77 undergraduate and 44 graduate students, whose age ranged from 19 to 47, with an average age of 23. All undergraduate students were either juniors or seniors. Sixty-two students were female +-:#FB#9)")#$+2)?#[+"&1,1*+-&%#&!!P#&()#Q$!&1!-+2#6-&)2213)-,)#7.!&1)-&#@13()"#Q:.,+&1!-#Q:1&1!-#5Q76@):8#!-21-)# self-assessment before intervention as a pre-test and then near the end of the semester, after intervention as a post- &)%&?#J()#Q76@):#1%#+#%)2'O")*!"&1-3#1-%&".$)-&#:);)2!*):#>/#\+"Od-#5EIII8#&!#$)+%.")#+-#+""+/#!'#-!-O,!3-1&1;)# capabilities, competencies and skills based on the construct model of social and emotional intelligence. J()#+%%)%%$)-&#&!!2#1%#:1;1:):#1-&!#S;)#3)-)"+2#,!$*!-)-&%#+2!-3#91&(#%);)"+2#%.>,!$*!-)-&%?#J()#S"%)-)"+2# component, intrapersonal, included measures of self-regard, emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, independence, and self-actualization. The second, interpersonal, included empathy, social responsibility, and interpersonal relationship. The third, stress management, included stress tolerance, and impulse control. The fourth, adaptability, 1-,2.:):#")+21&/#&)%&1-30#e)<1>121&/0#+-:#*"!>2)$O%!2;1-3?# 1-+22/0#3)-)"+2#$!!:0#1-,2.:):#!*&1$1%$#+-:#(+**1-)%%# 5M+/)"0#T+".%!#Z#G+2!;)/0#EIII8?#J+>2)#A#>)2!9#%(!9%#&()#;+"1+>2)#:)S-1&1!-%#'!"#&()#Q76@):#")*!"&#'"!$#\+"d-# Emotional Intelligence Quotient Technical Manual. f)# ");1)9):# &()# M@G# &)%&1-3# 1-%&".,&1!-%# +-:# 6-&)"-+2# U);1)9# \!+":# 56U\8# ,!-%)-&# *!21,1)%# '!"# !*&1$+2# .-:)"%&+-:1-3#!'#*+"&1,1*+&1!-# ")4.1")$)-&%#+-:#,!-S:)-&1+2&/?#Q+,(#%&.:)-&#*+"&1,1*+-&# "),)1;):#+#*+%%,!:)#+-:# instructions for accessing the EQiHed protocol through the MHS website. There was no time limit for completion of the EQIHed assessment, though the average time was 15 minutes. When the duration of the assessment was under 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 135 Advances in Business Research AI#$1-.&)%# 1 +%#e+33):#1-# &()#%,!"1-3#!"3+-1])"#'!"#'!22!9O.*#91&(# &()#%&.:)-&?#J("))#*!%%1>2)#%!.",)%#!'#>1+%# were controlled for. First, a positive impression score, to detect the feigning of enhanced emotional functioning. Next, a negative impression score, to detect imulation or malingering. And last, an inconsistency index, to identify respondents who contradict themselves or respond randomly. In no case did any respondents in this study have bias scores that exceeded the critical values set forth by the BarOn Emotional Intelligence Quotient Technical Manual. =('5"$GH$9(-4('5"$ "I,4/4!,# Intervention [+"&1,1*+-&%#9)")#*"!;1:):#+#,!*/#!'#&()#Q$!&1!-+2#T!$*)&)-,)# "+$)9!"P#'"!$#&()#T!-%!"&1.$#'!"#U)%)+",(# on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations as part of a group discussion to fully comprehend the scope of emotional itelligence. Assessment instructions and passcodes were emailed to participants with a deadline of one week for pre-test completion. After completing the initial assessment, students received a Student Summary Reports, which included a four page summary of the three highest and two lowest scores. Afer one week, participants received +#G&.:)-&#T!$*")()-%1;)#U)*!"&# ,!-&+1-1-3# +-# ACO*+3)# ")*!"&# !'# +22# %,+2)# +-:# %.>%,+2)# ")%.2&%0# 1-%&".,&1!-%# '!"# interpretation, and instructions for the in-class coaching session. J()#,!+,(1-3#%)%%1!-#9+%#:)%13-):#&!#+,(1);)#&()#'!22!91-3#3!+2%K#&!#.-:)"%&+-:#&()#$)+-1-3#!'#&()#Q6#%,+2)%#+-:# sub-scales and releated scores, to receive assistance in identifying strengths and growth areas for future development, and to develop a 30 day plan for self-improvement. In-class discussions addressed the impact of emotional intelligence in academic and career success, relationships, family life, and overall emotional well-being. Proposed self-improvement plans were reviewed to ensure feasibility, measurability, and appropriateness on a set limit of two intervention areas. Individuals were also provided an opportunity for individual counseling and coaching to address anxieties or concerns regarding any aspect of the report. Throughout the semester, on-going classroom discussions empasized the relevance of emotional intelligence in the academic, professional and social realms. At the end of the semester, the EQIHed test was re-administered online. Participants were instructed to conduct a comparative analysis of pre- and post-test scores to ascertain the extent to which EI scored increased, decreased or remained unchanged. Students were assigned to write a self-analysis paper &(+-,2.):):#&()#!.&,!$)%#!'#&()#VI#:+/#*2+-K#&()1"#*")O#+-:#*!%&O&)%&#%,!")%0#&()#:)&+12%#!'#&()#VIO:+/#1-&)";)-&1!-0# $)+%."+>2)#+-:#4.+21&+&1;)#!.&,!$)%0#+-:#'.&.")#*2+-%?# Results We computed descriptive statistics for the pre-test and the post-test for the population of 121 students. Table 2 shows the pre-test descriptive statistics and Table 3 shows the post-test descriptive statistics. Variable Variable Name Variable Definition T Total Emotional Intelligence A general indication of a respondent’s level of emotional intelligent. INTRA Intrapersonal It determines how in touch with your feelings you are, how good you feel about yourself and about what you’re doing in life. REG Self Regard The ability to respect and accept oneself as basically good. AW Emotional self-awareness The ability to recognize one's feelings. ASS Assertiveness The ability to express feelings, beliefs and thoughts and defend one's rights in a non-destructive manner. IND Independence The ability to be self-directed and self-controlled. ACT Self-Actualization The ability to realize one potential capacities. INTER Interpersonal Concerns what are known as people skills. EMP Empathy The ability to be aware of, understand, and appreciate the feelings of others. SOC Social responsiblity The ability to demonstrate oneself as a cooperative, contributing, and constructive member of one’s social group. INTREL Interpersonal relationship The ability to establish and maintain mutually satisfying relationships that are characterized by intimacy and by giving and receiving affection. SMGMT Stress managment Concerns the ability to withstand stress without caving in, falling apart, or losing control. STOL Stress tolerance The ability to withstand adverse events and stressful situations by actively and positively coping with stress. IMP Impulse control The ability to resist or delay an impulse, drive, or temptation to act. ADA Adaptability Concerns the ability to size up and respond to a wide range of difficult situations. REAL Reality testing The ability to assess the correspondence between what is expected and what objectively exists. FLEX Flexibility The ability to adjust one’s emotions, thoughts, and behaviors to changing situations and conditions. PRSOL Problem solving The ability to identify and define problems as well as to generate and implement potentially effective solutions. MOOD General mood Concerns your overall outlook on life, your ability to enjoy yourself and others and your overall feelings of contentment or dissatisfaction OPT Optimism The ability to look at the brighter side of life. HAP Happiness The ability to feel satisfied with one’s life, to enjoy oneself and others, and to have fun. 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 136 Advances in Business Research =('5"$JH$K-"L="#/$ "#)-4B/4M"$./(/4#/4)# =('5"$NH$K!#/L="#/$ "#)-4B/4M"$./(/4#/4)# We analyzed student pre-test and post-test scores using a paired sample t-test. Table 4 reports EI difference &O%&+&1%&1,%# +-:# %&+&1%&1,+2# %13-1S,+-,)# 2);)2%# '!"# +22# AEA# %&.:)-&%?#X# -)3+&1;)# &O%&+&1%&1,# %(!9%# 1$*"!;)$)-&# '"!$# the pre-test to the post-test assessment, while a positive t-statistic would show decline from the pre-test to the post- &)%&?#`1-)&))-#!'#&()#EI#Q6#%.>%,!")%#%(!9):#%&+&1%&1,+22/#%13-1S,+-,)#1-,")+%)%#!'#+)+%&#[#g#?IF#'!"#%&.:)-&%#'"!$# the pre-test to the post-test. The only variable not showing improvement was impulse control. The EI total score 1$*"!;):#>/#[#g#?IIA?#J()%)#")%.2&%#,!-S"$#@A0#&(+-&)";)-&1!-#:!)%#1-,")+%)#+#%&.:)-&%N#)$!&1!-+2#1-&)2213)-,)? J()#%&.:/#&()-#'!,.%):#!-#9()&()"#$+&."1&/#2);)20#+%#:)$!-%&"+&):#>/#%&.:)-&#%&+&.%#5.-:)"3"+:.+&)#!"#3"+:.+&)80# 1-e.)-,):#Q6#:);)2!*$)-&?#J+>2)#F#")*!"&%#Q6#:1'')")-,)#&O%&+&1%&1,%#+-:#%&+&1%&1,+2#%13-1S,+-,)#'!"#.-:)"3"+:.+&)# %&.:)-&%?#J()#&!&+2#Q6#%,!")#+-:#AH#!'#&()#EI#Q6#%.>%,!")%#%(!9):#%&+&1%&1,+22/#%13-1S,+-,)#1-,")+%)%#!'#+)+%&#[# g# ?IF#'!"#.-:)"3"+:.+&)#%&.:)-&%# '"!$#&()#*")O&)%&# &!# &()#*!%&O&)%&?#J()#;+"1+>2)%#-!&#%(!91-3# 1$*"!;)$)- )")# 1-:)*)-:)-,)0#%!,1+2#")%*!-%1>121&/0#1$*.2%)#,!-&"!20#+-:#e)<1>121&/? Variable n Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation T1 121 62 131 102.81 11.921 INTRA1 121 58 130 102.99 13.158 REG1 121 58 127 105.39 11.982 AW1 121 61 129 102.12 14.284 ASS1 121 62 130 102.21 14.134 IND1 121 52 126 99.64 14.605 ACT1 121 40 126 102.20 13.910 INTER1 121 67 127 101.73 12.774 EMP1 121 66 123 98.81 14.069 SOC1 121 63 120 99.74 13.958 INTREL1 121 66 127 104.14 12.691 SMGMT1 121 67 128 102.79 12.430 STOL1 121 57 130 98.92 14.216 IMP1 121 58 129 105.88 13.042 ADA1 121 64 133 102.01 12.397 REAL1 121 63 130 101.4 13.063 FLEX1 121 55 131 102.99 12.238 PRSOL1 121 63 126 100.83 13.188 MOOD1 121 62 125 103.75 10.988 OPT1 121 59 124 100.30 12.333 HAP1 121 72 123 106.48 10.708 121 77 134 110.74 11.153 121 74 132 110.67 10.815 121 80 129 110.07 10.446 121 67 132 109.73 13.702 121 68 130 108.96 11.825 121 62 126 104.14 13.160 121 68 124 108.43 10.774 121 60 127 107.12 12.840 121 48 123 104.53 14.663 121 52 123 103.00 13.729 INTREL2 121 73 128 109.34 11.246 SMGMT2 121 76 132 108.17 11.039 121 67 133 107.04 13.207 121 76 129 107.24 11.505 121 82 139 109.95 11.912 121 75 132 107.08 12.088 121 74 136 108.17 13.170 121 70 130 109.75 11.727 121 63 132 110.29 10.403 121 55 128 108.08 12.781 121 70 128 111.18 9.335 T2 121 77 134 110.74 11.153 INTRA2 121 74 132 110.67 10.815 REG2 121 80 129 110.07 10.446 AW2 121 67 132 109.73 13.702 ASS2 121 68 130 108.96 11.825 IND2 121 62 126 104.14 13.160 ACT2 121 68 124 108.43 10.774 INTER2 121 60 127 107.12 12.840 EMP2 121 48 123 104.53 14.663 SOC2 121 52 123 103.00 13.729 INTREL2 121 73 128 109.34 11.246 SMGMT2 121 76 132 108.17 11.039 STOL2 121 67 133 107.04 13.207 IMP2 121 76 129 107.24 11.505 ADA2 121 82 139 109.95 11.912 REAL2 121 75 132 107.08 12.088 FLEX2 121 74 136 108.17 13.170 PRSOL2 121 70 130 109.75 11.727 MOOD2 121 63 132 110.29 10.403 OPT2 121 55 128 108.08 12.781 HAP2 121 70 128 111.18 9.335 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 137 Advances in Business Research !"#$%&'%()%*+,,$-$./$% 012!2+32+/3%!.4%12!2+32+/!#%1+5.+6/!./$%7$8$#3%,9-%:##%;<;%12=4$.23 !"#$%>'%()%*+,,$-$./$% 012!2+32+/3%:.4%12!2+32+/!#%1+5.+6/!./$%7$8$#3%?9-%@.4$-5-!4=!2$%12=4$.23 Paired Differences t df Sig. 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean Diff. Std. Dev Std. Error Mean Lower Upper Pair 1 T1 – T2 -7.926 11.130 1.012 -9.929 -5.922 -7.833 120 .000 Pair 2 Intra1 - Intra2 -7.678 10.871 .988 -9.634 -5.721 -7.769 120 .000 Pair 3 Reg1 - Reg2 -4.678 9.416 .856 -6.372 -2.983 -5.465 120 .000 Pair 4 Aw1 - Aw2 -7.612 13.577 1.234 -10.055 -5.168 -6.167 120 .000 Pair 5 Ass1 - Ass2 -6.744 12.389 1.126 -8.974 -4.514 -5.988 120 .000 Pair 6 Ind1 - Ind2 -4.504 11.693 1.063 -6.609 -2.399 -4.237 120 .000 Pair 7 Act1 - Act2 -6.231 12.327 1.121 -8.450 -4.013 -5.560 120 .000 Pair 8 Inter1 - Inter2 -5.397 11.731 1.066 -7.508 -3.285 -5.061 120 .000 Pair 9 Emp1 - Emp2 -5.719 13.091 1.190 -8.075 -3.363 -4.806 120 .000 Pair 10 Soc1 - Soc2 -3.256 12.253 1.114 -5.462 -1.051 -2.923 120 .004 Pair 11 Intrel1 - Inter2 -2.983 13.317 1.211 -5.380 -.586 -2.464 120 .015 Pair 12 Smgmt1 - Smgmt2 -5.372 10.304 .937 -7.227 -3.517 -5.735 120 .000 Pair 13 Stol1 - Stol2 -8.124 11.196 1.018 -10.139 -6.109 -7.982 120 .000 Pair 14 Imp1 - Imp2 -1.364 10.773 .979 -3.303 .576 -1.392 120 .166 Pair 15 Ada1 - Ada2 -7.942 12.267 1.115 -10.150 -5.734 -7.122 120 .000 Pair 16 Real1 - Real2 -5.678 12.658 1.151 -7.956 -3.399 -4.934 120 .000 Pair 17 Flex1 - Flex2 -5.174 12.911 1.174 -7.497 -2.850 -4.408 120 .000 Pair 18 Prsol1 - Prsol2 -8.926 13.212 1.201 -11.304 -6.547 -7.431 120 .000 Pair 19 Mood1 - Mood2 -6.537 10.174 .925 -8.368 -4.706 -7.068 120 .000 Pair 20 Opt1 - Opt2 -7.785 11.703 1.064 -9.892 -5.679 -7.317 120 .000 Pair 21 Hap1 - Hap2 -4.702 10.133 .921 -6.526 -2.879 -5.105 120 .000 Difference Mean Std. Dev Error Mean Lower Pair 1 5.584 10.992 8.079 4.458 76 .000 Pair 2 5.571 10.717 8.004 4.562 76 .000 Pair 3 3.091 8.768 5.081 3.093 76 .003 Pair 4 4.701 13.726 7.817 3.006 76 .004 Pair 5 5.312 11.374 7.893 4.098 76 .000 Pair 6 2.286 11.042 4.792 1.816 76 .073 Pair 7 5.987 13.948 9.153 3.767 76 .000 ir 8 2.948 12.276 5.734 2.107 76 .038 Pair 9 3.286 13.763 6.410 2.095 76 .040 ir 10 1.403 13.455 4.456 .915 76 .363 Pair 11 2.649 11.414 5.240 2.037 76 .045 Pair 12 Smgmt2 3.091 9.852 5.327 2.753 76 .007 Pair 13 6.221 11.260 8.776 4.848 76 .000 Pair 14 .662 9.104 1.404 .638 76 .525 Pair 15 5.896 12.178 8.660 4.248 76 .000 Pair 16 3.610 12.998 6.561 2.437 76 .017 Pair 17 2.636 12.514 5.477 1.849 76 .068 Pair 18 8.468 13.409 11.511 5.541 76 .000 Pair 19 5.883 10.162 8.190 5.080 76 .000 Pair 20 7.299 12.440 10.122 5.148 76 .000 Pair 21 3.844 9.919 6.096 3.401 76 .001 Paired Differences t df Sig. 95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean Std. Dev Std. Error Mean Lower Upper Pair 1 T1 – T2 -5.584 10.992 1.253 -8.079 -3.090 -4.458 76 .000 Pair 2 Intra1 - Intra2 -5.571 10.717 1.221 -8.004 -3.139 -4.562 76 .000 Pair 3 Reg1 - Reg2 -3.091 8.768 .999 -5.081 -1.101 -3.093 76 .003 Pair 4 Aw1 - Aw2 -4.701 13.726 1.564 -7.817 -1.586 -3.006 76 .004 Pair 5 Ass1 - Ass2 -5.312 11.374 1.296 -7.893 -2.730 -4.098 76 .000 Pair 6 Ind1 - Ind2 -2.286 11.042 1.258 -4.792 .220 -1.816 76 .073 Pair 7 Act1 - Act2 -5.987 13.948 1.589 -9.153 -2.821 -3.767 76 .000 Pair 8 Inter1 - Inter2 -2.948 12.276 1.399 -5.734 -.162 -2.107 76 .038 Pair 9 Emp1 - Emp2 -3.286 13.763 1.568 -6.410 -.162 -2.095 76 .040 Pair 10 Soc1 - Soc2 -1.403 13.455 1.533 -4.456 1.651 -.915 76 .363 Pair 11 Intrel1 - Inter2 -2.649 11.414 1.301 -5.240 -.059 -2.037 76 .045 Pair 12 Smgmt1 - Smgmt2 -3.091 9.852 1.123 -5.327 -.855 -2.753 76 .007 Pair 13 Stol1 - Stol2 -6.221 11.260 1.283 -8.776 -3.665 -4.848 76 .000 Pair 14 Imp1 - Imp2 .662 9.104 1.038 -1.404 2.729 .638 76 .525 Pair 15 Ada1 - Ada2 -5.896 12.178 1.388 -8.660 -3.132 -4.248 76 .000 Pair 16 Real1 - Real2 -3.610 12.998 1.481 -6.561 -.660 -2.437 76 .017 Pair 17 Flex1 - Flex2 -2.636 12.514 1.426 -5.477 .204 -1.849 76 .068 Pair 18 Prsol1 - Prsol2 -8.468 13.409 1.528 -11.511 -5.424 -5.541 76 .000 Pair 19 Mood1 - Mood2 -5.883 10.162 1.158 -8.190 -3.577 -5.080 76 .000 Pair 20 Opt1 - Opt2 -7.299 12.440 1.418 -10.122 -4.475 -5.148 76 .000 Pair 21 Hap1 - Hap2 -3.844 9.919 1.130 -6.096 -1.593 -3.401 76 .001 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 138 Advances in Business Research !"#$%&%'$()'*+%,-%./00$'$12$%*3+*!*/+*/2+%!1.%+*!*/+*/2!#%+/41/52!12$%#$6$#+%0)'%4'!.7!*$%+*7.$1*+8% 9$%*)*!#%,-%+2)'$% !1.%!##%:;%,-%+7"+2)'$+%+9)<$.%+*!*/+*/2!##=%+/41/52!12$%/12'$!+$+%)0%>%?%8;@%0)'%4'!.7!*$%+*7.$1*+%0')A%*9$%('$3*$+*% to the post-test. While the results for undergraduates were not as uniform as for graduate student participants, both 4')7(+%*)*!#%+2)'$+%/A(')6$.%"=%!*%#$!+*%>%?%8;;B8%C9/#$%'$+7#*+%!'$%+)A$<9!*%2)1+/+*$1*%%?% 8;@% 0)'% 0$A!#$% +*7.$1*+% 0')A% *9$%('$3*$+*% *)% *9$%()+*3*$+*8% 9$%6!'/!"#$+%1)*% showing improvement were social responsibility and impulse control. !"#$%J%'$()'*+%,-%./00$'$12$%*3+*!*/+*/2+%!1.%+*!*/+*/2!#%+/41/52!12$%#$6$#+%0)'%A!#$%+*7.$1*+8% 9$%*)*!#%,-%+2)'$%!1.% BJ%)0%*9$%:;%,-%+7"+2)'$+%+9)<$.%+*!*/+*/2!##=%+/41/52!12$%/12'$!+$+%)0%>%?%8;@%0)'%A!#$%+*7.$1*+%0')A%*9$%('$3*$+*%*)% the post-test. The variables not showing improvement were interpersonal relationship and impulse control. While the '$+7#*+%0)'%0$A!#$%!1.%A!#$%+*7.$1*+%<$'$%1)*%2)A(#$*$#=%/.$1*/2!#E%")*9%4')7(+K%*)*!#%+2)'$+%/A(')6$.%"=%!*%#$!+*%>%?% .001. Therefore, we conclude that there is support for H3 because total EI scores improved for both female and male students. Paired Differences t df Sig. 95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean Std. Dev Std. Error Mean Lower Upper Pair 1 T1 – T2 -12.023 10.254 1.546 -15.140 -8.905 -7.778 43 .000 Pair 2 Intra1 - Intra2 -11.364 10.244 1.544 -14.478 -8.249 -7.358 43 .000 Pair 3 Reg1 - Reg2 -7.455 9.957 1.501 -10.482 -4.427 -4.966 43 .000 Pair 4 Aw1 - Aw2 -12.705 11.820 1.782 -16.298 -9.111 -7.130 43 .000 Pair 5 Ass1 - Ass2 -9.250 13.769 2.076 -13.436 -5.064 -4.456 43 .000 Pair 6 Ind1 - Ind2 -8.386 11.911 1.796 -12.008 -4.765 -4.670 43 .000 Pair 7 Act1 - Act2 -6.659 8.942 1.348 -9.378 -3.941 -4.940 43 .000 Pair 8 Inter1 - Inter2 -9.682 9.388 1.415 -12.569 -6.828 -6.841 43 .000 Pair 9 Emp1 - Emp2 -9.977 10.691 1.612 -13.228 -6.727 -6.190 43 .000 Pair 10 Soc1 - Soc2 -6.500 9.062 1.366 -9.255 -3.745 -4.758 43 .000 Pair 11 Intrel1 - Intrel2 -9.659 9.753 1.470 -12.624 -6.694 -6.570 43 .000 Pair 12 Smgmt1 - Smgmt2 -9.364 9.956 1.501 -12.391 -6.337 -6.239 43 .000 Pair 13 Stol1 - Stol2 -11.455 10.387 1.566 -14.612 -8.297 -7.315 43 .000 Pair 14 Imp1 - Imp2 -4.909 12.538 1.890 -8.721 -1.097 -2.597 43 .013 Pair 15 Ada1 - Ada2 -11.523 11.715 1.766 -15.084 -7.961 -6.525 43 .000 Pair 16 Real1 - Real2 -9.295 11.292 1.702 -12.729 -5.862 -5.460 43 .000 Pair 17 Flex1 - Flex2 -9.614 12.518 1.887 -13.420 -5.808 -5.094 43 .000 Pair 18 Prsol1 - Prsol2 -9.727 12.975 1.956 -13.672 -5.783 -4.973 43 .000 Pair 19 Mood1 - Mood2 -7.682 10.209 1.539 -10.786 -4.578 -4.991 43 .000 Pair 20 Opt1 - Opt2 -8.636 10.370 1.563 -11.789 -5.484 -5.524 43 .000 Pair 21 Hap1 - Hap2 -6.205 10.440 1.574 -9.379 -3.030 -3.942 43 .000 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 139 Advances in Business Research !"#$%&'%()%*+,,$-$./$% 012!2+32+/3%!.4%12!2+32+/!#%1+5.+6/!./$%7$8$#3%,9-%:$;!#$%12<4$.23 !"#$%='%()%*+,,$-$./$% 012!2+32+/3%!.4%12!2+32+/!#%1+5.+6/!./$%7$8$#3%,9-%>!#$%12<4$.23 Paired Differences t df Sig. 95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean Std. Dev Std. Error Mean Lower Upper Pair 1 T1 – T2 -6.758 11.719 1.488 -9.734 -3.782 -4.541 61 .000 Pair 2 Intra1 - Intra2 -6.581 11.793 1.498 -9.575 -3.586 -4.394 61 .000 Pair 3 Reg1 - Reg2 -4.161 8.679 1.102 -6.365 -1.957 -3.776 61 .000 Pair 4 Aw1 - Aw2 -4.806 14.077 1.788 -8.381 -1.232 -2.689 61 .009 Pair 5 Ass1 - Ass2 -7.032 13.080 1.661 -10.354 -3.711 -4.233 61 .000 Pair 6 Ind1 - Ind2 -3.758 12.999 1.651 -7.059 -.457 -2.276 61 .026 Pair 7 Act1 - Act2 -5.968 13.377 1.699 -9.365 -2.571 -3.513 61 .001 Pair 8 Inter1 - Inter2 -4.194 10.635 1.651 -6.894 -1.493 -3.105 61 .003 Pair 9 Emp1 - Emp2 -4.500 10.773 1.368 -7.236 -1.764 -3.289 61 .002 Pair 10 Soc1 - Soc2 -2.355 10.416 1.323 -5.000 .290 -1.780 61 .080 Pair 11 Intrel1 - Intrel2 -4.065 11.443 1.453 -6.971 -1.158 -2.797 61 .007 Pair 12 Smgmt1 - Smgmt2 -4.903 10.368 1.317 -7.536 -2.270 -3.724 61 .000 Pair 13 Stol1 - Stol2 -7.839 12.467 1.583 -11.005 -4.673 -4.951 61 .000 Pair 14 Imp1 - Imp2 -.758 8.702 1.105 -2.968 1.452 -.686 61 .495 Pair 15 Ada1 - Ada2 -6.387 12.607 1.601 -9.589 -3.186 -3.989 61 .000 Pair 16 Real1 - Real2 -3.903 12.520 1.590 -7.083 -.724 -2.455 61 .017 Pair 17 Flex1 - Flex2 -4.194 13.254 1.683 -7.559 -.828 -2.491 61 .015 Pair 18 Prsol1 - Prsol2 -8.016 12.381 1.572 -11.160 -4.872 -5.098 61 .000 Pair 19 Mood1 - Mood2 -6.742 9.554 1.213 -9.168 -4.316 -5.556 61 .000 Pair 20 Opt1 - Opt2 -8.403 10.836 1.376 -11.155 -5.651 -6.106 61 .000 Pair 21 Hap1 - Hap2 -4.419 9.382 1.191 -6.802 -2.037 -3.709 61 .000 Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean S.D. S.E. Lower Pair 1 9.153 10.433 1.358 11.781 6.738 58 .000 Pair 2 8.831 9.777 1.273 11.378 6.937 58 .000 Pair 3 5.220 10.180 1.325 7.873 3.939 58 .000 Pair 4 10.559 12.478 1.624 13.811 6.500 58 .000 Pair 5 6.441 11.724 1.526 9.496 4.220 58 .000 Pair 6 5.288 10.196 1.327 7.945 3.984 58 .000 Pair 7 6.508 11.227 1.462 9.434 4.453 58 .000 Pair 8 6.661 12.750 1.660 9.984 4.013 58 .000 Pair 9 7.000 15.141 1.971 10.946 3.551 58 .001 Pair 10 4.203 13.955 1.817 7.840 2.314 58 .024 Pair 11 3.407 13.787 1.795 7.000 1.898 58 .063 Pair 12 Smgmt2 5.864 10.301 1.341 8.549 4.373 58 .000 Pair 13 8.424 9.782 1.274 10.973 6.614 58 .000 Pair 14 2.000 12.637 1.645 5.293 1.216 58 .229 Pair 15 9.576 11.786 1.634 12.648 6.241 58 .000 Pair 16 7.542 12.640 1.646 10.836 4.583 58 .000 Pair 17 6.203 12.571 1.637 9.479 3.790 58 .000 Pair 18 9.881 14.076 1.833 13.550 5.392 58 .000 Pair 19 6.322 10.865 1.415 9.153 4.469 58 .000 Pair 20 7.136 12.612 1.642 10.422 4.346 58 .000 Pair 21 5.000 10.940 1.424 7.851 3.510 58 .001 Paired Differences t df Sig. 95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean S.D. S.E. Lower Upper Pair 1 T1 – T2 -9.153 10.433 1.358 -11.781 -6.434 -6.738 58 .000 Pair 2 Intra1 - Intra2 -8.831 9.777 1.273 -11.378 -6.283 -6.937 58 .000 Pair 3 Reg1 - Reg2 -5.220 10.180 1.325 -7.873 -2.568 -3.939 58 .000 Pair 4 Aw1 - Aw2 -10.559 12.478 1.624 -13.811 -7.308 -6.500 58 .000 Pair 5 Ass1 - Ass2 -6.441 11.724 1.526 -9.496 -3.385 -4.220 58 .000 Pair 6 Ind1 - Ind2 -5.288 10.196 1.327 -7.945 -2.631 -3.984 58 .000 Pair 7 Act1 - Act2 -6.508 11.227 1.462 -9.434 -3.583 -4.453 58 .000 Pair 8 Inter1 - Inter2 -6.661 12.750 1.660 -9.984 -3.338 -4.013 58 .000 Pair 9 Emp1 - Emp2 -7.000 15.141 1.971 -10.946 -3.054 -3.551 58 .001 Pair 10 Soc1 - Soc2 -4.203 13.955 1.817 -7.840 -.567 -2.314 58 .024 Pair 11 Intrel1 - Intrel2 -3.407 13.787 1.795 -7.000 .186 -1.898 58 .063 Pair 12 Smgmt1 - Smgmt2 -5.864 10.301 1.341 -8.549 -3.180 -4.373 58 .000 Pair 13 Stol1 - Stol2 -8.424 9.782 1.274 -10.973 -5.874 -6.614 58 .000 Pair 14 Imp1 - Imp2 -2.000 12.637 1.645 -5.293 1.293 -1.216 58 .229 Pair 15 Ada1 - Ada2 -9.576 11.786 1.634 -12.648 -6.505 -6.241 58 .000 Pair 16 Real1 - Real2 -7.542 12.640 1.646 -10.836 -4.248 -4.583 58 .000 Pair 17 Flex1 - Flex2 -6.203 12.571 1.637 -9.479 -2.927 -3.790 58 .000 Pair 18 Prsol1 - Prsol2 -9.881 14.076 1.833 -13.550 -6.213 -5.392 58 .000 Pair 19 Mood1 - Mood2 -6.322 10.865 1.415 -9.153 -3.491 -4.469 58 .000 Pair 20 Opt1 - Opt2 -7.136 12.612 1.642 -10.422 -3.849 -4.346 58 .000 Pair 21 Hap1 - Hap2 -5.000 10.940 1.424 -7.851 -2.149 -3.510 58 .001 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 140 Advances in Business Research Conclusion This research indicates a student development model incorporating emotional intelligence competencies in the !""# !$!%& '!$(& )**#*+& #,& *+!(-,+& (-.-$'/%-,+0&1,& #%/'"+),+& 2,(#,3& #*& +4)+& 5'+4& !,(-"3")(!)+-& ),(& 3")(!)+-6 $-.-$&*+!(-,+*& ),&5-,-2+&7"'%&+4-&#,+-3")+#',&'7&-%'+#',)$&#,+-$$#3-, -&+")#,#,30&8,&),&#, "-)*#,3$9&*-".# -6'"#-,+-(& %)":-+/$) -;& #,+-"/-"*',)$;& ),(& #,+")/-"*',)$& *:#$$*& ),& *#3,#2 ),+$9& #, "-)*-& +4-& /"'5)5#$#+9& '7& )"--"& *! -**0& Therefore, as higher educators we have a responsibility to increase both the theoretical knowledge and the emotional intelligence of students. !"! !#$!% !"#$%&'(%&)&*+#,"#%&-(&.//0(&1+2#&34&$!566$7&-+,&89:,&5,&,:!"$;&Journal of Accountancy%&<=>7&?>@A/( B:#@CD%&E(&.///(&3F+,5+D:6&:DG&$+H5:6&5D,"665I"DH"7&JD$5I9,$&K#+F&,9"&"F+,5+D:6&L2+,5"D,&5DM"D,+#N(&JD&E(&B:#@CD%&)& O(&*:#!"#%&P3G$(Q%&&'()*+,-.//0)/1)(2/34/,+5)4,3(5546(,7((&PRR&0?0@0SSQ(&T:D&U#:DH5$H+7&O+$$"N@B:$$( B:N%&V(%&)&'HW":I"%&W(&.//?(&3F+,5+D:6&5D,"665I"DH"&5D&2DG"#I#:G2:,"&:HH+2D,5DI&$,2G"D,$7&*#"65F5D:#N&:$$"$$F"D,(& 877/9,34,6)!-97+34/,:)8,);,3(<,+34/,+5)=/9<,+5%&<>7&X0=@X>X( Boyatzis, R., Stubbs, E., & Taylor, S. 2002. Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education. 87+-(2>)/1)?+,+6(2(,3)@(+<,4,6)+,-)!-97+34/,%&<7&<>/@SQ(&T:D&U#:DH5$H+7&O+$$"N@B:$$( 3$F+DG@W5I"#%& Y(%& Z2H!"#%&'(%& )&1+$,%& Y(& .//?(& 3F+,5+D:6& 5D,"665I"DH"7& U#+F& ,9"& H6:$$#++F& ,+& ,9"& 8+#!R6:H"(& Management Accounting Quarterly%&A7&0>@X.( Goleman, D. 1995. !2/34/,+5)4,3(5546(,7(:)A'>)43)2+33(<( Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. 1990. Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality%&=7&@.<<( T95MR2#5%&T(%&)&W5F&B(&.//X(&V+&"FR6+N"#$&:DG&H+66"I"$&$""&"N"@,+@"N";&Y+66"I"&$,2G"D,&G"M"6+RF"D,&:DG&:$$"$$F"D,(& #8$!)=/9<,+5%&?>7&0A@XX( Sternberg, R. 1996. Successful intelligence(&["8&1+#!7&T5F+D&)&TH92$,"# 2010, Vol. 1, No. 1, 133-141 Burgess-Wilkerson, Benson & Frankforter 141 Advances in Business Research Thorndike, R., & Stein S. 1937. An evaluation of the attempts to measure social intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 0X7&.A>@.SX(& Vandervoort, D. 2006. The importance of emotional intelligence in higher education. $9<<(,3) DB>7'/5/6>:) H(I(5/E2(,3+5J)@(+<,4,6J)D(J)%/74+5%&.>7&X@A( "̀^^%&W(&.//=(&̀ 9N&"F+,5+D:6&5D,"665I"DH"&$9+26G&F:,,"#&,+&F:D:I"F"D,7& &$2#M"N&+K&,9"&65,"#:,2#"(&SAM Advanced Management Journal%&AX7&0.@X<( K+<.+<+) K9<6(BBLA450(