Emotional intelligence
Emotional intelligence sits in the people atlas — mechanisms, locale notes and limits, not slogans.
Adoption and meaning follow schools, clubs and labs as much as peak specs.
Darker cells mean a higher score for this topic on that metric.
Innate weight40
Trainability82
Early window45
Evidence50
Transfer80
Visibility68
LessMore
Each bar is a 0-100 atlas score for this topic, not a timeline.
Both scores stay visible. Drag the slider to emphasize Innate or Trainable.
Innate
Trainable
Both scores stay visible. Drag the slider to emphasize Evidence or Myth vs evidence.
Evidence
Myth vs evidence
Milestones in order. This is history, not a weekly activity grid.
- Darwin’s Expression
- Salovey & Mayer paper
- Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence
- Bar-On EQ-i
- MSCEIT
- Damasio’s Descartes’ Error era
- Waterhouse-type critiques of related fashions
- Barrett’s How Emotions Are Made
- SEL in schools
- Workplace EQ procurement
Share a practice or pathway page — not claims about group intelligence.
Last reviewed Sources & creditsMedia creditsMethodology
Emotional intelligence is the ability to perceive, use, understand and regulate emotions — in Salovey and Mayer’s 1990 framing — later popularised and broadened by Daniel Goleman (1995).
The ability model has tests (MSCEIT). Mixed and trait models (Bar-On; trait-EQ questionnaires) wander toward personality. Lisa Feldman Barrett’s constructed-emotion work and Damasio’s somatic markers complicate any simple “EQ organ”.
This page treats EI as a useful, contested skill cluster with high trainability claims and mid evidence. It is not a ranking of warm peoples and not a diagnosis.
How this talent is seen here
English-speaking systems · US, UK, Canada, Australia and related school markets
Emotional intelligence shows up here through tests, conservatories, academies and workplace stories — windows that already mix training with starting points.
What follows is a map of institutions, not a diagnosis. Selection usually measures current performance.
Ability modelSalovey & Mayer
PopulariserGoleman 1995
MeasuresMixed
TrainableHigh
Not aSecond IQ caste
ToneEducational
Profile
Innate weight
40
Trainability
82
Early window
45
Evidence
50
Transfer
80
Visibility
68
Pin this loop against the last
Mark last practice-loop quality and this one using labels already on the topic. Teaching note — no group IQ.
Not a 10,000-hour promise, training prescription, diagnosis or group ability ranking.
Last loop quality (topic labels)
This loop quality (topic labels)
Where rest sits
Practice design only. Not an IQ claim.
Deep introduction
Deep dive: Emotional intelligence
Emotional intelligence mapped for mechanisms, locale notes and limits.
Expert note
selection systems without group rankings.
coaches, teachers and clinics.
Local lens
schools, clubs and labs.
conservatories, gyms and classrooms.
Caveat
No group IQ rankings; no race hierarchies.
Editorial scores help browsing; they are not certificates.
Seven chapters
Origins
How emotional intelligence was named, dated and argued — a history of claims, not a verdict on a child.
Read →
Science
Findings, mechanisms and debates around emotional intelligence, with evidence sized honestly.
Read →
Signs
How emotional intelligence is noticed without over-labelling — cues, tests and false positives.
Read →
Develop
Growing emotional intelligence as a system of catalysts, windows and supports — educational, not diagnostic.
Read →
Practice
Designed methods for emotional intelligence — steps, drills and pitfalls, not a promise.
Read →
Exemplars
Historical people in the orbit of emotional intelligence — a set, not a ranking.
Read →
Myths
Misconceptions and real systems around emotional intelligence, across more than three continents.
Read →
In this language region
How Emotional intelligence is noticed in US, UK, Canadian and Australian schools, conservatories and academies — institutions, not a diagnosis.
Read →
40innateWeightEditorial 0-100 browsing score
82trainabilityEditorial 0-100 browsing score
45earlyWindowEditorial 0-100 browsing score
50evidenceEditorial 0-100 browsing score
Emotional intelligence: concrete atlas depth on Tool-Lifes.
Frequently asked questions
Does this atlas rank groups by IQ, race or nation?
No. Pathways and evidence stay individual. Scores are browsing aids — never group biological or racial ranks.
Is EQ a second IQ?
Not in the ability model’s careful versions. Mixed models that predict “success” with everything from optimism to politics are the overclaim. g still organises cognitive batteries; EI is a different bet.
What did Goleman change?
Audience and scope. He mixed ability with social competencies and workplace stories. Useful as popularisation; sloppy as measurement.
Do programmes work?
Emotion-labelling and regulation drills can move some behaviours. Branded EQ curricula vary. Size is usually modest — treat like growth-mindset humility, not a miracle.
Bar-On versus Mayer–Salovey?
Bar-On’s EQ-i is a mixed/trait-leaning inventory. MSCEIT tries to be an ability test. They do not measure one thing.
Did Darwin start this?
The Expression of the Emotions (1872) is an ancestor of emotion science, not an EI test.
Is this interpersonal talent?
Overlap in perception and response. EI emphasises emotion processing; interpersonal talent is broader coordination. See that page.
Group EQ rankings?
No. Display rules differ. Inventories travel badly.