Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence

Abstract

p class="0abstract">Emotional intelligence is significant, and it is an integral key to successful intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships. High emotional intelligence strengthens individuals with additional abilities and skills necessary in personal and working life. This study aims to develop Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire, a reliable and valid measurement instrument of emotional intelligence, based on the theoretical nine-layer pyramid model of emotional intelligence which illustrates hierarchically the abilities and skills that people need to possess to reach the top of emotional intelligence. Models of emotional intelligence and literature on it were investigated, and tool with 81 items was developed. The question items were in full correlation with the levels of the pyramid model. Data were collected through self-reports from 520 teachers from primary and secondary school grade. Results via statistical analysis indicated that the scale is a reliable and valid instrument in measuring emotional intelligence and showing which level they have achieved better and at which level improvements are needed. </p

Full text

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for
Emotional Intelligence
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v17i07.22765
Athanasios Drigas (), Chara Papoutsi
N.C.S.R. ‘Demokritos’, Athens, Greece
dr@iit.demokritos.gr
Abstract—Emotional intelligence is significant, and it is an integral key to
successful intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships. High emotional intelli-
gence strengthens individuals with additional abilities and skills necessary in per-
sonal and working life. This study aims to develop Nine Layer Pyramid Model
Questionnaire, a reliable and valid measurement instrument of emotional intelli-
gence, based on the theoretical nine-layer pyramid model of emotional intelli-
gence which illustrates hierarchically the abilities and skills that people need to
possess to reach the top of emotional intelligence. Models of emotional intelli-
gence and literature on it were investigated, and tool with 81 items was devel-
oped. The question items were in full correlation with the levels of the pyramid
model. Data were collected through self-reports from 520 teachers from primary
and secondary school grade. Results via statistical analysis indicated that the
scale is a reliable and valid instrument in measuring emotional intelligence and
showing which level they have achieved better and at which level improvements
are needed.
Keywords—Emotional intelligence, measurement of emotional intelligence,
nine-layer pyramid model, validity, reliability
1 Introduction
1.1 Emotional intelligence, models, and measurements
Emotional Intelligence or EQ has become extremely popular both in the scientific
world and in the public. Emotional intelligence has been linked to a wealth of research,
many of them showing its positive correlations in many areas such as academic achieve-
ment [1,2] psychological well-being [3,4], stress [5,6], personality [7], social relation-
ships [8,9], workplace [10,11] leadership [12,13], health [14], education [15].
Despite its higher impact, there is much debate about the content of this concept, its
competencies, and its best way to measure it. Emotional intelligence is not a new term,
and many researchers have tried to reformulate older and more recent theories to better
approach it. Furthermore, multiple models of EQ and measurements of it have been
advocated. Despite the different perspectives, emotional intelligence seems to offer use-
ful insights into the convoluted and complex inner worlds of human beings.
Research on emotional intelligence has been divided into three distinct areas of per-
spectives in terms of conceptualizing emotional competencies and their measurements.
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
123

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
There is the ability EI model [16], the mixed models [17-19], and the trait EI model
[20,21].
The difference between the EI models stems from the way of conceptualization,
measurement, and assessment of the EI. Various psychometric tools have been devel-
oped to measure emotional intelligence, which are based on the theoretical models.
These psychometric tools are classified into three categories; 1) Self-reports: These are
suggestions-statements that are granted to those interested in the form of a question-
naire. The participants are carefully reading the suggestions-statements and are asked
to choose the degree to which they agree or disagree with what it is presented in the
sentence-declaration according to the five-point or seven-point Likert scale [22]. The
self-report method is mainly used by mixed models and trait models. 2) Other Reports:
These are again suggestions-statements in the form of a questionnaire. The difference
is that in this case other people (from the familial and social environment) are asked to
complete the sentences-statements that concern the abilities and characteristics of a per-
son that they know. A representative questionnaire is that of Goleman and Boyatzis. 3)
Objective measurement of skills: That measurement involve answers to questions or
solutions to problems and scored according to the answer - solution given since each
question - problem has only one correct answer and the answers - solutions are sorted
and are calibrated in terms of their correctness by experts. Ability models mainly belong
to this category. Perez et al. (2005), present a complete overview of ability EI measures
and trait - mixed EI measures, along with basic information about their reliability, va-
lidity and factor structure provided [23].
Recent worth noting efforts have also been made to develop reliable and valid meas-
urement instruments of emotional intelligence. One to mention is TIE [24], an ability
test and TYEIS [25], a test based on mixed model.
The aim of this paper is to introduce a new instrument, labeled the Nine Layer Pyr-
amid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence. The development of this ques-
tionnaire is attributed to our belief that it is legitimate and worthwhile to construct new
questionnaires in the scientific world to assess emotional intelligence based on a theo-
retical model. The already constructed questionnaires of any kind are remarkable and
are the best springboard for the creation of new ones for research and diagnostic pur-
poses. It is encouraging to develop and validate measuring instruments considering dif-
ferent cultural groups and cultures as these two factors influence the experience and
expression of emotions [26].
2 Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire of Emotional
Intelligence: Creation, Competencies, and Objectives
In Drigas & Papoutsi (2018) a thoroughly presentation was made of the pyramid of
Emotional Intelligence as an attempt to create a new layer model based on emotional,
cognitive, and metacognitive skills [27].
The idea was stemmed from the previous important theories of emotional intelli-
gence. The model of emotional intelligence has been created with a distinct classifica-
tion. Each level includes specific skills that the individual must have acquired to possess
that level of emotional intelligence and then be able to ascend to the next higher level.
It is a methodology for the further development and evolution of the individuals. We
124
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
analyzed the levels of our pyramid step by step, their characteristics, and the course of
their development to conquer the upper levels, transcendence, and emotional unity, as
well as pointing out the significance of EI in our life.
Most of the emotional intelligence abilities and skills that are layered in the pyramid
model have their origins in the three distinct and basic categories of models (Ability
model, Mixed models, Trait model). Some more abilities, skills were added to be pri-
oritized according to their contribution to the best stratification of all levels. If we were
allowed an approach to the concept of emotional intelligence from our perspective, it
would be the followed: “Emotional intelligence is a set of abilities and skills that a
person must train and develop gradually and hierarchically to reach emotional self-
realization. It is the response to emotional stimuli, the recognition – expression of emo-
tions, the full awareness and management of our own emotions but also the emotions
of others, the social skills for better intrapersonal, interpersonal and working relation-
ships, the empathy and compassion, the accurate discrimination of emotions with the
ultimate aim of the emotional development of our potential, self – actualization, tran-
scendence and finally the unity of emotions because humans are part of a united
world”. The development of emotional intelligence is not a static process, but a contin-
uous effort to evolve to reach higher levels for better balance with ourselves and those
around us, better mental and physical health, and more success. In summary, the nine
stages of the pyramid of emotional intelligence are the following [27]:
Emotional stimuli: The emotional stimuli constitute the base of the pyramid where
people can classify each emotional stimulus with accuracy to rapidly assess the emo-
tional situation, to produce emotional changes [28] and connected to conscious aware-
ness, even if it is an early stage [29,30].
Emotion Recognition, Perception-Expression of Emotions: The expression of
emotions is a daily [31] and desirable condition for our own emotional state, but also
for the emotional state of others. Furthermore, the ability to perceive and recognize
emotions, verbally or not verbally, is critical, with research showing that vital infor-
mation can be inferred from facial expressions [32-34].
Self-Awareness: The third level of the model of EI, the self-awareness one, is a
holistic approach to ourselves for better development at all levels, social, professional,
[35,36] interpersonal, intrapersonal. It is a psychological state in which oneself be-
comes the focus of attention.
Self-Management: In the level of self-management, the more you learn to manage
your emotions and have self-control, the greater your ability will be to articulate them
in a productive way [37]. Mischel et al., (2014) refer to emotional self-management as
an intrapsychic process and an attempt to inhibit impulsive emotional reactions to
achieve future goals [38].
Social-Awareness, Empathy, Discrimination of Emotions: Social awareness re-
fers to the awareness of others’ emotions, needs, and concerns [18]. Moreover, with
empathy, one can understand the feelings and thoughts of others taking their perspective
[39]. Discrimination of emotions is also an ability to discriminate with accuracy and in
detail between different emotions, to label them appropriately, to select among various
emotionally charged situations for better choices and decisions [40].
Social Skills, Expertise in Emotions: Social skills are a prerequisite for socializa-
tion, and individualization, because these skills help gaining more knowledge about
ourselves and others, which contributes to better social interactions and to the
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
125

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
configuration of self-concept [41] Expertise in emotions could be characterized as the
ability to increase sensitivity to emotional parameters and strategically expose one’s
own emotions and respond to emotions stemming from others [42].
Universality of Emotions, Self-Actualization: Self-Actualization is to realize and
achieve your potential capacities [43], and to reach self-fulfillment in the most creative
and effective way. Various authors have defined self-actualization as a life-long process
[44], a way of living [45] and a challenge [46]. Self-actualization leads to the univer-
sality of emotions by understanding the difference of emotions and their meanings in
other cultures too even though sometimes emotions are culturally dependent [47].
Transcendence: In the level of Transcendence, one helps others to self-actualize,
find self-fulfillment, and realize their potential [48,49]. Stellar et al. (2017) propose a
taxonomy of self-transcendent positive emotions which are classified into three broader
branches: the emotion of awe and relevant emotions of moral elevation, inspiration, and
admiration; compassion and related emotions of sympathy, love, and pity; and gratitude
and the related emotion of appreciation [50].
Emotional Unity: Emotional unity is the final level in the pyramid of emotional
intelligence. Emotions have an outstanding place in our lives because they influence
them, they make changes, they formulate situations [51]. The most important thing is
to perceive that we are all interconnected with other people, with the nature and the
whole planet. Researchers of emotions are explaining the unity or oneness of emotion
[52].
3 Materials and Methods
In this present study, the Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire of Emotional
Intelligence was constructed to measure emotional intelligence and assess the posses-
sion of each level of the pyramid model through self-report. The questionnaire was
based on the model of the emotional intelligence pyramid and all the questions are re-
lated to the nine levels. It was designed taking account of existing abilities and skills
through known models of EI with detailed examination of them (Ability model, Bar-
On model, Goleman model, Trait model) and with the addition of some more compe-
tencies.
Τhe Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire of Emotional Intelligence was devel-
oped for adults. Specifically, in the research it was granted to teachers of primary and
secondary education to detect their overall emotional intelligence, and in which of the
nine levels of the pyramid model a bigger or smaller percentage is observed. The edu-
cational field was chosen so that there is uniformity in the sample and because it is
important for teachers to have emotional intelligence since they are surrounded by pure
child souls. Access to the questionnaire was anonymous to encourage honest responses
and none of the questions identified the respondents in any way.
Aim of the research: This study aims to quantify the emotional intelligence and
investigate its dependency with the demographic characteristics of the participants. The
goal was to develop a valid and reliable instrument tapping multidimensional construct
of EI.
Research hypotheses: For the inferential part of the analysis, the following six hy-
potheses were tested:
126
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
1. Gender plays an important role in the levels of Emotional Intelligence.
2. Years of experience as a teacher are correlated positively with Emotional Intelli-
gence.
3. Age is correlated positively with Emotional Intelligence.
4. There are no significant differences on Emotional intelligence based on educational
level or training in special needs education.
5. There are no significant differences on Emotional intelligence based on the school
grade the teachers are responsible for.
6. Special Education Relevance has an important role in the levels of Emotional Intel-
ligence.
Research tool: The research tool (Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire of
Emotional Intelligence) is consisted of 81 questions measuring different layers of Emo-
tional Intelligence pyramid model. Answers were given on a 5-point Likert scale (1-
Totally Disagree, 2- Disagree, 3-Neutral, 4-Agree, 5-Totally Agree) with higher aver-
age values representing higher emotional intelligence. The questionnaire was divided
in 9 dimensions (9 questions each) each representing an Emotional intelligence layer.
Cronbach's Alpha were acceptable for all subscales except for Emotional Recognition
where the results were borderline. The Cronbach’s Alpha for the 9 subscales is pre-
sented below in Table 1.
Table 1. Cronbach’s Alpha for Emotional Intelligence subscales
Score
Cronbach's Alpha
N of Items
Emotional Stimuli
0.788
9
Emotion Recognition
0.637
9
Self-Awareness
0.776
9
Self-Management
0.700
9
Social-Awareness
0.853
9
Social Skills
0.835
9
Universality of Emotions
0.876
9
Transcendence
0.859
9
Emotional Unity
0.885
9
Emotional Intelligence
0.961
81
Sample: Sample demographics are presented in Table 2. The sample consists of 520
participants, 129 males (24.8%) and 391 females (75.2%). Most of the respondents
were between 45 and 54 years old (43.5%) and between 34 and 44 years old (20.6%).
Regarding education most participants had a master’s degree (48.3%), followed by
those with a Bachelor’s degree (47.1%) and a minority with PhD titles (4.6%). Further-
more, participants were mainly elementary school teachers (46.2%). Regarding work-
ing experience, 41.3% were working for longer than 20 years in education. A total of
107 (20.6%) participants had degrees which are relevant with special needs education,
with most of those degrees being Master’s degrees (70.1%).
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
127

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
Table 2. Sample Demographics (N=520)
Questions
N
Percentages
Gender
Male
129
24.8%
Female
391
75.2%
Age
25-34
86
16.5%
35-44
107
20.6%
45-54
226
43.5%
Over 55 years
101
19.4%
Educational Level
University Degree
245
47.1%
Master's Degree
251
48.3%
PhD Title
24
4.6%
School Grade
Primary (kindergarten)
81
15.6%
Primary (elementary)
240
46.2%
Secondary
199
38.3%
Years of working experience
1-10
107
20.6%
11-20
198
38.1%
20+
215
41.3%
Special Education Relevance
No
413
79.4%
Yes
107
20.6%
If yes, which degrees are Relevant
Bachelor's Degree
27
25.2%
Master's Degree
75
70.1%
Both Bachelor's Degree and Master's Degree
4
3.7%
PhD Title
1
0.9%
Statistical methods: To investigate the six hypotheses of this study, a series of in-
ductive tests were applied to the date. More specifically, for the 1st, 4th, 5th and 6th hy-
pothesis, the parametric T-tests and one-way ANOVA were conducted. The choice of
tests was based on Central limit theorem in regard to the sufficiently large sample size.
T-tests were used where the grouping factor was dichotomous and one-way ANOVA
when it had 3 or more values. For the 2nd and 3rd hypothesis the Pearson’s Correlation
coefficient test was conducted since age and years of experience were ordinal. The
Pearson correlation coefficient measures linear relationships between variables.
4 Results
Emotional Intelligence Scale: In order to present the emotional intelligence scale,
a total of 10 new variables were created by averaging the questions in each dimension.
Additionally, a discrete score measuring the entire Emotional Intelligence scale deriv-
ing from all 81 questions. Some of the statements were reverse coded where it was
appropriate, to create interpretable scores. Table 3 presents the means, standard
128
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
deviations, as well as the Cronbach's Alpha for each dimension. The highest scores on
average were reported for Universality of Emotions (M = 4.34), while the lowest were
reported for Self-Management (M = 3.55). There were no missing data as the structure
of the questionnaire did not allow submission without full completion.
Table 3. Means, standard deviations and Cronbach's Alpha for EI scales and subscales
Mean
Std. Deviation
N of Questions
Cronbach's Alpha
Emotional Stimuli
4.05
0.491
9
0.788
Emotion Recognition
3.99
0.397
9
0.637
Self-Awareness
4.01
0.484
9
0.776
Self-Management
3.55
0.513
9
0.700
Social-Awareness
4.15
0.486
9
0.853
Social Skills
4.00
0.491
9
0.835
Universality of Emotions
4.34
0.506
9
0.876
Transcendence
4.16
0.547
9
0.859
Emotional Unity
4.17
0.578
9
0.885
Emotional Intelligence
4.05
0.393
81
0.961
It was subsequently tested whether the first and second highest scores for each group
of school grade were similar. For teachers of kindergarten Universality of emotions and
Social-Awareness were the 2 highest dimensions, while for elementary teachers as well
as teachers of secondary education, Universality of emotions and Emotional Unity were
the two highest layers of EI.
1st Hypothesis: A total of 10 T-tests were conducted that revealed 5 statistically
significant results. The detailed T-test results and mean differences are presented in
Table 4. Test results showed a significant effect of gender was upon Emotional Stimuli
(t(518) = -3.217, p = 0.001), upon Emotional Recognition (t(518) = -3.786, p < 0.001)
upon Universality of Emotions (t(518) = -2.086, p = 0.038), upon Transcendence
(t(518) = -2.017, p = 0.044) and upon the totality of Emotional Intelligence (t(518) = -
1.996, p = 0.047) . For all the significant differences, female teachers always reported
higher scores compared to males.
Table 4. P-values and mean differences of EI between male and female teachers
Mean differences
Males
Females
P-value (Gender)
Emotional Stimuli
3.93
4.09
0.001
Emotion Recognition
3.88
4.03
0.000
Self-Awareness
3.96
4.02
0.170
Self-Management
3.62
3.53
0.086
Social-Awareness
4.09
4.18
0.086
Social Skills
3.96
4.02
0.226
Universality of Emotions
4.26
4.37
0.038
Transcendence
4.05
4.19
0.044
Emotional Unity
4.13
4.19
0.278
Emotional Intelligence
3.99
4.07
0.047
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
129

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
2nd and 3rd Hypothesis: To answer the 2nd and 3rd hypothesis, the Pearson corre-
lation coefficient test was used (see Table 5). A total of 20 tests, revealed 5 statistically
significant correlations. Age had Significant correlations with Self-Awareness (r =
+0.152, p < 0.001) with Self-Management (r = 0.107, p = 0.014) and with the total of
Emotional Intelligence (r = 0.092, p = 0.036). The correlations’ intensity is considered
“weak” and were all positive, indicating that as age increases, so does Emotional intel-
ligence. Furthermore, the years of teaching experience had significant correlations with
Self-Awareness (r = 0.142, p = 0.001) and Self-Management (Pearson, r = 0.132, p =
0.002). The intensity is again considered “weak”and all correlations were all positive,
indicating that more experience teachers tend to have higher Emotional intelligence.
Table 5. Pearson correlation coefficients for EI, Age and Years of teaching (N = 520)
Pearson Correlation Coefficients
Age
Years of teaching
Emotional Stimuli
0.056
0.039
Emotion Recognition
0.065
0.053
Self-Awareness
0.152**
0.142**
Self-Management
0,107*
0.132**
Social-Awareness
0.027
0.013
Social Skills
0.078
0.054
Universality of Emotions
0.053
0.028
Transcendence
0.057
0.066
Emotional Unity
0.059
0.069
Emotional Intelligence
0.092*
0.085
4th Hypothesis: A total of 10 t-tests were performed for differences on EI between
teachers with special needs degree relevance, and those without. Results revealed 4
significant differences (see Table 6). Results showed a significant effect upon Special
needs degree relevance upon Emotional Stimuli (T-test, t(518) = 2.343, p = 0.020),
upon Emotional Recognition (T-test, t(518) = 3.091, p = 0.002) upon Self-Awareness
(T-test, t(518) = 2.389, p = 0.017) and upon the total Emotional Intelligence (T-test,
t(145) = 2.164, p = 0.032). In all cases, teachers with training in Special needs education
reported higher EI scores.
Table 6. P-values and mean differences of EI based on Special Education Relevance
Mean differences
Degree with Relevance
No Relevance
P-value (Special Education
Relevance)
Emotional Stimuli
4.15
4.02
0.020
Emotion Recognition
4.10
3.97
0.002
Self-Awareness
4.11
3.98
0.017
Self-Management
3.65
3.52
0.051
Social-Awareness
4.23
4.14
0.089
Social Skills
4.05
3.99
0.287
Universality of Emotions
4.41
4.33
0.187
Transcendence
4.24
4.14
0.136
Emotional Unity
4.25
4.15
0.135
Emotional Intelligence
4.13
4.03
0.032
130
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
Additionally, a total of 10 one-way ANOVA tests were performed for differences on
Emotional Intelligence between the different educational levels of teachers (Table 7).
The results revealed 7 significant differences. There was a significant effect of Educa-
tional level upon Emotional Stimuli (F(2,517) = 3.242, p = 0.040), Self-Awareness
(F(2,517) = 4.639, p = 0.010), Self-Management (F(2,517) = 5.44, p = 0.005). Social
Skills (F(2,517) = 4.483, p = 0.012). Transcendence (F(2,517) = 3.778, p = 0.024).
Emotional Unity (F(2,517) = 4.078, p = 0.017) and total Emotional Intelligence
(F(2,517) = 5.518, p = 0.004). For all significant results, participants with PhD reported
the highest Emotional intelligence levels, followed by those with a Master’s Degree
and lastly those with a Bachelor’s degree that had the lowest scores, indicating that EI
is higher in people with higher educational levels.
Table 7. P-values and mean differences of EI based on Educational Level
Mean differences
Bachelor's
Master's
PhD
P-value (Educational Level)
Emotional Stimuli
3.99
4.09
4.17
0.040
Emotional Recognition
3.95
4.04
3.96
0.053
Self-Awareness
3.94
4.06
4.12
0.010
Self-Management
3.47
3.61
3.66
0.005
Social-Awareness
4.11
4.18
4.25
0.178
Social Skills
3.94
4.04
4.20
0.012
Universality of Emotions
4.29
4.38
4.46
0.092
Transcendence
4.09
4.22
4.25
0.024
Emotional Unity
4.10
4.23
4.31
0.017
Emotional Intelligence
3.99
4.09
4.15
0.004
5th Hypothesis: To investigate the differences on Emotional Intelligence between
the different school grades the teachers are responsible for, once again 10 one-way
ANOVA tests were performed (Table 8). The results revealed only 1 statistically sig-
nificant difference, as for the Emotional Recognition (F(2,517) = 4.438, p = 0.012).
Kindergarten teachers appear to have a higher score of Emotional Recognition, fol-
lowed by the elementary teachers, while the secondary teachers had the lowest score.
Table 8. P-values and mean differences of EI based on School Grade
Mean differences
Primary (kinder-
garten)
Primary (ele-
mentary)
Secondary
P-value (School Grade)
Emotional Stimuli
4.15
4.03
4.03
0.138
Emotional Recognition
4.08
4.01
3.94
0.012
Self-Awareness
4.08
3.98
4.01
0.255
Self-Management
3.57
3.55
3.54
0.947
Social-Awareness
4.24
4.12
4.16
0.171
Social Skills
4.09
3.97
4.00
0.148
Universality of Emotions
4.34
4.30
4.40
0.124
Transcendence
4.22
4.13
4.17
0.470
Emotional Unity
4.20
4.13
4.21
0.345
Emotional Intelligence
4.11
4.02
4.05
0.253
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
131

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
6th Hypothesis: Once again, a total of 10 T-tests were conducted that revealed 4
statistically significant results, as presented in Table 9. Test results showed a significant
effect of Special Education Relevance upon Emotional Stimuli (T-test, t = 518, p =
0.020), Emotional Recognition (T-test, t = 518, p = 0.002), Self-Awareness (T-test, t =
518, p = 0.017), and upon the totality of Emotional Intelligence (T-test, t = 145, p =
0.032). For all the significant differences, teachers with a special education relevance
seem to have a higher mean, hence a higher score.
Table 9. P-values and mean differences of EI based on Special Education Relevance
Mean differences
Νο
Yes
P-value (Special Education Relevance)
Emotional Stimuli
4.02
4.15
0.020
Emotional Recognition
3.97
4.10
0.002
Self-Awareness
3.98
4.11
0.017
Self-Management
3.52
3.65
0.051
Social-Awareness
4.14
4.23
0.089
Social Skills
3.99
4.05
0.287
Universality of Emotions
4.33
4.41
0.187
Transcendence
4.14
4.24
0.136
Emotional Unity
4.15
4.25
0.135
Emotional Intelligence
4.03
4.13
0.032
Additionally, in Table 10 the linear correlations among the 9 scales of emotional
intelligence are presented. The results were statistically significant in every test in 99%
trust level (all p-values<0.001), indicating positive correlation in all tested pairs. Con-
cluding, as one of the scales increased, so do all the others, with the most intense de-
pendency, being between universality and transcendence.
Table 10. Pearson’s Correlation between the 9 scales of Emotional Intelligence
Emo-
tional
Stimuli
Emo-
tional
Recog-
nition
Self-
Aware-
ness
Self-Man-
agement
Social-
Awareness
Social
Skills
Univer-
sality of
Emotions
Tran-
scend-
ence
Emo-
tional
Unity
Emotional
Stimuli
1
,557**
,577**
,298**
,524**
,469**
,458**
,412**
,402**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Emotional
Recogni-
tion
,557**
1
,560**
,353**
,597**
,542**
,492**
,549**
,487**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Self-
Awareness
,577**
,560**
1
,538**
,561**
,598**
,585**
,558**
,532**
132
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Self-Man-
agement
,298**
,353**
,538**
1
,440**
,547**
,522**
,505**
,506**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Social-
Awareness
,524**
,597**
,561**
,440**
1
,701**
,667**
,678**
,672**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Social
Skills
,469**
,542**
,598**
,547**
,701**
1
,712**
,757**
,696**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Universal-
ity of Emo-
tions
,458**
,492**
,585**
,522**
,667**
,712**
1
,811**
,766**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Transcend-
ence
,412**
,549**
,558**
,505**
,678**
,757**
,811**
1
,802**
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
Emotional
Unity
,402**
,487**
,532**
,506**
,672**
,696**
,766**
,802**
1
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Continuing, a factor analysis using varimax rotation was conducted, to extract the
factor loadings of the questionnaire. The loadings of each variable are presented below
in Table 11.
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
133

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
Table 11. Factor loadings
Factor
Questions/Items
Factor
loadings
1st
64. I am interested in my fellow man, his needs, and his emotional and social de-
velopment.
0,736
62. I have feelings of love, affection, and compassion for my fellow man.
0,729
44. I'm sensitive to other people 's emotional state.
0,685
63. I cultivate and develop positive emotions so that they are universally addressed
to everyone and everything, respecting that every creature, every social group,
every civilization has its own values, emotional expressions, and reactions.
0,677
38. I care about other people's emotions and concerns.
0,675
40. I recognize and respect the individual / social differences and the uniqueness of
human being.
0,661
78. I feel the life situation of another person regardless of the social group and the
nationality to which he belongs.
0,647
76. I feel inner harmony and mental uplift when I do positive actions towards the
social and natural environment.
0,588
67. I reward the efforts and successes of other people.
0,550
42. I understand the values and culture of a team and I can collaborate and under-
stand people from different social backgrounds and civilization.
0,543
79. I am an entity that belongs to a more general whole and I do not do things that
can harm others or the planet in general.
0,521
41. I can put myself in someone else's shoes, understand him and feel him.
0,519
60. I have a strong sense of worth, gratitude and truth in my life.
0,517
66. I help others better manage negative emotional states e.g., stress, irritability,
anger.
0,488
54. I believe that good, interpersonal, emotional relationships are important.
0,474
72. I admit my mistakes and try to do the right thing.
0,460
73. I believe that the existence of emotions gives meaning to life.
0,458
43. I listen carefully and actively to the person who wants to talk to me about a
topic that concerns him.
0,458
46. I try to provide support, encouragement, inspiration and create a positive emo-
tional climate in my personal and working life.
0,439
47. I can solve personal and interpersonal problems by considering the emotions
and perspective of other people.
0,405
39. I am aware of the emotions and thoughts of the people around me and I try to
meet their needs.
0,399
2nd
69. I enjoy life and I am optimistic.
0,752
70. I am possessed by higher feelings of euphoria, joy, and awe, which I try to con-
vey to others.
0,681
61. I appreciate the life and goods it offers me, and I have positive feelings even
for simple everyday things.
0,620
80. I love myself and I try to channel this feeling into everything around me (peo-
ple, animals, plants, etc.).
0,617
59. I focus on my positive emotions to activate me, to motivate me, to expand my
thought and be a guide for changes I must make in my life.
0,603
75. I am in emotional harmony with nature and the universe.
0,554
74. I base my decisions on my positive emotions.
0,546
68. I engage in activities that create emotional fullness for me.
0,542
56. I feel positive emotions (e.g., peace, joy) and I am good with myself even when
I am alone.
0,538
134
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
77. I feel the emotional unity of all things having positive emotions for all the man-
ifestations of life.
0,502
81. I have self-esteem.
0,487
57. I am aware of the positive and negative elements of my emotions and my char-
acter, I accept them and try to cultivate the positive and decrease the negative ones.
0,469
58. Based on past experience, I strive to improve to experience more emotional and
mental fulfillment.
0,450
71. I want to learn new things, improve myself, and contribute to the society.
0,431
55. I set creative goals and by regulating my emotional and mental state I try to do
my best to succeed.
0,428
3rd
5. I process and evaluate the incoming emotional stimuli to understand the emo-
tional actions that are manifested.
0,709
6. When I receive an emotional stimulus, I identify with similar stimuli from which
I have been emotionally affected in the past.
0,673
1. I notice my emotional reactions when I participate, or I am just present at an
event.
0,671
19. I observe and analyze my emotions and thoughts.
0,602
3. I try to relate emotional stimuli to my physical reactions.
0,570
7. I try to relate other people's emotional reactions to the stimuli that cause them.
0,512
2. I understand which emotional stimuli will arouse strong negative emotions e.g.,
anger, sadness, irritability.
0,507
27. Constant awareness of my emotions, beliefs and motivations is especially im-
portant to me.
0,473
4th
11. I express my feelings verbally.
0,620
12. I understand when the verbal or non-verbal expression of individuals is identi-
cal with the emotion they possess, and they want to show.
0,573
10. I recognize the emotions of others through non-verbal communication, i.e., fa-
cial expressions, gestures, body movements.
0,529
13. I express my feelings non-verbally (facial expressions, gestures, posture).
0,494
65. I share my feelings and emotional experiences with those around me.
0,483
8. I understand from the posture the emotional changes that can occur in other peo-
ple because of a stimulus.
0,452
53. I am aware of the non-verbal emotional messages I send to others, but also of
what others send to me.
0,450
45. I accurately identify and properly name the type of emotion that I and those
around me experience.
0,445
37. I understand other people's emotions and the reasons that create them.
0,439
52. I am emotionally active in my communication with others and I can listen to
them, convey my thoughts, and share my emotions.
0,400
18. I find out that the behavior of some people is different from the emotions that
those people express.
0,235
5th
49. I can stay calm and manage situations and conflicts that are emotionally
charged.
0,566
48. I can converse, work in groups, and effectively manage social interactions.
0,486
51. I accept criticism without being defensive.
0,475
50. I express my opinion by communicating honestly with others without becom-
ing aggressive.
0,455
33. I regulate my emotional functions to maximize the results of my work and the
achievement of my goals.
0,404
6th
14. I believe that the expression of our emotions is influenced by social and cul-
tural factors and by experiences of the past.
0,602
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
135

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
16. I believe that recognizing emotions is an important skill that guides our choices
and actions.
0,578
15. I believe that the expression of our emotions is necessary and plays an im-
portant role in everyday interaction and in interpersonal relationships.
0,500
9. I believe that emotional stimuli motivate a person and regulate his behavior.
0,455
7th
34. Even small problems can cause me intense emotional turmoil.
0,740
36. I need the help of others to manage my emotional tensions.
0,662
17. I draw hasty conclusions about the emotions that other people may have.
0,609
30. When there are strong negative emotions (e.g., anxiety, anger), my mental
function becomes difficult.
0,567
26. Sometimes I feel confused by the emotions I feel inside.
0,554
4. Some emotional stimuli can cause me strong emotional reactions (positive and /
or negative).
-0,318
8th
29. Evaluating the priority of social contacts and relationships I do not express un-
pleasant feelings not to bother/hurt others.
0,670
28. I observe my emotions when they arise, and I can keep the positive emotions
and calm the negative ones.
0,600
32. I pay attention to the manifestation of my emotions and regulate them to opti-
mize my behavior.
0,498
35. I manage my emotional functions properly so not to be emotional upset from
negative impacts from my social environment.
0,443
9th
22. I understand when I am possessed by positive emotions (joy, enthusiasm) and
when I am possessed by negative ones (sadness, irritation).
0,658
21. I am fully aware of my emotions, my character, and my behavior as well as
their impact to other people.
0,544
23. I have confidence as a person and I know what motivates me, what satisfies me
and what I can achieve.
0,478
20. I can describe my emotional state at any time and locate the source of my emo-
tions.
0,454
24. I recognize and evaluate my strengths and weaknesses in the emotional field.
0,414
31. I take responsibility for my emotional behaviors and their effects.
0,391
25. When I do something in my work and / or in my daily life, I always try to com-
plete it.
0,352
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 20 iterations.
The first level of the emotional intelligence pyramid, emotional stimuli, includes the
questions 1-9. The second level, emotion recognition-perception-expression of emo-
tions, includes the questions 10-18. The questions 19-27 belongs to the third level of
self – awareness. The self – management level includes the questions 28-36. As for the
fifth level of the pyramid, social awareness-empathy-discrimination of emotions, it in-
cludes the questions 37-45. The sixth level of social skills and expertise in emotions
consists of the questions 46-54. The next level of universality of emotions and self-
actualization contains questions 55-63. The penultimate level of transcendence com-
posed of questions 64-72. The last level of the questionnaire that of emotional unity
includes the questions 73-81.
Completing the research, to ensure the reliability of the questionnaire measuring the
emotional intelligence, an iterative algorithm was used. This algorithm, through a
136
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
random sampling process, collected 1000 different subsamples from the initial dataset
(520 participants), consisted of 100 participants each. Next, for every case the
Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated for the 9 subscales and the whole emotional intelli-
gence scale. The results were remarkable considering that Cronbach’s Alpha as an in-
dicator is overly sensitive to the sample’s size. The Table 10 below shows the minimum
and maximum value of the Cronbach’s index from the 1000 repetitions, while also
through the means and standard deviations of the reliability values it seems that in total,
the 1000 samples also had similarly high reliability as the initial sample. The con-
sistency between each subsample’s reliability can be presented as a strong indicator that
the studied questionnaire measures emotional intelligence accurately and reliably.
Table 12. Cronbach’s Alpha in 1000 subsamples comparing to the initial dataset
Score
Cronbach's Alpha (For
the whole sample)
Repetitive algorithm
Min Cronbach's
Max Cronbach's
Mean (±std. dev.)
Emotional Stimuli
0.788
0.744
0.815
0.799±0.125
Emotional Recogni-
tion
0.637
0.548
0.725
0.6065±0.111
Self-Awareness
0.776
0.723
0.839
0.771±0.120
Self-Management
0.700
0.658
0.888
0.823±0.088
Social-Awareness
0.853
0.822
0.926
0.884±0.128
Social Skills
0.835
0.803
0.924
0.8435±0.095
Universality of
Emotions
0.876
0.788
0.978
0.833±0.098
Transcendence
0.859
0.825
0.849
0.887±0.124
Emotional Unity
0.885
0.858
0.925
0.891±0.058
Emotional Intelli-
gence
0.961
0.923
0.988
0.995±0.038
5 Discussion and Conclusion
This study aimed to quantify the emotional intelligence and investigate its depend-
ency with the demographic characteristics of the participants. The sample consists of
520 participants, most of them females. The majority of respondents were between 45
and 54 years old and regarding education, most of the participants had a master’s de-
gree. Furthermore, participants were mainly elementary school teachers working for
longer than 20 years in education, with Master’s degrees relevant to special needs edu-
cation.
The inductive statistics revealed significant effect of gender upon Emotional Stimuli,
Emotion Recognition, Universality of Emotions, Transcendence, and the total Emo-
tional Intelligence, in which female teachers always reported higher scores compared
to males.
Age had Significant correlations with Self-Awareness, Self-Management, and the
total Emotional Intelligence, indicating that as age increases, so does Emotional intel-
ligence. Furthermore, the years of teaching experience had significant correlations with
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
137

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
Self-Awareness and Self-Management, indicating that more experience teachers tend
to have higher Emotional intelligence.
As for differences on EI between teachers with special needs degree relevance, and
those without, 4 significant results were revealed. More specifically, Special needs de-
gree relevance affects significantly Emotional Stimuli, Emotion Recognition, Self-
Awareness, and the total Emotional Intelligence. In all cases, teachers with training in
Special needs education reported higher EI scores.
Additionally, the tests between Emotional Intelligence among the different educa-
tional levels of teachers, revealed 7 significant differences. There was a significant ef-
fect of Educational level upon Emotional Stimuli, Self-Awareness, Self-Management,
Social Skills, Transcendence, Emotional Unity, and total Emotional Intelligence. For
all significant results, participants with PhD reported the highest Emotional intelligence
levels, followed by those with a Master’s Degree and lastly those with a Bachelor’s
degree that had the lowest scores, indicating that EI is higher in people with higher
educational levels.
Investigating the differences on Emotional Intelligence between the different school
grades the teachers are responsible for, it was revealed that only Emotion Recognition
was affected. More specifically, Kindergarten teachers appear to have a higher score of
Emotional Recognition, followed by the elementary teachers, while the secondary
teachers had the lowest score.
Continuing, a significant effect of Special Education Relevance upon Emotional
Stimuli, Emotion Recognition, Self-Awareness, and the totality of Emotional Intelli-
gence was revealed, with teachers with a special education relevance having a higher
score.
Additionally, the 9 scales of emotional intelligence were positively correlated with
each other, concluding that as one of the scales increased, so do all the others, with the
most intense dependency, being between universality and transcendence.
Completing the research, to ensure the reliability of the questionnaire measuring the
emotional intelligence, an iterative algorithm was used. This algorithm, through a ran-
dom sampling process, collected 1000 different subsamples from the initial dataset (521
participants), consisted of 100 participants each. Next, for every case the Cronbach’s
Alpha was calculated for the 9 subscales and the whole emotional intelligence scale.
The consistency between each subsample’s reliability can be presented as a strong in-
dicator that the studied questionnaire measures emotional intelligence accurately and
reliably.
It was observed that the group of teachers possesses better some levels of emotional
intelligence of the pyramid compared to some other levels which possesses them, but
to a lesser extent. Overall, their level of emotional intelligence is quite good. Based on
these results, various strategies can be made to develop and to improve the levels where
the amount of possession is lower. Also, the demographic factors we set, seem to affect
the dimensions of emotional intelligence but not all of them. The purpose of the con-
struction of the emotional intelligence pyramid is to show the hierarchical levels of
which it is composed. The purpose of the Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for
Emotional Intelligence is to measure emotional intelligence and to examine how well
138
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
each person holds each level. The results can show the lowest acquisitions to intervene
to increase the specific abilities / skills.
Although it is difficult to provide all the psychometric evidence for a new measure
in one study, the results of the present research are encouraging. A remarkable attempt
was made for the items of the questionnaire to choose the right words carefully after
many changes to convey the desired meaning precisely and for the questionnaire to be
readable. The research activity should be continued with multiple studies with different
and larger samples and a variety of theoretically relevant criteria. Something else that
should be taken seriously in the results through self-reports is the tendency sometimes
of the participants to give socially desirable responses, to agree with statements, even
have a false insight about their social and emotional skill in depth and not be quite
objective and accurate in assessing those skills [53,54]. In the specific measurement
some of the measurements showed that teachers possess more some levels of emotional
intelligence pyramid model that are high in the hierarchy and less some others that are
lower in the pyramid. The specific result as well as the objectivity of the answers on the
part of the respondents, should be examined in future measurements.
The Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence can be
used to evaluate the EI and monitor the development of the nine levels of the pyramid.
Moreover, prospective studies whose purpose is to test its reliability and validity on
bigger and diverse samples can be carried out and investigate correlation between the
EI and other variables, to reveal EI’s impacts on them. The Nine Layer Pyramid Model
Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence has been developed as an alternative measure
of emotional intelligence of adults to use for scientific and practical purposes in many
sectors.
6 References
[1] Costa, A., & Faria, L. (2015). The impact of emotional intelligence on academic achieve-
ment: A longitudinal study in Portuguese secondary school. Learning and Individual Differ-
ences, 37, 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.011
[2] MacCann, C., Jiang, Y., Brown, L. E., Double, K. S., Bucich, M., & Minbashian, A. (2020).
Emotional intelligence predicts academic performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bul-
letin, 146(2), 150. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000219
[3] Guerra-Bustamante, J., León-del-Barco, B., Yuste-Tosina, R., López-Ramos, V. M., &
Mendo-Lázaro, S. (2019). Emotional intelligence and psychological well-being in adoles-
cents. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(10), 1720.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101720
[4] Sánchez-Álvarez, N., Extremera, N., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2016). The relation between
emotional intelligence and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic investigation. The Journal
of Positive Psychology, 11(3), 276-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1058968
[5] Cejudo, J., Rodrigo-Ruiz, D., López-Delgado, M. L., & Losada, L. (2018). Emotional intel-
ligence and its relationship with levels of social anxiety and stress in adolescents. Interna-
tional journal of environmental research and public health, 15(6), 1073.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15061073
[6] Fteiha, M., & Awwad, N. (2020). Emotional intelligence and its relationship with stress
coping style. Health Psychology Open, 7(2), 2055102920970416. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2055102920970416
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
139

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
[7] Alegre, A., Pérez-Escoda, N., & López-Cassá, E. (2019). The relationship between trait
emotional intelligence and personality. Is trait EI really anchored within the big five, big two
and big One Frameworks? Frontiers in psychology, 10, 866. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2019.00866
[8] Ruvalcaba-Romero, N. A., Fernández-Berrocal, P., Salazar-Estrada, J. G., & Gallegos-
Guajardo, J. (2017). Positive emotions, self-esteem, interpersonal relationships, and social
support as mediators between emotional intelligence and life satisfaction. Journal of Behav-
ior, Health & Social Issues, 9(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbhsi.2017.08.001
[9] Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Bobik, C., Coston, T. D., Greeson, C., Jedlicka, C., ... &
Wendorf, G. (2001). Emotional intelligence and interpersonal relations. The Journal of so-
cial psychology, 141(4), 523-536. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540109600569
[10] Miao, C., Humphrey, R. H., & Qian, S. (2017). A meta‐analysis of emotional intelligence
and work attitudes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 90(2), 177-202.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12167
[11] Schutte, N. S., & Loi, N. M. (2014). Connections between emotional intelligence and work-
place flourishing. Personality and Individual Differences, 66, 134-139. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.paid.2014.03.031
[12] Kerr, B. A. (1991). Educating gifted girls. In Colangelo& G.A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of
gifted education, Neeham Heights. pp. 402-415
[13] Sadri, G. (2012). Emotional intelligence and leadership development. Public Personnel
Management, 41(3), 535-548. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102601204100308
[14] Martins, A., Ramalho, N., & Morin, E. (2010). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the rela-
tionship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and individual differences,
49(6), 554-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.029
[15] Puertas Molero, P., Zurita Ortega, F., Chacón-Cuberos, R., Castro Sánchez, M., Ramírez
Granizo, I. A., & González Valero, G. (2020). Emotional intelligence in the field of educa-
tion: a meta-analysis. https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2018.13.proc2.01
[16] Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional in-
telligence with the MSCEIT V2. 0. Emotion, 3(1), 97. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-
3542.3.1.97
[17] Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI). Psicothema,
18, 13-25.
[18] Boyatzis, R. (2009), “Competencies as a behavioral approach to emotional intelligence”,
The Journal of Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 749-770. https://doi.org/10.
1108/02621710910987647
[19] Goleman, D. An EI-based theory of performance. In The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace:
How to Selectfor, Measure, and Improve Emotional Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and
Organizations; John Wiley & Sons:Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2001; Volume 1, pp. 27–44.
[20] Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investi-
gation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European journal of personality, 15(6),
425-448. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.416
[21] Petrides, K. V. (2010). Trait emotional intelligence theory. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 3(2), 136-139.
[22] Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained.
Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 396-403. https://doi.org/10.9734/
bjast/2015/14975
[23] Pérez, J.C., Petrides, K.V. & Furnham, A. (2005). Measuring trait emotional intelligence. in
R. Schulze and R.D. Roberts (Eds.). International Handbook of Emotional Intelligence.
Cambridge: hogrefe & huber.
[24] Śmieja, M., Orzechowski, J., & Stolarski, M. S. (2014). TIE: An ability test of emotional
intelligence. PLoS One, 9(7), e103484. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103484
140
http://www.i-joe.org

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
[25] Coskun, K., Öksüz, Y., & Yılmaz, H. B. (2017). Ten years emotional intelligence scale
(TYEIS): Its development, validity, and reliability. International Journal of Assessment
Tools in Education, 4(2).
[26] Parker, J. D., Saklofske, D. H., Shaughnessy, P. A., Huang, S. H., Wood, L. M., & Easta-
brook, J. M. (2005). Generalizability of the emotional intelligence construct: A cross-cul-
tural study of North American aboriginal youth. Personality and individual differences,
39(1), 215-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.008
[27] Drigas, A. S., & Papoutsi, C. (2018). A new layered model on emotional intelligence. Be-
havioral Sciences, 8(5), 45.
[28] Jang, D., Elfenbein, H.A., 2015. Emotion, Perception and Expression of. In: James D.Wright
(editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edi-
tion, Vol 7. Oxford: Elsevier. pp. 483–489
[29] Mitchell, D.G.; Greening, S.G. Conscious perception of emotional stimuli: Brain mecha-
nisms. Neuroscientist 2012,18, 386–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858411416515
[30] Okon-Singer, H.; Lichtenstein-Vidne, L.; Cohen, N. Dynamic modulation of emotional pro-
cessing.Biol. Psychol.2013,92, 480–491 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.05.010
[31] Keltner, D., Sauter, D., Tracy, J., & Cowen, A. (2019). Emotional expression: Advances in
basic emotion theory. Journal of nonverbal behavior, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-
019-00293-3
[32] Adolphs, R. (2003). Cognitive neuroscience of human social behaviour. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 4(3), 165-178. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1056
[33] Aviezer, H., Hassin, R. R., Ryan, J., Grady, C., Susskind, J., Anderson, A., ... & Bentin, S.
(2008). Angry, disgusted, or afraid? Studies on the malleability of emotion perception. Psy-
chological science, 19(7), 724-732. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02148.x
[34] Chan, V. (2009). The perception and recognition of emotions and facial expression. Univer-
sity of Toronto Journal of Undergraduate Life Sciences, 3(1).
[35] Blakemore, T., & Agllias, K. (2019). Student reflections on vulnerability and self-awareness
in a social work skills course. Australian Social Work, 72(1), 21-33. https://doi.org/
10.1080/0312407x.2018.1516793
[36] Chinnery, S. A., & Beddoe, L. (2011). Taking active steps towards the competent use of self
in social work. Advances in Social Work and Welfare Education, 13(1), 89.
[37] Sunindijo, R.Y.; Hadikusumo, B.H.; Ogunlana, S. Emotional intelligence and leadership
styles in constructionproject management.J. Manag. Eng.2007,23, 166–170. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2007)23:4(166)
[38] Mischel, W., DeSmet, A., & Kross, E. (2014). Self-regulation in the service of conflict res-
olution. In P. Coleman, M.Deutsch, & E. Marcus (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolu-
tion: Theory and practice(3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
[39] Ioannidou, F.; Konstantikaki, V. Empathy and emotional intelligence: What is really
about?Int. J. Caring Sci.2008,1, 118
[40] Drigas, A., & Mitsea, E. (2020). The 8 Pillars of Metacognition. International Journal of
Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(21), 162-178. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.
v15i21.14907
[41] Khan, S., Gagné, M., Yang, L., & Shapka, J. (2016). Exploring the relationship between
adolescents' self-concept and their offline and online social worlds. Computers in Human
Behavior, 55, 940-945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.046
[42] Potworowski, G., & Kopelman, S. (2007). Developing evidence-based expertise in emotion
management: Strategically displaying and responding to emotions in negotiations. Ross
School of Business Paper, (1099). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1020626
[43] Gopinath, R. (2020). Confirmator Factor Analysis in Self Actualization.
[44] Rogers, C. (1961). On Becoming a Person, Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin
iJOE ‒ Vol. 17, No. 07, 2021
141

Paper—Nine Layer Pyramid Model Questionnaire for Emotional Intelligence
[45] Gowan, J. C. (1972). Levels of Development and Accomplishment in Superior Male Adults.
The Guidance and measurement of intelligence, development, and creativity, Northridge,
California. California State University, pp. 205-217.
[46] Kerr, R., Garvin, J., Heaton, N., & Boyle, E. (2006). Emotional intelligence and leadership
effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/
01437730610666028
[47] Lutz, C., & White, G. M. (1986). The anthropology of emotions. Annual review of anthro-
pology, 15(1), 405-436.
[48] Huitt, W. (2001). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational psychology interactive, 12.
[49] Huitt, W. (2007). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Educational psychology interactive, 23.
[50] Stellar, J. E., Gordon, A. M., Piff, P. K., Cordaro, D., Anderson, C. L., Bai, Y., Maruskin,
L. A., & Keltner, D. (2017). Self-transcendent emotions and their social functions: Compas-
sion, gratitude, and awe bind us to others through prosociality. Emotion Review, 9(3), 200-
207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916684557
[51] Ratcliffe, M. (2017). Grief and the Unity of Emotion. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 41,
154-174. https://doi.org/10.1111/misp.12071
[52] Adamos, M. (2007). The Unity of Emotion: An Unlikely Aristotelian Solution. The Journal
of Mind and Behavior, 28(2), 101-114.
[53] McDonald, J. D. (2008). Measuring personality constructs: The advantages and disad-
vantages of self-reports, informant reports and behavioural assessments. Enquire, 1(1), 1-
19.
[54] Paulhus, D. L., & Vazire, S. (2007). The self-report method. Handbook of research methods
in personality psychology, 1(2007), 224-239.
7 Authors
Athanasios Drigas is a Research Director at IIT-N.C.S.R. Demokritos. He is the
Coordinator of Telecoms Lab and founder of Net Media Lab since 1996. From 1990 to
1999 he was the Operational manager of the Greek Academic network. He has been the
Coordinator of Several International Projects, in the fields of ICTs, and eservices
(elearning, e-psychology, e-government, e-inclusion, e-culture etc). He has published
more than 300 articles, 7 books, 25 educational CD-ROMs and several patents. He has
been a member of several international committees for the design and coordination of
Network and ICT activities and of international conferences and journals. Also, he has
accepted several distinctions for his work (articles, projects, patents).
Chara Papoutsi is a PhD Candidate in Information and Communication Systems
Engineering at the University of the Aegean in Samos, Greece. She holds a Master’s
degree in Applied Pedagogy at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.
She is a teacher in a primary school. She has publications on empathy and emotional-
intelligence and she is also with NCSR DEMOKRITOS, Institute of Informatics and
Telecommunications, Net Media Lab, Athens, Greece, papoutsi.xara@yahoo.com
Article submitted 2021-03-19. Resubmitted 2021-04-12. Final acceptance 2021-04-12. Final version pub-
lished as submitted by the authors.
142
http://www.i-joe.org