Sex Roles, Vol. 42, Nos.

5/6, 2000

Brief Reports

Gender Differences in Measured and SelfEstimated Trait Emotional Intelligence

K. V. Petrides and Adrian Furnham1
University College London

Two hundred and sixty predominantly White participants completed a measure of trait emotional intelligence (EI) and estimated their scores on 15 EI
facets on a normal distribution with 100 points as the mean and 15 points
as a standard deviation. Females scored higher than males on the social
skills factor of measured trait EI. However, when the 15 facets of selfestimated EI were combined into a single reliable scale and the participantss
measured trait EI scores were held constant, it was demonstrated that males
believed they had higher EI than females. Most of the correlations between
measured and self-estimated scores were significant and positive, thereby
indicating that people have some insight into their EI. Correlations between
measured and self-estimated scores were generally higher for males than
females, and a regression analysis indicated that gender was a significant
predictor of self-estimated EI.

INTRODUCTION
Over the past decade there have been a number of studies on selfestimated IQ, concentrating particularly on gender differences. This paper
looks at gender differences, not in IQ, but in emotional intelligence (EI),
which has attracted much attention in recent years (e.g., Cooper & Sawaf,
1997; Goleman, 1995; Gross & John, 1995; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey,
Bedell, Detweiler, & Mayer, in press; Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey, &
Palfai, 1995; Schutte, et al., 1998).
Much of the work on EI has been carried out on a theoretical level
1

To whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Psychology, University

College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1 OAP; e-mail: ucjtsaf@ucl.ac.uk
449
0360-0025/00/0300-0449$18.00/0 2000 Plenum Publishing Corporation

450

Petrides and Furnham

and has not been accompanied by empirical studies particularly on the

measurement of the construct. Moreover, many of the theorists who
approached EI from a more popular angle associated with it several
variables from the domains of temperament and social intelligence (e.g.,
Bar-On, 1997; Goleman, 1995). Thus, many conceptualizations of EI
quickly grew to embrace a multitude of variables some of which were
very broad (e.g., happiness) and others very narrow (e.g., talent for negotiations).
The implications of the haphazard development of EI did not become
apparent until the first attempts at measuring the concept were made.
It then became obvious that the sampling domain for EI was not
clear-cut and, more importantly, that its operationalization was heavily
dependent on the method of measurement. In consideration of these
issues, Petrides and Furnham (in press) proposed a differentiation between
trait EI and information-processing EI. The former concerns behavioral
dispositions, is measured through self-report, and ought to be examined
in relation to temperament (Petrides, Furnham, Cotter, & Forde, 2000).
In contrast, information-processing EI is concerned specifically with actual
abilities. Consequently, it has to be assessed by means of maximumperformance measures and investigated relative to the main ability factors.
Thus, an information-processing EI scale designed to measure, say,
emotion perception would comprise items with correct and incorrect
responses (for examples, see Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, in press) whereas
the respective trait EI scale would consist of typical self-report items
such as I know what others are feeling just by looking at them. Selfreport inventories of EI are measures of trait EI regardless of whether
they are predicated on a strictly cognitive model like Mayer and Saloveys (1997).
The research on gender differences in self-estimated IQ has four
themes. First, early studies have examined gender differences in the
overall estimate (g) of ones own IQ (Beloff, 1992; Byrd & Stacey,
1993; Furnham & Rawles, 1995). Results showed males estimating their
(general) intelligence as higher than females, while males and females
rated their father as more intelligent than their mother (Beloff, 1992;
Byrd & Stacey, 1993; Furnham & Rawles, 1995) and their grandfather
as more intelligent than their grandmother (Furnham & Rawles, 1995).
Estimated scores declined by about one half a standard deviation for
each generation back that was estimated. Furnham and Gasson (1998)
recently found that parents gave higher IQ estimates for their male
children than for their female children.
Second, a group of studies have looked at estimates of Gardners
(1983) multiple intelligences rather than g (Bennett, 1996, Bennett, 1997;

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

451

Furnham, Clark, & Bailey, 1999) and showed consistent gender differences
primarily with respect to mathematical and spatial IQ. Furnham, Fong,
and Martin (1999) found three significant differences: females rated
themselves lower than males in mathematical (logical), spatial, and bodykinesthetic intelligence as described by Gardner (1983). In a study of
parents estimates of their own and their childrens multiple intelligences,
Furnham (in press) found that mothers gave lower estimates than fathers
on their mathematical (logical) and spatial intelligence. Both parents
rated sons as having greater mathematical, spatial, and intrapersonal
intelligence than daughters. Intrapersonal intelligence is to do with the
ability to ascertain ones own moods, feelings, and mental states and
utilize this information to adapt to the environment. It is one of Gardners
(1983) personal intelligences, the other being interpersonal intelligence,
and it bears directly on the concept of EI.
Third, studies have examined the relationship between estimated and
psychometrically measured IQ (Furnham & Fong, in press; Furnham &
Rawles, 1999; Reilly & Mulhern, 1995). Each has reported significant correlations in the range of r .13 to r .30 suggesting a weak, but positive
relationship. Borkenhau and Liebler (1993) found on a sample of 100
individuals a correlation of r .32 between self-rated and psychometrically
measured intelligence. This correlation dropped to r .29 when gender
and age were partialled out. Acquaintance ratings correlated very similarly
to self-ratings with measured IQ. Paulhus, Lysy, and Yik (1998) found,
on a sample of students, correlations between single-item self-reports of
intelligence and measured IQ scores in the range of r .20 to r .25.
However, when items were aggregated and weighted (to improve reliability)
and indirect questions were asked about intelligence (to reduce dissimulation), the correlation rose to about r .30.
Fourth, there have been a few cross-cultural studies of gender differences in self-estimates of IQ. Furnham et al. (1999) found culture differences
in their study of British, Hawaiian, and Singaporean students. Overall, the
British students gave higher estimates than either other group. Furnham
et al. (in press) also replicated the gender difference across cultures by
showing that males self-estimates of IQ exceeded those of females by three
IQ points on the average. Furnham and Baguma (1999) compared similar
groups of African, American, and British students and found fairly consistent gender and culture differences. Overall, American students estimated
their own scores the highest, but there were significant differences as a
function of the particular intelligence estimated. Furnham, Hosoe, and
Tang (in press) contrasted comparable groups of American, British, and
Japanese students. The Americans rated their multifaceted IQ scores higher
than the Japanese (between 6 and 10 points on the average) with the British

452

Petrides and Furnham

intermediate between the two. All participants rated their fathers and
brothers numerical IQ (i.e., the ability to manipulate numbers quickly
and accurately) higher and verbal IQ lower than those of their mothers
and sisters.
The present study is an investigation of gender differences in actual
and self-estimated scores on trait EI. From the foregoing discussion it
should be clear that it is not concerned with ones actual ability to perceive
and process emotion-laden information. Rather, it follows a long line of
research into the relationship between measured and self-estimated scores
on temperament-related variables (e.g., Baluch, Martin, Christian, & Corulla, 1996; Furnham, 1997; Furnham & Henderson, 1983; Furnham & Varian,
1988; Gray, 1972; Sanz, Sanchez, & Avia, 1996; Stones, 1977; Vingoe, 1966).
In particular, this study extended the second and third themes of research
on self-estimates of IQ to the concept of trait EI. According to Salovey and
Mayers (1990) three-factor model, EI encompasses the following domains:
appraisal and expression of emotions, regulation of emotions, and utilization of emotion-laden information in thinking and acting. Dulewicz and
Higgs (1998) did a content analysis of seven writers ideas on EI and found
seven core elements, which they labeled self-awareness, emotional management, self-motivation, empathy, handling relationships, interpersonal communications, and personal style. This study is largely based
on the two aforementioned conceptualizations of EI.
The first issue of concern was gender differences in measured (psychometrically assessed) and self-estimated, multifaceted EI. Fifteen listed and
specified abilities taken mainly from Dulewitz and Higgs (1998) were
given to males and females for self-estimation. The central hypothesis was
that there would indeed be a gender difference in the opposite direction
from the one observed on IQ data with females both scoring and rating
themselves higher than males. This hypothesis was based on a considerable
body of research on interpersonal social skills, which is closely linked to
EI and has consistently demonstrated a gender effect with females being
more perceptive, empathic, and adaptable than males (Argyle, 1990). Further, Schutte et al. (1998) predicted and found gender differences in their
measure of trait EI with females scoring higher than males.
The second central issue of this paper concerned the relationship between measured and self-estimated EI scores. On the basis of previous
studies on both personality and intelligence, we anticipated that all correlations between measured and self-estimated EI scores would be positive
and significant. More interestingly, perhaps, we wanted to examine whether
males self-estimates would be higher than females even within an area
in which the latter are traditionally thought to be more competent than
the former.

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

453

METHOD
Participants
In total, the sample comprised 260 participants of whom 175 were
female and 85 male. Their mean age was 23.4 years (SD 8.1). Most were
selected from participant panels from three British universities. Data on
race or ethnicity were not collected, but it would appear that between 5%
and 10 percent of the participants were Asian (mainly from the subcontinent
of India) and around 5% were Afro-Caribbean.

Questionnaires
Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (Schutte et al., 1998)
This 33-item questionnaire includes statements such as I have control
over my emotions, I know why my emotions change, and Other people
find it easy to confide in me, and is based on the original emotional
intelligence model developed by Salovey and Mayer (1990). Three of the
33 items (5, 28, and 33) are reverse-scored. Participants responded to the
items on a 7-point Likert scale. Despite an alpha of .90 and Schutte et
al.s (1998) claims about unidimensionality, we found evidence of four
interpretable factors similar to those mentioned in the original literature.
These factors accounted for almost 50% of the total variance in the participants scores and were labeled Optimism/Mood Regulation, Appraisal of
Emotions, Social Skills, and Utilization of Emotion.

Self-Estimated EI
This questionnaire was modeled on the one devised to measure selfestimated multifaceted intelligence (Furnham, in press; Furnham et al.,
1999). It concerned 15 abilities (see Table I) taken from a content analysis
by Dulewicz and Higgs (1998), who attempted to document the different
facets of EI as noted by various authors. Participants were shown a normal
distribution with labeled standard deviations for IQ and told the same
applied to the components of EI. The IQ scores and labels were as follows:
55 (mild retardation), 70 (borderline retardation), 85 (low average), 100
(average), 115 (high average), 130 (superior), and 145 (gifted). Participants
were asked to estimate their scores on each of the 15 EI facets.

454

Petrides and Furnham

Table I. Factor-Analytic Results Along with Item Means and Standard Deviations for SelfEstimated Scores
EI
1. Ability to understand your own emotionsa
2. Ability to express emotions clearly
3. Effectiveness under pressure
4. Ability to postpone immediate rewards for
the sake of some important reward in the
future
5. Ability not to give up in the face of
setbacks
6. Ability to sense what others are feeling
7. Ability to understand others: what
motivates them, how they work
8. Ability to handle conflict and settle
disputesa
9. Ability to understand and respond
appropriately to the moods of others
10. Ability to work cooperatively/team
working
11. Ability to persuade others to work for a
common goal
12. Really listening to others
13. Being able to accept responsibility
14. Ability to motivate oneself well
15. Being positive and optimistica

Females

Males

109.8
(12.0)
104.9
(13.1)
106.3
(13.8)
104.9
(12.2)

114.4
(15.0)
106.6
(15.8)
109.8
(14.8)
107.11
(15.2)

106.8
(12.7)
114.0
(11.8)
111.6
(11.8)
106.8
(12.3)
110.5
(11.5)
109.5
(11.3)
106.8
(11.5)
112.9
(11.6)
109.1
(12.6)
107.3
(13.5)
105.5
(14.2)

109.4
(12.4)
113.6
(14.7)
110.8
(15.6)
110.4
(14.9)
111.8
(14.4)
107.7
(11.2)
106.2
(12.6)
112.9
(12.8)
112.3
(13.7)
109.9
(14.8)
111.1
(15.5)

FA
.59
.59
.61
.68
.74
.84
.84
.69
.83
.50
.53
.60
.63
.75
.59

Statistically significant gender difference.

RESULTS
Gender Differences in Self-Estimated EI Scores
Table I shows the results for males and females for each EI facet.
There were significant gender differences on item 1 (t(258) 2.62, p .01),
item 8 (t(258) 2.02, p .05), and item 15 (t(258) 2.86, p .01), each
indicating that males believed they had higher EI. Overall, participants
gave themselves highest scores on empathy (Ability to sense what others
are feeling; mean 113.8) and counseling skills (Really listening to
others; mean 112.9) and lowest scores on emotional expression (Ability
to express emotions clearly; mean 105.7). Interestingly, this sample

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

455

rated themselves one half a standard deviation above average (100) on

both self-estimated EI factors. Table I also shows the factor-analytic results
from a varimax rotation of the 15 items. The two clear factors that emerged
from this analysis were labeled empathy and self-motivation and together accounted for nearly 55% of the total variance. Scores on the two
factors were estimated by summing the scores on the items that had the
highest loadings on each factor. A t test on the self-motivation factor
scores indicated that males awarded themselves a higher score (mean
659.7, SD 65.5) than females (mean 640.03, SD 55.06), t(258) 2.54,
p .05. A one-way, between-gender analysis of covariance on the total
self-estimated score with total measured trait EI as the covariate indicated
that males self-estimates of EI (adjusted mean 1659.3) were significantly
higher (F(1,257) 4.94, p .05) than those of females (adjusted mean
1624.4).

Gender Differences in Measured Trait EI Scores

There was a significant gender difference on the social skills factor
(F(1,258) 8.66, p .01) with females (mean 42.58, SD 5.9) scoring
higher than males (mean 40.36, SD 5.3). There were no significant
differences on any of the other factors nor on total measured trait EI
(Table II).

The Relationship Between Self-Estimated and Measured Scores

Before we discuss the correlations in Table III, it is important to note
that it is the absolute values rather than the significance levels that should be
used for the comparison between genders. This is because the power of the
two sets of correlations differs as a function of the sample size of the two
groups. For example, the correlation between empathy and optimism
is significant at p .01 for females (N 185), whereas the respective correlaTable II. Gender Differences on the Four Factors of the Schutte et al. (1998) Trait EI Measure
Factor
1.
2.
3.
4.

Optimism
Appraisal of emotion
Social skills
Utilization of emotion

*p .01.

Number of items
9
9
8
4

Females
(N 175)
44.94
40.37
42.57
21.06

(7.81)
(6.56)
(5.98)
(3.71)

Males
(N 85)
46.13
39.37
40.35
21.00

(6.38)
(6.66)
(5.29)
(3.16)

t
1.22
1.14
2.94*
0.13

Empathy
Self-Motivation

.20
.37**

Note: M, males; F, females; T, total sample.

*p .05, **p .001.

Estimated EI

M
.20**
.48**

Optimism

.20**
.45**

T
.42**
.24*

M
.35**
.20**

Appraisal of
Emotion

.37**
.20**

.36**
.37**

Measured Trait EI

.29**
.16*

Social Skills

.29**
.19**

.17
.28*

.09
.10

T
.12
.15*

Utilization of
Emotion

Table III. Correlations Between Estimated and Measured EI Factor Scores for Males, Females, and Total Sample

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

457

tion for males (N 85) does not reach significance even though it has the
same absolute value (r .20). With two exceptions, all correlations between
self-estimated and measured trait EI scores were higher for males than for
females. The correlation between self-motivation and optimism was
higher in the female sample, whereas that between empathy and optimism was, as noted, the same across the two samples.
As can be seen in Table III, all the correlations between self-estimated
and measured EI scores were positive. Further, all of them reached significance levels except for that between empathy and utilization of emotion. The significant correlations ranged from r .15 to r .45, which
suggests that there is moderate overlap of variance between measured and
self-estimated EI scores. The first self-estimated EI factor (empathy)
was significantly correlated with three of the four measured trait EI factors,
namely, optimism, appraisal of emotions, and social skills. The second self-estimated factor, self-motivation, correlated significantly with
all four factors of measured trait EI. When total self-estimated EI was
correlated with total measured trait EI, the correlation was positive and
significant (r .42, p .01) and somewhat higher than correlations observed in similar IQ studies (Furnham & Fong, 1999; Furnham & Rawles,
1999). The correlation between total self-estimated EI and total measured
trait EI was fairly higher in the male sample (r .48) than in the female
one (r .40). Looking at the extreme groups on measured trait EI (top
and bottom sixths of the distribution), we found that the correlation between total measured and total self-estimated EI was stronger for the
former (r .19) than for the latter (r .07). Of course, due to range
restriction, both correlations were much lower than that based on the
total sample.
When total self-estimated EI was regressed onto the four measured
trait EI factor scores and gender, the regression was significant and accounted for 18% of the total variance (R2adj .18, F(5,254) 12.3, p .01).
Gender proved to be a significant predictor in the presence of the measured
trait EI factor scores (beta .12, t 2.01, p .05). When controlling for
scores on the four measured trait EI factors, males self-estimates of EI
were significantly higher than females. Optimism (beta .234, t 3.37,
p .01) and appraisal of emotion (beta .216, t 3.41, p .01) were
also significant predictors of total self-estimated EI, whereas social skills
and utilization of emotion were not.
DISCUSSION
This study was specifically concerned with gender differences in selfestimated and measured trait EI. Several studies on gender differences in

458

Petrides and Furnham

self-evaluations of performance (Beyer, 1990) and IQ in particular (Furnham & Rawles, 1995) have shown that there is a self-enhancing bias in
men and a self-derogatory bias in women. The results of the present study
suggest that there is also a bias in self-estimation of EI. In contrast to
Schutte et al. (1998), we did not find a significant gender difference in total
measured trait EI. We did find, however, a significant difference on the
social skills factor of the questionnaire with females scoring higher than
males. This was in the opposite direction from the difference in self-estimated EI, where males self-estimates were higher than females, which
indicates that the process of self-estimation is biased. The nature (selfenhancement versus self-derogation) and source (male versus female) of
this bias are unclear. It could be, for example, that males self-enhance and
females self-derogate; that both genders self-enhance with males more so
than females; or that males are accurate and females self-derogate. It may
be argued that the bias is more likely to be self-derogatory and on the side
of females since, on the whole, the correlations between measured and
self-estimated EI were lower for females than for males.
However, the absence of a one-to-one correspondence between the
factors of the two questionnaires used in this study makes it difficult to
assess the accuracy of the self-estimates and trace the provenance of the
bias with certainty. A prerequisite for such research is the determination
of the factorial structure of EI. Although theoretical and empirical advances
have been made with regard to both trait and information-processing EI,
our view is that, presently, questions about the dimensionality of the two
constructs cannot be answered with great confidence. The trait EI measure
we have used in this study has certain problems and the four factors we
have derived have not been sufficiently validated (cf. Petrides & Furnham,
in press). As far as measured trait EI is concerned, the results of this
research cannot be definitive and it remains to be seen whether they will
be replicated with a more robust measure of the construct. It may also be
interesting to conduct a similar investigation with information-processing
EI so as to contrast the findings of the two studies. From the results of this
study, it is clear that in spite of the evidence that females seem to be more
socially skilled than males (Argyle, 1990; Hargie, Saunders, & Dickson,
1995) and score higher on existing EI tests (Mayer et al., in press; Schutte
et al., 1998), their self-estimated EI scores tend to be lower than those
of males.
The correlations between self-estimated and measured EI scores suggest that people do have some insight into their EI. Indeed it may be argued
that it is a sign of high EI to have insight into ones own temperament and
abilities. On the other hand, people with low EI may manifest this by
incorrectly believing they are very emotionally intelligent. As we have seen,

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

459

the correlation between total measured trait EI and total self-estimated EI

is stronger in the high-EI subsample than in the low-EI one. The presence
of individuals low on EI in the sample may, in part, account for the modest
absolute values of the correlations between self-estimated and measured
scores.
Even though the correlations between self-estimated and measured
EI were somewhat higher than the respective correlations observed in
intelligence research, it should be noted that, unlike intelligence studies,
this investigation relied on measures that shared common method variance.
This being the case, one might have expected even higher correlations.
An important question remains as to why we should be interested in
gender differences in EI, IQ, and other traits and abilities. First, there are
theoretical issues of importance, particularly looking at the accuracy of
self-evaluations of performance and response bias. Beyer and Bowden
(1997) demonstrated that for masculine tasks (but not feminine or
neutral tasks) females self-evaluations of performance were inaccurately
low, their confidence statements were less calibrated than males, and their
response bias was more conservative than males. Second, these studies
have important implications for health, education, and psychotherapy. Positive self-perceptions (e.g., high EI) are related to psychological adjustment
and self-esteem, whereas negative self-evaluations are related to depression.
In addition, inaccurate self-evaluations may have damaging behavioral
consequences because perceptions of competence are intimately tied to
aspirations, preferences for challenging tasks, curiosity, intrinsic motivation,
persistence and task performance (Beyer, 1998; p. 125). Thus, the selfperception that one is low average on EI may prevent certain individuals
from practising certain tasks that give accurate feedback on these skills. In
turn, this would prevent these individuals from enhancing such skills. Worse,
low expectations may lead to poor performance, thus providing self-fulfilling
strategies of a self-perpetuating behavioral pattern. Considering that EI
tasks are probably more feminine than masculine, the finding that males
self-estimates were higher than females is the most counterintuitive finding
in this study.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the helpful and critical comments of
two anonymous reviewers. This research was partially supported by an
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) studentship to the first
author.

460

Petrides and Furnham

REFERENCES
Argyle, M. (1990). The psychology of interpersonal behaviour. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Baluch, B., Martin, G. N., Christian, L., & Corulla W. J. (1996). Psychology and non-psychology
students estimation of their desirable and undesirable personality traits. Personality and
Individual Differences, 21, 617620.
Bar-On, R. (1997). BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. Toronto, Canada:
Multi-Health Systems Inc.
Beloff, H. (1992). Mother, father and me: Our IQ. Psychologist, 5, 309311.
Bennett, M. (1996). Mens and womens self-estimates of intelligence. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 411412.
Bennett, M. (1997). Self-estimates of ability in men and women. Journal of Social Psychology,
137, 540541.
Beyer, S. (1990). Gender differences in the accuracy of self-evaluation of performance. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 960970.
Beyer, S. (1998). Gender differences in self-perception and negative recall bias. Sex Roles,
38, 103133.
Beyer, S., & Bowden, E. (1997). Gender differences in self-perceptions: convergent evidence
from three measures of accuracy and bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
23, 157172.
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1993). Convergence of stranger ratings of personality and
intelligence with self-ratings, partner-ratings and measured intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 546553.
Byrd, M., & Stacey, B. (1993). Bias in IQ perception. Psychologist, 6, 16.
Cooper, R., & Sawaf, A. (1997). Executive IQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations. New York: Grosset/Putnam.
Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (1998). Emotional intelligence: Managerial fad or valid construct?
Henley Working Paper 9813, Henley Management College, Henley-on-Thames, England.
Furnham, A. (1997). Knowing and faking ones five-factor personality score. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 229143.
Furnham, A. (in press). Parents estimates of their own and their childrens multiple intelligences. British Journal of Developmental Psychology.
Furnham, A., & Baguma, P. (1999). A cross-cultural study of self-estimates of intelligence.
North American Journal of Psychology, 1, 6978.
Furnham, A., Clark, K., & Bailey, K. (1999). Sex differences in estimates of multiple intelligences. European Journal of Personality, 13, 247259.
Furnham, A., & Fong, G. (in press). North American Journal of Psychology.
Furnham, A., Fong, G., & Martin, N. (1999). Sex and cross-cultural differences in the estimated
multi-faceted intelligence quotient score for self, parents and siblings. Personality and
Individual Differences, 26, 10251034.
Furnham, A., & Gasson, L. (1998). Sex differences in parental estimates of their childrens
intelligence. Sex Roles, 38, 151162.
Furnham, A., & Henderson, M. (1983). The mote in thy brothers eye, and the beam in thine
own: Predicting ones own and others personality scores. British Journal of Psychology,
74, 381389.
Furnham, A., Hosoe, T. & Tang, T. (in press). Intelligence.
Furnham, A., & Rawles, R. (1995). Sex differences in the estimation of intelligence. Journal
of Social Behaviour and Personality, 10, 741745.
Furnham, A., & Rawles, R. (1999). Correlation between self-estimated and psychometrically
measured IQ. Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 405410.
Furnham A., & Varian, C. (1988). Estimating and accepting personality scores. Personality
and Individual Differences, 9, 735748.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: A theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

Gender Differences in Measured and Self-Estiatmed Trait EI

461

Gray, J. (1972). Self-rating and Eysenck Personality Inventory estimates of neuroticism and
extraversion. Psychological reports, 30, 213214.
Gross, J., & John, O. (1995). Facets of emotional expressivity. Three self-report factors and
their correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 555568.
Hargie, O., Saunders, C., & Dickson, O. (1995). Social skills in interpersonal communication.
London: Routledge.
Hogan, H. (1978). IQ self-estimates of males and females. Journal of Social Psychology,
106, 137138.
Mayer, J., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (in press). Emotional intelligence meets traditional
standards for an intelligence. Intelligence.
Mayer, J., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter
(Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications. New
York: Basic Books.
Paulhus, D., Lysy, D., & Yik, M. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful
as proxy IQ tests? Journal of Personality, 66, 523555.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (in press). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences.
Petrides, K. V., Furnham, A., Cotter, T., & Forde, L. (2000). The identification of an oblique
trait emotional intelligence factor in temperament space. Paper under review.
Reilly, J., & Mulhern, G. (1995). Gender difference in self-estimated IQ: The need for care
in interpreting group data. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 189192.
Salovey, P., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Mayer, J. D. (in press). Current directions in
emotional intelligence research. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook
of Emotions (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
9, 185211.
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Goldman, S., Turvey, C., & Palfai, T. (1995). Emotional attention,
clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the Trait Meta-Mood scale.
In J. W. Pennebaker (Ed.), Emotion, disclosure, and health (pp. 125154). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Sanz, J., Sanchez, B., & Avia, M. (1996). Self-monitoring and the prediction of ones own
and others personality test scores. European Journal of Personality, 10, 173184.
Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Hall, E., Haggerty, D., Cooper, J., Golden, D., & Dornheim, L.
(1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality
and Individual Differences, 25, 167177.
Stones, M. J. (1977). Self-ratings and the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI). Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 77, 713717.
Vingoe, F. (1966). Validity of the Eysenck Extraversion Scale as determined by self-ratings
in normals. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 5, 8991.