Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Self-insight into emotional and cognitive abilities is not related to higher adjustment

Nature Human Behaviour volume 3, pages 867–884 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Despite the popularity of the Ancient Greek maxim ‘know thyself’, the importance of self-insight for adjustment, or effective psychological functioning, remains unclear. Here we examined four perspectives about how cognitive and emotional abilities and self-views about these abilities relate to adjustment. We administered tests of cognitive and emotional abilities and assessed self-views about these abilities. Participants then completed daily diaries for a week to report multiple self-reported indicators of adjustment. We analysed data using polynomial regression and response surface analysis. We found no support for benefits of self-insight. The conditions to infer support for linear or curvilinear associations between abilities or self-views about these abilities and adjustment were also not met. The findings suggest that giving employees and students feedback about their cognitive and emotional abilities in organizations and in schools may not enhance their adjustment. We discuss the limitations of our study and offer suggestions for future research.

Protocol registration

The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 21 June 2018. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4283567.v1.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Response surface graphs for main hypotheses.
Fig. 2: Response surface graphs for emotional abilities and self-views.
Fig. 3: Response surface graphs for cognitive ability and self-views.

Data availability

The materials and data for the main study and the pilot studies have been deposited at Harvard Dataverse, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BSUNGB

To download the csv versions of the data that are required by the code, researchers need to select the ‘Original File Format (Comma Separated Values)’ option under ‘Download’. The code for analysis will not work if researchers download the tab versions of the data files instead.

Code availability

The R code for analysis for the main study and the pilot studies have been deposited at Harvard Dataverse, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BSUNGB

References

  1. Colvin, C. R., Block, J. & Funder, D. C. Overly positive self-evaluations and personality: negative implications for mental health. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 68, 1152–1162 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Maslow, A. H. Self-actualizing people: a study of psychological health. Personality 1, 11–34 (1950).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wilson, T. D. Know thyself. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 4, 384–389 (2009).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Allport, G. W. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation 422 (Holt, 1937).

  5. Taylor, S. E. & Brown, J. D. Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychol. Bull. 103, 193–210 (1988).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Greenwald, A. G. The totalitarian ego: fabrication and revision of personal history. Am. Psychol. 35, 603–618 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Taylor, S. E. & Brown, J. D. Positive illusions and well-being revisited: separating fact from fiction. Psychol. Bull. 116, 21–27 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychol. Bull. 124, 262–274 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kluger, A. N. & DeNisi, A. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol. Bull. 119, 254–284 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Galef, J. When is overconfidence useful (if ever)? Julia Galef https://juliagalef.com/2017/02/18/when-is-overconfidence-useful-if-ever/ (2017).

  11. Meikle, N. L., Tenney, E. R. & Moore, D. A. Overconfidence at work: does overconfidence survive the checks and balances of organizational life? Res. Organ. Behav. 36, 121–134 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Colvin, C. R. & Block, J. Do positive illusions foster mental health? An examination of the Taylor and Brown formulation. Psychol. Bull. 116, 3–20 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Humberg, S. et al. Is accurate, positive, or inflated self-perception most advantageous for psychological adjustment? A competitive test of key hypotheses. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 116, 835–859 (2019).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lewinsohn, P. M., Mischel, W., Chaplin, W. & Barton, R. Social competence and depression: the role of illusory self-perceptions. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 89, 203–212 (1980).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Paulhus, D. L. Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement: a mixed blessing? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1197–1208 (1998).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nisbett, R. E. & Wilson, T. D. Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychol. Rev. 84, 231–259 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Petrides, K. V., Furnham, A. & Martin, G. N. Estimates of emotional and psychometric intelligence: evidence for gender-based stereotypes. J. Soc. Psychol. 144, 149–162 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kwan, V. S., John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Kuang, L. L. Conceptualizing and assessing self-enhancement bias: a componential approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 94, 1062–1077 (2008).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Leising, D., Locke, K. D., Kurzius, E. & Zimmermann, J. Quantifying the association of self-enhancement bias with self-ratings of personality and life satisfaction. Assessment 23, 588–602 (2016).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Church, A. H. Managerial self-awareness in high-performing individuals in organizations. J. Appl. Psychol. 82, 281–292 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Edwards, J. R. Regression analysis as an alternative to difference scores. J. Manage. 20, 683–689 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Edwards, J. R. in Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis (eds Drasgow, F. & Schmitt N. W.) 350–400 (Jossey-Bass, 2002).

  23. Edwards, J. R. & Parry, M. E. On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Acad. Manage. J. 36, 1577–1613 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Barranti, M., Carlson, E. N. & Côté, S. How to test questions about similarity in personality and social psychology research: description and empirical demonstration of response surface analysis. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 8, 465–475 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Joseph, D. L. & Newman, D. A. Emotional intelligence: an integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 54–78 (2010).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mabe, P. A. & West, S. G. Validity of self-evaluation of ability: a review and meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 67, 280–296 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zell, E. & Krizan, Z. Do people have insight into their abilities? A metasynthesis. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 9, 111–125 (2014).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ruehlman, L. S., West, S. G. & Pasahow, R. J. Depression and evaluative schemata. J. Pers. 53, 46–92 (1985).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. John, O. P. & Robins, R. W. Accuracy and bias in self-perception: individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 66, 206–219 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Carlson, M. Performance: A Critical Introduction (Routledge, 2013).

  31. Robins, R. W. & John, O. P. in Handbook of Personality Psychology (eds Hogan, R. et al.) 649–679 (Academic Press, 1997).

  32. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84, 191–215 (1977).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gohm, C. L., Corser, G. C. & Dalsky, D. J. Emotional intelligence under stress: useful, unnecessary, or irrelevant? Pers. Individ. Dif. 39, 1017–1028 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wood, R., Allen, J., Pillinger, T. & Kohn, N. in Human Resource Strategies: An Applied Approach (eds Travaghone, A. & Marshall, V.) 210–230 (McGraw-Hill, 2000).

  35. Audia, P. G., Locke, E. A. & Smith, K. G. The paradox of success: an archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistence following radical environmental change. Acad. Manage. J. 43, 837–853 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Försterling, F. & Morgenstern, M. Accuracy of self-assessment and task performance: does it pay to know the truth? J. Educ. Psychol. 94, 576–585 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Anderson, C., Ames, D. R. & Gosling, S. D. Punishing hubris: the perils of overestimating one’s status in a group. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34, 90–101 (2008).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Jahoda, M. Current Concepts of Positive Mental Health (Basic Books, 1958).

  39. Helgeson, V. S. & Taylor, S. E. Social comparisons and adjustment among cardiac patients. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 23, 1171–1195 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Horton, R. S. Similarity and attractiveness in social perception: differentiating between biases for the self and the beautiful. Self Identity 2, 137–152 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Epley, N. & Whitchurch, E. Mirror, mirror on the wall: enhancement in self-recognition. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34, 1159–1170 (2008).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kuiper, N. A. & Derry, P. A. Depressed and nondepressed content self‐reference in mild depressives. J. Pers. 50, 67–80 (1982).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kuiper, N. A., Olinger, L. J., MacDonald, M. R. & Shaw, B. F. Self-schema processing of depressed and nondepressed content: the effects of vulnerability to depression. Soc. Cogn. 3, 77–93 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bandura, A. & Jourden, F. J. Self-regulatory mechanisms governing the impact of social comparison on complex decision making. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 60, 941–951 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cervone, D. & Peake, P. K. Anchoring, efficacy, and action: the influence of judgmental heuristics on self-efficacy judgments and behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50, 492–501 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wood, R. & Bandura, A. Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 56, 407–415 (1989).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Anderson, C., Brion, S., Moore, D. A. & Kennedy, J. A. A status-enhancement account of overconfidence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 103, 718–735 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kennedy, J. A., Anderson, C. & Moore, D. A. When overconfidence is revealed to others: testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 122, 266–279 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Barrick, M. R., Shaffer, J. A. & DeGrassi, S. W. What you see may not be what you get: relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 94, 1392–1411 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Tracy, J. L., Shariff, A. F., Zhao, W. & Henrich, J. Cross-cultural evidence that the nonverbal expression of pride is an automatic status signal. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 142, 163–180 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Grant, A. M. & Schwartz, B. Too much of a good thing: the challenge and opportunity of the inverted U. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6, 61–76 (2011).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Pierce, J. R. & Aguinis, H. The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management. J. Manage. 39, 313–338 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Milam, J. E., Richardson, J. L., Marks, G., Kemper, C. A. & McCutchan, A. J. The roles of dispositional optimism and pessimism in HIV disease progression. Psychol. Health 19, 167–181 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  54. De Ridder, D., Schreurs, K. & Bensing, J. The relative benefits of being optimistic: optimism as a coping resource in multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease. Br. J. Health Psychol. 5, 141–155 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I. & Vohs, K. D. Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 4, 1–44 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Baumeister, R. F. The optimal margin of illusion. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 8, 176–189 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  57. McAllister, H. A., Baker, J. D., Mannes, C., Stewart, H. & Sutherland, A. The optimal margin of illusion hypothesis: evidence from the self-serving bias and personality disorders. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 21, 414–426 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Bertua, C., Anderson, N. & Salgado, J. F. The predictive validity of cognitive ability tests: a UK meta‐analysis. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 78, 387–409 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hunter, J. E. Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. J. Vocat. Behav. 29, 340–362 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. Development of a causal model of processes determining job performance. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1, 89–92 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. Measurement error in psychological research: lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychol. Methods 1, 199–223 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H. & Egan, V. Personality, well-being and health correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Pers. Individ. Dif. 38, 547–558 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Rossen, E. & Kranzler, J. H. Incremental validity of the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test Version 2.0 (MSCEIT) after controlling for personality and intelligence. J. Res. Pers. 43, 60–65 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ali, A. et al. The relationship between happiness and intelligent quotient: the contribution of socio-economic and clinical factors. Psychol. Med. 43, 1303–1312 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Brackett, M. A. & Mayer, J. D. Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of competing measures of emotional intelligence. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29, 1147–1158 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Ree, M. J. & Earles, J. A. Predicting training success: not much more than g. Pers. Psychol. 44, 321–332 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Sackett, P. R., Gruys, M. L. & Ellingson, J. E. Ability–personality interactions when predicting job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 83, 545–556 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Terborg, J. R. Women in management: a research review. J. Appl. Psychol. 62, 647–664 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Bechtoldt, M. N. & Schneider, V. K. Predicting stress from the ability to eavesdrop on feelings: emotional intelligence and testosterone jointly predict cortisol reactivity. Emotion 16, 815–825 (2016).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Simpson, J. A. et al. Attachment and the management of empathic accuracy in relationship-threatening situations. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 37, 242–254 (2011).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Antonakis, J., House, R. J. & Simonton, D. K. Can super smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 102, 1003–1021 (2017).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Simonton, D. K. Intelligence and personal influence in groups: four nonlinear models. Psychol. Rev. 92, 532–547 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Beal, D. J. ESM 2.0: state of the art and future potential of experience sampling methods in organizational research. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2, 383–407 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Schönbrodt, F. D. Testing fit patterns with polynomial regression models. OSF https://osf.io/ndggf/ (2017).

  76. Cronbach, L. Processes affecting scores on “understanding of others” and “assumed similarity”. Psychol. Bull. 52, 177–193 (1955).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Humberg, S. et al. Enhanced versus simply positive: a new condition-based regression analysis to disentangle effects of self-enhancement from effects of positivity of self-view. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 114, 303–322 (2018).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Amdurer, E., Boyatzis, R. E., Saatcioglu, A., Smith, M. L. & Taylor, S. N. Long term impact of emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies and GMAT on career and life satisfaction and career success. Front. Psychol. 5, 1447 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Lounsbury, J. W., Gibson, L. W., Steel, R. P., Sundstrom, E. D. & Loveland, J. L. An investigation of intelligence and personality in relation to career satisfaction. Pers. Individ. Dif. 37, 181–189 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  80. Wigtil, C. J. & Henriques, G. R. The relationship between intelligence and psychological well-being in incoming college students. Psychol. Well Being 5, 1–19 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  81. Simpson, J. A., Ickes, W. & Blackstone, T. When the head protects the heart: empathic accuracy in dating relationships. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 629–641 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  82. Elfenbein, H. A., Foo, M.-D. D., White, J. B., Tan, H. H. & Aik, V.-C. Reading your counterpart: the benefit of emotion recognition accuracy for effectiveness in negotiation. J. Nonverbal Behav. 31, 205–223 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  83. Paolacci, G. & Chandler, J. Inside the Turk: understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23, 184–188 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  84. Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A. & Lenz, G. S. Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Polit. Anal. 20, 351–368 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  85. Shapiro, D. N., Chandler, J. & Mueller, P. A. Using Mechanical Turk to study clinical populations. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 1, 213–220 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. The satisfaction with life scale. J. Pers. Assess. 49, 71–75 (1985).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Diener, E., Inglehart, R. & Tay, L. Theory and validity of life satisfaction scales. Soc. Indic. Res. 112, 497–527 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  88. Lucas, R. E., Diener, E. & Suh, E. Discriminant validity of well-being measures. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 616–628 (1996).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L. & Liden, R. C. A social capital theory of career success. Acad. Manage. 44, 219–237 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  90. Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W. & Bretz, R. D. Jr An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success. Pers. Psychol. 48, 485–519 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Ng, T. W., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L. & Feldman, D. C. Predictors of objective and subjective career success: a meta‐analysis. Pers. Psychol. 58, 367–408 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  92. Impett, E. A., Javam, L., Le, B. M., Asyabi-Eshghi, B. & Kogan, A. The joys of genuine giving: approach and avoidance sacrifice motivation and authenticity. Pers. Relatsh. 20, 740–754 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  93. Cohen, J. A power primer. Psychol. Bull. 112, 155–159 (1992).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. US Census Bureau. Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, 2011–2015 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_15_5YR_B03002&prodType=table (2015).

  95. US Census Bureau. Sex by Age, 2011–2015 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_15_5YR_B01001A&prodType=table (2015).

  96. Conway, N. & Briner, R. B. A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological contract breach and exceeded promises. J. Organ. Behav. 23, 287–302 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  97. Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L. & Ferguson, M. J. Everyday sexism: evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. J. Soc. Issues 57, 31–53 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  98. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. Using Multivariate Statistics (Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education, 2007).

  99. Beaupré, M. G. & Hess, U. Cross-cultural emotion recognition among Canadian ethnic groups. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 36, 355–370 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  100. Nowicki, S. & Duke, M. P. in Interpersonal Sensitivity: Theory and Measurement (eds Hall, J. A. & Bernieri, F. J.) 183–198 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001).

  101. Sheldon, O. J., Dunning, D. & Ames, D. R. Emotionally unskilled, unaware, and uninterested in learning more: Reactions to feedback about deficits in emotional intelligence. J. Appl. Psychol. 99, 125–137 (2014).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Shanock, L. R., Baran, B. E., Gentry, W. A., Pattison, S. C. & Heggestad, E. D. Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: a powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. J. Bus. Psychol. 25, 543–554 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  103. Raven, J. C., Raven, J. & Court, J. H. Advanced Progressive Matrices Set II (Oxford Psychologists Press, 1962).

  104. Denissen, J. J. A., Schönbrodt, F. D., van Zalk, M., Meeus, W. H. & van Aken, M. A. Antecedents and consequences of peer-rated intelligence. Eur. J. Pers. 25, 108–119 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  105. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N. & Stone, A. A. Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science 312, 1908–1910 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Zou, C., Schimmack, U. & Gere, J. The validity of well-being measures: a multiple-indicator-multiple-rater model. Psychol. Assess. 25, 1247–1254 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Schimmack, U. in The Science of Subjective Well-being (eds Eid, M. & Larsen, R. J.) 97–123 (Guilford Press, 2008).

  108. Pavot, W. & Diener, E. Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychol. Assess. 5, 164–172 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  109. Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S. & Wormley, W. M. Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Acad. Manage. J. 33, 64–86 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  110. Côté, S. et al. Social power facilitates the effect of prosocial orientation on empathic accuracy. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101, 217–232 (2011).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Johnson, S. K., Murphy, S. E., Zewdie, S. & Reichard, R. J. The strong, sensitive type: effects of gender stereotypes and leadership prototypes on the evaluation of male and female leaders. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 106, 39–60 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  112. Bollen, K. A. & Jackman, R. W. Regression diagnostics: an expository treatment of outliers and influential cases. Sociol. Methods Res. 13, 510–542 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  113. Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E. & Welsch, R. E. Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity (John Wiley, 2005).

  114. Hair, J. F. Jr, Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. Multivariate Data Analysis 3rd edn (Macmillan, 1995).

  115. Kennedy, P. A Guide to Econometrics (Blackwell, 1992).

  116. Neter, J., Wasserman, W. & Kutner, M. H. Applied Linear Regression Models (Irwin, 1989).

  117. Schönbrodt, F. D. RSA: an R package for response surface analysis. Version 0.9.11 https://cran.r-project.org/package=RSA (2017).

  118. Humberg, S., Nestler, S. & Back, M. D. Response surface analysis in personality and social psychology: checklist and clarifications for the case of congruence hypotheses. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 10, 409–419 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by grant no. 500342 from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We thank M. Barranti, E. Carlson and J. Hirsh for guidance on data analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Joyce C. He & Stéphane Côté

Authors
  1. Joyce C. He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stéphane Côté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.C.H. jointly conceived the study with S.C., designed and conducted the pilot studies and main study, analysed the data and wrote the manuscript. S.C. supervised the design and analysis of the pilot studies and main study, and wrote and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joyce C. He.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information: Primary Handling Editor: Marike Schiffer

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Notes, Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Tables 1–5, Supplementary Fig. 1, and Supplementary References.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

He, J.C., Côté, S. Self-insight into emotional and cognitive abilities is not related to higher adjustment. Nat Hum Behav 3, 867–884 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0644-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0644-0

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing