Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings of support staff

working with clients with intellectual disabilities and
challenging behavior: An exploratory study
Linda J.M. Zijlmans a,b,*, Petri J.C.M. Embregts a,b,c,d,e, Anna M.T. Bosman b,f
a

Tilburg University, Tranzo, Tilburg, The Netherlands

Consortium Coping LVB, The Netherlands
Tilburg University, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg, The Netherlands
d
HAN University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Studies, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
e
Dichterbij Kennisn@, Ottersum, The Netherlands
f
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
b
c

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 21 May 2013
Received in revised form 9 August 2013
Accepted 14 August 2013
Available online 10 September 2013

Working with clients who show challenging behavior can be emotionally demanding and
stressful for support staff, because this behavior may cause a range of negative emotional
reactions and feelings. These reactions are of negative inuence on staff wellbeing and
behavior. Research has focused on negative emotions of staff. However, a distinction
between emotions and feelings has never been made in the research eld of intellectual
disabilities. Negative emotions and feelings may be regulated by emotional intelligence, a
psychological construct that takes into account personal style and individual differences.
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between emotional intelligence
on the one hand and emotions and feelings on the other. Participants were 207 support
staff serving clients with moderate to borderline intellectual disabilities and challenging
behavior. Emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings were measured with questionnaires. The results show that emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings are
related. However, found relationships were weak. Most signicant relations were found
between feelings and stress management and adaptation elements of emotional
intelligence. Because the explored variables can change over time they call for a longitudinal
research approach.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Staff
Challenging behavior
Emotions
Feelings
Emotional intelligence

1. Introduction
Challenging behaviors such as aggression and self-injurious behavior are a common phenomenon in care for people with
intellectual disabilities (Wallander, Koot, & Dekker, 2003). Consequently, support staff are often confronted with challenging
behavior. Therefore, working with clients who show challenging behavior can be emotionally demanding and stressful for
staff, because it may cause a range of negative emotional reactions, such as fear, anger, and disgust (Bromley & Emerson,
1995; Hastings, 1995; Hatton, Brown, Caine, & Emerson, 1995). These emotions may ultimately lead to burnout and they
may be reinforced by the persistent nature of challenging behavior of clients with intellectual disabilities, the lack of an
effective manner to handle such behavior, and difculties understanding this behavior (Bromley & Emerson, 1995).

* Corresponding author at: Tilburg University, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 654950902.
E-mail address: l.j.m.zijlmans@uvt.nl (Linda J.M. Zijlmans).
0891-4222/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.08.027

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

3917

Additionally, negative emotions may also affect staff behavior, which in turn may lead to less assistance and less positive
interactions (Rose, Jones, & Fletcher, 1998). Oliver (1995) described how negative emotions can actually cause patterns of
avoidance within interactions with clients who show challenging behavior. A model developed by Weiner (1985, 1986),
translated for the care for people with intellectual disabilities, states that inadequate beliefs with regard to challenging
behavior can lead to negative emotions. These emotions decrease the chance of supporting staff behavior towards the client
(Dagnan, Trower, & Smith, 1998; Hill & Dagnan, 2002; Weiner, 1985). In terms of interpersonal style, research has shown that
experiencing negative emotions is an important predictor of a hostile and controlling style (Zijlmans, Embregts, Bosman, &
Willems, 2012). In sum, negative emotions may negatively impact wellbeing and behavior of support staff.
Although the effects of challenging behavior of clients on staff emotions appear to be well established, the role of feelings,
a closely related aspect of affect development has not received the attention that emotions have (Hastings, 2002; Rose &
Rose, 2005). In general, emotions and feelings are treated the same (Mitchell & Hastings, 1998). Since the seminal works by
Damasio (1994), Damasio, Everitt, and Bishop (1996), and Damasio et al. (2000), it has become clear that emotions and
feelings albeit related have different meanings. The subtle details between emotions and feelings as described by Damasio
et al. (1996) will not be outlined here, but the most important distinction will be. Emotions, also called primary or basis
emotions, are present in very young children (Ekman, 1992). Limited cognitive processes are involved in experiencing the six
primary emotions of anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, and surprise (Ekman, Friesen, & Ellsworth, 1972). Feelings or secondary
emotions, always involve aspects of cognitive and conscious processes (Damasio, 2001; Hansen, 2005). Feelings develop
when a child grows up, interacting with his/her responsive parents. A responsive and sensitive parent provides security for
the child and helps the child to regulate primary emotions, such that an adequate transition from emotions to more cognitive
based, unique and personal feelings is established (Derksen, 2007). In addition, Damasio (2001) describes that feelings are a
subjective matter whereas emotions are not. Emotions are objectively observable processes within the human brain and
body. When dealing with challenging behaviors, staff members can experience primary emotions such as fear, but also
feelings such as helplessness (Bromley & Emerson, 1995; Mitchell & Hastings, 1998).
This distinction between emotions and feelings allows exploration of the effect of challenging behavior on basic emotions
and more cognitive and reective feelings, which may shed more light on the way staffs primary emotions are transposed to
personal feelings. Emotions can be viewed as temporary, unchangeable and affected or even caused by the situations in which
the person nds his or her self. When reecting on those emotions, one could say that the individual translates experienced
emotions into feelings. For example, support staff who was reecting on an aggressive incident with a client said: He slapped
me in my face, I got really frightened. The unpredictability of his behavior made me feel helpless. In this quote fear is the
emotion, helplessness the feeling. The emotion vanishes after the incident, whereas the feeling does not. It is quite conceivable
that every time the staff member reects on this incident or other incidents with this client, he feels helpless.
Apart from the effect of negative emotions and feelings on the behavior of support staff, staff behavior is also affected by
the way they regulate their emotions. An important predictor of emotion regulation is emotional intelligence. The general
denition of this non-cognitive form of intelligence include elements of emotion regulation like understanding ones
emotions and managing ones own emotions and emotions of others. Bar-On (1997) dened emotional intelligence as
. . .an array of emotional, personal and social abilities and skills that inuence an individuals ability to cope effectively with
environmental demands and pressures (Bar-On, Brown, Kirkcaldy, & Thome, 2000, p. 1108). Emotional intelligence
addresses the following key factors: The perception people have of themselves and their emotions, how they assert their own
desires and rights, the ability to understand and manage their own emotions and the emotions of others, relationships
people have with others, the extent to which they invest in other people and in themselves, the ability to recognize and
respect feelings of others, the strategies people use to handle problems, general well-being, and the capacity to control
impulses.
Emotional intelligence is a predictor of general functioning and wellbeing (Mayer, Caruso, Salovey, & Sitarenios, 2001).
Van der Zee, Thijs, & Schakel (2002) showed that emotional intelligence predicted a signicant amount of variance in
academic and social success, above indicators of academic intelligence and personality. Birks and Watt (2007) proposed that
emotional intelligence could affect patient-centred care, in which the ability to manage, read, and understand emotions and
feelings of one self and ones client is crucial. In addition, emotional intelligence can change over time (Goleman, 1995) and
appears to be trainable (Freedman, 2003; Wasseveld, Overbeeke, & Derksen, 2007). Research has even shown that a training
program focused on emotional intelligence related to treatment skills of support staff of clients with intellectual disability
and challenging behavior is effective in improving emotional intelligence (Zijlmans, Embregts, Gerits, Bosman, & Derksen,
2011).
Summarized, negative emotions and feelings of staff may be of negative inuence on staff behavior and thus on the
relationship between support staff and clients. Because feelings are more cognitive and reective than emotions, regulating
or changing feelings might be more effective than trying to regulate immediate emotions. In addition, coaching staff to
regulate feelings with regard to challenging behavior of clients may lead to more adequate staff behavior and higher staff
wellbeing, as they can reect more neutrally on incidents with clients. Individual differences of emotion regulation are
important when investigating staff emotions and feelings and nding pointers for staff training and coaching in order to
improve staff behavior. Emotional intelligence addresses these individual differences and serves a broad and useful
construct that could provide a signicant contribution to the research eld aimed at support staff working with individuals
with intellectual disabilities and challenging behavior. In addition, past research on staff did not distinguish between
emotions and feelings. Therefore, the main goal of this study is to explore the relationships among staff emotions, emotional

3918

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

intelligence, and feelings. The research question this study is aimed at is: is there a relationship between emotions, feelings,
and emotional intelligence? Also, the relationship between gender, age, and work experience on the one hand, and emotions,
feelings, and emotional intelligence on the other hand is considered.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
The participants in this study were 207 staff members (151 women, 73%, 56 men, 27%) who were employed at four
different residential treatment facilities in the Netherlands for children, adolescents, and adults with moderate to borderline
intellectual disabilities and challenging behavior. The age of the participants ranged from 19 to 61 (mean = 32.87 years,
SD = 9.27, median = 31) and their work experience with clients with intellectual disabilities and challenging behavior ranged
from two months to 37.5 years (mean = 7.77 years, SD = 6.93, median = 6 years). The hours staff members worked a week
ranged from 16 to 40 h (mean = 30.42, SD = 4.42, median = 32). Table 1 shows descriptive statistics of participants for each
residential treatment facility.
2.2. Procedure
In order to recruit participants, the experimenter rst obtained permission from the management of the organizations to
implement and conduct the research. Subsequently, the study was approved by the scientic and ethics committee of one of
the four participating organizations, Dichterbij, in the Netherlands. Managers were provided with information about the
main aims of the research project and together with the experimenter participants were randomly selected. All participants
were working with children, adolescents, or adults with intellectual disabilities and challenging behavior. The experimenter
contacted the staff to provide them with practical information about the research and after this each staff member received
the questionnaires. The experimenter guaranteed condentiality and anonymity to reduce the chance of social desirable
responding.
2.3. Measures
2.3.1. Demographic information
Participants obtained a general questionnaire on demographic characteristics like gender, age and work experience (see
Table 1).
2.3.2. Emotional intelligence
To measure emotional intelligence of staff members, the Dutch version of the Bar-On Emotional Quotient-inventory (EQi, Bar-On, 1997; Derksen, Jeuken, & Klein Herenbrink, 1998) was used. This instrument is widely used to measure emotional
intelligence and it consists of 133 items using a ve-point Likert scale with response categories ranging from 1 (very seldom
true or not true of me), 2 (seldom true of me), 3 (sometimes true of me), 4 (often true of me), to 5 (very often true of me or true
of me). The items constitute ve scales concerning intrapersonal abilities, interpersonal skills, adaptability, stressmanagement capacity, and general mood. Examples of items are I prefer others to make decisions for me, I know how to
deal with upsetting problems, and Im unable to understand the way other people feel.

Table 1
Descriptive statistics of participating staff.
Facility 1

Facility 2

Facility 3

Facility 4

Gender
Women
Men

39 (70%)
16 (30%)

40 (78%)
9 (22%)

36 (68%)
16 (32%)

36 (71%)
15 (29%)

Age
M
SD
Median

35.38
10.16
33

31.55
8.93
39

30.92
6.40
30

33.43
10.55
29

Work experience with people with ID and CB (months)

M
10.04
SD
9.58
Median
6

6.75
5.07
5.5

7.25
4.97
7

6.85
6.40
4.58

Contract (hours a week)

M
SD
Median
n

30.88
4.38
22
51 (24%)

30.15
3.49
32
53 (25%)

30.06
4.01
32
51 (26%)

30.60
5.53
32
55 (26%)

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

3919

Table 2
Converted subscales staff emotions and feelings.
Emotions

Feelings

Angry
Sad
Disgusted
Frightened
Afraid

Betrayed
Humiliated
Hopeless
Resigned
Helpless
Frustrated
Guilty
Nervous
Incompetent
Shocked

Considerable support for the reliability and validity of the EQ-i is provided by several studies (Bar-On, Brown, Kirkcaldy, &
Thome, 2000; Dawda & Hart, 2000; Reiff, Hatzes, Bramel, & Gibbon, 2001). The construct validity has been examined in 16
countries and the EQ-i has been found to map a broad range of related emotional constructs (Bar-On, 1997; Derksen, Kramer, &
Katzko, 2002). The mean Cronbach alpha coefcients for the different subscales range from .69 to .86. The average testretest
reliability coefcients after one and four months were .85 and .75, respectively. Empirical ndings presented in the manual of
the instrument show that the EQ-i is a reliable and valid instrument. The structural properties of the instrument have shown to
be good (Dawda & Hart, 2000). The internal consistency of the EQ-i scores (total EQ-i) in this study was excellent (a = .82).
2.3.3. Experienced emotions and feelings
To measure staff negative emotions and feelings when confronted with challenging behavior of their clients, the
Emotional Reactions to Challenging Behavior Scale was used (Mitchell & Hastings, 1998). The questionnaire was translated
into Dutch and checked by a native speaker. The scale comprises 15 4-point Likert items with response categories from 0 (no,
never), 1 (yes, sometimes), 2 (yes, frequently) to 3 (yes, very frequently). Participants may rate to what extent they
experience certain emotions and feelings when confronted with or dealing with challenging behavior. The questionnaire is
originally composed of two distinct subscales, namely: fear/anxiety and depression/anger. The subscales with regard to
negative emotions have a high internal consistency and a good testretest reliability (Mitchell & Hastings, 1998). To get
insight into emotions and feelings of staff members, the experimenter converted two new subscales from the items of the
questionnaire, namely emotions and feelings. Table 2 shows which items belong to which subscales. The alpha values for
these subscales were .65 (emotions) and .66 (feelings). To obtain a mean score for the two subscales all scores on items
belonging to a subscale were averaged.
It should be noted that the data used in this study originally belong to a large intervention study, in which 210 support
staff completed questionnaires before and after a training program (manuscript in preparation). In this study data of the pretest phase of 207 staff members were used. Three staff members did not complete the EQ-i, so they were discarded form the
study. With respect to missing items in the Emotional Reactions to Challenging Behavior Scale, there were very few, that is, 8
out of 3105 (less than .3%). Apart from the fact that means were used, these few missings cannot have affected the outcomes
in any way.
2.4. Design and analyses
A within-groups correlational design was adopted in this study. First, means and standard deviations for all variables
were calculated to describe our sample. Next, a correlational analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between
emotional intelligence on the one hand, and emotions, and feelings on the other.
3. Results
In Table 3 the means and standard deviations of the staff with regard to the subscale scores of the questionnaires are
presented. A KolmogorovSmirnov test was performed on the ve main scales of the EQ-i, emotions, and feelings. Only
interpersonal EQ-i, stress management, and adaptation were normally distributed. Because not all variables were normally
distributed (p < .05), Spearman correlations were calculated.
In Table 4 the Spearman correlations between the different scales are presented. To interpret the magnitude of the
correlation coefcients, Cohens criteria (1988) were used, with correlations between 0.1 and 0.3 judged as small or weak,
correlations between 0.3 and 0.5 as medium or moderate and correlations between 0.5 and 1.0 as large or strong. Only
signicant correlations are discussed here. It should be noted that the correlation between emotions and feelings was .59
(p < .001). The magnitude of this correlation indicates that the subscales of emotions and feelings are related, but do not
measure the same construct.
The results revealed that half of the correlations reached signicance, but their magnitude is weak. Emotions as well as
feelings correlated signicantly with stress management and adaptation. Feelings are also signicantly related to
Intrapersonal EQ. Adaptation and stress management seemed most important when relating emotional intelligence to

3920

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

Table 3
Mean scores and standard deviations for measures.
Mean

SD

Emotional intelligence
Intrapersonal EQ
Self-regard
Emotional self-awareness
Assertiveness
Independence
Self-actualization

104.45
101.15
105.13
105.81
102.87
101.86

12.66
11.84
12.84
13.98
13.73
11.91

Interpersonal EQ
Empathy
Social responsibility
Interpersonal relationships
Stress management
Stress tolerance
Impulse control
Adaptation
Reality testing
Flexibility
Problem solving
General mood
Optimism
Happiness
Emotions
Feelings

104.54
101.09
101.73
106.16
108.07
106.24
106.88
103.33
106.04
101.62
98.84
104.49
103.41
104.68
.42
.54

11.79
12.55
12.84
11.03
10.49
10.84
11.83
13.37
12.93
14.56
14.45
10.95
12.42
10.22
.34
.29

Table 4
Spearman correlations between the scales of emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings.
Emotions
Scales emotional intelligence
Intrapersonal EQ
Interpersonal EQ
Stress management
Adaptation
General mood

.07
.11
.22**
.15*
.02

Feelings
.23**
.08
.18*
.20**
.07

n = 207.
* p < .05.
** p < .001.

emotions and feelings. In other words, support staff who score higher on adaptation and stress management experience
fewer negative emotions and feelings when confronted with challenging behavior. To obtain a more detailed picture,
correlations among emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings were also calculated for each subscale of the Bar-On EQ-i.
These results are presented in Table 5.
Again, it should be noted that although the following relationships were signicant, they were all of weak magnitude. For
the intrapersonal EQ subscales the following correlations were signicant: the correlation between emotional selfawareness and feelings, the correlation between assertiveness and feelings, and the correlation between independence and
feelings. Support staff with better insight into their own emotions, are more assertive, can express their emotions and
cognitions more adequately, are more emotionally independent of others in life, report less negative emotions and feelings
when dealing with challenging behavior of clients. Again, subscales of the stress management scale en the adaptation scale
appeared to play the largest role with regard to experienced emotions and feelings when dealing with challenging behavior.
Individuals who scored higher on impulse control, reality testing, and problem solving experienced fewer negative emotions
when confronted with clients challenging behavior. Additionally, staff who scored higher on stress tolerance, and reality
testing, reported fewer negative feelings when working with a client who exhibits challenging behavior.
In sum, support staff who are better in regulating stress, are more able to delay gratication and control their emotions
more adequately, are more exible, solve problems in a more adequate way, and are more able to perceive themselves and
their present environment (reality testing), experience less negative emotions and feelings when working with clients who
show challenging behavior. Thus, support staff who are better stress managers and are more able to adapt to their
environment and situations they are confronted with, are more able to regulate the negative emotions and feelings which are
caused by challenging behavior of their clients.
In addition to the relationships between emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings, the relationship between these
variables on the one hand, and age, working experience and contract (hours a week) on the other were investigated. It should
be noted that a KolmogorovSmirnov test showed that age, working experience, contract (hours a week) were not normally
distributed (p < .01). Spearman correlations were calculated and the results showed signicant relationships between age

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

3921

Table 5
Spearman correlations between the subscales of emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings.
Emotions
Subscales emotional intelligence
Intrapersonal EQ
Self-regard
Emotional self-awareness
Assertiveness
Independence
Self-actualization
Interpersonal EQ
Empathy
Social responsibility
Interpersonal relationships
Stress management
Stress tolerance
Impulse control
Adaptation
Reality testing
Flexibility
Problem solving
General mood
Optimism
Happiness

Feelings

.06
.09
.07
.06
.06

.13
.16*
.22*
.22**
.11

.07
.10
.05

.03
.03
.14*

.07
.26**

.17*
.11

.14*
.01
.16*

.20**
.12
.07

.03
.01

.09
.08

n = 207.
* p < .05.
** p < .001.

and intrapersonal EQ (r = .21, p < .01), between working experience and intrapersonal EQ (r = .16, p = .03), the correlation
between working experience and general mood marginally signicant (r = .14, p < .05). The found signicant correlations
were of weak magnitude. There were no signicant correlations between staff variables, emotions, and feelings.
4. Discussion
The aim of the present study was to explore the relationships among staff emotions, feelings, and emotional intelligence of
support staff. Although the correlations between emotions and feelings on the one hand and emotional intelligence on the other
hand were not large, signicant relationships were found between certain subscales of emotional intelligence and emotions
and feelings. Stress management and adaptation skills of staff members appear to play the largest role in the relationship with
emotions and feelings. Support staff who are more adequate problem solvers, seem to experience fewer negative emotions
when confronted with challenging behavior of their clients. Also, staff who manage stress more adequately, handle stress in a
more constructive way and adapt more easily to certain situations in daily life, report less negative feelings. Staff who have a
higher impulse control and control emotions in a more effective way experience less negative emotions as well as feelings when
dealing with challenging behavior. This also applies to staff, who are more able to validate their feelings and cognitions with
external reality. This study also revealed signicant relationships between age and intrapersonal emotional intelligence. Older
staff scored higher on the intrapersonal subscale of the EQ-i. In addition, staff with more working experience also scored higher
on intrapersonal EQ-i, which makes sense because age and working experience are strongly related. Future research should
clarify whether age or working experience are determinants of emotional intelligence.
As said, the correlations were of weak magnitude. Note that, only correlational analyses were performed. The results should
not be interpreted in terms of causality. The correlations were not corrected for multiple statistical tests, but the observed effect
sizes were reported (r) and thereby the focus was put on the strength of the relationships between variables rather than their
signicance (Nakagawa, 2004; Perneger, 1998). This revealed that relationships were not very strong, but it did show a certain
pattern, revealing that emotional intelligence appears to be more strongly related to feelings than to emotions.
More specic denitions of the subscales of the EQ-I claries the relationships with emotions and feelings. For instance,
Bar-On (1997) denes impulse control as the ability to effectively and constructively control and manage ones own
emotions. In addition, reality testing is dened as the ability to objectively validate ones own feelings and cognitions with
external reality. This includes being able to assess the agreement between what is experienced and what objectively exists.
As said, staff scoring high on the subscales impulse control and reality testing reported less negative emotions and feelings.
These and the other relationships among emotional intelligence, emotions, and feelings underline the view of emotional
intelligence as a form of emotion regulation, which is in line work conducted by Montes-Berges and Augusto (2007). They
showed emotional intelligence to be related to aspects of emotional regulation and coping, such as an avoidance-based
coping strategy (Oliver, 1995).
Looking at the difference between correlations of emotional intelligence with emotions on the one hand and feelings on
the other, it is notable that more aspects of emotional intelligence are signicantly related to feelings than to emotions. For
instance, three out of ve subscales regarding intrapersonal EQ are related to feelings, none are related to emotions. Staff
members who have better abilities to express themselves and are emotionally and practically more independent of others,

3922

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

experience fewer negative feelings when confronted with challenging behavior. The fact that feelings seem to be more
related to emotional intelligence compared to emotions, may be explained by the cognitive and conscious nature of both
feelings and emotional intelligence and the relatively stronger unconscious nature of emotions (Damasio, 2001). When
support staff completed the EQ-i and the Emotional Reactions to Challenging Behavior Scale they had to reect on their own
emotions, feelings, and their own personal style. The latter two can be considered conscious processes that include processes
of reecting and thinking, whereas emotions refer to a direct physical reaction (Damasio, 2001; Hansen, 2005).
An explanation for the low correlations and the rather low scores on the Emotional Reactions to Challenging Behavior Scale,
might be a sign of socially desirable responding that may come with the use of self-report measurement (Lambrechts, Kuppens,
& Maes, 2009). Wanless and Jahoda (2002) showed that staff members reported more positive than negative emotions in
response to questions with regard to challenging behavior. Support staff may nd it difcult to admit they experience negative
emotions and feelings such as fear or anger when dealing with challenging behavior. This is illustrated by anecdotal
information. A direct quote from a staff member was I nd it hard to answer that I experience fear when working with X (client)
because my organization gives me the feeling that challenging behavior should be considered as normal and part of the job.
This quote also stresses the importance of taking into account the organizational environment and the support staff gain from
their supervisors when investigating emotions and feelings of staff (Blumenthal, Lavender, & Hewson, 1998; Hatton et al.,
1999). In addition, research has shown that emotions are observable reactions in the human brain and body that can be
investigated with, for instance, physical measurements (Damasio, 2001). These kind of measurements should be taken into
account in future research on the relationship between emotional intelligence and emotions.
The low values of the signicant correlations may be the result of staff members completing one questionnaire with
regard to their personal style in daily life (EQ-i) and another with respect to the emotions and feelings they experience when
working with one specic client who exhibits challenging behavior (Emotional Reactions to Challenging Behavior Scale).
Completion of the EQ-i with regard to a specic situation with a specic client might have led to higher correlations with
emotions and feelings. Future research should focus on the distinction between general measures and measures regarding
specic situations and clients.
The current study takes an important initial step in exploring and investigating the relationship among emotional
intelligence, emotions, and feelings of support staff working with clients who show challenging behavior. Some limitations
arise when analyzing the results. As said, the use of retrospective self-report can be seen as a limitation. Therefore future
research should also focus on other ways to measure staff emotions, for instance observational or even physiological
methods. Van Oorsouw, Embregts, and Sohier (2011) made a rst attempt in developing an observational instrument to
measure staff emotions, which could form a fundament for prospective research. Another line of research has shown that
emotions, feelings, and emotional intelligence are not stable factors and can change over time (Goleman, 1995; Kuppens,
Oravecz, & Tuerlinckx, 2010; Timmermans, Van Mechelen, & Kuppens, 2010). These ndings call for a more longitudinal
approach when investigating emotions, feelings, and emotional intelligence.
Conict of interest
None declared.
Funding
The research was funded by ZonMw. ZonMw has not imposed any restrictions on free access to or publication of the
research data. There was no conict of interest for any of the authors.
Disclaimer
This study is part of a larger PhD intervention research focused on the effectiveness of a staff training. For this research,
the ethics procedures have been followed and the standards governing research involving human participants in force in the
country in which the research has been conducted have been met.
The clients and/or their representatives gave permission to participate in this study by giving their written consent. The
authors submitted the research proposal to the scientic and ethics committee of one of the participating facility and this
was approved.
Acknowledgements
We thank clients and care staff of Dichterbij STEVIG, De La Salle, Vitree, and Ipse de Bruggen in The Netherlands for their
participation.
References
Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi Health Systems.

L.J.M. Zijlmans et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 39163923

3923

Bar-On, R., Brown, J. M., Kirkcaldy, B. D., & Thome, E. P. (2000). Emotional expression and implications for occupational stress: An application of the Emotional
Quotient Inventory (EQ-i). Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 11071118.
Blumenthal, S., Lavender, T., & Hewson, S. (1998). Role clarity, perception of the organization and burnout amongst support workers in residential homes for
people with intellectual disability: A comparison between a National Health Service trust and a charitable company. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research,
42, 409417.
Birks, Y. F., & Watt, I. S. (2007). Emotional intelligence and patient-centred care. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 100, 368374.
Bromley, J., & Emerson, E. (1995). Beliefs and emotional reactions of care staff working with people with challenging behaviour. Journal of Intellectual Disability
Research, 39, 341352.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dagnan, D., Trower, P., & Smith, R. (1998). Care staff responses to people with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour: A cognitiveemotional analysis.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37, 5968.
Damasio, A. (2001). Fundamental feelings. Nature, 413, 781.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. NY: Grosset/Putnam.
Damasio, A. R., Everitt, B. J., & Bishop, D. (1996). The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society,
351, 14131420.
Damasio, A. R., Grabowski, T. J., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Ponto, L. L. B., Parvizi, J., & Hichwa, R. D. (2000). Subcortical and cortical brain activity during the feeling of
self-generated emotions. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 10491056.
Dawda, D., & Hart, S. D. (2000). Assessing emotional intelligence: Reliability and validity of the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) in university students.
Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 797812.
Derksen, J. (2007). Zijn wij wel narcistische genoeg? Over het ontstaan van onze lentecultuur als gevolg van gewijzigde vroegkinderlijke condities [Are we narcissistic
enough?]. Nijmegen: PEN Tests Publisher.
Derksen, J. J. L., Jeuken, J., & Klein Herenbrink, A. J. (1998). Bar-On Emotioneel Quotient Vragenlijst, Nederlandse vertaling en bewerking. [Bar-On Emotional Quotient
Inventory Dutch translation and adaptation]. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: PEN Tests Publisher.
Derksen, J., Kramer, I., & Katzko, M. (2002). Does a self-report measure for emotional intelligence assess something different than general intelligence? Personality
and Individual Differences, 32, 3748.
Ekman, R. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6, 169200.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Ellsworth, P. (1972). Emotion in the human face: Guidelines for research and an integration of ndings. New York: Pergamon Press.
Freedman, J. (2003). Key lessons from 35 years of socialemotional education: How self-science builds self-awareness, positive relationships, and healthy
decision-making. Perspectives in Education, 21(4), 6980.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Hansen, F. (2005). Distinguishing between feelings and emotions in understanding communication effects. Journal of Business Research, 58, 14261436.
Hastings, R. P. (2002). Do challenging behaviours affect staff psychological well-being? Issues of causality and mechanism. American Journal on Mental Retardation,
107, 455467.
Hastings, R. P. (1995). Understanding factors that inuence staff responses to challenging behaviours: An exploratory interview study. Mental Handicap Research,
8, 296320.
Hatton, C., Brown, R., Caine, A., & Emerson, E. (1995). Stressors, coping, strategies, and stress-related outcomes among direct care staff in staffed houses for people
with learning disabilities. Mental Handicap Research, 40, 148156.
Hatton, C., Emerson, E., Rivers, M., Mason, H., Mason, L., Swarbrick, R., Kiernan, C., Reeves, D., & Alborz, A. (1999). Factors associated with staff stress and work
satisfaction in services for people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 43, 253267.
Hill, C., & Dagnan, D. (2002). Helping, attributions, emotions and coping style in response to people with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 6, 363372.
Kuppens, P., Oravecz, Z., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2010). Feelings change: Accounting for individual differences in the temporal dynamics of affect. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 99, 10421060.
Lambrechts, G., Kuppens, S., & Maes, B. (2009). Staff variables associated with the challenging behaviour of clients with severe or profound intellectual disabilities.
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53, 620632.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., Salovey, P., & Sitarenios, G. (2001). Emotional intelligence as a standard intelligence. Emotion, 1, 232242.
Mitchell, G., & Hastings, R. P. (1998). Learning disability care staffs emotional reactions to aggressive challenging behaviours: Development of a measurement tool.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37, 441449.
Montes-Berges, B., & Augusto, J.-M. (2007). Exploring the relationship between perceived emotional intelligence, coping, social support and mental health in
nursing students. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 14, 163171.
Nakagawa, S. (2004). A farewell to Bonferroni: The problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behavioural Ecology, 15, 10441045.
Oliver, C. (1995). Self-injurious behaviour in children with learning disabilities: Recent advances in assessment and intervention. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 36, 909927.
Perneger, T. V. (1998). Whats wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. British Medical Journal, 316, 1236.
Reiff, H. B., Hatzes, N. M., Bramel, M. H., & Gibbon, T. (2001). The relation of LD and gender with emotional intelligence in college students. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 34, 6678.
Rose, J., Jones, F., & Fletcher, B. (1998). The impact of a stress management programme on staff well-being and performance at work. Work & Stress: An International
Journal of Work, Health & Organisations, 12, 112124.
Rose, D., & Rose, J. (2005). Staff in services for people with intellectual disabilities: The impact of stress on attributions of challenging behaviour. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 827838.
Timmermans, T., Van Mechelen, I., & Kuppens, P. (2010). The relationship between individual differences in intraindividual variability in core affect and
interpersonal behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 24, 623638.
Van der Zee, K., Thijs, M., & Schakel, L. (2002). The relationship of emotional intelligence with academic intelligence and the Big Five. European Journal of
Personality, 16, 103125.
Van Oorsouw, W. M. W. J. , Embregts, P. J. C. M. , & Sohier, J. (2011). Verbal and nonverbal behaviour of staff: A rst attempt in the development of an observation
instrument. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 24082414.
Wallander, J. L., Koot, H. M., & Dekker, M. C. (2003). Psychopathology in children and adolescents with intellectual disability: Measurement, prevalence, course,
and risk. In Glidden, L. M. (Ed.). International review of research in mental retardation pp. 93134). (vol. 26San Diego, CA: Academic Press
Wanless, L. K., & Jahoda, A. (2002). Responses of staff towards people with mild to moderate intellectual disability who behave aggressively: A cognitive emotional
analysis. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46, 507516.
Wasseveld, R., Overbeeke, S., & Derksen, J. (2007). Kan emotionele intelligentie worden getraind? [Is emotional intelligence trainable?]. Psychologie & Gezondheid,
35, 182188.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548573.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Zijlmans, L. J. M., Embregts, P. J. C. M. , Gerits, L., Bosman, A. M. T., & Derksen, J. J. L. (2011). Training emotional intelligence related to treatment skills of staff
working with clients with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55, 219230.
Zijlmans, L. J. M., Embregts, P. J. C. M. , Bosman, A. M. T., & Willems, A. P. A. M. (2012). The relationship among attributions, emotions, and interpersonal styles of
staff working with clients with intellectual disabilities and challenging behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 14841494.