| Literature DB >> 32878197 |
Fabiana Cassano1, Andrea Tamburrano1, Claudia Mellucci1, Caterina Galletti1,2, Gianfranco Damiani1,2, Patrizia Laurenti1,2.
Abstract
Emotional intelligence is an important skill for nurses and midwives and leads them to cleverly work in various fields and contexts, successfully handling colleagues, patients and their families. The aim of this cross-sectional study is to evaluate the relationship between emotional intelligence, sociodemographic and academic variables in current and former master's degree students in nursing and midwifery, through the administration of a questionnaire to 71 subjects. Emotional intelligence is significantly related to gender. Females showed higher scores (0.2 points higher than men) for emotional intelligence factors, highlighting an excellent ability to "evaluate and express emotions in relation to others". Moreover, significant differences in academic performances are shown: both females and midwives demonstrated higher academic performance (a mean degree mark 3.8 points higher than men and a mean degree mark 2.6 point than nurses, respectively). High levels of emotional intelligence in individuals who carried out training activities in the organization area are also evident: These subjects have an ability regarding the "regulation of emotion in the others", which is significantly higher (p = 0.01) than those interested in other master's degree areas. Emotional intelligence (EI) is strongly linked to the individual's characteristics and their personalities and differs from technical and professional skills. EI is also an excellent predictor of professional success.Entities:
Keywords: EIS questionnaire; emotional intelligence; medical education; midwifery; nursing; students; survey
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32878197 PMCID: PMC7504047 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17176347
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Factor saturations and correlations between emotional intelligence factors (adapted from Grazzani et al., 2009 with permission).
| Item | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.43 | ||
| 4 | 0.36 | ||
| 5 | 0.27 | ||
| 15 | 0.39 | ||
| 18 | 0.60 | ||
| 25 | 0.55 | ||
| 26 | 0.47 | ||
| 29 | 0.56 | ||
| 30 | 0.52 | ||
| 32 | 0.42 | ||
| 33 | 0.28 | ||
| 9 | 0.60 | ||
| 19 | 0.58 | ||
| 21 | 0.42 | ||
| 22 | 0.74 | ||
| 3 | 0.33 | ||
| 10 | 0.34 | ||
| 14 | 0.45 | ||
| 16 | 0.54 | ||
| 17 | 0.74 | ||
| 20 | 0.60 | ||
| 24 | 0.35 | ||
| 27 | 0.38 | ||
| 31 | 0.42 | ||
| correlations | |||
| factor 1 | 1.00 | - | - |
| factor 2 | 0.43 | 1.00 | - |
| factor 3 | 0.62 | 0.35 | 1.00 |
Frequency distribution (values and row percentages) and p-value (Yates’s chi-squared test) of sample’s working situation, stratified by year of course, gender and professional qualification.
|
|
| B |
|
|
| 1st year | 10 (55.5%) | 8 (44.4%) | 18 (100%) | <0.01 |
| 2nd year | 23 (85.1%) | 4 (14.8%) | 27 (100%) | |
| Former student | 25 (95.1%) | 1 (3.9%) | 26 (100%) | |
| Total | 58 (81.7%) | 13 (18.3%) | 71 (100%) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 45 (78.9%) | 12 (21.1%) | 57 (100%) | 0.41 |
| Male | 13 (92.9%) | 1 (7.1%) | 14 (100%) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nurse | 51 (82.3%) | 11 (17.7%) | 62 (100%) | 0.89 |
| Midwife | 7 (77.8%) | 2 (22.2%) | 9 (100%) |
Frequency distributions (values and row percentages) and p-value (Yates’s chi-squared test) of sample’s postgraduate training, stratified by year of course, gender and professional qualification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1st year | 10 (14.1%) | 8 (11.3%) | 18 (100%) | 0.34 |
| 2nd year | 15 (21.1%) | 12 (16.9%) | 27 (100%) | |
| Former student | 19 (26.7%) | 7 (9.8%) | 26 (100%) | |
| Total | 44 (61.9%) | 27 (38.1%) | 71 (100%) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 33 (57.9%) | 24 (42.1%) | 57 (100%) | 0.26 |
| Male | 11 (78.6%) | 3 (21.4%) | 14 (100%) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nurse | 38 (61.3%) | 24 (38.7%) | 62 (100%) | 0.95 |
| Midwife | 6 (66.7%) | 3 (33.3%) | 9 (100%) |
Mean, standard deviation and p-value (Student’s t-test and ANOVA) of sample’s exam and degree marks, stratified by year of course, gender and professional qualification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1st year | 27.4 (SD 2.3) | 106.9 (SD 5.7) | 18 | 0.89 | 0.78 |
| 2nd year | 27.4 (SD 1.1) | 107.4 (SD 5.4) | 27 | ||
| Former student | 27.2 (SD 1.7) | 108.1 (SD 6.0) | 26 | ||
| Total | 27.3 (SD 1.5) | 107.5 (SD 5.7) | 71 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 27.5 (SD 1.4) | 108.4 (SD 4.5) | 57 | 0.08 | 0.02 |
| Male | 26.5 (SD 1.9) | 104.6 (SD 8.1) | 14 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nurse | 27.1 (SD 1.5) | 107.2 (SD 5.9) | 62 | <0.01 | 0.07 |
| Midwife | 28.8 (SD 0.8) | 109.8 (SD 3.3) | 9 |
Mean, standard deviation and p-value (Student’s t-test) of sample’s EI factors score, stratified by gender.
| Emotional Intelligence | Female (N = 57) | Male (N = 14) | Total (N = 71) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor 1 | 1.7 (SD 0.2) | 1.5 (SD 0.3) | 1.7 (SD 0.2) | 0.03 |
| Factor 2 | 2.2 (SD 0.4) | 2.0 (SD 0.4) | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | 0.13 |
| Factor 3 | 1.9 (SD 0.3) | 1.7 (SD 0.4) | 1.8 (SD 0.3) | 0.09 |
Figure 1Graphical representation of emotional intelligence factors by gender. Considering age, no significative correlations were found with emotional intelligence (EI) factors (Pearson’s r; p > 0.05).
Mean, standard deviation and p-value (ANOVA) of sample’s EI factors score, stratified by training activities.
| Emotional Intelligence | Nursing and Midwifery Care (N = 21) | Training and Education | Organization/Management | Research | Total (N = 71) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (N = 17) | (N = 22) | (N = 11) | ||||
| Factor 1 | 1.7 (SD 0.1) | 1.5 (SD 0.3) | 1.8 (SD 0.2) | 1.7 (SD 0.3) | 1.9 (SD 0.2) | 0.01 |
| Factor 2 | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | 2.1 (SD 0.5) | 2.2 (SD 0.5) | 2.2 (SD 0.5) | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | 0.64 |
| Factor 3 | 1.9 (SD 0.6) | 1.7 (SD 0.5) | 1.9 (SD 0.2) | 1.8 (SD 0.3) | 1.8 (SD 0.3) | 0.40 |
Mean, standard deviation and p-value (Student’s t-test) of sample’s EI factors score, stratified by professional qualification and postgraduate training.
| Emotional Intelligence | Nurse (N = 62) | Midwife (N = 9) | Masters or Specialization Courses (N = 44) | No Title (N = 27) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor 1 | 1.7 (SD 0.3) | 1.7 (SD 0.1) | >0.99 | 1.7 (SD 0.3) | 1.7 (SD 0.1) | >0.99 |
| Factor 2 | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | >0.99 | 2.1 (SD 0.4) | 2.2 (SD 0.4) | 0.3 |
| Factor 3 | 1.8 (SD 0.3) | 1.9 (SD 0.2) | 0.2 | 1.8 (SD 0.4) | 1.9 (SD 0.2) | 0.2 |
Figure 2Graphical representation of emotional intelligence factors by training activity.