Too Much of a Good Thing? Emotional Intelligence and Interpersonal Conflict Behaviors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research suggests that the outcomes of interpersonal conflict are determined not only by the conflict itself, but also by the way in which it is handled. Confrontational and domineering tactics have been found to magnify the adverse impact of conflict. Thus, investigations of determinants of aggressive conflict management behaviors are of considerable interest. This study extends the literature by examining the relationship between conflict management preferences and conflict management behaviors and by examining how emotional intelligence (EI) shapes this preference-behavior relationship. Individuals' conflict management preferences predicted actual conflict management behaviors. EI was found to moderate this relationship. However, some of these moderating effects run contrary to the popular view of EI as a prosocial concept. Specifically, some EI facets were found to strengthen the link between aggressive conflict management preferences and subsequent conflict management behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it