rxsocialchange

Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Labor?

This paper takes a humanistic approach to a critical relationship that is likely to affect every individual at some point throughout their lifetime. It begins with an overview of one of the emerging psychological theories of current time and extracts the connections to a naturally emotional social relationship. Using current literature which theorizes a cascading model, emotional intelligence is deconstructed with intent to compare its function in two different models of patient care: empathetic relationships and paternalistic relationships. It seeks to identify the opportunities for emotional intelligence within the traditional and contemporary forms of patient-provider relationships. At the end, this paper mentions advantages and disadvantages to each type of relationship. It discovers that empathetic relationships naturally produce the soft-skills ascribed to emotional intelligence. The paper concludes with a brief application of emotional intelligence and suggests the need for further research.

Emotional Intelligence and Medicine

The time has come for a new paradigm on how to address the realities of modern medicine. For one thing, as patients and physicians alike reach new ground in managing the increasing knowledge, technology, and legislation changes, it appears that dissatisfaction still remains. It is not to say that such advancement in the medical system has become overly commercialized so it inhibits meaningful intervention. Quite to the contrary, such a plethora of resources should enable more effective medical processes. What frequently goes unmentioned, unfortunately, are the exchanges of information between the patient and physician that determine the effectiveness of such processes. It is well-accepted in the medical community that academic intelligence is one of the strongest predictors of a successful physician. The complexities of care require cautious, detailed patient assessment. One might ask the question, “Does a physician earn his rapport by technical competence alone?” Arguably, without the soft skills, mistakenly made out to be inferior rather than complimentary, is what may be one of the most important relationships in health care jeopardized? This paper asks the question, if Emotional Intelligence (EI) is becoming more popular across-the-board, and if mainstream medicine is traditionally portrayed as solely a technical practice, by modifying communication through the application of emotional intelligence, will this enhance the patient-physician relationship to better serve the needs of the population?

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence, which is not to be confused as a way of encouraging reactive responses and emotional outpouring, is an organized way of regulating one’s behavior. This is not a new psychological phenomenon. As academia and production sites experimented with this relatively subjective intelligence, formerly known as only a part of social intelligence, more questions evolved about its practical applications.  Emotional intelligence eventually evolved into its own concept in the nineties and has been primarily a commercial interest (Joseph & Newman, 2010). Most evidence of its promise and relationship benefits, at this time, has been gained from organizational use. This is not to say, that its use in medicine, particularly in use for the patient-provider relationship would be incompatible with its current application. After all, human behavior is largely characterized by the connections and relationships that one has with another. Let us begin then, with the most recent depiction of what emotional intelligence (EI) entails and what is controversial about its validity.

Prior to the nineties, few researchers continued with the social focus, and even when they did, very little could be validated through research findings. Psychologists Mayer and Salovey (1997) updated their research and developed a more valid opinion of the function of emotional intelligence after further observation over many years. Agreeing to redefine emotional intelligence, they stated it is, “the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth.”  ( MSCEIT, 2009) It wasn’t until more recently, that researchers Joseph and Newman (2010) identified what is referred to as the cascading model.  At this point however, the “conceptual design” holds that most of EI’s causation is from the perception that one has of another’s feelings, and thus holds priority over the other elements of emotional intelligence: the understanding and the regulation.

Models of EI

Emotional Intelligence has two models that substantiate its validity: mixed traits and ability. The ability model, the initial construct, was seen as a form of intelligence that one is to use only in defending logic, and in explanation of the feelings that come forth with presentation (Joseph & Newman, 2010.) Like the ability model, the mixed-trait includes the logical focus but also draws in other behavioral components beyond cognitive capabilities. Even though many similarities exist within these models, the science community continues to reject the mixed-trait model, claiming the model has too many generalizations that remain scientifically unsupported (Joseph & Newman, 2010). Assuming that the ability model takes precedence over the mixed-trait, the main idea of EI is that it is practiced in a subsequent manner and in three stages: perception, understanding, and regulation.

Regulation

It is continuously argued that regulation is the determinant that makes EI the most successful. The challenge, however, is being able to differentiate between moods and emotions. Researchers Joseph and Newman (2010), citing Gross (1998), claimed that emotional regulation is the process of being able to induce and sustain positive affective states while identifying both emotions and moods.  Traditionally, suppression of any sort is not advised in emotional management, however in this context, suppression refers to a cognitive construct. To be more specific, it does mean expression, but suppressing reactive impulses for a cognitive reappraisal so that one can successfully accomplish his or her designated duties.

Even though it would seem to be valid, other researchers continue to oppose this proposition. They argue that emotional regulation should not be suppressed as it requires attentional resources, creating disequilibrium in one’s emotional energy and thus affects how one completes his or her tasks (Joseph & Newman, 2010). This means that job performance may be threatened because emotional regulation is supplied with finite resources, and individuals who conceal their emotions without adequate modification, subsequently lose the ability to focus on job performance more than they would had they relieved the discomfort entirely. An example used by Joseph and Newman (2010) suggests that surface acting is one such way to manage emotions. Surface-acting requires a significant amount of awareness so that facial expressions are consistent to the conceptual reappraisal, exerting more stress than the alternative, of deep-acting. Instead, deep-acting focuses on the internal distress where resolution relies on self-managed resource pools. Although each of the two suggest probable maintenance of emotional regulation, those who possess higher emotional intelligence will respond based on the situation at play and on accrued experience.

The cascading-model considers only the positive affective conditions that generate favorable behaviors for job performance. However, before the acquisition of emotional regulation can develop, the ability to perceive and understand emotions must be learned beforehand.

Perceiving and Understanding

Following the regulation theory, emotional perception and the ability to understand emotion espouses a pattern that must be executed in a specific order. To illustrate, first a stimulus is elicited, then an appraisal, and finally the response. While perception has been long-held as a way of identifying another’s emotions, independent of oneself, modern research shows a new change. Using verbal and non-verbal cues, it stands to reason that without consideration of the self, perception is limited and necessitates not only a less than accurate perception, but also limiting response (Joseph & Newman, 2010). During this time, researchers are quick to caution, even if an appropriate response is administered, it does not indicate that the individual has mastery in emotional perception. This signifies the importance of understanding emotion. Looking at how emotions develop, coupled with recognizing the inconsistencies of each emotion and the proper application in each situation, this dynamic of EI has always made denying any cognitive competencies needed to possess EI as controversial. Since EI is dependent on the knowledge of emotions and their involvement with various social dimensions, Joseph and Newman (2010) emphasized again why the mixed-trait model is becoming more popular in mainstream theory than its counterpart, the ability-trait model.

Knowledge

In the process of dissecting the cascading model, it is apparent that knowledge and intuition are becoming increasingly vital to EI theory. Because emotional regulation is the outcome of perception and understanding, the design of the cognitive appraisal is imperative. Joseph and Newman (2010) elaborated further, based on earlier contributors to EI theory, claiming that two forms of appraisal are employed. First, citing Lazarus (1968) they stated that the primary appraisal takes the self into consideration. The individual must acknowledge whether the situation is going to affect him or her and to what degree, if at all, it is personal. The secondary appraisal then asks the individual to reason with ways of solution and the contributions he or she can make to restructure the situation. These two step appraisals are the product of emotional perception, and raise the importance of building knowledge for later, should another similar situation come forward. Consider that without emotional perception and knowledge constructions, how difficult it would be for a physician to grow, not only for the patient’s benefit but for personal satisfaction. Again, inaccurate knowledge about emotion may hinder the secondary appraisal too. Joseph and Newman (2010) mentioned, for example, that if an individual is without knowledge of emotion, the correct response would not be delivered. Using anger, they stated that inaccurate schemas are largely responsible for this effect, as an individual who sees anger as rigid and incapable of being controlled might dismiss the need for any form of regulation. The caveat, as they propose, is not that our perception limits our knowledge, and thus understanding; rather, it is because most of our encounters with emotions have been left to the unconscious, in which the opportunity for regulation is not even questioned. What separates the cascading model of emotional intelligence is perhaps just this. Earlier theories and data governing the nature of emotional intelligence rely on both the unconscious and conscious ways of regulation for reasons related to the neurological responses to stimuli. However, this model excludes the unconscious and rightly affirms that one has to be conscious to comprehend the insight gained from the emotional encounter, because this model is based on ability (Joseph & Newman, 2010).

The Brain

The cascading model is a conceptual theory that is used to explain emotional intelligence. It may be helpful to stress the physical relationship to cognition and emotional intelligence at this time. To begin, Goleman (2002) stated that emotions and intellect work together as a system. The starting point of what Goleman defines as emotional regulation is located at the prefrontal regions of the brain which extends all the way to amygdala. As a part to the Limbic System, the amygdala is where all perceived emotions are directed, which then are transferred to other areas of the prefrontal region of the brain, thus allowing for a response to the stimulus. However, before the action is initiated, the prefrontal lobes can either execute or veto the response preventing action based off of sheer impulse (Goleman, 2004). The importance of understanding this process suggests that intellect and emotion are not as distinct and inseparable as one may think.

Empathy

Over time, and in nearly every analysis of emotional intelligence, it becomes especially clear that having empathy or conveying empathy is fundamental to what it means to be emotionally intelligent. Only when one is able to look at the behavior of the individual and avoid condemning or appraising the person out of hand does empathy earn its merit. Empathy is also said to be the primary motivation for altruistic acts and, as such, may be helpful in reshaping the impressions of the changing nature of health care delivery (Petri & Govern, 2004).

But, empathy is not a new phenomenon. In fact, it relates to development as a behavior that starts from infancy and grows stronger from then on. According to Spiro (1996), when there is the absence of feeling, empathy is non-existent. Spiro asserted that regardless of whether empathy is innate or learned – it can best be developed with active listening. A great part of active listening means not just knowing, as to know the logistics of emotion, but to know, as he puts that “this could happen to me” in a humanistic light. Spiro continues by suggesting that without consistent practice, being empathetic can be challenging as the physician may become numb to any emotional arousal.

One way to counteract what is seemingly identified as inevitable to the practice of medicine, and what is mostly conclusive to its training, is for one to take the time to converse with others as Spiro suggests. Ultimately, not only is there a shift in thinking, but the connections with others reinforce ongoing understanding both in the physician and patient role. Additionally, because each experience of the physician is different from the next, the reliance on conversation is advantageous for gaining additional knowledge about each unique patient.

Patient and Provider

In effort to simplify the context at play, the provider within this relationship is the practicing physician. A narrow understanding of what medicine means has always been prominent to not only the layperson but to the specialist as well (Spiro, 1996). While medicine has always implied a helping and selfless behavior given the aim of the relationship is to identify and treat patient needs, it brings one to question whether utilizing academic intelligence alone has lived up to the great promise of what it takes to be a successful physician.

Although academic intelligence has advanced many areas of medicine, the access to increasing amounts of technical information increases the possibility of overlooking the human component of the patient (Gédéon, 2006). Modern medical providers, like other organizations, need to see that emotional intelligence can enhance clinician performance in ways that parallel its usefulness in administrative settings. At this point, the beneficiaries of the application are the patients, though such knowledge can also serve the interests of the provider. But according to some researchers, not enough attention is given to this most critical component of medicine: the relationship and all the complexities that come with each patient and ways of providing care (Kaplan, Harold I.,Sadock, Benjamin J., 1998).

It is often believed that active listening and learning to see all angles of the patient are popular contributors to what makes the most respected physicians (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). This type of approach is recognized as the biopsychosocial model, in which Engels looked at the interdependent processes that happen outside of the actual diagnosis and path to recognition (Kaplan, Harold I.; Sadock, Benjamin J, 1998) Assuming that sociological factors, and personalities contribute just as much to the diagnosis, as they do the treatment, communication and how the provider retrieves such content, suggests that emotional intelligence would not only aid in patient disclosure, but help manage unplanned problems that may arise in a naturally emotionally charged situation.

Doctor-Patient

In some way, it becomes difficult to focus on the application of emotional intelligence without looking at the relationship as a whole. This means that as much as the objective is to provide the most effective care to the patient, it also must not dehumanize the physician in doing so.  (Hertzberg, 2003) Many different models of relationships have entered the practice of medicine and each one is dependent on both the patient and the physician. For the purpose of applying emotional intelligence to the informational exchanges that take place, it is important to look at the barriers and advantages within each context.

First, and unfortunately what may seem analogous to modern medicine, is what researchers’ term as the teacher-student model (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). This model has underlying authoritative motivations, in which the physician is seen as superior to the patient. At the same time, the patient behaves in ways that suggest a sense of learned helplessness and dependency. What follows next and similar to the former is the active-passive model. This model is appropriate when the patient has undergone surgery and is incapable of self-care, leaving the physician to dictate most of the treatment and action (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). In addition, the friendship-model is often deemed as unhealthy, but suggests a violation of ethical care. This happens when the physician is dependent on the patient in meeting his or her emotional needs detracting away from the focus of the patient. Lastly, the mutual participation model is when both the physician and patient work collaboratively and cooperatively and has the highest efficacy when the patient is afflicted with conditions that are long-term (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). It is worthwhile considering that the best relationships happen to resemble most of what emotional intelligence tries to accomplish. That is, the better the physician reflects and evaluates his or her performance, the more likely he or she can confidently enjoin advice or plans to treatment.

The communication

Even though technology has greatly influenced the relationship and ways of communication, for better or worse, the interviewing technique tends to be universal and has changed very little, at least in regard to its goals (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). During this time, the physician, although it may go unnoticed, must not only gather as much data as possible about the purpose of appointment, but very carefully diagnosis and modify treatment so that it is personalized. This cannot happen until trust is established and empathy is internalized, suggesting that emotional intelligence must come to the front.

Science and Humanism

One of the most overlooked details about medicine, which contributes to a considerable amount of dissatisfaction among both the patient and provider, is not just that the symptoms and maladies of the patient are still present. This may seem rather obvious, but suppose that even if the problems were diminished and the suffering was eliminated, many patients in spite of being cured, still walk away with disappointment (Brody, 1997). Having said that, it is evident that medical expertise, unconsciously, is seen as a physician dictated process, in which physicians are expected to possess the panaceas to all of life’s problems. While this may be true, it is suggested that expectations are established from participants, the patient and provider. The truth of the matter, however, is that the best practices of medicine are seen as patient-centered, in which the patient is equal, if not more active, in the relationship. Research states that if patients were to become more active, and make themselves just as accountable for finding a solution, the desired outcomes are more likely to be accomplished (Korsch, 1997). What this means, is that medicine must strive to make establishing partnerships the goal of both the physician and provider. Suppose though, that even if increased responsibility becomes suggested for the patient and provider, communicating and connecting are not a perfect science (Korsch, 1997).

Empathetic Relationships

When one talks of empathetic relationships, a tendency to talk about the feelings of the patient is implied, as if one is able to feel the same emotions of the presenting individual. What actually is happening, is what behavioral researchers’ term as associational linking (Halpern, 2001).  This happens when an individual is in the process of self-disclosure. Using products of their own cognitive constructs, the actively listening individual is able to associate and relate to the information being conveyed during the time of self-disclosure. It is important to remember that empathy is a shared process in which both the actor, in this case the patient, and the listener, the provider, are able to mold each other’s language and connect to achieve the desired positive affective mind states (Halpern, 2001). Even though, as the cascading model inclines, that being able to empathize begins at development, researchers advised the importance of using the imagination. The challenge to the patient and provider is the differences that come with uncertainty. “Uncovering a misunderstanding creates an opportunity for inquiry and for the possibility of more refined understanding.” (Halpern, 2001, p. 43). There is not only the uncertainty of what type of patient encounter is to about to present itself, but also the human aspect and the possibility, or lack thereof, in finding that associative link needed for connection.

Disadvantages

The communication used in the empathetic relationship relates to the ideas of humanism. “Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism). Some critics see humanistic undertones as a problem. For one, some researchers assert that the human experience is devoid of any larger culture influence. They suggest that participating individuals of the relationship may believe themselves as being only “one way” contributing to transference (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). That “one way” viewpoint, commonly identified as egocentrism, causes conflicting communication (Halpern, 2001, p 130). Furthermore, researchers who explained egocentrism to empathetic relationships revealed that socialization is inadequate to understanding empathy, defensively suggesting that individual differences have no bearing to the relationship. As such, empathy becomes irrelevant to the patient-provider relationship when egocentrism is considered. In addition, these same researchers reported that if one becomes reliant on empathy as a way of enhancing communication, it may also be counterproductive. There is a strong possibility that having empathy may weaken the objectivity required in diagnosis. More so, research also questions that if one is to practice with the open-communication  inherent to empathetic relationships, there may be a tendency to impose meaning from the imperfect associations. Unknowingly, this may make the patient more reluctant to communicate in a honest way.

Advantages

However, many might say is not true of modernity or at least acceptable to its time. According to the Biosocialpyscho model mentioned earlier, each individual possesses a long history of unique experiences, derived from culture, values, attitudes, and most importantly a lifetime worth of knowledge (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). Even though many would like to believe that language is universal and easily understood, it is not (Korsch, 1997) . There are two problems with this type of belief.

First, in a relationship where social roles may go overlooked, the patient and provider relationships appears to be rather hierarchical (Brody, 1997). This seems to come across as an observation among many patients and therefore subordination is assumed.  Consequently, patients are receptive to the fact that knowledge, in this sense, is a form of power. It is not suprising to believe that the messengers of such  knowledge should be treated with respect (Brody).  However, the empathetic relationship encourages a patient-centered mentality, making it easier to dismiss the earlier social norms that accompany a role with underlying hierarchical status. Without open communication, as this relationship suggests, it is difficult to explore other areas of information that the patient may be unwilling to disclose. This seems to be a dilemma. For one, it is be hard to predict whether knowing more about the patient is beneficial.  Diagnosis may be more difficult with added non-medical variables. On the other hand, more information could reject previous assumptions about diagnosis and make personalized treatments easier to design. In light of this information, being flexible in discussion, as well as attitude, may divulge further opportunity for empathy and connection.

Above all, what might be considered one of the most advantageous features of an empathetic relationship is one of the benefits stated earlier, as a part of the cascading model. Recall that emotional understanding is critical not only for reasons of perception, but for coming to a decision to be executed in regulation. Empathetic relationships incorporate similar dimensions of the cascading model, which makes it easier for the patient to invest and become more and comfortable. Emotional understanding is considered helpful in developing trust between patient and provider. Additionally, empathy also helps the patient recognize that the provider cares, and therefore when a patient feels understood, better outcomes are more likely (Feldman, 2001). More specifically, because emotional intelligence theory carries a progressive sequence, so might the empathetic relationship as it evolves. The more confidence and trust the patient feels, the more likely he or she is to express his or her emotions. Such feelings of trust and confidence allow active participation in the design of the treatment and may increase compliance. In short, these practices may also benefit the inexperienced emotionally-intelligent physician.

Paternalistic Relationships

Now let one consider the alternative to empathetic relationships. Paternalistic relationships have always held a moral tradition credited to earlier philosophical inquiry on social contracts. Today, paternalistic relationships are recognized as similar to the parental relationship. The physician selects and creates the expectations for the patient, and  the patient agrees to commit to physician orders without objection. Even when the patient may disagree with the ideas of the physician and asks for alternatives, the physician still has the ability to carefully select and frame suggestions to his or her beliefs. The physician holds the dominant and authoritative position within the relationship (Brody, 1997). This type of relationship is often attributed to the earlier statement made about the hierarchy and traditional nature of care. The focus is strictly on the problems presented and the social factors are disregarded in this type of interaction.

Advantages

Although current changes and future predictions of medicine show that consumerism has greatly contributed to the changing relationships between the patient and provider, it cannot be ignored that this relationship serves beneficial at times (Risse, 1999). As such, this type of relationship would be more appropriate, as stated by clinicians and patients, for patients who lack the competencies to understand the care measures enjoined, and for those who are most likely at risk of unconscious danger or mentally unstable (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994). Additionally, this type of relationship, while it does not enhance or contribute in any significant way like that of empathetic relationships, has been observed as one way of ensuring a medical focus. However, a strictly problem-focus though, may prevent the effects that come with attachment. It also lowers the chance of judgment being impaired from emotional connections. So for special reasons, as it goes to show, this relationship may serve a purpose. Finally, and still considerably controversial, this relationship is predicted as beneficial over the former relationship, as it avoids excess unrelated information attributed to the open-communication. Even though this may seem selfish for the underlying economic motivations, assuming in this context that medical expertise is eminently valued, it may make sense that it becomes the main focus of the conversation. Put another way, managing time while trying to complete each objective for the appointment, the physician may miss sharing pertinent information related to the diagnosis. Consider again that each patient is unique and may be less responsive or culturally uncomfortable with an empathetic relationship.

Disadvantages

The future of medicine often looks at the implications of history as part of looking for improvement. The paternalistic model, even with conditional utility, breaks apart the communication process. One of the most popular criticisms of the paternalistic model is that it implies, concrete thought as the only way of  reasoning. This excludes the need for abstract thought. In part, many physicians fear that using abstract thought prevents accurate diagnosis. The problem with that assumption, however, is that patients have infinite and diverse life experiences, which indicate that communication must be tailored to the needs and comfort of the patient. Additionally, research proves that noncompliance is one of the leading consequences to distasteful patient-provider encounters (Korsch, 1997). While it may not happen as much in health care settings today, from the increased availability of information technology, the paternalistic relationship once had the reputation of using information as power. This meant that physicians having the advantage of knowledge, could selectively reveal treatment and other information as they choose. It is less of an issue today, due to issues of litigation and the advent of technology, but much more can still be said about the need for trust.

Applying EI

The application of emotional intelligence between patient and provider is difficult to standardize as patient care is on-going and changing. The relationship may require consistent flexibility. For a general idea, the focus of application will be used during the initial medical interview. This is one of the most important parts to establishing a relationship (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994).

The medical interview, ideally, has three purposes: identification, communication and implementation of treatment (Kaplan). The goal of emotionally intelligent physicians is to apply emotional intelligence to each of the skill sets required to complete each objective. At any rate, communication becomes one of the most important attributes of emotional intelligence (Kaplan & Sadock, 1994).

A physician must have the ability to facilitate conversation in order to identify and treat the problem. To do so, the emotionally-intelligent physician may want to encourage information that is open-ended, all while maintaining organization of the interview (Korsch, 1997). At this time, it may also be helpful for the physician to pay special attention to the choice of words and body language. The choice words used by the patient are equally important to the words delivered by the physician. Notice earlier, that empathy cannot take place without having an association to construct the meaning.

In speaking with the patient, the physician should pay careful attention to the tone and avoid using medical terminology if necessary (Hertzberg, 2003). Using a language that patients understand will help show that the physician understands. Concluding, one of the most important parts of the application may require consistent and routine practice. The more a provider learns to self reflect and become knowledgeable to the ways of managing emotion, the easier it is to advance to the other competencies integral to the cascading model.

Conclusion

Emotional intelligence proves to be a complex area of psychology. It is still unclear how emotional intelligence can best be integrated to maximize the potential it promises to emotional labor, such as being a physician. Likewise, the research suggests that there may be a considerable need for researchers to explore ways of measuring the application of emotional intelligence for greater validity. Yet with all said, it stands to reason that being in pain or inflicted with illness is already an inevitable burden. Until physicians and patients uniformly agree that the relationship is to resemble a partnership where the exchanges are personal and empathy is encouraged, the science and art of medicine will continue to bring the same dissatisfaction.

Learner’s Thoughts

This learner feels that emotional intelligence is one of the most important areas of psychological study. She feels that it is unfortunate that helping professions or agencies with helping missions in general, do not devote enough time to a skill that explicitly benefits their clientele.  Additionally, this learner came to the realization throughout her analysis, that emotional intelligence is difficult to simplify. She questions whether this is one reason for its scarce implementation. It is popular wisdom that without comprehension of the content at hand it is difficult to see any reason for action. On that note, the learner wishes to add that she was surprised that little attention was given to the importance of reflection. Does reflection not constitute the base of the knowledge structure used in the cascading theory?  The learner admits to being passionate about healthcare but had always felt that the care she observed was dehumanizing. As of right now, the learner was impressed when discovering that emotional intelligence is becoming more experimental and applied in some areas of medicine. The opinion of the learner based off the research gathered is that emotional intelligence will greatly enhance a patient-provider relationship. However, in order for the most effective implementation the learner suggests that other areas of the health-care system as whole must change. As Chen (2009) stated, “Extreme multitasking has invaded the patient-doctor relationship.” Additionally the learner feels that emotional intelligence is still premature for the other challenges that come with patient consumerism and the politics of care. However, present research brings hope for the future of medicine and in turn for the wellbeing of humanity.

References

MSCEIT. (2009). The Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence. Retrieved August 27, 2010, from Emotional Intelligence and MSCEIT: http://www.emotionaliq.org/

Brody, H. (1997). The Physcian-Patient Relationship. In R. M. Veatch, Medical Ethics (pp. 77-79). Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Chen, P. W. (2009, October 15). How Mindfulness Can Make for Better Doctors . Retrieved August 27, 2010, from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/15/health/15chen.html?_r=1&ref=health

Feldman, M. D. (2001). Becoming an emotionally intelligent physician. WJM , n.a.

Gédéon, A. (2006). Introduction. In A. Gédéon, Science and Technology in Medicine (p. 13). New York: Springer Science and Business Media, Inc.

Goleman, D. (2004). Resonant Leadership. In D. Goleman, Primial Leadership: Learning to Lead with Emotional Intelligence (pp. 24-29). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Halpern, J. (2001). Emotional Reasoning. In J. Halpern, From detached concern to empathy: humanizing medical practice (pp. 40-43). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hertzberg, M. A. (2003). In M. A. Hertzberg, The Most Unhealthy Relationship of All: (pp. 100-105). Lincoln: IUniverse, Inc.

Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional Intelligence: An Integrative Meta-Analysis and Cascading Model. Journal of Applied Psychology , 55-78.

Kaplan, H. I., & Sadock, B. J. (1994). The Doctor-Patient Relationship and Interviewing Techniques. In H. I. Kaplan, & B. J. Sadock, Synopsis of Psychiatry (pp. 1-16). Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Korsch, B. M. (1997). The Intelligent Patient’s Guide to The Doctor-Patient Relationship. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

Larson, E. B., & Yao, X. (2005, March 2). Clinical Empathy as Emotional Labor in the Patient-Physcian Relationship . Retrieved August 27, 2010, from The Journal of the American Medical Association: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/293/9/1100

Petri, H. L., & Govern, J. M. (2004). Cognitive Motivation: Social Motivation and Consistency. In H. L. Petri, & J. M. Govern, Motivation: Theory, Research, and Applications (pp. 300-304). Belmont: Thomson Learning Inc.

Risse, G. B. (1999). The Future of Hospitals as Healing Spaces. In G. B. Risse, Mending bodies, saving souls: a history of hospitals (pp. 680-685). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Spiro, H. M. (1996). Empathy and the Practice of Medicine: Beyond Pills and the Scalpel. New York: Yale University Press.