Emotional Intelligence and Self-Leadership

Introduction and Context

Leadership is not only a matter of technical expertise, authority or strategic intelligence. Leaders work through relationships, interpret uncertain situations, regulate their own conduct and influence the emotions and motivation of others. These activities make emotional intelligence (EI) a central topic in organizational behaviour.

Emotional intelligence refers broadly to the capacity to perceive, understand, use and regulate emotion in oneself and in social situations. The concept has developed through several traditions. Howard Gardner’s work on interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences, Peter Salovey and John Mayer’s ability model, Reuven Bar-On’s emotional-social model, and Daniel Goleman’s popular mixed model each contributed to contemporary discussion. Although these approaches overlap, they do not define or measure exactly the same construct.

For leaders, EI is most useful when treated as a set of learnable capabilities and behavioural practices rather than as a fashionable label or a claim that emotions should always be positive. Effective self-leadership involves recognizing emotional information, evaluating it thoughtfully and choosing behaviour that supports ethical, professional and organizational objectives.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, students should be able to:

1. Explain emotional intelligence and distinguish it from general intelligence, personality and emotional labour.
2. Compare ability, trait and mixed models of EI.
3. Apply the capabilities of self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, social awareness and relationship management.
4. Explain how EI contributes to self-leadership and workplace effectiveness.
5. Evaluate common EI measurement methods and their limitations.
6. Identify ethical risks in the assessment and use of EI.
7. Design a practical personal-development plan for emotional competence.

1. Understanding Emotion in Organizations

An emotion is a relatively brief, organized response involving appraisal, physiological activation, subjective experience and action tendency. For example, a leader who interprets a sudden budget reduction as a threat may experience anxiety and become inclined to defend existing plans. A mood is generally more diffuse and longer lasting; a person may feel irritable throughout a day without being able to identify one specific cause.

Emotions provide information, but they do not provide infallible instructions. Fear may signal risk, anger may indicate perceived unfairness, and enthusiasm may support persistence. However, emotional interpretations can be distorted by incomplete information, assumptions, fatigue, cultural expectations or past experience. Emotional intelligence therefore requires both emotional sensitivity and critical reflection.

Several related concepts should be distinguished:

Emotional labour is particularly important in service and leadership work. A manager may remain calm and respectful when dealing with an angry employee, even when personally frustrated. This can be professional and constructive, but persistent suppression of genuine feelings may create strain. EI does not mean pretending to feel something at all times; it involves choosing an appropriate, authentic and ethical response.

2. Major Models of Emotional Intelligence

2.1 The ability model

Salovey and Mayer conceptualized EI as a form of mental ability involving emotional information. Their four-branch model generally includes:

1. Perceiving emotion: identifying emotions in facial expressions, voice, posture, language and one’s own bodily experience.
2. Using emotion to facilitate thought: using feelings to prioritize attention, stimulate creativity or consider alternative perspectives.
3. Understanding emotion: interpreting emotional vocabulary, causes, combinations and changes over time.
4. Managing emotion: regulating emotion in oneself and others while remaining open to relevant information.

The ability model asks whether a person can solve emotion-related problems correctly or effectively. For example, a person may be asked to identify the likely emotion expressed in a voice recording or select the most constructive response to a conflict. The model is conceptually close to intelligence because performance is assessed through tasks rather than through self-description.

A strength of the ability model is construct clarity. It distinguishes emotional reasoning from confidence, optimism or social popularity. Its limitation is that scoring emotional tasks can be difficult. Some tasks have multiple defensible answers, and expert or consensus scoring may reflect cultural assumptions about the “correct” emotion.

2.2 Trait models

Trait EI describes people’s perceptions of their own emotional abilities and behavioural tendencies. Petrides and colleagues distinguish trait EI from maximum-performance ability. Typical facets include emotional self-awareness, emotion regulation, adaptability, self-confidence, assertiveness, empathy and relationship skills.

Trait EI is commonly measured through questionnaires. Respondents indicate how accurately statements describe them, such as “I can usually understand why I feel a particular way.” This approach is valuable because self-beliefs influence motivation, coping and behaviour. It is also efficient and suitable for coaching or development.

However, trait measures may assess self-confidence, personality or self-image as much as actual emotional performance. A person may believe that they manage conflict well without demonstrating this skill under pressure. Self-report results should therefore be interpreted as information about perceived capability, not definitive evidence of competence.

2.3 Mixed models

Mixed models combine emotional abilities with motivational, social and personality-related characteristics. Goleman’s framework commonly groups competencies into self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management. Bar-On’s model includes intrapersonal skills, interpersonal skills, adaptability, stress management and general mood.

Mixed models are attractive in management education because they connect emotional functioning to leadership behaviours and workplace outcomes. They provide accessible development language: a leader can identify a need for better impulse control, empathy or conflict management and then practise relevant behaviours.

Their broadness is also a limitation. When a model includes optimism, achievement orientation, communication, resilience and social skills, it may overlap substantially with established personality traits, motivation and leadership constructs. Broad models can be useful development frameworks but should not automatically be treated as precise psychological measures.

2.4 Comparison of the models

These models should not be treated as interchangeable. A person may score highly on trait EI because of strong self-confidence while obtaining an average ability score. Conversely, a person may perform well on emotion-recognition tasks but lack confidence in social situations. A responsible practitioner states which model and instrument is being used and avoids claiming that one score represents “true EI.”

3. Emotional Intelligence as Self-Leadership

Self-leadership is the process of influencing one’s own thinking, motivation and behaviour to achieve desired outcomes. It includes behavioural strategies such as goal-setting, self-observation, self-reward and self-correction, as well as constructive thought strategies such as reframing assumptions and visualizing effective performance.

EI strengthens self-leadership in five connected ways:

1. Self-awareness identifies internal states, values, triggers and patterns.
2. Self-regulation creates a pause between emotional impulse and action.
3. Empathy improves understanding of another person’s experience.
4. Social awareness helps interpret group norms, power relations and climate.
5. Relationship management converts awareness into constructive interaction.

These capabilities are not a rigid sequence. A leader may move repeatedly among them during one conversation. For example, noticing defensiveness may lead to regulation, listening to an employee may produce empathy, reading the wider team may create social awareness, and a carefully chosen response may repair the relationship.

3.1 Self-awareness

Self-awareness involves recognizing emotions, thoughts, values, strengths, limitations and behavioural patterns. It is more than naming an emotion. A self-aware leader can ask:

• What am I feeling?
• What event or interpretation contributed to this feeling?
• What need, value or concern does it represent?
• How might it affect my judgement and communication?
• What evidence supports my interpretation?

Useful practices include a brief emotion journal, after-action reviews, requesting specific feedback and identifying recurring triggers. A practical journal entry might record the situation, emotion, intensity, interpretation, action and consequence. The purpose is not to eliminate emotion but to identify patterns.

Self-awareness has risks when misunderstood. Excessive self-focus can become rumination, and a leader who constantly analyses personal feelings may neglect the needs of others. Productive self-awareness connects reflection to responsible action.

3.2 Self-regulation

Self-regulation is the capacity to manage attention, impulses, emotional expression and behaviour in pursuit of appropriate goals. It does not mean suppressing all emotion or appearing calm while ignoring serious problems. It means choosing a response that is proportionate, timely and consistent with values.

A useful workplace process is:

1. Notice the trigger and bodily signs.
2. Pause before sending a message or making a decision.
3. Label the emotion precisely, such as disappointment rather than simply “stress.”
4. Check the interpretation and distinguish facts from assumptions.
5. Select a response consistent with the objective and ethical standards.
6. Review the outcome and adjust future behaviour.

Regulation strategies include breathing, taking a short break, cognitive reappraisal, seeking relevant information, using prepared scripts and postponing a difficult conversation until participants can engage productively. Regulation should not become avoidance. Repeatedly delaying a necessary conversation can worsen the problem.

3.3 Empathy

Empathy is the attempt to understand another person’s emotional experience and perspective. Cognitive empathy concerns understanding what another person may think or feel. Affective empathy concerns sharing or resonating with aspects of that experience. Compassion adds a concern for the person’s welfare and a willingness to respond constructively.

Empathy is not agreement, pity or the abandonment of standards. A manager can understand why an employee is distressed while still addressing missed deadlines. Effective empathic communication includes attentive listening, open questions, accurate paraphrasing and acknowledgement:

“It sounds as though the changing priorities have made it difficult to plan your work. Let us examine what can be clarified and what support is realistic.”

Empathy can be distorted by similarity bias, in which leaders empathize more readily with people who share their background. Structured questions and perspective-taking help reduce this risk.

3.4 Social awareness

Social awareness extends beyond one-to-one empathy. It involves recognizing group emotions, informal norms, status differences, inclusion or exclusion, and the effect of organizational events on morale. Leaders develop social awareness by observing who speaks, who remains silent, how disagreement is handled and which concerns are expressed indirectly.

Social awareness also requires cultural intelligence. Emotional displays and communication conventions differ across cultures and individuals. Silence may indicate respect, disagreement, uncertainty or lack of psychological safety. A leader should avoid treating one behavioural interpretation as universally correct and should verify meaning through respectful inquiry.

3.5 Relationship management

Relationship management involves building trust, communicating clearly, influencing ethically, managing conflict, giving feedback, supporting cooperation and repairing damaged relationships. It is not manipulation or popularity-seeking. Effective relationship management balances concern for people with accountability for work.

A constructive conflict process is to define the issue, listen to each perspective, identify shared interests, generate options, agree on action and review implementation. Feedback is most effective when it is specific, behaviour-focused and oriented toward improvement. The common structure “situation–behaviour–impact–next step” helps prevent vague personal criticism.

4. EI and Leadership Practice

Emotionally intelligent leadership is context-dependent. A crisis may require calm direction and rapid decisions; a developmental conversation may require patience and inquiry. The same behaviour can have different effects depending on timing, power and culture.

EI contributes to leadership through several mechanisms:

• Decision quality: emotional information can reveal stakeholder concerns, while regulation reduces impulsive choices.
• Trust: consistency, listening and appropriate transparency make leadership more predictable.
• Motivation: leaders who understand individual needs can frame work in meaningful ways.
• Conflict management: empathy and regulation reduce escalation and support problem-solving.
• Change leadership: recognizing uncertainty allows leaders to address legitimate concerns rather than dismissing resistance.
• Psychological safety: respectful responses to questions and mistakes encourage learning and voice.

EI is not a substitute for competence, resources, fair systems or sound strategy. An emotionally skilled leader cannot compensate indefinitely for unsafe working conditions, discriminatory policies or impossible workloads. Emotional capability should complement, not conceal, organizational responsibility.

5. Measuring Emotional Intelligence

5.1 Main assessment approaches

EI assessment commonly uses three approaches.

Performance-based assessment presents tasks involving emotion perception, understanding or management. It is closest to the ability model. Its advantages include reduced reliance on self-perception and the possibility of comparing responses with expert or consensus criteria. Its challenges include time, cost, uncertain scoring standards and cultural variation.

Self-report assessment asks respondents to rate their typical behaviour or perceived ability. It is economical and useful for reflection. It is vulnerable to social desirability, limited self-knowledge, response styles and deliberate impression management.

Other-report or 360-degree assessment collects ratings from supervisors, peers, direct reports or clients. It can reveal behavioural effects that self-ratings miss. It may nevertheless be influenced by relationships, retaliation fears, organizational politics and unequal opportunities to observe behaviour.

A sound assessment process identifies the purpose before selecting an instrument. Developmental coaching, recruitment, promotion and research require different levels of evidence and protection. A questionnaire designed for reflection should not automatically be used as a high-stakes selection test.

5.2 Reliability and validity

Reliability concerns consistency of measurement. An instrument should produce reasonably stable and internally coherent results under appropriate conditions. Validity concerns whether interpretations and uses of scores are supported by evidence. A reliable measure can still be invalid for a particular purpose.

Relevant forms of validity include:

• Content validity: coverage of the intended emotional capabilities.
• Construct validity: evidence that the measure relates to EI rather than an unrelated construct.
• Convergent validity: association with related measures where a relationship is theoretically expected.
• Discriminant validity: limited overlap with distinct constructs.
• Criterion-related validity: relationship with relevant outcomes, such as communication quality, while recognizing that correlation does not prove causation.

Scores should be interpreted with confidence intervals, comparison groups and contextual information where available. A numerical score creates an impression of precision that may exceed the quality of the underlying evidence.

5.3 Limitations of EI measurement

First, models differ in definition. A score from a trait questionnaire cannot be directly compared with a performance score from an ability test. Second, emotional behaviour is context-sensitive. Someone may be effective with a familiar team but less effective in a high-conflict or cross-cultural setting. Third, ratings may reflect gender, racial or cultural stereotypes. Assertiveness may be praised in one person and judged as aggression in another. Fourth, EI scores can be affected by temporary stress, language proficiency and test familiarity.

Finally, evidence linking EI to performance is often positive but not unlimited. EI may predict outcomes through communication, teamwork or leadership behaviour, but general cognitive ability, personality, technical expertise, job design and organizational climate also matter. Claims that EI is the single most important predictor of success are not academically responsible.

6. Ethical Use of EI

The ethical use of EI requires attention to consent, privacy, fairness, competence and consequences.

Informed consent: Participants should know why data are collected, how results will be interpreted, who will see them and whether participation is voluntary.

Confidentiality: Individual responses should not be disclosed beyond the agreed purpose. Group reports should avoid identifying individuals, especially in small teams.

Fairness and non-discrimination: Instruments should be examined for cultural, linguistic, disability-related and gender-related bias. A communication difference should not automatically be classified as emotional deficiency.

Proportionality: Assessment should be proportionate to the decision. It is ethically questionable to reject an applicant because of a weak EI score from an unvalidated questionnaire.

Professional competence: Administrators need appropriate training in test use, interpretation and feedback. Feedback should describe development opportunities rather than impose fixed labels.

Respect for autonomy: Employees should not be pressured to disclose intimate emotional information unrelated to work. Leaders should distinguish supportive development from psychological intrusion.

EI can itself be used manipulatively. A leader may read emotions accurately in order to exploit vulnerability, silence dissent or create dependency. Ethical emotional influence requires respect for dignity, truthful communication and legitimate organizational purposes.

7. Developing Emotional Intelligence: A Practical Framework

EI development is most effective when it is specific, practised and supported by feedback. A practical cycle is:

1. Diagnose: combine reflection, behavioural examples and carefully selected feedback.
2. Prioritize: choose one or two capabilities linked to a real leadership challenge.
3. Set a behavioural goal: for example, “In difficult meetings, I will ask two clarifying questions before responding.”
4. Practise: rehearse, apply and repeat the behaviour in relevant situations.
5. Obtain feedback: ask what was helpful and what could be improved.
6. Review and transfer: identify where the skill applies in new contexts.

A development goal should be observable. “Become more emotionally intelligent” is too vague. “When receiving criticism, I will summarize the feedback and request one example before explaining my perspective” is more useful.

Development methods include coaching, role-play, reflective writing, peer consultation, mindfulness practices, conflict simulations and structured after-action reviews. Mindfulness can improve attention to present experience, but it should not be presented as a universal cure or a replacement for organizational change.

8. Illustrative Case: The Restructuring Meeting

The following case is fictional and intended for learning purposes.

Background

A regional logistics company announces a restructuring that may eliminate several roles. Maya, a newly appointed operations supervisor, must explain the change to a team that has experienced repeated reorganizations. Senior management instructs her to “keep everyone positive.”

Problem

During the meeting, an employee asks whether the decision has already been made. Maya feels anxious and interprets the question as a challenge to her authority. She begins to defend senior management, interrupts two employees and says, “We need to focus on opportunities, not negativity.” The team becomes silent. Afterward, several employees privately report that they do not trust her.

Analysis

Maya’s initial difficulty is not a lack of goodwill but weak self-awareness and regulation. Her anxiety and perceived threat shape her interpretation. Her response also shows limited social awareness: silence is treated as compliance rather than possible fear or disengagement. The instruction to “keep everyone positive” encourages emotional suppression instead of honest communication.

Approach and solution

Before a second meeting, Maya reviews what happened and asks a trusted colleague for behavioural feedback. She identifies a trigger—questions that imply loss of control—and prepares a regulation routine: pause, breathe, name the emotion and ask a clarifying question. She also checks the facts so she can distinguish confirmed decisions from unresolved issues.

At the meeting she says:

“I recognize that the previous changes have reduced trust. I felt defensive in our last discussion, and I interrupted people. That was not helpful. I will share what is known, identify what is undecided and record questions that require an answer.”

She listens without promising outcomes she cannot control. When an employee expresses anger, Maya acknowledges its basis, asks what information would be most useful and explains the limits of her authority. She then arranges an anonymous question channel and a follow-up meeting with a human-resources representative.

Outcome

The restructuring still creates uncertainty, but employees report that communication is clearer and more respectful. Maya does not eliminate negative emotion; she helps the team address it constructively. Senior management also learns that demands for artificial positivity can damage trust.

Learning points

1. Self-awareness helps a leader identify personal triggers.
2. Regulation creates a choice between impulse and response.
3. Empathy does not require agreement with every demand.
4. Social awareness includes reading silence and power dynamics.
5. Relationship management depends on honesty, listening and follow-through.
6. EI cannot remove structural problems, but it can influence how responsibly they are handled.

9. Contemporary Developments and Technology

Digital and hybrid work increase the difficulty of emotional interpretation. Video meetings provide fewer bodily cues, written messages can appear harsher than intended, and asynchronous work delays repair after misunderstandings. Leaders should use explicit check-ins, clarify tone and avoid interpreting delayed responses without evidence.

Artificial intelligence tools may analyse language, facial expression or voice in recruitment and workplace monitoring. These applications raise serious concerns. Emotional states are not reliably inferred from facial movements alone, and automated systems may reproduce cultural or demographic bias. Employees may also feel coerced when emotional data are collected without meaningful consent. AI should not be treated as a neutral authority on a person’s character or suitability. Where such tools are considered, organizations need transparency, human review, data minimization, security, appeal processes and compliance with applicable privacy and employment law.

The strongest contemporary approach is therefore human-centred: use technology cautiously for reflection or administrative support, not as an unquestioned judge of emotional worth.

Chapter Summary

Emotional intelligence concerns the perception, understanding, use and regulation of emotional information. Ability models treat EI as a form of emotional reasoning assessed through performance tasks; trait models focus on perceived emotional dispositions measured mainly through self-report; and mixed models combine emotional, social, motivational and personality-related competencies. These models overlap but must not be confused.

Self-leadership applies EI to personal effectiveness. Self-awareness identifies emotions, values and triggers; self-regulation manages impulses and expression; empathy seeks to understand another person’s perspective; social awareness interprets group climate and context; and relationship management supports trust, feedback, conflict resolution and ethical influence. EI can improve leadership, but it cannot replace technical competence, fair systems or sound organizational design.

EI measurement may use performance tasks, self-reports or other-ratings. Each approach has strengths and limitations concerning reliability, validity, culture, bias and context. Ethical practice requires informed consent, confidentiality, fairness, professional competence, proportionality and protection against manipulation. Development is most effective when goals are behavioural, practised repeatedly and supported by feedback. In digital and AI-enabled workplaces, emotional interpretation requires particular caution, transparency and human judgement.

Key Terms

Emotional intelligence: The capacity or disposition to perceive, understand, use and regulate emotional information.

Ability model: An approach that defines EI as mental ability applied to emotional information.

Trait EI: Individuals’ perceptions of their emotional capabilities and typical emotional tendencies.

Mixed model: An EI framework combining emotional abilities with social, motivational or personality-related competencies.

Self-awareness: Recognition of one’s emotions, values, strengths, limitations and behavioural patterns.

Self-regulation: Management of emotional impulses, attention and behaviour in pursuit of appropriate goals.

Empathy: An attempt to understand another person’s emotional experience and perspective.

Cognitive empathy: Understanding what another person may think or feel.

Affective empathy: Emotional resonance with another person’s experience.

Compassion: Concern for another person’s welfare accompanied by constructive action.

Social awareness: Understanding group emotions, norms, power relations and organizational climate.

Relationship management: The ethical use of communication and interpersonal skills to build cooperation and manage conflict.

Self-leadership: The process of influencing one’s own thoughts, motivation and behaviour.

Emotional labour: Regulation of emotional expression to meet occupational expectations.

Reliability: Consistency of a measurement instrument or procedure.

Validity: Evidence supporting the interpretation and use of measurement results.

360-degree feedback: Assessment using ratings from multiple workplace perspectives.

Psychological safety: A shared belief that people can speak up, ask questions or admit mistakes without undue interpersonal punishment.

Emotional manipulation: The unethical use of emotional knowledge to exploit, control or deceive others.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. What is emotional intelligence, and how does it differ from general intelligence?
2. Identify the four branches of the ability model of emotional intelligence.
3. Explain the difference between empathy and agreement.
4. Why can self-report EI measures be affected by social desirability?
5. State three ethical principles that should guide EI assessment.

Long Answer Questions

1. Compare ability, trait and mixed models of emotional intelligence, including the principal strengths and limitations of each.
2. Explain how self-awareness and self-regulation contribute to effective self-leadership.
3. Discuss the role of empathy, social awareness and relationship management in resolving workplace conflict.
4. Evaluate performance-based, self-report and 360-degree approaches to measuring EI.
5. Explain why emotional intelligence should complement, rather than replace, technical competence and sound organizational systems.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A manager receives an angry email from an employee and immediately wants to respond defensively. Apply the self-regulation process in this chapter to design an appropriate response.
2. A company plans to use an AI system that infers applicants’ emotional suitability from video interviews. Analyse the proposal using validity, fairness, privacy and ethical-use principles.
3. Using the restructuring case, identify two points at which Maya could have acted differently and explain which EI capabilities would have been involved.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which model defines emotional intelligence primarily as a set of mental abilities for processing emotional information?

A. Ability model

B. Trait model

C. Mixed model

D. Behavioural conditioning model

Correct Answer: A. Ability model

Question 2

Which action best demonstrates self-regulation?

A. Ignoring all negative feelings

B. Responding immediately to an insulting message

C. Pausing, checking assumptions and choosing a proportionate response

D. Agreeing with every person to avoid conflict

Correct Answer: C. Pausing, checking assumptions and choosing a proportionate response

Question 3

What is the main focus of trait EI measures?

A. A person’s perceived emotional capabilities and tendencies

B. Only physiological reactions to stress

C. Technical knowledge of organizational systems

D. The number of relationships a person has

Correct Answer: A. A person’s perceived emotional capabilities and tendencies

Question 4

Which statement about empathy is most accurate?

A. Empathy requires agreeing with another person’s demands

B. Empathy means understanding another person’s perspective without abandoning standards

C. Empathy is identical to pity

D. Empathy is relevant only in counselling occupations

Correct Answer: B. Empathy means understanding another person’s perspective without abandoning standards

Question 5

Which is a limitation of self-report EI assessment?

A. It cannot collect information about self-perception

B. It is always more expensive than performance testing

C. Responses may be influenced by limited self-knowledge or social desirability

D. It measures only technical intelligence

Correct Answer: C. Responses may be influenced by limited self-knowledge or social desirability

Question 6

What does social awareness include?

A. Reading group climate, norms and power relations

B. Suppressing all emotional expression

C. Rewarding only employees who agree with the leader

D. Avoiding observation of team interactions

Correct Answer: A. Reading group climate, norms and power relations

Question 7

Which practice is most ethically appropriate when using EI assessment for employee development?

A. Sharing individual scores publicly

B. Using an unvalidated score as the sole basis for dismissal

C. Explaining the purpose, protecting confidentiality and providing constructive feedback

D. Requiring disclosure of unrelated private emotions

Correct Answer: C. Explaining the purpose, protecting confidentiality and providing constructive feedback

Question 8

Why should EI scores not automatically be treated as precise measures of leadership potential?

A. All EI models measure exactly the same construct

B. Scores may reflect different constructs, contexts, biases and measurement limitations

C. Leadership never involves emotion

D. Performance-based tests contain no interpretation

Correct Answer: B. Scores may reflect different constructs, contexts, biases and measurement limitations

Question 9

Which response best demonstrates relationship management during conflict?

A. Identifying shared interests, listening and agreeing on follow-up action

B. Avoiding the issue indefinitely

C. Using private emotional information to pressure the other person

D. Declaring one person entirely responsible before hearing perspectives

Correct Answer: A. Identifying shared interests, listening and agreeing on follow-up action

Question 10

What is a major concern about using AI to infer emotional suitability from facial expressions?

A. Facial and vocal signals always reveal a person’s true character

B. The technology eliminates all cultural bias

C. Emotional inference may be unreliable, biased and insufficiently transparent

D. Human review becomes unnecessary

Correct Answer: C. Emotional inference may be unreliable, biased and insufficiently transparent