The role of emotional intelligence in community language teaching -- a case study of intermediate second language learners in Iran

https://www.eduzhai.net
International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 2017, 7(6): 152-159 DOI: 10.5923/j.ijpbs.20170706.02

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Community Language Teaching: A Case Study of Iranian Intermediate L2 Learners
Hassan Banaruee, Hooshang Khoshsima*, Omid Khatin-Zadeh
Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran

Abstract This study aimed to explore the differences between high and low-EQ scorers in learning an L2. To achieve this
objective, a group of 30 intermediate learners attended a course in which community language teaching was used to teach speaking skills to the learners. Half of the participants had high EQs and the other half had low EQs. Speaking ability of these participants was checked by a pre-test before treatment and a post-test after treatment. Results of these tests showed that high-EQ L2 learners benefit more from those courses in which community language teaching is used to teach speaking skills to learners. It is suggested that being more aware of the feelings of themselves and others can be an influential factor in the success of those L2 learners who are taught by community language teaching. This is in agreement with humanistic approaches to language teaching that emphasize the role of emotional factors in the process of language development. The findings of this study suggest further lines of investigation through which the impact of EQ on L2 acquisition can be explored.
Keywords Emotional intelligence, Community language teaching, EQ

1. Introduction and Literature Review
This study aimed to investigate the relationship between emotional intelligence and degree of achievement among Iranian L2 learners. Emotional intelligence is one of the topics that have attracted a lot of attention among researchers working in various fields, including psychology and language teaching. The relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in various cognitive and linguistic abilities has been a topic of interest for researchers. This study focused on the speaking ability of L2 learners who attended a course in which community language teaching was used.
1.1. Emotional Intelligence
Emotional intelligence has been defined as the awareness of an individual of his/her feelings and other’s feelings and the ability to manage them (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000). Emotional quotient (EQ) is the ability to recognize emotions, to access and generate them in order to aid thought, to comprehend emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively control them to advance emotional and intellectual growth (ibid). Our emotional intelligence helps
* Corresponding author: khoshsima@cmu.ac.ir (Hooshang Khoshsima) Published online at https://www.eduzhai.net Copyright © 2017 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved

us to evaluate our own and others’ emotions, express feelings appropriately, and regulate emotions in order to achieve a goal (Ghabanchi & Rastegar, 2014; Salovey & Mayer, 1990).
Thorndike (1920) defines EQ as the ability to understand and manage others and to act intelligently. EQ has been defined by using different terms by many researchers in the field. The definitions have some commonalities as well as some differences. Emotional intelligence has been described as the ability to recognize, understand, and adjust emotions (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Schutte, Malouff, Hall, Haggerty, Cooper, Golden, & Dornheim, 1998). Emotional intelligence reflects abilities to combine intelligence, empathy and emotions to enhance thought and understanding of interpersonal dynamics. The term "emotional intelligence" initially appeared in two articles. Leuner (1966) was one of the first researchers who used the term in academic writings. Gardner (1983) used the term in subjects related to intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence. EQ has been discussed in the literature of the field for a long time (for example, Greenspan, 1989; Leuner, 1966), although it was in 1990 that the construct was introduced in its current form (Salovey & Mayer, 1990).
Mayer, Salovey, Caruso (2000) developed a way for scientifically measuring people's emotions. They said that a high EQ individual can better perceive emotions, use them in thought, understand their meanings, and manage emotions, than others. They added that solving emotional problems likely requires less cognitive effort for this individual.

International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 2017, 7(6): 152-159

153

1.2. Community Language Teaching
According to Moskowitz (1978), community language teaching refers to a group of methods that are called humanistic techniques. Moskowitz adds that humanistic techniques blend what the language learner feels with what s/he thinks. According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), humanistic techniques engage the whole person, including emotions, linguistic knowledge, and behavioral skills. La Forge (1983) says that in an L2 classroom, learners’ intimacy deepens as the class becomes a community of language learners. The desire to develop intimacy with other learners pushes them forward in the process of learning (ibid). Community language learning is holistic; that is, it involves cognitive and affective factors (Curran, 1972). That is why it is called whole-person learning. In this method of language teaching, learning takes place in a communicative context (ibid).
Having administered a pre-test before treatment and a post-test after treatment, this study intended to examine the role of emotional intelligence in the growth of speaking ability in a course that community language teaching was used. To this end, a group of high EQ learners and a group of low-EQ learners attended a two-month course of speaking. In this way, the study tried to answer the following questions:
1. Is there any significant relationship between emotional intelligence and growth of speaking ability in a class that is taught by techniques of community language teaching?
2. If there is a significant difference between high-EQ learners and low-EQ learners in this course, how can this difference be explained?
2. Methodology
2.1. Participants
Participants of the study were a group of 30 undergraduate students in the Department of English at Chabahar Maritime University. They were between 19 and 23 years old. This group consisted of 19 males and 11 females. A sample of Michigan TOEFL test was used to determine their proficiency in English. Based on the results of this test, only those students who were at intermediate level of English proficiency were selected for the main part of the study.
2.2. Instruments

items. Participants were expected to answer the items on the basis of a Likert scale that consisted of 5 options, ranging from ‘Never” (1 score) to ‘Always’ (5 scores). The sum of these scores for each participant was taken as EQ score of that participant. Therefore, the minimum possible score was 0 and the maximum possible score was 665. In addition to these, a voice recorder was used to record the voice of the participants during speaking test for re-checking and assigning scores. Two raters listened to these records and assigned scores independently.
2.3. Procedure
First, a sample of Michigan TOEFL test was administered among a large group of undergraduate students in the Department of English of Chabahar Maritime University. Only those who were at intermediate level of English proficiency were selected for the main part of the study. Then, Bar-On-EI test was used to select 15 high-EQ learners (with a score of higher than 340) and 15 low-EQ learners (with a score of lower than 340). Before receiving treatment, participants attended a pre-test of speaking. This test was administered by the researchers of the study. Then, they attended a community language teaching course of speaking for two months. All participants attended the same class that was taught by one of the researchers of the study. After treatment period, a post-test of speaking was administered to examine the progress of the participants.
2.4. Data Analysis
In the pre-test, each participant received two scores by two independent raters. Pearson coefficient was obtained to ensure inter-rater reliability. This value was 0.83, which was completely acceptable. For each participant, the mean of the two scores was taken as his/her score on the pre-test. Then, the data of post-test were analyzed. Inter-rater reliability of this test was checked by obtaining Pearson coefficient. This value was 0.79, which was an acceptable value. In the next stage of data analysis, two paired T-tests and two unpaired T-tests were run. The first paired T-test was used to compare the scores of high-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test. The second paired T-test was used to compare the scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test. The aim of the first unpaired T-test was to compare the scores of high-EQ participants with the scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test. The aim of the second unpaired T-test was to compare the scores of high-EQ participants with the scores of low-EQ participants in the post-test.

Before conducting the main part of the study, a sample of Michigan TOEFL test was used to select those students who were at the intermediate level of proficiency in English. Also, the Persian translation of Bar-On-EI test was used to measure EQ of the participants (See the Apendix). The validity and reliability of Persian translation of this test have been confirmed by Dehshiri (2003). This test included 133

3. Results
As was mentioned, the aim of the first paired T-test was to compare the scores of high-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test. Results of this T-test have been given in Table 1.

154

Hassan Banaruee et al.: The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Community

Language Teaching: A Case Study of Iranian Intermediate L2 Learners

Table 1. The difference between scores of high-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test

Paired Differences

M1-M2

95% Confidence interval of the

t

df

Pvalue

difference

High-EQ participants

-2.067

From -3.002 to -1.131

4.7393

14

0.0003

These values show that there was a significant difference between the scores of high-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test. In other words, participants of this group made a significant progress in their speaking proficiency throughout the treatment period.
Results of the second paired T-test, which aimed to compare the scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test, have been given in Table 2.

Table 4. The difference between scores of high-EQ participants and scores of low-EQ participants after treatment

Paired Differences

M1-M2

95% Confidence interval of the

t

df

Pvalue

difference

High-EQs and low-EQs in the post-test

1.167

From 0.250 to 2.083

2.6077

28

0.0145

These values show that there was a significant difference between high-EQ participants and low-EQ participants after treatment. High-EQ participants performed significantly better than low-EQ participants after receiving treatment. In other words, although the treatment led to progress in the speaking proficiency among the participants of both groups, the progress among high-EQ participants was more significant.

Table 2. The difference between scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test

Paired Differences

M1-M2

95% Confidence interval of the

t

df

Pvalue

difference

Low-EQ participants

-0.733

From -1.123 to -0.344

4.0359 14

0.0012

These values show that there was a significant difference between the scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test and post-test. In other words, participants of this group made a significant progress in their speaking proficiency throughout the treatment period.
Results of the first unpaired T-test, which aimed to compare the scores of high-EQ participants with the scores of low-EQ participants in the pre-test, have been given in Table 3.

Table 3. The difference between scores of high-EQ participants and the scores of low-EQ participants before treatment

Paired Differences

M1-M2

95% Confidence interval of the

t

df

Pvalue

difference

High-EQs and low-EQs in the pre-test

-0.167

From -1.267 to 0.934

0.3102 28 0.7587

These values show that there was no significant difference between high-EQ participants and low-EQ participants in terms of speaking ability before receiving treatment.
Results of the second unpaired T-test, which aimed to compare the scores of high-EQ participants with the scores of low-EQ participants in the post-test, have been given in Table 4.

4. Discussions
As was mentioned in the results, both high-EQ and low-EQ participants benefitted from community language teaching and made a significant progress throughout treatment period. However, degree of progress among high-EQ participants was significantly higher than low-EQ participants. The question that is raised here is that why high-EQ L2 learners highly benefit from community language teaching. To answer this question, we have to look at the nature of community language teaching and the practices that are used in a class that is taught by communicative activities. Communicative practices are highly reliant on the relationships that are created in the classroom as a mini-society. In this small society, L2 learners develop their linguistic ability through interaction with each other. There is no doubt that emotions are an important dimension of any relationship that is developed among human beings, and the relationships that are formed in an L2 classroom are not an exception. Therefore, it might be suggested that high-EQ L2 learners benefit more in a class that is taught by community language teaching because they are more successful in understanding others and cooperating with others. This puts them in a stronger position in those linguistic activities that are reliant on the relationships among L2 learners in a small society. Being more aware of other’s feelings can help high-EQ L2 learners to overcome affective hurdles that might prevent linguistic interactions among learners in the classroom. In fact, this can be a strong point for high-EQ learners and an effective tool for facilitating interactions in the classroom.
Any interaction in language classroom involves at least two parties. The high emotional ability of one of the involved parties could have a positive psychological impact on other parties. This positive impact could strengthen relationships. In other words, the positive psychological impact has a bilateral nature. In the interactions that take place among learners, when one party sends a signal indicating that s/he

International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 2017, 7(6): 152-159

155

understands others, the other learners become more motivated to participate in communicative activities. This can be crucially important for the progress of learners in a class that is taught by communicative methods of language teaching. In such an environment, learners can easily agree on a common goal and cooperate with each other to achieve that shared goal. This is psychologically very important and can function as a major source of motivation for learners. In fact, a small community in which learners have close bonds and share a common goal is the right place for the development of linguistic skills. In this community, learners do their best to communicate with each other and send their messages across through the networks of community.
The role of emotions has been emphasized by humanistic approaches to language learning and language acquisition. Humanistic approaches take this view that the process of linguistic development involves the whole dimensions of human life. Among these dimensions, feelings are crucially important because they could be a major force of motivation for pushing learners forward. On the other hand, negative feelings could be a hurdle for learners. In both cases, having a high EQ can be a great help for learners. In the first case (positive feelings), learners become aware that things are going in the right direction and they can even facilitate this process. In the latter case (negative feelings), they can employ proper strategies to remove emotional hurdles that could disrupt the processes of language learning and language acquisition in the classroom. All of these objectives can be achieved if L2 learners have a high degree of

awareness of their own feelings and those of others in the context of classroom as a small community.
5. Conclusions
Results obtained in a course that community language teaching is used are highly dependent on the strength of social bonds that are formed throughout the course. There are a number of factors that might influence these bonds. Among these factors, emotional ones play a crucial role. Results obtained in this study indicated that those L2 learners who have a high EQ are more successful in such courses. Even the presence of these learners in a class that is taught by community language teaching can benefit other L2 learners. This is in agreement with the position that is taken by humanistic approaches to language teaching. Therefore, it is suggested that EQ of L2 learners be taken into consideration in the planning for those courses in which community language teaching is used. In this way, better results can be achieved. It seems that a combination of high-EQ and low-EQ L2 learners in the classroom is the optimal way that can benefit various groups of learners, including those who have low EQs. The final point that must not be ignored is the role of cultural factors. The way that L2 learners interact with each other in a class that is taught by community language teaching can be very different from culture to culture. This is an issue that must seriously be taken into account in any planning for such courses.

Appendix

‫ﺑﮫ ﻧﺎم ﺧﺪا‬

‫ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﮫ‬EQ

‫ ﻃﺮز ﻓﮑﺮ و ﻧﺤﻮه‬،‫اﯾﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﮫ دارای ﺟﻤﻼﺗﯽ اﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دادن ﺑﮫ آﻧﮭﺎ اﺣﺴﺎس‬ :‫ ھﺮ ﺳﺌﻮال دارای ﭘﻨﺞ ﺟﻮاب اﺳﺖ‬.‫رﻓﺘﺎرﺗﺎن را در ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ھﺎ و زﻣﺎﻧﮭﺎی ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ ﻣﯿﺸﻮد‬
(‫ ھﺮﮔﺰ)ھﺮﮔﺰ در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﻦ ﺻﺎدق ﻧﯿﺴﺖ‬-1 (‫ ﺑﻨﺪرت )ﺑﻨﺪرت درﻣﻮرد ﻣﻦ ﺻﺎدق اﺳﺖ‬-2
(‫ ﮔﺎھﯽ )ﮔﺎھﯽ درﻣﻮرد ﻣﻦ ﺻﺎدق اﺳﺖ‬-3 (‫ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻ" )ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻ" درﻣﻮرد ﻣﻦ ﺻﺎدق اﺳﺖ‬-4
(‫ ھﻤﯿﺸﮫ )ھﻤﯿﺸﮫ درﻣﻮرد ﻣﻦ ﺻﺎدق اﺳﺖ‬-5
:‫دﺳﺘﻮر اﻟﻌﻤﻞ‬
‫ ﺟﻤﻼت زﯾﺮ را ﺑﺨﻮاﻧﯿﺪ و آن ﺟﻤﻠﮫ ای ﮐﮫ ﺑﮭﺘﺮﯾﻦ روﺣﯿﺎت ﺷﻤﺎ را ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ‬-1 .‫در ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻨﺎﻣﮫ ﻋﻼﻣﺖ ﺑﺰﻧﯿﺪ‬
‫ ﺗﻮﺟﮫ داﺷﺘﮫ ﺑﺎﺷﯿﺪ ﺑﮫ ﺟﻤﻠﮫ ای ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دھﯿﺪ ﮐﮫ‬.‫ ﺧﻮب ﯾﺎ ﺑﺪ وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد‬،‫ ﻏﻠﻂ‬،‫ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ درﺳﺖ‬-2 .‫واﻗﻌﺎ" ﺑﯿﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺣﺎل ﺷﻤﺎﺳﺖ ﻧﮫ آن ﭼﯿﺰی ﮐﮫ دوﺳﺖ دارﯾﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﯿﺪ‬

‫‪156‬‬

‫‪Hassan Banaruee et al.: The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Community‬‬

‫‪Language Teaching: A Case Study of Iranian Intermediate L2 Learners‬‬

‫‪ -3‬اﯾﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﮫ ﻣﺤﺪودﯾﺖ زﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﺪارد اﻣﺎ ﺳﻌﯽ ﮐﻨﯿﺪ ﺳﺮﯾﻊ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دھﯿﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -4‬ﺑﮫ ھﻤﮫ ﺳﺌﻮاﻻت ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دھﯿﺪ‪.‬‬
‫"ﺑﺎ ﺗﺸﮑﺮ از ﺗﻮﺟﮫ ﺷﻤﺎ در ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﮫ ﺳﺌﻮﻻت"‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺳﻌﯽ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﺑﺮای ﺣﻞ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺗﻢ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﮫ رﯾﺰی ﮐﻨﻢ و ﺑﺎ دﻗﺖ ﻋﻤﻞ ﮐﻨﻢ ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -2‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ از زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ﻟﺬت ﺑﺒﺮم ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺗﺮﺟﯿﺢ ﻣﯽ دھﻢ ﮐﺎرھﺎﺋﯽ اﻧﺠﺎم دھﻢ ﮐﮫ ﻧﺤﻮه اﻧﺠﺎم آن دﻗﯿﻘﺎ" ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -4‬ﻣﯽ داﻧﻢ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮫ از ﻋﮭﺪه ﻣﺸﮑﻼت ﺳﺨﺖ ﺑﺮآﯾﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -5‬ﺑﺎ ھﺮ ﮐﺲ ﮐﮫ ﺑﺮﺧﻮرد ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ از او ﺧﻮﺷﻢ ﻣﯽ آﯾﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -6‬ﺳﻌﯽ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ھﺪﻓﻤﻨﺪی داﺷﺘﮫ ﺑﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -7‬ﮐﺎﻣﻼ" ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ راﺣﺖ اﺳﺖ ﻋﻮاﻃﻔﻢ راﺑﯿﺎن ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -8‬ﺳﻌﯽ ﻣﯿﮑﻨﻢ ﻧﮕﺎه واﻗﻊ ﺑﯿﻨﺎﻧﮫ ای ﺑﮫ زﻧﺪﮔﯽ داﺷﺘﮫ ﺑﺎﺷﻢ و از ﺧﯿﺎل ﭘﺮدازی و روﯾﺎ ﭘﺮدازی ﺑﭙﺮھﯿﺰم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -9‬ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎدر ﺑﮫ درک ﺣﺎﻟﺘﮭﺎی ھﯿﺠﺎﻧﯽ ﺧﻮد ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -10‬در اﺑﺮاز ﻣﺤﺒﺘﻢ ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻣﺸﮑﻞ دارم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -11‬در اﮐﺜﺮ ﻣﻮﻗﯿﺖ ھﺎ ﺑﮫ ﺧﻮدم اﻃﻤﯿﻨﺎن دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -12‬اﺣﺴﺎس ﻣﯿﮑﻨﻢ ﮐﮫ دﭼﺎر ﻣﺸﮑﻞ ﻓﮑﺮی )روﺣﯽ( ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -13‬ﮐﻨﺘﺮل ﺧﺸﻢ ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -14‬ﺷﺮوع ﻓﻌﺎﻟﯿﺘﮭﺎی ﺗﺎزه ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮاراﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -15‬وﻗﺘﯽ ﺑﺎ ﯾﮏ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ ﻣﻮاﺟﮫ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮم‪،‬ﻣﺎﯾﻠﻢ ﺗﻤﺎم اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﻻزم را در ﻣﻮرد آن ﺟﻤﻊ آوری‬
‫ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -16‬دوﺳﺖ دارم ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﮐﻤﮏ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -17‬ﻟﺒﺨﻨﺪ زدن ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -18‬ﻗﺎدر ﺑﮫ درک اﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎت دﯾﮕﺮان ﻧﯿﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -19‬وﻗﺘﯽ ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان ﮐﺎر ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﯾﻞ دارم ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﮫ ﻧﻈﺮات آﻧﺎن ﻋﻤﻞ ﮐﻨﻢ ﺗﺎ ﺑﮫ ﻧﻈﺮات ﺧﻮدم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -20‬ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪم ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﺑﮫ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ھﺎ دﺳﺖ ﭘﯿﺪا ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -21‬ﻣﻦ واﻗﻌﺎ" ﻧﻤﯽ داﻧﻢ ﭼﮫ ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﯾﯽ ھﺎﯾﯽ دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -22‬ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﻧﻈﺮاﺗﻢ را ﺑﺮای دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﯿﺎن ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -23‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﻋﻮاﻃﻒ ﻋﻤﯿﻖ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان در ﻣﯿﺎن ﺑﮕﺬارم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -24‬ﻣﻦ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﺑﮫ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻧﺪارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -25‬ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ از ﻧﻈﺮ روﺣﯽ ﺑﯿﻤﺎر ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -26‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ اﮐﺜﺮ ﮐﺎره اﯾﻢ ﺧﻮش ﺑﯿﻦ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -27‬وﻗﺘﯽ ﺷﺮوع ﺑﮫ ﺣﺮف زدن ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﻗﻄﻊ ﮐﺮدن آن ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -28‬ﺑﮫ ﻃﻮر ﮐﻠﯽ ﺳﺎزﮔﺎری ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﯿﻂ ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮار اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -29‬دوﺳﺖ دارم ﭘﯿﺶ از ﺣﻞ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ آن را ﻣﺮور ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -30‬ﺳﻮء اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﮐﺮدن از دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮار ﻧﯿﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﮫ ﺧﺼﻮص اﮔﺮ آن ھﺎ ﻣﺴﺘﺤﻖ آن ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -31‬ﻓﺮد ﺷﺎدی ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -32‬ﺗﺮﺟﯿﺢ ﻣﯽ دھﻢ دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ ﺑﮕﯿﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -33‬ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﺑﺪون ﻋﺼﺒﯽ ﺷﺪن زﯾﺎد از ﻋﮭﺪه ی ﻓﺸﺎر و ﻧﺎراﺣﺘﯽ ھﺎ ﺑﺮآﯾﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -34‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﺧﻮش ﺑﯿﻦ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -35‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﻋﻮاﻃﻔﻢ را درک ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -36‬در ﭼﻨﺪ ﺳﺎل ﮔﺬﺷﺘﮫ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﯿﺖ ھﺎی اﻧﺪﮐﯽ داﺷﺘﮫ ام‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -37‬ھﻨﮕﺎﻣﯽ ﮐﮫ از دﺳﺖ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻋﺼﺒﺎﻧﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﺑﮫ آن ھﺎ ﺑﮕﻮﯾﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -38‬ﺗﺠﺎرب ﻋﺠﯿﺐ و ﻏﺮﯾﺒﯽ دارم ﮐﮫ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ آن را ﺑﮕﻮﯾﻢ‪.‬‬

‫‪International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 2017, 7(6): 152-159‬‬

‫‪157‬‬

‫‪ -39‬دوﺳﺖ ﺷﺪن دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ آﺳﺎن اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -40‬ﻣﻦ ﺑﺮای ﺧﻮدم اﺣﺘﺮام ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -41‬ﮐﺎرھﺎی ﻏﯿﺮ ﻋﺎدی از ﻣﻦ ﺳﺮ ﻣﯽ زﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -42‬زود از ﮐﻮره در ﻣﯽ روم و و اﯾﻦ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺗﯽ ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -43‬ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﻧﻈﺮم را ﻋﻮض ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -44‬ﺧﯿﻠﯽ ﺧﻮب اﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎت دﯾﮕﺮان را درک ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -45‬وﻗﺘﯽ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﮑﻠﯽ ﻣﻮاﺟﮫ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮم در اوﻟﯿﻦ ﻗﺪم درﺑﺎره ی آن ﺑﮫ ﻓﮑﺮ و ﺗﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﯽ ﭘﺮدازم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -46‬دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﮫ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﮫ ﻣﻦ واﺑﺴﺘﮫ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -47‬از زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ام راﺿﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -48‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻼﻧﮫ ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ ﺑﮕﯿﺮم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -49‬ﺗﺤﺖ ﻓﺸﺎر‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮدم ﺧﻮب ﻧﯿﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -50‬در زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ام دﺳﺖ ﺑﮫ ھﯿﭻ ﮐﺎر ﺑﺪی ﻧﻤﯽ زﻧﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -51‬از ﮐﺎره اﯾﻢ ﻟﺬت ﻧﻤﯽ ﺑﺮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -52‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﻋﻮاﻃﻒ ﺻﻤﯿﻤﺎﻧﮫ ام را ﺑﯿﺎن ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -53‬ﺳﺎﯾﺮﯾﻦ اﻓﮑﺎر ﻣﺮا درک ﻧﻤﯽ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -54‬دوﺳﺖ دارم ﺟﺰء ﺑﮭﺘﺮﯾﻦ اﻓﺮاد ﺑﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -55‬دوﺳﺘﺎﻧﻢ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎت ﺧﺼﻮﺻﯽ ﺧﻮدﺷﺎن را ﺑﮫ ﻣﻦ ﺑﮕﻮﯾﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -56‬درﺑﺎره ی ﺧﻮدم اﺣﺴﺎس ﺧﻮﺑﯽ ﻧﺪارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -57‬ﻣﻦ ﭼﯿﺰھﺎی ﻋﺠﯿﺒﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺑﯿﻨﻢ ﮐﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻧﻤﯽ ﺑﯿﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -58‬دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﮫ ﻣﻦ ﻣﯽ ﮔﻮﯾﻨﺪ ھﻨﮕﺎم ﺑﺤﺚ ﺻﺪاﯾﺖ را ﭘﺎﯾﯿﻦ ﺑﯿﺎور‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -59‬ﻣﻦ ﺑﮫ آﺳﺎﻧﯽ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ھﺎی ﺟﺪﯾﺪ ﺳﺎزﮔﺎر ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -60‬ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﺣﻞ ﯾﮏ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ اﺑﺘﺪا راه ﺣﻞ ھﺎی ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ را در ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﯿﺮم‪ ،‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﮭﺘﺮﯾﻦ را اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -61‬اﮔﺮ ﺑﭽﮫ ای را ﺑﺒﯿﻨﻢ ﮐﮫ ﺑﮫ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﮔﻢ ﮐﺮدن ﭘﺪر و ﻣﺎدرش ﮔﺮﯾﮫ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ ﺑﮫ او ﮐﻤﮏ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﺗﺎ ﭘﺪر و ﻣﺎدرش را ﭘﯿﺪا ﮐﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﯽ اﮔﺮ در آن ﻟﺤﻈﮫ ﮐﺎر زﯾﺎدی داﺷﺘﮫ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -62‬از ﺑﻮدن ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻟﺬت ﻣﯽ ﺑﺮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -63‬ﻣﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ اﯾﻨﮑﮫ ﭼﮫ ﻋﻮاﻃﻔﯽ دارم ھﻮﺷﯿﺎرم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -64‬اﺣﺴﺎس ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﺑﮫ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ اﺿﻄﺮاﺑﻢ را ﮐﻨﺘﺮل ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -65‬ﻣﻦ از ھﯿﭻ ﭼﯿﺰ ﻧﺎراﺣﺖ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺷﻮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -66‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻓﻌﺎﻟﯿﺖ ھﺎی ﻣﻮرد ﻋﻼﻗﮫ ام رﻏﺒﺘﯽ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻧﻤﯿﺪھﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -67‬وﻗﺘﯽ ﺑﺎ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺑﺎﺷﻢ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺘﻢ را ﺑﯿﺎن ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -68‬ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﺎت دور و ﺑﺮم ﺗﻮﺟﮫ دارم و دوﺳﺖ دارم آﻧﭽﮫ در اﻃﺮاﻓﻢ اﺗﻔﺎق ﻣﯽ اﻓﺘﺪ را رھﺎ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -69‬ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان راﺣﺖ ﮐﻨﺎر ﻣﯽ آﯾﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -70‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﺧﻮدم را ھﻤﺎﻧﮕﻮﻧﮫ ﮐﮫ ھﺴﺘﻢ ﺑﭙﺬﯾﺮم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -71‬اﺣﺴﺎس ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﮐﮫ از ﺑﺪﻧﻢ ﺟﺪا ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -72‬ﻣﻦ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﺎﺗﯽ ﮐﮫ ﺑﺮای دﯾﮕﺮان رخ ﻣﯽ دھﺪ را دﻧﺒﺎل ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -73‬آدﻣﯽ ﮐﻢ ﺻﺒﺮ و ﺗﺤﻤﻠﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -74‬ﻣﯿﺘﻮاﻧﻢ ﻋﺎدت ھﺎی ﻗﺒﻠﯽ ام را ﺗﺮک ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -75‬ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﺣﻞ ﻣﺸﮑﻼت ﺑﮫ ﺳﺨﺘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﺑﮭﺘﺮﯾﻦ راه ﺣﻞ را اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -76‬اﮔﺮ در ﺑﻌﻀﯽ ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺎﻧﻮن ﺷﮑﻨﯽ ﻣﺸﮑﻠﻢ ﺣﻞ ﺷﻮد اﯾﻦ ﮐﺎر را ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -77‬اﻓﺴﺮده ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -78‬ﻣﯽ داﻧﻢ در ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ھﺎی دﺷﻮار ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮫ آراﻣﺸﻢ را ﺣﻔﻆ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -79‬در زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ام دروغ ﻧﮕﻔﺘﮫ ام‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -80‬ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻ" در ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﺳﺨﺖ ھﻢ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﮐﺎرھﺎﯾﻢ را اداﻣﮫ ﺑﺪھﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -81‬ﻣﻦ دوﺳﺖ دارم ﮐﺎرھﺎﯾﯽ را ﮐﮫ ﻣﻮرد ﻋﻼﻗﮫ ام ھﺴﺘﻨﺪ اﻧﺠﺎم داده و ﮔﺴﺘﺮش دھﻢ‪.‬‬

‫‪158‬‬

‫‪Hassan Banaruee et al.: The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Community‬‬

‫‪Language Teaching: A Case Study of Iranian Intermediate L2 Learners‬‬

‫‪ -82‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ھﺮ وﻗﺖ ﮐﮫ ﺑﺨﻮاھﻢ "ﻧﮫ" ﺑﮕﻮﯾﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -83‬ﻏﺮق در روﯾﺎ و ﺧﯿﺎل ﭘﺮدازی ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -84‬ﻣﻦ و دوﺳﺘﺎﻧﻢ ﺑﮫ رواﺑﻂ ﻧﺰدﯾﮏ ﻣﺎن اھﻤﯿﺖ ﺑﺴﯿﺎر ﻣﯽ دھﯿﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -85‬از ﺷﺨﺼﯿﺖ ﺧﻮدم راﺿﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -86‬ﻋﺼﺒﺎﻧﯿﺖ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺪﯾﺪ اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -87‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮار اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ در زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ﻋﺎدی ام ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮ اﯾﺠﺎد ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -88‬ﺣﺘﯽ ھﻨﮕﺎﻣﯽ ﮐﮫ ﻏﻤﮕﯿﻦ و ﮔﺮﻓﺘﮫ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ آﻧﭽﮫ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬرد ھﻮﺷﯿﺎرم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -89‬ھﻨﮕﺎم ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻠﮫ ﺑﺎ ﭘﯿﺸﺂﻣﺪھﺎ درﺑﺎره ی ھﻤﮫ راه ﺣﻞ ھﺎ ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -90‬ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان اﺣﺘﺮام ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬارم‪.‬‬
‫‪ -91‬در زﻧﺪﮔﯽ اﺣﺴﺎس ﺷﺎدی ﻧﻤﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -92‬ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮ دﻧﺒﺎل رو ھﺴﺘﻢ ﺗﺎ رھﺒﺮ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -93‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ اﻣﻮر ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺷﺎﯾﻨﺪ روﺑﺮو ﺷﻮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -94‬ﮐﺎری ﺧﻼف ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻧﺠﺎم ﻧﺪاده ام‪.‬‬
‫‪ -95‬از ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎت ﻣﻮرد ﻋﻼﻗﮫ ام ﻟﺬت ﻣﯽ ﺑﺮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -96‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﮐﺎﻣﻼ" راﺣﺖ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﺑﮕﻮﯾﻢ ﭼﮫ ﻓﮑﺮی ﮐﺮده ام‪.‬‬
‫‪ -97‬ﺗﻤﺎﯾﻞ دﻟﺮم ﻣﺴﺎﯾﻞ را ﺑﺰرگ ﺟﻠﻮه دھﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -98‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﮫ ﻋﻮاﻃﻒ دﯾﮕﺮان ﺣﺴﺎس ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -99‬ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان رواﺑﻂ ﺧﻮﺑﯽ دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -100‬از ﻇﺎھﺮی ﮐﮫ دارم راﺿﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -101‬ﺷﺨﺺ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﯽ ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -102‬زود از ﮐﻮره در ﻣﯽ روم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -103‬ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮ در ﺷﯿﻮه زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮار اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -104‬ﻣﻦ ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ رﻋﺎﯾﺖ ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻣﺮ ﻣﮭﻤﯽ اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -105‬روزھﺎی ﺗﻌﻄﯿﻞ را دوﺳﺖ دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -106‬ھﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﮔﺎھﯽ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺗﯽ ﭘﯿﺶ ﻣﯽ آﯾﺪ‪ ،‬اﻣﺎ ﺑﮫ ﻃﻮر ﮐﻠﯽ ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯿﮑﻨﻢ اوﺿﺎع ﺑﺮ وﻓﻖ ﻣﺮاد اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -107‬دوﺳﺖ دارم ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻣﺘﮑﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -108‬در ﺣﻞ ﻣﺸﮑﻼت ﻣﮭﻢ ﺑﮫ ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﯾﯽ ھﺎﯾﻢ اﯾﻤﺎن دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -109‬از ﮐﺎرھﯽ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﮫ ام ﭘﺸﯿﻤﺎن ﻧﯿﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -110‬ﺗﺎ آن ﺟﺎ ﮐﮫ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺳﻌﯽ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ دﻧﺒﺎل ﻟﺬت ﻃﻠﺒﯽ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -11‬دﯾﮕﺮان ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎﻃﻌﯿﺖ ﻧﺪارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -112‬ﺑﮫ راﺣﺘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ از ﺧﯿﺎل ﭘﺮدازی دﺳﺖ ﺑﺮدارم و واﻗﻌﯿﺖ را در ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﯿﺮم‪.‬‬ ‫‪-113‬دﯾﮕﺮان ﻣﺮا ﻓﺮدی اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪-114‬از آﻧﭽﮫ در ﻧﻈﺮ دﯾﮕﺮان ھﺴﺘﻢ ﺧﻮﺷﺤﺎﻟﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -115‬اﻓﮑﺎر ﻋﺠﯿﺒﯽ دارم ﮐﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻧﻤﯽ ﻓﮭﻤﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -116‬ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﺳﺨﺖ اﺳﺖ ﻋﻮاﻃﻔﻢ را ﺑﯿﺎن ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -117‬ﺑﺪ اﺧﻼق ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -118‬درﺑﺎره ی ﺣﻞ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺗﻢ ﺑﺴﯿﺎر ﺟﺪی ھﺴﺘﻢ و ﺑﮫ راه ﺣﻞ ھﺎی ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ آن ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -119‬دﯾﺪن ﻏﻢ دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ دﺷﻮار اﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -120‬دوﺳﺖ دارم ﺧﻮش ﺑﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -121‬ﻓﮑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﮫ دﯾﮕﺮان ﻧﯿﺎزﻣﻨﺪم ﺗﺎ دﯾﮕﺮان ﺑﮫ ﻣﻦ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -122‬ﻣﻀﻄﺮب ھﺴﺘﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -123‬روﺣﯿﮫ ﺧﻮﺑﯽ دارم‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -124‬از ﺟﺮﯾﺤﮫ دار ﮐﺮدن ﻋﻮاﻃﻒ دﯾﮕﺮان اﺟﺘﻨﺎب ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -125‬در زﻧﺪﮔﯽ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﮫ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﯽ ﻧﺪارم‪.‬‬

International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 2017, 7(6): 152-159

159

.‫ ﺑﺮاﯾﻢ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ اﺳﺖ ﮐﮫ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺣﻘﻮﻗﻢ ﭘﺎ ﻓﺸﺎری ﮐﻨﻢ‬-126 .‫ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ را درﺳﺖ و ھﻤﺎﻧﮕﻮﻧﮫ ﮐﮫ ھﺴﺘﻨﺪ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﯿﺮم‬-127
.‫ ﺑﺎ دوﺳﺘﺎﻧﻢ ﻧﻤﺎس ﻧﺪارم‬-128 .‫ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﮫ ﺑﮫ ﺿﻌﻒ ھﺎ و ﻗﻮت ھﺎﯾﻢ درﺑﺎره ی ﺧﻮدم اﺣﺴﺎس ﺧﻮﺑﯽ دارم‬-129
.‫ ﺑﮫ راﺣﺘﯽ ﺧﺸﻤﮕﯿﻦ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮم‬-130 .‫ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﮫ ﻣﺠﺒﻮر ﺑﮫ ﺗﺮک ﺧﺎﻧﮫ ﺷﻮم ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﻢ ﺧﻮدم را ﺑﺎ آن وﺿﻌﯿﺖ ﺳﺎزﮔﺎر ﮐﻨﻢ‬-131
.‫ ﻗﺒﻞ از ﺷﺮوع ﮐﺎری ﺟﺪﯾﺪ اﻏﻠﺐ اﺣﺴﺎس ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﻢ در اﯾﻦ ﮐﺎر ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺷﻮم‬-132 .‫ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻼﻗﮫ ﻣﻨﺪی و ﺻﺪاﻗﺖ ﺑﮫ ﺳﻮاﻻت ﺑﺎﻻ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دادم‬-133

REFERENES
[1] Curran, C. A. (1972). Counseling-Learning: A Whole-Person Model for Education. New York: Grune and Stratton.
[2] Dehshiri, R. (2003). The Reliability and validity of EQ-i in Iran’s context. Unpublished master’s thesis, Allame Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.
[3] Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
[4] Ghabanchi, Z., & Rastegar, R. E. (2014). The correlation of IQ and emotional intelligence with reading comprehension. Reading, 14(2), 135-144.
[5] Greenspan, S. I. (1989). Emotional intelligence. In K. Field, B. J. Cohler, & G. Wool (Eds.), Learning and education: psychoanalytic perspectives (pp. 209–243). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
[6] La Forge, P. G. (1983). Counseling and Culture in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.

[7] Leuner, B. (1966). Emotionale intelligenz und emanzipation (Emotional intelligence and emancipation). Praxis derKinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatry, 15, 196–203.
[8] Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In R. J. Strenberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 396-420). New York: Cambridge University Press.
[9] Moskowitz, G. (1978). Caring and Sharing in the Foreign Language Class. Massachusetts: Newbury House.
[10] Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[11] Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional Intelligence: Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185–211.
[12] Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences 25, 167–17.
[13] Thorndike, E.L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper's Magazine, 140, 227-235.