Zum Inhalt

Assessing emotional intelligence domains and levels in substance use disorders

  • Open Access
  • 01.12.2024
  • Research
Erschienen in:

Abstract

Background

Many individuals with substance use disorders face challenges in their social interactions and often have strained relationships with peers. Challenges related to problem-solving, stress management, and impulsivity often contribute to their substance use disorders. Emotional intelligence plays a pivotal role in assisting individuals with substance use disorders in coping with stress, enhancing peer connections, resolving problems, and preventing relapse. Consequently, our study aimed to assess emotional intelligence in individuals with substance use disorders and explore the factors influencing it. A cross-sectional study compared 50 individuals with substance use disorders and 50 healthy individuals. We assessed various factors, including clinical data, sociodemographic variables, family socioeconomic status, Addiction Severity Index (ASI) scores, and Emotional Intelligence (EI) scale scores.

Results

Individuals with substance use disorders had significantly lower mean scores in total EI and its subscales compared to the healthy control group. Additionally, a higher percentage of individuals with substance use disorders exhibited low EI levels, while healthy individuals demonstrated better EI. Furthermore, there was a substantial association between higher ASI scores in individuals with substance use disorders and lower EI scores.

Conclusions

Lower EI scores are associated with an increased risk of substance use disorders. Also, can contribute to difficulties in impulse control, and challenges in managing relationships and stress. These findings underscore EI crucial role in preventing and treating substance use disorders.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
EI
Emotional Intelligence
ASI
Addiction Severity Index

Background

Substance use disorders have emerged as a significant threat to Egyptian society, particularly among young adults, with an estimated prevalence of over nine million substance users in Egypt [1]. Substance use disorders are characterized as a chronic dysfunction of the brain system involving reward, motivation, and memory [2]. Various factors, including genetics, pharmaceutical effects, peer pressure, emotional stress, anxiety, depression, and environmental stress, can contribute to substance use disorders [3]. Freud also emphasized the role of emotions in substance use disorders, suggesting that overcoming the psychological aspects of substance use disorders, such as fear, pain, and despair, is possible [4]. Additionally, substance use disorders are associated with low self-esteem, an inability to express feelings, a lack of assertiveness, and poor communication skills [5]. Research has emphasized the importance of social competence, self-awareness, impulse control, and empathy as essential traits that protect against risky behaviors. Consequently, EI has been linked to reduced risk behaviors, improved relationships, and overall well-being [6].
Hence, EI encompasses two types of awareness: interpersonal and intrapersonal. Interpersonal awareness refers to a person's ability to appropriately recognize and respond to the emotional signals and behaviors of others, while intrapersonal awareness pertains to the ability to measure and manage one’s own emotional responses [7]. EI plays a crucial role in human interactions within the social environment, distinguishing itself from cognitive intelligence by incorporating the capacity to recognize and utilize emotions, make appropriate emotional decisions, regulate moods, control impulses, and possess effective social skills. It is a vital and rewarding aspect of dealing with everyday life situations [8].
A study by Ke and Barlas [9] indicated that individuals with poor emotional awareness, a lack of knowledge about when to express emotions, and an inability to manage their moods may struggle in various aspects of life, including coping with stress. This maladaptive coping strategies may serve as a link between low EI and substance use disorders, as evidence suggests that maladaptive coping is associated with the initiation, maintenance, and relapse stages of substance use [10]. Individuals with substance use disorders, in their attempts to manage irrational feelings, impulses, and internal tension, may turn to psychoactive substances as a form of self-treatment [11].
Drigas and Sideraki’s study [12] suggested that individuals who understand and control their emotions can approach problems more flexibly, explore alternative solutions, and avoid rigid decision-making. On the other hand, Henneberger et al.’s study [13] demonstrated that substance use disorders in its early phases are linked to difficulties in managing relationships with parents and peers. Poor EI can lead to decision-making weaknesses, particularly in personal and social matters [13].
Furthermore, the choice of a specific substance depends on an individual's self-regulation and affect-regulation problems, as well as personality dysfunctions. People prone to violence, excessive emotion, and poor stress management may prefer opioids, while those with difficulty expressing emotions, repressed aggressiveness, emptiness, tendencies toward despair, and self-esteem issues may opt for stimulants [14].
Many individuals with substance use disorders are struggling with deficiencies in their social skills and have strained relationships with their peers. Other contributing factors to substance use disorders may include problems with problem-solving, stress management, and impulsivity [15]. Assessing EI skills of individuals with substance use disorders can have a positive impact on their ability to cope with stress, cultivate healthier relationships with peers, improve their problem-solving abilities, and reduce the likelihood of relapse. Therefore, our objective was to assess the levels of EI among individuals with substance use disorders and identify the factors that influence it.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted within the inpatient sector of the addiction management unit at the Psychiatry, Neurology, and Neurosurgery Hospital at Assiut University between January 2022 and June 2022. The study included males aged 18 years and older who were substance use disorders, whether a single substance or a combination of substances. Participants with cognitive impairments due to any cause (such as Alzheimer’s disease or mild cognitive impairment), organic brain disorders (including delirium, dementia, and amnesia), comorbid medical disease, and comorbid psychotic disorders were excluded. individuals with substance use disorders were randomly chosen using computer-generated random numbers. On the other hand, healthy control individuals had to be males 18 years or older, with no history of substance use disorders, psychiatric disorders, or other medical conditions, and negative on a urine substance abuse screening.

Sample size

A purposive sample of 50 individuals with substance use disorders was utilized for the study. The sample size was determined using Open Epi Info version (3) based on the prevalence of individuals with substance use disorders reported in a study conducted by Rabie et al. [1], with a 90% confidence level and a 5% confidence limit.

Study tools

All individuals with substance use disorders were evaluated using a semi-structured interview designed by psychiatrists from Assiut University addiction department. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5th Edition (DSM-5) [16] was used to diagnose psychiatric disorders, and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Disorders—Clinician Version (SCID-5-CV) during the psychiatric interview [17] was used to confirm the diagnosis and exclude comorbidities.
The following scales were administered:

Tool 1: sociodemographic and clinical data

This data sheet, developed by the researcher, includes information such as age, marital status, residence, occupation, and level of education. Additionally, it captures clinical data, including diagnosis, type of substance use, method of substance use, duration of substance use, and motivations behind initiating substance use.

Tool 2: scale for measuring family socioeconomic status

This scale, originally Sawsan and AF [18] and updated by El-Gilany, et al. [19], assesses family socioeconomic status. It consists of seven domains: education and culture, Occupation, Family, Family possessions, Economics, Home sanitation, and Healthcare access. The total scores range from 0 to 84, with scores below 42 indicating a very low level of socioeconomic status, scores between 42 and less than 63 indicating a low level of socioeconomic status, scores between 63 and less than 71.4 indicating a middle level of socioeconomic status, and scores between 71.4 and 84 indicating a high level of socioeconomic status. The scale demonstrates high reliability, with Pearson correlation coefficients for inter- and intra-observer reliability ranging from 0.84 to 1.00.

Tool 3: Emotional Intelligence Scale

Developed by Bar-On in 1997 [20], this scale measures emotional intelligence using a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (often). It comprises 60 items divided into six domains: personal competency, social competence, stress management, adaptation, general mood, and positive impression. The total scores on the scale amount to 240, representing 100%. Emotional intelligence is categorized as high if the percent score is above 75%, moderate if the total score falls within the range of 60% to 75%, and low if the total score is below 60%. It was translated into Arabic language by Ahmed Abdel Salam with a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of 0.910 the scale exhibits strong internal consistency and demonstrates convergent and discriminant validity, encompassing a wide array of emotional components [21].

Tool 4: the Addiction Severity Index (ASI)

Developed by McLellan et al. [22] in 1980, the ASI assesses patients' functional status in various domains over the recent 30 days and their lifetime. It comprises 200 questions organized into 7 subscales: medical status, employment and support, drug use, alcohol use, legal status, family and social status, and psychiatric status. Scoring ranges from 0 to 1 (no problem), 2 to 5 (mild to moderate problems), and 6 to 9 (severe problems). The ASI demonstrates good reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.64 to 0.77 across different domains. Test–retest reliability and concurrent validity are also favorable, with moderate to high levels of reliability and validity for the ASI composite scores. The ASI is considered a reliable and valid assessment tool [23].

Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted with five individuals with substance use disorders to evaluate the applicability and clarity of the tools who were not included in the final study. The pilot study intended to investigate 10% of the sample to assure the accuracy and relevance of the research tools, but no modifications have been adopted based on the results of the pilot study.

Statistical analysis

For data input and statistical analysis, the SPSS 26 Statistical Soft Ware Package was utilized. Qualitative data were presented as numbers and percentages; the χ2 or Fisher’s exact test was used to compare categorical variables, as applicable. The mean and standard deviation were used to describe quantitative data. independent t test was used for comparison between two groups. Multivariate regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between the difference in total EI and other parameters. The P-value was considered statistically significant if it was < 0.05.

Results

Sociodemographic characteristics of participants

There was no significant statistical differences with regard to sociodemographic characteristics and family socioeconomic status of the individuals with substance use disorders and healthy control group (Table 1). Most of participants were from urban areas, age 30 or more, had secondary education level and manual workers.
Table 1
Sociodemographic characteristics of studied groups (individuals with substance use disorders and healthy control group)
Variables
Individuals with substance use disorders
n = 50
Healthy control group
n = 50
Chi or t value
P-value
No
%
No
%
Age: (mean ± SD)
28.32 ± 8.17
29.10 ± 6.25
− 0.536
0.593
 < 30
35
70.0
28
56.0
  
 ≥ 30
15
30.0
22
44.0
2.102
0.147
Residence
 Rural
18
36.0
16
32.0
0.178
0.673
 Urban
32
64.0
34
68.0
  
Levels of education
 Read and write
9
18.0
5
10.0
4.026
0.259
 Preparatory
12
24.0
8
16.0
  
 Secondary
23
46.0
25
50.0
  
 University
6
12.0
12
24.0
  
Marital status
 Single
26
52.0
23
46.0
0.360
0.548
 Married
24
48.0
27
54.0
  
Occupation
 Manual workers
40
80.0
32
64.0
3.175
0.075
 Employee
10
20.0
18
36.0
  
Family socioeconomic status
    
4.149
0.126
 Very low
26
52.0
17
34.0
  
 Low
18
36.0
28
56.0
  
 Middle
6
12.0
5
10.0
  
Chi-square test, t: independent t-test

Clinical characteristics of individuals with substance use disorders

Regarding clinical characteristics of individuals with substance use disorders, most of them use a single substance, especially opioids, used by inhaling, starting substance use between 20 and 30 years old, and using substances because of adverse peer effects (Table 2).
Table 2
Clinical characteristics of individuals with substance use disorders group
Variables
Individuals with substance use disorders (n = 50)
No.
%
Diagnosis
  
 Single substance
27
54.0
 Poly substance
23
46.0
Types of substance usea
  
 Cannabinoids
17
34.0
 Opioids
30
60.0
 Tramadol
15
30.0
 Amphetamines
15
30.0
 Benzodiazepine
2
4.0
Methods of substance usea
  
 Oral
24
48.0
 Inhalation
38
76.0
 Injection
7
14.0
Age of at onset abuse (in years): (mean ± SD)
21.82 ± 5.98
 < 20
20
40.0
 20–30
26
52.0
 > 30
4
8.0
Duration of abuse (days)
  
(mean ± SD)
Median (interquartile range)
7855.20 ± 2151.03
7740 (2880)
Motivation for initiating substancea
 Peer effect
38
76.0
 Trial
19
38.0
 Increase strength and energy
4
8.0
 Escape from life stressors
10
20.0
 Relieve chronic pain
1
2.0
aMore than answer

EI domains and levels

There were statistically significant differences of total and subscales of EI between individuals with substance use disorders and healthy control group (Table 3). The mean scores of the total and subscales of EI in individuals with substance use disorders were found to be significantly lower than the mean scores of the total and subscales of EI in healthy control group.
Table 3
Emotional intelligence domains of studied group
Emotional intelligence domains
Individuals with substance use disorders
(n = 50)
Healthy control group
(n = 50)
t value
P-value
Mean ± SD
Mean ± SD
Personal competence
10.28 ± 3.15
17.20 ± 3.17
− 10.952
< 0.001*
Social competence
21.14 ± 5.41
37.82 ± 5.51
− 10.952
< 0.001*
Stress management
20.54 ± 5.17
35.16 ± 5.30
− 15.275
< 0.001*
Adaptation
17.42 ± 5.07
31.04 ± 5.58
− 15.275
< 0.001*
General mood
24.24 ± 6.71
43.88 ± 5.68
− 13.960
< 0.001*
Positive impression
10.94 ± 3.04
17.94 ± 2.72
− 13.960
< 0.001*
Total of Emotional Intelligence domains
104.44 ± 25.67
183.04 ± 21.77
− 12.772
< 0.001*
t independent t-test
*Statistically significant difference (P < 0.05)
A comparison between the two groups, low level of EI was higher percentage in individuals with substance use disorders group than healthy control group while high level of EI was in healthy control group than individuals with substance use disorders group (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1
Levels of emotional intelligence among studied groups. Chi-square test. *Statistically significant difference (P < 0.05)
Bild vergrößern

ASI results

Regarding ASI, most participants had no problems in medical status, alcohol abuse, and legal status while employment status, drug abuse, and psychiatric status had severe problems (Table 4).
Table 4
Addiction Severity Index among individuals with substance use disorders
Variables
Individuals with substance use disorders
n = 50
No
%
Medical status
 No problems
31
62.0
 Mild to moderate
16
32.0
 Severe problems
3
6.0
Employment status
 No problems
10
20.0
 Mild to moderate
16
32.0
 Severe problems
24
48.0
Alcohol abuse
 No problems
48
96.0
 Mild to moderate
2
4.0
Drug abuse
 No problems
3
6.0
 Mild to moderate
18
36.0
 Severe problems
29
58.0
Legal status
 No problems
40
80.0
 Mild to moderate
7
14.0
 Severe problems
3
6.0
Family and social status
 No problems
15
30.0
 Mild to moderate
19
38.0
 Severe problems
16
32.0
Psychiatric status
 No problems
16
32.0
 Mild to moderate
10
20.0
 Severe problems
24
48.0

Regression

In a multivariate linear regression analysis involving the total scores of EI and various other parameters, it was observed that an increase in the total scores of ASI among individuals with substance use disorders was significantly associated with a decrease in the total scores of EI (P = 0.006) (Table 5).
Table 5
Multivariate linear regression between emotional intelligence domains and other psychometric scales among individuals with substance use disorders’ group
Variables
B
Std. error
Beta
T
Sig
95.0% confidence interval for B
Lower bound
Upper bound
Cannabinoids
2.708
8.800
0.050
0.308
0.760
− 15.064
20.481
Opioids
7.135
9.975
0.138
0.715
0.478
− 13.010
27.280
Tramadol
− 6.870
8.832
− 0.124
− 0.778
0.441
− 24.708
10.967
Amphetamines
− 14.151
10.381
− 0.255
− 1.363
0.180
− 35.116
6.815
Benzodiazepine
19.596
19.883
0.151
0.986
0.330
− 20.559
59.750
Total score of family socioeconomic status
0.183
0.302
0.088
0.606
0.548
− 0.426
0.792
Total score of ASI
− 0.985
0.342
− 0.441
− 2.876
0.006*
− 1.676
− 0.293
Single substance addictiona
8.530
11.126
0.167
0.767
0.448
− 13.940
31.000
ASI Addiction Severity Index
aPoly substance addiction is the reference
*Statistically significant difference (P < 0.05)

Discussion

An individual’s EI plays a crucial role as a risk factor in substance use disorders. Good emotional control, adept social skills, and competencies enable individuals to exercise better control over their substance use consumption, reducing the likelihood of developing substance use disorders [24].
A study by Bodrogi et al. [25] highlighted that low EI hinders individuals from efficiently managing life’s stresses, potentially leading to increased substance use disorders and engagement in illicit activities. It also impedes individuals from regulating their moods and expressing their emotions effectively [25]. Moreover, Goleman, a prominent figure in emotional intelligence research, argued in his book that emotional intelligence can wield significant influence, often surpassing the impact of IQ [26]. He emphasized that academic intelligence has limited bearing on an individual's emotional life, noting that individuals with high IQ scores may struggle in social domains and exhibit uncontrolled passions and impulses. Goleman’s assertion that emotional intelligence contributes approximately 80% to life successes, compared to IQ’s 20%, underscores the significance of emotional intelligence in personal and professional achievements [26]. Thus, the primary aim of the present study was to assess the levels of EI among individuals with substance use disorders.
Our current study unveiled that most individuals with substance use disorders primarily opted for inhaled substances. Notably, the most prevalent substances abused were cannabinoids and amphetamines, predominantly consumed through smoking. This method was widely utilized due to its ease, lower associated risks, enhanced efficacy, and accessibility for individuals with substance use disorders. In contrast, Kun et al. [24] reported that injectable substance were used by over 25% of participants in both experimental and control groups.
Furthermore, our study revealed that most individuals-initiated substance use during late adolescence and early adulthood, typically between the ages of 20 and 30. This pattern may be attributed to the multiple physical, psychological, emotional, and social challenges faced during this transitional period. Opioids emerged as the most used substance, given their capacity to induce pleasure and relieve pain through neurological mechanisms. Moreover, they are characterized by a strong, compulsive drive to consume even when medically unnecessary, making them particularly appealing to individuals in the 20 to 30 age group [27]. These findings align with those of Mohamed et al. [28], who reported an onset of substance use between 21 and 32 years in 83% of their participants.
Additionally, our study demonstrated that most individuals with substance use disorders typically relied on a single substance. Furthermore, a significant proportion attributed their substance use disorders to peer influence. This observation aligns with the notion that individuals with low EI may resort to substances to cope with mental and life challenges and when making decisions under peer pressure [29]. These findings corroborate Sayed et al. [30], who found that over 50% of experimental and control groups, mainly influenced by peer pressure. Similarly, López et al. [31] reported that about two-thirds of both groups used a single type of substance.
Regarding socioeconomic status, our study found that most individuals with substance use disorders had very low levels, while most healthy individuals had low levels as well. This discrepancy can be attributed to participants in our study being predominantly manual workers with unstable incomes. This finding aligns with Bond et al.’s [32] discovery that more than half of individuals with substance use disorders fall into the low-income category. However, Mohamed et al. [28] reported contrasting results, with 28% of their research participants belonging to high socioeconomic status, 24% to low socioeconomic status, and 43% to middle socioeconomic status. Moreover, the previous study suggests that individuals with higher socioeconomic status may read the emotions of others poorly. This phenomenon is explained by the fact that higher-income individuals, having more resources, may be less dependent on others and less motivated to pay attention to others' emotions. On the other hand, individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, who grow up in a culture of interdependency, learn to read facial expressions and consider others’ perspectives [33]. In light of these findings, the 88% of our sample with a low socioeconomic level may actually present high emotional intelligence, challenging the association suggested in our study.
Furthermore, our study revealed that individuals with substance use disorders exhibited significantly lower levels of EI in all domains than healthy individuals. This outcome may be explained by the understanding that EI is a positive trait associated with effective coping strategies. It plays a pivotal role in an individual’s physical and psychological well-being when facing stressful or adverse life events. Low EI, on the other hand, is linked to a reduced capacity to manage and control emotions, which may predispose individuals to substance use disorders [34]. Consistent with these findings, Kun et al. [24] reported lower EI levels in individuals with various substances, such as alcohol, opiates, and cannabis, than those without substance use disorders. Moreover, they found that polysubstance use were associated with even lower EI levels. A more recent study by Henning et al. [35] also supported these findings, showing that adults with substance use disorders scored considerably lower on EI assessments.
Lastly, our study identified that an increase in the total score of ASI among individuals with substance use disorders was significantly associated with a decrease in the total score of EI. This suggests that individuals with low EI struggle to manage intra and interpersonal relationships, leading to employment, family, and social difficulties. Furthermore, their inability to control impulses and effectively cope with stressors due to emotional mismanagement can result in aggressive behavior, irritability, depression, and even psychotic symptoms [36]. These findings are in line with the research by Collins [7], who also found a negative correlation between substance use disorders and EI.
This study has a limitation due to the relatively small number of individuals with substance use disorders admitted during the research period, which could impact the applicability of the findings to a broader population. Furthermore, the researcher faced challenges in managing the behaviors of individuals with substance use disorders, resulting in extended time spent on their assessment.
Based on the study’s outcomes, it may be beneficial to consider incorporating routine assessments of EI for individuals with substance use disorders. This could provide a more precise understanding of their EI levels and subsequently inform the integration of EI program into their rehabilitation efforts. Further research should be conducted to evaluate emotional intelligence and behavioral addiction in children and adults [3739].
In conclusion, our findings found that lower EI scores are associated with increased vulnerability to substance use disorders. Individuals with low EI may turn to substances as a coping mechanism, struggle with impulse control, and face challenges in managing relationships and stressors. These insights shed light on the importance of EI in substance use prevention and intervention efforts.

Acknowledgements

None.

Declarations

The study received ethical approval from the nursing faculty (343) on December 26/2021. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants, assuring them of the confidentiality and anonymity of their data. Participants had the right to refuse participation or withdraw from the study at any time. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments, following the standards of the institution and/or national research committee.
The participants have consented to publishing their data result.

Competing interests

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Download
Titel
Assessing emotional intelligence domains and levels in substance use disorders
Verfasst von
Hanan Faried Maghawry
Alaa M. Darwish
Naglaa Abd ElMegeed Mohammed
Nadia Abd El-ghany Abd El-hameed
Gellan K. Ahmed
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2024
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41983-024-00797-w
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Rabie M, Shaker NM, Gaber E, El-Habiby M, Ismail D, El-Gaafary M, Lotfy A, Sabry N, Khafagy W, Muscat R. Prevalence updates of substance use among Egyptian adolescents. Middle East Curr Psychiatry. 2020;27:1–8.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Cadet JL, Bisagno V, Milroy CM. Neuropathology of substance use disorders. Acta Neuropathol. 2014;127:91–107.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Martini F, Fregna L, Bosia M, Perrozzi G, Cavallaro R. Substance-related disorders. In: Fundamentals of psychiatry for health care professionals. Springer; 2022. p. 263–95.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Mohagheghi A, Amiri S, Mousavi Rizi S, Safikhanlou S. Emotional intelligence components in alcohol dependent and mentally healthy individuals. Sci World J. 2015;2015: 841039.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Plantade-Gipch A, Bruno J, Strub L, Bouvard M, Martin-Krumm C. Emotional regulation, attachment style, and assertiveness as determinants of well-being in emerging adults. Front Educ. 2023;2023:1058519.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Blaik Hourani R, Litz D, Parkman S. Emotional intelligence and school leaders: evidence from Abu Dhabi. Educ Manag Admin Leadership. 2021;49(3):493–517.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Collins K. Relationship among attachment security, emotional intelligence, trait anxiety, and substance abuse. Walden University; 2016.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Waiswa HCA, Baguma PK, Oonyu J. Emotional intelligence and academic achievement among university upgrading (Grade V) teacher students. Afr J Educ Pract. 2020;6(4):39–64.
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ke T, Barlas J. Thinking about feeling: Using trait emotional intelligence in understanding the associations between early maladaptive schemas and coping styles. Psychol Psychother Theory Res Pract. 2020;93(1):1–20.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Davis RE, Doyle NA, Samuel KD, Wilkerson AH, Nahar VK. The relationship between trait emotional intelligence and problematic alcohol use among college students. Health Promot Perspect. 2022;12(1):101.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Alcaro A, Brennan A, Conversi D. The SEEKING drive and its fixation: a neuro-psycho-evolutionary approach to the pathology of addiction. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021;15: 635932.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Drigas A, Sideraki A. Emotional intelligence in autism. Technium Soc Sci J. 2021;26:80.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Henneberger AK, Mushonga DR, Preston AM. Peer influence and adolescent substance use: a systematic review of dynamic social network research. Adolesc Res Rev. 2021;6:57–73.
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Kun B, Demetrovics Z. Emotional intelligence and addictions: a systematic review. Subst Use Misuse. 2010;45(7–8):1131–60.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Trigueros R, Sanchez-Sanchez E, Mercader I, Aguilar-Parra JM, López-Liria R, Morales-Gázquez MJ, Fernández-Campoy JM, Rocamora P. Relationship between emotional intelligence, social skills and peer harassment. A study with high school students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(12):4208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat American Psychiatric Association, Association AP. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5, vol. 5. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat First MB. Structured clinical interview for the DSM (SCID). In: The encyclopedia of clinical psychology. Wiley; 2015. p. 1–6.
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Sawsan IF, El Sherbini AF. Determining simple parameters for social classifications for health research. Bull High Inst Public Health. 1983;8:95–107.
19.
Zurück zum Zitat El-Gilany A, El-Wehady A, El-Wasify M. Updating and validation of the socioeconomic status scale for health research in Egypt. East Mediterr Health J. 2012;18(9):962–8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bar-On R. BarOn emotional quotient inventory. Multi-health systems. 1997; 40.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahmed Abdel Salam Ali Ali NEE, Samad AHA. Program for the development of the emotional intelligence and its impact on the self-efficacy of gifted students with learning disabilities. Ain Shams University; 2019.
22.
Zurück zum Zitat McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE. O’BRIEN CP: an improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients: the Addiction Severity Index. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1980;168(1):26–33.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Mohamed MN, Marican S, Othman M, Thurairajasingam S, Ali N. Validation of addiction severity index Bahasa Melayu version (ASI-5-BM). MOJ Addict Med Ther. 2017;4(2):243–7.
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Kun B, Urbán R, Paksi B, Griffiths MD, Richman MJ, Demetrovics Z. The effects of trait emotional intelligence on adolescent substance use: findings from a Hungarian representative survey. Front Psych. 2019;10:367.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Bodrogi B, Bereczkei T, Deak A. Be aware, make it clear, and take the Lead: Emotion regulation difficulties and emotional intelligence as moderators of cognitive reappraisal. Curr Psychol. 2020;41:1–13.
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Goleman D. Emotional intelligence. Why it can matter more than IQ. Learning. 1996;24(6):49–50.
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Daga MK, Kumar L, Shukla J. Central nervous system depressants: overdose and management. Princ Pract Crit Care Toxicol. 2019;77.
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Mohamed NR, El Hamrawy LG, Shalaby AS, El Bahy MS, Abd Allah MM. An epidemiological study of tramadol HCl dependence in an outpatient addiction clinic at Heliopolis Psychiatric Hospital. Menoufia Med J. 2015;28(2):591.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Hosseini FH, Anari AMZ. The correlation between emotional intelligence and instable personality in substance abusers. Addict Health. 2011;3(3–4):130.
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Sayed SM, Ahmad HEK, Sayied NE, El-Aziz A, Mohamed A. Effect of psycho-educational program on depression among drug addict patients at Assiut University Hospital. Assiut Sci Nurs J. 2020;8(20):45–55.
31.
Zurück zum Zitat López G, Orchowski LM, Reddy MK, Nargiso J, Johnson JE. A review of research-supported group treatments for drug use disorders. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2021;16(1):1–21.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Bond KT, Yoon IS, Houang ST, Downing MJ, Grov C, Hirshfield S. Transactional sex, substance use, and sexual risk: comparing pay direction for an internet-based US sample of men who have sex with men. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2019;16:255–67.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Dietze P, Knowles ED. Social class and the motivational relevance of other human beings: evidence from visual attention. Psychol Sci. 2016;27(11):1517–27.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Nehra DK, Sharma V, Mushtaq H, Sharma N, Sharma M, Nehra S. Emotional intelligence and self esteem in cannabis abusers. J Indian Acad Appl Psychol. 2012;38(2):385–93.
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Henning C, Crane AG, Taylor RN, Parker JD. Emotional intelligence: relevance and implications for addiction. Curr Addict Rep. 2021;8:28–34.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Olatoye R, Aderogba A. Harnessing the power of emotional intelligence, scientific literacy and problem-solving skills for successful living. Pac J Sci Technol. 2012;13(1):403–17.
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahmed GK, Abdalla AA, Mohamed AM, Mohamed LA. shamaa HA: Relation between internet gaming addiction and comorbid psychiatric disorders and emotion avoidance among adolescents: a cross-sectional study. Psychiatry Res. 2022;312: 114584.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Ibrahim AK, Fouad I, Kelly SJ, El Fawal B, Ahmed GK. Prevalence and determinants of internet addiction among medical students and its association with depression. J Affect Disord. 2022;314:94–102.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahmed GK, Abdalla AA, Mohamed AM, Mohamed LA, Shamaa HA. Relationship between time spent playing internet gaming apps and behavioral problems, sleep problems, alexithymia, and emotion dysregulations in children: a multicentre study. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2022;16(1):67.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kompaktes Leitlinien-Wissen Neurologie (Link öffnet in neuem Fenster)

Mit medbee Pocketcards schnell und sicher entscheiden.
Leitlinien-Wissen kostenlos und immer griffbereit auf ihrem Desktop, Handy oder Tablet.

Neu im Fachgebiet Neurologie

Schützt Optimismus vor Demenz?

  • 14.04.2026
  • Demenz
  • Nachrichten

Wer insgesamt zuversichtlicher aufs Leben blickt, trägt ein geringeres Risiko, später einmal an Demenz zu erkranken als pessimistischere Zeitgenossen. Dafür sprechen zumindest Ergebnisse einer Längsschnittdatenanalyse aus den USA. Ob mehr Optimismus allerdings tatsächlich einer Demenz vorbeugt, bleibt unklar.   

Verzögert eine hochdosierte Influenza-Vakzine eine Demenz?

  • 10.04.2026
  • Demenz
  • Nachrichten

Eine hochdosierte Influenza-Vakzine geht mit einer verzögerten Demenzdiagnose einher. Darauf deutet eine Auswertung von US-Gesundheitsdaten hin. Besonders auffällig sind die Effekte in den ersten Monaten nach der Impfung.

Intensive Drucksenkung zeigt U-förmigen Nutzen nach Hirnblutung

Intensive Senkung eines erhöhten Blutdrucks kann nach einer intrazerebralen Blutung die funktionelle Erholung verbessern – mutmaßlich über eine Reduktion der Hämatomausdehnung. Offenbar hängt das aber vom Ausgangsvolumen ab, wie eine Analyse ergeben hat.

Steaks gegen Alzheimer

  • 02.04.2026
  • Demenz
  • Nachrichten

Da schmeckt das Rinderfilet gleich doppelt so gut: Fleisch beugt einer aktuellen Studie zufolge einer Demenz vor. Allerdings gilt das nur für ApoE4-Träger. Diese haben sich im Laufe der Evolution offenbar an einen hohen Fleischkonsum angepasst – und brauchen ihre Steak-Rationen.

Update Neurologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Bildnachweise
Die Leitlinien für Ärztinnen und Ärzte, Alter Mann entspannt sich im Grünen/© koldunova_anna / stock.adobe.com (Symbolbild mit Fotomodell), Hirn-MRT zeigt bilaterale subdurale Blutung (blaue Pfeile)/© Salvatore Perrone et al doi.org/10.1007/s00277-023-05392-2 unter CC-BY 4.0