Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391 – 398

www.elsevier.com/locate/jsr www.nsc.org

Exploring the role of emotional intelligence in behavior-based safety coaching

Douglas M. Wiegand ⁎
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, USA
Virginia Tech Department of Psychology, USA

Received 22 June 2006; received in revised form 9 January 2007; accepted 15 March 2007
Available online 16 July 2007

Abstract

Introduction: Safety coaching is an applied behavior analysis technique that involves interpersonal interaction to understand and manipulate
environmental conditions that are directing (i.e., antecedent to) and motivating (i.e., consequences of) safety-related behavior. A safety coach
must be skilled in interacting with others so as to understand their perspectives, communicate a point clearly, and be persuasive with
behavior-based feedback. Method: This article discusses the evidence-based “ability model” of emotional intelligence and its relevance to the
interpersonal aspect of the safety coaching process. Results: Emotional intelligence has potential for improving safety-related efforts and
other aspects of individuals' work and personal lives. Safety researchers and practitioners are therefore encouraged to gain an understanding
of emotional intelligence and conduct and support research applying this construct toward injury prevention.
© 2007 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Emotional intelligence; Behavior-based safety; Safety coaching; People-based safety; Feedback

1. Introduction and consequences of the behavior(s), which may not have

been directly observable. For example, workers may perform
When considering psychology-based interventions for a task in a particular way because they saw another worker
improving safety, the behavior-based approach has been the doing the same thing, or they may believe performing a task
forerunner for several decades. While there are numerous in a particular way will lead to more comfort and/or pro-
injury prevention tactics within the realm of behavior-based ductivity. Once the antecedents and consequences of a par-
safety, the comprehensive observation and feedback or ticular behavior are identified, safety coaches attempt to
“safety coaching” process is one of the more popular and manipulate these conditions by delivering behavior-based
critical applications (e.g., Geller, 2001; Geller & French, feedback to increase safe behavior and/or decrease at-risk
2001; Krause, 1996; McSween, 2003). Safety coaching is behavior.
grounded in behavior analysis because it involves under- The safety-coaching process has been successful in re-
standing and manipulating environmental conditions that are ducing injuries in a variety of occupational settings (see
directing (i.e., antecedent to) and motivating (i.e., conse- Sulzer-Azaroff, McCann, & Harris, 2001 for a review).
quences of) safety-relevant behavior (e.g., Geller, 2001; Indeed, a meta-analysis exploring the effectiveness of
McSween, 2003). various interventions for occupational safety revealed be-
Safety coaching typically involves observing workers havior-based processes were the most effective, showing an
behavior and interacting with them to discuss the antecedents effect size of 59.6 (Guastello, 1993). While this adds
credibility to behavior-based processes, it is obvious there is
room for improvement.
⁎ Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, 3500 Transportation Research
To address continuous improvement, several researchers
Plaza, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA. Tel.: +1 540 230 8517; fax: +1 540 231
and practitioners have recently challenged behavior analysts to
1555. consider the theories, principles, and empirical research gen-
E-mail address: dwiegand@vtti.vt.edu. erated by other subfields of psychology when designing,
0022-4375/$ - see front matter © 2007 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2007.03.010
392 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398

implementing, and evaluating their interventions to address caring model have offered partial support of this assertion
safety-related behavior (Geller, 2002a,c; Roberts, 2003; (Allen & Ferrand, 1999; Geller et al., 1996; Porter, 1998;
Wiegand, 2005; Wiegand & Geller, 2005). By understanding Roberts & Geller, 1995), but additional studies are required to
and applying knowledge from areas such as cognitive, social, determine whether these variables predict participation and if it
and clinical psychology, it should be possible to complement is possible to influence them (Geller, 2002b).
and strengthen behavior-based safety interventions while While Geller's model focuses on person-level variables that
addressing other aspects of the human experience relevant to theoretically influence one's propensity to participate in the
injury prevention (Geller, 2003; Roberts, 2003). safety coaching process, it leaves one's ability or skill to be
effective in this realm relatively unexplored. This is important,
1.1. People-based safety because even if people are willing to be safety coaches, they
may lack the ability (or skill) to engage another employee in a
Geller (2005) recently coined the term people-based safety caring, trusting, and productive manner. Research has shown
to refer to this more encompassing approach. People-based the manner in which employees are coached and the con-
safety applies behavior-based principles to improve safety, but sequent perceptions and feelings influence whether corrective
also targets person-level variables (e.g., personality, emotions, feedback will be accepted and acted upon in a positive,
perceptions) relevant to supporting the behavior-based process productive manner (Clampitt, 2004; Fedor, 1991; Fedor,
and fostering positive outcomes such as job satisfaction, work Davis, Maslyn, & Mathieson, 2001; Herold & Fedor, 1998;
quality, productivity, and interpersonal relationships within the Ilgen, Fisher, & Taylor, 1979; Kinicki, Prussia, Wu, & McKee-
work culture (Geller, 2005). A people-based approach may Ryan, 2004; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Steelman & Rutkowski,
therefore be useful for addressing challenges that arise with the 2004).
implementation and maintenance of behavior-based interven-
tions by influencing variables internal to the individuals 1.3. Coaching skills
involved in the intervention, such as attitudes, feelings, and
abilities. London (2003) relates the skills of a coach to those of a
For example, one challenge of behavior-based interven- therapist or counselor, and describes eight behavioral dimen-
tions is getting employees directly involved as change agents sions of successful coaching within an organization. These
or safety coaches. Researchers have recommended the safety- eight dimensions were originally postulated by Kahn (1997),
coaching process be employee-driven (Boyce & Geller, 2001; who applied them toward the improvement of human service
Geller, Roberts, & Gilmore, 1996; Krause, Seymour, & Sloat, providers' mentoring relationships. They are as follows:
1999). That is, employees at all levels of an intervention site, accessibility (allowing time and space for contact and
especially the front-line employees, should be enlisted and connection), inquiry (probing for other's experiences, thoughts,
trained as change agents to apply the safety coaching process and feelings), attention (showing comprehension with verbal
among their peers. When employees learn how to successfully and nonverbal gestures), validation (communicating positive
implement the process themselves, organizations achieve regard, respect, and appreciation), empathy (identifying with
maximum application, cost effectiveness, and process main- others' experiences and communicating this with them),
tenance, in addition to increased perceptions of control and support (offering feedback; helping others reframe or analyze
ownership among employees (Geller et al., 1996). However, a situation), compassion (showing emotional presence by
getting employees actively involved in this process is no easy displaying kindness), and consistency (providing a steady
task. stream of resources, compassion, and emotional presence for
others). By displaying these behavioral dimensions, people can
1.2. Actively caring make a desirable impression on the individuals they coach,
gaining the trust needed to facilitate the coaching process and
To address the issue of employee involvement, Geller improve outcomes (Kahn, 1997; London, 2003).
(1991, 1995) developed the actively caring model based on Taking this into account, it seems logical that attention
social psychology principles investigating the conditions in should be given to individual differences in the ability to
which one is most likely to engage in prosocial behavior or to interact successfully with others while engaging in a safety
intervene in an emergency situation. From his review of this coaching process. Of course, the challenges that arise from this
literature, Geller identified five person-level variables believed proposition involve determining what these individual differ-
to influence one's propensity to intervene for the safety of ences in ability are, how they can be measured, and ultimately,
others (see Geller, 2001 for a review). These person-level whether and how they can be influenced to produce mean-
variables are: self-esteem (“I am valuable”); self-efficacy (“I ingful improvements in safety coaching outcomes. The
can do it”); personal control (“I'm in control”); optimism (“I remainder of this article addresses the first of these challenges;
expect the best”); and belongingness (“I belong to a team”). namely, identifying what specific skills facilitate a meaningful
Geller proposes that increasing these variables throughout an and effective safety coaching process. In this regard, it is
organizational culture will lead to more participation in believed the psychological concept of emotional intelligence
behavior-based interventions. Direct tests of the actively (EI) has much to offer.
 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398 393

2. Emotions and the popularization of emotional credibility of the concept to some in the field of psychology.
intelligence The numerous conceptualizations of EI and the claims of
what it can predict led to misunderstanding, misdirection,
Before delving into EI, it is important to define what is and controversy.
meant by the term emotion. Emotions are highly subjective, The model of EI discussed below is one developed by
positively or negatively valenced feelings that arise in scientists who studied the concept well before the “buzz” that
response to either an internal or external event. Emotions are popularized the concept. This model has led to the creation of
generally shorter lasting and more intense than the closely- one of the most popular measures of EI (the MSCEIT; Mayer,
related concept of mood. Many researchers in psychology Salovey, & Caruso, 2002a; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002b)
believe emotions can be adaptive and can transform personal and has fueled a prolific line of research to bolster the cred-
and social interactions into positive, enriching experiences ibility of a concept that is still piquing interest among psy-
(Salovey & Mayer, 1990). chologists and others to this day.
Over the last 16 years or so, the concept of EI has become
popular among researchers, academics, businesspeople, and 3. The ability model of EI and its impact on the safety
laypersons alike. Although scientific studies explicitly study- industry
ing the concept began in the early 1990s (Salovey & Mayer,
1990), EI did not capture widespread attention until the In what may be the first scholarly article published on EI,
publication of the New York Times best-seller Emotional Salovey and Mayer (1990) defined the concept as “the ability
Intelligence by Daniel Goleman (1995). This book and a to monitor one's own and others' feelings and emotions, to
subsequent Time Magazine cover story on EI (Gibbs, 1995) discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide
sparked enormous interest in the topic, yet it seems to have also one's thinking and actions” (p. 189). Salovey and Mayer began
generated questions about exactly what EI is (and equally their study of EI by reviewing research on intelligence,
important, what it is not), how it can be measured, and whether emotions, aesthetics, artificial intelligence, neurology, and
it can be influenced. clinical psychology. In addition to using this scientific basis to
Goleman did not clearly define EI, but instead used it as an define EI and shape their model (Mayer & Salovey, 1997;
umbrella term for a variety of positive personality attributes, Salovey & Mayer, 1990), these authors presented the first
stating “there is an old-fashioned word for the body of skills empirical demonstration of how it could be tested as a cognitive
that emotional intelligence represents: character” (p. 285). ability (i.e., intelligence) as opposed to a set of personality traits
He also seems to have defined EI by exclusion; that is, any that would be measured by self-report (Mayer, Caruso, &
positive attribute not considered part of intellectual intelli- Salovey, 1999; Mayer, DiPaolo, & Salovey, 1990).
gence (IQ) can therefore be described as EI (Matthews, Several years later, Mayer and Salovey (1997) revised
Zeidner, & Roberts, 2002). their original definition of EI because they believed it stressed
Moreover, Goleman (1995) made unsubstantiated claims perception and regulation of emotion without taking into
about the importance of EI and what it can predict. For account thought processes related to feelings. They therefore
example, when addressing the prediction of success in life he expanded their conceptualization of EI to include such
wrote EI is “. . . as powerful, and at times more powerful, than processes, which resulted in the following revised definition:
IQ” (p. 34). Such a powerful assertion combined with wide-
Emotional intelligence involves the ability to perceive
spread publicity and the loose definition of the concept opened
accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to
the floodgates for many to capitalize on the concept of EI.
access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate
Assessment measures and trade books claiming to hold the
thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional
“secrets” of how to influence EI were rapidly developed and
knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to pro-
marketed under the guise of EI. These publications could be
mote emotional and intellectual growth (p. 10).
more accurately described as lists of positive personality
attributes that seem intuitive for increasing one's success in Working from this definition, Mayer and Salovey (1997)
business and/or interpersonal relations (e.g., conscientious- devised a model with four hierarchical branches, arranged by
ness, assertiveness, agreeableness). Many of these works are complexity, each of which relates to a class of skills. The
not based on empirical evidence, and accomplish little in terms branches are composed of subskills also organized by
of helping the concept grow as a scientifically valid construct. complexity. The subskills and their respective branches are
The criticisms above are not meant to be as harsh as they organized in such a way that higher-level skills are dependent
may sound, especially toward Dr. Goleman. His book in on the skills from lower levels. The four branches of the
many ways was brilliant, thoughtful, and well-written. He ability model of EI are summarized in Fig. 1. These branches
certainly put EI “on the map” and inspired many to ponder are elaborated below with emphasis on how they are relevant
this intriguing concept and what it may offer. It is possible to effective safety coaching. Note that due to space
Dr. Goleman's writing was intentionally vague in places so limitations, these skills are described only with respect to
as to spur independent thought and creativity among his the role of the safety coach. However it is important to realize
audience. It did just that, but unfortunately tarnished the they are just as applicable to the individual being coached.
394 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398

3.1. Branch 1: Perception, appraisal, and expression of feedback is objective and reflects actual performance (Ilgen
emotions et al., 1979; Steelman & Rutkowski, 2004). Recipients of
corrective feedback often question the intent of the
A central aspect of this branch involves identifying and individual giving the feedback, which can lead to dismissal
appraising emotions in oneself and among other people. of the feedback if that person is perceived as having an
Individuals must be sensitive to their physical states, feelings, ulterior motive (Fedor, Buckley, & Eder, 1990). Recognition
and thoughts to correctly identify their own emotions. In of one's own emotions is the first step to being able to
terms of others, one must be able to infer emotion based regulate those emotions that may bias the way an individual
on others' verbal content, tone, body posture, and facial observes behavior (or what s/he pays attention to) as well as
expressions. the delivery of objective performance feedback. Regulation
of emotion is discussed further in Branch 4, below.
3.2. Identifying emotions in oneself and others A safety coach should also be tuned in to how the coworker is
reacting to the coaching process from beginning to end. For
The ability to identify emotions accurately in oneself and example, if one's body posture and facial expression suggest the
others is essential for effective safety coaching. Coaches feeling of shame or anger when receiving corrective feedback,
must be aware of their own emotions when approaching and these emotions will need to be addressed by the coach. Other-
engaging in a safety coaching session so as to detect emo- wise, the recipient of the feedback may associate negative
tions that may bias their observations and the feedback they feelings with the coaching process, and may either dismiss the
give. Feedback should be based on the coworker's behavior feedback or otherwise refuse to give consent to receive feedback
rather than other factors such as personal feelings toward that in the future. London (2003) lists several self-protection
individual or the coach's mood at the time (London, 2003). mechanisms people may engage in to protect their self-image
Research on feedback effectiveness suggests an important when receiving corrective feedback, including denial, giving up,
factor associated with one's motivation to improve perfor- rationalization, and fear of failure. An effective safety coach
mance based on corrective feedback is the perception that the must be able to recognize emotional expression consistent with

Fig. 1. Mayer and Salovey's (1997) Hierarchical Model of EI.

 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398 395

these self-protective reactions so as to address the negative someone else's shoes” so as to better understand their
emotions driving them. perspective. By imagining the emotions someone else is
experiencing to the point that you actually feel those
3.3. Accurate and honest emotional expression emotions yourself, you may be able to gain a greater under-
standing of how to communicate effectively with that person
Another component of this branch involves one's ability at that particular time, based on your empathic response to
to express emotions accurately. This involves using one's their situation.
verbal (e.g., tone and words) and nonverbal behavior (e.g., Another way emotion facilitates thinking is when one can
facial expression) to convey what one is thinking, feeling, or better anticipate their own and others' emotional reactions to
intending. A safety coach may have feelings of concern and a certain behaviors or procedures. This is an important skill for
desire to be helpful when seeing a coworker engage in at-risk coaches to use when planning their coaching approach. By
behavior, and this should be appropriately expressed when anticipating a coworker's reaction to particular feedback,
addressing the coworker. Likewise, feelings of respect, coaches can tailor their verbal and non-verbal language for
appreciation, and pride should be expressed while engaging greater effectiveness. For example, if the coach anticipates a
in a coaching session (e.g., London, 2003). coworker will be embarrassed by public praise in a particular
Finally, if EI is achieved at this initial level, one is able to situation, he may choose to give the coworker a “thumbs up”
discern between accurate and inaccurate (or honest vs. instead of offering verbal praise in front of others.
dishonest) expression of emotion in oneself and others. The
emotional expression of a safety coach must be perceived as 3.6. Emotions as different perspectives
genuine and trustworthy for the feedback to be accepted (Ilgen
et al., 1979; Kinicki et al., 2004; Steelman & Rutkowski, A related ability involves the use of emotions to generate
2004). If not, the coaching recipient may dismiss feedback different problem-solving approaches. For example, it has
from a coach who seems superficial. On the other hand, it is been shown that positive moods encourage inductive
also useful for the coach to be able to identify when a coworker reasoning and creativity (Mayer, 1986; Mayer & Hanson,
is not expressing true feelings, such as reacting to the coaching 1995; Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Emotionally intelligent
process with sarcasm or just saying what the coach wants to safety coaches can use their emotions to generate multiple
hear (e.g., “I'll do better next time”) when the true intention is perspectives and to facilitate creativity in coaching behavior.
not there. Similarly, it is useful for detecting when a coworker For example, a certain mood may facilitate recollection of a
does not understand feedback yet verbally agrees with it to personal story that can be told to emphasize one's point when
avoid feelings of embarrassment. Such emotions can under- giving feedback. Telling personal stories is often seen as more
mine the effectiveness of the safety coaching process, and need effective in increasing individuals' motivation than present-
to be identified and addressed as they come up. ing them with non-personal information or statistics (Ash-
forth & Humphreys, 1995; Geller, 2001).
3.4. Branch 2: Emotional facilitation of thinking
3.7. Branch 3: Understanding and analyzing emotions and
This branch involves the use of emotions to facilitate employing emotional knowledge
thinking. One aspect of this branch is based on the belief that
emotions guide and prioritize thinking. Usually a change in This branch involves the ability to understand the
emotions means something has changed in the environment or complexities of emotions and to apply emotional knowledge.
within the individual (Salovey, Mayer, & Caruso, 2002). When One aspect concerns the ability to recognize how emotions
one notices a change in personal emotions and the physiolog- can vary based on levels of intensity (e.g., annoyance is less
ical symptoms associated with them, it is important to check intense than anger). It also involves the ability to interpret the
environmental events that may need attention. For example, if a relationships between emotions and certain situations, such
coach leaves a feedback session feeling unsettled, it may signal as when failure to meet a goal results in feelings of frustration.
important points were not addressed in the session. The By recognizing the level of intensity of various emotions, a
emotions signal the coach to think about the session and what safety coach can gauge how much attention needs to be given
may have brought these feelings to fruition. For example, the to a certain situation, especially in terms of knowing when to
coach may think, “Okay, I just gave feedback to Bob about his “back off” from a particular approach. This can help a safety
lockout procedure, but something still doesn't seem right . . . coach find a balance between minimizing the importance of a
why is my gut telling me something was not addressed?” situation and blowing it out of proportion.

3.5. Empathic understanding and anticipation 3.8. Complex emotions

Emotion also facilitates thinking when individuals Another aspect of this branch of EI is relevant for the
generate emotions “on demand” in order to have empathy recognition of complex and/or contradictory emotions in
for others. Empathy typically involves “putting yourself in certain conditions. This is reflected, for example, by the
396 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398

ability to recognize when one is feeling several emotions express in the situation, and those to avoid. This is not to say
simultaneously, such as feeling happy when winning a com- emotions judged as inappropriate should be ignored, only that
petition yet feeling sorry for the losing opponent. It can also they should be put aside for later reflection. As mentioned
be reflected in the acknowledgement that certain complex above, this skill is especially important for delivering ob-
emotions can involve the combination of separate emotions. jective performance feedback — if an emotion is felt that is
For example, hope has been described as a combination of not due to the immediate feedback session (e.g., frustration
faith and optimism (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). from an earlier event), that emotion should not be expressed
By understanding the complexities of emotions, a safety while giving feedback about the behavior just witnessed.
coach can address several relevant emotions in a coaching Finally, this branch includes the ability to manage the
session. For example, if a coworker has completed a task emotions of others. This involves moderating negative emo-
successfully, yet behaves in an unsafe manner in the process, tions and enhancing positive ones, without invalidating or
an emotionally intelligent coach can address the feelings of exaggerating information they may convey. For example, the
pride the coworker may feel for having completed the task coach can attempt to motivate the coworker toward successful
while also addressing potential feelings of frustration that change by describing others who succeeded under similar
may accompany receiving corrective feedback. conditions (London, 2003). This branch represents the highest-
level ability of EI and involves the use of EI skills to suc-
4. Emotional transitions cessfully navigate social situations and exert social influence.
The safety coaching process is inherently social because it
Finally, this branch involves the ability to recognize involves engaging coworkers to discuss openly what is
transitions between emotions. For example, frustration may directing and motivating their safe or at-risk behavior, and
lead to anger, which may then lead to behaviors that could involves influencing them to either continue behaving safely
later be associated with regret. By understanding that or to change their at-risk behavior.
corrective feedback can lead to frustration or defensiveness,
one might anticipate what psychologists call psychological 5. In summary
reactance (Brehm, 1966). Reactance is when people do the
opposite of what they are told because they want to assert The paragraphs above reflect the definition and structure of
their independence over someone they feel is trying to control EI as put forth by leading research psychologists in the fields of
them. Understanding this progression could help the safety emotion and intelligence. Each branch of Mayer and Salovey's
coach address the frustration before it leads to reactance. (1997) model can be applied to various aspects of daily life, yet
were described here in terms of their applicability to safety
4.1. Branch 4: Reflective regulation of emotions to promote coaching, with a focus on the role of the coach.
emotional and intellectual growth Safety coaching is no simple process. It involves skillfully
interacting with another individual so feedback and instruc-
The highest branch in Mayer and Salovey's (1997) model tions are successfully communicated in a manner that pro-
involves the conscious, effortful regulation of one's own and motes positive, win-win relationships and outcomes on the
others' emotions. This branch begins with one's willingness job. EI is an integral aspect of this process, one that should be
to experience and learn from different types of emotion. For discussed among safety professionals to explore how it applies
example, resisting or ignoring negative emotions can limit to various aspects of their work.
one's ability to cope with life's adversities and also limits The concept of EI has developed substantially over the past
one's ability to empathize with others. If people consistently decade, and has been applied to many aspects of life, including
avoid their own negative emotions, they can't be expected to psychological well-being, quality of life, interpersonal rela-
understand another's plight. tionships, performance at work, and group dynamics. Recently
On the other hand, some of us have difficulty experiencing there has been a resurgence of studies on EI in the workplace
and embracing positive emotions when they occur. Do you (e.g., Druskat, Sala, & Mount, 2005; Salovey & Grewal,
know people who are consistently hard on themselves or 2005), and researchers are beginning to evaluate interventions
believe positive emotions make them vulnerable? These in- to increase people's EI.
dividuals may dismiss positive emotions quickly by com- For example, within the network of the Consortium for
bating them with cynicism or a sense of low self-esteem as in Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations (CREIO,
“I don't deserve to feel like this.” We need to experience and 2005; www.eiconsortium.org), Cary Cherniss and colleagues
embrace our full range of emotions if we are to gain an conducted an exhaustive review of training programs related to
understanding of them. the development of emotionally-relevant skills within the
workplace (Cherniss, 2000; Cherniss & Adler, 2000; Cherniss
4.2. Monitoring and managing emotions & Goleman, 1998, 2001). The training programs reviewed did
not focus specifically on EI as currently conceptualized and
This branch of EI is also relevant to monitoring one's own outlined above. However, they can be considered precursors to
emotions so as to choose those relevant or appropriate to current and future initiatives in influencing EI. While reviewing
 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398 397

these programs is beyond the scope of the current article, the Geller, E. S. (2002b). People-based safety: Social influence principles
references provided here are an excellent starting point for fueling participation in occupational safety. Professional Safety, 47,
25−31.
interested researchers and safety managers. Geller, E. S. (2002c). Should organizational behavior management expand
Safety researchers and practitioners alike are encouraged its content? Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 22,
to become familiar with and follow this rapidly accumulating 13−30.
scientific literature on EI, and to make their own contribu- Geller, E. S. (2003). People-based safety: The psychology of actively caring.
Professional Safety, 48, 33−43.
tions in developing methods for incorporating this concept
Geller, E. S. (2005). People-based safety: The source. Virginia Beach, VA:
into the work culture. Such efforts are needed not only for the Coastal Training and Technologies Corporation.
study of EI, but for many other constructs and theories being Geller, E. S., & French, A. (2001). Safety coaching through observation and
explored in the human dynamics of injury prevention (e.g., feedback. In E. S. Geller, & J. H. Williams (Eds.), Keys to behavior-based
people-based safety). safety Rockville, MD: ABS Consulting.
Geller, E. S., Roberts, D. S., & Gilmore, M. (1996). Predicting propensity to
actively care for occupational safety. Journal of Safety Research, 27, 1−8.
References Gibbs, N. (1995, October 2). The EQ factor. Time, 60−68.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Allen, J. B., & Ferrand, J. L. (1999). Environmental locus of control, Guastello, S. J. (1993). Do we really know how well our occupational
sympathy, and proenvironmental behavior: A test of Geller's actively accident prevention programs work? Safety Science, 16, 445−463.
caring hypothesis. Environment and Behavior, 31, 338−353. Herold, D. M., & Fedor, D. B. (1998). Individuals' interaction with their
Ashforth, B. E., & Humphreys, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A feedback environment: The role of domain-specific individual differ-
re-appraisal. Human Relations, 48, 97−125. ences. In G. R. Ferris, & K. M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel
Boyce, T. E., & Geller, E. S. (2001). Applied behavior analysis and and human resources management, Vol. 16. (pp. 215−254), Greenwich,
occupational safety: The challenge of response maintenance. Journal of CT: JAI Press.
Organizational Behavior Management, 21, 31−60. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Oxford, England: individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied
Academic Press. Psychology, 64, 349−371.
Cherniss, C. (2000). Social and emotional competence in the workplace. In Kahn, M. (1997). Between therapist and client: The new relationship. New
R. Bar-On (Ed.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 433−458). York, NY: Owl Books.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B. J., & McKee-Ryan, F. M. (2004).
Cherniss, C., & Adler, M. (2000). Promoting emotional intelligence in A covariance structure analysis of employees' response to performance
organizations. Alexandria, VA: American Society of Training and feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1057−1069.
Development. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on
Cherniss, C., & Goleman, D. (1998). Bringing emotional intelligence to the performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary
workplace: A technical report issued by the Consortium for Research on feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254−284.
Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. Retrieved October 15, 2004 Krause, T. R. (1996). The behavior-based safety process: Managing
from. http://www.eiconsortium.org/research/technical_report.htm involvement for an injury-free culture (2nd ed). New York: Van Nostrand
Cherniss, C., & Goleman, D. (2001). The emotionally intelligent workplace: Reinhold.
How to select for, measure, and improve emotional intelligence in Krause, T. R., Seymour, K. J., & Sloat, K. C. M. (1999). Long-term
individuals, groups, and organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. evaluation of a behavior-based method for improving safety perfor-
Clampitt, P. G. (2004). Communicating for managerial effectiveness (2nd mance: A meta-analysis of 73 interrupted time-series replications. Safety
ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Science, 32, 1−18.
Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. London, M. (2003). Job feedback: Giving seeking and using feedback for
(2005). Retrieved on February 12, 2005 from www.eiconsortium.org performance improvement (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Druskat, V. U., Sala, F., & Mount, G. (2005). Linking emotional intelligence Associates.
and performance at work: Current research evidence with individuals Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2002). Emotional intelligence:
and groups. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Science and myth. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Fedor, D. B. (1991). Recipient responses to performance feedback: A Mayer, J. D. (1986). How mood influences cognition. In N. E. Sharkey
proposed model and its implications. In G. R. Ferris, & K. M. Rowland (Ed.), Advances in cognitive science (pp. 290−314). Chichester, West
(Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management, Vol. Sussex: Ellis Horwood Limited.
9. (pp. 73−120), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence
Fedor, D. B., Buckley, M. R., & Eder, R. W. (1990). Measuring subordinate meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267−298.
perceptions of supervisor feedback intentions: Some unsettling results. Mayer, J. D., DiPaolo, M. T., & Salovey, P. (1990). Perceiving affective content
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 73−89. in ambiguous visual stimuli: A component of emotional intelligence.
Fedor, D. B., Davis, W. D., Maslyn, J. M., & Mathieson, K. (2001). Journal of Personality Assessment, 54, 772−781.
Performance improvement efforts in response to negative feedback: The Mayer, J. D., & Hanson, E. (1995). Mood-congruent judgment over time.
roles of source power and recipient self-esteem. Journal of Management, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 237−244.
27, 79−97. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P.
Geller, E. S. (1991). If only more would actively care. Journal of Applied Salovey & D.J. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional
Behavior Analysis, 24, 607−612. intelligence: Educational implications. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Geller, E. S. (1995). Integrating behaviorism and humanism for environ- Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002a). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso
mental protection. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 179−195. Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), version 2.0. Toronto, Canada:
Geller, E. S. (2001). The psychology of safety handbook. Boca Raton, FL: Multi-Health Systems.
CRC Press. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002b). MSCEIT technical
Geller, E. S. (2002a). Organizational behavior management and industrial/ manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
organizational psychology: Achieving synergy by valuing differences. McSween, T. E. (2003). The values-based safety process (2nd ed). New York:
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 22, 111−130. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
398 D.M. Wiegand / Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 391–398

Porter, B. E. (1998). Predicting active and effective agents for safety: Test Sulzer-Azaroff, B., McCann, K. B., & Harris, T. C. (2001). The safe
of the actively caring approach. Journal of Safety Research, 29, performance approach to preventing job-related illness and injury. In
223−233. C. M. Johnson, W. K. Redmon, & T. C. Mawhinney (Eds.), Handbook
Roberts, D. S. (2003). Integrating person factors into the OBM framework: of organizational performance: Behavior analysis and management
Perspectives from a behavioral safety practitioner. Journal of Organizational (pp. 277−302). Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Behavior Management, 22, 31−39. Wiegand, D. M. (2005). A people-based approach to OBM: Synergy, not
Roberts, D. S., & Geller, E. S. (1995). An “actively caring” model for “sin”-ergy. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 24, 3−25.
occupational safety: A field test. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 4, Wiegand, D. M., & Geller, E. S. (2005). Connecting positive psychology
53−59. and organizational behavior management: Achievement motivation and
Salovey, P., & Grewal, D. (2005). The science of emotional intelligence. the power of positive reinforcement. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 281−285. Management, 24, 185−193.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination,
Cognition and Personality, 9, 185−211. Douglas M. Wiegand earned his doctorate in the clinical psychology
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., & Caruso, D. (2002). The positive psychology of program at Virginia Tech in 2006. He is currently a Senior Research
emotional intelligence. In C. R. Snyder & S.J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook Associate at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, specializing in truck
of positive psychology (pp. 159−171). New York, NY: Oxford and bus safety. His interests include the psychology of safety, applied social
University Press. psychology, personality, transportation safety, emotional intelligence, and
Steelman, L. A., & Rutkowski, K. A. (2004). Moderators of employee reducing the negative effects of alcohol consumption. Correspondence
reactions to negative eedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, regarding this article can be addressed to dwiegand@vtti.vt.edu.
6−18.