The purpose of CQ: Communication Quotient™ : Bridging the gap between IQ and EQ
/ Methodology / The purpose of CQ: Communication Quotient™ : Bridging the gap between IQ and EQ
The human brain has two systems that are often in conflict: the ancient emotional system (EQ) and the newer executive system (IQ).
EQ, driven by emotions, processes information quickly but has a propensity for inaccuracies (Zeidner, Matthews, Roberts, 2001), as it bypasses the conscious and deliberate cognitive processes associated with intellectual processing. On the other hand, IQ, encompassing executive and rational functions, is accurate but slower and weaker, as it involves the engagement of multiple brain regions and demands a higher level of cognitive effort and time investment (Duncan & Owen, 2000).
This conflict between these two systems can lead to challenges in clear decision making during interpersonal exchanges (Loewenstein and Lerner, 2003; Starcke et al., 2011; Kunda, 1990).Language serves as a bridge between our thoughts, emotions and meanings, highlighting the critical importance of CQ in balancing IQ and EQ.
CQ: Communication Quotient™ acts as a bridge between these systems, enabling the expression and regulation of emotions while engaging in rational thinking for problem solving and decision making. Strong emotions can in fact impede logical and rational thought processes (Slovic et al., 2005).However, by using CQ: Communication Quotient TM to communicate our emotions and understanding their significance, and exchanging ideas with others, we gain perspectives, regulate our emotional states constructively and foster new insights. This facilitates critical thinking for informed decision making.
The purpose of CQ: Communication Quotient™ is to strike a balance between EQ and IQ through language. Language serves as a tool to navigate the tensions between our internal and external worlds (Vigliocco et al., 2014), enabling us to comprehend reality, overcome biases and manage the cognitive distortions stemming from our unruly emotional default network EQ (Kahneman, 2011)Through Relational Framing, Theory of Mind and by using language to frame our experiences and thoughts, we create negotiated realities that help us better understand ourselves, others and the world around us (Hayes et al., 2001; Zlatev et al., 2008)
The CQ: Communication Quotient™ Integrated Model of Communication recognizes the neuropsychological reality of language-based information processing, recognizing that emotions, processed in rapid unconscious emotional centers, play a significant role in information acquisition. By analyzing how we negotiate the tensions between our internal thoughts and external reality, the CQ: Communication Quotient™ Integrated Model guides us in creating a strategic communication that transcends biases, cognitive and emotional distortions.
Ultimately, CQ: Communication Quotient™ aims to create a more balanced experience and increase psychological flexibility, enabling us to effectively interact with the world. Since our brains are wired for language and social interaction, CQ focuses on how we communicate with ourselves and others.
Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2001). Slow down, you move too fast: emotional intelligence remains an" elusive" intelligence.
Duncan, J., & Owen, A. M. (2000). Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands. Trends in Neurosciences, 23(10), 475-483.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480-498.
Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In Handbook of Affective Science (pp. 619-642). Oxford University Press.
Starcke, K., Brand, M., & Kluge, A. (2011). Differential effects of emotional and neutral cues on go/no-go performance in pathological gamblers. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 42(1), 89-95.
Slovic, P., Peters, E., Finucane, M. L., & MacGregor, D. G. (2005). Affect, risk, and decision making. Health psychology, 24(4S), S35.
Vigliocco, G., Kousta, S. T., Della Rosa, P. A., Vinson, D. P., Tettamanti, M., Devlin, J. T., & Cappa, S. F. (2014). The neural representation of abstract words: the role of emotion. Cerebral Cortex, 24(7), 1767-1777.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Zlatev, J., Racine, T. P., Sinha, C., & Itkonen, E. (Eds.). (2008). The Shared Mind: Perspectives on Intersubjectivity. John Benjamins Publishing.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. Springer Science & Business Media.