Goleman, page 4
Howard Gardner vs. Salovey/Mayer
Today I was reading Goleman's 1995 book Emotional Intelligence again and noticed how many times Goleman cited the work of Howard Gardner. It seemed like Goleman talked more about the work of Gardner than about the work of Peter Salovey and John Mayer. So I decided to count the number of times each of the authors was mentioned. I found that Salovey was mentioned 4 times. Mayer was also mentioned 4 times. Gardner, though, was cited 33 times.
What does this imply? It could imply that Goleman didn't take the work of Salovey and Mayer very seriously. Or it could imply that Goleman just liked the term "emotional intelligence" but nothing much more about the research that Salovey and Mayer had done. Or it could imply that the writing that Goleman did for his book was oriented more towards the work of Gardner than of Salovey and Mayer. Or it could imply, as I have long suspected, that the idea of titling the book "Emotional Intelligence" came after the majority of the writing had been done on the book.
See this note about the original intention of the book
The Title of the 1995 Book
As I read the acknowledgments in Goleman's 1995 best-selling book, I also notice that Goleman never tells us exactly how he came up with the idea of titling the book "Emotional Intelligence." He thanks Rob Lehman for inspiring him to write a book about emotional literacy and later he says he is indebted to Salovey for the concept of emotional intelligence, but he never thanks anyone for giving him the idea of titling the book "Emotional Intelligence." Was this Goleman's idea? Or was it the idea of some marketing person?
By the way, Goleman only thanks Salovey for the concept of EI. We don't know why he didn't thank Jack Mayer. Goleman knows they wrote the first article about emotional intelligence in 1990 together, so what was his motivation in leaving Mayer out? Was it because it sounds more impressive to mention Salovey since Salovey is at Yale? Mayer, by the way, is at a much less famous university, The University of New Hampshire. (See note on the original intention of the book for more info about the acknowledgements)