Short Communication Emotional intelligence (EI) is an indicator of a slow life history strategy: A test of ability and trait EI Dimitri van der Linden a,⇑ , Donna van Klaveren a , Curtis S. Dunkel b a Erasmus University Rotterdam, Institute of Psychology, The Netherlands b Western Illinois University, Department of Psychology, USA article info Article history: Received 29 July 2014 Received in revised form 17 September 2014 Accepted 18 September 2014 Keywords: Life history theory Emotional intelligence Evolutionary psychology Social behavior abstract Life history (LH) theory applied to humans states that individual differences exist in reproductive strat- egies. A slow LH strategy implies that one invests relatively much into parental care but less so in mating effort. A fast LH strategy implies a reversed pattern (i.e., high mating effort, lower parental investment). It has been hypothesized that due to higher demands of social complexity, slow LH strategist may have higher levels of emotional intelligence (EI). In a sample of N = 201, mainly high-school students, the pres- ent study is the first to use well-known ability and trait measures of EI in order to test this hypothesis. Ability and trait measures of EI, as well as a general EI factor, all were significantly related to a slow life history strategy. Findings provide further insight into the characteristics of fast versus slow life history strategies. Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Life history (LH) theory was originally developed as a mid-level evolutionary account of difference in the reproductive strategies between species (Wilson, 1975). Essentially, it focuses on the trade-off between mating effort versus parental care. Species investing relatively much effort into mating and lower effort into parenting (e.g., rabbits) are considered to adopt a fast LH strategy. In contrast, species investing relatively much in parental care at the expense of mating effort (e.g., elephants) adopt a slow LH strat- egy. These differences are assumed to have evolved in order to maximize reproductive success in relation to environmental char- acteristics such as the presence of pathogens or predators, and climate. Compared to other species, all humans adopt a slow LH strat- egy. Nevertheless, it has been argued and shown that even among humans, individual differences exists in LH strategy with some inclining more towards a slower strategy and others towards a fas- ter strategy (Figueredo, Vásquez, Brumbach, & Schneider, 2004; Rushton, 1985). Such variations in LH strategy arise from adapta- tions to optimize reproductive success and have been proposed to play a key role in numerous individual differences among humans, including speed of maturation, parenting styles, personality, and cognitive and physical abilities (e.g., Figueredo et al., 2004; Rushton, 1985). One major area of individual differences in which LH strategy is considered to be relevant is social behavior. Specifically, a slow LH strategy is presumed to be associated with an increased sensitivity for social norms and higher levels of prosocial and cooperative behavior (e.g., Figueredo & Rushton, 2009). Also, during human development, a slow LH strategy implied a more stable relation- ship between parents to ensure that both contribute to parental care until the offspring reached the reproductive age. The social behavior typically associated with a slow LH strategy requires emotional impulse control and behavioral self-regulation (Figueredo, Andrzejczak, Jones, Smith-Castro, & Montero, 2011). Interestingly, a recent controlled laboratory study provided direct evidence for this by showing that slow LH-strategists displayed higher levels of socially desirable, prosocial, and cooperative behavior in a task in which they had to interact with others (Sherman, Figueredo, & Funder, 2013). In line with the above, it is likely that a slow LH strategy is asso- ciated with higher levels of emotional intelligence (EI). Researchers currently still debate about which theoretical EI model to adopt and whether EI can best be measured with ability tests or self- report surveys (e.g., Zeidner, Robert, & Mathews, 2008). However, there is general consensus that high-EI individuals have the social knowledge and skills to regulate their behavior and emotions and those of others in order to optimize social interaction (Zeidner et al., 2008). Defined as such, a high EI may be particularly useful http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.09.027 0191-8869/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding author at: Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotter- dam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 10 4082454. E-mail address: vanderlinden@fsw.eur.nl (D. van der Linden). Personality and Individual Differences 73 (2015) 84–87 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid