Mehler Miriam, Balint Elisabeth, Gralla Maria, Pößnecker Tim, Gast Michael, Hölzer Michael, Kösters Markus, Gündel Harald
Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany.
Center for Burnout and Stress-Related Disorders, Privatklinik Meiringen, Meiringen, Switzerland.
BMC Psychol. 2024 Dec 4;12(1):718. doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-02198-3.
Recent systematic reviews have shown that emotional competencies can be improved through training. In the workplace, such training has become increasingly popular over the last decade. These programs aim to enhance emotional intelligence, empathy or emotion regulation. This study wants to assess the training effects and potential moderators of these workplace interventions. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review that focuses on the workplace context and integrates emotional intelligence, empathy, and emotion regulation training interventions. This study has been preregistered with PROSPERO and a protocol has been published before the review was conducted (CRD42021267073). We conducted a systematic literature search using Embase, PsycInfo, PSYNDEX, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The included studies were analyzed in two metaanalyses. In the primary analysis, we analyzed standardized mean changes in emotional competencies before and after the training for 50 included studies, depending on (a) training construct and (b) participants' profession (teachers, health professionals, managers, and others). To determine the efficacy of the trainings, we conducted a separate metaanalysis of controlled trials only (k = 27). Both metaanalyses yielded moderate overall effect sizes that also persisted more than three months after the training end: (1) SMD = 0.44 (95% CI [0.29, 0.59]), (2) SMD = 0.46 (95% CI [0.30, 0.63]). All professions benefited equally from the interventions and we observed no significant differences in the effectiveness of emotional intelligence, empathy, and emotion regulation trainings. Overall, our results suggest that workplace interventions effectively train emotional competencies, regardless of profession or specific training focus. Limitations are the high heterogeneity and the low methodological quality of the studies analyzed. Our study shows the need for more high-quality studies, like randomized controlled trials. Additionally, companies may consider incorporating emotional competence training into their employee and leadership development programs routinely. This study was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42021267073).
最近的系统评价表明,情绪能力可以通过培训得到提高。在工作场所,这类培训在过去十年中越来越受欢迎。这些项目旨在提高情商、同理心或情绪调节能力。本研究旨在评估这些工作场所干预措施的培训效果和潜在调节因素。据我们所知,这是第一项聚焦于工作场所背景并整合了情商、同理心和情绪调节培训干预措施的系统评价。本研究已在PROSPERO上进行了预注册,并且在进行评价之前已发表了一份方案(CRD42021267073)。我们使用Embase、PsycInfo、PSYNDEX、科学引文索引和Cochrane对照试验中央登记册进行了系统的文献检索。纳入的研究在两项荟萃分析中进行了分析。在主要分析中,我们根据(a)培训结构和(b)参与者的职业(教师、卫生专业人员、管理人员和其他人员),分析了50项纳入研究中培训前后情绪能力的标准化平均变化。为了确定培训的效果,我们仅对对照试验进行了单独的荟萃分析(k = 27)。两项荟萃分析均产生了中等程度的总体效应量,并且在培训结束后三个多月仍持续存在:(1)标准化均数差 = 0.44(95%置信区间[0.29, 0.59]),(2)标准化均数差 = 0.46(95%置信区间[0.30, 0.63])。所有职业都从这些干预措施中平等受益,并且我们观察到情商、同理心和情绪调节培训的有效性没有显著差异。总体而言,我们的结果表明,无论职业或具体培训重点如何,工作场所干预措施都能有效培养情绪能力。局限性在于所分析研究的高度异质性和较低的方法学质量。我们的研究表明需要更多高质量的研究,如随机对照试验。此外,公司可能会考虑将情绪能力培训常规纳入其员工和领导力发展计划。本研究已在PROSPERO上进行了预注册(CRD42021267073)。