2006/10/30 by Lynn Waterhouse · 2 citations
Psychology · Neuroscience · #Emotional Intelligence and Performance #Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function #Cognitive Science and Education Research #Psychology #Emotional intelligence #Theory of multiple intelligences #MOZART #Cognition #Active listening #Empirical evidence #Cognitive psychology #Social psychology #Developmental psychology #Epistemology #Psychotherapist #Neuroscience
paper · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4104_5
openalex publication_date 2006/10/30 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
I (Waterhouse, 2006) argued that, because multiple intelligences, the Mozart effect, and emotional intelligence theories have inadequate empirical support and are not consistent with cognitive neuroscience findings, these theories should not be applied in education. Proponents countered that their theories had sufficient empirical support, were consistent with cognitive neuroscience findings, and should be applied in education (Cherniss, Extein, Goleman, & Weissberg, 2006; Gardner & Moran, 2006; Rauscher & Hinton, 2006). However, Gardner and Moran offered no validating evidence for multiple intelligences, Rauscher and Hinton concluded that "listening-to-Mozart" studies should be disregarded, and Cherniss, Extein, Goleman, and Weissberg agreed that emotional intelligence lacked a unitary empirically supported construct. My reply addresses theory proponents' specific criticisms of my review and reasserts my original claims.