Which matters more, IQ or EQ? See how they differ, how they overlap, what each predicts, why the "80 per cent EQ" claim misleads, and what else matters for success and wellbeing.
Last updated: 12 October 2026. Written by the EDUSAMBAM Editorial Team. This article is for general education and does not replace advice from a qualified professional.
"Which is more important, IQ or EQ?" It may be the most common question about intelligence, and it is usually asked with a strong expectation that the answer is one or the other. Popular books, motivational posts and job-interview advice have repeated that EQ is "80 per cent of success" or that "IQ gets you hired, EQ gets you promoted". In this final article of our series, we put those claims to the test. We compare what each concept is, how they are related, what each of them predicts according to large meta-analyses, where the famous 80 per cent figure came from, and what else matters. We also give you a map of the whole series and a practical plan for building both. All main numbers come from published studies, which are listed at the end.
IQ and EQ are different but related. The best-fitting scientific models treat emotional intelligence as a group of abilities that sits within general intelligence, and tests of emotion understanding overlap with knowledge. IQ is a strong predictor of education (r about .56), a moderate predictor of job performance (about .31 in the latest large revision) and a modest predictor of income (about .20 to .23). EQ shows modest but real links with grades (about .20), well-being (about .32) and some work outcomes, and it adds only a small amount beyond IQ and personality. The claim that EQ is "80%" of success is a misreading of a statistic. Self-discipline, conscientiousness, relationships, health, opportunity and good teaching matter too. The sensible answer to "which matters more?" is: it depends on the outcome, the situation and the person, and you can improve both.
Before comparing IQ and EQ, we need three ideas that decide how any comparison should be read.
| Correlation (r) | Share of variance explained (r squared) | How to describe it |
|---|---|---|
| .10 | 1% | Very small |
| .20 | 4% | Small |
| .30 | 9% | Small to moderate |
| .45 | 20% | Moderate to large |
| .56 | 31% | Large |
Notice that even a "strong" correlation of .45 leaves about 80 per cent of the variation unexplained by that one factor. That is the key to understanding the "20/80" claim that we examine in Section 7. Also remember that group statistics describe averages across many people. They cannot predict what any one person will do.
| Feature | IQ | EQ |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A score from standardised tests of reasoning, memory, knowledge and speed | A set of abilities (or traits, depending on the model) for noticing, understanding and managing emotions |
| Origins | Binet and Simon (1905); Wechsler scales (1939) | Salovey and Mayer (1990); Goleman (1995); Bar-On |
| Measured by | Individually administered, standardised ability tests | Ability tests (such as the MSCEIT), self-report questionnaires, ratings by others |
| Scale | Average 100, standard deviation 15 | No single standard; scales differ between tests |
| Stability | Fairly stable in rank; small changes with schooling and health | Can be trained with moderate effects on scores |
| Main strengths | Well-studied; reliable; predicts education, learning and some work outcomes | Captures social and emotional skills; linked with well-being and relationships |
| Main weaknesses | Misses creativity, character, empathy and wisdom | Measures overlap with personality; scoring is debated |
A common belief says that "clever people have low EQ" or that "emotionally skilled people are not academic". The evidence points in the opposite direction: the two are positively and modestly related. A study of 688 students (MacCann, Joseph, Newman and Roberts, 2014) tested several models of how emotional abilities fit with cognitive abilities. The best-fitting model treated emotional intelligence as a second-level group of abilities within general intelligence (with a strong link of about .80 to the general factor g). A later study (Evans and colleagues, 2020) replicated the result. In other words, ability-based EI behaves like "intelligence applied to emotional information", rather than like an unrelated trait.
A separate line of meta-analytic evidence found weak to modest relationships between the four emotional ability branches and fluid and crystallised intelligence. The strongest links were between emotion understanding and crystallised knowledge (which makes sense, since understanding emotions depends on vocabulary and life knowledge), and the weakest was for emotion regulation.
A caution: this applies to ability EI. The popular "EQ" of books and workplace questionnaires is usually the mixed type, which, as we showed in our article on Goleman's five components, overlaps strongly with personality traits such as emotional stability and conscientiousness. So when someone says "high EQ", it is worth asking which kind they mean.
| Outcome | Finding | Source and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Education | Correlation of about .56 between intelligence and educational attainment | Strenze (2007), meta-analysis of longitudinal studies; 59 samples, about 85,000 people |
| Occupational level | About .43 (about .45 in a restricted-age analysis) | Strenze (2007) |
| Income | About .20 (about .23 in the restricted-age analysis), meaning 4 to 5% of differences | Strenze (2007); parental socioeconomic status and school grades were also strong predictors, and intelligence was "not overwhelmingly better" than they were |
| Job performance | General mental ability about .31 in the most recent large re-estimate, lower than the .51 usually quoted from 1998 | Sackett, Zhang, Berry and Lievens (2022): earlier estimates were inflated by over-correction; structured interviews came out highest at about .42 |
| Health and survival | One standard deviation (15 IQ points) higher in youth was linked with about 24% lower risk of death over follow-up (hazard ratio 0.76) | Calvin and colleagues (2011); 16 studies, 1,107,022 people; the link was weaker after adjusting for education and adult social class, and is observational |
This is a solid and consistent record. It also shows two things that are often forgotten: IQ's predictive power is strongest for education and much more modest for income and job performance, and other factors such as family background are comparably important.
| Outcome | Finding | Source and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Academic performance | Overall correlation of about .20 (ability EI .24; mixed EI .19; self-rated EI .12); EI was the third most important predictor after intelligence and conscientiousness; stronger in humanities than science | MacCann and colleagues (2020), 158 citations, 42,529 students |
| Extra value beyond IQ and personality | After controlling for intelligence and the Big Five personality traits, EI explained an additional 1.7% (ability), 0.7% (self-rated) and 2.3% (mixed) of the variance in grades | MacCann and colleagues (2020); a real but small increment |
| Well-being | Correlation of about .32 between EI and subjective well-being (mixed .38; self-report ability .32; performance-based ability .22) | Sánchez-Álvarez, Extremera and Fernández-Berrocal (2016); 25 studies, 8,520 people; self-report scales partly measure feeling positive about yourself |
| Job performance | Ability EI adds little beyond IQ and personality overall, with slightly more in high-emotional-labour jobs; the link of self-reported mixed EI with performance (about .29) disappeared after controlling for personality and related factors | Joseph and Newman (2010); Joseph and colleagues (2015); see our earlier article |
| Skills that can be taught | School social and emotional learning programmes improved skills, behaviour and achievement (about 11 percentile points in one large review) | Durlak and colleagues (2011); a different question from what EQ tests predict |
In short, EQ has real but modest links with several outcomes, and the strongest evidence is for school performance and well-being. The evidence that high EQ "beats" IQ in career success is not there.
Seeing the numbers next to each other may tempt you to conclude "IQ wins". Please be careful, for four reasons:
A fair summary is that IQ is a stronger predictor of learning and schooling, while emotional skills are especially relevant for well-being, relationships and the way people handle their emotions at school and work.
In his 1995 book Emotional Intelligence, Daniel Goleman wrote that IQ contributes, at best, about 20 per cent to the factors that determine life success, which leaves 80 per cent to other forces. This sentence has been quoted thousands of times, often turned into "IQ is 20% and EQ is 80%". Researchers who studied the claim have noted several problems:
Imagine a study finds that height explains 20% of the differences in basketball skill among a group of adults. Would you conclude that the other 80% is "shoe size"? Of course not. It is practice, coaching, health, motivation, teamwork and more. In the same way, if IQ "explains" about 20% of differences in some measure of success, the rest is a long list of things, of which emotional skills are only one.
Focusing on the two famous letters can hide other important ingredients.
| Factor | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Self-discipline and conscientiousness | In two studies of eighth graders (Duckworth and Seligman, 2005; 140 students, and 164 in a replication), self-discipline measured in the autumn accounted for more than twice as much variance as IQ in final grades the following spring, and still predicted grades after controlling for IQ. IQ remained important for scores on standardised achievement tests. In personnel selection, conscientiousness had a revised validity of about .19 (Sackett and colleagues, 2022) |
| Parental background | Strenze (2007) found parental socioeconomic status to be a meaningful predictor of later success, and intelligence was "not overwhelmingly better" |
| Quality of teaching and relationships | Warm teacher-student relationships were linked with engagement and achievement (Roorda and colleagues, 2011) |
| Structured methods in selection | Structured interviews (about .42) were among the best predictors of job performance, ahead of cognitive ability (about .31) in the 2022 revision |
| Health, sleep and nutrition | Basic conditions that affect learning and mood, as shown in our articles on brain training and stress |
| Opportunity and chance | Good schools, supportive people and fair opportunities shape which abilities can develop |
These findings do not make IQ or EQ unimportant. They show that success and well-being come from a mix of abilities, habits, relationships and circumstances.
A high score on an intelligence test does not guarantee good judgement. In two studies with university students (West, Meserve and Stanovich, 2012), people showed a bias blind spot: they believed that thinking biases affect other people more than themselves. This blind spot was not reduced by higher cognitive ability, and if anything, a larger blind spot was linked with higher cognitive ability. The researchers also found that many classic thinking biases were unrelated to cognitive ability, though in much of the wider literature, a number of biases do decrease with higher ability. The practical lesson: being intelligent does not automatically protect you from fooling yourself. Habits such as asking "What would change my mind?" matter.
Similarly, emotional skill is a tool and not a moral compass. Someone who reads people well may use that skill to help or to manipulate (see our article on EQ at school, home and work). Values such as honesty, fairness and compassion need to guide both kinds of ability.
| IQ and thinking skills | EQ and emotional skills | |
|---|---|---|
| What research shows | Scores are fairly stable in rank, but each extra year of schooling raised scores by about 1 to 5 points in a large meta-analysis (Ritchie and Tucker-Drob, 2018) | Meta-analyses of training found moderate improvements in EI scores that were stable at follow-up (Hodzic and colleagues, 2018); school programmes improve skills and behaviour |
| What helps most | Schooling, reading, deliberate practice, sleep, nutrition and health | Naming feelings, reappraisal, listening, practising skills with feedback, supportive relationships |
| What does not help much | Commercial brain games for general intelligence | One-off lectures or quizzes without practice |
| Where to read more | Our articles on types of intelligence, whether IQ can change, and brain training | Our articles on Goleman's components, anger and stress, empathy, motivation and resilience, and EQ at school, home and work |
| Situation | Mainly thinking skills (IQ-type) | Mainly emotional and social skills (EQ-type) |
|---|---|---|
| Solving a hard maths problem | Reasoning, knowledge, working memory | Staying calm when stuck; asking for help |
| Doing a group project | Planning, analysis, quality of ideas | Listening, fair sharing, handling disagreement |
| Facing an exam | Knowledge and exam technique | Managing anxiety and motivation |
| Managing a team | Strategy, organisation, decision quality | Fair feedback, trust, handling conflict and stress |
| Making a big life decision | Weighing evidence and probabilities | Knowing what you value; handling uncertainty and others' reactions |
| Caring for a sick relative | Understanding information and instructions | Empathy, patience, self-care |
In nearly every real situation, both kinds of skill are needed, in different mixes.
| Myth | Fact |
|---|---|
| "EQ is 80% of success and IQ only 20%" | A misreading of a variance statistic; the 80% is everything else, and no study shows an 80% share for EQ |
| "IQ is useless; only EQ matters" | IQ is a solid predictor of education and a moderate predictor of job performance |
| "EQ is useless; it's just soft skills" | EI is linked with grades, well-being and relationships, though its extra value beyond IQ and personality is modest |
| "Clever people have low EQ" | They are positively related; ability EI fits within models of intelligence |
| "Your IQ and EQ are fixed" | IQ rank is fairly stable, yet schooling matters; EI skills can be trained |
| "A high IQ guarantees good judgement" | Higher cognitive ability did not reduce the bias blind spot |
| "EQ tests can pick the best person for a job" | Tests overlap with personality, add little beyond other measures, and should be used with caution |
| "IQ gets you hired, EQ gets you promoted" | A catchy saying, not a research finding |
| "You must choose which to develop" | Both can be improved, and effort on one often helps the other |
| Week | Thinking skills | Emotional and social skills |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Read for 20 minutes daily; do closed-book recall of what you read | Write down three feelings each evening with precise words |
| 2 | Study in spaced sessions; solve one logic puzzle a day and explain your steps | Practise one slow breath with a long exhale before reacting to something annoying |
| 3 | Learn one new, challenging skill with feedback; test yourself without notes | Have one conversation where you only ask and listen; use one coaching response to a feeling |
| 4 | Review weak topics; ask "What would change my mind?" about one belief | Apologise or thank someone properly; give one piece of specific, kind feedback |
| Article | Main message |
|---|---|
| 1. IQ and EQ Explained | IQ is about reasoning, EQ about emotions; both matter |
| 2. Types of Intelligence | There is a general factor, fluid and crystallised abilities; multiple intelligences are useful but not proven; learning styles are a myth |
| 3. Can IQ Change? | Genes and environment both matter; schooling and nutrition help; scores shift across generations |
| 4. Brain Training | Games improve games; real learning, exercise and sleep are better supported |
| 5. Goleman's Five Components | Self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills, with criticisms |
| 6. Managing Anger and Stress | Venting backfires; breathing, reappraisal, sleep and exercise help |
| 7. Empathy and Social Skills | Ask, do not assume; listen; friendships take time |
| 8. Motivation and Resilience | If-then plans, habits and self-compassion; resilience is common and supported by people |
| 9. EQ at School, Home and Work | Warm relationships, emotion coaching, honest limits on emotional labour |
| 10. IQ vs EQ (this article) | Related, not opposed; neither is 80% of success; build both |
The main claims in this article come from the following published works, which you can find by searching the authors, year and title.
| Topic | Source |
|---|---|
| EI within intelligence | MacCann, C., Joseph, D. L., Newman, D. A., and Roberts, R. D. (2014). Emotional intelligence is a second-stratum factor of intelligence: Evidence from hierarchical and bifactor models. Emotion, 14, 358-374. Evans, T. R., and colleagues (2020). A conceptual replication of emotional intelligence as a second-stratum factor of intelligence. Emotion, 20. |
| Intelligence and success | Strenze, T. (2007). Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research. Intelligence, 35, 401-426. |
| Intelligence and job performance | Schmidt, F. L., and Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274. Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., and Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107, 2040-2068. |
| Intelligence and mortality | Calvin, C. M., Deary, I. J., Fenton, C., and colleagues (2011). Intelligence in youth and all-cause mortality: Systematic review with meta-analysis. International Journal of Epidemiology, 40, 626-644. |
| EI and academic performance | MacCann, C., Jiang, Y., Brown, L. E. R., Double, K. S., Bucich, M., and Minbashian, A. (2020). Emotional intelligence predicts academic performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146, 150-186. |
| EI and well-being | Sánchez-Álvarez, N., Extremera, N., and Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2016). The relation between emotional intelligence and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic investigation. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11, 276-285. |
| EI and job performance | Joseph, D. L., and Newman, D. A. (2010). Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 54-78. Joseph, D. L., Jin, J., Newman, D. A., and O'Boyle, E. H. (2015). Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 298-342. |
| The 20/80 claim | Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books (p. 34). Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., and Caruso, D. R. (2000). Emotional intelligence as zeitgeist, as personality, and as a mental ability. In R. Bar-On and J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence. |
| Self-discipline and IQ | Duckworth, A. L., and Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939-944. |
| Bias blind spot | West, R. F., Meserve, R. J., and Stanovich, K. E. (2012). Cognitive sophistication does not attenuate the bias blind spot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 506-519. |
| Schooling and IQ | Ritchie, S. J., and Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 29, 1358-1369. |
| EI training; SEL; teachers | Hodzic, S., and colleagues (2018). Emotion Review, 10, 138-148. Durlak, J. A., and colleagues (2011). Child Development, 82, 405-432. Roorda, D. L., and colleagues (2011). Review of Educational Research, 81, 493-529. |
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Bias blind spot | Seeing biases in others more easily than in yourself |
| Correlation (r) | A number from 0 to 1 (or -1 to 0) showing how strongly two things go together |
| General mental ability | The shared element of performance on many mental tasks (g) |
| Incremental validity | How much extra a predictor adds once other predictors are taken into account |
| Meta-analysis | A study that combines the results of many earlier studies |
| Observational study | A study of existing differences without assigning people to groups |
| Operational validity | How well a method predicts job performance in real use, after statistical corrections |
| Second-stratum factor | A group of related abilities sitting between narrow skills and general intelligence |
| Variance explained (r squared) | The share of differences between people that one factor accounts for statistically |
Over ten articles, we have seen that intelligence is not one thing, that it grows with schooling, health and practice, that games promise more than they deliver, and that emotional skills are real, learnable and valuable, though not magic. The question "IQ or EQ?" is like asking whether a bird needs the left wing or the right. People thrive when they can think clearly, feel wisely, relate kindly and keep learning. Choose one thinking habit and one emotional habit this week, practise them, and check the evidence before you believe the next big claim, including this one.
14 questions. Select an answer for each, then submit to see your score instantly.