应该是which is more important,IQ or EQ?不要标题说出去就被人笑话了..下面是我以前参考过的文章,也给你参考下吧..While IQ (Intelligence Quotient) defines how smart you are,EQ (Emotional Quotient) defines how well you use what smarts you have.Peter Salovey,Yale psychologist and author of the term EQ,states that IQ gets you hired,EQ gets you promoted.He also suggests that it's important to redefine,in our complex world,what it means to be smart.In short,when it comes to "predicting future successes," brainpower,as measured by IQ and standardized achievement tests,may actually matter less than the character,or EQ of an individual.Salovey tells of a simple test where four year olds are invited into a room and are given the following instruction:"You can have this marshmallow right now; or if you wait,you can have two marshmallows when I get back." Then,the researcher leaves.Some kids grab for the treat the second he's out the door,while others wait for the researcher to return.The results are recorded and Science waits for the kids to grow up.By the time the kids reach high school,significant differences appear between the two groups.The kids who held out for two marshmallows were better adjusted,more popular,more adventurous,more confident,and more dependable than kids in the quick gratification group.The latter group was also more likely to be lonely,more easily frustrated,more stubborn,more likely to buckle under stress,and more likely to shy away from challenges.When both groups took scholastic aptitude tests,the "hold out group" walloped the "quick gratification group by 210 points (the test scores range from a minimum of 200 points to a maximum of 800,with an average for all students of 500 points).Did you ever wonder what happened to the smartest kid in the class who didn't end up being successful,or why some of your friends survive the greatest trauma while others crumble over minor issues?Perhaps it is because of differences in a person's EQ.EQ is not the opposite of IQ,and indeed it is hoped that people have generous quantities of both.But,there is little doubt that people without sufficient EQ will have a hard time surviving in life.For five generations researchers have been discussing whether it's possible to raise a person's IQ.Geneticists say No,while social scientists say Yes.But while brain power researchers continue the debate,social science researchers have concluded that it's possible to improve a person's EQ,and in particular,a person's "people skills," such as empathy,graciousness,and the ability to "read" a social situation.Social scientists continually cite situations where experiences have modified a person's EQ.For example,educational researchers indicate that when normal students are introduced to disabled peers,those in the former group dramatically improve their ability to become empathetic and gracious.Additionally,the introduction of behaviourally disturbed students in a class of normal aged peers increases the ability of the latter group to learn to "read" social situations.A more profound improvement is frequently noted in the behaviourally disturbed student as well.Social scientists conclude that EQ is perhaps best observed in people described as either pessimists or optimists.Optimists have high EQ and treat obstacles as minor,while the pessimistic low-EQ group personalizes all setbacks.In social research circles,high EQ denotes one's ability to survive,and it's here that there may be an overlap between EQ,IQ,genetics and environment.In this regard,I am reminded of the words of Darwin,"The biggest,the smartest,and the strongest are not the survivors.Rather,the survivors are the most adaptable." Those of us who survive and thrive in this complex world are not only the most adaptable,but also the most optimistic and the most likely to have a high EQ.