Mapping Emotional Intelligence and Psychological Capital Research: A Bibliometric Analysis and Future Research Agenda

Abstract

This study explores the scholarly literature on emotional intelligence (EI) and psychological capital (PsyCap) using a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to map the research landscape and propose future directions. Data was collected from the Scopus database using specific search queries related to EI and PsyCap, with inclusion and exclusion criteria established to refine the dataset. A total of 39 articles published between 2007 and 2023 were selected for analysis. Utilizing bibliometric techniques through VOSviewer, patterns of citation and collaboration within the field were quantified, capturing descriptive statistics related to citation data and performing network analysis on authors, countries, publications, citations, and keywords. Key documents, sources, authors, organizations, and countries contributing to the discourse on PsyCap and EI were identified, providing insights into the evolution and trends within this field. The analysis revealed longitudinal trends in research output and explored the intersectionality of EI and PsyCap with other individual differences and personality traits. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of knowledge growth in positive organizational psychology, informing evidence-based practices, and guiding future research endeavors.

1. Introduction

Emotional intelligence (EI) refers to the ability to recognize, understand, and manage one’s own emotions as well as those of others, effectively navigating interpersonal relationships and adapting to various social situations [1,2]. On the other hand, psychological capital (PsyCap) encompasses an individual’s positive psychological resources, including hope, resilience, optimism, and self-efficacy, which are crucial for personal well-being and performance outcomes in both work and non-work settings [3,4]. Both EI and PsyCap have garnered considerable attention in research and practice due to their profound implications for individual and organizational outcomes. In research, studies have examined the impact of EI and PsyCap on various outcomes such as job performance [5], leadership effectiveness [6], employee engagement [7], job satisfaction [8], and overall well-being [9,10]. Recent studies have highlighted the role of EI and PsyCap in enhancing adaptive coping strategies [11], stress management, and resilience [12] in challenging work environments [3,13]. Moreover, both constructs have been linked to important organizational outcomes such as organizational commitment [14,15], innovation [16], and overall organizational effectiveness [17,18]. In practice, EI and PsyCap have gained recognition as critical competencies for effective leadership [19], work engagement and talent development [20], and organizational success [21]. Organizations are increasingly incorporating EI and PsyCap development programs into their training and development initiatives to foster a positive work environment, enhance employee well-being [22], and improve overall organizational performance [23]. In practice, practitioners are leveraging EI and PsyCap assessments and interventions to enhance individual and team effectiveness [24], improve interpersonal dynamics [25], and drive organizational change initiatives [26]. Despite the growing interest in EI and PsyCap and their implications for individual and organizational outcomes, there remains a need for a comprehensive understanding of the research landscape surrounding these constructs. The existing literature has focused primarily on empirical studies examining the relationships between EI, PsyCap [27], and various outcomes [28], with limited attention given to synthesizing and mapping the broader research domain. Consequently, there is a gap in knowledge regarding the overall structure, trends, and emerging research directions within the scope of EI and PsyCap. To address this gap, the present study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis to map the research landscape of EI and PsyCap comprehensively. Specifically, the study seeks to identify key research trends, influential publications, prolific authors, collaborative networks, and emerging research themes within the field. With a bibliometric analysis, the study aims to provide valuable insights into the current state of research on EI and PsyCap, as well as to identify future research directions and opportunities for further exploration. Hence, in this investigation, we have undertaken a bibliometric analysis to address the following questions:

• How has research output on EI and PsyCap evolved over time, and are there noticeable trends in contemporary research?
• What relationships exist between publications in the field of EI and PsyCap based on co-citation patterns, and are there identifiable clusters of related research within this domain?
• What are the common keywords or terms that co-occur in publications related to EI and PsyCap, and what emerging trends or topics can be identified based on this analysis?
• How are publications related to EI and PsyCap cited within the literature, and what are the most influential works and authors based on citation counts?
• What are the collaboration patterns among countries, organizations, and authors in the field of EI and PsyCap research, and who are the key contributors driving collaborations and advancements in this area?
• Who are the most prolific authors in the field of EI and PsyCap research, what are their main contributions to the literature, and are there any patterns or themes in their research output?

2. Bibliometric Analysis in EI and PsyCap

Conducting a bibliometric analysis is essential for mapping the research landscape and identifying future research directions in the field of EI and PsyCap for several reasons. Firstly, bibliometric analysis allows for a systematic examination of the scholarly literature, enabling researchers to identify key research trends, influential publications, and prolific authors within the fields [29,30]. By synthesizing and visualizing the existing literature, researchers can gain a comprehensive understanding of the current state of research on EI and PsyCap, as well as identify gaps and areas requiring further exploration [31]. Secondly, bibliometric analysis facilitates the identification of collaborative networks and research clusters within the field [30]. By analyzing co-authorship patterns and co-citation networks, researchers can uncover important collaborations among scholars, identify research communities, and understand the flow of ideas within the field of EI and PsyCap. This information is invaluable for fostering collaboration, interdisciplinary research, and knowledge exchange among researchers. Furthermore, bibliometric analysis enables researchers to identify emerging research themes and topics within the field of EI and PsyCap [29]. By analyzing keyword co-occurrence patterns and publication trends over time, researchers can identify new areas of interest, emerging theoretical frameworks, and methodological approaches that warrant further investigation. This information is crucial for guiding future research agendas and directing resources toward areas of greatest need and potential impact. Overall, conducting a bibliometric analysis is instrumental in providing researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with valuable insights into the research landscape of EI and PsyCap, as well as identifying future research directions and opportunities for advancing knowledge in this important area of study.

3. Materials and Methods

Bibliometric analysis, a robust method for systematically analyzing the scholarly literature and quantifying patterns of citation and collaboration within a specific research domain [32,33], served as the cornerstone of this study. Bibliometric analysis involves the quantitative examination of existing academic studies within a specific subject area [29,34,35]. It captures descriptive statistics related to citation data and performs network analysis on authors, countries, publications, citations, abstracts, and keywords based on citation and frequency analysis methods [31,36]. In this study, bibliometric analysis was employed to map the landscape of research on PsyCap [37] and EI [38], aiming to identify key documents, sources, authors, organizations, and countries contributing to the discourse on PsyCap and EI, thereby providing insights into the evolution and trends within this field [29]. This method enabled a thorough analysis of existing academic studies, deepening understanding of knowledge growth, and providing a rich foundation for suggestions for further research by identifying publication trends, authorship patterns, and conducting network analysis as well as clustering existing studies [39]. This research was registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/, accessed on 1 March 2024), which is a tool that promotes open, centralized workflows by enabling capture of different aspects and products of the research lifecycle, including developing a research idea, designing a study, storing and analyzing collected data, and writing and publishing reports or papers. The registration link (https://osf.io/2kgv3/, accessed on 1 March 2024) is reported in the section.

3.1. Data Collection

The primary data source for this study was the Scopus database, chosen for its extensive coverage of the peer-reviewed literature across diverse disciplines [39]. The selection of Scopus was based on its credibility and comprehensive nature, making it an ideal repository for bibliometric exploration [34]. The search strategy involved the formulation of specific search queries or keywords derived from scholarly articles related to EI and PsyCap. The finalized keywords or search queries included terms such as “Emotional Intelligence” OR “EI” OR “EQ” AND “Psychological Capital” OR “PsyCap”.

3.2. Data Extraction

During the data extraction phase, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established to refine the dataset and ensure the relevance of the retrieved documents [29,34,40]. The search parameters were restricted to titles, abstracts, and keywords, encompassing various document types such as articles, books, book chapters, and conference papers. Documents were included if they met the predefined search criteria and directly addressed the concepts of EI and PsyCap, or their related constructs, such as emotional regulation, resilience, optimism, self-efficacy, and positive psychological states. Articles were excluded if they did not directly relate to EI and PsyCap, or primarily focused on constructs other than EI or PsyCap.

A methodological flowchart (see Figure 1) delineates the clear and logical steps followed to ensure methodological rigor. No delimitations were imposed in this regard. Consequently, a total of 60 articles published between 2007 and 2023 were compiled and exported in CSV format, compatible with the VOSviewer software, which is a versatile software tool designed for creating maps based on network data and facilitating their visualization and exploration. It further employs advanced algorithms to construct and visualize networks, utilizing techniques such as network clustering and layout optimization to reveal patterns and relationships within the data [40,41]. Subsequent screening led to the exclusion of 20 articles deemed irrelevant, along with 1 article not in English, resulting in the selection of 39 articles for bibliometric analysis. The bibliographic details of chosen articles were saved in CSV format, encompassing authors’ names, paper titles, affiliations, keywords, publication sources, references, citations, and various other data points.

4. Results

The findings entail an evaluation of the literature on EI and PsyCap through citation methods, followed by a scientific mapping analysis utilizing VOSviewer’s citation, co-citation, co-authorship, keyword occurrence, publication evolution, and prolific authors analysis techniques. The search was conducted in January 2024, resulting in the identification of 39 publications that met the specified inclusion and exclusion criteria outlined by the authors (as shown in Figure 1).

4.1. Evolution of Research Output on EI and PsyCap

A comprehensive analysis of scholarly publications in the field offers insights into the evolution of research output on EI and PsyCap over time as presented in Figure 2 below. The analysis covered publication trends from 2007 to 2023, revealing a notable evolution in research output. The data illustrates a clear upward trajectory in the number of publications, indicating a rising interest and acknowledgment of the significance of these constructs within organizational psychology and management [43,44]. Notably, the inclusion of a single publication in 2007 marked an early recognition of EI and PsyCap as relevant research subjects, followed by a gradual but consistent increase in publications in subsequent years. A substantial surge in publications was observed in 2020 and 2021, indicating heightened scholarly activity in this domain, with the pinnacle of growth evident in 2022 and 2023. This comprehensive examination of publication trends offers valuable insights into the evolving scholarly discourse surrounding EI and PsyCap, emphasizing their increasing importance in comprehending human behavior, workplace dynamics, and organizational outcomes.

4.2. Contemporary Research Topics

Additionally, the analysis identified several noteworthy contemporary research topics within the field of EI and PsyCap. Notable themes include the exploration of the mediating effects of PsyCap on job burnout and job performance [45], as well as the moderating role of EI in disruptive leadership and innovative behavior among new generation employees in China [46]. Furthermore, there is a growing focus on developing PsyCap and EI among higher education students, particularly in the economics and management disciplines [47]. Additionally, research has investigated factors influencing the work readiness of graduates and the impact of knowledge sharing and interpersonal trust on PsyCap and EI in higher educational institutions in India [48,49]. This analysis highlights the evolving nature of research output on EI and PsyCap, with a noticeable increase in scholarly activity over the years. Moreover, contemporary research topics reflect a diverse array of interests, ranging from understanding the mechanisms underlying employee well-being to exploring the role of EI in various organizational contexts. This comprehensive examination provides valuable insights into the trajectory of research on EI and PsyCap, as well as emerging trends shaping the field.

4.3. Analysis of Co-Citation Patterns among Publications in the Field of EI and PsyCap

4.3.1. Co-Citation of Cited References

The co-citation examination performed on the referenced sources within the EI and PsyCap literature provided significant insights into the connections among influential studies and thematic clusters within the discipline. Figure 3 indicates the co-citation analysis conducted on the cited references within the literature on EI and PsyCap revealed 15 references that met the minimum threshold of at least 4 citations each. Among these, Luthans et al. [4] emerged as the most cited reference with 10 citations and a total link strength of 27, indicating its significant influence within the field. Other notable references include Goleman [50], Goleman [51], Avey et al. [13], Schaufeli et al. [52], and Wong and Law [53].

4.3.2. Clustering of Cited References

These references were grouped into three distinct clusters based on their co-citation patterns, highlighting different thematic groupings or shared research interests within the literature as seen in Figure 3 above and in

Table 1. Clusters (cited authors).

Cluster	Source
1 (Red)	Bandura [54], Goleman [51], and Luthans et al. [55], Luthans [56], Snyders [57]
2 (Green)	Goleman [50], Luthans et al. [56], Luthans [3], O’Connor et al. [58], Petrides et al. [59]
3 (Blue)	Avey et al. [13], Luthans et al. [55], Salovey and Mayer [60], Schaufeli et al. [61], Wong and Law [53]

below. These clusters yielded valuable insights into the connections among the cited references and their thematic foci, shedding light on the evolving discourse and research directions within the realm of EI and PsyCap.

4.3.3. Co-Citations of Cited Sources

In terms of the co-citation analysis as shown in

Table 2. Co-citation of sources.

Rank	Source	Citations	Ranking Index	Total Link Strength
1	Journal of Applied Psychology	56	6.13	774
2	Personality and Individual Differences	52	1.463	479
3	Journal of Organizational Behavior	34	3.804	469
4	American Psychologist	34	3.363	259
5	Frontiers in Psychology	32	0.891	325
6	Journal of Management	30	4.492	456
7	Academy of Management Journal	27	10.91	437
8	The Leadership Quarterly	25	4.331	470
9	Journal of Personality and Social Psychology	23	3.799	509
10	Personnel Psychology	23	3.749	342

, it revealed 10 sources that met the threshold of a minimum of 23 citations each within the literature on EI and PsyCap. These sources represent influential works in the field, with the Journal of Applied Psychology leading with 56 citations and a total link strength of 774. Following closely are Personality and Individual Differences with 52 citations and a total link strength of 479, and Journal of Organizational Behavior with 34 citations and a total link strength of 456 as shown in Table 2. Other notable sources include American Psychologist, Frontiers in Psychology, Journal of Management, Academy of Management Journal, The Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, and Personnel Psychology.

4.3.4. Clustering of Cited Sources

Clusters were formed based on the co-citation patterns among the identified sources, revealing distinct groupings of related research within the literature on EI and PsyCap (Figure 4). Cluster 1 (red) includes American Psychologist, Frontiers in Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, and Personality and Individual Differences. These sources are likely interconnected in terms of their thematic content or shared research interests within the field. Cluster 2 (green) comprises Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and The Leadership Quarterly. This cluster indicates another set of interconnected sources, possibly focusing on different aspects or perspectives related to EI and PsyCap. The clustering analysis provides insights into the network of relationships among the co-cited sources, highlighting potential research communities or thematic areas within the literature on EI and PsyCap and showcasing the diversity of research perspectives and approaches within the field.

4.3.5. Co-Citations of Authors

As shown in

Table 3. Ranking of authors based on publications, citations, and total link strength in EI and PsyCap research.

Rank	Author	No. of Documents	Citations	Total Link Strength
1	Luthans F.	34	181	2888
2	Avey J.B.	26	60	1294
3	Avolio B.J.	29	55	1210
4	Salovey P.	25	55	1128
5	Youssef C.M.	26	44	1049
6	Mayer J.D.	25	49	1021
7	Bakker A.B.	14	44	894
8	Schaufeli W.B.	11	29	641
9	Goleman D.	20	34	628
10	Petrides K.V.	13	28	333

, the co-citation analysis conducted with a focus on cited authors identified 14 authors who met the threshold of a minimum of 23 citations each. Among these authors, the highest total link strength was observed for Fred Luthans, with 181 citations and a total link strength of 2888. Other notable authors with significant link strength include Avey J.B. (60 citations; 1294 total link strength), Avolio B.J. (55 citations; 1210 total link strength), and Salovey P. (55 citations; 1128 total link strength). These findings suggest that these authors are frequently cited together in the literature, indicating potential associations or collaborations in the field of study.

4.3.6. Clustering of Co-Cited Authors

The authors were further grouped into two clusters based on their co-citation patterns. Cluster 1 (red) includes authors such as Bakker A.B., Mayer J.D., Petrides K.V., Salovey P., and Schaufeli W.B., indicating a potential thematic grouping or shared research interests among these authors. Cluster 2 (green) comprises Avey J.B., Avolio B.J., Goleman D., Luthans F., and Youssef C.M. This clustering provides insights into the network of relationships among the cited authors based on their co-citation patterns, highlighting potential research communities or thematic areas within the literature related to EI and PsyCap. The bibliometric analysis provides valuable insights into the underlying reasons and implications behind the identified clusters and themes (as shown in Figure 5).

4.4. Keyword Co-Occurrence Networks

The keyword co-occurrence network analysis conducted on the literature pertaining to EI and PsyCap reveals significant emerging themes. Out of 188 keywords, 29 keywords met the minimum occurrence threshold of 2. “Emotional intelligence” and “psychological capital” emerged as prominent themes, with 30 and 26 occurrences, respectively, showcasing a substantial focus on these constructs in the literature as shown in Figure 6. Additionally, keywords such as “psychological capitals”, “resilience”, and “work engagement” each appeared three times, indicating emerging areas of interest within the field as shown in

Table 4. Thematic clusters of keywords and their significance.

Thematic Clusters	Keywords	Significance
1	Efficacy, hope, mindfulness, optimism, resilience, and well-being.	Reflects a shift towards understanding the importance of positive organizational psychology, highlighting how factors like optimism, resilience, and well-being contribute to individual and organizational success.
2	Keywords related to China, conservation of resource theory, emotion, human, and psychology.	Suggests a growing interest in cross-cultural studies and the role of EI in diverse cultural contexts.
3	Information management, psychological capitals, personnel, human capitals, and work behavior.	Aligns with the broader literature on human resource management and organizational behavior, emphasizing the significance of PsyCap in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors.
4	Keywords related to India, EI, organizational citizenship, and work engagement.	Underscores the interconnectedness of these constructs and their impact on employee performance and organizational outcomes.
5	Keywords such as job performance and perceived organizational support.	Provides insights into their association and shared relevance within the research discourse.
6	Emphasis on knowledge sharing and trust.	Aligns with growing recognition of the importance of social capital and interpersonal relationships in organizational settings.
7	Focus on positive psychological capital and occupational stress.	Reflects increasing attention towards employee well-being and mental health in the workplace.
8	Keywords related to the hospitality industry.	Suggests a specific focus on applying EI and PsyCap concepts in service-oriented sectors.

below. The remaining keywords occurred twice.

The thematic clusters of keywords and their significance provide valuable insights into the evolving trends and research directions within the field [43,44]. These clusters reflect the shifts in focus and emerging areas of interest. For instance, Cluster 1 highlights the importance of positive organizational psychology, emphasizing how factors like optimism, resilience, and well-being contribute to individual and organizational success. Similarly, Cluster 2 suggests a growing interest in cross-cultural studies and the role of EI in diverse cultural contexts. Such insights gleaned from the thematic clusters help delineate the trajectory of research on EI and PsyCap, offering guidance for future investigations.

4.5. Thematic Evolution in Organizational Psychology: Insights from Keywords

The evolution of keywords over time in the literature reflects shifting research interests and emerging trends within the field of organizational psychology. Initially, seminal works by Luthans et al. [55] laid the foundation for understanding PsyCap, which has since garnered increasing attention, particularly in studies examining its influence on organizational citizenship behavior, job burnout [62], and job performance [45]. Subsequent research has delved into the moderating role of emotional intelligence in various contexts, including disruptive leadership, innovative behavior, and work engagement [46,63], highlighting its interplay with PsyCap. Moreover, studies have explored cultural variations in emotional intelligence and PsyCap, with a particular focus on regions like China, India, and Nigeria [49,64,65]. The COVID-19 pandemic has also shaped research inquiries, with investigations into the mediating role of positive psychological capital in occupational stress and resilience [66]. Overall, the evolution of keywords underscores the dynamic nature of organizational psychology research, with a growing emphasis on factors influencing employee well-being, performance, and organizational outcomes across diverse cultural and situational contexts.

4.6. Citation Analysis of EI and PsyCap

4.6.1. Citation of Documents

The bibliographic coupling analysis was conducted on a set of 39 documents related to EI and PsyCap research, as detailed in

Table 5. Citation patterns and trends.

Rank	Documents	Citations	Titles
1	Luthans et al. [55]	1684	Psychological Capital: Developing the Human Competitive Edge
2	Magnano et al. [67]	74	Resilience and emotional intelligence: Which role in achievement motivation
3	Pradhan et al. [62]	54	Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Moderating role of emotional intelligence
4	Gong et al. [45]	50	The Influence of Emotional Intelligence on Job Burnout and Job Performance: Mediating Effect of Psychological Capital
5	Lim and Kim [68]	28	Does Emotional Intelligence of Online Shoppers Affect Their Shopping Behavior? From a Cognitive-Affective-Conative Framework Perspective

. Each document was treated as a unit of analysis, and only those with a minimum of 10 citations were included, resulting in 16 documents meeting the threshold. Notably, Luthans et al. [55] emerged as the most highly cited document, signifying its seminal contribution to the field. Other significant authors within the dataset include Magnano et al. [67], Pradhan et al. [62], Gong et al. [45], and Lim and Kim [68], among others. Surprisingly, none of the 13 selected documents had citation links within the dataset, indicating a lack of direct citation by other documents. This suggests a potential limited impact or connectivity within the scholarly discourse of EI and PsyCap research, at least within the analyzed dataset. Moreover, although the documents were associated with specific clusters based on citation patterns, their absence of citation links within those clusters implies restricted influence. Possible explanations for this lack of citation links include the niche focus of the research, limited visibility or dissemination, or recent publication dates of some documents. Additionally, the dataset used for analysis might not fully capture the broader network of citations beyond the selected documents. Despite the absence of citation links, assigning documents to clusters provides insights into thematic coherence and shared research interests. However, further exploration and validation of these documents’ impact within a broader scholarly context are necessary to understand their significance in EI and PsyCap research comprehensively.

4.6.2. Most Influential Author

The bibliometric analysis of publications related to EI and PsyCap revealed several influential authors based on citation counts. Among the authors whose works met the predefined thresholds for inclusion in the analysis, Fred Luthans, Bruce J. Avolio, and Carolyn M. Youssef emerged as the most influential, with each of their documents garnering an exceptionally high number of citations (1684 each) [55] as illustrated in

Table 6. Citation counts of influential authors.

Author	Documents	Citations
Fred Luthans	1	1684
Bruce J. Avolio	1	1684
Carolyn M. Youssef	1	1684
Paola Magnano	1	74
Giuseppe Craparo	1	74
Anna Paolillo	1	74
Rabindra Kumar Pradhan	1	54
Pratishtha Bhattacharya	1	54
Gong Zhun	1	50
Chen Yuqi	1	50
Wang Yayu	1	50

. Following closely behind were Paola Magnano, Giuseppe Craparo, and Anna Paolillo, with their respective documents receiving 74 citations each [67]. Pratishtha Bhattacharya, and Rabindra Kumar Pradhan also contributed significantly to the literature, with their documents accumulating 54 citations each [67]. Similarly, Zhun Gong, Yuqi Chen, and Yayu Wang received notable recognition, with their documents cited 50 times each [45].

4.6.3. Citation of Cited Sources in EI and PsyCap Research

Based on the analysis of citations on sources with a minimum of one document and 28 citations, six sources met the thresholds. These sources encompassed a variety of topics within the field of EI and PsyCap. Among these sources, “Psychological Capital: Developing the Human Competitive Edge” emerged as the most cited document with 1684 citations. Similarly, the “International Journal of Psychological Research” and “Frontiers in Psychology” each had one document meeting the threshold criteria. “Cogent Business and Management” and “Asia Pacific Business Review” had two documents each meeting the thresholds. Lastly, the “International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction” had one document meeting the threshold criteria. Despite their citation counts, they did not exhibit any total link strength with other sources, indicating their independent influences in the literature. Each of these sources formed its own cluster, suggesting distinct thematic coherence within their respective bodies of literature as shown in

Table 7. Citation count on sources.

Sources	Documents	Citations
Psychological Capital. Developing the Human Competitive Edge	1	1684
International Journal of Psychological Research	1	74
Frontiers in Psychology	2	65
Cogent Business and Management	2	55
Asia Pacific Business Review	1	28
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction	1	28

. These findings provide insights into the diverse landscape of research on EI and PsyCap and highlight the independent influence of seminal works within the field.

4.6.4. Insights into Evolving Scholarly Landscape

The comprehensive evaluation of the literature on EI and PsyCap through citation methods has provided valuable insights into the evolving scholarly landscape in this field. The increasing trend in publications over the years, as depicted in Figure 2, underscores a growing interest and recognition of EI and PsyCap within organizational psychology and management. Notably, the substantial surge in publications in recent years, particularly in 2022 and 2023, suggests heightened scholarly activity and an expanding research focus on understanding the complexities surrounding EI and PsyCap. This trend aligns with findings from Guerrero-Alcedo et al. [43] and Sharma and Tiwari [44], reinforcing the significance of these constructs in contemporary research. Furthermore, the analysis of top-cited documents and influential authors highlights seminal contributions and key contributors to the literature, such as Fred Luthans, Bruce J. Avolio, and Carolyn M. Youssef [55]. These findings not only underscore the foundational works shaping the discourse on EI and PsyCap but also emphasize the ongoing scholarly engagement and collaboration within this domain. Additionally, the identification of thematic clusters and citation patterns provides insights into the interconnectedness and diversity of research contributions, offering valuable directions for future research endeavors. These findings not only contribute to a deeper understanding of the current state of research on EI and PsyCap but also offer implications for advancing knowledge and guiding evidence-based practices in organizational psychology and management.

4.7. Collaboration Patterns and Key Collaborative Relationships among Researchers

4.7.1. Co-Authorship of Countries

The provided bibliometric data offers insights into the co-authorship patterns among countries in the research on EI and PsyCap as 13 countries met the established thresholds. The United States emerges as the leading contributor with the highest number of documents (8) and citations (1746), reflecting its significant involvement and impact in the field. Moreover, the United States also possesses the highest total link strength (5), indicating robust collaborations with other countries. India and the United Kingdom follow closely behind, each with a total link strength of 3, despite differences in document count and citations. India’s relatively low citation count compared to its document count suggests a potential area for further exploration regarding the quality and impact of its research output. Nigeria, Australia, and China also exhibit notable participation, with varying levels of document counts, citations, and total link strength. Notably, African countries such as Nigeria and South Africa made significant contributions to the co-authorship networks, highlighting their involvement in global research despite challenges in research infrastructure and funding [69]. While China has the highest document count (9) among all countries, its relatively low total link strength (1) indicates a potential for further enhancing collaborative efforts in co-authorship networks. South Africa, on the other hand, shows moderate involvement with a total link strength of 0, indicating limited collaboration compared to other countries in the dataset. This analysis highlights the diverse contributions of countries in the field of EI and PsyCap research and underscores the importance of collaboration in advancing knowledge and fostering global partnerships within the scholarly community as illustrated in

Table 8. Co-authorship of countries by total link strength.

Rank	Country	Documents	Citations	Total Link Strength
1	United States	8	1746	5
2	India	8	105	3
3	United Kingdom	4	26	3
4	Thailand	2	8	3
5	Egypt	1	8	3
6	Nigeria	2	24	2
7	Australia	2	29	1
8	China	9	104	1
9	Italy	2	82	1
10	Malaysia	3	9	1
11	South Korea	2	28	1
12	South Africa	3	23	0
13	Portugal	1	22	0

.

Clusters 1 and 2 further exemplify regional or thematic collaborations, with Cluster 2 comprising Australia, Nigeria, and the United Kingdom, and Cluster 1 consisting of China, India, South Korea and the United States. Cluster 3 consists of Italy and Malaysia, while Cluster 4 consists of South Africa. The findings regarding co-authorship networks in research on EI and PsyCap align with previous studies highlighting the importance of international collaboration in advancing knowledge within the field [30]. The robust collaboration observed among countries like the United States, China, and India reflects the global nature of research on EI and PsyCap, enriching scholarly contributions with diverse perspectives and collective efforts. Additionally, moderate collaboration in countries like Nigeria highlights the importance of international partnerships in overcoming research infrastructure and funding challenges. Thematic clusters identified in co-authorship networks further underscore regional or thematic collaborations, emphasizing the interconnectedness of research communities across borders. These findings align with the existing literature on international collaboration in EI and PsyCap research, providing valuable insights into the global landscape of scholarly endeavors in this field.

4.7.2. Co-Authorship of Organizations

The bibliometric analysis of citations, with organizations as the unit of analysis, identified a total of 62 organizations meeting the threshold criteria out of 79 authors examined. Each of these organizations was analyzed for its total strength of citation links with other organizations. Among the selected organizations, the largest set of connected items consisted of eight organizations. Jiangxi Normal University (China) emerged as the organization with the greatest total link strength, with 28 citations and a total link strength of 7, leading to its clustering within Cluster 1. Other notable organizations within Cluster 1 include Shih Chien University (Taiwan) and Tamkang University (Taiwan), both with a total link strength of 6. Similarly, Christ (Deemed to be University) and Xavier University, both from India, each had a total link strength of 5 within Cluster 1. Suez Canal University’s Department of Hotel Management (Egypt) also clustered within Cluster 1, with a total link strength of 3. Jilin University (China), Niccoló Cusano University (Italy), Prince of Songkla University Phuket Campus (Thailand), and Taylor’s University (Malaysia) were among the organizations clustering within Cluster 1, each with a total link strength of 3 or higher. Taylor’s University from Malaysia also formed part of Cluster 2, along with Suez Canal University’s Mental Health Department from Egypt, both with a total link strength of 3 (Figure 7). This analysis highlights the interconnectivity and collaboration among various academic institutions across different countries in contributing to research on EI and PsyCap.

4.7.3. Co-Authorship of Authors

In

Table 9. Co-authorship by articles and citations.

Author	Documents	Citations	Total Link Strength
Parayitam, Satyanarayana	3	26	4
Andiappan, Vignesh Sethu	2	26	4
Usman, Syed Aktharsah	2	26	4
George, Olusoji James	2	24	2
Okon, Samuel Essien	2	24	2
Jena, Lalatendu Kesari	2	61	0

, Parayitam, Satyanarayana emerges as the most influential author within the dataset, showcasing their impact through a combination of document count, citation count, and total link strength. With three documents attributed to their name, Parayitam, Satyanarayana has accrued 26 citations, indicating a significant recognition for their research within the field [49,70,71]. Moreover, their total link strength of 4 suggests extensive collaboration with other authors, further highlighting their influence. For example, George et al.’s [63,72] investigation into the mediating role of EI in the relationship between PsyCap and work engagement provides valuable insights into employee engagement and performance in the Nigerian public sector, further affirming Parayitam, Satyanarayana’s contribution. Jena, Lalatendu Kesari also stands out within the dataset for their substantial citation count of 61, indicating the significant impact of their research within the field of study. Despite having authored two documents [62,73], Jena has accrued a remarkable number of citations, reflecting the recognition and relevance of their contributions to the literature on the subject matter. However, in terms of co-authorship networks, it is important to note that while Jena has a high citation count, their total link strength is reported as 0, suggesting limited collaboration with other authors within the dataset. Despite this, Jena’s considerable citation count underscores their influence and contribution to the body of knowledge in the field of EI and PsyCap.

4.7.4. Key Insights and Overview of Their Main Contributions

Based on the data discussed herein, the collaboration patterns among researchers in the field of EI and PsyCap are multifaceted and dynamic. The analysis of co-authorship networks reveals robust collaborations among countries, organizations, and individual authors, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in this area. Among countries, the United States emerges as a leading collaborator, demonstrating substantial engagement with other countries in co-authorship networks. Notably, countries such as China, India, and various European nations actively contribute to global research endeavors on EI and PsyCap, showcasing the importance of international collaboration. Additionally, thematic clusters identified in co-authorship networks highlight regional or thematic collaborations among countries, underscoring the interconnectedness of research communities across geographical boundaries. At the organizational level, Jiangxi Normal University from China stands out as the organization with the greatest total link strength, indicating extensive collaboration with other organizations. Other notable organizations within collaboration clusters include Shih Chien University and Tamkang University from Taiwan, Christ (Deemed to be University) and Xavier University from India, and Suez Canal University from Egypt, among others.

Regarding individual authors, Parayitam, Satyanarayana emerges as a prominent figure, showcasing considerable influence through a robust combination of document count, citation count, and total link strength. Their research explores various critical aspects of EI and PsyCap, contributing significantly to the scholarly discourse in the field. Similarly, authors such as Andiappan, Vignesh Sethu and Usman, Syed Aktharsah demonstrate strong collaboration and impactful contributions to the literature. Overall, the collaboration patterns among researchers in the field of EI and PsyCap reflect a vibrant and interconnected research community, driven by key researchers who actively collaborate to advance knowledge and understanding in this important area of study.

Based on the data provided, Parayitam, Satyanarayana stands out as a prominent figure in the realm of EI and PsyCap research, showcasing considerable influence through a robust combination of document count, citation count, and total link strength. Their research delves into various critical aspects of EI and PsyCap, exploring topics such as the moderating role of EI and PsyCap in the relationship between employee commitment and work engagement among banking employees in India [70]. Additionally, their work investigates the impact of knowledge sharing and interpersonal trust on PsyCap and EI in higher educational institutions in India, with a specific focus on gender as a moderator.

Furthermore, Parayitam, Satyanarayana’s research examines the effects of EI and PsyCap on knowledge, service, and leadership excellence, highlighting the moderating role of knowledge sharing and trust [71]. Jena, Lalatendu Kesari, although having authored a smaller number of documents, stands out for their remarkably high citation count, indicating the widespread recognition and relevance of their contributions to the field. While their total link strength suggests limited collaboration with other authors within the dataset, Jena’s substantial citation count underscores their individual impact on the literature concerning EI and PsyCap. Their research themes span various topics as illustrated below in

Table 10. Key themes in Parayitam, Satyanarayana and colleagues’ research output.

Key Themes	Descriptions
Moderating Effects	The research explores the moderating influence of EI and PsyCap on various organizational outcomes, such as employee commitment, work engagement, and leadership excellence.
Contextual Application	Parayitam, Satyanarayana’s work demonstrates a focus on real-world contexts, particularly within the banking sector and higher educational institutions in India, indicating a practical approach to understanding EI and PsyCap in specific organizational settings.
Gender Dynamics	A notable theme in their research involves the examination of gender differences in the relationship between knowledge sharing, interpersonal trust, PsyCap, and EI, suggesting an interest in understanding how these constructs operate differently across genders.
Organizational Excellence	The research underscores the importance of EI and PsyCap in fostering organizational excellence, emphasizing their role in enhancing knowledge sharing, service quality, and leadership effectiveness within organizations.
Moderation by Trust	Another recurring theme in Parayitam, Satyanarayana’s work is the moderating role of trust, particularly in the context of knowledge sharing and interpersonal relationships, indicating a nuanced understanding of the mechanisms underlying EI and PsyCap effects.

, including factors influencing work readiness and the effect of knowledge sharing and interpersonal trust on EI and PsyCap in higher educational institutions.

The key themes provided in the table are derived from the analysis of prolific authors, their contributions, and research themes within the field of EI and PsyCap.

4.8. Prolific Authors, Main Contributions and Key Patterns in Their Research Output

The analysis of prolific authors in the field of EI and PsyCap research reveals several noteworthy findings as indicated in

Table 11. Key contributions and themes.

Authors	Main Contributions to the Literature	Key Themes
Luthans et al. [55]	Development of psychological capital.	Thematic trends highlighted the importance of positive organizational psychology, resilience, optimism, and well-being in enhancing organizational effectiveness and fostering a positive work environment.
Magnano et al. [67]	Investigated the role of resilience and emotional intelligence in achievement motivation.	Role of EI and resilience in achievement of motivation.
Pradhan et al. [62]	Moderating role of EI in organizational citizenship behavior.	Mechanisms and practical implications.
Gong et al. [45]	Influence on job burnout and performance.	Interplay between EI, PsyCap, and outcomes.

below. Among the most prolific authors, Fred Luthans, Bruce J. Avolio, and Carolyn M. Youssef stand out with their seminal contributions, each garnering an exceptionally high number of citations [55]. Their works have significantly influenced the scholarly discourse surrounding EI and PsyCap, emphasizing their importance in understanding human behavior and organizational dynamics [43,44]. Their contributions span various aspects of EI and PsyCap, including the development of PsyCap [55], the role of resilience and EI in achievement motivation [67], the moderating role of EI in organizational citizenship behavior [62], and the influence of EI on job burnout and performance [45]. The authors delved into the mechanisms through which EI and PsyCap contribute to individual and organizational success, emphasizing their practical implications for organizational interventions and leadership development. However, while Jena has a high citation count, their total link strength, indicating collaboration with other authors, is reported as zero, suggesting limited collaborative efforts within the dataset. Despite this, Jena’s significant citation count underscores their individual impact on the literature. Prolific authors focused on cross-cultural studies, examining the role of EI in diverse cultural contexts. These studies highlighted the global relevance of EI and PsyCap in multicultural workplaces. Overall, the analysis highlights the influential contributions of prolific authors in advancing knowledge and understanding in the field of EI and PsyCap, contributing to the broader scholarly discourse and shaping research agendas and priorities.

The key contributions and themes table provides a summary of the main contributions of prolific authors in the field of EI and PsyCap research, along with key thematic trends identified in their work. The information presented here is based on the bibliometric analysis and thematic analysis conducted as part of this study. Citation references are provided for further exploration of the literature.

4.9. Insights from Studies on EI and PsyCap

The integration of insights from various scholars sheds light on the intricate relationship between EI and PsyCap, elucidating their interconnectedness in shaping individual and organizational outcomes. From the predictors and ramifications of positive PsyCap among various occupational cohorts, such as Nigerian employees, graduate employees, and rural school teachers, as elucidated by Aderibigbe and Mjoli [74], Aderibigbe et al. [65], Ali Yusuf and Widodo [75], Bhullar et al. [76], Clarence et al. [73], and D’Souza et al. [71], to the nuanced dynamics of emotional and cognitive dimensions influencing anxiety symptoms and innovative behavior, as emphasized by Fei et al. [77], Gao et al. [78], Gallagher et al. [79], and Gomes da Costa et al. [47], the literature underscores the multifaceted nature of EI and PsyCap. Additionally, insights from studies by Hou et al. [46], Jena and Pradhan [64], Liao et al. [80], and Lim and Kim [68] illuminate the pivotal role of EI in shaping leadership dynamics, organizational citizenship behavior, and job performance. Moreover, research by Masole and van Dyk [41], Moorthy et al. [81], and Narayanasami et al. [70] highlight the significance of EI and PsyCap in fostering work engagement, employee performance, and organizational commitment across diverse sectors, including banking and education. Furthermore, contributions by Pradhan et al. [62], Salem et al. [82], and Šimunjak [83] emphasize the mediating and moderating roles of EI and PsyCap in augmenting organizational outcomes, promoting resilience, and facilitating entrepreneurship. The integration of insights from additional studies, such as those by Usman et al. [49], Vanka et al. [84], Vermooten et al. [85], Wuttaphan [86], Xu and Choi [87], and Zhou et al. [88], further enriches our understanding of the multifaceted nature of EI and PsyCap, underscoring their indispensability in elucidating individual and organizational phenomena. These collective findings underscore the need for continued scholarly inquiry and practical applications to optimize personal and professional development strategies, thereby fostering resilience, well-being, and performance across various domains.

Studies by George [72] and George [63] delve into the serial mediation model linking emotional intelligence and work engagement, emphasizing the role of EI in fostering employee commitment and organizational citizenship behavior. Similarly, investigations by Gong et al. [45] and Gutiérrez-Carrasco et al. [89] underscore the mediating effects of psychological capital in the relationship between emotional intelligence and job performance, highlighting the significance of both constructs in enhancing workplace effectiveness. Furthermore, research by Javeed et al. [90] and Javeed et al. [91] explores the impact of novel dimensions of human capital on innovative work behavior, emphasizing the role of emotional intelligence in fostering creativity and adaptability. Additionally, studies by Jing et al. [92], Luthans et al. [55], and Lye et al. [93] highlight the associations between psychological capital, emotional intelligence, and various facets of individual well-being and organizational performance. Moreover, contributions by Magnano et al. [67], Pathak et al. [94], Ravikumar [66], and Sarfaz et al. [7] underscore the moderating and mediating roles of EI and PsyCap in enhancing employee resilience, well-being, and performance, thereby emphasizing their importance in contemporary organizational contexts. These collective findings, along with the additional studies, underscore the indispensability of EI and PsyCap in elucidating individual and organizational phenomena, thereby necessitating continued scholarly inquiry and practical applications to optimize personal and professional development strategies while highlighting their relevance in fostering resilience, well-being, and performance across various domains.

In addition to highlighting the multifaceted nature of EI and PsyCap across various occupational contexts, it is imperative to underscore their broader significance in contemporary organizational settings. EI and PsyCap not only play pivotal roles in shaping individual behaviors and outcomes but also exert substantial influence on organizational culture, performance, and sustainability. By fostering a positive work environment, enhancing interpersonal relationships, and promoting adaptive responses to challenges, EI and PsyCap contribute to the overall effectiveness and resilience of organizations. Furthermore, the integration of EI and PsyCap into leadership development programs, talent management strategies, and employee well-being initiatives can yield substantial benefits, including improved employee engagement, reduced turnover rates, and increased organizational agility. Moreover, in the face of rapidly evolving economic, technological, and social landscapes, the cultivation of EI and PsyCap among organizational members becomes increasingly essential for navigating uncertainties, driving innovation, and maintaining a competitive advantage. Therefore, recognizing and harnessing the importance of EI and PsyCap in organizational contexts can pave the way for sustainable growth, enhanced performance, and greater employee satisfaction.

5. Discussion

This study represented a comprehensive analysis of research output on EI and PsyCap, revealing significant insights into the evolving landscape of research concerning these constructs over time. The discussion emphasizes the evolving scholarly discourse surrounding EI and PsyCap, highlighting their significance in contemporary organizational psychology and management research. The analysis of publication trends depicted a steady growth in publications, reflecting an increasing interest and expanding research efforts in exploring the complexities surrounding EI and PsyCap [43,44]. Notably, a substantial surge in scholarly interest and research output was observed in recent years, particularly in 2022 and 2023, underscoring the growing recognition of the importance of EI and PsyCap in understanding human behavior, workplace dynamics, and organizational outcomes. Moreover, the examination of co-citations, citation patterns, co-authorship networks, and keyword co-occurrence networks provided valuable insights into the interconnectedness of seminal works, collaborative efforts among researchers, and emerging thematic clusters within the literature. Seminal works such as Luthans et al. [55] garnered exceptionally high citation counts, indicating their significant contribution to the field of EI and PsyCap research. Similarly, other notable publications by authors such as Magnano et al. [67], Pradhan et al. [62], and Gong et al. [45] received considerable attention within the literature, as evidenced by their citation frequencies, and their contributions have significantly impacted the scholarly discourse on EI and PsyCap.

Co-citation patterns unveiled thematic clusters representing emerging trends and research priorities within the field, including the exploration of positive organizational psychology [3,95], cross-cultural studies [76,89], and the role of PsyCap [96] in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors. Collaboration patterns among researchers highlighted the importance of international partnerships in advancing research productivity and knowledge dissemination [30,69]. Moreover, the analysis of common keywords and emerging trends provided insights into the evolving research topics and themes, such as the application of EI and PsyCap concepts in service-oriented sectors and the growing attention towards employee well-being and mental health in the workplace [37,38,88]. These findings collectively contribute to advancing research and practice in the field of EI and PsyCap, providing valuable insights for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers.

The evolution of keywords over time in the literature reflects shifting research interests and emerging trends within the field of organizational psychology. Notably, the COVID-19 pandemic has shaped research inquiries, with investigations into the mediating role of positive psychological capital in occupational stress and resilience gaining prominence. These findings highlight the importance of considering contextual factors, such as global events like the COVID-19 pandemic, in shaping research agendas and priorities within the field of EI and PsyCap. Furthermore, the identification of cultural variations in emotional intelligence and PsyCap underscores the need for cross-cultural research to understand the applicability of these constructs across diverse cultural and situational contexts. In addition to exploring the evolving landscape of research on EI and PsyCap, it is imperative to consider the broader implications of EI within the contemporary organizational context, particularly in the realm of leadership [46,71,73,82]. The findings underscore the pivotal role of EI not only as a predictor but also as a moderator in diverse organizational contexts. The studies reviewed highlight how EI interacts with constructs such as PsyCap and disruptive leadership, influencing outcomes such as knowledge sharing, innovation, and a resistance to change. Moreover, EI emerges as a critical factor in shaping effective leadership styles, particularly in the contemporary landscape of Leadership 4.0, where adaptability, empathy, and interpersonal skills are paramount [46,82]. By recognizing the significance of EI in fostering a conducive environment for knowledge exchange, fostering innovation, and managing organizational change, organizations can cultivate a culture of resilience and adaptability essential for navigating today’s dynamic business environment. Furthermore, the findings underscore the need for future research to explore the intricate interplay between EI, leadership styles, and organizational outcomes, providing valuable insights for theory and practice in fostering sustainable organizational success [46,71,73,82]. Overall, this discussion underscores the dynamic nature of research on EI and PsyCap and its implications for understanding and enhancing individual and organizational outcomes.

5.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications

The findings of this study hold several theoretical and practical implications for the field of EI and PsyCap. The identification of seminal works and emerging thematic clusters contributes to the theoretical understanding of EI and PsyCap by highlighting key research trends and priorities. For instance, the emphasis on positive organizational psychology, cross-cultural studies, and the role of PsyCap in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors provides theoretical insights into the underlying mechanisms and processes involved in these constructs. Additionally, the analysis of co-authorship networks underscores the importance of international collaboration in advancing knowledge and fostering global partnerships within the scholarly community, further enriching the theoretical foundations of EI and PsyCap research.

From a practical perspective, the findings offer valuable insights for practitioners and policymakers involved in organizational psychology and management. The growing interest and research output in EI and PsyCap underscore their significance in enhancing individual and organizational outcomes. Practitioners can leverage these insights to design interventions and training programs aimed at developing emotional intelligence and psychological capital among employees, thereby fostering a positive work environment and enhancing organizational effectiveness. Moreover, the identification of influential authors and prolific research themes can guide practitioners in accessing the relevant literature and implementing evidence-based practices in their respective domains. Furthermore, the emphasis on collaborative relationships among researchers highlights the importance of fostering partnerships and knowledge exchange across geographical boundaries, ultimately facilitating the dissemination of best practices and innovations in EI and PsyCap research. Overall, the theoretical and practical implications of this study underscore the dynamic nature of research on EI and PsyCap and its potential to drive positive change in organizational settings.

5.2. Limitations and Future Research Agenda

While this study provides valuable insights into the landscape of research on EI and PsyCap, it is not without limitations. Firstly, the bibliometric analysis conducted in this study relied primarily on publicly available databases, which may not encompass the entire body of literature on EI and PsyCap. The exclusion of certain sources or databases such as Google Scholar and PubMed could have influenced the findings and may limit the generalizability of the results. Additionally, the threshold criteria used for document selection, such as the minimum number of citations, may have inadvertently excluded relevant but less-cited works, potentially biasing the analysis towards highly cited publications. Another limitation is the reliance on VOSviewer quantitative metrics, such as citation counts and co-authorship networks, which may not fully capture the qualitative aspects of research impact or collaboration dynamics. Future studies could complement quantitative analyses with qualitative methods, such as content analysis or interviews with researchers, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the field. Furthermore, the analysis focused primarily on scholarly output and collaboration patterns, overlooking other forms of knowledge dissemination, such as grey literature or practitioner-oriented publications. Future research could explore these alternative sources of information to gain a more holistic view of research trends and their practical implications in organizational contexts.

Despite these limitations, this study offers valuable directions for future research in the field of EI and PsyCap. One potential avenue for future investigation is the exploration of emerging topics or theoretical frameworks that have received limited attention in the existing literature. For example, studies could delve deeper into the intersectionality of EI and PsyCap with other constructs, such as leadership styles or organizational culture, to uncover novel insights into their effects on individual and organizational outcomes. Moreover, longitudinal studies tracking the evolution of research trends over time could provide valuable insights into the dynamics of scholarly discourse and the impact of external factors, such as societal or technological changes, on research priorities. Additionally, comparative studies across different cultural contexts could elucidate the generalizability of findings and inform culturally sensitive interventions aimed at enhancing EI and PsyCap in diverse organizational settings. Future studies pertaining to the keyword co-occurrence networks and thematic clusters within the field of organizational psychology could delve deeper into longitudinal analyses of keyword evolution to track shifting research interests over time, providing nuanced insights into the evolving landscape of organizational psychology and informing future research agendas within thematic clusters.

Lastly, future studies in organizational psychology could explore cross-cultural variations in emotional intelligence and psychological capital, particularly in regions such as China, India, and Nigeria. Additionally, research could investigate the long-term effects of disruptive events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, on employee well-being, resilience, and organizational dynamics. Studies could examine the synergistic effects of interventions targeting both emotional intelligence and psychological capital on organizational outcomes, informing strategies for enhancing employee performance, engagement, and organizational effectiveness.

6. Conclusions

The comprehensive bibliometric analysis of EI and PsyCap research provides valuable insights into the evolving scholarly landscape and research dynamics within this field. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer to examine the landscape of research on EI and PsyCap. A total of 39 articles were retrieved from the Scopus database for analysis, with individual documents, sources, and cited references serving as distinct units of analysis. The article’s approach encompassed various bibliometric measures, including citation counts, total link strength, and co-citation patterns, to characterize research trends and identify gaps in the literature within the field. The results of this analysis revealed several key findings. Firstly, documents authored by Parayitam, Satyanarayana, emerged as the most influential, with a notable number of documents as well as a high total link strength within the scholarly discourse. Notably, the seminal work by Luthans et al. (2007) [55] was highlighted, underscoring its significant influence within the domain of EI and PsyCap research. These findings underscore the global nature of research on EI and PsyCap, emphasizing the importance of international collaboration in advancing knowledge in this domain. Secondly, the authors identified prominent journals such as the Journal of Applied Psychology and Personality and Individual Differences as top contributors to the literature on EI and PsyCap, highlighting the importance of these outlets in disseminating knowledge in this field. Thirdly, the analysis of co-authorship networks among countries showcased active collaborations between countries such as the United States, India, and the United Kingdom, underscoring the global nature of research on EI and PsyCap. Furthermore, the analysis of co-authorship networks among countries revealed active collaborations between regions, with African countries such as Nigeria and South Africa making notable contributions despite challenges in research infrastructure and funding. This underscores the significance of international collaborations in driving progress in this field, particularly in regions with constrained research resources.

Additionally, the evolution of keywords over time in the literature reflects shifting research interests and emerging trends within the field of organizational psychology. Notably, the COVID-19 pandemic has shaped research inquiries, with investigations into the mediating role of positive psychological capital in occupational stress and resilience gaining prominence. These findings highlight the importance of considering contextual factors, such as global events like the COVID-19 pandemic, in shaping research agendas and priorities within the field of EI and PsyCap. Furthermore, the identification of cultural variations in emotional intelligence and PsyCap underscores the need for cross-cultural research to understand the applicability of these constructs across diverse cultural and situational contexts. Overall, the comprehensive bibliometric analysis provides valuable insights into the current state and future directions of research on EI and PsyCap, informing evidence-based practices in organizational psychology and management.

While the study has certain limitations, such as a reliance on quantitative metrics and the exclusion of alternative sources of information, it offers valuable directions for future research, including the exploration of emerging topics, longitudinal studies, and comparative analyses across cultural contexts. By addressing these limitations and pursuing new research avenues, scholars can further advance knowledge and inform evidence-based practices in organizational psychology and management, ultimately contributing to individual and organizational success in diverse contexts.