Measurement of ability emotional intelligence: Results for two new tests

Emotional intelligence (EI) has attracted considerable interest amongst both individual differences researchers and those in other areas of psychology who are interested in how EI relates to criteria such as well‐being and career success. Both trait (self‐report) and ability EI measures have been developed; the focus of this paper is on ability EI. The associations of two new ability EI tests with psychometric intelligence, emotion perception, and the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso EI test (MSCEIT) were examined. The new EI tests were the Situational Test of Emotion Management (STEM) and the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding (STEU). Only the STEU and the MSCEIT Understanding Emotions branch were significantly correlated with psychometric intelligence, suggesting that only understanding emotions can be regarded as a candidate new intelligence component. These understanding emotions tests were also positively correlated with emotion perception tests, and STEM and STEU scores were positively correlated with MSCEIT total score and most branch scores. Neither the STEM nor the STEU were significantly correlated with trait EI tests, confirming the distinctness of trait and ability EI. Taking the present results as a starting‐point, approaches to the development of new ability EI tests and models of EI are suggested.     

Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0

Does a recently introduced ability scale adequately measure emotional intelligence (EI) skills? Using the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, & D. R. Caruso, 2002b), the authors examined (a) whether members of a general standardization sample and emotions experts identified the same test answers as correct, (b) the test's reliability, and (c) the possible factor structures of EI. Twenty-one emotions experts endorsed many of the same answers, as did 2,112 members of the standardization sample, and exhibited superior agreement, particularly when research provides clearer answers to test questions (e.g., emotional perception in faces). The MSCEIT achieved reasonable reliability, and confirmatory factor analysis supported theoretical models of EI. These findings help clarify issues raised in earlier articles published in Emotion.     

Revisiting the predictive validity of emotional intelligence: self-report versus ability-based measures

In response to general press assertions that training emotionally intelligent children will lead to great rewards, this study examined the relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and academic achievement in college students, using both self-report and ability-based measures of EI. Specifically, the Mayer, Salovey, Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT, an ability-based measure) and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i, a self-report measure) were used to predict academic achievement. Achievement was operationalized as the respondents’ cumulative GPA. Results indicated that EI is not a strong predictor of academic achievement regardless of the type of instrument used to measure it. However, a construct validity examination revealed that the MSCEIT correlated highly with indices of cognitive ability but minimally with personality dimensions. In contrast, the EQ-i failed to correlate with indices of cognitive ability but correlated substantially with numerous personality dimensions.     

A magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H MRS) investigation into brain metabolite correlates of ability emotional intelligence

The neurobiological basis of Emotional Intelligence (EI), which relates to our cognitive capacity to deal with emotions, is yet to be firmly established; although the amygdala and the dlPFC have been identified as two key brain regions required for emotional understanding and management. While proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (¹H MRS) has previously been used to examine the in vivo neurochemical processes associated with psychiatric disorders, personality and general intelligence, this technique is yet to be applied to the construct of EI. In the current study, associations between the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT V2.0), the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) and N-acetylaspartate (NAA) and Choline (Cho) concentrations in the amygdala and dlPFC were investigated in thirty healthy participants (15 males with a mean age of 24.9 ± 2.7 years; 15 females with a mean age of 25.2 ± 4.5 years). A significant association between left dlPFC Cho concentrations and MSCEIT Managing Emotions was found, together with a significant association between left Amygdala Cho concentration and MSCEIT Understanding Emotions. In contrast, NAA resonance was found to be unrelated to ability EI in these regions. Possible interpretations of increased Cho resonance in association with ability EI are discussed, including increased myelin turnover in the amygdala and dlPFC which contributes to enhanced emotional processing.     

Emotional intelligence in incarcerated men with psychopathic traits

The expression, recognition, and communication of emotional states are ubiquitous features of the human social world. Emotional intelligence (EI) is defined as the ability to perceive, manage, and reason about emotions, in oneself and others. Individuals with psychopathy have numerous difficulties in social interaction and show impairment on some emotional tasks. Here, the authors investigate the relation between EI and psychopathy in a sample of incarcerated men (N = 374), using the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) and the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002). The MSCEIT is a well-validated ability-based EI measure that does not rely on self-report judgments of emotional skills. The Hare PCL-R is the gold standard for the assessment of psychopathy in clinical populations. Controlling for general intelligence, psychopathy was associated with lower EI. These findings suggest individuals with psychopathy are impaired on a range of EI abilities and that EI is an important area for understanding deficits in psychopathy.     

Emotional Intelligence: An Opportunity for Occupational Therapy

Emotional intelligence theory developed within the psychology and business fields and is described as an ability to monitor emotions and to use the information to guide thinking and problem solving. Emotional intelligence skills are needed by occupational therapy practitioners to support therapeutic use of self, promote client-centered care, and foster communication skills within the workplace. A scenario illustrates how emotional intelligence supports the therapeutic use of self during a clinical interaction. The Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test is introduced as a resource for occupational therapy practitioners to measure and develop therapeutic relationship skills based upon emotional intelligence research.     

The assessment of emotional intelligence: a comparison of performance-based and self-report methodologies

We assessed the patterns of convergent validity for the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002), a performance-based measure of emotional intelligence (EI) that entails presenting problems thought to have correct responses, and a self-report measure of EI (Schutte et al., 1998). The relations between EI and demographic characteristics of a diverse community sample (N = 223) concurred with previous research. However, the performance-based and self-report scales were not related to one another. Only self-reported EI scores showed a consistent pattern of relations with self-reported coping styles and depressive affect, whereas the performance-based measure demonstrated stronger relations with age, education, and receiving psychotherapy. We discuss implications for the validity of these measures and their utility.     

World Crisis and the Changing Policies of Peace and Patriotic Societies

Abstract

Emotional intelligence is an increasingly popular consulting tool. According to popular opinion and work-place testimonials, emotional intelligence increases performance and productivity; however, there has been a general lack of independent, systematic analysis substantiating that claim. The authors investigated whether emotional intelligence would account for increases in individual cognitive-based performance over and above the level attributable to traditional general intelligence. The authors measured emotional intelligence with the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS; J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, & D. R. Caruso, 1997). As measured by the MEIS, overall emotional intelligence is a composite of the 3 distinct emotional reasoning abilities: perceiving, understanding, and regulating emotions (J. D. Mayer & P. Salovey, 1997). Although further psychometric analysis of the MEIS is warranted, the authors found that overall emotional intelligence, emotional perception, and emotional regulation uniquely explained individual cognitive-based performance over and beyond the level attributable to general intelligence.     

Psychometrics of Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) scores

A sample of 183 medical students completed the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT V2.0). Scores on the test were examined for evidence of reliability and factorial validity. Although Cronbach's alpha for the total scores was adequate (.79), many of the scales had low internal consistency (scale alphas ranged from .34 to .77; median = .48). Previous factor analyses of the MSCEIT are critiqued and the rationale for the current analysis is presented. Both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of the MSCEIT item parcels are reported. Pictures and faces items formed separate factors rather than loading on a Perception factor. Emotional Management appeared as a factor, but items from Blends and Facilitation failed to load consistently on any factor, rendering factors for Emotional Understanding and Emotional Facilitation problematic.     

Confirming the Factor Structure of the 41-Item Version of the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale

The main aim of this study was to investigate the factor structure of the 41-item version of the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale within a South African nursing environment. An availability non-probability sample (N =290) of nurses from hospitals in the North-West and Gauteng Provinces of South Africa were taken. Participants completed the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEIS). The data were analysed by employing Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) via AMOS. The data fitted the original model of Emotional Intelligence of Salovey and Mayer (1990), best explaining 58.52% of the variance. The results supported a five-factor structure of the SEIS. The five factors were named: Emotion Utilisation; Emotion Management; Emotion Awareness; Emotion Perceiving and Emotion Integration.     

Is emotional intelligence an advantage? An exploration of the impact of emotional and general intelligence on individual performance

Emotional intelligence is an increasingly popular consulting tool. According to popular opinion and work-place testimonials, emotional intelligence increases performance and productivity; however, there has been a general lack of independent, systematic analysis substantiating that claim. The authors investigated whether emotional intelligence would account for increases in individual cognitive-based performance over and above the level attributable to traditional general intelligence. The authors measured emotional intelligence with the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS; J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, & D. R. Caruso, 1997). As measured by the MEIS, overall emotional intelligence is a composite of the 3 distinct emotional reasoning abilities: perceiving, understanding, and regulating emotions (J. D. Mayer & P. Salovey, 1997). Although further psychometric analysis of the MEIS is warranted, the authors found that overall emotional intelligence, emotional perception, and emotional regulation uniquely explained individual cognitive-based performance over and beyond the level attributable to general intelligence.     

Relating emotional abilities to social functioning: a comparison of self-report and performance measures of emotional intelligence

Three studies used J. D. Mayer and P. Salovey's (1997) theory of emotional intelligence (EI) as a framework to examine the role of emotional abilities (assessed with both self-report and performance measures) in social functioning. Self-ratings were assessed in ways that mapped onto the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), a validated performance measure of EI. In Study 1, self-ratings and MSCEIT scores were not strongly correlated. In Study 2, men's MSCEIT scores, but not self-ratings, correlated with perceived social competence after personality measures were held constant. In Study 3, only the MSCEIT predicted real-time social competence, again, just for men. Implications for analyzing how emotional abilities contribute to social behavior are discussed, as is the importance of incorporating gender into theoretical frameworks and study designs.     

Factor structure, measurement invariance and structural invariance of the MSCEIT V2.0

This study explored factor structure and measurement and structural invariance of the MSCEIT V2.0 across two age groups: 258 young (18-31 years) and 262 older adults (32-79 years). Results supported a three-factor solution reflecting the Experiential Emotional Intelligence area, and Understanding Emotions and Managing Emotions branches. There was evidence of measurement invariance of factor structure and factor loadings, and partial support for invariance of the intercepts. Comparisons of latent factor means suggested that older adults have significantly higher mean scores on two of the three factors: Understanding and Managing Emotions. Implications of the invariance tests and latent means analyses are discussed.     

Emotional Intelligence in Personnel Selection: Applicant reactions,criterion, and incremental validity

In two studies, based on four samples and more than 600 participants, the authors examined applicant reactions, criterion and incremental validity, and differential prediction of emotional intelligence (EI) in personnel selection using the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test. The first study examined applicant reactions in terms of face validity and fairness evaluation of the EI test. The second study examined across three samples (salespeople, front‐desk public employees, and hospital chief executive officers) the criterion validity, incremental validity, and differential prediction of EI. Results suggest that the EI test is perceived as a fair selection tool, and is predictive of performance. The EI test has incremental validity over cognitive abilities and personality (big five) when predicting subjective and objective performance criteria. Based on these results, the authors encourage further research on the use of EI in selection settings.     

The ability model of emotional intelligence: Searching for valid measures

Current measures of ability emotional intelligence (EI) – in particular the well-known Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) – suffer from several limitations, including low discriminant validity and questionable construct and incremental validity. We show that the MSCEIT is largely predicted by personality dimensions, general intelligence, and demographics having multiple R’s with the MSCEIT branches up to .66; for the general EI factor this relation was even stronger (Multiple R = .76). As concerns the factor structure of the MSCEIT, we found support for four first-order factors, which had differential relations with personality, but no support for a higher-order global EI factor. We discuss implications for employing the MSCEIT, including (a) using the single branches scores rather than the total score, (b) controlling for personality and general intelligence to ensure unbiased parameter estimates in the EI factors, and (c) accounting for measurement error. Failure to correctly model these methodological aspects may severely compromise predictive validity testing. We also discuss potential avenues for the improvement of ability-based tests.     

Exploring the validity of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) with established emotions measures

Emotions measures represent an important means of obtaining construct validity evidence for emotional intelligence (EI) tests because they have the same theoretical underpinnings. Additionally, the extent to which both emotions and EI measures relate to intelligence is poorly understood. The current study was designed to address these issues. Participants (N = 138) completed the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), two emotions measures, as well as four intelligence tests. Results provide mixed support for the model hypothesized to underlie the MSCEIT, with emotions research and EI measures failing to load on the same factor. The emotions measures loaded on the same factor as intelligence measures. The validity of certain EI components (in particular, Emotion Perception), as currently assessed, appears equivocal.     

Evaluating the MSCEIT V2.0 via CFA: comment on Mayer et al. (2003)

This investigation uncovered several substantial errors in the confirmatory factor analysis results reported by J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, D. R. Caruso, and G. Sitarenios (see record 2003-02341-015). Specifically, the values associated with the close-fit indices (normed fit index, Tucker-Lewis Index, and root-mean-square error of approximation) are inaccurate. A reanalysis of the Mayer et al. subscale intercorrelation matrix provided accurate values of the close-fit indices, which resulted in different evaluations of the models tested by J. D. Mayer et al. Contrary to J. D. Mayer et al., the 1-factor model and the 2-factor model did not provide good fit. Although the 4-factor model was still considered good fitting, the non-constrained 4-factor model yielded a non-positive definite matrix, which was interpreted to be due to the fact that two of the branch-level factors (Perceiving and Facilitating) were collinear, suggesting that a model with 4 factors was implausible.     

Relation of an Ability Measure of Emotional Intelligence to Personality

Is emotional intelligence simply a naive theory of personality, or is it a form of intelligence? If emotional intelligence is to be of value, it must measure something unique and distinct from standard personality traits. To explore this question, this study examined an ability test of emotional intelligence and its relationship to personality test variables to determine the extent to which these constructs overlap. A sample of 183 men and women took the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999), an ability measure of emotional intelligence as well as measures of career interests, personality, and social behavior. Emotional intelligence was measured reliably and was relatively independent of traditionally defined personality traits, supporting the discriminant validity of the emotional intelligence construct.     

Positive emotions, emotional intelligence, and successful experiential learning

This study explored the role that positive emotions and emotional intelligence play in experiential learning. Students’ field practicum journals were analyzed using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count Program (LIWC) and a measure of emotional intelligence was obtained using the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Positive emotion words were robustly associated with almost all dimensions of supervisors’ ratings of students’ performance, but showed weak associations with students’ ratings of perceived benefits associated with their practicum experiences. Overall EI scores were correlated with several of the supervisor rating items and the Facilitating Thought and Managing Emotions subscales of the EI were robustly correlated with many of the student rating items. This study thus yielded a more differentiated view of the role of positive emotions and emotional intelligence in adaptive functioning and underscored the importance of using multiple informants to assess a complex construct such as successful experiential learning.