A construct in
psychology is defined as a tool for a better comprehension of human
behavior. It is a crucial part of psychology, as it allows the classification
of human behavior and cognition in different domains. Constructs in
psychology are tangible and usually unobservable (LeBreton et al.,
2006). Psychological constructs are grouped based on their
characteristics as natural, practical, social, and complex (Fried, 2017).
According to statistical
models, constructs in psychology are latent variables. The
following are the three statistical models of psychological construct:
(a) reflective model, (b) formative model, and (c) network model. The
reflective model based on the view that the observable behavior is due to the
presence of a latent variable and the individual’s status on the latent
variable can be determined by measuring the observable behavior. The formative
model is based on the opposite view of the reflective model; it stated that the
observable indicator regulates the latent variable. According to the network
model, the latent variables and psychological indicators influence each other
and the environment plays a major role in this association (Fried, 2017).
Emotional intelligence
Emotional
intelligence is defined as the ability of an individual to be aware of his own
and other’s feelings and emotions can differentiate among them and is capable
of using this information to guide one’s thinking and behavior. It was emerged
as a chief psychological construct in the early 1990s and conceptualized as a
group of abilities mostly similar to general intelligence. According to the
researches, the individual with high emotional intelligence could accurately
perceive, discriminate, and regulate certain emotions in self and others
(Connor et al., 2019).
The emotional
intelligence pyramid explains that there are nine levels of emotional
intelligence and to acquire the upper-most level the individual has to pass
through other levels. This pyramid begins with emotional stimuli and ends with
emotional unity. The other seven factors emotion recognition, self-awareness,
and self-management, empathy- the discrimination of emotions, expertise in
social skills, self-actualization, and transcendence lies in between them
(Drigas & Papoutsi, 2018).
Characteristics of early measures
In the early
stages, the emotional intelligence test developers were more focused on
emotion-focused questions that could be scored objectively. These tests were
inadequate to differentiate between measures of maximal and typical
performance. Some test developers also used self-report questions instead of
ability based questions. All these factors lead to the proliferation of
emotional intelligence measures. Recently, two popular methods (the difference
between trait and ability emotional intelligence and three “streams” emotional
intelligence) are used to categorize emotional intelligence measures (Connor et
al., 2019).
Classification of emotional intelligence measures
The first method
to classify emotional intelligence measures is the distinction between
emotional intelligence ability and emotional intelligence trait. According to
this method, the ability emotional intelligence test measures the constructs
associated with an individual’s theoretical knowledge of emotions and emotional
functioning, while the trait emotional intelligence tools measure the
self-rated abilities and emotion-relevant circumstances. The tests that are
consisted of self-report questions are labeled as trait emotional intelligence
and the measures that are comprised of maximal performance items are
categorized as ability emotional intelligence (Connor et al.,
2019).
The second
method of classification is three emotional intelligence “stream”. According to
this method, the emotional intelligence measures are divided into three
streams. The first stream involves ability measures, the second stream consists
of self-report measures, and the third stream includes expanded models of
emotional intelligence. The third stream has also been mentioned as mixed
models because they include a fusion of behavioral and personality items. The
test that measures the mixture of traits, social skills, and capabilities that
overlaps with other personality tools is also denoted as mixed models (Connor
et al., 2019).
Ability emotional intelligence
The ability
emotional intelligence tests include questions that are analogous to the items
present in IQ tests. This test tends to measure the maximal ability of an
individual. It focuses on skills rather than traits or typical behavior. These
measures are valid, yet weak, and good predictors of a variety of results, such
as job performance and satisfaction (Connor et al., 2019).
Trait emotional intelligence
The trait
emotional intelligence tests involve self-report questions that tend to measure
the typical behavior instead of maximal ability. An individual with high scores
in the trait emotional intelligence tests is highly capable of regulating and
managing emotions. These measures are good predictors of genuine behaviors in a
variety of scenarios. They are also used for the assessment of work attitudes
(Connor et al., 2019).
Mixed emotional intelligence
The mixed
emotional intelligence tools assess both trait emotional intelligence and
ability emotional intelligence. These tests are the combination of items
related to traits, social skills, and competencies that overlap with other
personality tools. These measures can be used as predictors and for improving
performance in different settings such as the workplace (Connor et.al,
2019).
Emotional intelligence scales
The following
are the general measures of emotional intelligence that also assess the key
aspects which are common emotional intelligence measures i.e. perceiving
emotions, regulating emotions, and utilizing emotions.
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Tests
(MSCEIT)
MSCEIT is an ability-based test
that can be used to measure emotional intelligence across four domains. The
four domains include: (a) ability to perceive emotions, (b) facilitating
thoughts, (c) understanding emotions, and (d) managing emotions. The main
construct to be measure in this test is intrapersonal competencies. This test
applies to the age range of seventeen to adults. This is a Likert-type scale
and comprised of 141 questions.
This test can be performed digitally and traditionally
(paper-pencil) and take about thirty to forty-five minutes. It is available in
more than twenty languages and requires qualification level B for
administration. The test is scored through a scoring service after that, scores
are normed and scaled for comparison. The score is presented as an overall
score report and sub-score report as area score, branch score, and individual
task score.
The evidence for reliability and validity was collected
by administrating tests on 2,122 respondents (18+). The overall reliability
(split-half coefficients) was more than 0.90. The internal consistency
reliability of the four subdivisions ranged from 0.76 to 0.91 (Mayer et al.,
2003). The test-retest reliability for the overall test was reported as 0.86
(Brackett & Mayer, 2001).
According to the evidence-based
content, this test had been developed and refined based on more than a year of
study and research on emotional intelligence (Mayor, Salovery, & Caruso,
2004). According to the prove based on the relationship with other variables
MSCEIT scores and scores on the Big Five personality test showed the
individuals who scored high on this test were more likely to be agreeable (r =
0.21), open (r = 0.17), and conscientious (r = 0.11). Also, those individuals
who scored high on the branch of using emotions were more likely to select an
adaptive defense mechanism (Mayer et al., 2004). However, this test showed poor
validity across different cultures (Karim & Weisz, 2010).
The Schutte Self Report Emotional Intelligence Test
(SSEIT)
The Schutte Self Report Emotional
Intelligence Test is based on the Salovey and Mayer (1990) model of emotional
intelligence. The questions in this test measure the three domains of emotional
intelligence. The following are the four domains: (a) appraisal and expression
of emotion, (b) regulation of emotions, (c) utilization of emotions, and (d)
social skills. This test is a self-report inventory consisted of thirty-three
items was developed by Schutte et al. (1998) which was refined by other test
developers. According to the test developer and her fellows the overall
reliability of this scale is 0.90 however, the sub-scale utilizing emotions has
shown poor reliability (Ciarrochi et al., 2001). An average correlation with
the Big Five personality test (0.51) was also reported (Petrides & Furnham,
2000). In 2010, Karim and Weisz researched to evaluate the cross-cultural
validity of SSEIT and revealed that the cross-cultural construct validity of
SSEIT was a good fit to assess the emotional intelligence. They used composite
reliability index and average variance extracted that further proves the
convergent reliability and validity of the SSEIT sub-scales. The results of
this research approve the usefulness of SSEIT (Karim & Weisz, 2010).
Emotional
and Social competence Inventory (ESCI)
Emotional and Social
competence Inventory is used to discriminate outstanding from average one thus,
very helpful in organizations and other workplaces. This inventory can be used
in the following ways: (a) to measure the emotional intelligence in leaders and
professionals, (b) to raise awareness through powerful feedback, (c) to focus
on coaching and in the development of crucial capabilities and (d) brings out
the best in individuals and teams. This test includes a multi-rater, requires a
certification for the administration of the test, and can be completed in forty
to forty-five minutes.
There are twelve defined competency scales of ESCI that are used for
assessment and enhancement of different emotional intelligence constructs. The
twelve scales with their reliabilities and test-retest reliabilities
(internal-validity) are listed as: (a) emotional self-awareness (.83, .55), (b)
conflict-management( .79, .39), (c) emotional self-control (.91, .49), (d)
teamwork (.89, .57), (e) adaptability( .85, .52), (f) influence (.84, .19), (g)
achievement orientation (.86, .60), (h)inspirational leadership (.89, .56), (i)
positive outlook (.88, .92), (j) coach and mentor(.92 ,.75), (k) empathy (.86,
.62), and (l) organizational awareness (.86, .82). The values of reliability
and internal-validity approve the utility of ESCI to measure emotional
intelligence (Boyatzis & Goleman, 2011).
Limitations
and Suggestions
Although the knowledge of
emotional intelligence has been increased still there are several advantages
and disadvantages i.e. emotional intelligence assessment tools involve
self-report measures, researchers argued that self-report measures are not
adequate as some people cannot judge their emotion-related tendencies and abilities.
Some intelligence and personality theorists question the occurrence of ability
emotional intelligence and claim that there is ability emotional intelligence
is nothing more than intelligence. Moreover, poor psychometric properties in
terms of reliability and validity are associated with common measures of
ability emotional intelligence. Therefore, the professionals must be conscious
in the selection of emotional intelligence measures and must choose appropriate
and standardized tests; more efforts are required to develop standardized
measures (O’Connor et al., 2019).
Comments
Post a Comment