2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2013.01.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Convergent and divergent validity of integrative versus mixed model measures of emotional intelligence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
88
0
5

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 110 publications
(100 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
7
88
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Self-report measures are primarily assessed by the Self-Reported Emotional Intelligence Scale by Schutte et al (1998), the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS) developed by Wong and Law (2002), the Situational Test of Emotional management (MacCann & Roberts, 2008) and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (Webb et al, 2013). The choice of measurement test depends on a wide array of factors, but mostly on the definition of emotional intelligence as either a trait or an ability.…”
Section: Emotional Intelligencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Self-report measures are primarily assessed by the Self-Reported Emotional Intelligence Scale by Schutte et al (1998), the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS) developed by Wong and Law (2002), the Situational Test of Emotional management (MacCann & Roberts, 2008) and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (Webb et al, 2013). The choice of measurement test depends on a wide array of factors, but mostly on the definition of emotional intelligence as either a trait or an ability.…”
Section: Emotional Intelligencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prominent emotion theorists (e.g., Scherer, 2007;) have criticized previous work in this research tradition because of several shortcomings, such as the partial reliance on self-reports and comparisons of subjects' responses with expert scores (see also Wilhelm, 2005). Still, there are persistent discussions on the validity of integrative versus mixed-model measures of emotional intelligence (e.g., Webb et al, 2013), debating and questioning whether self-reports are suitable to measure the construct of emotional intelligence (e.g., Zeidner, Shani-Zinovich, Matthews, & Roberts, 2005). In the present research, we focus on performance-based measures because only these adequately conceptualize ability constructs (e.g., Wilhelm, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relationship between self-reported EI and results from MSCEIT have not been found to be strongly correlated (Brackett et al, 2006). A more recent study found that significant variance in results using SREI could be accounted for by personality and emotional well-being measures, while those from MSCEIT were largely related to IQ and only to a much lesser extent (14%) to personality and emotional well-being measures (Webb et al, 2013). Stream 3 contains results from self-reporting tests that are based on models using competencies or traits or a combination of both.…”
Section: Ei Measurementmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…This work was confirmed in a meta-analysis (O'Boyle et al, 2011) that found that all the major measurements of EI had incremental predictive validity when compared to the Big Five personality dimensions. An alternative view is offered in a paper by Webb et al (2013) that concluded that the Big Five dimensions could account for 62% of results from the EQ-I test but only 14% of results from the MSCEIT.…”
Section: Ei Comparison With the Big Five Personality Dimensions (Persmentioning
confidence: 99%