2015 EIQ Reliability

EIQ16
emotional intelligence questionnaire

> User Manual
Emotional Intelligence Assessment
EIQ16 User Manual
Copyright 2011, MySkillsProfile.com Limited. www.myskillsprofile.com.com. EIQ16 is a trademark of MySkillsProfile.com Limited. The EIQ16 has been reviewed by the British Psychological Society Psychological Testing Centre. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means or stored in a database or retrieval system without the prior written permission of MySkillsProfile.com Limited.
2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com
EIQ16 User Manual
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................5
1.1 EIQ16 questionnaire ........................................................................................... 5 1.2 Concept model ................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Factor Model ....................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Versions ............................................................................................................. 6 1.5 Access ................................................................................................................ 7 1.6 Psychometric criteria .......................................................................................... 7
2.0 ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................9

2.1 Administered by professional .............................................................................. 9 2.2 Direct access ...................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Scoring and norming ........................................................................................... 9
3.0 SCALE DESCRIPTIONS...................................................................................10

3.1 Scale items ....................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Relationships with other scales ......................................................................... 10 3.3 Scale contents .................................................................................................. 10
4.0 INTERPRETATION AND FEEDBACK REPORT ..............................................28

4.1 Sten scores....................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Feedback report................................................................................................ 29
5.0 RELIABILITY & VALIDITY................................................................................30

5.1 Internal consistency reliabilities ......................................................................... 30 5.2 Correlations between versions .......................................................................... 31 5.3 Scale intercorrelations ...................................................................................... 32 5.4 Intercorrelations and reliability .......................................................................... 32 5.5 Standard error of difference .............................................................................. 32 5.6 Factor analysis.................................................................................................. 36 5.7 Relationship to other measures ........................................................................ 36 5.8 Correlations with job performance .................................................................... 37 5.9 Demographics and EIQ16 scales ...................................................................... 41 5.10 Impression management ................................................................................ 45
6.0 NORMS .............................................................................................................46
EIQ16 User Manual
7.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................53 ANNEX 1: SAMPLE FEEDBACK REPORT ...........................................................54
EIQ16 User Manual
1.0
Introduction
This User Manual1 describes the administration, interpretation and technical properties of the EIQ16. It is available as a soft copy download only from www.myskillsprofile.com.
1.1 EIQ16 questionnaire

The EIQ16 emotional intelligence questionnaire is designed to provide information about a persons emotional intelligence. The purpose of the instrument is to help people understand and develop emotional competencies and skills to improve their performance and reach their potential.
1.2 Concept model

The EIQ16 questionnaire was designed around the concept model of emotional intelligence developed by Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2002). This model of emotional intelligence has four key branches which in the EIQ16 are named as follows: Figure 1. Concept model of emotional intelligence
Reading people
Using emotions
Understanding emotions
Managing emotions
Reading people, according to Mayer at al, covers the ability to recognize emotions in oneself and others as well as in objects, art, stories, music and other phenomena. Using emotions is the ability to generate, use and feel emotion to communicate feelings and employ them in thinking and decision making. Understanding emotions means being able to appreciate emotional information and to realize how emotions combine and progress through relationship transitions.
US English version.
EIQ16 User Manual
Managing emotions describes the ability to be open to feelings and to control them in oneself and others in order to advance personal understanding and growth.
It is important to note that the EIQ16 is a behavioral style instrument whereas the MayerSalovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test is an ability-based test.
1.3 Factor Model

There is as yet no widely accepted and replicated statistical model in the field of emotional intelligence research as there is in the field of personality research where the Big Five factor framework prevails. Although some studies have provided support for a four-factor structure of the Mayer et al assessment test consistent with their four-branch model, others studies have provided evidence for one, two and three factor solutions. The EIQ16 data provides evidence for a two factor model/solution for men and a three factor model/solution for women (section 5.6). Figure 2. Two and three factor models of emotional intelligence 2 Factor Solution (Men) 3 Factor Solution (Women)
Perceiving, understanding and managing emotions
Perceiving and understanding emotions Using emotions
Using emotions Managing emotions
1.4 Versions
There are two versions of the questionnaire. a. EIQ16 The full normative questionnaire requires a test taker to rate their emotional skills and competencies using a 5 point Likert scale ranging from Strongly agree to Strongly disagree. The test also has one scale measuring impression management. The questionnaire consists of 136 statements (8 items per scale) and most test takers complete the questions in about 20 minutes. Table 1 summarizes what the EIQ16 questionnaire scales measure. More detailed descriptions of scale content are provided in Chapter 3.
EIQ16 User Manual
b. EIQ16 App The App version of the questionnaire is a short instrument measuring the 4 key branches of emotional intelligence depicted in Figure 1. It also provides an indication of impression management. This short test has 36 items taken from the full questionnaire and takes about 5 minutes to complete.
1.5 Access
The EIQ16 is designed to be used by psychologists, coaches and other HR professionals but can also be purchased direct by individual customers from www.myskillsprofile.com.
1.6 Psychometric criteria

The EIQ16 was designed to meet the key criteria in the EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological Tests (Bartram, 2002). The EFPA Review Model was produced to support and encourage the process of harmonizing the reviewing of tests. It provides a standard set of criteria to assess the quality of modern psychometric tests. These cover the common areas of test review such as norms, reliability, and validity. The EIQ16 has been reviewed by the British Psychological Society Psychological Testing Centre (PTC).
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 1. Summary of EIQ16 key areas and scales
Scale
What the scale measures The degree to which you are in touch with your feelings and emotions and notice when your mood changes. Reading people The extent to which you pay attention to and identify other peoples feelings and emotions. How far you are able to describe and communicate your feelings and emotions. How far you pick up on emotional cues and can tell when something is wrong or when someone is trying to deceive you. The degree to which you follow your hunches and feelings and let your feelings guide your thinking. Using emotions The extent to which you allow your instincts and intuition to influence your judgments and decisions. The extent to which you are able to capitalize on mood changes in a positive way to explore and analyze things. The extent to which you use your own and other peoples feelings and emotions to help solve problems. Your ability to recognize a range of common emotions for example, happiness, anger, fear, surprise, interest etc. How far you understand the factors that lead people to experience different feelings and emotions. The extent to which you understand complex feelings, emotional blends and contradictory states. The degree to which you are aware of and can anticipate how emotions progress and change. The extent to which you stay open to pleasant and unpleasant feelings to help manage situations and events. How far you are able to reflectively engage or ignore your feelings and emotions to help guide your actions. Your ability to stay in control of your feelings and emotions when you are under pressure and stress. The degree to which you are able to manage other peoples feelings and emotions in a sympathetic manner. Understanding emotions
Self-analysis
Analysis of others
Self-expression
Discrimination
Thinking
Judgment
Sensitivity
Problem solving
Symptoms
Causes
Complexity
Transitions
Openness
Managing emotions
Monitoring
Self-control
Managing others
EIQ16 User Manual
2.0 Administration
The EIQ16 can only be administered online via the Internet. There are two ways that people can be tested.
2.1 Administered by professional

Where the test is being administered to a group of people by a psychologist or coach, the test taker receives an email from the test administrator containing a hyperlink which takes the test taker to a testing screen with instructions on how to complete the test. The test taker then goes through a series of screens with the questions and completes a personal details form. Once the assessment test has been completed, the client may view or download the computer-generated feedback report if the online testing service has been set up to provide feedback reports to test takers. The online testing system can be set up by a test administrator to have feedback reports emailed to the test administrator, or to the test taker, or to the test taker and to the test administrator.
2.2 Direct access

Individual clients/test takers can also purchase a EIQ16 assessment test direct from myskillsprofile.com. In this instance, the test taker is presented with instructions about how to complete the test, does the test and then completes a personal details form. The test taker then pays for the assessment by credit card and once the transaction has been processed, the test taker can view and download the feedback report in PDF format. Test takers can also request a copy of their feedback report to be emailed to them.
2.3 Scoring and norming

The scoring and generation of feedback reports are done online. A persons EIQ16 raw scores are compared to a very large international comparison group of people who have answered the questionnaire. Details of this norm group are given in Chapter 6.
10
EIQ16 User Manual
3.0 Scale Descriptions

Each scale description table in this chapter contains elements covering the meaning of low scores, moderate scores and high scores.
3.1 Scale items

There are 8 items per scale and most of the scales have equal numbers of positively and negatively keyed items. The tables below present examples of the items.
3.2 Relationships with other scales

The final section of each table shows other scales that the scale correlates highly with. These correlations are from the international comparison group. The full intercorrelation matrix is shown in Table 6 in Chapter 5.
3.3 Scale contents
Scale
Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others
Page 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Impression management
11
EIQ16 User Manual
Key Area 1. Reading people
Scale 1.1. Self-analysis High scorers
Description Are in touch with their feelings and emotions and notice when their mood changes. Typical positive item I notice when my mood changes. Moderate scorers
Description Are moderately aware of their feelings and emotions. Or Are aware of how they are feeling some of the time.
Low scorers Description Pay little attention to their feelings and emotions. Typical negative item I rarely stop to analyze how I'm feeling.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Openness Transitions Problem solving
12
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 1.2. Analysis of others High scorers
Description Pay close attention to and identify other peoples feelings and emotions. Typical positive item I am good at sensing what others are feeling.
Moderate scorers Description Pay some attention to other peoples feelings and emotions. Or Pay attention to and identify other peoples feelings and emotions in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Pay very little attention to and do not tend to identify other peoples feelings and emotions. Typical negative item I am indifferent to the feelings of others. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Transitions Openness Complexity
13
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 1.3. Self-expression High scorers Description Are skilled at describing and communicating their feelings and emotions. Typical positive item I am able to describe my feelings easily.
Moderate scorers Description Are moderately skilled at describing and communicating their feelings and emotions. Or Are able to describe and communicate their feelings and emotions in some situations but not in others. Low scorers Description Are unable to describe and communicate their feelings and emotions. Typical negative item I do not easily share my feelings with others.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Self-analysis Openness Transitions
14
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 1.4. Discrimination High scorers Description Pick up on emotional cues and can tell when something is wrong or when someone is trying to deceive them. Typical positive item I can tell when someone is putting on a false smile. Moderate scorers Description Are fairly competent at picking up on emotional cues and telling when something is wrong or when someone is trying to deceive them. Or Pick up on emotional cues and can tell when something is wrong or when someone is trying to deceive them in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Dont pick up on emotional cues and cannot tell when something is wrong or when someone is trying to deceive them. Typical negative item I dont pick up on emotional cues. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Analysis of others Transitions Complexity
15
EIQ16 User Manual
Key Area 2. Using emotions
Scale 2.1. Thinking High scorers
Description Follow their hunches and feelings and let their feelings guide their thinking. Typical positive item My feelings help me focus on whats important.
Moderate scorers Description Follow their hunches and feelings and let their feelings guide their thinking to a moderate degree. Or Follow their hunches and feelings and let their feelings guide their thinking in some situations but not in others. Low scorers Description Use data and information rather hunches and feelings to guide their thinking. Typical negative item I prefer to deal with information rather than emotions.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Judgment Problem solving Sensitivity
16
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 2.2. Judgment High scorers
Description Allow their instincts and intuition to influence their judgments and decisions. Typical positive item I follow my instincts when I have an important decision to take.
Moderate scorers Description Allow instincts and intuition to influence their judgments and decisions to a moderate extent. Or Allow their instincts and intuition to influence their judgments and decisions in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Do not allow their instincts and intuition to influence their judgments and decisions. Typical negative item I try not to let emotions sway my judgment.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Thinking Problem solving Sensitivity
17
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 2.3. Sensitivity High scorers Description Are able to capitalize on mood changes in a positive way to explore and analyze issues and problems. Typical positive item I use mood changes to help see a problem from different points of view. Moderate scorers Description Possess some ability to capitalize on mood changes in a positive way to explore and analyze issues. Or Use mood changes in a positive way to explore and analyze issues in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Are unable to capitalize on mood changes in a positive way to explore and analyze issues and problems. Typical negative item I do not change my mood a lot. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Thinking Judgment Problem solving
18
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 2.4. Problem solving High scorers
Description Use their own and other peoples feelings and emotions to help solve problems. Typical positive item I find examination of my feelings useful in solving personal problems.
Moderate scorers Description Have some ability to use their own and other peoples feelings and emotions to help solve problems. Or Use their own and other peoples feelings and emotions to help solve problems in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Have not learned how to use their own and other peoples feelings and emotions to help solve problems. Typical negative item I rarely consider my feelings when problem solving. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Thinking Self-analysis Judgment
19
EIQ16 User Manual
Key Area 3. Understanding emotions
Scale 3.1. Symptoms High scorers Description Can recognize a range of common emotions for example, happiness, anger, fear, surprise, interest etc. Typical positive item I can see when someone is angry. Moderate scorers Description Can recognize a range of common emotions for example, happiness, anger, fear, surprise, interest - as well as the average person. Or Can recognize common emotions in some situations but not in others. Low scorers Description Have difficulty recognizing a range of common emotions for example, happiness, anger, fear, surprise, interest etc. Typical negative item I can't tell when someone is distracted. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Analysis of others Discrimination Complexity
20
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 3.2. Causes High scorers
Description Understand the factors that lead people to experience different feelings and emotions. Typical positive item I know what causes shame and guilt.
Moderate scorers Description Show a reasonable understanding of the factors that lead people to experience different feelings and emotions. Or Understand what leads people to experience different feelings and emotions in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Do not understand the factors that lead people to experience different feelings and emotions. Typical negative item No negatively keyed items in this scale. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Complexity Analysis of others Symptoms
21
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 3.3. Complexity High scorers
Description Understand complex feelings, emotional blends and contradictory states. Typical positive item I understand how you can experience mixed emotions.
Moderate scorers Description Have a moderate understanding of complex feelings, emotional blends and contradictory states. Or Understand complex feelings, emotional blends and contradictory states as well as the average person. Low scorers Description Do not understand complex feelings, emotional blends and contradictory states. Typical negative item I dont understand why people become violent.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Transitions Analysis of others Causes
22
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 3.4. Transitions High scorers
Description Are aware of and can anticipate how emotions progress and change. Typical positive item I can usually anticipate how emotions are likely to change.
Moderate scorers
Description Are moderately skilled at anticipating how emotions progress and change. Or Can anticipate how emotions progress and change in some situations but not others.
Low scorers Description Are unaware of and cannot anticipate how emotions progress and change. Typical negative item I don't understand how emotions change.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Complexity Analysis of others Openness
23
EIQ16 User Manual
Key Area 4. Managing emotions
Scale 4.1. Openness High scorers
Description Stay open to pleasant and unpleasant feelings to help manage situations and events. Typical positive item I think that being in touch with emotions is essential.
Moderate scorers Description Possess some ability to attend to pleasant and unpleasant feelings to help manage situations and events. Or Attend to pleasant and unpleasant feelings to help manage situations and events in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Do not turn their attention to pleasant and unpleasant feelings to help manage situations and events. Typical negative item I avoid dealing with uncomfortable emotions. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Self-analysis Analysis of others Transitions
24
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 4.2. Monitoring High scorers Description Are able to reflectively engage or ignore their feelings and emotions to help guide their actions. Typical positive item I psych myself up when necessary. Moderate scorers Description Possess a moderate ability to reflectively engage or ignore their feelings and emotions to help guide their actions. Or Are able to reflectively engage or ignore their feelings and emotions to help guide their actions in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Are unable to reflectively engage or ignore their feelings and emotions to help guide their actions. Typical negative item I don't evaluate the usefulness of my emotions. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Transitions Self-control Complexity
25
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 4.3. Self-control High scorers Description Are able to stay in control of their feelings and emotions when they are under pressure and stress. Typical positive item I think clearly and stay focused under pressure. Moderate scorers Description Are as capable as the average person of staying in control of their feelings and emotions when they are under pressure and stress. Or Manage to stay calm and in control in some situations but have difficulty in others. Low scorers Description Have difficulty staying in control of their feelings and emotions when they are under pressure and stress. Typical negative item I take my feelings out on others. Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Monitoring Complexity Transitions
26
EIQ16 User Manual
Scale 4.4. Managing others High scorers
Description Are able to manage other peoples feelings and emotions in a sympathetic manner. Typical positive item I am sensitive to other people's emotions and needs.
Moderate scorers Description Have some ability to manage other peoples feelings and emotions in a sympathetic manner. Or Manage other peoples feelings and emotions in a sympathetic manner in some situations but not others. Low scorers Description Are unable to manage other peoples feelings and emotions in a sympathetic manner. Typical negative item I would not feel guilty about hurting the feelings of someone I disliked.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Analysis of others Openness Transitions
27
EIQ16 User Manual
Response Style
MD Scale. Impression management High scorers
Description Answer questions honestly and self-critically. Typical positive item I always tell the truth.
Moderate scorers
Description Answer questions as honestly as the average person. Or Have a reasonably accurate picture of their strengths and weaknesses. Low scorers Description Present a less honest and self-critical assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. Typical negative item I get back at others.
Relationships with other scales Strongest correlations with Self-control Managing others Monitoring
28
EIQ16 User Manual
4.0 Interpretation and Feedback Report

This chapter describes how the EIQ16 sten scoring system works and explains how the EIQ16 computer-generated feedback report is constructed.
4.1 Sten scores

The EIQ16 uses the Standard Ten (sten) scoring approach. To help professional users and test takers understand what different sten scores mean, the EIQ16 interpretive model breaks the sten range into five categories. The meaning of each of the categories is defined using Red Amber Green (RAG) traffic light assessment ratings, descriptions of emotional competency level and development implications (Table 2). The table below illustrates the approach, for example: A sten score of 8 appearing in the green area of the relevant EIQ16 scorecard indicates that the person has Level 5 emotional competencies which they should make the most of / exploit. A sten score of 5 appearing in the amber area of the relevant EIQ16 scorecard indicates that the person has Level 3 emotional competencies which they should endeavor to work on. A sten score of 4 appearing in the amber red area of the relevant EIQ16 scorecard indicates that the person has Level 2 emotional competencies which they should try to develop.
Table 2. EIQ16 scoring approach

Sten Range 8-10 7 5-6 4 1-3 RAG Rating Green Amber Green Amber Amber Red Red Skill Level 5 Very high 4 High 3 Average 2 Low 1 Very low Development Capitalize on Round off Work on Develop Improve
Table 3 shows how a persons sten scores relate to percentiles. For example, a sten score of 6 indicates that the persons emotional competencies are more developed than those of about 60 percent of persons in the international comparison group.
29
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 3. Relationship between stens and percentiles

Sten Score 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Higher than 99 percent of persons in the comparison group 95 percent of persons in the comparison group 90 percent of persons in the comparison group 75 percent of persons in the comparison group 60 percent of persons in the comparison group 40 percent of persons in the comparison group 25 percent of persons in the comparison group 10 percent of persons in the comparison group 5 percent of persons in the comparison group 1 percent of persons in the comparison group
4.2 Feedback report

The EIQ16 computer-generated feedback report has five sections. Section 1 Gives a brief introduction to the questionnaire explaining what the instrument measures and how the scoring system works. Section 2 Provides concise descriptions of what each of the sixteen EIQ16 scales measure. Section 3 Provides an executive summary of the results of the assessment covering the test takers overall emotional competence, their scores on the four branches of emotional intelligence and impression management. Section 4 Provides scorecards for each of the four branches of emotional intelligence and summarizes the potential implications for work performance using the SHL Universal Competency Framework (Bartram, 2006). Section 5 Gives guidance on development with practical tips and suggestions for performance improvement . Annex 1 shows a typical feedback report.
30
EIQ16 User Manual
5.0 Reliability & Validity

5.1 Internal consistency reliabilities
Table 4 presents internal consistency estimates for the EIQ16 based on Cronbachs Coefficient Alpha together with raw and sten score SEms for the international comparison group. The characteristics of the sample are described in Chapter 6. The internal consistencies range from 0.66 to 0.87 with a median of 0.73. The sten score SEms range from 0.84 to 1.40 with a median of 1.17. This indicates that there is a 68 percent likelihood that the persons true score on one of the scales will about one sten either side of the observed score. There needs to be a difference of two stens between the scores of two persons on a scale before it can be assumed that there is a reliable difference between them on a scale. Table 4. Internal consistency reliabilities for EIQ16 (n = 6,000)
Scale Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management Median Alpha 0.73 0.77 0.87 0.78 0.67 0.69 0.68 0.70 0.73 0.80 0.77 0.81 0.69 0.67 0.82 0.77 0.66 0.73 Mean 31.61 31.73 27.84 30.03 26.96 26.64 24.71 28.24 32.43 33.47 30.86 29.97 30.39 27.17 28.09 32.49 24.00 29.97 SD 4.26 4.71 6.54 4.61 4.70 4.49 4.85 4.51 4.11 3.86 4.60 4.92 4.28 4.68 6.04 4.71 4.87 4.68 Raw score SEm 2.21 2.26 2.36 2.16 2.70 2.50 2.74 2.47 2.14 1.73 2.21 2.14 2.38 2.69 2.56 2.26 2.84 2.36 Sten score SEm 1.17 1.07 0.84 1.07 1.29 1.28 1.29 1.25 1.17 1.00 1.08 1.01 1.25 1.29 0.97 1.10 1.40 1.17
31
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 5 presents internal consistency estimates for the EIQ16 App version based on the App data set. The internal consistencies range from 0.65 to 0.77 with a median of 0.74. The App data set is a subset of the data set for the full questionnaire.
Table 5. Internal consistency reliabilities for App version (n = 6,000)

Scale Reading people Using emotions Understanding emotions Managing emotions Impression management Median Alpha 0.77 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.65 0.74 Mean 30.53 25.83 31.35 29.92 11.26 29.92 SD 5.07 4.96 4.46 4.88 3.13 4.88
5.2 Correlations between versions

Table 6 shows the correlations between the EIQ16 and the shorter App version of the questionnaire for the four key branches of emotional intelligence and impression management. The correlations range from 0.78 to 0.88 with a median of 0.87 demonstrating a very strong relationship between scores on the two questionnaires.
Table 6. Correlation between EIQ16 and App version (n = 6,000)
Scale Reading people Using emotions Understanding emotions Managing emotions Impression management Median
Correlation 0.88 0.84 0.87 0.87 0.78 0.87
32
EIQ16 User Manual
5.3 Scale intercorrelations

Intercorrelations indicate how closely related or independent the EIQ16 scales are. This helps interpretation and throws light on construct validity. Table 6 shows the intercorrelations of the EIQ16 scales. The correlations for the EIQ16 range from -0.45 to 0.68 with a median of 0.38. About three quarters of the intercorrelations were less than 0.50. This indicates a reasonable degree of independence between the scales.
5.4 Intercorrelations and reliability

In order to determine how well an assessment test differentiates between the different dimensions it is designed to measure, it is necessary to correct the correlations for unreliability. A correlation needs to be divided by the square root of the product of the two variables reliability to determine what the correlation between the two variables would be if the variables reliabilities were perfect. If two scales share less than 50 percent reliable variance, then we can be reasonably certain that they are independent. Table 7 shows the percentage of common reliable variance for the EIQ16 scales. Forty nine percent of the EIQ16 scale pairs share less than 25 percent common variance and 76 percent share less than 50 percent indicating that the scales show a fair degree of independence.
5.5 Standard error of difference

The Standard Error of Difference (SEd) helps determine the size of the gap that you need to see between a persons scores on any two scales before you can conclude that the difference is real. The SEd depends on the reliability of the scales the higher the reliability the smaller the SEd is. If there are two full SEds between the scores on two scales, then there is a 95 percent likelihood that there is a real difference. Table 8 shows the SEds for the EIQ16. The median SEd for the EIQ16 primary scales is 1.41 indicating that a difference of 3 stens is likely to indicate a real difference between one scale score and another. In other words, you need to see a difference of 3 stens (depending on the scales in question) before you can say that a person has more emotional competencies in one area than another.
33
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 6. Scale intercorrelations for the EIQ16 (n = 6,000)
Analysis of others
Managing others 0.54 0.63 0.45 0.37 0.32 0.23 0.11 0.47 0.43 0.39 0.49 0.50 0.56 0.32 0.29 1.00
Problem solving
Self-expression
Discrimination
Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management
1.00
0.60 1.00
0.62 0.51 1.00
0.46 0.62 0.38 1.00
0.43 0.29 0.32 0.12 1.00
0.38 0.27 0.26 0.15 0.69 1.00
0.23 0.12 0.12 -0.02 0.44 0.41 1.00
0.61 0.52 0.49 0.33 0.59 0.58 0.37 1.00
0.43 0.53 0.34 0.54 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.30 1.00
0.42 0.47 0.34 0.42 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.29 0.46 1.00
0.54 0.64 0.49 0.56 0.18 0.18 0.02 0.43 0.51 0.58 1.00
0.62 0.64 0.52 0.58 0.23 0.22 0.09 0.53 0.49 0.47 0.69 1.00
0.66 0.65 0.60 0.54 0.35 0.31 0.16 0.54 0.48 0.47 0.59 0.62 1.00
0.44 0.48 0.40 0.46 0.00 0.06 -0.03 0.39 0.34 0.32 0.52 0.63 0.47 1.00
0.22 0.37 0.24 0.39 -0.22 -0.18 -0.45 0.11 0.29 0.25 0.41 0.42 0.32 0.56 1.00
0.17 0.16 0.21 0.16 -0.07 -0.10 -0.14 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.19 0.24 0.32 0.21 1.00
Self-analysis
Self-control
Transitions
Complexity
Monitoring
Symptoms
Sensitivity
Openness
Judgment
Thinking
Causes
Scale
34
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 7. Percentage of common reliable variance for EIQ16 scales (n=6,000)
Analysis of others
Managing others
Problem solving
Self-expression
Discrimination
64
61 39
37 64 21
38 16 18 3
29 14 11 4 103
11 3 2 0 42 36
73 50 39 20 74 70 29
35 50 18 51 5 5 0 18
30 36 17 28 3 3 0 15 36
52 69 36 52 6 6 0 34 46 55
65 66 38 53 10 9 1 50 41 34 76
86 80 60 54 26 20 5 60 46 40 66 69
40 45 27 40 0 1 0 32 24 19 52 73 48
8 22 8 24 9 6 36 2 14 10 27 27 18 57
52 67 30 23 20 10 2 41 33 25 40 40 59 20 13
6 5 8 5 1 2 4 1 4 3 6 10 8 13 19 9
Self-analysis
Self-control
Transitions
Complexity
Monitoring
Symptoms
Sensitivity
Openness
Judgment
Thinking
Causes
Scale
35
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 8. SEd of EIQ16 scales (n = 6,000)
Analysis of others
Managing others
Problem solving
Self-expression
Discrimination
0.82
0.99 0.97
0.92 0.90 1.05
0.82 0.80 0.97 0.90
0.89 0.88 1.03 0.96 0.87
1.32 1.31 1.42 1.37 1.31 1.35
1.40 1.39 1.49 1.45 1.39 1.43 1.73
1.12 1.11 1.23 1.18 1.10 1.16 1.51 1.58
1.23 1.22 1.33 1.28 1.21 1.26 1.59 1.66 1.43
1.18 1.17 1.29 1.23 1.17 1.22 1.56 1.63 1.39 1.48
1.24 1.23 1.35 1.29 1.23 1.28 1.60 1.67 1.44 1.53 1.49
1.16 1.15 1.27 1.21 1.14 1.20 1.54 1.61 1.37 1.47 1.42 1.48
1.30 1.29 1.40 1.35 1.29 1.34 1.65 1.72 1.50 1.58 1.55 1.59 1.53
1.31 1.30 1.41 1.36 1.30 1.34 1.66 1.72 1.50 1.59 1.55 1.60 1.53 1.65
1.51 1.50 1.59 1.55 1.50 1.54 1.82 1.88 1.68 1.75 1.72 1.76 1.71 1.81 1.81
1.41 1.40 1.51 1.46 1.40 1.45 1.74 1.81 1.60 1.67 1.64 1.68 1.62 1.73 1.73 1.89
Self-analysis
Self-control
Transitions
Complexity
Monitoring
Symptoms
Sensitivity
Openness
Judgment
Thinking
Causes
Scale
36
EIQ16 User Manual
5.6 Factor analysis

Principal components extraction with oblique rotation was performed on the EIQ16 scales separately for men and women in the international comparison group of 6,000 respondents. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy was above 0.9 in each analysis, well above 0.6 required for a good factor analysis. Three factors were extracted for women and two for men accounting for 64 percent and 61 percent of variance. The variables were on the whole reasonably well-defined by the factor solutions. Communality values ranged from 0.48 to 0.76 for women and 0.42 to 0.73 for men. The median communality values were 0.66 and 0.64. Table 9 shows loadings of variables on factors, communalities, and percents of variance and covariance. The first factor for women includes scales from three key areas of emotional intelligence but appears to be mainly a measure of Understanding Emotions, the third branch of emotional intelligence in the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso model of emotional intelligence. Factor 2 for women is predominantly measuring the second branch in the framework to do with facilitating thought. Factor 3 for women appears to be assessing the ability to manage emotions with the Monitoring and Self-Control scales loading highest. Scales from three of the four branches in the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso model load strongly on Factor 1 for men. Factor 2 for men is similar to Factor 2 for women with the highest loadings coming from the four scales measuring the ability to feel and use emotion in thinking, problem solving and decision making. Although these findings fail to support a four factor model of emotional intelligence, they are not inconsistent with research on the internal structure of the MayerSaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test Version 2.0 (MSCEIT). Although some studies have provided support for a four-factor MSCEIT structure consistent with the four-branch model, others studies have provided evidence for one, two and three factor solutions. Fan, Jackson, Yang, Tang and Zhang (2010) carried out a meta-analysis of 19 matrices and concluded that a three-factor solution was the best-fitting model of the MSCEIT structure.
5.7 Relationship to other measures

In order to confirm that the EIQ16 measures aspects of emotional intelligence and style, we included marker variables in the test development questionnaire. These markers were taken from scales published by the International Personality Item Pool (2001) and were designed to measure the components of emotional intelligence identified by Barchard (2001). Table 10 shows the relationships between these marker variables and 13 out of 17 EIQ scales for a sample of 1,500 respondents. There are no equivalent scales to the Symptoms, Causes, Complexity and Transitions scales in the IPIP. The mean age of respondents was 37.2 with a standard deviation of 12. The majority of respondents were between the ages of 21 and 50 with roughly equal numbers in the 21-30, 31-40 and 41-50 age groups. Two thirds of respondents described themselves as White, 7.6% said they were Asian, 7% said they were Black, and 4.2% of a mixed background.
37
EIQ16 User Manual
Approximately half of the respondents were from the United States and one fifth from the United Kingdom. About a fifth of respondents were from Canada and Australia and New Zealand. The correlations between the EIQ16 scales and the marker variables are in the range of 0.42 to 0.76 with a median correlation of 0.62. The overall correlation between the marker variables total score and the EIQ16 total score was 0.85.
5.8 Correlations with job performance

The international comparison group data set contains information about all respondents job performance based on questionnaire items asking respondents to self-assess their job performance and report their line managers assessment using a 4-point scale from Excellent to Not satisfactory. Table 11 shows the frequency of the two types of job performance ratings reported by respondents. Just over 2,000 respondents rated their performance as excellent, 3,004 thought it was good, 763 thought it was satisfactory and 200 said it was not satisfactory. The correlation between the self-assessments and reported line manager assessments was 0.69. Table 11. Distribution of ratings of job performance (n = 6,000)
Line Managers Assessment Self-Assessment Excellent Excellent Good Satisfactory Not satisfactory Total 1,715 594 64 7 2,380 Good 284 2,122 251 26 2,683 Satisfactory 24 245 393 67 729 Not satisfactory 10 43 55 100 208 Total
2,033 3,004 763 200 6,000
Table 12 shows the correlations between the EIQ16 scales and the self-assessed performance ratings, the line manager ratings and a combined rating (the sum of the two ratings). There were statistically significant correlations between job performance ratings and test scores on 3 key factors and 14 primary scales. Median correlations for the key factors ranged from 0.24 to 0.27 and the median correlations for the primary scales ranged from 0.19 0.22. The magnitude of these correlations is consistent with those reported in the literature for personality and EI variables. For example, Robertson (1997) reports that the upper limits for the validity of personality variables against overall work performance variables are in the range of 0.25 to 0.4. In a recent meta-analysis of the relation between emotional intelligence and job performance, O'Boyle et al (2011) report corrected correlations between different types of EI measures and job performance ranging from 0.24 to 0.30.
38
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 9. Factor loadings, communalities (h2), percents of variance and covariance for principal components extraction and oblique rotation on EIQ16 scales (n = 6,000)
Women Scale F1 Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Percent of variance Percent of covariance 0.29 0.64 0.13 0.63 0.01 -0.07 0.09 0.05 0.87 0.86 0.66 0.46 0.47 0.09 0.13 0.60 42.37 66.46 F2 0.48 0.18 0.41 -0.03 0.84 0.85 0.59 0.73 -0.08 -0.08 0.04 0.17 0.32 0.03 -0.29 0.15 15.08 23.65 F3 -0.36 -0.20 -0.48 -0.19 0.12 0.06 0.46 -0.33 0.14 0.16 -0.24 -0.45 -0.29 -0.77 -0.79 -0.06 6.31 9.90 h
2
Men F1 0.70 0.82 0.63 0.78 0.11 0.11 -0.09 0.49 0.69 0.65 0.83 0.84 0.77 0.74 0.67 0.68 45.00 73.73 F2 0.35 0.08 0.22 -0.10 0.83 0.77 0.76 0.60 -0.05 -0.04 -0.05 0.04 0.21 -0.16 -0.55 0.14 16.03 26.27 h
2
0.66 0.69 0.55 0.52 0.72 0.69 0.53 0.73 0.62 0.60 0.66 0.69 0.65 0.67 0.76 0.48
0.69 0.70 0.50 0.59 0.73 0.64 0.56 0.70 0.46 0.42 0.68 0.71 0.69 0.54 0.64 0.51
39
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 10. Correlations between EIQ16 scales and IPIP marker variables (n =1,500)
Scale Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management EIQ16 total score R 0.70 0.62 0.76 0.59 0.50 0.55 0.68 0.62 0.59 0.42 0.56 0.66 0.66 0.85 IPIP Marker Variable Scale (Barchard, 2001) Attending to emotions Social/personal/emotional intelligence Expressiveness Attending to emotions Emotion-based decision making Emotion-based decision making Tranquillity Emotion-based decision making Emotionality Warmth Negative expressivity Understanding Impression management Marker variable total score
40
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 12. Correlations between EIQ16 scales and job performance (n = 6,000)
Scale Key Factors Reading people Using emotions Understanding emotions Managing emotions Median Primary Scales Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Median
Self-Assessment
Managers Assessment
Combined Assessment
0.26 0.01 0.24 0.31 0.25
0.25 0.01 0.23 0.30 0.24
0.27 0.01 0.26 0.33 0.27
0.20 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.02 -0.13 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.23 0.25 0.21 0.30 0.30 0.17 0.21
0.17 0.23 0.18 0.23 -0.01 0.01 -0.11 0.12 0.18 0.15 0.22 0.23 0.19 0.26 0.27 0.19 0.19
0.20 0.24 0.22 0.25 0.00 0.02 -0.13 0.14 0.18 0.18 0.25 0.26 0.22 0.30 0.31 0.20 0.22
*All scales significant at 0.01 level except Using Emotions key factor and Thinking and Judgment primary scales (2-tailed).
41
EIQ16 User Manual
5.9 Demographics and EIQ16 scales

The EIQ16 was designed to be used in different countries by adults of all ages. In this section, we examine the influence of age, gender, ethnic origin and country of origin. The analyses were carried out on the international comparison group. Age Table 13 shows the correlations between age and EIQ16 test scores. There are statistically significant correlations between age and test scores in 14 scales but all of these are below 0.20 in absolute magnitude. Self-expression, Openness and Self-Control correlate strongest with age demonstrating that older people are, for example, more able to express their feelings and emotions, more open to feelings and emotions, and more capable of controlling their feelings and emotions. There would seem to be no need for separate norm groups for adults in different age groups, however, because the observed age differences are very small. Gender There were statistically significant correlations between gender and test scores in 13 scales but the observed gender differences are again pretty small (Table 13). Only one reaches 0.20 in absolute magnitude. Women tend to score higher than men on all but one of the scales--the exception being Self-Control. As the differences are again quite insignificant in scale, it would seem to be acceptable to use combined sex norms. Ethnic origin Table 14 shows means and standard deviations on EIQ16 scales for six race and ethnicity categories. Analysis of variance showed that the differences in scores between the groups were statistically significant on all the scales but the differences were once again quite modest in size. People of Chinese and Asian origin tended to have slightly lower scores generally on the EIQ16 scales but as with age and gender, the differences are quite modest. Country of origin Table 15 gives means and standard deviations on EIQ16 scales for respondents from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and the rest of the world. Analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences on all the scales but as with the other demographic variables, the differences were once again quite slender in size. These findings would seem to suggest that a combined country international sample is justified.
42
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 13. Correlations of age and sex with EIQ16 scales (n = 6,000)
Scale Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Median
Age 0.06** 0.07** 0.15** 0.02 0.00 0.06** -0.11** 0.07** 0.08** 0.10** 0.10** 0.04 0.15** 0.06** 0.13** 0.07** 0.07**
Gender 0.14** 0.12** 0.13** 0.00 0.19** 0.15** 0.16** 0.18** 0.03 0.00 0.06** 0.11** 0.08** 0.03 -0.14** 0.20** 0.11**
** Significant at 0.01 level, * Significant at 0.05 level (2-tailed). Gender was coded 1 for male and 2 for female.
43
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 14. EIQ16 scale scores by ethnic origin (n = 6,000*)

Asian Scale Mean Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management 30.49 29.95 26.70 28.70 26.05 25.46 25.00 27.47 31.31 32.30 29.52 29.15 28.75 26.53 26.68 31.09 23.98 SD 4.27 4.77 5.84 4.61 4.28 4.55 4.74 4.16 4.30 4.26 4.73 5.02 4.07 4.30 5.87 4.72 4.75 Mean 31.82 31.51 27.48 30.47 25.46 25.25 23.87 27.76 32.07 33.75 30.38 30.14 30.12 27.94 29.02 32.47 24.66 SD 4.26 4.50 6.74 4.24 4.43 4.59 5.03 4.27 4.26 4.11 4.91 4.65 4.24 4.43 6.27 4.72 5.36 Mean 30.34 29.62 26.20 28.03 25.34 25.23 23.79 26.80 31.20 31.97 29.46 28.11 27.95 26.20 27.41 30.33 23.80 SD 3.86 4.30 5.79 4.25 3.59 4.71 4.32 4.13 3.64 3.36 3.74 4.42 4.22 4.52 5.61 4.16 3.75 Mean 31.52 31.73 27.68 29.85 26.92 26.57 25.07 28.07 32.13 33.42 30.31 29.93 30.39 27.28 27.59 32.14 23.44 SD 4.47 4.67 6.50 4.29 4.48 4.54 4.60 4.28 4.18 4.01 5.02 4.97 4.21 4.87 6.23 4.87 4.50 Mean 31.48 31.08 27.81 29.80 26.00 25.36 23.62 27.90 31.59 33.30 30.79 29.75 29.45 27.34 27.82 31.82 24.47 SD 4.33 4.64 6.51 4.39 4.52 4.64 4.79 4.37 4.78 4.02 4.48 4.74 4.49 4.59 5.92 5.02 4.66 Mean 31.76 32.04 28.07 30.21 27.29 27.01 24.81 28.44 32.68 33.63 31.12 30.11 30.70 27.15 28.24 32.76 23.97 SD 4.23 4.66 6.59 4.62 4.46 4.42 4.89 4.60 3.98 3.74 4.51 4.93 4.25 4.72 6.03 4.66 4.89 Mean 31.61 31.73 27.84 30.03 26.96 26.64 24.71 28.24 32.43 33.47 30.86 29.97 30.39 27.17 28.09 32.49 24.00 SD 4.26 4.71 6.54 4.60 4.47 4.49 4.85 4.51 4.11 3.86 4.60 4.92 4.28 4.67 6.04 4.71 4.87 Black Chinese Mixed Spanish** White Total
*Asian = 432, Black = 395, Chinese = 61, Mixed = 256, Spanish/Hispanic/Latino = 253, White = 4,334, Other = 269. **Spanish/Hispanic/Latino.
44
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 15. EIQ16 scale scores by country of origin (n = 6,000*)

United States Scale Mean Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management 31.85 32.08 28.05 30.28 26.78 26.65 24.31 28.45 32.64 33.76 31.18 30.34 30.60 27.63 28.76 32.71 24.36 SD 4.19 4.57 6.50 4.53 4.56 4.52 4.96 4.53 4.00 3.78 4.48 4.81 4.22 4.62 5.98 4.66 5.03 Mean 31.65 31.88 28.08 30.10 27.73 27.17 25.50 28.22 32.57 33.42 30.91 29.84 30.78 26.52 27.42 32.83 23.07 SD 4.22 4.59 6.66 4.56 4.22 4.29 4.67 4.45 4.09 3.67 4.42 4.95 4.18 4.86 6.16 4.54 4.76 Mean 31.62 31.94 27.58 30.01 27.22 26.66 25.05 28.12 32.40 33.57 30.76 29.84 30.51 26.85 27.59 32.67 23.73 SD 4.22 4.61 6.65 4.36 4.37 4.41 4.88 4.36 4.00 3.77 4.65 4.68 4.16 4.66 6.15 4.46 4.71 Mean 31.39 31.52 27.92 29.83 27.31 26.77 25.01 28.42 32.53 33.25 30.65 29.74 30.36 26.98 27.79 32.33 23.73 SD 4.38 5.12 6.60 4.90 4.39 4.53 4.73 4.58 4.03 3.94 4.86 5.14 4.30 4.76 6.11 5.10 4.51 Mean 30.89 30.41 26.87 29.29 26.31 25.89 24.76 27.47 31.45 32.68 29.92 29.12 29.18 26.66 27.06 31.38 24.20 SD 4.38 4.88 6.31 4.75 4.38 4.51 4.65 4.42 4.48 4.20 4.88 5.10 4.47 4.40 5.76 4.77 4.59 Mean 31.61 31.73 27.84 30.03 26.96 26.64 24.71 28.24 32.43 33.47 30.86 29.97 30.39 27.17 28.09 32.49 24.00 SD 4.26 4.71 6.54 4.60 4.47 4.49 4.85 4.51 4.11 3.86 4.60 4.92 4.28 4.67 6.04 4.71 4.87 United Kingdom Canada Australia Rest of the World Total
*United States = 2,996, United Kingdom = 1,060, Canada = 441, Australia = 621, Rest of the World = 882.
45
EIQ16 User Manual
5.10 Impression management

The impact of response style on scores was analyzed by comparing the results of test takers with high and low impression management scores that is, sten scores of 8 to 10 and sten scores of 1 to 3. This revealed that there were statistically significant differences related to response style in average scale sten scores on many of the scales. Table 16 shows the differences in mean scores for high and low levels of impression management rounded to the nearest whole number.
Table 16. Differences in mean scale sten scores for impression management (n = 6,000)
Impression Management Sten Scale 1 Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Median -1 -1 -1 0 0 1 1 -1 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 -2 -1 2 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 1 1 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 3 0 0 -1 -1 0 1 1 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 10 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -2 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1
46
EIQ16 User Manual
6.0 Norms
The comparison group was created from an international sample of just under 15,000 persons who completed the online assessment between December 2009 and May 2011 at www.myskillsprofile.com. This incidental sample included people who had taken the test as individual customers and people who had taken the test as part of corporate selection and development initiatives. Respondents aged under 16 or over 70 were deleted from the sample. Duplicate cases and cases with missing personal data were also identified and deleted. This left a sample of just under 10,000 respondents two thirds of whom were women. A data set of 6,000 cases was then created from two equally-sized gender data sets. The cases for the gender data sets were selected randomly using SPSS. Age and gender The age and gender distribution of the sample is shown in Table 17. There were roughly equal numbers in the four age categories from age 16 to age 54. About one in ten respondents was aged 55-64 and one in one hundred was in the 65-70 age band. The mean age of the sample was 37.7 with a standard deviation of 12.9.
Table 17. Age and gender distribution of EIQ16 comparison group (n = 6,000)
Age Band
Male 618
Female 632 10.5% 649 10.8% 698 11.6% 722 12.0% 274 4.6% 25 0.4% 3,000 50.0%
Total 1,250 20.8% 1,284 21.4% 1,432 23.9% 1,392 23.2% 567 9.5% 75 1.3% 6,000 100.0%
16-24 10.3% 635 25-34 10.6% 734 35-44 12.2% 670 45-54 11.2% 293 55-64 4.9% 50 65-70 0.8% 3,000 Total 50.0%
47
EIQ16 User Manual
Ethnic origin Table 18 shows the distribution by race and ethnicity. Seventy two percent described themselves as White, 7.2 percent said they were Asian, 6.6 percent reported that they were Black and 4.2 percent said they were Hispanic and Latino.
Table 18. Ethnic origin of respondents in EIQ16 comparison group (n = 6,000)

Ethnic Origin Male 254 Asian 4.2% 199 Black 3.3% 40 Chinese 0.7% 132 Mixed 2.2% Spanish/Hispanic/ Latino 125 2.1% 2,126 White 35.4% 124 Other 2.1% 3,000 Total 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 2.4% 3,000 4.5% 6,000 36.8% 145 72.2% 269 2.1% 128 2.1% 2,208 4.3% 253 4.2% 4,334 0.4% 124 1.0% 256 3.3% 21 6.6% 61 3.0% 196 7.2% 395 Female 178 Total 432
48
EIQ16 User Manual
Country of origin Table 19 gives the country distribution of the sample. Most respondents came from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia. About half the sample was from the United States, one fifth from the United Kingdom and one tenth from Australia.
Table 19. Country of origin of respondents in EIQ16 comparison group (n = 6,000)
Country
Male 1,519
Female 1,477 24.6% 559 9.3% 236 3.9% 329 5.5% 399 6.7% 3,000 50.0%
Total 2,996 49.9% 1,060 17.7% 441 7.4% 621 10.4% 882 14.7% 6,000 100.0%
United States 25.3% 501 United Kingdom 8.4% 205 Canada 3.4% 292 Australia 4.9% 483 Other 8.1% 3,000 Total 50.0%
Table 20 shows the top twenty sectors represented in the sample. The largest groups were education and health services making up about one quarter of the sample.
49
EIQ16 User Manual
Table 20. Top twenty sectors in EIQ16 comparison group (n = 6,000)
Sector Education Health services Government Other services Accounting Consulting Sales Food/beverage Medical/health care devices Construction Social services Engineering Retail/wholesale Arts/culture Other non-profit Food service/lodging Computers/software Advertising/marketing Computer-related services
Frequency 994 622 407 319 188 180 178 169 154 153 144 142 133 130 127 110 109 104 103
Percent 16.6 10.4 6.8 5.3 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7
Cumulative Percent 16.6 26.9 33.7 39.0 42.2 45.2 48.1 51.0 53.5 56.1 58.5 60.8 63.1 65.2 67.3 69.2 71.0 72.7 74.4
Table 21 provides norms for the EIQ16 scales using the Standard Ten (sten) scoring approach and Table 22 provides percentiles for the scales.
50
EIQ16 User Manual Table 21. EIQ16 general population norms (n = 6,000)
sten Scale 1 Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management 8-21 8-20 8-13 8-18 8-16 8-16 8-14 8-17 8-23 8-25 8-20 8-18 8-20 8-16 8-14 8-20 8-13 2 22-24 21-23 14-16 19-22 17-19 17-19 15-16 18-20 24-25 26-27 21-23 19-21 21-23 17-19 15-17 21-24 14-16 3 25-27 24-26 17-19 23-25 20-22 20-21 17-19 21-23 26-27 28-29 24-25 22-24 24-25 20-22 18-21 25-27 17-18 4 28-29 27-29 20-24 26-27 23-24 22-24 20-21 24-25 28-30 30-31 26-28 25-27 26-28 23-24 22-24 28-30 19-21 5 30-31 30-31 25-28 28-29 25-26 25-26 22-24 26-28 31 32 29-30 28-30 29-30 25-27 25-28 31-32 22-23 6 32-33 32-33 29-31 30-31 27-28 27-28 25-26 29-30 32-33 33-34 31-32 31 31-32 28-29 29-31 33-34 24-25 7 34-35 34-35 32-33 32-33 29-30 29-30 27-29 31 34-36 35-37 33-34 32-33 33 30-31 32-33 35-36 26-28 8 36-37 36-38 34-36 34-36 31-32 31-32 30-31 32-33 37-38 38 35-37 34-36 34-35 32-33 34-36 37-38 29-30 9 38 39 37-38 37-38 33-34 33-34 32-33 34-36 39 39 38-39 37-38 36-37 34-35 37-38 39 31-33 10 39-40 40 39-40 39-40 35-40 35-40 34-40 37-40 40 40 40 39-40 38-40 36-40 39-40 40 34-40 Self-analysis Analysis of others Self-expression Discrimination Thinking Judgment Sensitivity Problem solving Symptoms Causes Complexity Transitions Openness Monitoring Self-control Managing others Impression management 31.61 31.73 27.84 30.03 26.96 26.64 24.71 28.24 32.43 33.47 30.86 29.97 30.39 27.17 28.09 32.49 24.00 4.26 4.71 6.54 4.60 4.47 4.49 4.85 4.51 4.11 3.86 4.60 4.92 4.28 4.67 6.04 4.71 4.87 Scale Mean SD
51
EIQ16 User Manual Table 22. Percentiles for EIQ16 scales (n = 6,000)
Analysis of others
Managing others
Problem solving
Self-expression
Discrimination
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 1 1 2 3 4 7 9 12 16 21 1 1 1 2 3 4 6 8 11 13 17 22 1 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 13 16 19 23 26 30 34 38 43 48 1 1 2 2 3 4 6 8 12 15 20 26 33 1 1 1 2 3 4 6 8 11 15 20 27 35 43 52 62 1 1 1 2 3 4 6 9 12 16 22 30 37 47 55 65 1 1 2 3 5 7 10 14 20 25 33 39 49 56 64 71 78 1 1 2 2 4 5 8 10 14 21 26 33 40 49 1 1 4 6 9 12 17 1 1 1 2 2 3 5 8 1 1 1 2 3 5 6 9 12 17 22 28 1 1 1 2 3 4 6 8 11 15 18 22 27 33 1 1 2 3 4 6 10 14 19 24 31 1 1 1 2 3 4 7 9 12 16 20 27 33 42 49 59 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 12 15 18 22 28 32 37 43 49 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 13 17 1 1 2 4 5 8 13 18 24 31 39 46 55 63 71 77 82
Self-analysis
Self-control
Transitions
Complexity
Monitoring
Symptoms
Raw score
Sensitivity
Openness
Judgment
Thinking
Causes
52
EIQ16 User Manual

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 26 35 44 56 68 76 83 89 92 96 98 99 27 35 42 54 64 72 79 85 90 93 97 99 53 60 66 76 81 86 89 92 95 97 98 99 41 52 61 72 80 85 89 93 95 97 99 70 79 86 91 94 97 98 99 74 82 87 92 95 97 98 99 83 88 92 95 97 98 99 58 68 76 85 90 93 96 97 99 21 30 36 56 63 71 77 83 87 91 94 99 11 17 25 45 57 65 71 77 82 86 91 99 34 43 51 65 73 80 85 89 92 95 97 99 40 49 57 71 79 85 89 92 95 97 98 99 37 47 56 68 77 85 90 93 96 98 99 67 76 83 89 93 96 97 99 55 62 68 75 81 86 90 93 96 98 99 21 28 35 45 55 65 73 80 86 92 96 99 87 91 93 96 97 98 99
53
EIQ16 User Manual
7.0 References
Barchard, K. A. (2001). Seven components potentially related to emotional intelligence. International Personality Item Pool: A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of Advanced Measures of Personality Traits and Other Individual Differences (http://ipip.ori.org/). Internet Web Site. Bartram, D. (2002). EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological Tests: Notes for Reviewers: European Federation of Psychologists Associations. http://www.efpa.be. Bartram, D. (2006). The SHL Universal Competency Framework. SHL White Paper. Thames Ditton: SHL Group plc. Fan, H., Jackson, T., Yang, X., Tang, W. and Zhang, J. (2010) The factor structure of the MayerSaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test V 2.0 (MSCEIT): a meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 48 (7). pp. 781-785. International Personality Item Pool (2001). A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of Advanced Measures of Personality Traits and Other Individual Differences. http://ipip.ori.org. Mayer J.D., Salovey P. and Caruso D.R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Multi-Health Systems, Inc. Toronto, Ontario. O'Boyle, E.H., Humphrey, R.H., Pollack, J.M., Hawver, T.H. and Story, P.A. (2011). The relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(5), 88818. Robertson, I. T. (1997). Personality and Work Behaviour: Keynote Address to 2nd Australian Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference. SPSS for Windows, Rel. 11.0.1. 2001. Chicago: SPSS Inc. Tabachnick, G.T. and Fidell, S. (1989). Using Multivariate Statistics. HarperCollinsPublishers, Inc.
54
EIQ16 User Manual
Annex 1: Sample Feedback Report

2015 EIQ Reliability

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2015 EIQ Reliability

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EIQ16

emotional intelligence questionnaire

Emotional Intelligence Assessment

EIQ16 User Manual

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

2.0 ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................9

3.0 SCALE DESCRIPTIONS...................................................................................10

4.0 INTERPRETATION AND FEEDBACK REPORT ..............................................28

5.0 RELIABILITY & VALIDITY................................................................................30

6.0 NORMS .............................................................................................................46

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

7.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................53 ANNEX 1: SAMPLE FEEDBACK REPORT ...........................................................54

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

1.1 EIQ16 questionnaire

1.2 Concept model

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

1.3 Factor Model

Perceiving, understanding and managing emotions

Perceiving and understanding emotions Using emotions

Using emotions Managing emotions

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

1.6 Psychometric criteria

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Table 1. Summary of EIQ16 key areas and scales

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

2.1 Administered by professional

2.2 Direct access

2.3 Scoring and norming

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

3.0 Scale Descriptions

3.1 Scale items

3.2 Relationships with other scales

3.3 Scale contents

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 1. Reading people

Scale 1.1. Self-analysis High scorers

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 1. Reading people

Scale 1.2. Analysis of others High scorers

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 1. Reading people

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 1. Reading people

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 2. Using emotions

Scale 2.1. Thinking High scorers

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com

EIQ16 User Manual

Key Area 2. Using emotions

Scale 2.2. Judgment High scorers

2011 Published by MySkillsProfile.com