Different assesmen of Emotional intelligence

 

TOPIC 2: The assessment of EI.

 

Following my topic 2: 

 

First of all, I need to say that I handed over my PEC 1 without any answer about some questions topic 2. On the contrary my mate maid a fantastic task 2: congratulations!. I forgot to answer someones, but not others.

 

Despite answering PEC, I didn´t my answers so good some weeks ago, due to I don´t mention Validity, Reliability, or even Variance or Correlations. It is important to mention because I can see a lot of questions about that and nowadays I am considering adding it at the end. Even though that

 I honestly believe that Reliability and Validity are both math’s dates and there is a variable interpretation according to culture and individuals as well. I said that because I remembered a Pilot balance for young people when I was younger, in the Red Cross. In that case, I did some instruments to measuring and even a Liker scale, I tried a pilot assessment. 

 

Despite good statistics dates, not every think is statistics, not everything is a number, and they are emotions as well. 

 

 I would like to summarize my ideas of the second topic into 2 parts: 

On the one hand, validity and reliability, internal consistency, or maybe variance!

On the other hand, EI models; TEIque, TMMS, EQi, MSCEIT,...and so on.

Finally, my opinion is that we are humans and emotional living creatures. 

but increasingly they are hundreds and hundreds of humanoids, adds or health prosthesis because technology is from time to time better.

 

After all, I would like to say that they are some different instruments to measure trait and ability of EI. Furthermore,   they were some of them which are mixes too.

 

On the one hand, I like speaking about Reliability and Validity. Using Google Scholar, I search papers exploring this literature and more competing measures of EI. Both of them on Uned and the net.

 

We can find different constructs for measuring: ability, trait, and Mixte

For instance, MSCEIT is an ability model, TEIque is a trait model or even Bar-On is a mixes model (with ability measurement and trait).

 

 

TEIque. Internal consistency=. 89,

                   But we find different references in facets and 4 factors=.64 and .92

              Reliability,test.retest=.59 and .86

              Constructo-Validity=some evidence in factorial analysis 

 

MSCEIT. Internal consistency=.91 (.81manegement e, .77 compression, .76 facilitation and .9 for                        perception)

                Reliability=.93

                Discriminant-Validity in personality and well-being

 

STEM      Internal consistency are different by different studies (steu=.71 or stem=.68) 

                 Stem -Y, Reliability=.73/ Stem -YNV=.80

                 Different types of validity

 

EQi           Internal consistency=.97

                 Reliability=it´s different by time .85 or. 75

                 Validity=.59

In my opinion there are too many variables and constructs and models to measuring EI and maybe too much information as well.

 

On the other hand, I mention 2 exploratory tables about different models: and assessment

The first one is referred to MSCEIT, Goleman and Bar-On (EQ-i 2.0) and

The second one it referred to TMMS, TEIque, WLEIS  and EQ-i,BAR-on

 

MSCEIT	Goleman	Bar-On, 133 items,  5 factor
-Perceiving emotions   -Facilitating thought   -Understanding                           emotions   -Managing emotions	-Self-awareness   -Self-management   -Self-awareness   -Relationship management	-Self- perception   -Interpersonal   -Decision-making   -Self- expression   -Stress-management

 

The second one it referred to TMMS, TEIque, WLEIS  and EQ-i,/BAR-on

 

TMMS, test 30 items /5 point Liker	TEIque, 150 items (15 facets and 4 factors)	WLEIS scale Wrong and Law EI scale	EQi 133 items and 15 subscales
Scores on 3 factors:   -Attention to emotions   -emotional clarity   -emotional repair	Questionaire more versatile and broadcast     4 elements:   -emotion   -work   -people feeling   -relationship	Consist of 2 parts; 1)20 escenarios   2)20 ability pairs     WEIS is a scale based in 4 ability dimension:   1)expression e. in self   2)recognition e, .other   3)regulation e in the self   4)use e to performance	Facets limitation:   -Problem solving   -reality testing independence   -emotion perception   -e expression   -e. regulation

 

 

To sum up,

 

 

 

Validity, Reliability, or even Variance or Correlations. There are important to mention because I can see a lot of questions about that and nowadays I am considering adding it at the end. Even though that

 I honestly believe that Reliability and Validity are both math’s dates and there is a variable interpretation according to culture and individuals as well

 

Some important notions that should be emphasized are: reliability and validity. Internal consistency and variance. Is more there is a need to stress the social  and publica awarenwss dimensions of learning

 

Variance (a)= it is a measure of the dispersion of the distribution of the test or measurement results under repeatability conditions; test-retest

 

Reliance (tool/instrument)= there are some methods most regular to show/prove the internal consistency in a test-retest. Item of a test is measure by alfa de Cronbach. If the alfa coefficient obtained is more than 0,7, then we have a good internal consistency.

 

Validity(items of the test) and for validating contents My question about this is:  Are data collection manuals sufficiently clear to ensure Validity in the field work?