Phenotypic and Genetic Relations Between the HEXACO Dimensions and Trait Emotional Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the location of trait emotional intelligence (trait EI or trait emotional self-efficacy) within the context of the HEXACO model - a more comprehensive personality framework than the conventional Big Five structure. A total of 666 MZ and 526 DZ adult twin pairs from the United Kingdom completed the short form of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue-SF) and the short form of the HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-60). Many significant phenotypic correlations between the TEIQue-SF and the HEXACO-60 were obtained, which were strongest for HEXACO Extraversion, and weakest for HEXACO Honesty-Humility. As was expected, Emotionality was the only HEXACO dimension to correlate negatively with TEIQue-SF scores. Bivariate behavioral genetic analyses revealed that all phenotypic correlations were attributable to common genetic and common nonshared environmental factors. The study confirms the validity of trait EI as a constellation of emotional self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".