MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051348604 · doi:10.1002/per.552

Predicting psychological health: assessing the incremental validity of emotional intelligence beyond personality, Type A behaviour, and daily hassles

2005· article· en· W2051348604 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Personality · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityIncremental validityEmotional intelligenceTraitStressorClinical psychologyType A and Type B personality theoryType D personalityMental healthBig Five personality traitsPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyTest validitySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although some research has linked emotional intelligence (EI) and psychological health, little research has examined EI's ability to predict health outcomes after controlling for related constructs, or EI's ability to moderate the stressor–strain relationship. The present study explored the relationships among EI (as assessed by a trait‐based measure, the EQ‐i), Big Five personality factors, Type A Behaviour Pattern (TABP), daily hassles, and psychological health/strain factors (in terms of perceived well‐being, strain, and three components of burnout). The EQ‐i was highly correlated with most aspects of personality and TABP. After controlling for the impact of hassles, personality, and TABP, the five EQ‐i subscales accounted for incremental variance in two of the five psychological health outcomes. However, the EQ‐i scales failed to moderate the hassles–strain relationship. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it