MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095791382 · doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000267

Incremental Validity of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire-Adolescent Short Form (TEIQue-ASF)

2015· article· en· W2095791382 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 Psychological Assessment · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioemotional selectivity theoryPsychologyEmotional intelligenceDevelopmental psychologyIncremental validityTraitEmotionalityCoping (psychology)Criterion validityAcademic achievementCognitionConstruct validityClinical psychologyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This study examined the incremental validity of the adolescent short form of the Trait Emotional Questionnaire (TEIQue-ASF) in two European secondary-school samples. The TEIQue-ASF was administered as a predictor of socioemotional or academic achievement criteria, along with measures of coping strategies or cognitive ability, respectively. In Dutch high school students (N = 282), the TEIQue-ASF explained variance in all socioemotional criteria, controlling for coping strategies and demographics. In a sample of British preadolescents, the measure showed incremental contributions to academic achievement in the core areas (English, math, and science) of the English curriculum, controlling for cognitive ability subscales and gender (N = 357–491). Implications for the validity and applied utility of the TEIQue-ASF are discussed.

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)0.004
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 score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.212 · 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