New Reliability and Validity Evidence of the Emotional Intelligence Scale
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotional Intelligence Scale (EIS) is a popular EI measure. Yet, it has been criticized for an unclear factor structure, and its psychometric properties were mainly examined in the Western context. This study was to evaluate its psychometric properties based on 1,724 Hong Kong undergraduate students, including its (a) factor structure, (b) internal consistency, and (c) criterion validity. We compared different factor structures reported in the literature. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results supported a six-factor structure, which is tallied with Salovey and Mayer’s EI conceptualization. A multigroup CFA also rendered the structure as gender invariant. The scale was internally consistent with high McDonald’s omega coefficients. Significant association between EI and grade point average (GPA) was revealed in the faculties with people-oriented studies. Furthermore, EI was correlated with social, cognitive, and self-growth outcomes and satisfaction of university experience. The study contributes to clarify the factor structure and provides new reliability and validity evidence of the EIS in the Eastern context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it