Validity Evidence Based on Internal Structure of Scores of the Emotional Quotient Inventory: Youth Version Short (EQ-i: YV-S) in a Chinese Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the lack of any Chinese instrument validated for emotional intelligence (EI) among adolescents, the purpose of this study was to explore new sources of validity evidence drawn from scores on the Emotional Quotient Inventory: Youth Version Short (EQ-i: YV-S) in a sample of Chinese adolescents. The sample was composed of 406 adolescents (236 girls). Results support the multidimensionality of the EQ-i: YV-S, but its hierarchical structure did not receive empirical support. Three of the four main subscales (all but interpersonal) had acceptable reliability indices. In addition, although the impact of the Positive Impression subscale on responses to the main scales was generally low, the effect is not ignorable, and its impact should be modeled in further investigations of the EQ-i: YV-S. Finally, four main subscales of EQ-i: YV-S showed significant power in the prediction of general self-concept and moderate temporal stability. The findings provide overall support for the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of EQ-i: YV-S.
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 | 0.014 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".