An Investigation of the Psychometric Properties of Emotional Intelligence Scale Using Item Response Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students’ emotional intelligence represents an important variable that is connected to students’ academic achievementand life success. One main challenge when measuring students’ emotional intelligence is to have a valid and reliablemeasure that captures this emotional construct. The current study aims to investigate the psychometric properties of theArabic version of Alsmadoni emotional intelligence scale (AEIS-25) using item response theory (IRT) models. Thestudy was applied among 3030 students in grades 7-10 in Oman.Data model fit was examined through evaluating IRT assumptions (i.e. unidimensional assumption and localindependence assumption) and goodness of fit (i.e. items fit and persons fit). It was found that item parameters wereacceptable and satisfactory, which indicates the appropriateness of AEIS to examine emotional intelligence amongadolescents. Findings from exploratory factor analysis for 2924 students and for the remaining 24 items indicated thepresence of a 2-factor model since the third factor was loaded by only one item. AEIS was considered as a reliable andpotentially valid measure of trait emotional intelligence.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".