The Reliability of Spiritual Intelligence Self-Report Inventory Instrument among Brunei’s Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spiritual intelligence (SQ) promotes better health behavior and quality of life. Those with a higher level of spirituality live longer and are happier, satisfied with their job, and live more productive lives. The nature of SQ makes it attractive for Brunei’s teachers. The SQ of an individual can be measured and developed. Therefore, the quality of SQ is necessary for teachers too. This article adapts the Spiritual Intelligence Self-Report Inventory (SISRI-24) developed by King (2008) in Brunei Darussalam and examines Brunei’s teachers’ SQ. This study was one of the first in Brunei and secondary education. However, there exists a substantial controversy in the measurement of SQ. Hence, in this study, based on the review of various measures of SQ, it was decided to analyze the SISRI-24 developed by King (2008). The scale was initially developed and validated in Canada. A reliability study was conducted to identify whether the scale validly measures SQ in the Bruneian scenario. Supervisors and pilot studies authorized this instrument to obtain credibility among Brunei’s teachers. According to the results, the overall reliability value was 0.832. In addition, the results of EFA revealed that the item communalities in the SISRI-24 ranged from 0.436 to 0.738. Based on these findings, the SISRI-24 questionnaires have high reliability. It is suitable for use among teachers in Brunei. Keywords: spiritual intelligence, self-report inventory, Brunei’s teacher, reliability. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55463/hkjss.issn.1021-3619.61.34
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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".