Justification of the author’s methodology of emotional intelligence research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotional intelligence is one of the new concepts in psychology, which is constantly being studied by many scientists. The article analyses the concepts of emotional intelligence, emotional competence and its structural components. The article considers various concepts of emotional intelligence of such scientists as P. Salovey, D. Mayer, D. Caruso, G. Gardner, R. Bar-On, S. Marcus, G. Dudchak, M. Mykolaychak. The article also analyses domestic concepts of emotional intelligence. As a result of the analysis of various scientific views on the concept of emotional intelligence and methods of its research, it has been made a decision to develop the author’s own psychodiagnostic test. The author has developed own test methodology for studying the emotional component, since there are no similar test methods in the national psychodiagnostics.
 The author's methodology includes five main and two additional scales. The main scales of the methodology include the following properties of emotional intelligence: 1. managing one’s own emotions; 2. managing the emotions of others; 3. understanding one’s own emotions; 4. understanding the emotions of others; 5. empathy. Additional scales of the methodology are the lying scale and the general level of emotional intelligence (calculated by adding the results of the 5 main scales).
 Subsequently, various test methods were considered to study emotional intelligence and its components. The following tests were chosen for correlation: Toronto Alexithymia Scale, N. Hall’s Self-Esteem Emotional Intelligence Inventory, and the Profile of Emotional Competence (PEC).
 A correlation analysis of the own methodology with existing test methods for the study of emotional intelligence has been carried out to confirm its validity. The study proved the validity and reliability of the developed test methodology. Therefore, the developed test methodology is indeed aimed at studying the general level of emotional intelligence and studying its components such as: managing one's own emotions and the emotions of others, understanding one's own emotions and the emotions of others, empathy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".