Incremental Validity of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire-Short Form (TEIQue-SF)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Copyright © 2015 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. This study examined the incremental validity of the adult short form of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue-SF) in predicting 7 construct-relevant criteria beyond the variance explained by the Five-factor model and coping strategies. Additionally, the relative contributions of the questionnaire's 4 subscales were assessed. Two samples of Canadian university students completed the TEIQue-SF, along with measures of the Big Five, coping strategies (Sample 1 only), and emotion-laden criteria. The TEIQue-SF showed consistent incremental effects beyond the Big Five or the Big Five and coping strategies, predicting all 7 criteria examined across the 2 samples. Furthermore, 2 of the 4 TEIQue-SF subscales accounted for the measure's incremental validity. Although the findings provide good support for the validity and utility of the TEIQue-SF, directions for further research are emphasized. © 2015
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".