MacCann, C. (2010). Further examination of emotional intelligence as a standard intelligence: A latent variable analysis of fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 490-496.
Abstract
This study tests whether emotional intelligence (EI) is distinct from existing factors of intelligence after controlling for method factors in EI measurement. The relationship between EI, fluid intelligence (Gf), and crystallized intelligence (Gc) latent factors is examined in a sample of Australian undergraduates (N = 207). EI measures are all multiple-choice so as to control for response format, and the study also examines the effect of consensus scoring on the distinction of EI from Gf and Gc. Results show that EI forms a latent factor distinct from Gf and Gc, though strongly related to Gc, and that consensus scoring has only minor effects on the factor structure. EI and Gc factors show similar relationships with big five personality, relating only to Openness. Females tend to score higher on EI, whereas males tend to score higher on Gf and Gc. It is suggested that EI might be considered a different content domain for acquired knowledge than is typically examined by Gc tests, and may have different motivational pathways to development.
Article Outline
Technorati Tags: Psychology, school psychology, developmental psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, neuropsychology, special education, intelligence, cognitive abilities, cognition, intelligence theories, CHC theory, CHC, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, intelligence, cognition, IQ, IQ tests, Gf, Gc, EI, emotional intelligence, factor analysis
Abstract
This study tests whether emotional intelligence (EI) is distinct from existing factors of intelligence after controlling for method factors in EI measurement. The relationship between EI, fluid intelligence (Gf), and crystallized intelligence (Gc) latent factors is examined in a sample of Australian undergraduates (N = 207). EI measures are all multiple-choice so as to control for response format, and the study also examines the effect of consensus scoring on the distinction of EI from Gf and Gc. Results show that EI forms a latent factor distinct from Gf and Gc, though strongly related to Gc, and that consensus scoring has only minor effects on the factor structure. EI and Gc factors show similar relationships with big five personality, relating only to Openness. Females tend to score higher on EI, whereas males tend to score higher on Gf and Gc. It is suggested that EI might be considered a different content domain for acquired knowledge than is typically examined by Gc tests, and may have different motivational pathways to development.
Article Outline
1. Introduction
1.1. Summary of hypotheses
2. Method
2.1. Participants
2.2. Materials
2.2.1. Situational Test of Emotional Understanding – short form (STEU)
2.2.2. Situational Test of Emotion Management – short form (STEM)
2.2.3. Blends and Changes test from the MEIS
2.2.4. Vocabulary test
2.2.5. Esoteric analogies
2.2.6. General knowledge
2.2.7. Letter series
2.2.8. Nonsense syllogisms
2.2.9. Letter counting
2.2.10. Five factor model of personality
3. Results
3.1. Reliability and descriptive statistics
3.2. Structural analyses
3.2.1. EFA
3.2.1.1. Intelligence tests scored dichotomously
3.2.1.2. Intelligence tests scored by consensus
3.2.2. CFA
3.2.2.1. Intelligence tests scored dichotomously
3.2.2.2. Intelligence tests scored by consensus
3.2.3. Hierarchical factor analysis
3.3. Personality correlates of Gf, Gc, and EI factors
4. Discussion
4.1. The effect of consensus scoring on factor structure
4.2. Limitations and future directions
5. General conclusion
Acknowledgements
References
Technorati Tags: Psychology, school psychology, developmental psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, neuropsychology, special education, intelligence, cognitive abilities, cognition, intelligence theories, CHC theory, CHC, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, intelligence, cognition, IQ, IQ tests, Gf, Gc, EI, emotional intelligence, factor analysis
No comments:
Post a Comment