Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![Emotional Intelligence and Social Problem Solving:]( "Emotional Intelligence and Social Problem Solving:")
Emotional Intelligence and Social Problem Solving:32,99 €![Emotional Intelligence in Organizations]( "Emotional Intelligence in Organizations")
Emotional Intelligence in Organizations51,99 €![EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND LEADERSHIP]( "EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND LEADERSHIP")
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND LEADERSHIP51,99 €![Exploring the Validity of Emotional Intelligence]( "Exploring the Validity of Emotional Intelligence")
Exploring the Validity of Emotional Intelligence44,99 €![Counselor's attitudes toward crying and their emotional intelligence]( "Counselor's attitudes toward crying and their emotional intelligence")
Counselor's attitudes toward crying and their emotional intelligence38,99 €![MMPI-2 Personality Profiles of Male Victims of Domestic Violence]( "MMPI-2 Personality Profiles of Male Victims of Domestic Violence")
MMPI-2 Personality Profiles of Male Victims of Domestic Violence38,99 €![Emotional Processing Deficits in Parkinson's Disease]( "Emotional Processing Deficits in Parkinson's Disease")
Emotional Processing Deficits in Parkinson's Disease32,99 €
Emotional intelligence (EI) has become an active
topic among researchers. Such attention has increased
awareness of EI but also fueled controversy. Much of
the conflict has focused on the multiple definitions
of EI. This dilemma introduces issues of convergent
validity and questions about discriminant validity
between EI and similar constructs such as
personality. The purpose of this study was to explore
some of these controversial issues. Participants in
the study provided responses on three instruments:
the MSCEIT, EQ-i, and 16PF. Discriminant validity
between EI and personality factors was examined by
comparing results from the two EI questionnaires with
the personality inventory. Convergent validity of the
two EI measures was also assessed, and gender
differences were explored. The MSCEIT was found to
measure components of EI separate from personality,
whereas the EQ-i was determined to measure EI
competencies that are related to and influenced by
personality. The MSCEIT and EQ-i were also found to
measure entirely different concepts from each other,
and no gender differences were detected. Implications
of these findings and suggestions for future research
are discussed.
topic among researchers. Such attention has increased
awareness of EI but also fueled controversy. Much of
the conflict has focused on the multiple definitions
of EI. This dilemma introduces issues of convergent
validity and questions about discriminant validity
between EI and similar constructs such as
personality. The purpose of this study was to explore
some of these controversial issues. Participants in
the study provided responses on three instruments:
the MSCEIT, EQ-i, and 16PF. Discriminant validity
between EI and personality factors was examined by
comparing results from the two EI questionnaires with
the personality inventory. Convergent validity of the
two EI measures was also assessed, and gender
differences were explored. The MSCEIT was found to
measure components of EI separate from personality,
whereas the EQ-i was determined to measure EI
competencies that are related to and influenced by
personality. The MSCEIT and EQ-i were also found to
measure entirely different concepts from each other,
and no gender differences were detected. Implications
of these findings and suggestions for future research
are discussed.