A new approach to assessing emotional understanding.

Abstract

This article describes (a) the origins of, (b) rationale underlying, and (c) preliminary validity evidence for, a new ability measure of emotional understanding (EU), a major component of emotional intelligence. A novel conceptual approach-the empathic agent paradigm (EAP)-provided the theoretical foundation. The EAP results in a veridical, logically defensible scoring key, a major development for the assessment of EI, which otherwise has relied on less defensible approaches. Validity evidence for test score interpretations of the Empathic Agent Paradigm Test (EAPT) was subsequently obtained in two studies. In Study 1, participants (N ϭ 321) completed the EAPT (␣ ϭ .72 at testlet level), along with measures of classical intelligence, the Big Five personality traits, and a situational judgment measure of EU. This study provides factorial, convergent, and discriminant validity evidence for EAPT test score interpretations. In Study 2 (N ϭ 158), an important assumption about the response processes in the EAPT was verified experimentally, in the process providing further validity evidence for test score interpretations. In sum, findings suggest that the EAPT is a promising new maximum performance measure for the assessment of EU. Public Significance StatementFindings from this paper suggest that the assessment of emotional understanding-a core component of emotional intelligence-can be improved using a test design that ensures responses can be scored unambiguously: right or wrong. This measurement approach results in maximum, rather than typical, performance indicators. This makes the current approach different from widely used self-report measures of EI but consistent with the measurement intention to assess human cognitive abilities.

It looks like construct validity, but look again: Comment on Clutterbuck et al. (2021) and recommendations for test developers in the broad “empathy” domain.

“…When participants rate their own abilities, their answers may more strongly reflect general self-confidence, narcissism, lack of self-insight, agreeableness, or other theoretically distinct constructs than they reflect their intended construct: actual ability. This is a main reason behavioral tests of such abilities are preferred (e.g., in this journal, see Hellwig et al, 2020).…”

“…but also on broader theoretical judgments. Given a lack of set thresholds, test developers and evaluators may encounter confirmation biases when evaluating validity: an association strength could be perceived as support for a measure's validity by one scholar while being seen as a sign of invalidity by another scholar (e.g., consider Hellwig et al, 2020: Is a correlation between two behavioral tests of r = .70 evidence that the two tests are or are not redundant with one another?). We encourage researchers to play "Devil's advocate" when evidence is ambiguous.…”

“…Second, the QCAE OS and IRI PT scales themselves do not possess construct validity for the purpose of deconflating “mentalizing” from other constructs such as affective empathy; these scales demonstrate particularly strong correlations not only with affective empathy (e.g., caring concern for others) but also with trait agreeableness (e.g., Murphy et al, 2020). It is thus probable that, unlike behavioral tests of social cognition accuracy, which are rarely correlated strongly with such general personality variables (e.g., Hellwig et al, 2020; see Hall et al, 2009), the FIMI will be heavily suffused with construct-irrelevant variance.…”

Once More, with Feeling: A Case Study in Emotional Intelligence Testing of Library Staff

“…The Emotional Ties section of the assessment requires test-takers to match a described scenario with a face realistically displaying the emotion likely triggered in a participant in the situation (Criteria, 2020). Other situational judgment tests with a similar premise include the Changes section of the MSCEIT and the Situational Test of Emotional Understanding, though scoring of these tests remains a challenge (Hellwig, Roberts, & Schulze, 2020). The case study involved 46 volunteer participants who were current public library staff members.…”

Vietnamese Undergraduate Students' Perceived Changes in Emotional Intelligence and Coping Strategies

“…She argues that the application of emotional intelligence in everyday decision-making could enhance people's rationality and result in more critical and rational decision-making as well as more effective stress coping. Similarly, Hellwig et al (2020) found that higher emotional understanding resulted in higher reasoning ability and better ability to comprehend and interpret what is going on in situations, which are considered essential abilities that encompass effective and productive coping.…”