2014
DOI: 10.4102/sajip.v40i1.1192
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The psychometric properties of the Emotional Quotient Inventory 2.0 in South Africa

Abstract: Orientation: Psychological assessments require continued refinement, updating and evaluation.Research purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the psychometric properties of the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) 2.0 in South Africa. Item response and classical test theory methods are employed to investigate its item functioning and factor structure.Motivation for the study: Although there has been some scientific research published on the EQ-i in South Africa, there has been no research on the revise… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2.0. endemic to studies conducted in South Africa, with very few investigations conducted on the hierarchical structure of EI before inspecting the predictive validity of a general score of EI. Van Zyl (2014) conducted the only identifiable study in South Africa that inspected a higher-order model for EI, but did not find evidence, in terms of model-data fit based on a confirmatory factor model, to support a general factor of EI. Since the study conducted by Van Zyl (2014), specific factor analytical procedures have been recommended by Credé and Harms (2015), which might shed some additional light on the hierarchical structure of EI in South Africa.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…2.0. endemic to studies conducted in South Africa, with very few investigations conducted on the hierarchical structure of EI before inspecting the predictive validity of a general score of EI. Van Zyl (2014) conducted the only identifiable study in South Africa that inspected a higher-order model for EI, but did not find evidence, in terms of model-data fit based on a confirmatory factor model, to support a general factor of EI. Since the study conducted by Van Zyl (2014), specific factor analytical procedures have been recommended by Credé and Harms (2015), which might shed some additional light on the hierarchical structure of EI in South Africa.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The EQ-i 2.0 demonstrates excellent test-retest reliability in the 2-4 week range (0.92) and maintains good reliability after 8 weeks (0.81). [54] If seeking to measure ability-model EI, the MSCEIT V2 was the only ability-model instrument included in this review, but it also is widely cited with excellent test-retest reliability, high discriminant validity from measures of trait-EI, analytic intelligence, and personality constructs, as well as incremental validity associated with psychological well-being, depression, anxiety, quality of social interactions, and aspects of job performance. [52,53] Additional attention can be paid to construct validity of the varying instruments as researchers establish what specific characteristics of EI they're interested in exploring.…”
Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The factor structure showed poor fit indices for Optimism, Impulse Control, and Empathy (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; RMSEA = 0.192, RMSEA = 0.149, RMSEA = 0.155, respectively). The reliability ranged from ω = 0.72 for Flexibility to ω = 0.91 for Self-Perception, Interpersonal, Decision Making, and Stress Management ( Van Zyl, 2014 ). The EQ-i 2.0 measured the EI associated with leadership and job performance (from r = 0.20 to r = 0.47) ( Stein and Deonarine, 2015 ; Ackley, 2016 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%