How can we best conceptualize and assess emotional intelligence (EI)? Current Issues, problems and pitfalls

Moshe Zeidner, Haifa, Israel
Carolyn MacCann, Princeton, USA
Richard Roberts, Princeton, USA

The construct of emotional intelligence (EI) has emerged as one of the most high profile and protean ability constructs of this kind (Zeidner et al., in press). EI research has prospered, in part, due to the increasing personal importance of intelligence for people in modern society, with EI commonly claimed to predict important educational and occupational criteria above and beyond that predicted by general intellectual ability. However, despite a high level of interest in EI among both researchers and practitioners, the science of EI is in its infancy, and many key questions remain unanswered.   One such question is: How do we conceptualize EI? Is it best construed as an ability or personality trait?  Another key unsettled question is how should EI best be assessed? At present, both objective tests and self-report questionnaires have been developed, but these measures are beset with some serious flaws and difficulties.  First, scores on different instruments fail to converge particularly well. These measures also relate differently to other individual difference constructs. Objective tests, notably those developed by Mayer et al. (2000), are moderately correlated with both general intelligence and personality dimensions. Self-report scales are very highly confounded with existing personality constructs but are independent of conventional intelligence (e.g., Dawda & Hart, 2000). Furthermore, the practical utility of tests for EI is limited by these conceptual and psychometric deficiencies. There are some indications of predictive validity (e.g., Mayer et al., 2000), but as yet there is too little validity for the tests to be used with confidence in making real-world decisions, such as hiring a job applicant on the basis of their score on a test of EI (Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2004). The purpose of this INTRODUCTORY workshop is to familiarize practicing psychologists, researchers, and graduate students with current methods of conceptualizing and assessing emotional intelligence (EI) and problems and fissures when applying these measures for research or practical purposes.  Participants will learn about prevalent conceptual models, key tests and measures, and problems and pitfalls associated with their usage. I begin by surveying key models of EI and move on to presentingmixed vs. ability-based conceptual models of EI, pointing out key similarities and differences between these models. I then survey key measures for assessing mixed models of EI (EQ_I, Schutte, ECI, etc.).   Among other topics, I will discuss test item content and test dimensionality, evidence for construct and predictive validity, scoring issues, and major problem and pitfalls in applying self-report measures in EI assessment and research.  I then move on to discuss ability-based models of EI, focusing on the MSCEIT, the most prevalent performance measures of EI.  I examine test structure and content, scoring procedures (consensus, expert, target), along with issues relating to test reliability, construct and predictive validity.  I then point out some key concerns in using the MSCEIT for EI assessment in research and practical settings, including unstable dimensionality and factor structure, problematic branch reliability, nonveridical scoring procedures, and contradictory evidence for predictive validity in applied settings.  I conclude by pointing out some alternative future directions for EI assessment, including experimental paradigms, situational judgment procedures, and behavioral tests.