Transcript Lecture 1 - Psychometric Lab

KV Petrides
Lecture 5
Multiple intelligences and emotional intelligence
Dr. KV Petrides
www.psychometriclab.com
KV Petrides
Multiple ‘intelligences’ I
• Gardner (1983) placed emphasis on the idea that the
traditional understanding of intelligence that relies on IQ
testing is too limited. Instead, he claimed that there exist
eight different types of intelligence:
– Logical/Mathematical
•
logical thinking, detecting patterns, scientific reasoning and deduction; analyse problems, perform
mathematical calculations, understands relationship between cause and effect towards a tangible
outcome or result
– Linguistic
•
words and language, written and spoken; retention, interpretation and explanation of ideas and
information via language, understands relationship between communication and meaning
– Musical
•
musical ability, awareness, appreciation and use of sound; recognition of tonal and rhythmic patterns,
understands relationship between sound and feeling
– Spatial
•
visual and spatial perception; interpretation and creation of visual images; pictorial imagination and
expression; understands relationship between images and meanings, and between space and effect
– Bodily-Kinaesthetic
•
body movement control, manual dexterity, physical agility and balance; eye and body coordination
KV Petrides
Multiple ‘intelligences’ II
– Naturalistic
•
recognize and distinguish between plants and animals; categorizing them; sensitivity to nature and one’s
place within it
– Intrapersonal
•
self-awareness, personal cognisance, personal objectivity, the capability to understand oneself, one's
relationship to others and the world, and one's own need for, and reaction to change
– Interpersonal
•
perception of other people's feelings; ability to relate to others; interpretation of behaviour and
communications; understands the relationships between people and their situations, including other
people
• The notion of MI has been influential in educational settings, but
rejected from mainstream psychological science. Some important
limitations include:
–
–
–
–
Arbitrary redefinition of talents and abilities as intelligences
Arbitrary criteria for including and excluding ‘intelligences’
Lack of empirical support (e.g., Visser, Ashton, & Vernon, 2008).
See also Chen (2004), Waterhouse (2006), and White (2008).
KV Petrides
Background & milestones
• Thornike’s (1920) ‘social intelligence’.
• Gardner’s (1983) ‘multiple intelligences’.
– Intrapersonal intelligence
– Interpersonal intelligence
• ‘Emotional intelligence’ as a term appears in
Greenspan (1989), Leuner (1966), Payne
(1986).
• Salovey & Mayer (1990)
• Goleman (1995)
• Petrides and colleagues (2000-)
– Trait EI versus Ability EI
– Trait emotional intelligence research programme
KV Petrides
Operationalization of EI
• Two crucial issues are involved in the operationalization of
EI (and of any other construct):
– What is the sampling domain of the construct?
– How do we measure the various components of the
sampling domain?
• Until recently – and even now – the first question was
resolved by having as many sampling domains and EI
definitions as researchers in the field.
• Until recently – and even now – the second question was
not even considered, with researchers assuming that the
use of self-report or maximum-performance tests has no
implications for operationalization.
KV Petrides
Trait EI vs ability EI I
• Ability EI (or ‘cognitive-emotional ability’) comprises
actual emotion-related cognitive abilities and should be
measured via maximum-performance tests.
• Trait EI (or ‘trait emotional self-efficacy’) comprises
emotion-related self-perceptions and dispositions and
should be measured via self-report questionnaires.
KV Petrides
Trait EI vs ability EI II
KV Petrides
Veridical scoring in IQ tests
Nonverbal analogies
Raven’s matrices
• The existence of single, invariant, and objectively derived
correct response is a defining characteristic of intelligence
testing.
KV Petrides
Operationalization of ability EI
• If ability EI is a new cognitive ability, then items
or tasks with emotional content must be developed
such that they can be scored according to truly
veridical criteria.
• In other words, the construct in its entirety ought
to be assessed through items that can be responded
to correctly or incorrectly.
• Is it possible to develop EI items along cognitive
ability lines?
– NO: emotional experiences are inherently subjective
(Brody, 2004; Pérez, Petrides, & Furnham, 2005;
Roberts, Zeidner, & Matthews, 2001; Emotion).
KV Petrides
Pérez, Petrides, & Furnham, 2005
Measures of ability EI
KV Petrides
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional
Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) I
KV Petrides
MSCEIT II
• It should be obvious that items like the
foregoing are not amenable to truly veridical
scoring criteria (Brody, 2004; Davies, Stankov,
& Roberts, 1998; Roberts, Zeidner, &
Matthews, 2001; Petrides & Furnham, 2001).
• To identify correct and incorrect responses,
Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey (1999) used two
scoring methods previously employed to score
items in failed social intelligence tests.
KV Petrides
Consensus scoring I
• Consensus scoring: Introduces ‘degrees of
correctness,’ with each response weighted by
the percentage of participants in the sample
who have endorsed it.
– E.g., if 55% of the sample believe that a given
design expresses ‘happiness,’ one gets .55 points
for agreeing with them.
– If 13% of the sample believe that the same design
expresses ‘sadness’, then the endorsement of the
sadness option is considered less correct and earns
only .13 points.
KV Petrides
Consensus scoring II
• Consensus scoring is problematic for the
following reasons:
– Likely to lead to noninvariant or sample-specific
‘correct’ responses.
– Contradicts the foremost function of tests, which is
to discriminate between test-takers.
– Impossible to incorporate difficult items in the test,
since the ‘correctness’ of a response is a function of
the number of participants who will ultimately
endorse it.
KV Petrides
Expert scoring
• Expert scoring: A group of experts examines the
items/stimuli and decides which of the alternative
responses should be deemed correct.
• Some limitations of expert scoring include:
– In many cases (intrapersonal EI), it assumes that
experts have more insight into normal adults’ emotional
states than the adults themselves.
– Who is an EI expert (therapists, researchers,
psychiatrists, psychologists)?
KV Petrides
Validity of ability EI I
• Empirical evidence does not provide solid support
for the construct validity of ability EI:
– Consensus and expert scoring methods tend to produce
divergent findings (Davies et al., 1998; Roberts et al.
2001).
– Many ability EI subfactors do not correlate with IQ
(Roberts et al., 2001). Ciarrochi, Chan, & Caputi
(2001) found a zero correlation between ability EI and
Raven’s matrices.
– Correlations with external criteria are frequently the
result of severe confounding with crystallized IQ (esp.
vocabulary size; Wilhelm, 2005).
KV Petrides
Validity of ability EI II
•
•
•
•
Reliability problems.
Factor structure problems.
Inconsistent/nonreplicable results.
Frequent use of odd and atheoretical criteria
(number of self-help books read, academic
performance marks from a quarterly term in
a single year at high-school, etc.).
• Low correlations and low incremental
validity.
KV Petrides
Validity of ability EI II
• Brody, N. (2004). What cognitive intelligence is and what emotional
intelligence is not. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 234-238.
• Conte, J. M. (2005). A review and critique of emotional intelligence measures.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 433-440.
• Keele, S. M. & Bell, R. C. (2008). The factorial validity of emotional
intelligence: An unresolved issue. Personality and individual differences, 44,
487-500.
• Ortony, A., Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. (2007). Why emotional intelligence
needs a fluid component. In G. Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.),
The science of emotional intelligence. Knowns and unknowns - Series in
Affective Science (pp.288-304). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• O’Sullivan, M., & Ekman, P. (2005). Facial expression recognition and
emotional intelligence. In G. Geher, (Ed.). Measuring emotional intelligence:
Common ground and controversy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishing.
• Rossen, E., Kranzler, J. H., & Algina, J. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis
of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test V2.0 (MSCEIT).
Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1258-1269.
• Wilhelm, O. (2005). Measures of emotional intelligence: practice and
standards. In R. Schulze, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), International handbook of
emotional intelligence (pp. 131-154). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
KV Petrides
Trait EI
• Trait emotional intelligence is defined as a
constellation of emotional self-perceptions
located at the lower levels of personality
hierarchies (Petrides, Pita, & Kokkinaki,
2007).
• Trait emotional self-efficacy is an
alternative label for the same construct.
KV Petrides
The sampling domain of trait EI
• Petrides & Furnham (2001; EJP):
KV Petrides
Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire
(TEIQue , TEIQue-SF, TEIQue-ASF, TEIQue-CF,TEIQue 360o)
•
153 items, 15 subscales, 4 factors,
global trait EI score.
• TEIQue translations
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Greek
French
Spanish
Chinese
Portuguese
Dutch
Norwegian
Croatian
Serbian
Italian
• Theory-based
• Research-based
• Peer-reviewed
• Open-access
• TEIQue-SF
– 30 items, global trait EI score
• Adolescent TEIQue-ASF
• TEIQue 360o
KV Petrides
Trait EI factor structure
Petrides, Pita, &
2007; BJP
KVKokkinaki,
Petrides
Location of trait EI in personality factor space
TEIQue Raw English data; N = 371
TEIQue Raw Spanish data; N = 538
KV Petrides
Petrides, Furnham, & Martin (2004); N = 224; JSP
Gender differences in trait EI
• Overall, small or non-existent gender differences in global trait EI scores.
TEIQue data; N = 351; p = ns
Modified EQ-i data; N = 166; p < .01
TEIQue-SF data; N = 668; p < .01
Schutte et al. scale data; N = 260; p = ns
KV Petrides
Estimates of EI I
• Typically, when males are asked to estimate their IQ, they provide
higher estimates than females .
• What is the case for EI estimates?
Petrides, Furnham, & Martin (2004); N = 224; JSP
Furnham & Petrides (2004); N = 239; AJP
KV Petrides
Estimates of EI II
• Typically, participants tend to estimate their father’s IQ as higher than
their mother’s.
• What is the case for EI estimates?
Petrides, Furnham, & Martin (2004); N = 224; JSP
KV Petrides
The trait emotional intelligence
research programme
Research divisions
International links
Psychometric
Educational
Industrial/Organizational
Child/Human Development
Behavioural Genetic
UK, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Croatia,
Cyprus, Greece, The Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Spain.
Students
PhD: E. Cole
BA, BSc, MA, MSc, MPhil
Current & past funding bodies
ESRC
Nuffield Foundation
British Academy
University of London
www
www.psychometriclab.com
Google: trait EI