Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

This Special Issue of the Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment offers a critical appraisal of the validity, applied utility, and limitations of self-report assessments of emotional competencies. Using self-concept theory as an integrative theoretical framework, this introductory editorial highlights key methodological and validity issues raised in the contributing articles: (a) distinction between emotional competence self-perceptions and objectively measured abilities, (b) effects of response biases and respondents’ age on the psychometric properties of self-reports, (c) importance of adopting a multi-dimensional assessment strategy, and (d) various aspects of construct validity (conceptual definitions and paradigms, gender differences, relationships with basic personality, mechanisms and scope of prediction). The added value of conceptualizing emotional competence self-reports as self-concepts (as proposed in this article) is illustrated in the discussion of practical implications, outstanding questions, and directions for future research on the meaning and uses of these assessments.

In the present article, we present a review of the current status of the art with regard to the construct of regulatory emotional self-efficacy beliefs. We start with the definition of the psychological construct of regulatory emotional self-efficacy beliefs, presenting its theoretical status within the broader theory of self-efficacy, in the social-cognitive theory. Then, we offer a broad perspective on the evaluation of the construct, by introducing the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy (RESE) scale. This instrument assesses two broad factors, self-efficacy in managing negative emotions (NEG) and self-efficacy beliefs in expressing positive emotions (POS). We review studies attesting to the reliability of the instrument and reporting gender differences in NEG and POS self-efficacy beliefs. Developmental trajectories of POS and NEG self-efficacy beliefs are also presented, and their pervasiveness is demonstrated with reference to results of several empirical studies. We also discuss differences between regulatory emotional self-efficacy beliefs and constructs classically associated to self-regulation. A critical evaluation of the field of research on regulatory emotional self-efficacy beliefs and suggestions on how to move the field forward is offered.

Emotional self-efficacy (ESE) is an important aspect of emotional functioning, with current measures for children and adolescents focused on the measurement of self-beliefs in relation to the management of emotions. In the present study, we report the psychometric properties of the first adaptation of the Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale for youth (Youth-ESES) that measures additional aspects of ESE, such as perceiving and understanding emotions and helping others modulate their emotions. Participants were 192 young adolescents aged 11 to 13 years from a U.K. state school. They completed the Youth-ESES and measures of ability emotional intelligence (EI) and cognitive ability. Results support the same four-factor structure that has been previously documented using the adult version of the ESES, with the four subscales being largely independent from cognitive ability and only moderately related to ability EI. However, the four subscales were less differentiated in the present study compared with adult data previously published, suggesting that there is a strong general factor underlying young adolescents’ ESE scores. Overall, the results suggest that the adapted Youth-ESES can be reliably used with youth, and that confidence in how a young person feels about his or her emotional functioning remains distinct from emotional skill.

Recent research has suggested that the association between emotional intelligence (EI) and depression is dependent on the type of EI measured (ability EI vs. perceived EI) and on gender. Whereas perceived EI is negatively related with depression in both men and women, only men with high levels of ability EI report less of a depressive affect. An intriguing question arises from these results: Is ability EI an important resource to reduce negative moods in women, and if so, when? In this study, we tried to shed light on this by examining the interaction effect of ability EI and perceived EI on depression in women. Participants were 213 female students who completed an ability measure of EI, a self-report measure of EI, and a depression inventory. Results showed that perceived EI moderated the associations between ability EI and depression, with ability EI being negatively related with depression only in women with high levels of perceived EI. We discuss the importance of integrating ability EI and perceived EI in the EI theory, as well as practical implications of their interactive effects.

This study investigated if the linkages between trait emotional intelligence (trait EI) and the Five-Factor Model of personality were invariant between men and women. Five English-speaking samples (N = 307-685) of mostly undergraduate students each completed a different measure of the Big Five personality traits and either the full form or short form of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). Across samples, models predicting global TEIQue scores from the Big Five were invariant between genders, with Neuroticism and Extraversion being the strongest trait EI correlates, followed by Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Openness. However, there was some evidence indicating that the gender-specific contributions of the Big Five to trait EI vary depending on the personality measure used, being more consistent for women. Discussion focuses on the validity of the TEIQue as a measure of trait EI and its psychometric properties, more generally.

This study tested whether trait emotional intelligence (TEI) measures of narrow bandwidth predict perception of facial emotion, using two tasks: identification of microexpressions of emotion and controlled visual search for target emotions. A total of 129 undergraduates completed multiple scales for TEI, as well as cognitive ability, personality, and stress measures. TEI was associated with a reduced stress response, but failed to predict performance on either task, contrary to the initial hypothesis. However, performance related significantly to higher cognitive intelligence, subjective task engagement, and use of task-focused coping. Individual differences in attentional resources may support processing of both emotive and non-emotive stimuli.

Self-report ratings of emotional intelligence (EI) can be faked in high-stakes situations. Although forced-choice administration can prevent response distortion, it produces ipsative scores when scored conventionally. This study (n = 486) develops an 18-item EI rating scale assessing emotion perception, understanding, and management. We compare validity evidence for: (a) a single-stimulus rating scale; and (b) a forced-choice assessment scored with conventional methods versus item response theory (IRT) methods. The single-stimulus items showed acceptable fit to a three-factor solution, and the forced-choice items showed acceptable fit to the IRT solution. Correlations with criterion variables (ability and self-reported EI, Big Five personality, loneliness, life satisfaction, and GPA) were obtained for 283 participants. Correlations were in the expected direction for the single-stimulus and the IRT-based forced-choice scores. In contrast, the conventionally scored forced-choice test showed the expected correlations for emotion management, but not for emotion perception nor understanding. Results suggest that IRT-based methods for scoring forced-choice assessments produce equivalent validity to single-stimulus rating scales. As such, IRT-based scores on forced-choice assessments may allow EI tests to be used for high-stakes applications, where faking is a concern.