|
|
|
|
JOURNAL
OF
SPORTS SCIENCE &
MEDICINE
|
 |
|
Research
article
|
VALIDITY OF THE EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR USE IN SPORT |
|||||||||
Andrew M. Lane1, Barbara B. Meyer2, Tracey J. Devonport1, Kevin A. Davies1, Richard Thelwell3, Gobinder S. Gill1, Caren D.P. Diehl, Mat Wilson1 and Neil Weston3 |
|||||||||
1University of Wolverhampton, Walsall, UK, 2University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee WI, USA, 3University of Portsmouth, UK |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
© Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2009) 8, 289 - 295 Search Google Scholar for Citing Articles |
|||||||||
|
|
| ABSTRACT | |||
| This study investigated the factorial validity of the 33-item
self-rated Emotional Intelligence Scale (EIS: Schutte et al., 1998)
for use with athletes. In stage 1, content validity of the EIS was assessed
by a panel of experts (n = 9). Items were evaluated in terms of whether
they assessed EI related to oneself and EI focused on others. Content validity
further examined items in terms of awareness, regulation, and utilization
of emotions. Content validity results indicated items describe 6-factors:
appraisal of own emotions, regulation of own emotions, utilization of own
emotions, optimism, social skills, and appraisal of others emotions. Results
highlighted 13-items which make no direct reference to emotional experiences,
and therefore, it is questionable whether such items should be retained.
Stage 2 tested two competing models: a single factor model, which is the
typical way researchers use the EIS and the 5-factor model (optimism was
discarded as it become a single-item scale fiolliwng stage 1) identified
in stage 1. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results on EIS data from
1,681 athletes demonstrated unacceptable fit indices for the 33-item single
factor model and acceptable fit indices for the 6-factor model. Data were
re-analyzed after removing the 13-items lacking emotional content, and CFA
results indicate partial support for single factor model, and further support
for a five-factor model (optimism was discarded as a factor during item
removal). Despite encouraging results for a reduced item version of the
EIS, we suggest further validation work is needed.
Key words: Mood, psychometric, regulation, construct validity, measurement. |
|