The Validity of the MSCEIT: Additional Analyses and Evidence

Emotion Review 4 (4):403-408 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We address concerns raised by Maul (2012) regarding the validity of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). We respond to requests for clarifications of our model, and explain why the MSCEIT’s scoring methods stand up to scrutiny and why many reported reliabilities of the MSCEIT may be underestimates, using reanalyses of the test’s standardization sample of N = 5,000 to illustrate our point. We also organize findings from four recent articles that provide evidence for the MSCEIT’s validity based on its relations with other tests.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,621

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Emotional intelligence and job performance in policemen: Criterion validity for the MSCEIT.M. Muniz & R. Primi - 2007 - Aletheia: An International Journal of Philosophy 25:66 - 81.
Evidence without Priors.Kai Draper - 2010 - Philo 13 (1):18-22.
The Role of Measurement in Establishing Evidence.L. McClimans - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (5):520-538.
Validity as a primitive.J. Ketland - 2012 - Analysis 72 (3):421-430.
Old evidence and new explanation II.Carl G. Wagner - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (2):283-288.
Intuition as a Philosophical Argument.Ota Weinberger - 1996 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 52 (1):1-7.
Subjective and objective confirmation.Patrick Maher - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (2):149-174.
Resisting buck-passing accounts of prudential value.Guy Fletcher - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 157 (1):77-91.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-30

Downloads
99 (#158,656)

6 months
1 (#1,011,292)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?