Factoral, structural, and theoretical validity of the test

Exploratory factor analysis

For a preliminary assessment of the structure of the EIT methodology, an exploratory factor analysis was carried out (using the principal component method, the Varimax rotation). Based on the structure of the EIT

Table 2.11 The reliability of the scales of the EIT method

Sections

Alpha Cron bach

The “weakestquestions

1. Faces

.625

1.3-2. 1.1-1

2. Facilitation

.768

2.3-4, 2.6-2, 2.6-3

3. Changes

.395

3.3-1, 3.10-1

4. Emotion management

.318

4.2-3

5. Pictures

.670

5.2-3

6. Empathy

.665

-

7. Blending

.169

7.5-1, 7.1-1, 7.6-1

8. Impact on the emotions of others

.427

8.2-1, 8.1-3

9a. Situations

.654

-

9b. Dynamics

.359

9.14

Alpha Cron bach

Split-half

Branch 1

.784

.601

Branch 2

.809

.660

Branch 3

.398

.153

Branch 4

.547

.545

Experiential Domain

.860

.616

Strategic Domain

.582

.471

Overall test reliability

.862

.728

Source: Authors' own compilation.

methodology, two or four factors can be identified, according to the number of domains or branches.

The analysis showed that two factors explain 41.3 percent of the variance. An analysis of the factor loadings presented in Table 2.12 showed that the first factor with large loads included scales contained in the domain of experiential emotional intelligence - 1, 2, 5, 6, and 9a, and the second, scales belonging to the second domain of management of emotions - 3, 4, 7, and 8. At the same time, however, the scale of 9b, relating to the second domain, received a very low factor load on the corresponding factor, and an average, but noticeable load on the first factor.

An increase in the number of factors to four made it possible to explain 60.3 percent of the variance, but at the same time, the third and fourth factors with large factor loads included one scale each - the scales of emotion blending and dynamics, respectively (see Table 2.13). At the same time, the “Changes” scale, belonging to the same branch, has an average positive factor load on the “Blending” factor and an average negative load on the “Dynamics” factor, thus being opposed to it.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >