March journal madness continues with the latest issue of the journal Human Performance.There's really only one article in here related to selection, but it's an interesting one, so let's take a look.
In this study of 229 students from an southeastern U.S. university, Grubb and McDaniel looked at the constructs measured and fakability of the Emotional Quotient Inventory Short Form (EQ-i:S), a popular proposed measure of emotional intelligence.
The bottom line results:
- Participants were able to "fake" their scores, raising them substantially (by .83 standard deviations). Not particularly surprising as it's fairly well established that non-cognitive measures can be "faked." (What's not clear is whether it matters...)
- The two "screens" built into the EQ-i:S to try to identify fakers correctly identified only 31% of the fakers.
- EQ-i:S scores were predicted by the Big Five measure with a multiple correlation of .79. This result, say the authors, "casts doubt on the construct of emotional intelligence as operationalized in the EQ-i:S."
But there's some additional goodness in this article, largely because the authors also had the participants take the Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT) and a measure of the Big Five personality factors (IPIP):
- WPT scores were correlated strongly with only one Big Five factor--Openness.
- The correlation between WPT scores and gender was small.
- Black-White score differences on the Big Five factors were small.
- Gender was correlated with Big Five scales, but the nature varied depending on the condition (honest or faking).
- The ability to fake on the EQ-i:S was a function of cognitive ability and personality (mostly agreeableness).
There were other articles, one of which I'll discuss over at HR Coal.
No comments:
Post a Comment