【導(dǎo)讀】盡管取得了令人鼓舞的證據(jù),以正確的收斂與判別措施來(lái)表現(xiàn)情感的能力,本研究報(bào)告提出注意一個(gè)潛在的限制這種測(cè)量的方法。旨在評(píng)估情緒管理的趨向來(lái)衡量個(gè)人的知識(shí),而不是他們實(shí)際的自身情緒管理能力。為了減少這種限制,我們所采取的努力是開(kāi)發(fā)和驗(yàn)證績(jī)效，反應(yīng)人際情感能力評(píng)估的有效性，一個(gè)人在情緒化的情況下的典型行為更加直接。已在進(jìn)行的一項(xiàng)研究,以277名參與者伴隨著自我發(fā)展的問(wèn)卷,自我評(píng)估情緒的能力,進(jìn)行分量的多維智力測(cè)驗(yàn)和個(gè)性測(cè)驗(yàn)。結(jié)果,在很大程度上取得了預(yù)期的如何判別業(yè)績(jī)效果和收斂?jī)?nèi)在的人際情感能力關(guān)系的措施,自我估量對(duì)自身能力以及個(gè)性特征有很大影響。不過(guò),沒(méi)有實(shí)質(zhì)性的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)如何認(rèn)知智能。其中包括提出任務(wù)要求的回應(yīng),是對(duì)評(píng)價(jià)預(yù)定的打分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。對(duì)比最高等級(jí)的表現(xiàn),典型表現(xiàn)措施理應(yīng)具有較強(qiáng)烈與認(rèn)知能力。分析收斂與判別自我報(bào)告EI型措施產(chǎn)生幾乎無(wú)相關(guān)情報(bào)認(rèn)知成分。絕大多數(shù)的與會(huì)者雇員或本科生。

　　

【正文】 ording to the “big five” model of personality (., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness). For this purpose, the NEOFFI by Costa and McCrae (translated into German by Borkenau amp。 Ostendorf, 1993) was administered. Procedure The participants were tested in small groups (up to 19) in a lecture room of the department. After a brief introduction the IST 2000 subscales were administered. The participants were then asked to plete the emotional ability questionnaire. After a break of 15 min the performance measures of intrapersonal and interpersonal emotional abilities were given in a randomized order. Finally, the participants were asked to plete the NEOFFI and a demographic sheet. The whole procedure took about 3 h. 3 Results Development of emotional ability scales To examine the dimensional structure of the developed performance items concerning the assessment of intrapersonal and interpersonal emotional abilities, we employed a principal axis exploratory factor analysis with orthogonal rotation on the respective responses of the 277 subjects. A joint scree/meaningfulness criterion yielded a twofactor solution. Although numerous eigenvalues were above , the plot of eigenvalues displayed a pronounced dip between the second and third factor. The two factors accounted for 12% of the total variance. The first factor had an eigen value of and loaded 18 of the items. Ten of these items were generated for the assessment of the adequate behavior in emotional situations and eight items were generated for the measurement of the effective regulation of one’s own emotions. As both sets of items refer to aspects of managing one’s own emotions this factor can be interpreted as intrapersonal emotional ability. A reliability analysis of this performance scale showed a Cronbach’s alpha of .72. The second factor had an eagan value of and loaded 24 of the items. This factor prised most of the items (n = 17) generated for the assessment of the effective regulation of other’s emotions and some items (n = 7) that were generated for the measurement of the adequate behavior in emotional situations. Taking into account that one’s behaviors in social interactions might have a particular influence on the emotions of others in various situations, it seems plausible that these seven items primarily address the ability of managing the emotions of others adequately. Thus, the second factor can be interpreted as interpersonal emotional ability. An analysis of the internal consistency of this subscale yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of .70. The two performance measures of intra and interpersonal emotional abilities showed a positive inter relation of r = .29, p .01. Relations of performance measures to selfestimate of emotional abilities Regarding the assessment of the construct validity of the performance measures we examined their relations to selfestimate of respective emotional abilities at first. The selfreport measures showed satisfactory reliabilities (α = .81 for intrapersonal abilities, α = .86 for interpersonal abilities) and were positively inter related (r = .28, p .01). As expected, higher scores on performancebased intrapersonal emotional abilities were substantially associated with greater selfassessed intrapersonal emotional abilities (r = .52, p .01), and also related to selfassessed interpersonal emotional abilities (r = .35, p .01). The performance measure of interpersonal emotional abilities was also significantly but only modestly correlated with selfassessed interpersonal emotional abilities (r = .26, p .01), but not with selfassessed intrapersonal emotional abilities (r = .09). 4 DiscussionsThese papers describe the development and construct validation of performance and selfreport measures of intrapersonal and interpersonal emotional abilities. With respect to the empirical status of the developed instruments, the psychometric analyses yielded very good reliabilities of more than .80 for the two positively intercool related selfreport measures. The two positively related performance measures showed internal consistency coefficients of .70 for managing one’s own emotions, and .72 for managing the emotions of others. Although the reliabilities are somewhat lower than desired, they are satisfactory, especially given the diversity of emotions or emotional situations that are addressed by these two performance scales. However, testretest reliabilities have to be analyzed in future research, before any firm conclusion can be drawn about this psychometric aspect of the developed scales. In addition, the performance scales showed positive relations to the selfestimated emotional abilities. While there was evidence of convergent validity between the intrapersonal emotional ability measures (r = .52), the correlation between the interpersonal emotional ability measures was rather weak (r = .26). These findings might reveal that people are quite aware of their intrapersonal emotional abilities, but do not have such accurate insights into their interpersonal emotional abilities. Promising findings were obtained concerning the relations of the performance measures of emotional abilities to personality traits. The two performance scales display a psychologically meaningful pattern of—mostly expected—convergent and discriminant correlations with the big five personality dimensions. Intrapersonal emotional abilities were particularly (negatively) associated with neuroticism, whereas interpersonal emotional abilities were primarily related to agreeableness. Moreover, both performance scales tend to correlate only moderately with personality。 only one correlation exceeds .40. These findings provide further evidence for the distinctiveness of performancebased emotional ability measures (cf. O’Connor and Little, 2003 and Roberts et al., 2001). In addition, they support the pro