Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings
IntroductionThe model of emotional intelligence as an ability has evolved since its introduction 35 years ago. The revised model includes that emotional intelligence (EI) is a broad intelligence within the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence, and that more areas of problem solving are i...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1539785/full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849698386598428672 |
|---|---|
| author | John D. Mayer David R. Caruso Peter Salovey Iris Y. Lin Braden J. Hansma Joanna Solomon Gill Sitarenios Manolo Romero Escobar |
| author_facet | John D. Mayer David R. Caruso Peter Salovey Iris Y. Lin Braden J. Hansma Joanna Solomon Gill Sitarenios Manolo Romero Escobar |
| author_sort | John D. Mayer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionThe model of emotional intelligence as an ability has evolved since its introduction 35 years ago. The revised model includes that emotional intelligence (EI) is a broad intelligence within the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence, and that more areas of problem solving are involved than originally detailed. An argument is made here that veridical scoring of EI test responses is a sound procedure relative to scoring keys based on expert consensus or a single emotion theory. To the degree that EI fits present-day theories of intelligence (i.e., the CHC model), any subsidiary factors of EI reasoning should correlate highly with one another. These and other considerations led to a revision of the original Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) to the MSCEIT 2.MethodsThe MSCEIT 2 was developed and tested across 5 studies: Two preliminary studies concerned, first, the viability of new item sets (Study 1, N = 43) and, in Study 2 (N = 8), the development of a veridical scoring key for each test item with the assistance of Ph.D. area experts. Next, a pilot study (Study 3, N = 523) and a normative study (Study 4, N = 3,000) each focused on the test’s item performance and factor structure, including whether a four-domain model continued to fit the data in a manner consistent with a cohesive broad intelligence. Study 5 (N = 221) examined the relation between the original and revised tests.ResultsThe studies provide evidence for factor-supported subscale scores, and good reliability at the overall test level, with acceptable reliabilities for 3 of the 4 subscale scores, and adequate measurement precision across the range of most test-takers’ abilities.DiscussionOverall, the MSCEIT 2 used updated theory to guide its construction and development. Its test scores fit the CHC model, and correlate with the original MSCEIT. The revised test is 33% shorter than the original. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-54a6b75948b14a7eb5bcc03148ffeb7c |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1664-1078 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychology |
| spelling | doaj-art-54a6b75948b14a7eb5bcc03148ffeb7c2025-08-20T03:18:55ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782025-06-011610.3389/fpsyg.2025.15397851539785Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findingsJohn D. Mayer0David R. Caruso1Peter Salovey2Iris Y. Lin3Braden J. Hansma4Joanna Solomon5Gill Sitarenios6Manolo Romero Escobar7Department of Psychology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, United StatesOffice of the Dean of Yale College, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United StatesDepartment of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United StatesResearch and Development, Multi-Health Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON, CanadaResearch and Development, Multi-Health Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON, CanadaResearch and Development, Multi-Health Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON, CanadaResearch and Development, Multi-Health Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON, CanadaResearch and Development, Multi-Health Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON, CanadaIntroductionThe model of emotional intelligence as an ability has evolved since its introduction 35 years ago. The revised model includes that emotional intelligence (EI) is a broad intelligence within the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence, and that more areas of problem solving are involved than originally detailed. An argument is made here that veridical scoring of EI test responses is a sound procedure relative to scoring keys based on expert consensus or a single emotion theory. To the degree that EI fits present-day theories of intelligence (i.e., the CHC model), any subsidiary factors of EI reasoning should correlate highly with one another. These and other considerations led to a revision of the original Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) to the MSCEIT 2.MethodsThe MSCEIT 2 was developed and tested across 5 studies: Two preliminary studies concerned, first, the viability of new item sets (Study 1, N = 43) and, in Study 2 (N = 8), the development of a veridical scoring key for each test item with the assistance of Ph.D. area experts. Next, a pilot study (Study 3, N = 523) and a normative study (Study 4, N = 3,000) each focused on the test’s item performance and factor structure, including whether a four-domain model continued to fit the data in a manner consistent with a cohesive broad intelligence. Study 5 (N = 221) examined the relation between the original and revised tests.ResultsThe studies provide evidence for factor-supported subscale scores, and good reliability at the overall test level, with acceptable reliabilities for 3 of the 4 subscale scores, and adequate measurement precision across the range of most test-takers’ abilities.DiscussionOverall, the MSCEIT 2 used updated theory to guide its construction and development. Its test scores fit the CHC model, and correlate with the original MSCEIT. The revised test is 33% shorter than the original.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1539785/fullemotional intelligenceassessmentfour-domain modelCHC Modelfactor analysisveridical scoring |
| spellingShingle | John D. Mayer David R. Caruso Peter Salovey Iris Y. Lin Braden J. Hansma Joanna Solomon Gill Sitarenios Manolo Romero Escobar Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings Frontiers in Psychology emotional intelligence assessment four-domain model CHC Model factor analysis veridical scoring |
| title | Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings |
| title_full | Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings |
| title_fullStr | Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings |
| title_full_unstemmed | Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings |
| title_short | Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT 2: theory, rationale, and initial findings |
| title_sort | measuring emotional intelligence with the msceit 2 theory rationale and initial findings |
| topic | emotional intelligence assessment four-domain model CHC Model factor analysis veridical scoring |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1539785/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT johndmayer measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT davidrcaruso measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT petersalovey measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT irisylin measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT bradenjhansma measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT joannasolomon measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT gillsitarenios measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings AT manoloromeroescobar measuringemotionalintelligencewiththemsceit2theoryrationaleandinitialfindings |