Psychometric properties of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire: Factor structure, reliability, construct, and incremental validity in a French-speaking population

250Citations
Citations of this article
362Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In this research, we investigated the psychometrical properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue, Petrides & Furnham, 2003) in a French-speaking population. In summary, we found that (a) TEIQue scores were globally normally distributed and reliable; (b) the United Kingdom four-factor structure (well-being, self-control, emotionality, sociability) replicated in our data; (c) TEIQue scores were dependent on gender but relatively independent of age; (d) there was preliminary evidence of convergent/discriminant validity, with TEIQue scores being independent of nonverbal reasoning (Raven's [1976] matrices) but positively related to some personality dimensions (optimism, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness) as well as inversely related to others (alexithymia, neuroticism); (e) there was also preliminary evidence of criterion validity, with TEIQue scores predicting depression, anxiety, and social support as well as future state affectivity and emotional reactivity in neutral and stressful situations; (f) TEIQue scores were susceptible to socially desirable responding; however, (g) TEIQue scores had incremental validity to predict emotional reactivity over and above social desirability, alexithymia, and the Five-factor model of personality. Such results constitute encouraging preliminary findings in favor of the use of the TEIQue. Copyright © 2007, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Leroy, C., & Roy, E. (2007). Psychometric properties of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire: Factor structure, reliability, construct, and incremental validity in a French-speaking population. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(3), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701333431

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free