This study investigated the factorial validity of the 33-item self-rated Emotional Intelligence Scale (EIS: Schutte et al., 1998) for use with athletes. In stage 1, content validity of the EIS was assessed by a panel of experts (n = 9). Items were evaluated in terms of whether they assessed EI related to oneself and EI focused on others. Content validity further examined items in terms of awareness, regulation, and utilization of emotions. Content validity results indicated items describe 6-factors: appraisal of own emotions, regulation of own emotions, utilization of own emotions, optimism, social skills, and appraisal of others emotions. Results highlighted 13-items which make no direct reference to emotional experiences, and therefore, it is questionable whether such items should be retained. Stage 2 tested two competing models: a single factor model, which is the typical way researchers use the EIS and the 5-factor model (optimism was discarded as it become a single-item scale fiolliwng stage 1) identified in stage 1. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results on EIS data from 1,681 athletes demonstrated unacceptable fit indices for the 33-item single factor model and acceptable fit indices for the 6-factor model. Data were re-analyzed after removing the 13-items lacking emotional content, and CFA results indicate partial support for single factor model, and further support for a five-factor model (optimism was discarded as a factor during item removal). Despite encouraging results for a reduced item version of the EIS, we suggest further validation work is needed. Key pointsGiven the inherent link between construct measurement and theory testing, it is imperative for researchers to pay close attention to measurement issues showed poor fit indices. The present study investigated a self-report emotional intelligence for use in sportResults indicate that a single-item model shows poor fit with acceptable fit indices for a 6-factor model.A revised 5-factor and 19-item model showed improved model fit.Despite encouraging results, we suggest further validation work is needed.
Keywords: Mood; construct validity; measurement.; psychometric; regulation.