CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY
Chapter 1 discusses the theory regarding measurement instruments, arguing that they should be equivalent and unbiased when used in cross-cultural studies. Emotional intelligence (EI) as an industrial psychology concept has grown tremendously over the past decade and the advantages that it poses has been recognised. There is, however, one issue not mentioned and studies enough and this is the extent to which EI is a culturally relevant concept. The presumption that emotions can be spoken of across various cultures cannot be made, and EI measurements therefore need to pay attention when measuring across various groups of culture whom perceive emotions differently. Language can be viewed as a vehicle of culture, and emotions are shaped within
specified cultural groups speaking languages that are of the same origin of that culture. The Greek Emotional Intelligence Scale (GEIS) has only been used in one other study previously in SA, but this study was not on equivalence. Two language families will be tested in this study namely the West-Germanic (Afrikaans and English) and the Sotho (Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, and Tswana) group.
REFERENCES
Akerjordet, K. (2009). Emotional intelligence: Part 1-Development of scales and psychometric testing. Nursing and Health Sciences, 11(1), 58-63.
Arbuckle, J. (1997). AMOS user's guide version 3.6. Chicago, IL: Smallwaters.
Ashkanasy, N. M. (2003). Emotions organizations: A multi-level perspective. Research in Multilevel Issues, 2, 9-54.
Badenhorst, S. (2010). Descent of Iron Age farmers in Southern Africa during the last 2000 years. African Archaeological Review. 27, 87-106.
Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
Bar-On, R (2000). Emotional and social intelligence: Insights from the Emotional Quotient Inventory. In R. Bar-On, & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence:
Theory, development, assessment and application at home, school and in the workplace (pp.
363-388). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bentler, P. M. (1992). On fit of models to covariances and methodology to the Bulletin.
Psychological Bulletin, 112, 400-404.
Bierbrauer, G., Meyer, H., & Wolfradt, U. (1994). Measurement of normative and evaluative aspects in individualistic and collectivistic orientations: The Cultural Orientation Scale (COS). In U. Kim, H. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 189-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Boon, M. (2007). The African way: The power of interactive leadership. Cape Town, South Africa: Zebra Press.
Botma, N. (2009). Emotion experience, emotional intelligence and well-being in South Africa (Unpublished doctoral thesis). North West University, Potchefstroom.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, &
J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445-455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Chemiss, C. (2000, April). Emotional intelligence: What it is and why it matters. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting for the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Cole, N. S., & Moss, A. (1989). Bias in test use. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed), (pp. 201-219). Washington, DC: American Council on Education & National Council on Measurement in Education.
Conte, J. M. (2005). A review and critique of emotional intelligence measures. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 26, 433-440.
Conte, J. M., & Dean, M. A. (2006). Can emotional intelligence be measured? In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), A critique of emotional intelligence (pp. 59-80). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Crane, P. K., Gibbons, L. E., Jolley, L., & Van Belle, G. (2006). Differential item functioning analysis with ordinal logistic regression techniques: DIF detect and dif with par. Medical Care,
44, S115–S123.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
De Klerk, M., & Mostert, K. (2010). Work-home interference: Examining socio-demographic predictors in the South African context. SA Journal of Human Resource Management / SA Tydskrif vir Menslikehulpbronbestuur, 8(1), 7- 10.
Gelfand, M. J., & Brett, J. M. (2004). The Handbook of negotiation: Theoretical advances and cultural perspectives (pp. 3-6). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Ghorbani, N., Bing, M., Watson, P., Davison, H., & Mack, D. (2002). Self-reported emotional intelligence: Construct similarity and functional dissimilarity of higher-order processing in Iran and the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 37, 297-308.
Gignac, G. E., Palmer, B. R., Manocha, R., & Stough, C. (2005). An examination of the factor structure of the Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence (SSREI) scale via confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1029-1042.
Gignac, G. E., & Ekermans, G. (2010). Group differences in EI within a sample of black and white South Africans. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(6), 639-644.
Goldenberg, I., Matheson, K., & Mantler, J. (2006). The assessment of emotional intelligence: A comparison of performance-based and self-report methodologies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86(1), 33-45.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.
Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional intelligence: Why it matters more than IQ. New York, NY:
Bantam Dell.
Goliath-Yarde, L., & Roodt, G. (2011). Differential item functioning of the UWES-17 in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 37(1), 1-11.
Gregory, R. J. (2007). Psychological testing (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Group.
Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviours, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications .
Hofstede, G. (2003). Geert hofstede cultural dimensions. Retrieved from http://www.geert- hofstede.com/
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Human, L. (2005, February). Current issues and practices for global diversity. Paper presented at the American Society for Training and Development‟s global conference and exhibition, Cape Town, South Africa.
Ilangovan, A., Scroggins, W. A., & Rozell, E. J. (2007). Managerial perspectives on emotional intelligence differences between India and the United States: The development of research propositions. International Journal of Management, 24, 541-548.
Jonker, C. S. (2002). The compilation and evaluation of a development program aimed at emotional intelligence (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Jonker, C. S., & Vosloo, C. (2008). The psychometric properties of the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale. South African Journal for Industrial Psychology, 34, 21-30.
Joreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis.
Psychometrika, 34, 183-202.
Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 54-78. doi 10.1037/a0017286 Kagitcibasi, C. (1994). A critical appraisal of individualism and collectivism: Toward a new
formulation. In U. Kim, H. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.),
Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 52-65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kang, S., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). Individual differences in emotional complexity: Their psychological implications. Journal of Personality, 54, 757-765.
Keele, S. M., & Bell, R. C. (2008). The factorial validity of emotional intelligence: An unresolved issue. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 487-500.
Kim, S. H. (2001). An evaluation of a Markov chain Monte Carlo method for the Rasch model.
Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 163-176.
Libbrecht, N., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2010). Scale across self and other ratings measurement equivalence of the Wong and Law emotional intelligence. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 1007.
MacCullum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modelling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
Marascuilo, L. A., & Serlin, R. C. (1988). Statistical methods for the social and behavioural sciences. New York, NY: Freeman.
Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implication for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Matsumoto, D. (2002). Methodological requirements to test a possible in-group advantage in judging emotions across cultures: Comments on Elfenbein and Ambady and evidence.
Psychological Bulletin, 128, 236-242.
Matsumoto, D., Angua-Wong., & Martinez, E. (2008). Priming effects of language on emotion judgments in Spanish-English bilinguals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 335-342.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267-298.
Mayer, J. D., & Caruso, D. R. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27(4), 267-298.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction of regulation of feelings. Applied and Preventative Psychology, 4, 197-208.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey, & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators (p. 3- 31). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In R. J.
Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 396-420). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15(3), 197-215.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). A further consideration of the issues of emotional intelligence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(3), 249-255.
Meiring, D., Van de Vijver, A. J. R., Rothmann, S., & Barrick, M. R. (2005). Construct, item, and method bias of cognitive and personality tests in South Africa. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(1), 1−8.
Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R, Van Altine, J., Bennet, N., Lindi, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989).
Evaluation of goodness-of-fit statistics for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430-445.
Ogarkova, A., Borgeaud, P., & Scherer, K. (2009). Language and culture in emotion research: a multidisciplinary perspective. Social science information, 48, 339-357.
Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS Survival Manual (2nd ed.). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Parker, J. D. A., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2003). The 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale III: Reliability and factorial validity in a community population. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55, 269-275.
Parker, J. D. A., Duffy, J. M., Wood, M., Bond, B. J., & Hogan, M. J. (2005). Academic achievement and emotional intelligence: Predicting the successful transition from high school to university. Journal of First-Year Experience, 17, 1-12.
Parker, J. D. A., Keefer, K. V., & Wood, L. M. (2011). Toward a brief multidimensional assessment of emotional intelligence: Psychometric properties of the emotional quotient inventory-short form. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 762-777.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioural validation in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of Personality, 17, 39-57.
Pheifer, S. I. (2001). Emotional intelligence: Popular but elusive construct. Roeper Review, 23(3), 138–143.
Ratner, C. (2000). A cultural-psychological analysis of emotions. Culture and Psychology, 6, 5- 39.
Republic of South Africa (1998). Employment Equity Act No. 55 of 1998. Government Gazette, 400, 19370. Pretoria, South Africa: Government printer.
Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emotional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 805- 819.
Saklofske, D. H., Austin, J., & Minski, P. S. (2003). Factor structure and validity of a trait emotional intelligence measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 707-721.
Salkind, N. J. (2004). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., &
Domheim, (1998). Development and validation of a measure if emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167-177.
Sedmar, A., Robins, G., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). Comparing the validity of multiple social effectiveness constructs in the prediction of managerial job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 443-461.
Shipper, F., Kincaid, J., Rotondo, D. M., & Hoffman, R. C. (2003). A cross-cultural exploratory study of the linkage between emotional intelligence and managerial effectiveness. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11, 171-19l.
Smit, P. J., & Cronje, G. J. (2011). Management principles: A contemporary edition for Africa.
Cape Town, South Africa: Juta and Company Ltd.
Struwig, F. W., & Stead, G. B. (2001). Planning, designing and reporting research. Cape Town, South Africa: Pearson Education.
Tang, H. V., Yin, M., & Nelson, D. B. (2010). The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership practices: A cross-cultural study of academic leaders in Taiwan and the USA.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(8), 899-926.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Tsaousis, I. (2008). Measuring trait emotional intelligence: Development and psychometric properties of the Greek Emotional Intelligence Scale (GElS). Psychology, 15, 200-218.
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 25(2), 1-10.
Urban, B. (2011). Entrepreneurial networking differences: An ethnic in-group and out-group analysis. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 37(1), 1-14.
Van de Vijver, A. J. R., & Rothmann, S. (2004). Assessment in multicultural groups: The South African case. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30(4), 1-7.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology, 54, 119-135.
Van Dyk, G. A. J., & De Kock, P. S. (2004). The Relevance of the Individualism- Collectivism factor for the management of diversity in the South African National Defence Force. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30(2), 90-95.
Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 65(1), 71-95.
Visser, D., & Viviers, R. (2010). Construct equivalence of the OPQ32n for black and white people in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 36(1), 1-11.
Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emot ional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243-274.
Zeller J. (2004). Relative clause formation in the Bantu languages of South Africa. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 22(1&2), 75-93.
Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of Differential Item Functioning (DIF): Logistic Regression Modelling as a unitary frame-work for binary and likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defence.
CHAPTER 2
RESEACH ARTICLE
STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCE AND ITEM BIAS OF A SELF-REPORT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE MEASURE IN THE MINING INDUSTRY
Abstract
Orientation: Emotional intelligence (EI) in organisations has grown immensely over the past two decades. Considerable research regarding this concept and the advantages it poses for the individual as well as the organisation has been conducted; however, one aspect that has not been explored sufficiently is the extent to which EI can be viewed as a culturally relevant concept.
The presumption that emotions can be explained in the same way across different culture cannot be made; therefore measuring EI across cultures becomes important and challenging. Language can be viewed as a vehicle of culture, and emotions are shaped by the language spoken in the specific culture.
Research purpose: The main purpose of the study was to determine whether the Greek Emotional Intelligence Scale is an equivalent measure, which is free of item bias, when measuring a West-Germanic (English and Afrikaans) and Sotho (Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, and Setswana) language groups.
Research design, approach and method: A quantitative research design was used in this study.
The study was cross-sectional by nature. A combined random and stratified probability sample (N = 357) is extracted from the mining sector in the North West and Gauteng Provinces of South Africa. The Greek Emotional Intelligence Scale was applied as measuring instrument.
Main findings: The GEIS tested reliable for the combined sample and Sotho language group yielding four factors namely Expression and Recognition of Emotion, Caring and Empathy, Control of Emotion and Use of Emotion to facilitate thinking. However a three factor model was tested for the West-Germanic group, and proved acceptable internal consistency. The model indices were satisfactory indicating equivalence except on the West-Germanic language group.
Lastly the GEIS proved to be unbiased across the language groups.
Practical/managerial implications: Managers in South Africa must be aware of the advantages EI pose for the organisation and therefore understand that EI might differ across culture groups.
Managers should understand that placing different cultural EI profiles in strategic positions could benefit the organisation.
Contribution/value-add: This study provides new insight regarding EI research across different language groups and the various similarities and differences that may occur.
Emotional Intelligence (EI) has become an increasingly popular research concept within organisations in recent years (Ashkanasy, Hartel, & Zerbe, 2000; Byrne, Dominick, Smither, &
Reilly, 2007; Fisher & Ashkanasy, 2000). Not only has it been comprehensively researched in the field of psychology (Craig et al., 2009; Phelps, 2006), but also in the field of industrial and organisational psychology (Goleman, 1995; Law, Wong & Song, 2004; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Various studies have indicated that EI as a predictor of numerous organisational outcomes include job performance (Langhorn, 2004; Rosete & Carrrochi, 2005), leadership effectiveness (George, 2000; Kerr, Garvin, Heaton, & Boyle, 2006), diversity management (Boon, 2007;
Human 2005), and interpersonal relationships (Luthans, 2002) have been conducted.
Along with this interest in the concept EI, interest in the measurement of EI has increased tremendously throughout the past few years (Akerjordet, 2009; Jonker, 2002; Sedmar, Robbins,
& Ferris, 2006). Various studies have proven the need to accurately measure EI and the advantages thereof (Clarke, 2000; Conte, 2005; Craig et al., 2009). Two schools of thought pertaining to the measurement of EI are evident in literature (Shipper, Kincaid, Rotondo, &
Hoffman, 2003) namely performance-based tests and self-report instrument. Performance-based instruments are tests with questions scored as “right‟ or “wrong”. They therefore have definite answers and can be measured with regards to a score attributed to the individual. Self- report EI instruments are measured by means of Likert-type scales where a certain level of accuracy is given to a question such as “I often feel alone in this world”.
Mayer and Salovey (1995) initially conceptualised EI as an ability. Within emotional functioning, EI is seen as a set of cognitive abilities which assists an individual when making emotional decisions and reacting emotionally. In contrast to this school, there also exists research regarding EI as mixed (trait) ability, where EI is seen as a combination of various other characteristics (Mayer, Salovey, & Curuso, 2000). These include all the non-cognitive models (Bar-on, 1997), as well as the competency based models (Goleman, 1995).
Although research interest in EI measurement has increased over the last couple of years, there have been a number of issues regarding measurement of EI (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2000; Petrides
& Furnham, 2003). Jonker and Vosloo (2008) asserted that there is a great amount of research on
EI and its advantages for the workplace, but very little literature has described how it should be measured and the factors that needs to be taken into account with EI measurements. Other problems regarding the measurement of EI include questionable levels of internal consistency, the stability of the instrument (Keele & Bell, 2008; Petrides & Furnham, 2003), equivalence issues when measuring the same constructs across different groups (Van de Vijver, 2011), as well as item bias when measuring across groups (Bar-On & Parker, 2000).
Apart from these measurement issues, another research issue is the extent to which EI is a culturally relevant research topic (Jonker & Vosloo, 2008; Shipper et al., 2003). According to (Visser & Viviers, 2010), the key concept in cross cultural psychology when measuring any construct, is whether the instrument can be equivalent and the items unbiased. According to Botma (2009), very little research has focused on validation studies in terms of EI, with only a few studies conducted with regards to EI and different gender, culture, and occupation groups.
Van Hemert, Poortinga, and Van de Vijver, (2007) are in agreement that different cultures interpret emotional information differently. The conclusion can therefore be made that EI measurements need to be equivalent and unbiased. Instruments that aren’t equivalent can be viewed as being unable to measure the same constructs in various groups, such as different languages. For the purposes of this research, biasness refers to the inability of an instrument to measure a meaning or implication for one subgroup of test takers, and then measure the same meaning or implication on another subgroup of test takers (Van de Vijver, 2011). One can thus make the assumption that all instruments measuring EI must be equivalently applicable for different groups, including cultural ones.
Within cross-cultural research, the study of the underlying structure of any EI instrument is sensitive to bias and in-equivalent elements (Eaton & Louw, 2000). It is not yet determined whether instruments are actually focussing on this issue when they are created to measure emotions in cross-cultural studies. According to Visser and Viviers (2001), equivalence and item bias are both the most determining factors in EI measurements of different la nguage groups. According to (Van de Vijver, 2011), item bias refers to an instrument‟s inability to remain reliable and valid when comparing cultures. Constructs such as EI are considered to be
equivalent amongst different culture groups when the scores obtained remain constant, even when different versions of measurements are used (Van de Vijver & Tanzer, 1997).
In this study the structural equivalence and item bias of a self-report EI measure will be tested in order to add to the limited body of knowledge regarding these studies. In a previous study conducted by Botma (2009), the author noted that the Greek Emotional Intelligence Scale is a promising instrument when measuring for item bias and structural equivalence amongst different cultural and language groups. In the present study, the equivalence of two language family groups will be measured in order to establish the proposition proposed by Botma (2009).
The West-Germanic language family group (Afrikaans and English) and the Sotho group (Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, and Setswana) were selected for inclusion in this study. The reason for the inclusion of these particular language groups are because of the percentage amount of South Africans speaking it. More than 25.3% of the overall population speak a language from the Sotho language group, while 21% speak Afrikaans or English (Census, 2011). However, for the relevance of this study, it was important to mention that the predominantly spoken language in the North West province is Setswana (64%), followed by Afrikaans, thus explaining the choice of languages (Census, 2011).
A literature review follows; focusing on the key constructs (emotional intelligence and culture as well as bias and equivalence). Then, the method employed by the research will be discussed, with the statistical findings outlines. Finally, a discussion regarding how the statistical inferences used with regards to the GEIS‟s psychometric properties will be given.
Emotional intelligence and culture
According to Mayer and Salovey (1997), EI is the ability to understand emotions, relocate your own emotions in order to assist the way in which thinking is established, and perceive emotional knowledge to effectively regulate emotions in order to stimulate emotional growth. In essence, it proposes the process in which behaviour is recognised by combining emotions with the ability to reason. George (2000) describes EI as the ability to tap into your own capability by recognising emotions and the way in which they can cognitively be managed. According to Russel and Barret