GROUP 5

INTRODUCTION

Social intelligence is an essential skill that can benefit individuals and businesses in various
contexts, including consumer behavior. It has its origins in Thorndike's (1920) theory of
intelligence, which viewed intelligence as consisting of 3 facets - having ability to understand
and manage ideas, concrete objects, and people. Gardner (1983) distinguished between 2 aspects
of social intelligence, i.e., interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. Intrapersonal intelligence
means having access to one's own feeling, the capacity to discriminate between these feelings
instantly and be able to label them, and drawing upon them to understand and guide one's
behaviour. Interpersonal intelligence is personal intelligence turned outwards, wherein the
individual should have the core capacity to notice and make distinctions among other
individuals.

THEORITICAL REVIEW

INTRAPERSONAL

Goukens et al. (2009) conducted a study on the relationship between private self-awareness and
variety-seeking behavior. The results showed that private self-awareness leads to fewer choices
compared to the control and public self-awareness conditions, and that participants in the private
self-awareness condition were more likely to stick with their favorite drinks compared to those in
the control and public self-awareness conditions. However, the study has some limitations that
should be considered when evaluating its implications for decision-making in real-world settings.

INTERPERSONAL

The passage discusses the importance of interpersonal relationships in the fashion retailing
industry, including trust and commitment. It could benefit from a clearer structure and
organization, more specific examples, and more detailed information about the studies being
cited.

ADAPTABILITY

Two studies suggest that customers are typically unadaptable when it comes to product
availability, but more information is needed to evaluate the validity and reliability of these
studies. The term "adaptability" should be defined more specifically to draw meaningful
conclusions.
STRESS MANAGEMENT

Moschis (2007) argued that stress can have a significant impact on the way individuals process
information and make decisions, which can ultimately affect their purchasing behaviour. Stress
can lead to changes in the way individuals process information, such as relying on heuristics
instead of carefully considering all available information. Additionally, stress can affect
individuals' motivation and ability to make decisions, leading to a decreased willingness to
engage in complex decision-making tasks.

GENERAL MOOD

Impulsive purchasing is characterized by excitement and pleasure, as well as a strong need to

purchase, and is often driven by an immediate stimulus object.

Scales developed in the area of social intelligence and consumer behaviour

The Bennett scale, Tromso Scale, Brand Personality Scale, Interpersonal Reactivity Index,
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and Adaptability Scale are all used to measure social intelligence
and its dimensions. The Bennett scale focuses on cultural sensitivity, the Tromso Scale is a self-
report scale of social intelligence, and the Brand Personality Scale evaluates a brand's
personality. The Interpersonal Reactivity Index is a self-report 5-point Likert scale with
statements like "describes me well" and "does not describe me well". The Brief Mood
Introspection Scale, Status Consumption in Consumer Behaviour Scale, Compulsive Buying
Scales, and Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence Scale are all self-report scales
used to measure an individual's capacity to adapt in a new environment. The Brief Mood
Introspection Scale is a 5-point Likert scale used to measure general mood, the Status
Consumption in Consumer Behaviour Scale is a 7-point Likert Scale used to measure status
consumption, and the Compulsive Buying Scales is a 12-item measure of compulsiveness.

CRITICISM

The most important details in this text are that many of these tools rely on self-report measures,
which can be biased and may not accurately reflect a person's genuine degree of social
intelligence. They also don't take into account cultural variations in social behaviour and
communication styles, and don't take into account the larger social and cultural framework in
which social interactions occur. Additionally, social intelligence may not be a significant
predictor of consumer behaviour in offline purchasing contexts due to accessibility to the goods,
location, and cost.
DEVELOPING OF SCALES

Bar-On (2006)'s model of emotional-social intelligence is a useful framework for understanding

the various competencies, skills, and behaviors that contribute to it. However, it is important to
evaluate empirical evidence and consider its applicability to different cultural contexts and
populations. The use of five factors (intrapersonal, interpersonal, stress management,
adaptability, and general mood) captures important aspects of social intelligence that can impact
consumer behavior, but more information is needed about how each factor was developed and
validated.

ADMINISTRATION

The Social Intelligence in Consumer Behavior Scale has a well-structured administration process
and suitable language for participants to understand, but potential biases may exist due to
environmental variables and sample characteristics. It is important to interpret the results with
caution and in the context of the study's limitations.

SCORING

The Social Intelligence in Consumer Behavior scale is clear and detailed, providing information
about the number of items, response options, and scoring procedures. However, there are a few
areas where more detail could be provided to ensure transparency and reproducibility. These
include the method of factor analysis, how many factors were extracted, and what criteria were
used to decide on the final set of items. Additionally, the description of the norms is vague, with
no information on the population and how they were developed. This would help readers
interpret their own scores in relation to the norms and understand the implications of their scores

PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

DEMOGRAPHIC

The table provides a summary of the demographic data of 94 individuals, including 60 females,
33 males, and one participant who preferred not to mention their gender. However, the sample
size is small and the gender distribution is uneven, making it difficult to generalize the findings
to a larger population.

AGE

Table 2 provides a summary of the age data, but it should be interpreted with caution and
considered in conjunction with other aspects of the study design and sample characteristics.
CONTENT VALIDITY

Content validation is an important step in developing a reliable and valid instrument. In this case,
100 items were sent to subject matter experts for review, but 39 items were eliminated. It is
unclear why these items were eliminated and what steps were taken to ensure the remaining
items were representative of the construct of emotional-social intelligence. Lawshe's Content
Validity Ratio (CVR) is a common method to determine content validity, but it does not
necessarily reflect the opinions of the target population.

CONCURRENT VALIDITY

The study used Pearson's Product Moment Correlation coefficient to assess the concurrent
validity of the Social Intelligence in Consumer Behaviour (SICB) scale. The correlation
coefficients reported for the SICB facets with the BEIS-10 and Life Skills Development Scale
for Adolescents should be interpreted with caution. It is unclear why the correlation coefficient
for the Stress Management facet is lower than that of the other facets. Further research is needed
to establish the concurrent validity of the SICB scale with other established measures of
emotional and social intelligence.

RELIABILITY

The initial reliability of the 60-item scale was moderate, but acceptable. After removing
individual items from each facet, the reliability of the Stress Management facet increased to 0.77,
but the Interpersonal facet decreased to 0.63. The Intrapersonal and Adaptability facets remained
the same, and the General Mood facet increased slightly to 0.82. Further refinement and testing
may be necessary to improve its psychometric properties.

FACTOR ANALYSIS

The use of principal component analysis (PCA) to examine the component structure of the
current scale is a widely accepted statistical method for data reduction in the field of
psychometrics. The results of the PCA on the individual facet scales are reported in an organized
manner, with the factor loading values listed for each item in descending order. The selection of
the top 5 items with the highest factor loadings to be retained in each facet is a common
approach in factor analysis.

INTERPERSONAL

The Interpersonal facet of the scale has 5 items with the highest factor loadings and were
retained in the final scale. However, the number of items retained may vary depending on the
research question, sample size, and other factors. PCA is a valid approach to reduce variables
while capturing the underlying dimensions of the construct being measured.

INTRAPERSONAL

The Intrapersonal facet scale was found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.72. The
retained items capture different aspects of intrapersonal intelligence, such as self-awareness and
self-reflection. Additional analyses, such as confirmatory factor analysis, could be conducted to
further validate the construct validity of the scale.

ADAPTABILITY

The results of the PCA on the Adaptability facet scale showed that the 5 items retained had high
factor loadings, suggesting they were the most important items in measuring the facet. However,
it is important to consider the reliability and validity of the retained items, as well as their
theoretical relevance to the construct being measured.

STRESS MANAGEMENT

The decision to retain 5 items out of 10 in the social domain based on their factor loadings is a
common practice in exploratory factor analysis. However, it is important to consider multiple
factors such as theoretical underpinnings, relevance, and reliability and validity when selecting
items. Multiple methods should be used to evaluate the appropriateness of item selection, such as
item-total correlation, internal consistency, and content validity.

GENERAL MOOD

The second PCA found that the 5 items in the General Mood domain were strongly correlated
and retained in the final scale, suggesting they are important for assessing General Mood in
consumer behavior. However, further research is needed to confirm the validity and reliability of
this scale.

Parallel analysis is a reliable technique for factor analysis, but it is important to consider the
optimal number of factors to include in the final scale. The scree plot suggests a 4-factor
solution, but the decision to use a 5-factor solution was based on a varimax rotation. It is unclear
why some facet items were shuffled in the 5-factor solution. Further information is needed to
evaluate the validity of the scale.

NORMS
Table 7 presents the norms for the total score on the SICB Scale, which are converted into Z-
scores and then into t-scores. The ranges are labeled as very low, low, average, high, and very
high. The normative ranges presented in Table 7 are based on the specific sample used in this
study and may not generalize to other populations or contexts. The raw score table is a useful
tool for researchers and practitioners to interpret the scores of individuals who have taken the
SICB scale, providing a more comprehensive understanding of their scores across the different
facets.

LIMITATIONS

The critique of the Social Intelligence in Consumer Behaviour Scale raises important issues that
must be considered when using it to assess consumer behavior. It is a self-report questionnaire,
which may not provide a full assessment of the construct being examined. It is intended to
evaluate purchasing behavior in offline settings, which excludes online shopping platforms. It is
subjective and can lead to misinterpretation of consumer behavior. It also raises ethical concerns
around privacy and manipulation.

The Social Intelligence in Consumer Behaviour Scale has been constructed with great care, but
its limitations must be taken into account when using it to assess consumer behavior. It is
important to consider cultural norms and socio-economic backgrounds when evaluating social
intelligence, and to use behavioural observations in addition to self-report measures. Examples of
how the current scale may not accurately capture social intelligence in consumer behavior should
be provided. Overall, the critique highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach to
evaluating social intelligence in consumer behavior.