Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706

The validity of the Bar-On emotional intelligence quotient in an offender population q
Toni Hemmati
a b c


, Jeremy F. Mills


, Daryl G. Kroner


Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada Department of Psychology, Bath Institution, P.O. Box 1500, 5775 Bath Road, Bath, ON, Canada K0H 1G0 Deparment of Psychology, Pittsburgh Institution, P.O. Box 4510, HNY 15, Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 5E5 Received 21 January 2003; received in revised form 22 September 2003; accepted 6 October 2003 Available online 19 November 2003

Abstract Recent research has suggested that emotional intelligence can be quantified and is distinct from general intelligence. Bar-On (1997) established a self-report measure of emotional intelligence, the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i), proposed to reflect the potential for success in life. The current study examines the validity of the EQ-i in an offender sample. Results show that the EQ-i has no relationship with age, only a weak relationship with IQ, but a strong negative correlation with measures of psychopathology, depression and hopelessness. In addition, offenders as a group score higher than normals. Discussion centres on the suggestion that offenders interpret items differently from non-offenders, respond differently, and therefore require distinctive norms. Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Emotional intelligence; Offenders; Personality

1. Introduction While the current wave of interest in measuring emotional intelligence was stimulated by Gardner (1983), research into emotional measurement theory has been well established for several

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Correctional Services of Canada. * Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, Bath Institution, P.O. Box 1500, 5775 Bath Road, Bath, ON, Canada K0H 1G0. Tel.: +1-613-351-8019; fax: +1-613-351-8347. E-mail address: (T. Hemmati). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.10.003


and Catano (2000) also reported no relationship (r ¼ 0:08) between the EQ-i and a measure of cognitive ability.. Bar-On endorses this concept but includes the personality aspects of general mood and happiness in the Bar-On emotional intelligence quotient (EQ-i. These authors suggest that emotional intelligence can be useful in predicting particular life criteria such as parental warmth.. inner contentment) and personal intelligences. Bar-On (1997.696 T.. and intrapersonal intelligence. these studies have used various measures of both types of intelligence. personal and social information in an adaptive way (Mayer et al. use and regulate emotional. Day. far from being a throwback to pre-behaviouristic days. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 decades.g. However.e. Mayer. the ability to understand others. Intelligence quotient A number of studies have examined the relationship between emotional intelligence and traditional measures of cognitive intelligence. proposed by Salovey and Mayer (1990) and popularized by Goleman (1995). Salovey. 1. Gardner (1983) proposed that there are seven primary types of intelligence: verbal. intraphysic abilities (insight. and Caruso (2000) present a comprehensive review of three distinct concepts of emotional intelligence from the literature: The first is as a popular representation of current culture––a zeitgeist. In support of the ability model. Bar-On. Analogous to these personal intelligences. self-report). reflecting the perspective of Mayer et al. He describes emotional intelligence as the emotional. Citing past research. life satisfaction and artistic ability.. is in many ways the preferred method of measuring and indexing states of emotional arousal’’ (p. Caruso. Kramer. and Datzko (2002). attempts were made to measure emotions across three distinct parameters: physiological concomitants (e. 137) reported the absence of a relationship (r ¼ 0:12) between the EQ-i and the total score of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) as evidence for the divergent validity of the EQ-i from IQ. Hemmati et al. p. These researchers examined the relationship of the EQ-i with the General Adult Mental Ability Scale (GAMA). Traditionally. introspective assessment (i. social and survival dimensions of intelligence. assimilating and understanding emotions. mathematical–logical. emotional intelligence is a measure of oneÕs ability to recognize. the ability to develop an accurate model of the self and use it effectively to operate throughout life. 1999). or synonymous with. However. Bar-On developed the EQ-i as a measure of emotional intelligence. the Wonderlic Personnel Test. the sample was very small (n ¼ 40) and only the total WAIS score was reported. Based on this definition. ability is linked to skill and capacity. personality. is that emotional intelligence is conceptualized as a mental ability.. is the concept of emotional intelligence. spatial. Mayer. 1997).e. From this perspective. The second consists of emotional intelligence as a component of.1. and behavioural observation (i. Newsome. in a sample of 489 men. kinesthetic. Eysenck (1975) offered a summary of past research into emotion measurement. The authors . musical. Eysenck concluded ‘‘the evidence suggests that verbal report. For example. judging observed behaviour). The third view. Rather than a measure of emotion per se. The personal intelligences consist of interpersonal intelligence. a non-verbal measure of general intelligence. Similarly. and Salovey (1999) illustrated through factor analysis that emotional intelligence is composed of three separate factors: perceiving and expressing emotions. personal. Other research into the relationship of the EQ-i with a Standard Intelligence Test was conducted by Derksen. 441). and managing those emotions. heart rate).

. Subsequent research by Ciarrochi. Psychopathology Bar-On proposed that emotional intelligence contributes to psychological well being. He suggested that in addition to traditional IQ tests. and negatively related to measures of psychopathology and neuroticism. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 697 found that the total EQ-i score was not related to GAMA but the EQ-i scales of stress and general mood were significantly but weakly related to GAMA (r ¼ 0:10 and r ¼ 0:12. EQ-i can make a unique contribution to ‘‘better understand people and their potential to succeed in various aspects of life’’ (Bar-On.. and Caputi (2000) did not find a relationship (r ¼ 0:05) between emotional intelligence as measured by the MEIS and cognitive intelligence as measured by the RavenÕs Intelligence Test. With age broken into 10-year blocks. p.. high emotional intelligence might convey protective factors against mental and physical illness. Parker.. Mayer et al.g.2. If the relationship between EQ-i and age is consistent. respectively).3. Caruso. and Salovey (2000) later argued that the low correlation between emotional intelligence and the RavenÕs was due to the RavenÕs measurement of performance or spatial intelligence and not verbal performance. Through their development of the MEIS. the 40–49 year-old age group consistently had the highest means across domains. Although the relationship was statistically significantly the overall variance accounted for was less than two percent. Age Research has demonstrated that IQ decreases with age in adulthood (e. 1999) has also been studied with measures of cognitive intelligence. Hemmati et al. Chan. 2002). None of the above studies examined the relationship of emotional intelligence with both verbal and non-verbal (performance) measures of cognitive intelligence. 1. . Derksen et al. 1997. The discrepancies between these findings may hinge upon this distinction. Taylor. Dawda and Hart (2000) found that EQ-i scores were positively correlated with emotional stability and negatively correlated with neuroticism and psychopathology. They suggested that because alexithymia is associated with illness behaviour and increased mortality from all causes. and Bagby (2001) also found a strong negative relationship between EQ-i scores and alexithymia. Emotional intelligence as measured by the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS. that emotional intelligence would also diminish as one ages. They proposed that individuals high in alexithymia (therefore low in emotional intelligence) are intolerant of stress and possess limited adaptive resources. The current study will examine the relationship of emotional intelligence with cognitive intelligence as measured by both verbal and performance measures of cognitive intelligence. Mayer. One might expect then. (1999) found that emotional intelligence was correlated (r ¼ 0:36) with the vocabulary scale of the Army Alpha Intelligence Scale. 2002) although these authors found a decrease in EQ-i scores past the age of 65 years. This finding was replicated in a more recent study (Derksen et al. 4). 1. Bar-On demonstrated that EQ-i total scores are positively related to measures of emotional health. it might be reflected in offender populations with a broad age range representation.T. Mayer et al. however this is not the case: Bar-On (1997) found that EQ-i and scale scores were positively and significantly related to age.

698 T. Consistent with prior research there are four hypotheses: First. rapists and child molesters. range 2–16. Twenty-six subjects were serving life sentences. then the EQ-i might offer a unique insight into forensic populations. what job to take and so on’’ (p. low scores of emotional intelligence will be related to not abiding by societal laws. if the EQ-i is predictive of success in life. commit offences) would be expected to have lower interpersonal intelligence than those who do not commit offences. studies have demonstrated a general increase in emotional intelligence with age. All of the participants volunteered and were not paid for their involvement in the study. . The literature on emotional intelligence measures in correctional facilities is limited. p. 2% Asian and 1% other. If indeed ability is related to capacity and behaviour. criminal negligence/driving 5% and drugs 3%. Participants Participants were 119 male inmates in a medium security federal institution with an average age of 37.0 years (SD 11.4. past research comparing emotional intelligence measures to those of general intelligence showed a positive relationship between emotional intelligence and verbal components of IQ (Mayer et al. OffendersÕ most serious index (confining) offences were assaultive 45%.8 years). 15% Black. The racial composition of the sample was 70% White. sexual 4%. 146). Goleman (1995) stated that empathy (as defined as the capacity to know how another feels) is absent in criminal psychopaths. youÕll make poor choices about who to marry. then offendersÕ scores on the EQ-i should be lower than those of the normative sample.1. property 9%. no intelligence is more important than the interpersonal (intelligence). a child molester who believes he is expressing love.g. then those who make poor choices (e. Criminality Gardner (1983) stipulates ‘‘in the day-to-day world.6. the mean sentence length was 6. It is implied then that conversely. Fourth. range 20–60). He further asserted that the inability to feel the victimÕs pain allows a perpetrator to fabricate and believe lies that further facilitate their crime. of the remaining subjects. Hemmati et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 1. 12). Little research has been conducted on the utility of emotional intelligence measures with criminals. There were minimal relationships between emotional intelligence and non-verbal IQ measures. 2..0 years (SD 3. Bar-On (1997) cites an unpublished study that indicates prisoners in an American state facility scored significantly lower on the total and most scale scores when compared to a matched group from a community sample. 1997. if the EQ-i captures the ability to deal effectively with day to day life then it is expected to be inversely related to measures of psychopathology. If this position is true.7. Bar-On speculated that for this population. The purpose of the current study is to examine the validity of the Bar-On EQ-i with an offender population. 1999). Method 2. therefore it is hypothesized that EQ-i scores will be positively related to age among offenders. Third. robbery 34%. Second.. for example. 12% Native American. If you donÕt have it. emotional intelligence is equated to success in abiding by the rules of society (Bar-On. It is therefore hypothesized that EQ-i scores will be positively related to verbal IQ but not to performance IQ.

self-regard. Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR. impulse expression. My problems don’t seem to end). represents deliberate manipulation to demonstrate a better (or worse) presentation. Each of the 11 clinical scales (excluding deviation) has 20 items with balanced true/false keying. The results are reported in four formats: the total score. Scores were derived by using item scales provided in the manual. interpersonal intelligence (empathy. social introversion. assertiveness. 1994) The BIDR is a 40-item self-report with a seven-point Likert Response Scale. independence). alienation. very true.1. I recently had thoughts of hurting myself).g. such as sadness. Jackson. and deviation. Hemmati et al. Kroner. Materials 2. optimism). social withdrawal and a reduced interest in previously enjoyed activities. very often or true of me for positively or negatively-keyed items. . 1997) The EQ-i is a 133-item questionnaire with a 5-point Likert Response Scale.2. 2. is scored as 1 (e. Bar-On. Developed and normed on an offender population. A false response to a negatively-keyed item is scored as 1 (e. Mills & Kroner. Holden. depression. denial. Higher scores indicate a higher level of emotional intelligence. & Beckett. although their answers are inflated through self-deception. Responses to each item can range from 1. Participants respond in a true or false format. general mood (happiness.. The deviation scale is a critical-item scale.2. anxiety. stress management (stress tolerance. Higher scores on the depression scale indicate depressed affect. SDE is a measure of the degree to which respondents answer honestly. 2. not true to 7. Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i. impulse control). thinking disorder. The scales and subscales are intrapersonal intelligence (emotional self-awareness. social responsibility).. flexibility). Kroner. self-depreciation.g. Reddon. The DHS includes a 13-item critical item checklist for self-harm and suicide ideation that is not to be summed (e. The final item is a self-report on honesty of responding and is not included in any scale. and 15 subscales. Items are scored from 1. & Reddon. persecutory ideation. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 699 2. the DHS has demonstrated both internal consistency and validity (Mills & Kroner. interpersonal relationships. Paulhus. The BPI has demonstrated reliability and validity when used in an offender population (Kroner & Reddon.. Depression and hopelessness items are both negatively and positively keyed. reality testing. Depression Hopelessness and Suicide Screening Form (DHS. in press).2.4. 2002) The DHS is a 39-item true/false response questionnaire designed to screen for hopelessness and depression and flag suicide and self-harm concerns.g. A response of true to a positively-keyed item.T. 5 scales. interpersonal problems.2. Basic Personality Inventory (BPI. IM however. the validity score. My future will be mostly happy). with all items true-keyed. 1997) The BPI is a 240-item instrument comprised of 12 scales: hypochondriasis. very seldom or not true of me to 5.2. Results are reported in two scales: Self-Deception Enhancement (SDE) and Impression Management (IM). adaptability (problem solving. for example the inability to anticipate future happiness and little sense of self-efficacy. 1996.3. Kroner and Weekes (1996) have demonstrated the reliability and validity of the BIDR when used with an offender sample. self-actualization. Elevated scores on the hopelessness scale are suggestive of despair.2. 1997. 1991). 2.

similarities and vocabulary subscales. 1998) The MAB-II is a measure of aptitude and intelligence. correcting for unequal variance when encountered (Reddon. No one responded with 2. and 15 subscales. Correlations between the EQ-i and the MAB total score were statistically significant at the p < 0:05 level for only the EQ-i scales of adaptability and general mood. adaptability. and as an overall IQ score. often true of me or 5. four age categories similar to those used by Bar-On (1997) were compared: less than 29 years (n ¼ 36). picture arrangement. Table 4 shows the correlations between EQ-i total and EQ-i scales with other measures used in the study. 114Þ ¼ 0:043. and 50 years and older (n ¼ 15). therefore the indication of non-validity should be 1. Only one subject in the current study responded with 1 for this item and was dropped from analysis. general mood) were related to MAB verbal. Most EQ-i scale scores were higher for the current sample than those reported for the normative sample by Bar-On (1997). DHS. alpha and T -score equivalents for the EQ-i total. Jackson. therefore the total n was reduced from 119 to 118. All participants were tested for literacy and achieved at least a grade five reading level. The EQ-i total and scales are negatively correlated with the DHS and BPI scales with the exception of BPI denial that shows a positive relationship. 1992). This is not a reverse-scored item. BIDR and MAB scales.3. DHS scores were available for only 104 participants and only 92 participants had MAB scores. 1997. Hemmati et al. seldom true of me. A one-way ANOVA between EQ-i and age groups revealed no differences in EQ-i scores (F ð3. p. p > 0:05). All correlations between the EQ-i and the BPI. very seldom or not true of me. All of the measures were administered within a time period of two or three days. very often true of me renders the results invalid. range. DHS and BIDR are significant at the p < 0:01 level with the exception of the EQ-i interpersonal scale with the BPI thinking disorder scale that is non-significant. Although three scales of the EQ-i (interpersonal. Calculation of the T -score equivalents was based upon the North American norms provided by Bar-On (1997). T -tests between group means. The EQ-i manual (Bar-On. indicated the offender scores were significantly greater than . Table 2 provides descriptive statistics for the BPI. or 2. Scores are reported in three formats: As a verbal IQ comprised of information. 43) states that item 133 is included as a validity measure and not summed in any scale: a response of 4. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 2.2. To test for a relationship between EQ-i score and age. arithmetic.5. and object assembly subscales.700 T. 3. Multidimensional Aptitude Battery-II (MAB. EQ-i is also positively related to the BIDR scales. comprehension. scales. 2. Results Table 1 shows the mean. Procedure Offenders were approached at the time they completed testing for a psychological risk assessment and asked if they would participate in this research. Agreement was indicated by signing a consent form. 40–49 years (n ¼ 32). 30–39 years (n ¼ 35). spatial. standard deviation. as performance IQ comprised of digit symbol. there were no relationships between MAB performance and the EQ-i scales. picture completion. All EQ-i scale intercorrelations are significant at the p < 0:01 level (Table 3).

76 0. 1999.4 33.8 105.6 107.9 42. intrapersonal. 4.4 102.2 106.8 99.0 SD 57. and Mayer.1 103.61 0. the EQ-i would qualify as a measure of emotional intelligence by Mayer et al. second.3 5.78 701 T -score equivalent 104. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 Table 1 EQ-i descriptive statistics Scale EQ-i total Intrapersonal Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Interpersonal Empathy Interpersonal relationships Social responsibility Adaptability Problem solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress management Impulse control Stress tolerance General mood Happiness Optimism Range 320–577 103–190 17–40 16–35 18–45 23–45 18–35 64–120 19–40 23–55 23–50 73–130 20–40 30–50 14–40 43–87 23–43 19–45 41–85 21–45 19–40 Mean 481.83 0. These results are also consistent with those of Derksen et al.87 0.4 107. (2000).9 107..8 32. the results from the current study support the hypothesis that EQ-i is weakly related to verbal IQ.9 104. Stankov.1 70.3 4. Mayer. Salovey et al. Mayer et al. and third that abilities of the intelligence will develop with age and experience from youth to adulthood.90 0.4 4.2 37. 2000.6 34. This position is also supported by Mayer et al.2 6. Caruso et al.90 0.92 0.3 5. and adaptability scales (Table 5).0 44. Davies.79 0.7 20.5 6..Õs (1999) standards.83 0. interpersonal.8 5.6 108. (1999) specified three criteria for an intelligence: First.7 102. (1999).2 13.1 99.4 104..85 0.3 102.9 100..84 0. Caruso et al.g.8 6. Mayer.1 103. Discussion Consistent with prior research (e.5 35.6 46. and Roberts (1998) specify that if emotional intelligence is to qualify as an intelligence. that it can be operationalized by a set of abilities.8 109.76 0. By meeting these criteria.9 32.6 5.0 10. that these abilities should form related sets and be related to a standard pre-existing intelligence while still accounting for unique variance.0 Alpha 0. Mayer et al.6 28. Hemmati et al.3 164.5 6. it must be independent from personality traits.0 5.T.5 37.1 69.5 4.89 0.0 37.2 9. Mayer.6 100. 2000).8 103.82 0.7 28.1 98.75 0.75 0.97 0.0 12.1 5.4 32.59 0.5 4.1 those of the normative sample for the EQ-i total. though there is no relationship between EQ-i and performance IQ.1 5.0 33.1 100. Salovey .0 103.73 0.83 0. However. (2002) who found minimal but significant relationships between the EQ-i scales and IQ total score.

8 4. This was supported by the strong relationship between EQ-i and psychopathology as measured by the BPI and DHS. it could be argued that the EQ-i meets the first two of the (personality-excluded) criteria for intelligence stipulated by Mayer et al. both include personality components as a necessity in an emotional intelligence concept. The third hypothesis was that there would be an inverse relationship between EQ-i and psychopathology.7 3. the developmental component cannot be fully tested.7 94.5 1.3 1. The failure to replicate that finding in the current sample might be unique to an offender sample.0 1.5 2. . the hypothesis that EQ-i scores increase with age was not supported. Our results that show the EQ-i is more strongly related to psychopathology than IQ is reflective of the personality-inclusion view.9 3.4 3. and MAB descriptives Scale BPI hypochondriasis BPI depression BPI denial BPI interpersonal problems BPI alienation BPI persecutory ideation BPI anxiety BPI thinking disorder BPI impulse expression BPI social introversion BPI self-depreciation BPI deviation DHS totala DHS hopelessnessa DHS depressiona BIDR impression management BIDR self-deception MAB overallb MAB verbalb MAB performanceb a b Range 0–16 0–15 0–16 1–17 0–12 0–15 0–14 0–7 0–17 0–19 0–14 0–10 0–22 0–9 0–14 32–134 43–123 73–128 74–122 70–134 Mean 3.1 19. BIDR. SD ¼ 15).4 0.9 DHS scores based on 104 participants.4 2. the third criterion for an intelligence. DHS. A replication with a larger offender sample would help to verify this finding.6 5. In the current sample.9 95.7 98.702 T.0 12. The size of these correlations when compared to those between EQ-i and IQ suggests that the EQ-i may be more strongly linked to personality constructs than cognitive intelligence.1 5.1 3. found a positive relationship between EQ-i and age in community samples.7 2.1 3. Without pre-adult participants however.2 2.6 3.1 82.6 3.9 13. Hemmati et al. et al. (2002) and Bar-On (1997) however. Eysenck (1975) and Bar-On (1997) though. Both correlational analysis and a one-way ANOVA failed to show a relationship between EQ-i and age.8 1.2 3. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 Table 2 BPI.2 3. Similar correlations were found by Bar-On (1997) between EQ-i total and negative affect measured by the Beck Depression Inventory and the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale. MAB scores based on 92 participants and are reported in standardized form (M ¼ 100.0 5.7 3. Derksen et al.0 14.5 11.7 3.7 SD 3.0 93.7 3. It is interesting to note that although inclusive of personality. (2000).9 7.1 2.0 3.

75 0.69 0.70 0. Happiness .79 0.62 0. 2. Emotional 0.56 0. Problem 0.53 0.77 Stress 0. 5.70 0.75 0.58 0.59 control 20.77 0.87 0.67 0.41 0.91 0. Hemmati et al.85 0.92 0.56 0.75 0.78 0.87 0.73 0.69 0.66 0.85 0. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 703 EQ total 0.68 0.74 0.92 0.59 0.80 0.64 0.77 Interpersonal 0.94 0.59 responsibility 0.70 0.72 0.94 7.75 0.69 0.85 Intrapersonal 0.76 0.75 0.56 0.69 0.67 0.68 0.71 0.83 0.80 0.52 0.71 0.48 0.72 0. 3.86 0.67 0.72 0.64 0. 4.45 0.85 0.69 testing 16.65 0. Social 0.65 0.74 0.57 0.46 0.62 0. General mood 0. Impulse 0.63 0.57 13.36 0.Table 3 EQ-i interscale correlations Scale 1.90 0.64 0.65 0.54 0.75 0.69 0.71 mangement 6.77 0.74 0.76 0.40 0.41 0.65 0.71 0.71 ization 12.73 0.41 0.75 0. Self-actual0.65 0.82 0.67 0.79 0.49 0.71 0. Self-regard 0.61 0.81 0.78 14.64 0.58 0. Independence 0.82 0.59 self-awareness 9.86 0.49 0.81 8.45 0.34 0.56 0.75 0.37 0.77 0.76 Adaptability 0.79 0.62 0.56 0.75 0.73 0.66 0.67 0.77 0.95 0.50 0.49 0.66 0.70 0.90 0.39 11.63 0.87 0.79 0.79 0.83 0.69 0.91 0.74 0.62 0.88 0.60 solving 18.41 0.68 0.80 0.70 0.86 0.84 0.73 0.74 17. Reality 0.86 0.63 0.87 0.93 0.63 0.79 0. Stress 0.77 0.67 0.56 0.31 0. Flexibility 0.76 0.53 0.33 0.56 0.70 0. Empathy 0. Interpersonal relationship 15.82 0.80 0.74 0.69 0.73 0.80 0.61 0.65 0.67 0.75 0.54 0.55 0.77 0.60 10.68 0.58 0.80 0.57 0.64 0.68 0.71 0.95 0.71 21.75 0.82 0.91 0.84 0.41 0.76 0.62 0.80 0.60 0.80 0.88 0.79 0.67 0.70 tolerance 19.89 0.82 0.75 0.74 0.75 0. Assertiveness 0.66 0.44 0.81 0.75 0.63 0. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 T. Optimism 0.77 0.46 0.

47 0.52 )0.41 )0.56 )0.34 )0.51 )0. IQ.53 )0.02 ns Stress )0.20 ns 0.64 )0.53 df 122.65 )0.21 0.46 0.04 ns Adapt )0.54 0.41 )0.67 0.49 )0.50 0.49 )0.20 ns 0.67 0.60 )0. This however. A potential explanation is that offenders demonstrate a high degree of social desirability in their responses.62 )0. If it is true that individuals who make poor life decisions (i. Correlations with the MAB and its scales are significant at the p < 0:05 level unless otherwise indicated.26 )0. submitted.49 6.12 )0.54 )0.58 )0.44 )0.15 0.28 )0.03 2.17 ns 0.31 )0.57 )0. and age Scale BPI hypochondriasis BPI depression BPI denial BPI interpersonal problems BPI alienation BPI persecutory ideation BPI anxiety BPI thinking disorder BPI impulse expression BPI social introversion BPI self-depreciation BPI deviation DHS total DHS hopelessness DHS depression BIDR impression management BIDR self-deception MAB overall MAB verbal MAB performance Age EQ-i total )0. & Kroner.001 <0.60 0.01 <0.54 )0.47 )0.97 4.61 )0.704 T.45 0.45 )0.64 )0.58 )0.20 )0.61 )0. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 Table 4 EQ-i scale correlations with BPI.54 )0.43 0.47 0.43 0.57 0.67 )0.50 0.42 0.25 0..00 ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns Note: All correlations between the EQ-i.33 0.19 ns )0.e. EQ-i scales.59 )0.62 0.45 )0.50 )0..01 Inter )0.e.38 )0.36 )0.40 1.44 )0.26 )0.54 )0.18 0.62 )0.60 0.44 )0.38 )0.43 )0.65 0.47 )0. as .56 )0.39 0.52 )0.05 <0.63 )0.50 )0. engage in criminal activity) are lower in emotional intelligence than those who make good life decisions (i.57 )0.30 )0.43 0.40 )0.21 0. Loza. BIDR scales and DHS scales are significant at the p < 0:01 level unless otherwise indicated. then the finding that offenders have scores equal to or higher than non-offenders presents a paradox.55 )0.46 )0.43 )0.17 0. 2003). Hemmati et al. DHS.57 )0.50 )0.25 0. BPI scales.41 )0.01 ns Intra )0.45 )0.38 0.47 3947 122.42 )0.50 )0.65 )0.59 0.51 )0.43 )0.61 )0.49 )0.48 0.49 )0.56 )0.17 ns )0.21 0.18 ns )0. choose not to engage in criminal activity). In other words.43 )0.16 0.62 )0. is confounded by research that shows a significant negative relationship between the BIDR and criminal risk indices (Mills & Kroner. Mills.15 0.001 ns ns The fourth hypothesis that offenders as a group would have lower scores than those of the normative sample was not supported. BIDR.21 0.56 )0.61 )0.56 )0.02 General mood )0.35 p <0.47 )0.54 0.44 )0.55 )0.20 ns )0.50 )0.6 3947 3947 122.32 )0.47 )0. Table 5 Comparison between inmate scores and Bar-OnÕs (1997) normative sample Scale EQ total Intrapersonal Interpersonal Adaptability Stress management General mood t 2.46 0.

D. New York: Raven Press. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment.e. P. American Psychologist.. EQ-i) with the same low degree of socially desirable responding. Davies. R. (2000). Levi (Ed. Emotional intelligence: In search of an illusive construct. Assessing emotional intelligence: Reliability and validity of the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-I) in university students. Multidimensional aptitude battery-II. R. New York: Bantam Books. D. Personality and Individual Differences. Hemmati et al. Goleman. Y. Derksen. 539–561. 2000. D. Basic Personality Inventory.. Basic Personality Inventory clinical and validity scales: Stability and internal consistency. D. 18. 141–153. (1997). (1996). (2000). Personality and Individual Differences.. M. R. 267–298. R. E. & Datzko. Dawda. 323–333. Toronto. & Reddon. 797–812.). D. 34–43. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. (1983).. D. J. J.. G. The measurement of emotion: Psychological parameters and methods. (1975). Kroner. S. . N. N. (1999). As suggested by Mills et al. J. This intuitively paradoxical finding suggests that these high-risk individuals would respond to other measures (i. EQ-i Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory. this suggests that correcting for socially desirable responding in offender scores in the same manner as for non-offenders to produce corrected clinical scores will not yield comparable results. Stankov. 13. it may be insufficient to gauge the level of intelligence governing emotion. although self-report is the most common and arguably the preferred method of measuring emotion (Diener. (2000). Alternative measures that do not rely purely on self-report could be less susceptible to socially desirable responding and thereby yield different results when applied to an offender population. R. G. 28. J. & Beckett. ON: Research Psychologist Press. Emotions––their parameters and measurement. & Hart. C. reliability and validity with an offender sample. R. Watson. G. Kroner. G. A. 32. References Bar-On. Mayer. ON: Research Psychologist Press. Reddon. H.. & Caputi. V. Diener.. 989–1015. Further research in testing competing models of emotional intelligence that account for the potential influence of socially desirable responding is recommended. (2003) it appears that the items might hold different meaning for offenders in the way that they see themselves and in the way they report that information. J. M. D. Gardner. H. Intelligence. Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. P.. D. (1997). Does a self-report measure for emotional intelligence assess something different than general intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences. Validity of the Basic Personality Inventory in a correctional setting. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. A critical evaluation of the emotional intelligence construct. 147–154. ON: Multi-Health Systems. J. Balanced inventory of desirable responding: Factor structure.T. R. Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. the failure of offender scores to reflect those of the normative sample suggests the need for offender norms distinct from nonoffender norms. Caruso.. & Reddon. 28. I. offenders who demonstrate the least amount of socially desirable responding have the greater risk of re-offence. Factor structure of the Basic Personality Inventory with incarcerated offenders.. J. 275–284.. (1995). (1996).. Kroner. Chan. Kroner. D. & Salovey. D. London. & Weekes. D. J. London. Ciarrochi. 2000). In L. Taken together.. (1991). 21. Personality and Individual Differences. Kramer. R.. Eysenck. Assessment. 4. New York: Basic Books. N. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 705 a group. D. 55.. Jackson. Jackson. (1998). Holden. (1998). (1997). 75.. Although different results might be obtained using a larger sample. Emotional intelligence. 27. 37–48. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. L. & Roberts. R. In regard to the type of measure used. (2002).

. Bar-On & J. & Bagby. & Caruso. Bar-On & J. P. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health. L. G. (2003). development. F. Reddon. J. A. D. Newsome. D. D. (2000). Impression management and self-report among violent offenders. Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: The case for ability studies. Cognition. Mills.. Assessing the predictive validity of emotional intelligence. Handbook of emotional intelligence theory. Watson. 86. P. J. G. Unpublished manuscript. D. & Salovey. & Kroner. Personality and Individual Differences. G. and in the workplace. Personality and Individual Differences. P. hopelessness and suicide screening form. D. Paulhus.. F. In R. assessment. Applied Psychological Measurement. Emotional intelligence. (1992). . Salovey. D. and in the workplace. New York: Guilford Press. D. and as a mental ability. Loza. (2000).706 T. R.).). (submitted). J. Unpublished user guide. J. as personality. 107–115. 9. Predictive validity despite social desirability: Evidence for the robustness of self-report among offenders. (in press). S. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass. Parker.. Day. D. D. In R. (2000). (1990). Handbook of emotional intelligence theory. D. The depression.. (2001). Salovey. & Catano. 29. F. & Kroner. 16. assessment. A_Stat: Statistical hypotheses and utilities (version 2. Imagination. Psychological Services.. G. development. University of British Columbia.. & Kroner. Parker (Eds.. Emotional intelligence as zeitgeist. 144–154. Hemmati et al. 185–211. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass. 30. and application at home. 1005–1016. A.. Mills. D. & Mayer. D. The relationship between emotional intelligence and alexithymia. school. Mayer. J. and Personality. R.0). school. & Kroner. (2002). Mood and temperament.. J. L. A. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) 695–706 Mayer. Mills. A.. A new instrument to screen for depression. J. hopelessness and suicide in offenders. J. R. Mills. V.. M. J. Balanced inventory of desirable responding: Reference manual for the BIDR version 6. (2000). W. D. 13. G. (1994). M. D. Caruso. R.. and application at home. Taylor.. Parker (Eds. F.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful