Critical Evaluation of Two Tests of Personality and Intelligence

Critically evaluate the effectiveness of two
different tests of personality or intelligence

Critical evaluation of the effectiveness of two different tests of personality or
intelligence
The main purpose of the current research paper is to critically evaluate as well as
analyse the overall effectiveness of the two scales that is “Relations of emotional intelligence
with gender-linked personality: Implications for a refinement of EI constructs” and
“Personality in Situations: Going beyond the OCEAN and Introducing the Situation Five”.
This research paper is to pinpoint the methods being utilized in both the papers. The Selected
paper in this work is also going to be critiqued from different perspectives such as methods
being utilized, validity and reliability of data collected and psychometric properties in the test
construction. In other words, it simply means assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the
entitlements the authors mark in relation with their psychological instruments. Focusing in
relation with the first article that is “Relations of emotional intelligence with gender-linked
personality: Implications for a refinement of EI constructs”, it is being conducted by four
authors and was being done to examine the association amid trait and ability emotional
intelligence with gender-linked personality (GLP) dimensions of agency as well as
communion (Petrides, Mason & Sevdalis, 2018). The research took place in at a large
western Canadian university. The participants were the students who came from different
academic disciplines. The participants were required to complete self-report measures of
traits emotional intelligence, gender-linked personality dimensions and the Big Five. All the
participants were being asked to take the MSCEIT and all of them accomplished all
procedures namelessly online. Speaking about the trait and ability emotional intelligence
psychological instruments being utilized by the authors, both the instruments can be
distinguished based on the approaches of measurements being utilized for operationalizing
them. Trait EI or in other words trait emotional self-efficacy is concerned in regards with the
emotion related self-perception which is calculated through self-report. On the other hand, the
ability EI or in other words or cognitive-emotional ability efficacy is concerned in regards
with emotions related to reasoning capabilities which is calculated through performance tests.
The author has utilized MSCEIT version for the purpose of measuring the ability of the
participants for performing the tasks and solving issues related to emotions. The trait EI is
being referred as an assemblage of self-perception positioned at the inferior levels of
personality hierarchies while the ability EI is referred as the capability to observe as well as
express emotions and integrating the same in thought, comprehending the reason with
emotion in self and others (Janda, 2016). The correlation amid the measures of trait EI and
1

ability EI is consistently low which supports the explicit difference amid the two scales.
Moving further, the MSCEIT (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test. The
operationalization of ability EI is challenging due to the fact of subjectivity of emotional
experience. The main issue with the MSCEIT approach or test is that it is majorly utilized for
testing the ability emotional intelligence and is not going to measure any intelligible
measurement of psychological interest. The approach being taken by the authors such as trait
EI reflects the fact that the different ideas which have been conversed in the literatures under
the emotional inelegance consistently designate variations of personality traits, for example
adaptableness, emotive expression, understanding and self-control. All these are
psychometrically unrelated to mental capability. Thus, it is quite clear that the chosen
framework by the authors in which the case of models are operationalized through self-report
questionnaires, the claim by the authors is irrational. In case of models which are
operationalized through performance tests, the claim by the authors might have unacceptable
(Van Kampen, 2017).
Articulating in regards with the gender-linked personality (GLP) dimensions, the
authors have made use of Personal Attributes Questionnaire for measuring activity and
empathy. The use of this method by the author has some weaknesses as through these testing
point it is quite possible for the students or participants to fake their responses on the test for
giving enhanced response that performance of a student is not essentially relied on the
personality of individual. On the other hand, from only a single test, complexities of the
personalities of individual cannot be tested briefly. Because of this fact, there has been
question about the accuracy as well as reliability of the overall process. The other method
being used by the authors is big five. In this, the author intends to measure neuroticism,
extraversion, directness, sociability and thoroughness with the Big Five Inventory. There is
no denying the author's subject knowledge but it is important for the authors to know that
traits keeps on changing and they are not fixed (Williams & et.al, 2019). In addition to this,
these personality tests being used are not considered as effective tools for examining the
personality of the participants because of the probability for biased methods of answering and
altering of personalities with the passage of time. Personalities in fact are very complex and
this cannot be adequately scrutinized on the basis of single test alone.
On the other hand, the second article that is “Personality in Situations: Going beyond
the OCEAN and Introducing the Situation Five” is being conducted by three authors
underwrites numerous features to the research on person-situation transactions. In order to
construct the final assessment tool, the author has constructed a big Five in Psychological
2