Table 2.

Summary of major emotional Intelligence assessment measures.

Name of tool and original citation	Explanation of the theoretical basis	Test length and description	Example Item/s	Availability free vs. cost
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) Mayer et al. (2002a,b, 2003) Cited in more than 1,500 articles	In 1997 Salovey and Mayer developed a 4 branch approach to ability EI called MEIS and since then this has been developed into the MSCEIT (Mayer et al., 2002a,b) and revised with additional versions. The revised model is a process-orientated model that emphasizes stages of development in EI, potential for growth and the contributions emotions make to intellectual growth. The scale was developed based on a review of ability EI literature around focusing on individuals' processing of emotion related information. Each of the four branches is measured with two objective, ability-based tasks. There are different response formats. Some tasks such as the “picture task,” use 5-point rating scales, whereas other tasks, such as the “blends task,” use a multiple-choice response. For all questions however, answers can be considered correct or incorrect in a similar way to IQ tests. The facets can be defined as follows: Perceiving Emotion represents the ability to correctly identify how oneself and others are feeling. Facilitating Thought represents the ability to create emotions that impact thought processes. Understanding Emotion represents the ability to understand the causes of emotions. Managing Emotion represents the ability to create effective strategies that utilize emotions for a specific purpose.	Consists of 8 MSCEIT tasks which are made up of a number of individual items. 141 questions in total. 4 constructs including: Perceiving Emotions; Facilitating Thought; Understanding Emotions; Managing Emotions.	In the faces task (four item parcels; 5 responses each), participants view a series of faces and for each, respond on a five-point scale, indicating the degree to which a specific emotion is present in the face.	Cost Website https://www.mhs.com/
Self-report Emotional Intelligence Test (SREIT) Schutte et al. (1998) Cited in more than 3,000 articles	Schutte et al. (1998) developed a self-report EI questionnaire based on Salovey and Mayer's (1990) model. A factor analysis was conducted on 62 items using data from 346 participants from which a 33-item scale was created. The measure showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.90) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.78). The scale was also tested against theoretically related constructs including alexithymia, non-verbal communication of affect, optimism, pessimism, attention to feelings, clarity of feelings, mood repair, depressed mood and impulsivity and found to have construct validity. The model however has been criticized for confusing ability and trait forms of EI (however this criticism can be applied to the development of most trait based models). Participants respond to items on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly-disagree) to 5 (strongly-agree).	Consists of 33 self-report statements. Four factors including: 1. Optimism/ mood regulation 2. Appraisal of emotions 3. Social skills 4. Utilization of emotions	An example item is “I am aware of my emotions as I experience them”.	Free
Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). Long Form and Short Forms. Petrides and Furnham (2001) Cited in more than 2,000 articles	TEIQue-Long Form The TEIQue is based on trait EI theory, which conceptualizes emotional intelligence as a personality trait. It has also been described as “emotional self-efficacy.” Unlike Schutte et al.'s (1998) measure, it did not originally aim to measure ability based EI with self-report questions. Item and facets were developed by conducting a content analysis of the EI literature and available constructs (Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Goleman, 1995; Bar-On, 1997a,b). TEIQue-Short Form Petrides and Furnham also created a short-form questionnaire (TEIQue-SF) which contains 30 items and the same 4 factors from the long version. Additional adaptations such as a 360 degree measure can be found on their website http://psychometriclab.com/	Consists of 153 self-report statements. Four factors and 15 facets including: 1.Well-being (Trait optimism, trait happiness and self-esteem); 2. Sociability (Emotional management (others), assertiveness and social awareness); 3. Emotionality (trait empathy, emotional perception, emotion expression and relationships); 4. Self-control (emotion regulation, impulsiveness and stress management).	Example items include: “Understanding the needs and desires of others is not a problem for me”; “I'm usually able to influence the way other people feel” and “I can handle most difficulties in my life in a cool and composed manner.”	Cost. Not freely available for commercial use. Details for obtaining permission are on website. Free for research purposes.
Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) Bar-On (1996, 1997a,b) Cited in more than 1,000 articles	Mixed position, considers EI as a mixed construct consisting of both cognitive ability and personality aspects. The scale emphasizes how the personality traits influence a person's general well-being. Bar-On's model was based on empirical research into personal factors related to EI and particularly into emotional and social elements of behavior. The concept was theoretically developed from logically clustering variables and identifying underlying key factors claimed to determine effective and successful functioning. The EQ-i measures abilities and the potential for performance rather than performance itself; it is process-oriented, rather than outcome-oriented. Bar-On's original report of EQ-i from 1996 is in a book form. However, since the development of the original EQ-i scale, Bar-On and others have revised the scale (Bar-On et al., 2000) thus creating EQ-i 2.0. The total EQ-i can be used to create total EI scores as well as factor and facet/subscale scores. The subscales have adequate internal consistency. Bar-On went on to develop additional test versions including a youth version (EQ-i:YV) and 360 multi-rater measure (EQ-360).	Revised model consists of 125 items. Five factors, 15 facets (subscales) including: 1. Self-Perception (Self-Regard, Self-Actualization, Emotional Self Awareness) 2. Interpersonal (Interpersonal Relationships, Empathy Social Responsibility) 3. Decision Making (Problem Solving, Reality Testing, Impulse Control) 4. Self-Expression (Emotional Expression, Assertiveness Independence) 5. Stress Management (Flexibility Stress Tolerance, Optimism)	Example items include: “When I'm angry with others, I can tell them about it,” “I know how to deal with upsetting problems,” and “I like helping people.”	Cost http://www.reuvenbaron.org/wp/
The situational test of emotion management (STEM). The situational test of emotional understanding (STEU) MacCann and Roberts (2008) Cited in more than 250 articles	MacCann and Roberts (2008) developed ability-based measures of EI. MacCann and Roberts based their STEM and STEU scales on 2 of the four hierarchical ordered branches of emotion-related abilities outlined by Mayer et al. (2000): understanding and managing emotions which form the Strategic EI area (Mayer et al., 2001). STEM The STEM was developed to be administered in both multiple-choice and rate-the-extent formats (i.e., test takers rate the appropriateness, strength, or extent of each alternative, rather than selecting the correct alternative). Items for STEM were developed by conducting semi-structured interviews with 50 individuals who described emotional situations they experienced in the past 2 weeks (with a total of 290 situations). These items were categorized and tested. STEU Roseman's (2001) emotion appraisal theory was used as the basis for item construction and scoring of the STEU such that answers could be regarded as correct or incorrect. According to this model, the 17 most common emotions can be explained by a combination of seven appraisal dimensions. The STEU comprised 42 items with each item presenting emotional situations, and participants had to choose which emotion the situation will most likely elicit. Fourteen emotions were assessed in 3 separate contexts—de-contextualized, work and private life.	STEM−44 items Anger (18 items); sadness (14 items) and fear (12 items). STEU −42 items (14 context-reduced, 14 with a personal-life context, and 14 with a workplace context.	STEU—workplace example assessing relief includes: a supervisor who is unpleasant to work for leaves Alfonso's work. Alfonso is most likely to feel? (a) joy, (b) hope, (c) regret, (d) relief, (e) sadness	Can be freely obtained in Appendix 2.1 of MacCann's (2006) study. However permission is required to use the test for non-research purposes.
Emotional and Social Competence Inventory (ESCI). Boyatzis et al. (2000) Cited in more than 1,500 articles	The ESCI is based on a mixed model of EI and regards EI as consisting of both cognitive ability and personality aspects. The model focuses heavily on predicting workplace success. The ESCI utilizes 360 degree assessment that can include self-ratings, peer ratings and supervisor ratings. Boyatzis and Goleman include a set of emotional competencies within each construct of EI. Emotional competencies are not regarded as innate talents, but rather learned capabilities that must be worked on and can be developed to achieve outstanding performance. Boyatzis and Goleman argue that individuals are born with a general emotional intelligence potential that determines their potential for learning emotional competencies. Internal consistency of the scales ranges from 0.61 to 0.85 (Conte, 2005).	Consists of 110 items Assesses 12 competencies organized into four factors: 1.Self awareness 2. Social awareness 3. Self-Management 4. Relationship management	Example items includes: “I recognize my emotions and their effects on others,” and “I can keep disruptive emptions or impulses under control.”	Cost

Note the measures reviewed above were selected based on widespread use and validation. Although other measures exist, they were not reviewed based on either less research in general or poor psychometric support. However, if none of those reviewed above are considered appropriate, three further available measures could be considered. One relatively new measure with good preliminary support is the Genos Emotional Intelligence Inventory (Palmer et al., 2009). This is a commercial, mixed measure of EI and requires payment. A further, freely available measure is Wong's Emotional Intelligence Scale (WEIS) (trait-based; see Wong et al., 2004, 2007). A third very new measure is the Geneva Emotional Competence Test (GECo) (see Schlegel and Mortillaro, 2019). It is an ability based measure designed for the workplace that looks very promising based on early work.