![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
People process emotional information using visual, vocal, and verbal cues. However, emotion management is typically assessed with text based rather than multimedia stimuli. This study (N = 427) presents the new multimedia emotion management assessment (MEMA) and compares it to the text-based assessment of emotion management used in the MSCEIT. The text-based and multimedia assessment showed similar levels of cognitive saturation and similar prediction of relevant criteria. Results demonstrate that the MEMA scores have equivalent evidence of validity to the text-based MSCEIT test scores, demonstrating that multimedia assessment of emotion management is viable. Furthermore, our results inform the debate as to whether cognitive saturation in emotional intelligence (EI) measures represents “noise” or “substance”. We find that cognitive ability associations with EI represent substantive variance rather than construct-irrelevant shared variance due to reading comprehension ability required for text-based items.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1Note that we chose to compare the MEMA to the most widely used emotion management test rather than to a text-based version of the MEMA. This was due to concerns with transcribing (i.e., transcriptions of verbal text versus non-verbal expressions, see Lievens & Sackett, Citation2006, p. 1183, see also the Discussion section below), and to ensure a comparison to an assessment intentionally designed as a text-based test.
2Note that the Geneva Emotion Recognition Task is a better representation of emotion recognition in dynamic stimuli, as compared to the DANVA. This assessment was not yet available when we collected our data.