Common Questions about the EQ-i 2.0™

Here you may find the answers to the most common questions about the EQ-i 2.0™ - Emotional Intelligence.


Please visit MHS' YouTube-channel for more inspiring and educational videos about the EQ-i 2.0 or have a look at our educational video where we will tell you more about how we measure and develop EQ!

The EQ portal

  • What is a token?

    Tokens are a type of currency which is used by MHS in order to buy reports. When you order through Kandidata you specify how many reports you need, and we will calculate how many tokens it corresponds to.

  • How do I order tokens?

    E-mail us at kdt@kandidata.se and we will help you.

  • How do I send a link to several participants?

    You can copy and paste it in an email and send it to your contact person or the participants who will complete EQ-i 2.0.

    1.      If you want to include the instructions with the link, copy and paste the recommended text in the e-mail and send it to the participant.

    2.      If you don’t have the e-mail address to all participants, the link can be posted online on a website that the participants have access to.

    3.      Alternatively, the link can be printed and manually distributed to participants.

  • Does choosing a different language to generate the report impact the price?

    No. You may generate your coach and client report using any language of your choosing and the report will be the same number of tokens. If you have already generated a report and you wish to change the language that is fine as well, no additional costs will be added.

  • Will it affect the price if I adjust factors in the report, such as language, action plan or follow-up questions?

    No, you use the same number of tokens regardless of how you adjust and customize the report. However, it does cost extra to generate a report with a new norm group.

  • Can I regenerate a report for free? What do I do if I would like to use another norm group?

    You can regenerate a report for free if you use the same norm group. If you choose to use another norm group, you will be debited for a new report.

  • Does the system allow people to omit items? What is the cutoff?

    The EQ-i 2.0 is designed in such a way that respondents should be able to answer every item on the assessment. However, because the items are not mandatory, it is possible for a respondent to choose to skip certain items. An overall omission rate is calculated by dividing the number of omitted items by 133 (the total number of items on the EQ-i 2.0) and multiplying by 100.

    If the Overall Omission Rate is 8% or higher the results may be invalid. A similar omission rate is calculated at the composite and subscale level, where an Omission Rate of 8% or higher renders the results for any particular scale possibly invalid. If this is the case you may want to ask your client about his/her process when responding to the assessment. Rushing through the items, not fully understanding English or the purpose of the assessment may be possible explanation for omitted items.


  • Can a client go back and respond to previously omitted items?

    Clients can only go back and respond to omitted items during the administration of the assessment. Once they ‘submit’ their data, they can no longer complete the omitted items without taking the entire assessment again.


  • When does the system flag something?

    For the Inconsistency Index, Positive Impression, Negative Impression, a flag will appear when the score is 3 or more. For the Time to completion, anything below 7 minutes or above 90 minutes will activate a flag. A response to 133 of 3 or lower will generate a flag, and the following omission rates will be flagged:



    EI Total Score9 items are missing across the entire assessment

    Composite Scales

    3 items are missing on any given composite scale
    Subscales

    1 item is omitted on any given subscale




  • Can I print the new user manual?

    The user manual is available in the EQ-i 2.0 portal for free but may not be printed. If you prefer a printed manual, they are available for sale. Please contact customerservice@mhs.com to purchase manuals.

Reports

  • What report options are available for the EQ-i 2.0?

    The report options are:

    • EQ-i 2.0 Workplace report
    • EQ-i 2.0 Leadership report
    •  EQ-i 2.0 Group report
    •  EQ360- report


    Since new reports are continuously being released, they will be synced with MHS and Kandidata’s different channels, such as the EQ-i 2.0 portal, through mail-communication and social media.


  • What languages is the EQ-i 2.0 available in?

    •English(USA/Canada)
    •English (UK)
    •Portuguese
    •French
    •Spanish(european)
    •Danish
    •German
    •Swedish
    •Simplified Chinese

    New languages will be announced via the EQ - portal. 

  • Why does the Client Report look different than my Coach Report?

    The Coach Report provides you with interpretive information that allows you, the practitioner, to better understand and interpret the results. This in turns allows you to provide valuable feedback to your client. The Client report provides the results, while the Coach Report includes the details around how those results were derived.

  • Are the validity scales still there? How is validity addressed?


    For both the EQ-i 2.0 and the EQ 360 2.0, all validity information is presented on the first page of the Coach’s Report called Response Style Explained. You must understand how to interpret the following five validity indices:

    • Time to Completion
    • Inconsistency Index (IncX)
    • Positive and Negative Impression
    • Item 133
    • Omitted Items



  • Is the composite score an average of the subscale scores?

    No, it is not simply an average of the subscale scores. A composite score is calculated as the sum of all the items that go into that composite scale. For example, there are 24 items that make up the Self Perception Composite scale:  8 items under Self-Regard, 7 items under Emotional Self-Awareness, and 9 items under Self-Actualization.  


    The Composite raw score is the result of adding up all the responses that a client makes for each of those 24 items. This raw score is then compared to the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) for the Self-Perception composite scale.  While we do not publish the M and SD for each scale, the formula is:

    Standard Score = (raw score – M)/SD x 15 + 100


  • What is the section ”Balance you EI” about? Why is it a new addition in the reports for the EQ-i 2.0?

    Balance within the subscales is important for the EQ-profile, as the subscales which are higher could be attenuated by other subscales and subscales which are lower could be strengthened by adjacent scales. If there are 10 or more points between two subscales it is an indicator that the candidate exhibits a set of behaviours significantly more often than the others.


    Pages 5-9 in the Coach-report show the balance between the subscales. Each scale has three related scales that are the most related to balancing your emotional intelligence. 


    The section “Balance your EI” is included to help with easier interpretation of the results. It can also help the coach/consultant to initiate their conversation with the candidate. The coach/consultant should interpret the areas that are in balance or imbalance and those that are relevant to the candidate.

  • Can the positive impression (PI) and the negative impression (NI) identify respondents who are dishonest in their answers?

    An elevated PI may suggest that the individual may have inflated his responses on purpose, or for other reasons which may include self-deception, lack of personal insight, criticism avoidance, unwillingness to face one’s limitations, or misunderstanding the assessment’s purpose.

    An elevated NI may suggest that the individual could have deflated his responses on purpose, or for other reasons which may include attempting to create a negative impression of oneself, seeking sympathy or help, low self-esteem, a self-critical response style, or misunderstanding the assessment’s purpose.  

    The correct interpretation of an elevated PI or NI can only be gained through the feedback discussion of the results with the client.

  • What are confidence intervals?

    All measurements contain some error. Confidence Intervals take this error into account by providing a range of scores, at a specific level of probability, within which an individual’s true score is expected to fall.

    For the EQ-i 2.0 a 90% Confidence Interval was calculated, which allows you to say that 9 times out of 10 the individual’s true score would fall within the range shown. For example, your client’s Total EI score is 100. The 90% Confidence Interval for this score is 96-104 which allows you to say that nine times out of ten your client’s true score would be between 96 and 104.

  • How long should I wait between administrations?

    You should wait at least four months between administrations of the EQ-i 2.0. This time may be reduced if you have a specific EI related training/intervention/coaching that is expected to produce behavioural change in a short period of time.




Norm groups

  • What norm groups are available?


    Norm groups for EQ-i 2.0 and EQ 360 are available for: 


    • North America 
    • U.K. and Ireland
    • South Africa
    • Australia
    • Sweden (only EQ-i 2.0)
    • Denmark






  • What does the global norm group for the EQ-i 2.0 look like?

    The Global Norms are comprised of data collected from 10,000 individuals, evenly proportioned from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceania. This new norm provides our international community with a robust, wide-reaching reference group when generating EQ-i 2.0 reports.

    New norm groups will be released via the EQ-i 2.0 portal.

  • Can I use the North American norm in other countries?

    Yes, you can choose any of the available norm options when generating the report.

  • What is the difference between the General Population, Professional and Age/Gender norm groups? When should I use each?

    The General Population norm group includes representative proportions of age, gender, ethnicity, education and employment groups. It is, in essence, the broadest comparison you can make between your client’s score on the EQ-i 2.0 and how the average person would score.  Use this option when you want to compare your client to others within the general population.

    The Professional Norm allows you to compare your client’s score to professionals rather than to the average person. Use this norm option when you want to compare your client to other professionals, rather than the average person. The professional norm is comprised of professionals who:

    1.      Are employed or self-employed

    2.      Have at least some post-secondary education

    3.      Are in a “white collar” occupational category, or in a higher-level position (i.e., management) in a “blue collar” occupational category

    For both the General Population and the Professional Norms, there is also a norm that is broken down into Age and Gender Specific groups. The General Population Age/Gender norm allows for the comparison of your client to other individuals in the general population who are of the same gender and age group. The Professional Age/Gender norm allows you to compare your client to professionals of the same gender and age group.  Use one of these age/gender options when you want to be very specific with your comparisons, by only comparing your client to others of the same gender and age bracket as him or her. Keep in mind, you can only use the age/gender option if your client provides this information when completing the assessment.

  • What criteria was used to select the "US/Canada General Population" norm group?

    The EQ-i 2.0 normative sample was collected within ten age ranges (400 cases in each age range), equally proportioned by gender. The normative sample is very similar to the Censuses (within 3%) in terms of race/ethnicity, geographic region, and education level.


    Therefore, the reference group against which individual EQ-i 2.0 scores are compared is representative of the North American general population.

  • Did males and females score differently on the EQ-i 2.0?

    Results of the gender analyses showed that males and females did not significantly differ on the EQ-i 2.0 Total EI score, indicating that overall emotional intelligence as measured by the EQ-i 2.0 is the same for males and females; however, small to medium gender effects were found for some subscales. The largest difference was found in Empathy, with women scoring higher than men with a moderate effect size. Smaller differences were found with women scoring higher than men on the Interpersonal Composite, Emotional Expression, and Emotional Self-Awareness.

    Men scored higher than women with small effect sizes on Stress Tolerance, Problem Solving, and Independence. It is important to note that these effects were small and represent only a few absolute standard score points.


The EQ360

  • What languages/norm options are available for EQ360?

    Available languages:

    • English (USA/Canada)
    • English (UK)
    • Danish
    • Portuguese
    • Swedish


    Available languages will be communicated through the EQ-i 2.0 portal as they are released.


    Available norm groups:

    • North America
    • US and Ireland
    • Australia
    • South Africa
    • Denmark


    Norms will be communicated through the EQ-i 2.0 as they are released.



  • How long does it take someone to complete the EQ 360?

    Most raters will need approximately 20 minutes to complete the EQ 360. It should be noted, however, that completion of the EQ 360 assessment might take longer for individuals who are native in a language other than English or those that have difficulty reading and/or comprehending the items.

  • Where would I find an overview of best practices for implementing a 360 multi-rater program?

    Refer to the User’s Handbook – Part III: Administering a Multi-Rater EQ 360 2.0 for information on best practices when implementing a 360 program. You may find the handbook in the EQ-portal after logging on to your user page.

  • Why do I need 3 raters per group?

    Inclusion of a sufficient number of raters in each group not only helps to increase the quality of feedback obtained from the particular groups that participate in the assessment, but also helps ensure the confidentiality of the responses provided by each rater within the group.

    Keep in mind that the Manager Rater Group is the only rater group that does not require more than 1 rater.


  • Is there a maximum number of raters? What is ideal?

    There is no maximum number of raters, but the more raters you have, the more ‘average’ or washed out the results will appear. The recommendation is usually not more than 15 raters per group where appropriate.


  • Why are there only 5 rater groups?

    The rater groups included in the EQ 360 will give your client a well-rounded view of his or her emotional intelligence as seen by others he or she interacts with. These different raters naturally grouped into:

    • Manager
    • Direct Reports
    • Peers
    • Family/Friends
    • Other


    We used Other to enable the coach to include any group that does not appear already, such as Clients.

  • How do I add/change/delete raters? Is there an additional cost to do so?

    Go to the EQ-i 2.0 Portal. Click on EQ 360 – Manage. Click on the magnifying glass next to the appropriate participant name. Click on the ‘Raters’ tab. From here you can add, delete, or edit rater information. There is no cost to doing this, up to 6 weeks from first generating the EQ 360 report.


  • Can I link EQ-i 2.0 results to an EQ 360? How?

    You can import an existing EQ-i 2.0 report into an EQ 360, if the EQ-i 2.0 was completed within 90 days of the EQ360 invitation set up.


    For more information on how to invite participants to take the EQ 360, please refer to the Getting Started Tutorial: Inviting Participants and raters in the EQ 360, located in the Resource Centre.

  • Why can’t I import EQ-i 2.0 results into my EQ 360 if it’s been more than 90 days since the EQ-i 2.0 was completed?

    If more than 90 days have lapsed between taking the EQ-i 2.0 and generating an EQ 360, one can assume that there is ample opportunity and time for a change to have occurred in an individual’s EI over this time period. Therefore, you would be comparing results/feedback from two very different periods in time making the report difficult to interpret. Because of this, the individual is required to re-take the EQ-i 2.0 if the 90 days have passed.

  • Is there a ‘select-all’ button for scoring reports?

    Yes. Please click the box in the upper left corner of the rater/ratee table to “select all.”

  • What does the profile gap analysis do?

    The information on this page provides you with a general overview of the level of agreement between your client’s self-report and how others see him or her.


    1. The vertical axis shows your client’s self-rating. Higher scoring subscales will appear towards the top of the graph and lower scoring subscales at the bottom.
    2. The horizontal axis shows you how much agreement there is between your client’s self-score and the scores received from each rater, across the various subscales. Subscales appearing to the far right indicate consensus—raters agree with your client’s own assessment of each behavior.
    3. Subscales that overlap with one another indicate a consistent experience of those EI behaviors.

  • Is the PI/NI in the EQ 360? How does it work?

    The PI/NI information for the raters is included on the Rater Response Summary page, listed by rater group. It is calculated in the same way as the EQ-i 2.0 PI/NI, but no flags will appear on this page since we do not assess the validity of an assessment based on rater information.

  • Why does the EQ 360 now include item 133 item (instead of 88)?

    The EQ 360 is a multi-rater version of the EQ-i 2.0 that assesses the same emotional and social skills as the self-report but from an observer’s perspective. Therefore, it also contains the item 133 like the EQ-i 2.0 but worded from the rater’s perspective. This perfect alignment allows participants to see that raters responded to the same statements, which makes feedback more credible, and facilitates comparisons.



  • Why is Happiness no longer a port of the model itself?

    The EQ-i 2.0 has been modified to view happiness as a product of emotional intelligence rather than a contributing factor to emotional intelligence. That is, generally speaking, people who have reported higher EI scores on the EQ-i were more likely to also report higher happiness scores, and those with a lower EQ-i were more likely to report lower happiness scores.

    This, coupled with the fact that most coaches, consultants, and counselors found it difficult to directly coach to Happiness, allows the introduction of the Well-Being indicator. It explores the relationship between one’s level of Happiness and Self-Regard, Optimism, Interpersonal Relationships, and Self-Actualization. Each report will consist of a Happiness score which is generated in the same manner as all other EQ-i 2.0 subscales, but it does not effect the Total EI score. As a result, the Well-Being Indicator presents a great place for addressing the correlates to happiness.



Differences between the EQ-i 2.0 and the EQ-i BarOn

  • Why isn’t this revision called the “Bar-On” EQ-i 2.0?

    The EQ-i® 2.0 is a revision of the EQ-i® (Bar-On, 1997, 2004). Both assessments are the products of a rigorous development process, further refining not only the very definition of EI but also the process by which it is measured. While Dr. Bar-On was not involved in the revision, the EQ-i 2.0 is a product of the continued evolution of emotional intelligence and continues to reflect the essence of the EQ-i and the contributions of Dr. Bar-On.

  • How is Independence part of Self-Expression?

    The Self-Expression Composite scale is an extension of Self-Perception and addresses the outward expression or the action component of one’s internal perception. This facet of emotional intelligence assesses one’s propensity to remain self-directed and openly express thoughts and feelings, while communicating those feelings in constructive and socially acceptable ways.

     

    Independence is the ability to be self-directed and free from emotional dependency on others. Independent people are self-reliant in planning, daily tasks and decision-making; however, highly independent individuals may seek and consider the opinions of others before making the best decision. Seeking consultation or advice and gathering information are not signs of dependency. Independence is the ability to function autonomously without protection and support: independent people avoid clinging to others to satisfy their emotional needs.

  • Why does Decision Making include Impulse Control?

    The Decision Making Composite scale addresses the ways in which one uses emotional information. This facet of emotional intelligence includes Problem Solving, Reality Testing, and Impulse Control. The application of emotional information (Problem Solving), while remaining objective (Reality Testing), paired with the ability to delay immediate gratification (Impulse Control) when necessary, is the foundation of effective decision-making.

  • Why does Stress Management include Flexibility?

    The Stress Management facet of emotional intelligence addresses how well one can cope with the emotions associated with change and unfamiliar or unpredictable circumstances, while remaining hopeful about the future and resilient in the face of setbacks and obstacles.


    This composite includes mechanisms that can help an individual buffer stress or otherwise cope with arguably the greatest source of stress: change.  Because Flexibility addresses one’s capacity to cope with change, it is part of the Stress Management Composite.

  • How was the Decision Making Composite constructed?

    The Decision Making composite scale addresses the way one uses emotional information in the decision making process. This facet of emotional intelligence includes Problem Solving, Reality Testing, and Impulse Control subscales. This composite scale reveals how well one understands the impact emotions have on decision making, including the ability to resist or delay impulses and remain objective to avoid rash behaviour and ineffective problem-solving. 


    The Decision Making composite is also a result of the realignment and restructuring of the original Adaptability and Stress Management composites. Decision Making is more intuitive, easier to coach to, and better addresses the needs of EQ-i 2.0 users.

  • Why was Adaptability removed as a composite?

    Because of the many changes that came about when the EQ-i was revised, there no longer was a need for a composite level scale called ‘Adaptability’. The items within that composite moved either to the new ‘Decision Making’ composite scale, or the ‘Stress Management’ composite scale.

  • Why is anger no longer a part of the EQ-i 2.0?

    When updating the assessment, we wanted to make sure each scale measures only one thing, which in turn makes it easier to interpret. Impulse control is about the delay of temptation, impulsivity, and that is what we choose to focus on for that scale. The anger component was removed to better address impulsiveness.

  • Have you fixed the double-content scales?

    Yes. Impulse Control now only measures impulsivity. Emotional Self-Awareness now measures how you understand your emotions, and Emotional Expression measures how you express your emotions. Self-Regard now only measures self-confidence, and no longer addresses body image.

  • Does Problem solving still measure linear problem solving?

    No. Problem Solving is now less about using a linear pragmatic approach and more about the ability to find solutions to problems in situations where emotions are involved. It includes the ability to understand how emotions impact decision-making and the ability to use emotional information in a meaningful way to enhance the problem-solving process: recognizing a problem, feeling confident in one’s ability to work through it, defining the problem, generating a solution, and implementing a plan.

  • How did you choose the four subscales that link to Happiness? Are the associated scales used for the Wellness Indicator derived by correlations?

    Generally speaking, people who with higher EI scores on the EQ-i were more likely to also report higher happiness scores, and those with a lower EQ-i were more likely to report lower happiness scores. Given this trend, coupled with the fact that most coaches, consultants, and counsellors find it difficult to directly coach happiness, the decision was made to move happiness away from representing a component of EI to more appropriately reflect one’s well-being. As a result, the Well-Being Indicator was born. The exploration of the Well-Being Indicator included a detailed look into the relationship between one’s level of happiness and all the other facets of emotional intelligence. The result of a series of theoretical, practical, and empirical analyses identified Self-Regard, Optimism, Interpersonal Relationships, and Self-Actualization as key facets of emotional intelligence with direct connections to happiness and well-being that can be developed by effective coaching practices and positive change.


  • Why is Happiness no longer a part of the model itself?

    The EQ-i 2.0 has been modified to view happiness as a product of emotional intelligence rather than a contributing factor to emotional intelligence. That is people who have reported higher EI scores on the EQ-i were more likely to also report higher happiness scores, and those with a lower EQ-i were more likely to report lower happiness scores.


    This, coupled with the fact that most coaches, consultants, and counsellors found it difficult to directly coach to Happiness, allows the introduction of the Well-Being indicator. It explores the relationship between one’s level of Happiness and Self-Regard, Optimism, Interpersonal Relationships, and Self-Actualization. Each report will consist of a Happiness score which is generated in the same manner as all other EQ-i 2.0 subscales, but it does not affect the Total EI score. As a result, the Well-Being Indicator presents a great place for addressing the correlates to happiness.

  • Why do my scores differ?

    Despite the updates made to the EQ-i 2.0 from the original EQ-i, correlations between the subscales on the two measures were high. That means that, for the most part, the results should not be radically different between the two assessments. There are some subscales that underwent more dramatic changes between versions.  The correlations were still high but lower, as expected, than those found for the unchanged subscales. 


    Some other factors to consider when assessing the difference in scores between the two assessments are:


    • The time interval between taking the two assessments
    • Any development that may have taken place in the interim
    • The fact that self-awareness itself can have an impact on results between the two administrations
    • Scores are no longer adjusted for the PI and NI



  • What are correction factors? Why are the scores no longer “adjusted”? Why did the original EQ-i adjust scores? What does it mean?

    The EQ-i used correction factors to adjust scores based on how the client responded to the positive and negative impression items. This adjustment is sometimes used with assessments. Experience with the EQ-i suggests that such correction adds complexity to score interpretation that may offset any benefits, and therefore the EQ-i 2.0 no longer uses correction factors, adjusted or unadjusted scores.


    EQ-i 2.0 assumes a simpler method through directly interpreting the index for Positive and Negative Impressions, instead of adjusting the points to compensate for the response style.




  • What happened to the critical items?

    The EQ-i included 6 items that were designed to help identify depressive conditions, psychotic states, and the potential for losing control. Although in some cases these items were helpful, the inclusion of these items proved challenging in the corporate space. The revision of the EQ-i has resulted in the removal of the critical items. In an effort to move away from items addressing clinical topics and to facilitate the broader use of the instrument (particularly in non-clinical environments such as corporate applications) the critical items have been removed.