Home Tools Surveys & Questionnaires Grounding Professional Coaching Practice with Positive Assessments of Emotional Intelligence

Grounding Professional Coaching Practice with Positive Assessments of Emotional Intelligence

39 min read
0
0
0
Table 3

SCALE® and ESAP® Cronbach’s alpha Reliability Statistics

SCALE® (N = 98) ESAP® (N = 98) ESAP® (2004, N = 1,389)
α No. Items α No. Items α
Self-Esteem 0.70 7 0.83 25 0.81
Assertion 0.75 7 0.82 18 0.60
Comfort 0.73 7 0.61 12 0.74
Empathy 0.85 7 0.90 12 0.79
Drive Strength 0.54 7 0.80 25 0.81
Decision Making 0.75 7 0.80 12 0.76
Time Management 0.86 7 0.91 12 0.82
Influence 0.71 7 0.81 12 0.82
Commitment Ethic 0.52 7 0.66 12 0.76
Stress Management 0.85 7 0.90 25 0.81
Physical Wellness 0.84 7 N/A N/A N/A
Aggression* 0.88 7 0.85 18 0.70
Deference* 0.83 7 0.89 18 0.75
Change Orientation* 0.77 7 0.84 12 0.75

 

Overall, the SCALE® provided strong evidence of internal reliability (Hammett, in press).  The SCALE’s composite measure of Interpersonal skills (combining Assertion, Comfort, & Empathy) was high (α > .80), as were the composite measures of Career and Life Skills (combining Drive Strength, Decision Making, Time Management, Influence, & Commitment Ethic), and Personal Wellness (combining Stress Management & Physical Wellness).  The Problematic Indicator composite (combining Aggression, Deference, & Change Orientation) was also high.  Finally, the overall reliability when combining all items less those making up the Problematic Indicators was very high (α = .94).  Overall based on these reliability statistics, it can be said that the SCALE® assessment reliably measures the global and composite skills constructs purportedly assessed by the instrument.

Reliability statistics for the ESAP® are also provided in Table 2.  Including them was necessary because it was the instrument used for the SCALE® validity comparisons (Hammett, in press).  Its baseline statistics for reliability may also be informative, therefore, as a comparison to SCALE®. Overall, the ESAP® yielded very high internal estimates of reliability with all composite scales exceeding α = .92. Finally, combining the ten skills resulted in a total instrument skills reliability of α = .96. One likely reason for the slightly higher composite scale alphas for the ESAP® compared to SCALE® is the increased number of items in each scale. Consider, for example, the 25 items that assess Stress Management for ESAP® compared to only 7 items for the same skill for SCALE®.  As explained by Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2018),

According to the domain sampling model, each item in a test is an independent sample of the trait or ability being measured. The larger the sample [of items representing the domain], the more likely that the test will represent the true characteristic. In the domain sampling model, the reliability of a test increases as the number of items increases. (p. 124).

Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1K Club
Load More Related Articles
Load More By Gary Low
Load More In Surveys & Questionnaires

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also

Perspectives from the Waterfront: Assessment and Coaching

Assessments don’t offer the Truth; rather, they offer the client (and coach) a lens throug…