Search results

This article provides a review and conceptual comparison between self‐report and performance‐based measures of emotional intelligence. Analyses of reliability, psychometric properties, and various forms of validity lead to the conclusion that self‐report techniques measure a dispositional construct, that may have some predictive validity, but which is highly correlated with personality and independent of intelligence. Although seemingly more valid, performance‐based measures have certain limitations, especially when scored with reference to consensual norms, which leads to problems of skew and restriction of range. Scaling procedures may partially ameliorate these scoring weaknesses. Alternative approaches to scoring, such as expert judgement, also suffer problems since the nature of the requisite expertise is unclear. Use of experimental paradigms for studying individual differences in information‐processing may, however, inform expertise. Other difficulties for performance‐based measures include limited predictive and operational validity, restricting practical utility in organizational settings. Further research appears necessary before tests of E1 are suitable for making real‐life decisions about individuals.

Breakfast consumption is associated with a range of beneficial health outcomes including improved overall diet quality, lower BMI, decreased risk of chronic disease, and improved cognitive function. Although there are many models of health and social behaviour, there is a paucity of research utilising these in breakfast consumption and very few studies that directly compare these models. This study aims to compare the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and the health action process approach (HAPA) in predicting breakfast consumption.

University students (N=102; M=19.5 years) completed a questionnaire measuring demographics, TPB and HAPA motivational variables, and intentions. Behaviour and HAPA volitional variables were measured four weeks later.

Using structural equation modelling, it was found that the TPB model was a superior fit to the data across a range of model indices compared to the HAPA. Both models significantly predicted both intentions and behaviour at follow up; however, the TPB predicted a higher proportion of the variance in breakfast consumption (47.6 per cent) than the HAPA (44.8 per cent). Further, the volitional variables did not mediate the intention-behaviour gap, and the data were not an adequate statistical fit to the model compared to the TPB.

The results support the use of the TPB and show that some aspects of the HAPA are useful in predicting breakfast consumption, suggesting that risk perception and self-efficacy be targeted in interventions to increase behaviour. The volitional variables did not appear to mediate breakfast consumption indicating that intention is still the strongest predictor, at least in this behaviour.

The current study is the first to compare the TPB and HAPA in predicting breakfast consumption.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.