What is your Emotional Intelligence EQ score?

[Gilly]

96

[Creepy-bg]

why is everyone ignoring me?!

they only give you your score for the "self report component", which I'm pretty sure is the first part ("how often do you ...").

To get the whole report, you need to pay them.

yup that's how these scams work

[jason_m]

When I was answering the questions to this test, I felt as if the people here had mistyped me. I was thinking, "You think I'm a logical type? Wait until you see the score I get. The answers are obvious." Then the results came in:

Snapshot Report
Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 90
Subscale percentile = 27

I guess I am an INTj after all.

Jason

EDIT: I actually went through the test again and paid them to find out my score: 115. What I meant to say is that I told you that I'm an ethical type. Honestly though, my subscores were all over the place. Also, some of it seems to have more to do with general intelligence than emotional intelligence: "What weather condition correlates with being happy?" The answer is "sunny." Some of the coldest people would probably know that. I did very well on the motivation and emotional knowledge questions, and average to very poor on questions that dealt with how I actually behave and my insight into the emotions of others. To illustrate the contrast, I got 147 on the emotional integration subtest (which is composed of questions similar to what I stated above), and 64 on social insight and empathy.

[hellothere]

When I was answering the questions to this test, I felt as if the people here had mistyped me. I was thinking, "You think I'm a logical type? Wait until you see the score I get. The answers are obvious." Then the results came in:

Snapshot Report
Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 90
Subscale percentile = 27

I guess I am an INTj after all.

Jason

lol but see, some ethical types here have gotten low scores too. I wish they would give us the scores for every component!

[Mattie]

I couldn't go through the test because I didn't feel like it was measuring my EQ at all. I personally don't understand how "No matter how much I accomplish, I feel like I should be doing more." is EQ related, I would think watching videos or seeing pictures would help with EQ. Maybe more situational questions too? I normally like doing tests like these but it the questions didn't really match up to what I thought EQ is. Though I think posting tests for everyone to do is fun =)

[hellothere]

I couldn't go through the test because I didn't feel like it was measuring my EQ at all. I personally don't understand how "No matter how much I accomplish, I feel like I should be doing more." is EQ related, I would think watching videos or seeing pictures would help with EQ. Maybe more situational questions too? I normally like doing tests like these but it the questions didn't really match up to what I thought EQ is. Though I think posting tests for everyone to do is fun =)

if you mean seeing pictures and guessing the emotions of the people in the pictures, then they had those questions later on in the test. but they don't tell you how well you did on those questions unless you pay for the full report

[Wynch]

Bah, the picture stuff was straight forward. I mean most emotional retards can associate a wistful face with being amused and a bland face with boredom and "breaking up" with anxiety and depression. Come on, we watch Hollywood movies. The part about how you would deal with emotional issues would have been better if you could just rank them in order of most likely to least likely. All in all I think it would be really hard to measure someone's EQ without some sort of psychiatric evaluation.

[Creepy-bg]

Bah, the picture stuff was straight forward. I mean most emotional retards can associate a wistful face with being amused and a bland face with boredom and "breaking up" with anxiety and depression. Come on, we watch Hollywood movies. The part about how you would deal with emotional issues would have been better if you could just rank them in order of most likely to least likely. All in all I think it would be really hard to measure someone's EQ without some sort of psychiatric evaluation.

+10

[hellothere]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence

[liveandletlive]

127

[Mattie]

if you mean seeing pictures and guessing the emotions of the people in the pictures, then they had those questions later on in the test. but they don't tell you how well you did on those questions unless you pay for the full report

Oh, I see, I was way too impatient and frustrated to get past the second page lol I don't know why, but I almost felt insulted by the test, it's just something online =P I guess it would be hard to measure EQ online outside of watching videos of people, because I know in actual situations there are some people (my ENTp best friend) who is completely oblivious to peoples' emotions and feelings for the most part when we're out. She jokes that it's the only reason she keeps me around, so I notice when guys are hitting on her or not =P

[Wynch]

because I know in actual situations there are some people (my ENTp best friend) who is completely oblivious to peoples' emotions and feelings for the most part when we're out. She jokes that it's the only reason she keeps me around, so I notice when guys are hitting on her or not =P

Hahahaha, that is SO true. I'm totally oblivious a lot of the time. Like one time I was at the pet store looking for fish and I got to talking to the guy there. After I got out my roomie told me he was totally hitting on me. I was convinced that we were just having a nice conversation, but apparently he was definitely into me. Which was a bummer because, after I showed no apparent signs of interest, he didn't really pursue anything but in retrospect he was très cute.

[Mattie]

I tend to hang around a lot of T types, so I'm typically the only person who really sees what is going on. The ones who favor Fi to Fe seem to be able to pick up on things but not really know what to do with the information they gather, so it's almost like junk mail so to speak and they put it in the back of their mind. So my group of friends were always open to what I had to say about interpersonal issues since I was the "empathic one."

[jason_m]

After thinking about this thread, the snapshot they give you probably doesn't really indicate how you performed on the test. I think a lot of the test was common sense, and most people here would have done well. Therefore, for those of you who think that you did badly because of your snapshot, don't draw any conclusions unless you're willing to shell out the $8 for the results.

Jason

[akeaneau]

I personally think things like IQ and to an even greater extent, EQ, are bullshit. You can't quantify something like intelligence or emotion, especially when we still don't understand what either of those qualities truly comprise of.

[hellothere]

but you can define what you mean by those terms and then attempt to measure how people differ in the concept you have defined

[akeaneau]

But how do you know what you're trying to define is what is really measured by that test? How can you possibly account for all the variables? All you can definitely say about what an EQ test tells you is that some people are better at doing an EQ test than others.

[hellothere]

But how do you know what you're trying to define is what is really measured by that test? How can you possibly account for all the variables? All you can definitely say about an EQ test really tells you is that some people are better at doing an EQ test than others.

there are ways of determining how valid a test is

though of course with psychological constructs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construct_%28philosophy_of_science%29) there is no way of being 100% sure that any measurment tool is valid

(if you really care, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) <-- that last parenthesis is part of the url, but i suspect you don't )

[akeaneau]

Lol no I'm afraid not. I'd say there isn't any scientific basis to it, but hey that's really the same with socionics. But my problem with it is still the same - it is quantifying/simplifying something that probably shouldn't be. How applicable is it when with a lot of the answers, you know how to pick to right one but it isn't what you'd do in real life? Or how applicable is being able to guess expressions/motives in a few pictures when compared to doing so in real life, with actual people? The numbers may give a hint in one way or the other, but nothing more.

...And, at least in the case of IQ, some people take it to heart. It certainly measures an aspect of intelligence (although even then there's cultural, environmental, etc, factors, which interfere with it). But I really, really hate people who try to use IQ as the last word how much better/more intelligent they are than someone. I know that wasn't the original intention of the IQ test, but that seems to have been what's happened to some extent. Mensa be damned.

[hellothere]

Lol no I'm afraid not. I'd say there isn't any scientific basis to it, but hey that's really the same with socionics. But my problem with it is still the same - it is quantifying/simplifying something that probably shouldn't be.

Hmm I generally agree with this, but still, as long as you precisely define what you are attempting to measure then I still think measuring it quantitatively is still okay. The problem occurs when people read too much into the meaning of the measurement.

How applicable is it when with a lot of the answers, you know how to pick to right one but it isn't what you'd do in real life?

That's not really a problem with the concept - in the test it could explicitly ask "what would you do" as opposed to "what should you do". It's up the person answering the question then whether they are honest or not.

Or how applicable is being able to guess expressions/motives in a few pictures when compared to doing so in real life, with actual people? The numbers may give a hint in one way or the other, but nothing more.

Obviously it's not a perfect substitute for performance in real life, but I suspect there would still be a sufficient degree of overlap

...And, at least in the case of IQ, some people take it to heart. I really, really hate people who try to use IQ as the last word how much better/more intelligent they are than someone. I know that wasn't the origin intention of the IQ test, but that seems to have been what's happened to some extent.

People can abuse anything.

ETA: personally, I don't really have a problem with people trying to research things like IQ/EQ, but what I do find annoying is when people latch onto terms like it without really knowing what they refer to and the problems with them and then go around making huge generalisations and misinforming others

[Mediator Kam]

I can't sit through 120 questions.

[jason_m]

I personally think things like IQ and to an even greater extent, EQ, are bullshit. You can't quantify something like intelligence or emotion, especially when we still don't understand what either of those qualities truly comprise of.

It's generally noted that IQ tests aren't completely accurate. There are people who do well on them who probably aren't that intelligent, and people who do don't do well who are intelligent. However, IQ correlates quite well with school and work success. Therefore, I would say that IQ is *roughly* measuring intelligence. As for EQ, it's a relatively new concept, and I've seen no evidence as to how accurate it is, so it's difficult to say whether it's doing a good job of measuring what it's supposed to be measuring.

Jason

[Exodus]

IQ has a lot more to do with intelligence than school grades do, considering that they primarily measure obedience (which if anything is anti-correlated with intelligence).

[akeaneau]

However, IQ correlates quite well with school and work success. Therefore, I would say that IQ is *roughly* measuring intelligence.

Jason

I think it would be more accurate to say it roughly measures an aspect of intelligence. It can't, for example, even begin to quantify creativity. I may have been a little too harsh in saying it was bullshit, but people do tend to read too much into it.

[jason_m]

I think it would be more accurate to say it roughly measures an aspect of intelligence. It can't, for example, even begin to quantify creativity. I may have been a little too harsh in saying it was bullshit, but people do tend to read too much into it.

I agree. I think it measures several aspects of intelligence, but certainly not everything. On another board, someone was mentioning certain aspects that modern psychologists commonly believe that IQ tests miss. They didn't mention creativity, but I think it could be argued that it is one of them.

Jason

[jason_m]

IQ has a lot more to do with intelligence than school grades do, considering that they primarily measure obedience (which if anything is anti-correlated with intelligence).

I don't think grades in lower education are necessarily indicative of intelligence, because they can be performed by just about anyone, and you don't get much choice in what you study. However, higher education is more intellectually involved, and you choose what you want to study, so you have incentives to want to be obedient. Of course, there will still be rebels who want to follow their own path. Therefore, there should still be a good correlation between higher education and intelligence and it would show itself such that high grades would be well correlated with intelligence, and mediocre grades would only be mildly correlated with intelligence.

Jason

[Exodus]

I don't think grades in lower education are necessarily indicative of intelligence, because they can be performed by just about anyone, and you don't get much choice in what you study. However, higher education is more intellectually involved, and you choose what you want to study, so you have incentives to want to be obedient. Of course, there will still be rebels who want to follow their own path. Therefore, there should still be a good correlation between higher education and intelligence and it would show itself such that high grades would be well correlated with intelligence, and mediocre grades would only be mildly correlated with intelligence.

Good point. If it's something you actually want to study it's very different.

[hellothere]

I think it would be more accurate to say it roughly measures an aspect of intelligence. It can't, for example, even begin to quantify creativity. I may have been a little too harsh in saying it was bullshit, but people do tend to read too much into it.

what Jason mentioned is related to predictive validity. variance in IQ scores does help explain quite a bit of variance in job performance (compared to other rateable variables such as education, age, interview performance), across a wide range of jobs... so that's one way in which IQ testing is useful even if the construct of IQ measured by the tests is limited

[EllaC]

110, not bad... considering others' results! xx

[angelalala]

Snapshot Report
Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 131
Subscale percentile = 98

According to your self-report answers, your emotional intelligence is excellent. People who score like you do feel that they have almost no trouble understanding and dealing with their own emotions and those of others. They have an easy time overcoming difficulties in their lives and they are able to control their moods. It’s easy for them to motivate themselves to overcome obstacles and reach their goals. In addition, they find social interactions to be quite easy and fulfilling, for several reasons. They are comfortable allowing themselves to get close with others, and feel comfortable being vulnerable enough to establish intimacy. They also report having an easy time offering support to others; this is likely due to an empathetic nature and a clear mind when it comes to offering good advice.

I dno what to think of this, I mean...if it's "self-report" does that mean that i just gave myself a 'good grade' so to speak. I think that you have a high Emotional Intelligence if your emotional attitude keeps you stable and happy *and* helps those around you feel happier than they otherwise would have

On a side note, I'd like to thank my ISFP boyfriend for the extensive social sensitivity training, lol, my EQ result thanks you

[iAnnAu]

I got a 111 ... must be the Forer effect ...
For example, I have no clue how to console others, and overtly emotional people drain me quickly. At work I'm seen as aloof and when socializing I prefer to have something to do with my hands, like play pool.
I didn't *think* I was gaming the test as I took it ...
w/e

[Bardia]

99

[Subteigh]

I got 87.

[Warlord]

Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 70
Subscale percentile = 2

Fe-PoLR FTW!

[Khola aka Bee]

My EQ when I last took this test was 118. Scroll back to x many months ago, It hink that's correct.

[astralsilky]

Snapshot Report
Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 87
Subscale percentile = 19


87
According to your self-report answers, your emotional intelligence is somewhat poor.

I had no idea.

And to think, I always used to assume that I'd score well on an EQ test (i.e., before typing myself, too (per current sig's indication)).

Assigning emotions to those pictorial "dramas" was by far the most difficult part of that test. Too vague - not enough situational data to understand what could be going on.

[mikemex]

Subscale IQ score = 108
Subscale percentile = 70

I think the test is very inaccurate.

[crazedrat]

Those tests are made by F types who got their feelings hurt by the IQ test

[Simon Ssmall]

Snapshot Report
Self-report Component
Subscale IQ score = 117
Subscale percentile = 87

[slaven]

75

According to your self-report answers, your emotional intelligence is very poor.