دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی ارزیابی هوش هیجانی کارکنان سلامت - امرالد 2018

Abstract

Purpose – This study aims to assess health workers’ level of emotional intelligence (EI) in Accra North and recommend a simple but robust statistical technique for compulsorily validating EI measurement scales. Design/methodology/approach – The researchers used a self-reported questionnaire to collect data from 1,049 randomly selected health workers. Two non-nested models, BNK MODEL and CMODEL, were compared to see which of them better fits the study population and yields a better level of EI. The one-sample and independent-samples t-tests, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to present results. Findings – The study found that health workers were appreciably emotionally intelligent for both models at the 5 per cent significance level. However, EI was higher for the CMODEL. The CMODEL also better fits the study population (x2 = 132.2, p = 0.487, Akaike information criterion = 124.932) and thus better underlies EI in it. This study recommends proper validation of the two EI scales evaluated in this study, and possibly other scales, before the use of their data in research, as failure to do so could lead to unrealistic results. Originality/value – Apart from its contribution to the literature, this study provides a robust statistical approach for assessing health workers’ EI and validating EI scales. By comparing two models of EI in the validation process, this paper suggests that the researcher’s choice of a measurement scale can influence his/ her results.

6. Conclusion and recommendation

Health workers in Accra North are emotionally intelligent within the framework of items retained in the EFA and CFA for both models, though their level of EI has room for improvement, especially with respect to the BNK MODEL. The CMODEL fits the population of health professionals than the BNK MODEL. The CMODEL is thus a more suitable scale for measuring EI in this study’s population when compared to the BNK model. The implication is that the level of EI in a population and the individual items to use in measuring EI in that population are not the same for different measurement scales – there is always a scale that is the most reliable and valid and therefore represents the most useful tool of measurement. Results of this study imply that every researcher measuring or assessing EI must validate his or her adopted scales from their theoretical points of view. It is ideal for such validation to take place in a pilot study for the researcher to be able to compare competing models, choose the most suitable one and leverage lessons taken from the validation process to develop a theoretical framework that is in ample harmony with hypotheses and research objectives.