SPECIFICITY AND DOMINANTS OF THE DIAGNOSIS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AS A REHABILITATION RESOURCE OF THE INDIVIDUAL
Abstract
The article explores the problems of diagnosing the emotional intelligence of the individual as a rehabilitation resource of the individual. The semantics of the concept of "emotional intelligence," "rehabilitation resource" are considered, theoretical aspects of the connection between these concepts are developed. The problems of diagnostics of these psychological phenomena are outlined. The prerequisites for an empirical study of emotional intelligence as a rehabilitation resource are investigated, the dominants of this diagnosis are developed.
The issue of EI diagnosis in general and as a rehabilitation resource requires further study, development of the latest and already adapted Ukrainian-language variants of methods for determining the level of EI. According to the researchers, some of the existing methods used in Ukraine until 2022 have a number of shortcomings regarding the validity and ethicality of their use: Lucin's method - an aspect of ethics, Hall's method - obsolescence and questionable validity. The newest methods are undergoing the approval stage of the Ukrainian-language version. During the diagnosis of EI, it is important to take into account the appropriateness of the diagnostic toolkit to age and other personal characteristics, the validity, reliability, and discrimination of the methods. For the diagnosis of EI, it is advisable to offer the following methods: EI - MSCEIT (The Mayer–Salovey–Caruzo Emotional Intelligence Test), Bar-On's EQ-i emotional intelligence test, Petrides and Farnham's TEIQue emotional intelligence test. However, the last two tests require approval in the Ukrainian-speaking sample and official adaptation in the Ukrainian language. For the diagnosis of EI as a rehabilitation resource of the individual, it is appropriate to resort to combining the specified methods with the methods of researching psychological resources: the test-questionnaire for the diagnosis of existential resources of the individual by O. Ryazantseva and I. Brynza, the method of determining (in)tolerance to uncertainty by S. Badler, the method by Sh. Schwartz PVQ "Portrait of Values" (adapted by I. Semkiv), questionnaire of psychological resourcefulness (OPRO) by O. Shtepa. As for the above-discussed EI dominants, they are theoretically related to personality resources in terms of content and functions, but an experimental verification of the degree, level, and strength of this connection is required.
References
2. Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI). Psicothema, 18, 13–25. http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3271.pdf.
3. Bar-On, R., Tranel, D., Denburg, N. L., & Bechara, A. (2003). Exploring the neurological substrate of emotional and social intelligence. Brain, 126, 1790–1800. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awg177
4. Bradberry, T., Greaves, J. & Lencioni, P. (2009). Emotional Intelligence 2.0. TalentSmart.
5. Brahina, K. (2022). Hubrystychna motyvatsiia yak umova proiavu emotsiinoho intelektu osib litnoho viku. Dys. d-ra filosofii v haluzi psykholohii, Volynskyi natsionalnyi universytet imeni Lesi Ukrainky.
https://evnuir.vnu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/20550/1/brahina_dissertation.pdf.
6. Budner, S. (1982). Intilerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of personality, 30, 29–50.
7. Chaika, H. V. (2017). Avtonomiia yak skladova psykholohichnoho blahopoluchchia v suchasnykh doslidzhenniakh. Aktualni problemy psykholohii. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Instytutu psykholohii imeni H. S. Kostiuka NAPN Ukrainy. Psykholohiia obdarovanosti, 7, 294–304. http://appsychology.org.ua/data/jrn/v6/i13/34.pdf.
8. Chepulchenko, T.O. (2010). Sotsial na vidpovidalnist: poniatia ta sutnist. Visnyk NTUU «KPI». Politolohiia. Sotsiolohiia. Pravo: zb. nauk. pr., 1 (5), 137–142.
9. Chykhantsova, O. (2023). Rozvytok rezylientnosti osobystosti v sytuatsiiakh nevyznachenosti. Vcheni zapysky TNU imeni V.I. Vernadskoho. Seriia: Psykholohiia, 34 (73), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.32782/2709-3093/2023.1/07
10. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books. https://www.phantastike.com/intellect/frames_of_mind/zip.
11. Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: the theory in practice. Basic Books.
12. Hresko, I.M. (2019). Rol samootsinky u pidtrymanni psykholohichnoho zdorovia osobystosti. Osobystisni ta sytuatyvni determinanty zdorovia. 65–68.
https://jhealth.donnu.edu.ua/article/view/7499
13. Karhina, N. (2017). Self-sufficiency as a resource of individual’s psychological well-being. Science and Education, 23(7), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.24195/2414-4665-2017-7-12
14. Koval, H.V., Spitsyna, L.V. (2021). Empathy as a resource of socio-psychological support in the system of factors of volunteering. Insight: The Psychological Dimensions of Society, 5, 30–45. https://doi.org/10.32999/2663-970X/2021-5-3
15. Kuzikova, S. B. (2012). Empirychne doslidzhennia samorozvytku subiektnoi diialnosti. Psykholohichni nauky: problemy i zdobutky. Tematychnyi vypusk «Problemy empirychnykh doslidzhen u psykholohii», IV, 132–139.
16. Mayer, J., Caruso, D., Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267–298.
17. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. (1993). The Intelligence of emotional intelligence. Intelligence, 17 (4), 433–442.
18. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction and regulation of feelings. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 4, 197–208.
19. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? Emotional development and emotional intelligence: educational applications. Basic Books.
20. Mayer, J., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Multi-Health Systems, Inc.
21. Medynska, Yu. (2013). Teoretychni pidkhody ta praktychni aspekty diahnostyky kompetentnosti osobystosti u sferi emotsii. Praktychna psykholohiia ta sotsialna robota. 10. 11–15. https://er.ucu.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/1/660/Medynska.
22. Minenko, O. (2023). Teoretychnyi analiz problemy empatii v riznykh napriamakh psykholohii. Materialy konferentsii MTsND, (Lviv), 160–162.
https://archive.mcnd.org.ua/index.php/conference-proceeding/article/view/546.
23. Nosenko, E., Chetveryk-Burchak, N. (2014). Teoriia emotsiinoho intelektu. DNU im. O. Honchara.
24. Petrides, K.V., Furnham, A. (2006). The role of trait emotional intelligence in a gender-specific model of organizational variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 552–569.
25. Petrides, K.V. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, and J. D. Parker, Advances in the assessment of emotional intelligence. New York: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_5.
26. Riazantseva, O. Yu. (2012). Ekzystantsiini resursy osib, shcho perezhyvaiut psykholohichnu kryzu. Avtoref. dys. kand. polit. nauk, PDPU im. K.D. Ushynskoho]. http://dspace.pdpu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/677?mode=full.
27. Riazantseva, O.Yu., Brynza, I.V. (2010). Do problemy diahnostyky ekzystentsialnykh resursiv osobystosti. Aktualni problemy psykholohii. Zb. nauk. prats Instytutu psykholohii im. H.S. Kostiuka, 7, 201–209.
28. Safin , O., Dzhulai, A., & Horenko , M. (2022). Emotsiinyi intelekt yak predyktor riznykh aspektiv rehuliatsii u profesiinii diialnosti psykholoha. Visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu oborony Ukrainy, 64 (6), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.33099/2617-6858-2021-64-6-78-84.
29. Sapolsky, R. (2018). Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst. Penguin Random House.
30. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the structure and content of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1– 65.
31. Semkiv, I.I. (2013). Adaptatsiia metodyky Sh. Shvartsa «Portret tsinnostei» ukrainskoiu movoiu. Praktychna psykholohiia ta sotsialna robota, 1, 12–28.
32. Sushchenko, V. (2021). Katehoriia «vidpovidalnist» u humanitarnykh naukakh ta yurysprudentsii: multydystsyplinarnyi pidkhid. Filosofiia prava i zahalna teoriia prava, 2, 166–184. https://doi.org/10.21564/2707-7039.2.242857.
33. Shaforost, A. (2024). Emotsiinyi intelekt ta ekzystentsiine samovyznachennia osobystosti: problematyka doslidzhennia vzaiemozviazku v osvitnii diialnosti. Nauka i osvita v hlobalnomu ta natsionalnomu vymirakh: vyklyky, zahrozy, perspektyvy rozvytku. LNU imeni Tarasa Shevchenka, 215–220.
34. Shaforost, A.V. (2023). Emotsiinyi intelekt yak osobystisnyi resurs. Suchasni vektory vidnovlennia ta rozvytku Ukrainy na zasadakh stalosti ta bezpeky. Naukovo-osvitnii innovatsiinyi tsentr suspilnykh transformatsii. 246–251.
https://doi.org/10.54929/conf_21_11_2023-18-08.
35. Shyron, Yu.O. (2022). Test emotsiinoho intelektu MSCEIT: opys, validyzatsiia ta adaptatsiia. Halytskyi ekonomichnyi visnyk. TNTU, 74, 141–151.
36. Shtepa, O. (2011). Empirychne vyvchennia psykholohichnykh resursiv osobystosti. Aktualni problemy psykholohii: Psykholohiia osobystosti. Psykholohichna dopomoha osobystosti, 11, 4. 335–361.
37. Shtepa, O. (2020). Resursna nasychenist osobystosti. Problemy suchasnoi psykholohii, 47, 231–252. https://doi.org/10.32626/2227-6246.2020-47.231-252.
38. Shtepa, O. (2021). Psykholohichni resursy peretvoren u samozdiisnenni osobystosti. Problemy suchasnoi psykholohii, 53, 330–354. https://doi.org/10.32626/2227-6246.2021-53.330-354
39. Shtepa, O.S. (2018). The questionnaire of a personality’s psychological resourcefulness: the results of development and approbation of the author’s method. Problems of Modern Psychology : Collection of research papers of Kamianets-Podilskyi National Ivan Ohiienko University, G. S. Kostiuk Institute of Psychology of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, 39, 380–399. https://doi.org/10.32626/2227-6246.2018-39.380-399.
40. Zhmai, A., Sorokina, T. (2016). Porivnialna kharakterystyka testiv dlia vyznachennia rivnia emotsiinoho intelektu (eq) zghidno z teoriiamy Kholla ta Liusina. Rynkova ekonomika: suchasna teoriia i praktyka upravlinnia, 15, 3, 130–141. http://dspace.onu.edu.ua:8080/handle/123456789/14124.
41. Zaporozhchenko, O., Mateiko, N., Chystovska, Yu., Prokofieva, O., & Prokofieva, O. (2024). Rezylientnist ta yii rol v podolanni skladnykh zhyttievykh obstavyn. Naukovi innovatsii ta peredovi tekhnolohii, 2 (30). https://doi.org/10.52058/2786-5274-2024-2(30)-1540-1551.
42. Zarytska, V. (2023). Fenomen samorealizatsii u psykholohichnomu dyskursi. Visnyk KhNPU imeni H.S. Skovorody «Psykholohiia», 68, 47–57.
https://doi.org/10.34142/23129387.2023.68.04.
