EQ-i
Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i)
The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure perceived emotional and social competencies. It notably explores intrapersonal functioning, interpersonal relationships, adaptability, stress management and general mood. Used by psychologists in clinical, counseling, career guidance and personal functioning assessment settings, it provides a structured profile of the perceived emotional quotient. This tool does not, on its own, establish a psychopathological diagnosis, but it is a useful aid for understanding emotional resources, adaptive vulnerabilities and areas to work on in psychological support.
- Number of questions
- 133 questions
- Estimated duration
- 30 minutes
- Language
- English
- Original name
- Emotional Quotient Inventory
- Target audience
- Adults
- Authors
- Reuven Bar-On (1997)
- Category
- Emotion regulation
Scoring & interpretation
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale according to the degree to which each statement describes the person. Responses are summed and then converted into standard scores using the test norms. Interpretation covers an overall emotional quotient score as well as several dimensions and subscales. High scores reflect emotional and social competencies perceived as more developed, while low scores suggest relative difficulties in the areas concerned. The analysis should be placed in its clinical context and, if possible, supplemented by an interview and other sources of information.
Usage
This tool isn't available on Mentaal. To use this questionnaire in your practice, you need a valid license. We invite you to send it directly from the publisher's website.
Available alternatives
What psychologists think
No ratings yet. Be the first to rate this questionnaire.
Clarity and comprehension
—Are the test's instructions and questions easy for patients to understand?
Clinical relevance
—Does the test measure what it's meant to measure, and is it useful in a clinical setting?
Perceived reliability of the results
—Do the results seem reliable and consistent in their interpretation?