Factor structure and correlates of the Mandarin version of the Managing the Emotions of Others (MEOS) scale

The English‐language version of the Managing the Emotions of Others (MEOS) scale has been found to have a six‐factor structure. This includes two pairs (Enhance, Divert and Worsen, Inauthentic) that respectively describe prosocial and non‐prosocial interpersonal emotion management, together with an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of psychology 2016-02, Vol.51 (1), p.72-77
Main Authors: Saklofske, Donald H., Austin, Elizabeth J., Yan, Gonggu, Smith, Martin M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Asian Americans - psychology
Cultural Characteristics
Discriminant analysis
Emotion regulation
Emotional Intelligence
Emotions
Factor analysis
Factor Analysis, Statistical
Female
Humans
Male
Personality
Psychometrics
Questionnaires
Surveys and Questionnaires - standards
Translations
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The English‐language version of the Managing the Emotions of Others (MEOS) scale has been found to have a six‐factor structure. This includes two pairs (Enhance, Divert and Worsen, Inauthentic) that respectively describe prosocial and non‐prosocial interpersonal emotion management, together with an emotional concealment factor (Conceal) and a factor assessing poor self‐rated emotional skills. A Mandarin translation of the MEOS was completed by 277 Chinese student participants. Factor analysis indicated a four‐factor structure comprising a merged Enhance/Divert factor, together with Worsen, Inauthentic and Conceal factors. The emergence of a different factor structure compared to Western samples may be related to culture‐dependent attitudes to emotional expression. The associations of the MEOS factors with Five‐Factor model personality, the Dark Triad and trait emotional intelligence (EI) were examined; these were similar to but generally weaker than those found for the English‐language version.
ISSN:0020-7594
1464-066X
DOI:10.1002/ijop.12147