CCCristina Anguiano Carrasco

Cristina Anguiano Carrasco

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Cristina Anguiano Carrasco has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Fluid Ability (Gf) and Complex Problem Solving (CPS)

    by Patrick Kyllonen, Cristina Anguiano Carrasco, Harrison J. Kell

    Complex problem solving (CPS) has emerged over the past several decades as an important construct in education and in the workforce. We examine the relationship between CPS and general fluid ability (Gf) both conceptually and empirically. A review of definitions of the two factors, prototypical tasks, and the information processing analyses of performance on those tasks suggest considerable conceptual overlap. We review three definitions of CPS: a general definition emerging from the human problem solving literature; a more specialized definition from the “German School” emphasizing performance in many-variable microworlds, with high domain-knowledge requirements; and a third definition based on performance in Minimal Complex Systems (MCS), with fewer variables and reduced knowledge requirements. We find a correlation of 0.86 between expert ratings of the importance of CPS and Gf across 691 occupations in the O*NET database. We find evidence that employers value both Gf and CPS skills, but CPS skills more highly, even after controlling for the importance of domain knowledge. We suggest that this may be due to CPS requiring not just cognitive ability but additionally skill in applying that ability in domains. We suggest that a fruitful future direction is to explore the importance of domain knowledge in CPS.


  • Development of a Forced-Choice Measure of Typical-Performance Emotional Intelligence

    by Cristina Anguiano-Carrasco, Carolyn MacCann, Mattis Geiger, Jacob M. Seybert, Richard D. Roberts

    Self-report ratings of emotional intelligence (EI) can be faked in high-stakes situations. Although forced-choice administration can prevent response distortion, it produces ipsative scores when scored conventionally. This study (n = 486) develops an 18-item EI rating scale assessing emotion perception, understanding, and management. We compare validity evidence for: (a) a single-stimulus rating scale; and (b) a forced-choice assessment scored with conventional methods versus item response theory (IRT) methods. The single-stimulus items showed acceptable fit to a three-factor solution, and the forced-choice items showed acceptable fit to the IRT solution. Correlations with criterion variables (ability and self-reported EI, Big Five personality, loneliness, life satisfaction, and GPA) were obtained for 283 participants. Correlations were in the expected direction for the single-stimulus and the IRT-based forced-choice scores. In contrast, the conventionally scored forced-choice test showed the expected correlations for emotion management, but not for emotion perception nor understanding. Results suggest that IRT-based methods for scoring forced-choice assessments produce equivalent validity to single-stimulus rating scales. As such, IRT-based scores on forced-choice assessments may allow EI tests to be used for high-stakes applications, where faking is a concern.