情緒智力測驗
English
This page is available in English
The whole page — instructions, buttons and results.
Switch to English情緒智力的「覺察情緒」技能,誠實解析:情緒雷達的樣子、最常見的兩種誤讀(在乎≠覺察、焦慮≠雷達),以及有證據支援的練法。
情緒智力測驗
覺察情緒 — 雷達技能
Last reviewed: 2026-06-12
覺察情緒,一段話說清
這是雷達技能:在情緒 — 你自己的和別人的 — 還來得及處理時就捕捉到它。高覺察意味著你的情緒變化在接管你之前就被你登記在案,別人的表情和語氣在你這裡有訊號,一個房間的情緒溫度進門就能讀到。低覺察意味著情緒總是不請自來、來時已成形("我突然就火了"),別人的內心天氣要等暴雨才看見。它是四項技能裡的地基:其餘三項都建立在這一項探測到的東西上 — 沒被覺察的情緒無法調節,沒接收到的求救訊號無法回應。
這個分數怎麼來的
你的分數來自量表中測量覺察的四道題(中文譯本,計分與英文版一致),總分 4–20,與其餘三項技能一起排序。自評的邊界在這一項格外要緊:它測的是你自認為覺察了多少 — 而漏接情緒訊號的人,往往也會漏掉"自己在漏接"這個事實。下面的校準練習是結果的一部分。
這項技能的樣子
高覺察的日常:同事那句不是真的"沒事"被你接住;伴侶說"好啊"之前那半秒遲疑被你聽見;自己的煩躁還在火苗階段就被你點名,而不是燒到週五才發現。你很少被自己的壞情緒偷襲,也很少對別人"突然"辭職、流淚或爆發感到意外 — 鋪墊你早就收到了。低覺察的日常:情緒由後果來通知你 — 你沒預料到的那句口不擇言(你的),你沒看出來的那封辭職信(別人的)。兩者都不是人品判決,是技能水平 — 而且是可練的那種。
最容易被誤讀的地方
兩個經典錯誤。第一,覺察不等於在乎 — 有些深情的人是真誠的差接收器(他們深深在乎自己沒探測到的訊號),有些好接收器對探測到的東西並不上心。如果親近的人說你"不上心",缺的可能是雷達不是愛 — 這反而是好訊息,因為雷達可練。第二,焦慮不是雷達:高警覺感覺像什麼都注意到了,但它專門高估威脅 — 把中性的表情讀成不滿不是敏感,是警報失準。真正的覺察是準確,不只是忙碌。
怎麼練 — 有證據的練法
- 每小時給天氣貼標籤。 最簡單且有實證的練法:一天幾次,用一個具體的詞命名當下狀態(不許說"還行"— 要說"心浮"、"發蔫"、"上弦")。貼標籤直接鍛鍊覺察迴路,精確本身就是練習。
- 每天靜音看一場對話。 開會或在咖啡館時,先用兩分鐘只讀姿態、節奏和表情,再對照後續發生的事。準確度反饋是雷達校準的方式。
- 每週問一次校準問題。 對一位安全的人:"這周我狀態到底怎麼樣?"把對方對你的讀數和你自己的對比 — 落差就是課程表。
- 每天接住一次火苗。 一天一次,試著在某個情緒還小的時候就注意到它 — 只需注意。早期探測就是這項技能的全部;其餘的都叫應對。
誠實的註腳
本頁描述的是未經效度驗證的原創題庫(中文譯本)的一個技能維度 — 供自我反思的詞彙,不是臨床評估;而且自評測的是自我認知,恰恰在技能最低處最不準。如果你的高分經不起一位熟人對你四項排序的盲猜,那個落差才是最有價值的結果。若情緒困擾已持續影響生活,請諮詢有執業資格的心理專業人士 — 那超出任何網頁測驗的範圍。
量表:RECATOOLS 原創 16 題情緒技能量表(繁體中文譯本),基於公共的四分支情緒智力研究傳統(Salovey–Mayer 脈絡);條目原創宣告與翻譯說明見本工具的 PROVENANCE 記錄。本測驗刻意不計算「EQ 總分」。
About this assessment
RECATOOLS 原創 16 題情緒技能量表(繁體中文譯本,臺灣用語基準),基於公共的四分支情緒智力研究傳統(Salovey–Mayer 脈絡)— 覺察、理解、管理自己、處理關係四項技能各 4 題,4–20 分排序呈現;刻意不計算「EQ 總分」。計分與英文原版一致。
Not your result? Take the test
This page describes one outcome of the 情緒智力測驗. The assessment takes about five minutes, runs entirely in your browser, and nothing you answer is uploaded or stored.
Take the 情緒智力測驗 →方法與來源
計算方式
十六道陳述,每個面向四題,五點同意量表,全部正向計分,各面向合計 4–20 分,四個面向相互排序。不提供綜合情緒智商分數——這是刻意的:單一數字會引導出這類工具無法支撐的比較。並列第一以並列呈現,按字母順序排列。
本工具採用的標準
- Original 16-item set, four statements per facet, all positively keyed. The author wrote every statement from the published description of the four branches and consulted no EI instrument's item text.
- NO composite EQ number is produced, deliberately. A single score invites a comparison the instrument cannot support, so the result is the four facets ranked against each other.
- Facets are named as everyday skills — noticing emotions, understanding emotions, managing yourself, handling relationships — rather than in branch-model jargon, and the academic framework is cited alongside.
- An unvalidated self-reflection instrument. Ability EI is normally measured by performance tasks, not by asking people how good they are at emotions, and self-report is a weaker method — the page says so rather than implying a test score.
- Joint-top facets are disclosed as ties rather than broken by key order.
- A RECATOOLS Traditional Chinese rendering on a Taiwan baseline. It was produced from the Simplified edition with OpenCC cn→twp — Taiwan standard plus phrase lexicon — followed by a curated Taiwan-usage pass over the 測驗/剖繪/解析/資訊 conventions. That lexicon layer is what makes it a Taiwan text rather than converted characters; a native QA pass is still outstanding and this note stands until it is done.
資料來源
- Salovey P, Mayer JD. Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 1990;9(3):185-211. https://doi.org/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG — the paper that named the construct and set out the ability tradition these four facets follow.
- Mayer JD, Salovey P. What is emotional intelligence? In: Salovey P, Sluyter DJ (eds). Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications. Basic Books, 1997:3-31 — the four-branch model: perceiving, using, understanding and managing emotion.
- Schutte NS, Malouff JM, Hall LE, Haggerty DJ, Cooper JT, Golden CJ, Dornheim L. Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences 1998;25(2):167-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00001-4 — REJECTED as an item source: the SSEIT requires permission for commercial use.
可能使本頁過時的因素
- Nothing is fetched at runtime and the item bank is static. What can date this page is the vocabulary around emotional intelligence, which is a reading task rather than a data feed.
- The Traditional Chinese rendering is RECATOOLS' own. Character conversion alone does not make a Taiwan text — the vocabulary pass does — so revisions are editorial rather than mechanical.
已節錄——本工具的完整審閱紀錄長於上列。
Pick up where you left off
Stored only in this browser — never sent to our servers.