An empirical examination of the factor structure of compassion

Abstract

Compassion has long been regarded as a core part of our humanity by contemplative traditions, and in recent years, it has received growing research interest. Following a recent review of existing conceptualisations, compassion has been defined as consisting of the following five elements: 1) recognising suffering, 2) understanding the universality of suffering in human experience, 3) feeling moved by the person suffering and emotionally connecting with their distress, 4) tolerating uncomfortable feelings aroused (e.g., fear, distress) so that we remain open to and accepting of the person suffering, and 5) acting or being motivated to act to alleviate suffering. As a prerequisite to developing a high quality compassion measure and furthering research in this field, the current study empirically investigated the factor structure of the five-element definition using a combination of existing and newly generated self-report items. This study consisted of three stages: a systematic consultation with experts to review items from existing self-report measures of compassion and generate additional items (Stage 1), exploratory factor analysis of items gathered from Stage 1 to identify the underlying structure of compassion (Stage 2), and confirmatory factor analysis to validate the identified factor structure (Stage 3). Findings showed preliminary empirical support for a five-factor structure of compassion consistent with the five-element definition. However, findings indicated that the ‘tolerating’ factor may be problematic and not a core aspect of compassion. This possibility requires further empirical testing. Limitations with items from included measures lead us to recommend against using these items collectively to assess compassion. Instead, we call for the development of a new self-report measure of compassion, using the five-element definition to guide item generation. We recommend including newly generated ‘tolerating’ items in the initial item pool, to determine whether or not factor-level issues are resolved once item-level issues are addressed.

The Association of Trait Mindfulness and Self-compassion with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Symptoms: Results from a Large Survey with Treatment-Seeking Adults

“…As results from recent factor analytic studies of the SCS-SF are mixed (e.g. Garcia-Campayo et al 2014;Gu et al 2017;Hayes et al 2016;Strauss et al 2016), future studies should test the association of self-compassion with OCD using new measures of self-compassion once available. The nature of the relationship of mindfulness and self-compassion with obsessive beliefs also needs to be explored further; the conceptual overlap of nonjudging and nonreactivity facets and obsessive beliefs with decentering or meta-cognitive awareness should also be examined further in the context of OCD (Bernstein et al 2015;Segal et al 2013).…”

De La Benevolencia a La Ciudadanía Compasiva: La Recuperación De Conceptos Claves Para El Cultivo De La Democracia

“…Nussbaum reconoce los cimientos aristotélicos de esta emoción, pero llevará la argumentación filosófica a otros niveles de reflexión que rehabilitan el valor de la compasión para el hombre actual. Sus planteamientos, además de ser consistentes con las ideas antiguas, también se encuentran alineados con diversos estudios empíricos actuales que intentan explicar ciertos elementos claves que integran esta emoción: 1) reconocer el sufrimiento ajeno, 2) entender la universalidad del sufrimiento en la experiencia humana, 3) sentir por la persona que sufre y conectarse emocionalmente con su angustia, 4) tolerar cualquier sentimiento incómodo que pueda despertarse en una situación (por ejemplo, miedo, disgusto o enojo) para que permanezcamos abiertos y aceptemos a la persona que sufre, y 5) actuando o siendo motivados a actuar para aliviar el sufrimiento (Gu, Cavanagh, Baer, & Strauss, 2017).…”

Ways of Knowing Compassion: How Do We Come to Know, Understand, and Measure Compassion When We See It?

“…First, we do not intend to critique alternate definitions or ways of operationalizing compassion. Constructive critiques are ongoing to refine and validate the construct of compassion, but this is not our project ( Singer and Klimecki, 2014 ; Gu et al, 2017 ). Neither do we intend to privilege any empirical method or set of methods over others.…”