The assessment of empathy in adolescence: A contribution to the Italian validation of the “Basic Empathy Scale”

Abstract

The present study examined the validity of the Basic Empathy Scale (BES) [Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2006a). Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 589–611; Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2006b). Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32(6), 540–550.] and found further evidence for the scale's good psychometric properties. The BES was administered to a sample of 655 Italian adolescents to examine the generalizability and reliability of its factor structure. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed a reasonable data fit with the two hypothesized BES domains of Cognitive Empathy and Affective Empathy. Scale reliability was also satisfactory, showing good internal consistency. Lastly, BES scores were significantly associated with other empathy questionnaire scores (the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale) and with a scale measuring prosocial behavior. Research and practice implications are discussed.

Two systems for empathy in obsessive-compulsive disorder: mentalizing and experience sharing

“…32,33,38 The affective subscale of the BES comprises 11 items designed to measure emotional congruence with another person's emotions. Example items include ''I get caught up in other people's feelings easily.''…”

“…32,33,38 The BES comprises 20 items, which are scored by participants on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). In the two-factor model, 32 nine items assess cognitive empathy (items 3,6,9,10,12,14,16,19,20), and 11 items assess affective empathy (items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 18).…”

“…The a coefficient was 0.86. 33 Statistical analysis SPSS version 22 was used. One-way ANOVA was conducted to identify significant differences among the two groups (OCD and control) in sociodemographic, mentalizing (EQ, BES cognitive subscale), and experience-sharing measures (Eyes task, Emotion Attribution Task, BES affective subscale).…”

“…Jolliffe & Farrington 31,32 highlighted at least two serious limitations of the IRI: the first is that empathy is confused with sympathy, a distinct, albeit closely linked construct. [33][34][35] Second, using the IRI to assess the cognitive components of empathy mostly focuses on the respondent's ability to take another person's perspective, and overlooks ability to recognize and understand the emotions felt by another. Given that the emotional aspect of empathy has consistently been considered a fundamental component of empathy since its earliest theorizations, this oversight is puzzling.…”

Measuring Empathy in a German Youth Prison: A Validation of the German Version of the Basic Empathy Scale (BES) in a Sample of Incarcerated Juvenile Offenders

“…Although the BES has been shown to be a valid and reliable instrument in different countries, such as the Netherlands (Van Langen, Wissink, Stams, Asscher, & Hoeve, 2015), Spain (Salas-Wright, Olate, & Vaughn, 2012), China (Geng, Xia, & Qin, 2012), Italy (Albiero, Matricardi, Speltri, & Toso, 2009), and France (Ambrosio, Olivier, Didon, & Besche, 2009), there is no valid and reliable instrument to investigate cognitive and affective empathy in delinquent youth in Germany. While cross-cultural studies support the validity and reliability of the BES, only a few studies have validated the BES among juvenile offenders.…”