Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T19:19:00.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation of the Griffith Empathy Measure in the Chinese Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Qi Zhang ,
Yi Wang ,
Simon S.Y. Lui ,
Eric F.C. Cheung ,
David L. Neumann ,
David H.K. Shum  and
Raymond C.K. Chan
Qi Zhang
Affiliation:
Neuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Yi Wang
Affiliation:
Neuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Simon S.Y. Lui
Affiliation:
Neuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Castle Peak Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
Eric F.C. Cheung
Affiliation:
Castle Peak Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
David L. Neumann
Affiliation:
School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia Behavioural Basis of Health Program, Griffith Health Institute, Gold Coast, Australia
David H.K. Shum
Affiliation:
Behavioural Basis of Health Program, Griffith Health Institute, Gold Coast, Australia
Raymond C.K. Chan*
Affiliation:
Neuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
*
Address for correspondence: Raymond Chan, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16 Lincui Road, Beijing 100101, China. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Objectives: The Griffith Empathy Measure (GEM) is a self-report measure of empathy. The current study aimed to explore the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the GEM. It also aimed to compare individuals with and without schizotypal personality disorder (SPD) features on various components of empathy.

Methods: 420 college students from Beijing and 526 college students from Guangzhou completed a set of questionnaires that measured empathy and schizotypal personality disorder traits. Cronbach's coefficient alpha was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the GEM. Construct validity was evaluated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA). Construct validity was also examined by looking at the relationship between the GEM and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). Finally, the sensitivity of the GEM was evaluated by comparing the total and factor GEM scores between individuals with and without SPD traits.

Results: The Chinese GEM showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.83). Results of an exploratory factor analysis suggested a three-factor model consisting of cognitive, affective and behavioural empathy components. Results of a confirmatory factor analysis showed that the three-factor model, as well as the two-factor model found in the English version, were both acceptable. Construct validity (specifically convergent validity) was also corroborated by significant correlations between the IRI subscales and GEM (personal distress: r = .09, p > .05; perspective taking: r = .34, p < .01; fantasy: r = .44, p < .01; empathic concern: r = .51, p < .01). Individuals with SPD traits showed lower scores on the GEM than individuals without SPD traits (t(1,250) = −1.99, p = .05), thus confirming discriminative validity.

Conclusions: These preliminary findings suggest that the Chinese version of the GEM demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency and construct validity. In addition, the findings suggest that the GEM is culturally appropriate and researchers can use it to study empathy in healthy and clinical Chinese participants.

Keywords

empathyChinesevalidation
Type
Articles
Information
Brain Impairment , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , May 2014 , pp. 10 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for the Study of Brain Impairment 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arbuckle, J.L. (1999). Amos for Windows. Analysis of moment structures. Chicago, IL: Smallwaters.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The empathy quotient: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34 (2), 163–175.Google Scholar
Batson, C.D. (2009). These things called empathy: Eight related but distinct phenomena. In Ickes, J.D.W. (Ed.), The social neuroscience of empathy (pp. 3–15). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Blair, R.J.R. (2005). Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations. Consciousness and Cognition, 14 (4), 698–718.Google Scholar
Borke, H. (1971). Interpersonal perception of young children: Egocentrism or empathy? Developmental Psychology, 5 (2), 263–269.Google Scholar
Bryant, B.K. (1982). An index of empathy for children. Child Development, 53 (2), 413–425.Google Scholar
Chan, J.C. (1986). The relations between age, sex-role, orientation of human and empathy. Unpublished thesis, Department of Education, National Chengchi University, Taibei.Google Scholar
Chen, W.J., Hsiao, C.K., & Lin, C.C.H. (1997). Schizotypy in community samples: The three-factor structure and correlation with sustained attention. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106 (4), 649–654.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16 (3), 297–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dadds, M., Hunter, K., Hawes, D., Frost, A., Vassallo, S., Bunn, P., . . . Masry, Y.E. (2008). A measure of cognitive and affective empathy in children using parent ratings. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 39 (2), 111–122.Google Scholar
Davis, M. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10 (85).Google Scholar
Davis, M.H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 (1), 113–126.Google Scholar
Frith, C. (1994). Theory of mind in schizophrenia. In David, A.S. & Cutting, J.C. (Eds.), The neuropsychology of schizophrenia (pp. 147–161). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Guan, R., Jin, L., & Qian, M. (2012). Validation of the Empathy Quotient Short Form among Chinese healthcare professionals. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40 (1), 75–84.Google Scholar
Henry, J.D., Bailey, P.E., & Rendell, P.G. (2008). Empathy, social functioning and schizotypy. Psychiatry Research, 160 (1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffman, M.L. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 84 (4), 712–722.Google Scholar
Iannotti, R.J. (1978). Effect of role-taking experiences on role taking, empathy, altruism, and aggression. Developmental Psychology, 14 (2), 119–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, E.J., Shaw, P., Baker, D., Baron-Cohen, S., & David, A.S. (2004). Measuring empathy: reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient. Psychological Medicine, 34 (5), 911–920.Google Scholar
Neumann, D.L., Chan, R.C.K., Boyle, G.J., Wang, Y., & Westbury, H.R. (in press). Self-report, behavioral, and neuroscientific approaches to measuring empathy: A multidisciplinary perspective. In Boyle, G.J. & Saklofske, D.H. (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological constructs. Chennai, India: Elsevier.Google Scholar
O’Connor, B. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, 32 (3), 396–402.Google ScholarPubMed
O’Connor, L.E., Berry, J.W., Weiss, J., & Gilbert, P. (2002). Guilt, fear, submission, and empathy in depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 71 (1–3), 19–27.Google Scholar
Raine, A. (1991). The SPQ: A Scale for the Assessment of Schizotypal Personality Based on DSM-III-R Criteria. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 17 (4), 555–564.Google Scholar
Seidel, E.-M., Habel, U., Finkelmeyer, A., Hasmann, A., Dobmeier, M., & Derntl, B. (2012). Risk or resilience? Empathic abilities in patients with bipolar disorders and their first-degree relatives. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 46 (3), 382–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shamay-Tsoory, S.G., Shur, S., Harari, H., & Levkovitz, Y. (2007). Neurocognitive basis of impaired empathy in schizophrenia. Neuropsychology, 21 (4), 431–438.Google Scholar
Siu, A.M.H., & Shek, D.T.L. (2005). Validation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index in a Chinese context. Research on Social Work Practice, 15 (2), 118–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinella, M. (2005). Prefrontal substrates of empathy: Psychometric evidence in a community sample. Biological Psychology, 70 (3), 175–181.Google Scholar
Thakkar, K.N., & Park, S. (2010). Empathy, schizotypy, and visuospatial transformations. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 15 (5), 477–500.Google Scholar