Cited by 1,021Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsEmpathy and Medical EducationPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What is compassion and how can we measure it? A review of definitions and measures

Open access
Strauss, Clara, Lever Taylor, Billie, Gu, Jenny, Kuyken, Willem, Baer, Ruth, Jones, Fergal, Cavanagh, Kate·2016·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

The importance of compassion is widely recognized and it is receiving increasing research attention. Yet, there is lack of consensus on definition and a paucity of psychometrically robust measures of this construct. Without an agreed definition and adequate measures, we cannot study compassion, measure compassion or evaluate whether interventions designed to enhance compassion are effective. In response, this paper proposes a definition of compassion and offers a systematic review of self- and observer-rated measures. Following consolidation of existing definitions, we propose that compassion consists of five elements: recognizing suffering, understanding the universality of human suffering, feeling for the person suffering, tolerating uncomfortable feelings, and motivation to act/acting to alleviate suffering. Three databases were searched (Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Medline) and nine measures included and rated for quality. Quality ratings ranged from 2 to 7 out of 14 with low ratings due to poor internal consistency for subscales, insufficient evidence for factor structure and/or failure to examine floor/ceiling effects, test-retest reliability, and discriminant validity. We call our five-element definition, and if supported, the development of a measure of compassion based on this operational definition, and which demonstrates adequate psychometric properties.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.05.004

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 70 references

3 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Penner, 1995, Measuring the prosocial personality, Advances in personality assessment, Vol. 10

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Strauss, C., Lever Taylor, B., Gu, J., Kuyken, W., Baer, R., Jones, F., & Cavanagh, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • Warneford Hospital (GB)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Canterbury Christ Church University (GB)
Corresponding author
Strauss, Clara
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
47
Pages
15-27
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2395884151
Cited by
1,021
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 118 · 2025: 156 · 2024: 143 · 2023: 124 · 2022: 149 · 2021: 102 · 2020: 96 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 3
FWCI
6.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Create (Canterbury Christ Church University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (1362793)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
compassion, psychometric properties, factor structure
MeSH terms
Empathy, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review