The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring empathy: reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient
Abstract
Background. Empathy plays a key role in social understanding, but its empirical measurement has proved difficult. The Empathy Quotient (EQ) is a self-report scale designed to do just that. This series of four studies examined the reliability and validity of the EQ and determined its factor structure. Method. In Study 1, 53 people completed the EQ, Social Desirability Scale (SDS) and a non-verbal mental state inference test, the Eyes Task. In Study 2, a principal components analysis (PCA) was conducted on data from 110 healthy individuals and 62 people reporting depersonalisation (DPD). Approximately 1 year later, Study 3, involved the re-administration of the EQ ( n =24) along with the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; n =28). In the last study, the EQ scores of those with DPD, a condition that includes a subjective lack of empathy, were examined in depth. Results. An association was found between the Eyes task and EQ, and only three EQ items correlated with the SDS. PCA revealed three factors: (1) ‘cognitive empathy’; (2) ‘emotional reactivity’, and (3) ‘social skills’. Test–retest reliability was good and moderate associations were found between the EQ and IRI subscales, suggesting concurrent validity. People with DPD did not show a global empathy deficit, but reported less social competence. Conclusions. The EQ is a valid, reliable scale and the different subscales may have clinical applications.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Importantly, mentalising and alexithymia are distinct constructs, and there is debate as to whether the RMET indexes mentalising (the common assumption and the assertion of the authors, who validated it against other mentalising tasks [88–90]) or recognition of emotional expressions [91], deficits in which are associated with alexithymia.”
From A 'choice', an 'addiction', a way 'out of the lost': Exploring self-injury in autistic people without intellectual disability (2019) · cites this paper as [89]
In the citing paper
“ToM is often considered to be conceptually similar to, or equivalent with, cognitive empathy because both constructs involve inferring the mental state of another person (e.g., Lawrence et al., 2004).”
From A psychometric analysis of the reading the mind in the eyes test: toward a brief form for research and applied settings (2015) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2004
In the citing paper
“ToM is largely considered by some to be similar to, if not the same as, Cognitive Empathy (e.g., Lawrence et al., 2004).”
From A psychometric analysis of the reading the mind in the eyes test: toward a brief form for research and applied settings (2015) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2004
Citations
Cites
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties.
Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.56.6.893 · Cited by 14,407
The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors
Cattell, R. B. (1966) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10 · Cited by 13,554
Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Carbin, M. G. (1988) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5 · Cited by 11,696
A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960) · Journal of Consulting Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0047358 · Cited by 8,686
(1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,712
Baron‐Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S. J., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 4,313
Self-citationBaron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1023/b:jadd.0000022607.19833.00 · Cited by 4,093
Self-citationDevelopment, reliability, and validity of a dissociation scale
BERNSTEIN, E. M., & PUTNAM, F. W. (1986) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-198612000-00004 · Cited by 3,793 · cited 1×
“The EQ and the Dissociative Experiences Scale version II (DES; Bernstein & Putnam, 1986; Carlson & Putnam, 1993) were administered (see Study 2).”
MethodA measure of emotional empathy1
Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1972.tb00078.x · Cited by 2,360
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market*
Deming, D. J. (2017) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjx022 · Cited by 1,727
Empathy Decline and Its Reasons: A Systematic Review of Studies With Medical Students and Residents
Neumann, M., Edelhäuser, F., Tauschel, D., Fischer, M. R., Wirtz, M. A., Woopen, C., Haramati, A., & Scheffer, C. (2011) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e318221e615 · Cited by 1,708
Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior
Christov-Moore, L., Simpson, E. A., Coudé, G., Grigaityte, K., Iacoboni, M., & Ferrari, P. F. (2014) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.09.001 · Cited by 1,137
The QCAE: a questionnaire of cognitive and affective empathy
Reniers, R. L. E. P., Corcoran, R., Drake, R., Shryane, N. M., & Völlm, B. A. (2011) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.528484 · Cited by 961
Spreng*, R. N., McKinnon*, M. C., Mar, R. A., & Levine, B. (2009) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223890802484381 · Cited by 1,161
Metadata
- Authors
- LAWRENCE, E. J., SHAW, P., BAKER, D., BARON-COHEN, S., & DAVID, A. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Psychological Medicine
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2004-07
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 911-920
- ISSN
- 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8978
- OpenAlex
- W1976994271
- Cited by
- 1,014
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 38 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 114 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 64 · 2015: 66 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 37
- FWCI
- 5.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
- Keywords
- Empathy Quotient, empathy measurement, self-report scale, reliability statistics, validity, factor structure, cognitive empathy, emotional reactivity, social skills, depersonalization, social desirability, mental state inference, Interpersonal Reactivity Index, social competence
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Empathy, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Desirability, Reproducibility of Results
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
