The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index in a Chinese Context
Abstract
Objectives: Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (C-IRI) for the assessment of empathy in Chinese people were examined. Method: The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) was translated to Chinese, and an expert panel reviewed its content validity and cultural relevance. The translated instrument (C-IRI) was administered to 189 junior high school students and 391 university students. Results: Confirmatory factor analyses revealed a stable hierarchical three-factor structure that was consistent with structure of the English IRI, but the cognitive and emotional aspects of empathy were combined to form a new factor. The subscales of the C-IRI demonstrated acceptable to good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Some evidence for the construct validity of the measure was also found. Conclusions: The C-IRI possessed acceptable psychometric properties in Chinese adolescent samples. The present findings suggest that the cognitive and emotional aspects of empathy are not differentiated in Chinese adolescents.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
Davis, M. H. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 · Cited by 10,272
Reliability and factorial structure of the Chinese version of the state-trait anxiety inventory.
Shek, D. T. L. (1988) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1007/bf00960624 · Cited by 272
Self-citation
Cited by
Compassion: an evolutionary analysis and empirical review
Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0018807 · Cited by 2,200
Measurement of Prosocial Reasoning among Chinese Adolescents
Lai, F. H. Y., Siu, A. M. H., Chan, C. C. H., & Shek, D. T. L. (2012) · The Scientific World Journal · doi:10.1100/2012/174845 · Cited by 648
Self-citationPhysicians down-regulate their pain empathy response: An event-related brain potential study
Decety, J., Yang, C.-Y., & Cheng, Y. (2010) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.01.025 · Cited by 531
Gilet, A.-L., Mella, N., Studer, J., Grühn, D., & Labouvie-Vief, G. (2013) · Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · doi:10.1037/a0030425 · Cited by 308
The Chinese Positive Youth Development Scale: A Validation Study
Shek, D. T. L., Siu, A. M. H., & Lee, T. Y. (2007) · Research on Social Work Practice · doi:10.1177/1049731506296196 · Cited by 263
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Siu, A. M. H., & Shek, D. T. L.
- Venue
- Research on Social Work Practice
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 118-126
- ISSN
- 1049-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7581
- OpenAlex
- W2055878545
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index in a Chinese Context. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1049731504270384
- The paper
- Siu, A. M. H., & Shek, D. T. L. (2005). Validation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index in a Chinese Context. Research on Social Work Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731504270384
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.