CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingCrime Patterns and InterventionsBullying, Victimization, and Aggression

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Examining the relationship between low empathy and self‐reported offending

Jolliffe, Darrick, Farrington, David P.·2007·Legal and Criminological Psychology
DOI 10.1348/135532506x147413
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose . This paper reports the results of a study comparing measures of cognitive and affective empathy to self‐reported offending in a group of adolescents. Methods . Data on self‐reported offending and empathy were collected from 720 UK adolescents (376 males, 344 females) in Year 10 (mean age = 14.8) using anonymous questionnaires administered in a classroom setting. The prevalence of self‐reported offending was found to be consistent with results of a national level study that employed a similar methodology. The empathy scale, which was developed and validated using this sample, assessed levels of cognitive and affective empathy. Results . Males who had committed any offence had lower empathy (especially affective) than those who had not. Females who had committed any offence did not have low empathy compared to those who had not. Both males and females who had committed violence had lower empathy than males and females who had not. High‐rate male offenders had lower empathy (especially affective) than low‐rate male offenders, and high‐rate female offenders had lower empathy (especially affective) than low‐rate female offenders. For males (but not for females), the relationship between low affective empathy and violence was accounted for by the relationship between low affective empathy and a high rate of offending. Conclusions . More research comparing the empathy of males and females with their self‐reports of offending is needed, especially in prospective longitudinal studies, so that the time ordering of the effects can be established. Also, more research is needed to investigate whether the relationship between low empathy and self‐reported offending holds independent of other factors previously found to be associated with offending (e.g. low intelligence, low socio‐economic status).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/135532506x147413

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Arnold H. L.(1999).Individual differences in personality factors: A comparison of violent and non‐violent offenders.Unpublished M. Phil Thesis University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology.
  2. Farrington D. P., 1998, Youth violence, 421
  3. Farrington D. P., 2001, What has been learned from self‐reports about criminal careers and the causes of offending?
  4. Flood‐Page C., 2000, Youth crime: Findings from the 1998/99 youth lifestyles survey
  5. Graham J., 1995, Young people and crime
  6. Hart S. D., 1995, The Hare PCL: Screening version
  7. Lennon R., 1987, Empathy and its development, 195
  8. Mulloy R., 1999, The impact of empathy training on offender treatment, Focus on Corrections Research, 11, 15
  9. Ross R., 1995, Thinking straight: The reasoning and rehabilitation program for delinquency prevention and offender rehabilitation
  10. Tangney J., 2004, The social psychology of good and evil: Understanding our capacity for kindness and cruelty, 327
  11. Walker A., 2002, Living in Britain: Results from the 2001 General Household Survey
  12. Wikstrom P. O., 2002, Adolescent crime in context: A study of gender, family social position, individual characteristics, community context, life‐styles, offending and victimisation

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–141 of 141

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Jolliffe, Darrick
ORCID
Venue
Legal and Criminological Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-09
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
265-286
ISSN
  • 1355-3259 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8333
DOI
10.1348/135532506x147413
OpenAlex
W2036683553
Cited by
142
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 1210 d)
Locations
  • Legal and Criminological Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Keywords
empathy, affective empathy, cognitive empathy, self-reported offending, adolescent offending, violent offending, gender differences

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