Reliability and Validity of the Korean-Version of Interpersonal Reactivity Index

한국어판 대인 관계 반응성 척도의 신뢰도 및 타당도 연구

Kang, Il;Kee, Seon-Wan;Kim, Sung-Eun;Jeong, Bum-Seok;Hwang, Ji-Hee;Song, Ji-Eun;Kim, Ji-Woong
강일;기선완;김성은;정범석;황지희;송지은;김지웅

  • Published : 20090000

Abstract

ObjectivesZZThe aim of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Korean version of Interpersonal Reactivity Index (K-IRI). MethodsZZA total of 484 participants were included in this study. Internal consistency and test/retest reliability (n=35) were examined. Criterion validity of the K-IRI was assessed against Affective Dimension of the 3D-Wisdom Scale. Factor analyses were also performed using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. ResultsZZThe internal consistency of the K-IRI was 0.80, and test-retest reliability was 0.76. Criterion validity was evaluated by correlating the K-IRI with the Affective Dimension of 3D-Wisdom Scale (r=0.31). Factor analyses revealed factor structures similar to the original IRI. ConclusionZZThe K-IRI appeared to be a reliable and valid instrument for assessing empathy in the Korean population. This suggests that this scale may be applicable in clinical trials, research, and clinicalpractice.

Keywords

References

  1. Decety J, Jackson PL. The functional architecture of human empathy. Behav Cogn Neurosci 2004;3:71-100 https://doi.org/10.1177/1534582304267187
  2. Preston, S.D., De waal, F.B. Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases. Behav Brain Sci 2002;25:1-20;discussion 20-71
  3. Levine FJ. Self-psychology and the new narcissism in psychoanalysis. Clin Psychol Rev 1985;5:215-229 https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(85)90045-5
  4. Greenson, R.R. Empathy and its vicissitudes. Int J Psychoanal 1960;11:418-424
  5. Hojat M. Empathy in patient care: antecedents, development, measurement, and outcome. New York: Springer;2007
  6. de Vignemont F, Singer T. The empathic brain: how, when and why? Trends Cogn Sci 2006;10:435-441 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.008
  7. Frith U, Frith CD. The biological basis of social interaction. Psychol Sci 2001;10:151-155 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00123
  8. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ, Mangione S, Vergare M, Magee M. Physician Empathy: definition, components, measurement and relationship to gender and speciality. Am J Psychiatry 2002;159:1563-1569 https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1563
  9. Davis, M.H. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of selected documents in psychology 1980;10:85
  10. Hogan R. Development of an empathy scale. J Consult Clin Psychol 1969;33:307-316 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027580
  11. Mehrabian A, Epstein N. A measure of emotional empathy. J Pers 1972;40:525-543 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1972.tb00078.x
  12. Albiero P, Matricardi G, Speltri D, Toso D. The assessment and empathy in adolescence: a contribution to the Italian validation of the “Basic Empathy Scale”. J Adolesc 2009;32:393-408 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.01.001
  13. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidencefor a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;44:113-126 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
  14. Davis MH. Empathy: a social psychological approach. Brown and Benchmark;1994
  15. Litvack-Miller, W., McDougall, D., Romney, D.M. The structure of empathy during middle childhood and its relationship to prosocial behaviour. Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr 1997;123:303-324
  16. Eisenberg N, McNally S. Socialization and mothers’ and adolescents’ empathy-related characteristics. J Res Adolesc 1993;3:171-191 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327795jra0302_4
  17. Hoffman ML. Toward a comprehensive empathy-based theory of prosocial moral development. In: Bohart AC, Stipek DJ, editors. Constructive and destructive behavior implications for family, school and society. Washington: American Psychological Association;2001. p.61-86
  18. Feshbach N. Parental empathy and children adjustment/maladjustment. In: Eisenberg N, Strayer J, editors. Empathy and its development. New York: Cambridge University Press;1987. p.271-291
  19. Ardelt M. Empirical Assessment of a Three-Dimensional Wisdom Scale. Res Aging 2003;25:275-324 https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027503025003004
  20. Batson CD, Sympson SC, Hindman JL, Decruz P, Todd RM, Weeks JL, et al. I’ve been there, too: effect on empathy of prior experience with a need. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1996;22:474-482 https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296225005
  21. Gault BA, Sabini J. The roles of empathy, anger, and gender in predicting attitudes toward punitive, reparative, and preventative public policies. Cogn Emot 2000;14:495-520 https://doi.org/10.1080/026999300402772
  22. Lennon R, Eisenberg N. Gender and age differences in empathy and sympathy. In: Eisenberg N, Strayer J, editors. Empathy and its development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press;1987. p.195-217
  23. Macaskill A, Maltby J, Day L. Forgiveness of self and others and emotional empathy. J Soc Psychol 2002;142:663-665 https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540209603925
  24. Schieman S, Van Gundy K. The personal and social links between age and self-reported empathy. Soc Psychol Q 2000;63:152-174 https://doi.org/10.2307/2695889
  25. Frith CD. Schizophrenia and theory of mind. Psychol Med 2004;34:385-389 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291703001326
  26. Silani, G., Bird, G., Brindley, R., Singer, T., Frith, C., Frith, U. Levels of emotional awareness and autism: an fMRI study. Soc Neurosci 2008;3:97-112 https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910701577020
  27. Jaimie, P., Beven, J.P., O'rien-Malone, A., Hall, G. Using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index to Assess Empathy in Violent Offenders. Int J Forensic Psychol 2004;1:33-41
  28. Spinella M. Prefrontal substrates of empathy: psychometric evidence in a community sample. Biol Psychol 2005;70:175-181 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2004.01.005
  29. Yarnold PR, Bryant FB , Nightingale SD, Martin GJ. Assessing physician empathy using the interpersonal reactivity index: a measurement model and cross-sectional analysis. Psychol Health Med 1996;1:207-221 https://doi.org/10.1080/13548509608400019