Sesso G, Brancati GE, Fantozzi P, Inguaggiato E, Milone A, Masi G. Measures of empathy in children and adolescents: A systematic review of questionnaires. World J Psychiatr 2021; 11(10): 876-896 [PMID: 34733649 DOI: 10.5498/wjp.v11.i10.876]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Gabriele Masi, MD, Chief Doctor, Senior Researcher, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris, Scientific Institute of Child Neurology and Psychiatry, Viale del Tirreno 331, Calambrone 56128, Italy. gabriele.masi@fsm.unipi.it
Research Domain of This Article
Psychology
Article-Type of This Article
Systematic Reviews
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Gianluca Sesso, Giulio Emilio Brancati, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa 56100, Italy
Pamela Fantozzi, Emanuela Inguaggiato, Annarita Milone, Gabriele Masi, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris, Scientific Institute of Child Neurology and Psychiatry, Calambrone 56128, Italy
Author contributions: Masi G and Sesso G contributed to study conception and design; Sesso G and Brancati GE performed the systematic search and drafted the manuscript; Fantozzi P and Inguaggiato E revised the draft and contributed to the interpretation of the data; Milone A and Masi G critically revised the article; all the authors approved the final version of the article to be published.
Conflict-of-interest statement: Authors declare no conflict of interests for this article.
PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Gabriele Masi, MD, Chief Doctor, Senior Researcher, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris, Scientific Institute of Child Neurology and Psychiatry, Viale del Tirreno 331, Calambrone 56128, Italy. gabriele.masi@fsm.unipi.it
Received: February 16, 2021 Peer-review started: February 16, 2021 First decision: May 13, 2021 Revised: May 15, 2021 Accepted: August 19, 2021 Article in press: August 19, 2021 Published online: October 19, 2021
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS
Research background
Empathy deficits significantly contribute to developmental psychopathology. Questionnaires are the most used tools for the assessment of empathy both in adults and in children and adolescents.
Research motivation
No comprehensive overview of validated questionnaires for measuring empathy was available for clinicians and researchers in the neurodevelopmental field.
Research objectives
We aimed to identify and describe empirically validated questionnaires assessing empathy in children and adolescents and to provide a summary of related theoretical perspectives on empathy definitional issues.
Research methods
A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.
Research results
We identified and described 16 measures used to assess empathy in children and adolescents. Most measures were multidimensional. Several instruments were based on a bipartite model of empathy, with dissociable affective and cognitive components. Other tools were built on Hoffman’s developmental model or included new facets, such as sympathy or somatic empathy.
Research conclusions
Different scales are suitable in varying research and clinical settings, depending on the object of study, the clinical population, the age range and the models of interest. The combination of different assessment methods is recommended.
Research perspectives
Future studies shall focus on directly comparing psychometric properties and factor-structure of different empathy questionnaires in multiple clinical and community samples.
