Design and reliability of a scale on the concept of empathy. Differences between health and social professions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/ap.10.2.12217Keywords:
empathy, health professions, physician-patient relations, relationship abilities, measuring scaleAbstract
Objective: design, reliability analysis and internal structure of a scale about the concept of the term empathy. Analysis of the concept fitting relation with social or health professions. Method: a questionnaire was designed including correct and popular definitions of the concept of empathy. A total of 284 people answered, while attending a Workshop organized at a health centre at Comunidad de Madrid, the average age was 37 years and the majority of which were women 82% (230) . For the reliability analysis and the exploratory factor internal structure analysis Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used. For hipothesis testing one factor ANOVA, contrast T- student for independent samples and Pearson correlation were used. Results: The scale of 34 items offered a 0.919 Cronbach alpha and 4 Factors which explain 50,95% of the variance; empathy (28,850%) and attitude (5,858%) which define properly the term and attitude. And feel (9,011%) and sympathy (7,233%) which encompass misleading concepts. People from Health professions (n=100) scored higher than those from Social professions (n=60) in Feel factor (average of 50.01 and 43,55) and than Social (media: 53,31) and Others (average: 54.76) in sympathy (average: 63,89). Conclusions: a scale on the concept of empathy has been designed which requires to be improved in subsequent research. The present analyses suggests the existence of a misconception of the term empathy among sanitary professions.
Downloads
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Accion Psicologica is published under Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial (CC BY-NC). The opinions and contents of the articles published in Acción Psicológica are responsibility of the authors and do not compromise the scientific and political opinion of the journal. Authors are also responsible for providing copies of the raw data, ratings, and, in general, relevant experimental material to interested readers.