Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

A Brazilian adaptation of the Affective and Cognitive Measure of Empathy

This study translated and validated a Brazilian-Portuguese version of the Affective and Cognitive Measure of Empathy (ACME-BP). Whereas most empathy scales measure cognitive empathy and affective empathy, their affective subscale only reflects affective resonance – feeling the same emotion as others. The ACME expands the measurement of affective empathy with a third subscale that measures affective dissonance – feeling an opposing emotion, such as pleasure from others’ pain, or pain from others’ pleasure. Compared to previous measures of empathy, which predict 1-4% of the variance in aggression and externalizing disorders,11. Vachon DD, Lynam DR, Johnson JA. The (non) relation between empathy and aggression: surprising results from a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2014; 140:751-73. the ACME predicts 15-30% of variance in these constructs.22. Vachon DD, Lynam DR. Fixing the problem with empathy: development and validation of the affective and cognitive measure of empathy. Assessment. 2016;23:135-49.

This study recruited 338 Brazilian community members, who completed the 28-item Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), a traditional measure of empathy,33. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psycho. 1983;44:113-26. and the 36-item ACME-BP. To construct the ACME-BP, the English ACME was first translated by a native Brazilian-Portuguese speaker and then back-translated by a native speaker of English, naive to the ACME. The back-translated version was compared to the original English ACME by one of its authors (Vachon) and two other collaborators who judged if the two versions were equivalent in meaning. A sample of 10 people then evaluated the readability of ACME-BP items, and three experts judged the semantic validity of each item.

After collecting the data, structural equation modeling was used to validate the three-factor model of empathy. The data were suitable for factor extraction, based on a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index of 0.90 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001). The model had good fit: χ2 (591) = 697.46, p = 0.002; comparative fit index = 0.949; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.945; root mean square error of approximation = 0.023.44. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6:1-55. Factor loadings are presented in Table 1; only items that loaded on a theory-congruent factor and had adequate factor loadings were retained, defined as a factor loading above 0.32.55. Tabachnick BG, Fidel LS. Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2001. The factor loadings for ACME and ACME-BP were very similar, differing on average by 0.10. They also showed nearly identical factor correlations: across both measures, cognitive empathy was correlated with affective resonance at 0.32-0.34, cognitive empathy with affective dissonance at 0.16-0.20, and affective resonance with affective dissonance at 0.71-0.75. Taken together, these findings provide evidence of structural generalizability.

Table 1
Item descriptions and factor loadings for the Affective and Cognitive Measure of Empathy - Brazilian-Portuguese version (ACME-BP) and the original English version (ACME)

Finally, the ACME-BP scales were internally reliable (0.81 ≤ α ≤ 0.90) and had high 6-month test-retest reliability (0.81 ≤ ρ ≤ 0.89). Theoretically similar constructs on the IRI correlated strongly with those of the ACME-BP (0.40 ≤ r ≤ 0.66), providing evidence of concurrent validity. It is worth noting that the sample was disproportionately young (20% of participants older than 38), limiting the generalizability of the results. Future work should evaluate the ACME in older Brazilian samples and in clinical samples. The ACME-BP is a short, useful measure of empathy that shows evidence of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and structural generalizability in a Brazilian sample.

References

  • 1
    Vachon DD, Lynam DR, Johnson JA. The (non) relation between empathy and aggression: surprising results from a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2014; 140:751-73.
  • 2
    Vachon DD, Lynam DR. Fixing the problem with empathy: development and validation of the affective and cognitive measure of empathy. Assessment. 2016;23:135-49.
  • 3
    Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psycho. 1983;44:113-26.
  • 4
    Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6:1-55.
  • 5
    Tabachnick BG, Fidel LS. Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2001.

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    15 Feb 202122 Feb 2021
  • Date of issue
    May-Jun 2021

History

  • Received
    22 Mar 2020
  • Accepted
    1 Dec 2020
Associação Brasileira de Psiquiatria Rua Pedro de Toledo, 967 - casa 1, 04039-032 São Paulo SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 11 5081-6799, Fax: +55 11 3384-6799, Fax: +55 11 5579-6210 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: editorial@abp.org.br