and quantifiable measure of empathy, substantial future work is required. Psychometrically grounded research is
required to develop a standardized testing protocol that includes both the test stimuli and parameters of the mea-
surement approach (e.g., data scoring and quantification). Moreover, the testing protocol is required to undergo
the necessary tests of item homogeneity, reliability, and validity. While current research tends to support the
validity of neuroscientific measures in the form of convergent and discriminative validity, other forms of validity
require further confirmation. Moreover, the reliability of the various measures has yet to be determined in the
context of empathy measurement. In the absence of such information, the promise of the objectivity that neurosci-
entific approaches can bring to empathy measurement will not be fulfilled.
Neuroimaging techniques provide the most direct link between empathy and the activity of the brain regions
that underlie them. However, it is also a technique that is currently expensive, has high technical requirements,
and displays low temporal resolution. Facial EMG provides an objective measurement of motor mimicry and is
linked to the most information rich part of an empathy eliciting situation (i.e., the face). However, it can be lim-
ited by measuring only one muscle group whereas facial expressions reflect the combined action of many and it
appears only validated for the affective component of empathy. The EEG and ERP provide the advantage of high
temporal resolution and link to cognitive and emotional processes that are associated with empathy. However, it
requires technical equipment and is largely limited to recording the action of brain structures near the surface of
the skull. All neuroscientific approaches can suffer from interpretation difficulties if they are not correctly used.
For example, a range of psychological processes and environmental stimuli may influence the physiological pro-
cesses under investigation. Thus, it is important to ensure a strong link between the observed change in the phys-
iological response and the empathic response.
Another limitation of most approaches to empathy measurement is that they do not permit an assessment of
empathy across the entire lifespan. The complex nature of empathy and the type of self-insight that is required
has meant that instruments constructed in adults have not been suitable for empathy assessment in children.
This has resulted in the development of child or adolescent scales through the modification of adult question-
naires. The MDEES ( Caruso & Mayer, 1998 ) represents one exception to this rule due to its construction using
adult and adolescent samples. However, it remains to be validated with young child samples. Future research
might develop an empathy measure applicable across any age group. In self-report measures, the use of ‘plain
language’ worded items may be one means by which this could be done. For example, the item ‘The suffering of
others deeply disturbs me’ from the MDEES may be reworded in plain terms as ‘I get upset when I see someone
in pain’.
Although current empathy measures continue to have several limitations ( Reid et al., 2012 ), a potentially fruit-
ful avenue is to combine measures to provide a comprehensive approach to empathy assessment, drawing on the
diversity of self-report, behavioral, and neuroscientific measurement approaches. Such a battery may best com-
prise a broad self-report measure of empathy administered in conjunction with appropriate behavioral tests or
physiological measures of empathy in specific situations, such as in emotional contagion, motor mimicry, or
empathy for pain.
Acknowledgements
This research received support from a Griffith Health Institute Project Grant, Griffith Health Institute Area of Strategic Investment for Chronic
Disease Project Grant, and Bond University Vice Chancellor’s Research Grant Scheme. The assistance of Kylie Loveday in research assistance
and manuscript preparation is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Albiero, P., Matricardi, G., Speltri, D., & Toso, D. (2009). The assessment of empathy in adolescence: a contribution to the Italian validation of
the ‘Basic Empathy Scale’. Journal of Adolescence ,32, 393/C0408.
Allison, C., Varon-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S. J., Stone, M. H., & Muncer, S. J. (2011). Psychometric analysis of the Empathy Quotient (EQ).
Personality and Individual Differences ,51, 829/C0835.
Ashraf, S. (2004). Development and validation of the emotional empathy scale (EES) and the dispositional predictor and potential outcomes of emotional
empathy . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Institute of Psychology, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
Auyeung, B., Wheelwright, S., Allison, C., Atkison, M., Samarawickrema, N., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2009). The children’s empathy quotient and
systemizing quotient: sex differences in typical development and in autism spectrum conditions. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders ,39, 1509/C01521.284 10. MEASURES OF EMPATHY: SELF-REPORT , BEHAVIORAL, AND NEUROSCIENTIFIC APPROACHES
III. EMOTION REGULATION