et al. 1994; Gross, 1998 ). Furthermore, throughout this period physiological measurements, such as skin conduc-
tance and heart rate (e.g., Levenson & Ruef, 1992 ) were increasingly being used. From the 1990’s through to the
present day empathy measurement has been influenced by the development of social-cognitive neuroscience,
although self-report approaches have continued to be developed and extensively used.
Reviews of empathy measures have been provided in the past (e.g., Chlopan, McCain, Carbonell, & Hagen,
1985; Eisenberg & Fabes, 1990 ; Wispe, 1986). The present aim is to provide brief, succinct psychometric reviews
of contemporary empathy measures, and also to expand upon recent reviews on empathy measures constructed
for specific research audiences, such as the measurement of empathy in social work ( Gerdes et al., 2010 ) and
medicine ( Hemmerdinger, Stoddart, & Lilford, 2007; Pedersen, 2009 ). Hopefully, the present chapter will enable
researchers interested in measuring empathy to gain an appreciation of what approaches are available and an
understanding of the benefits and challenges that each of the reviewed measures present. Using a combination of
measures may also counter the criticism that some measurement approaches are narrow in scope ( Levenson &
Ruef, 1992 ).
MEASURES REVIEWED HERE
An extensive search of literature databases (PsycINFO, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Google Scholar),
test manuals and related publications, citation searches of original scale descriptions, and inspection of the refer-
ence lists of relevant reports was carried out. Only measures that were constructed or extensively revised follow-
ing the first edition of this handbook were selected for review (i.e., post-1991). For this reason, questionnaires
that were constructed earlier have not been included even though they have been frequently used in research.
Examples include the Hogan Empathy Scale ( Hogan, 1969 ), the Emotional Empathic Tendency Scale ( Mehrabian
& Epstein, 1972 ), and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index ( Davis, 1983 ). In addition, due to space limitations,
empathy measures designed for specific applications were excluded. Examples of such questionnaires include
the Consultation and Relational Empathy measure ( Mercer, Maxwell, Heaney, & Watt, 2004 ), the Jefferson Scale
of Physician Empathy ( Hojat et al. 2001 ), the Nursing Empathy Scale ( Reynolds, 2000 ), the Autism Quotient
(Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner, Martin, & Clubley, 2001 ), the Japanese Adolescent Empathy Scale
(Hashimoto & Shiomi, 2002 ), the Scale of Ethnocultural Empathy ( Wang et al. 2003 ), and the Emotional Empathy
Scale ( Ashraf, 2004 ). The measures reviewed here were grouped into three categories: self-report instruments,
behavioral observational methods, and neuroscientific approaches.
Self-Report Measures
1.Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale ( Mehrabian, 1996 )
2.Multidimensional Emotional Empathy Scale ( Caruso & Mayer, 1998 )
3.Empathy Quotient ( Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004 )
4.Feeling and Thinking Scale ( Garton & Gringart, 2005 )
5.Basic Empathy Scale (Joliffe & Farrington, 2006a)
6.Griffith Empathy Measure ( Dadds et al., 2008 )
7.Toronto Empathy Questionnaire ( Spreng, McKinnon, Mar, & Levine, 2009 )
8.Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy ( Reniers et al. 2011 )
Behavioral Measures
1.Picture Viewing Paradigm
2.Comic Strip Task ( Vo¨llm et al. 2006 )
3.Picture Stories ( Nummenmaa, Hirvonen, Parkkola, & Hietanen, 2008 )
4.Kids Empathetic Development Scale ( Reid et al. 2011 )
Neuroscientific Measures
1.Magnetic Resonance Imaging
2.Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
3.Facial Electromyography
4.Electroencephalogram
5.Event-Related Potentials258 10. MEASURES OF EMPATHY: SELF-REPORT , BEHAVIORAL, AND NEUROSCIENTIFIC APPROACHES
III. EMOTION REGULATION