ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Investigation on the Rationality of the Extant Ways of Scoring the Interpersonal Reactivity Index Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Empathy in Adults with Acquired Brain Injury: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Neuropsychology review · 2026Pooled it
- Disentangling Counter-Empathy: Developing a Three-Dimensional Model and Measure of Dispositional Counter-Empathy.Journal of personality · 2026Article
- Exploring the Dose-Response Relationship Between Nature-Based Outdoor Activities, Nature Connectedness and Social Health In Adolescents: A Quasi-Experimental Controlled Study.Journal of adolescence · 2025Article
- Current status and influencing factors of empathy and moral decision-making among Chinese clinical intern nurses - a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Gender difference in self-reported empathy: Effects of task instructions and exposure to gender essentialism primes.PloS one · 2025Article
- Unfolding the empathic insights and tendencies among medical students of two gulf institutions using interpersonal reactivity index.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Thwarted belongingness and empathy's relation with organizational culture change.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- The contribution of cultural identity to subjective well-being in collectivist countries: a study in the context of contemporary Chinese culture.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Exploring narcissism and human- and animal-centered empathy in pet owners.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Dissociating cognitive and affective empathy across psychopathy dimensions: The role of interoception and alexithymia.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Shared meditation involving cancer patients, health professionals and third persons is relevant and improves well-being: IMPLIC pilot study.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2022Article
- Measuring empathy in groups with high schizotypy: Psychometric evaluation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index.Psychological assessment · 2022Article
- Empathy scores amongst undergraduate medical students and its correlation to their academic performance.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2022Article
- Cognitive flexibility as a protective factor for empathy.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Emotion regulation and delusion-proneness relate to empathetic tendencies in a transdiagnostic sample.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Exploring the Interpersonal Level of Music Performance Anxiety: Online Listener's Accuracy in Detecting Performer Anxiety.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Exploring the Structure and Interrelations of Time-Stable Psychological Resilience, Psychological Vulnerability, and Social Cohesion.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Applied Artificial Intelligence and user satisfaction: Smartwatch usage for healthcare in Bangladesh during COVID-19.Technology in society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the most frequently used tool for measuring empathy, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) is often scored by researchers arbitrarily and casually. Many commonly used IRI scoring approaches and their corresponding measurement models are unverified, which may make the conclusions of subsequent variable relation studies controversial and even misleading. We make the first effort to summarize these measurement models and to evaluate rationality of the common scoring methods of the IRI by confirmatory factor analysis, focusing on model fitting, factor loading, and model-based reliability simultaneously. The results show that most of these models do not fit well, indicating that the scoring approaches of the IRI corresponding to these models may be problematic. Relatively speaking, better scoring approaches of the IRI include summing empathic concern (EC) and perspective taking (PT) as the total score of the IRI and reporting the score of PT as cognitive empathy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.