Psychometry: Cutting-Off Points and Standardization of the Jefferson Empathy Scale Adapted for Students of Kinesiology
Cargando...
Archivos
Fecha
2021-11
Profesor/a Guía
Facultad/escuela
Idioma
en
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
SAGE Publications Inc.
Nombre de Curso
Licencia CC
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Licencia CC
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Resumen
Currently, the most common measurement of empathy is obtained using scales that offer a continuum between a minimum and a maximum value. The objectives of this study were to establish a norm and estimate cut-off points that would make it possible to assess the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) version for Health Professions students (HPS-version), and to determine its psychometric properties in Chilean physical therapy students. A secondary analysis was done on a data set from three schools of physical therapy ([n = 850], 412 women [48.5%], and 438 men [51.5%]), applying confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and hierarchical cluster analysis. A CFA replicated the original three-factor model of empathy with sufficiently fit the data. A hierarchical cluster analysis yielded four categories for the level of empathy: high, medium-high, medium-low, and low. Multi-group analyses supported the assumption of a gender-invariant factor structure. Results confirmed the reliability of the global scale (α =.835), and the Perspective Taking (α =.732), Compassionate Care (α =.842), and Walking in Patient’s Shoes (α =.686) dimensions. The instrument made it possible to establish four ordinal categories in the level of students’ empathy. We conclude that the HPS-version of the JSE has adequate psychometric properties; namely validity, reliability, and cut-off points that justify administering it to Chilean physical therapy students. © The Author(s) 2021.
Notas
Indexación Scopus.
Palabras clave
compassionate care, cut-off points, empathy, perspective taking, walking in patient’s shoes
Citación
SAGE Open Open Access Volume 11, Issue 4 November 2021
DOI
10.1177/21582440211056628