Exploring the psychometric properties of the empathy quotient for farsi speakers

  • Stefanie A. Wind
  • Parvaneh Yaghoubi Jami
  • Behzad Mansouri


Although researchers have studied empathy among many populations, there are few studies in which researchers have focused on empathy among Farsi speakers. We explore the psychometric properties of a Farsi translation of the Empathy Quotient (EQ), and compare the degree to which the items function in a comparable way to the English version of the items. We used Rasch measurement theory to examine the psychometric properties of the EQ in terms of item ordering, item fit, and differences between Farsi-speakers and English speakers related to the overall locations of participants within the two language subgroups and the consistency of item ordering between the two subgroups. Overall, the results suggested that the Farsi translation of the EQ demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties for measuring empathy among Farsi speakers. However, several items appeared to function differently across the two translations. We discuss our findings in terms of their implications for research and practice.


Empathy Farsi Survey translation Rasch measurement theory Personality assessment 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Allison, C., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S. J., Stone, M. H., & Muncer, S. J. (2011). Psychometric analysis of the empathy quotient (EQ). Personality and Individual Differences, 51(7), 829–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrich, D. A. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43(4), 561–573. Scholar
  3. Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The empathy quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(2), 163–175. Scholar
  4. Berthoz, S., Wessa, M., Kedia, G., Wicker, B., & Grèzes, J. (2008). Cross-cultural validation of the empathy quotient in a French-speaking sample. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 53(7), 469–477.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bora, E., & Baysan, L. (2009). Psychometric features of Turkish version of empathy quotient in university students. Bulletin of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 19(1), 39–47.Google Scholar
  7. Chlopan, B. E., McCain, M. L., Carbonell, J. L., & Hagen, R. L. (1985). Empathy: Review of available measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(3), 635–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chopik, W. J., O’Brien, E., & Konrath, S. H. (2016). Differences in empathic concern and perspective taking across 63 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
  9. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113126. Scholar
  10. De Bruijn, (2015). Encyclopedia Britannica: Persian literature [blog post], retrieved from
  11. De Wied, M., Maas, C., Van Goozen, S., Vermande, M., Engels, R., Meeus, W., et al. (2007). Bryant's empathy index. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23(2), 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeAyala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  13. Dimitrijević, A., Hanak, N., Vukosavljević-Gvozden, T., & Opačić, G. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Serbian version of the empathy quotient (S-EQ). Psihologija, 45(3), 257–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Engelhard, G. (2013). Invariant measurement: Using Rasch models in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Feshbach, N. D. (1975). Empathy in children: Some theoretical and empirical considerations. The Counseling Psychologist, 5(2), 25–30. Scholar
  16. Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Gouveia, R. S., Neto, J. R., & Galvão, L. (2012). Brazilian-Portuguese empathy quotient: Evidences of its construct validity and reliability. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(02), 777–782.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Groen, Y., Fuermaier, A. B. M., Den Heijer, A. E., Tucha, O., & Althaus, M. (2015). The empathy and systemizing quotient: The psychometric properties of the Dutch version and a review of the cross-cultural stability. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(9), 2848–2864.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Guan, R., Jin, L., & Qian, M. (2012). Validation of the empathy quotient–short form among Chinese healthcare professionals. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40(1), 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hambleton, R. K. (2001). The next generation of the ITC test translation and adaptation guidelines. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hambleton, R. K., & de Jong, J. H. (2003). Advances in translating and adapting educational and psychological tests. Language Testing, 20, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hambleton, R. K., & Kanjee, A. (1995). Increasing the validity of cross-cultural assessments: Use of improved methods for test adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11(3), 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 307–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hojat, M., Mangione, S., Nasca, T. J., Cohen, M. J., Gonnella, J. S., Erdmann, J. B., & Magee, M. (2001). The Jefferson scale of physician empathy: Development and preliminary psychometric data. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(2), 349–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iacoboni, M. (2009). Imitation, empathy, and mirror neurons. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 653–670.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Joreskog, K. G. (2007). Factor analysis and its extensions. In Factor analysis at 100: Historical developments and future directions (pp. 47–77). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Kim, J., & Lee, S. J. (2010). Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the empathy quotient scale. Psychiatry Investigation, 7(1), 24–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kosonogov, V. (2014). The psychometric properties of the Russian version of the empathy quotient. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 7(1), 96–104.Google Scholar
  28. Lawrence, E. J., Shaw, P., Baker, D., Baron-Cohen, S., & David, A. S. (2004). Measuring empathy: Reliability and validity of the empathy quotient. Psychological Medicine, 34(5), 911–919. Scholar
  29. Linacre, J. M. (1989). Many-facet Rasch measurement. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.Google Scholar
  30. Linacre, J. M. (1998). Structure in Rasch residuals: Why principal components analysis (PCA)? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 12(2), 636.Google Scholar
  31. Linacre, J. M. (2015). Facets Rasch Measurement (Version 3.71.4). Chicago, IL: Scholar
  32. Mehrabian, A. (1996). Manual for the balanced emotional empathy scale (BEES), Available from Albert Mehrabian, 1130 Alta Mesa road, Monterey, CA 93940.Google Scholar
  33. Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of Personality, 40(4), 525–543.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Mehrabian, A., Young, A. L., & Sato, S. (1988). Emotional empathy and associated individual differences. Current Psychology, 7(3), 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Muncer, S. J., & Ling, J. (2006). Psychometric analysis of the empathy quotient (EQ) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1111–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Preti, A., Vellante, M., Baron-Cohen, S., Zucca, G., Petretto, D. R., & Masala, C. (2011). The empathy quotient: A cross-cultural comparison of the Italian version. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 16(1), 50–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and achievement tests (expanded edition, 1980). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 4(3), 207–230. Scholar
  39. Rueda, P., Fernández-Berrocal, P., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2015). Dissociation between cognitive and affective empathy in youth with Asperger syndrome. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12(1), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 34(2, no. 17).Google Scholar
  41. Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 139–152). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Schumacker, R. E. (2015). Using R with multivariate statistics. New York, NY: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Sireci, S. G., Yang, Y., Harter, J., & Ehrlich, E. J. (2006). Evaluating guidelines for test adaptations: A methodological analysis of translation quality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(5), 557–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith, R. M. (1994). Detecting item bias in the Rasch rating scale model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(4), 886–896. Scholar
  45. Smith, R. M. (2004). Fit analysis in latent trait models. In E. V. Smith & R. M. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to Rasch measurement (pp. 73–92). Maple Grove, MN: JAM Press.Google Scholar
  46. Spreng, R. N., McKinnon, M. C., Mar, R. A., & Levine, B. (2009). The Toronto empathy questionnaire: Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 62–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Thoits, P. A. (1989). The sociology of emotions. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 317–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wakabayashi, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Goldenfeld, N., Delaney, J., Fine, D., et al. (2006). Development of short forms of the Empathy Quotient (EQ-Short) and the Systemizing Quotient (SQShort). Personality and Individual Differences, 41(5), 929–940.
  49. Wakabayashi, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Uchiyama, T., Yoshida, Y., Kuroda, M., & Wheelwright, S. (2007). Empathizing and systemizing in adults with and without autism spectrum conditions: Cross-cultural stability. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(10), 1823–1832.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolfe, E. W. (2013). A bootstrap approach to evaluating person and item fit to the Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 14(1), 1–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best Test Design. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wu, M., & Adams, R. J. (2013). Properties of Rasch residual fit statistics. Journal of Applied Measurement, 14(4), 339–355.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Wu, S., & Keysar, B. (2007). The effect of culture on perspective taking. Psychological Science, 18(7), 600–606.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhao, Q., Neumann, D. L., Cao, X., Baron-Cohen, S., Sun, X., Cao, Y., et al. (2018). Validation of the Empathy Quotient in Mainland China. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(3), 333–342.
  56. Zhou, Q., Valiente, C., & Eisenberg, N. (2003). Empathy and its measurement. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 269–284). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018
corrected publication August/2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.Educational Studies in Psychology, Research Methodology, & CounselingThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations