Yetişkin Bilişsel, Duyuşsal ve Somatik Empati Ölçeği (Y-BDSEÖ): Türkçeye Uyarlama, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Empati, sosyal ilişkilerde başkalarını anlama, kişilerarası ilişkileri düzenleme ve toplumsal uyum için önemli bir beceridir. Ancak yetişkinlerde empatiyi çok boyutlu ölçen Türkçe araçların sayısı oldukça sınırlıdır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, Yetişkin Bilişsel, Duyuşsal ve Somatik Empati Ölçeği’ni Türkçeye uyarlamak ve çeşitli psikometrik özelliklerini test etmektir. Bu doğrultuda, araştırmada ağırlıklı olarak genç yetişkinlerden oluşan 562 (Yaş Ort. = 28.01, SS = 7.16) katılımcıdan veri toplanmış ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada beş farklı model analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, üç faktörlü ve altı faktörlü modellerin daha güçlü sonuçlar verdiğini ve ölçeğin geçerlik vegüvenirlik değerlerinin kabul edilebilir düzeylerde olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ölçeğin iç tutarlılığına ilişkin Cronbach alfa katsayısı, toplam puan için .84 olarak bulunmuş; alt boyutlar için ise .64 ile .77 arasında değiştiği belirlenmiştir. Sonuçlar, Y-BDSEÖ'nün Türkiye örnekleminde empatiyi değerlendirmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Empati
• Bilişsel empati
• Duyuşsal empati
• Somatik empati

Adult Cognitive, Affective, and Somatic Empathy Scale (CASES): Turkish Adaptation and Validity-Reliability Study

Öz

Empathy is an important skill for understanding others in social relationships, regulating interpersonal interactions, and promoting social adjustment. However, the number of Turkish instruments that assess empathy multidimensionally in adults is quite limited. The aim of this study was to adapt the Adult Cognitive, Affective, and Somatic Empathy Scale into Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties. For this purpose, data were collected from 562 participants, predominantly young adults (M age = 28.01, SD = 7.16), and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. Five different models were tested in the study. The findings indicated that the three-factor and six-factor models yielded stronger results and that the validity and reliability indices of the scale were at acceptable levels. Regarding internal consistency, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be .84 for the total score, while the subscale coefficients ranged from .64 to .77. The findings indicate that CASES is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing empathy in a Turkish sample.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Empathy
• Cognitive empathy
• Affective empathy
• Somatic empathy

Kaynakça

1. Andreychik, M. R., & Migliaccio, N. (2015). Empathizing with others’ pain versus empathizing with others’ joy: Examining the separability of positive and negative empathy and their relation to different types of social behaviors and social emotions. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(5), 274–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2015.1071256
2. Asadi, E., Khodagholi, F., Asadi, S., Mohammadi Kamsorkh, H., Kaveh, N., & Maleki, A. (2021). Quality of early-life maternal care predicts empathy-like behavior in adult male rats: Linking empathy to BDNF gene expression in associated brain regions. Brain Research, 1767, 147568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2021.147568
3. Bae, M. (2023). The effects of message order on emotions and donation intention in charity advertising: The mediating roles of negative and positive empathy. Journal of Marketing Communications, 29(3), 270–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2021.2015616
4. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
5. Bernardi, R. A. (1994). Validating research results when Cronbach’s alpha is below .70: A methodological procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 766–775. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164494054003023
6. Blair, R. J. R. (2005). Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations. Consciousness and Cognition, 14(4), 698–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.004
7. Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
8. Cheung, G. W., Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Lau, R. S., & Wang, L. C. (2024). Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 41(2), 745–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y

9. Guthridge, M., & Giummarra, M. J. (2025). The taxonomy of empathy: A meta-definition and the nine dimensions of the empathic system. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 65(6), 1386–1403. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211018015
10. Güzel, H. Ş., Sevi Tok, E. S., & Güney, E. (2019). Validity and reliability of the Turkish Version of the Cognitive, Affective, and Somatic Empathy Scales for Children. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry, 20(Suppl. 1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.22991
11. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
12. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Pearson.
13. Hasan, M. R., Hossain, M. Z., Ghosh, S., Krishna, A., & Gedeon, T. (2025). Empathy detection from text, audiovisual, audio, or physiological signals: A systematic review of task formulations and machine learning methods. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 16(4), 2507–2525. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAFFC.2025.3590107
14. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
15. Jackson, P. L., Brunet, E., Meltzoff, A. N., & Decety, J. (2006). Empathy examined through the neural mechanisms involved in imagining how I feel versus how you feel pain. Neuropsychologia, 44(5), 752–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.07.015
16. Jain, S., & Angural, V. (2017). Use of Cronbach’s alpha in dental research. Medico Research Chronicles, 4(3), 285–291. http://www.medrech.com/index.php/medrech/article/view/242
17. Keysers, C., & Gazzola, V. (2009). Expanding the mirror: Vicarious activity for actions, emotions, and sensations. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 19(6), 666–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2009.10.006
18. Krznaric, R. (2014). Empathy: Why it matters, and how to get it. Perigee Books.
19. Lamm, C., & Majdandžić, J. (2015). The role of shared neural activations, mirror neurons, and morality in empathy-A critical comment. Neuroscience Research, 90, 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2014.10.008
20. Liu, J., Qiao, X., Dong, F., & Raine, A. (2018). The Chinese version of the cognitive, affective, and somatic empathy scale for children: Validation, gender invariance and associated factors. PLOS ONE, 13(5), e0195268. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195268
21. Martingano, A. J., & Martingano, D. (2017). Measuring multidimensional empathy: Theoretical and practical considerations for osteopathic medical researchers. Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 117(11), 697–704. https://doi.org/10.7556/jaoa.2017.136
22. Morelli, S. A., Lieberman, M. D., & Zaki, J. (2015). The emerging study of positive empathy. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(2), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12157
23. Palmieri, A., Kleinbub, J. R., Pagnini, F., Sorarù, G., & Cipolletta, S. (2021). Empathy-based supportive treatment in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A pragmatic study. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 63(3), 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029157.2020.1797623
24. Paradiso, E., Gazzola, V., & Keysers, C. (2021). Neural mechanisms necessary for empathy-related phenomena across species. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 68, 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2021.02.005
25. Park, Y. E., Yoon, H.-K., Kim, S. Y., Williamson, J., Wallraven, C., & Kang, J. (2019). A preliminary study for translation and validation of the Korean version of the Cognitive, Affective, and Somatic Empathy Scale in young adults. Psychiatry Investigation, 16(9), 671–678. https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2019.06.25
26. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
27. Preston, S. D., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2002). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X02000018
28. Raine, A., & Chen, F. R. (2018). The Cognitive, Affective, and Somatic Empathy Scales (CASES) for children. Journal of Clinical Child &Adolescent Psychology, 47(1), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2017.1295383
29. Raine, A., Chen, F. R., & Waller, R. (2022). The cognitive, affective and somatic empathy scales for adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 185, 111238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111238
30. Ratka, A. (2018). Empathy and the development of affective skills. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 82(10), 7192. https://doi.org/10.5688/AJPE7192
31. Sallquist, J., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Eggum, N. D., & Gaertner, B. M. (2009). Assessment of preschoolers’ positive empathy: Concurrent and longitudinal relations with positive emotion, social competence, and sympathy. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760902819444
32. Shamay-Tsoory, S. G., Aharon-Peretz, J., & Perry, D. (2009). Two systems for empathy: A double dissociation between emotional and cognitive empathy in inferior frontal gyrus versus ventromedial prefrontal lesions. Brain, 132(3), 617–627. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awn279
33. Stosic, M. D., Fultz, A. A., Brown, J. A., & Bernieri, F. J. (2022). What is your empathy scale not measuring? The convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of five empathy scales. The Journal of Social Psychology, 162(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2021.1985417
34. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2015). Çok değişkenli istatistiklerin kullanımı (M. Baloğlu, Çev. Ed.; 6. basımdan çeviri). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
35. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
36. Telle, N. T., & Pfister, H. R. (2016). Positive empathy and prosocial behavior: A neglected link. Emotion Review, 8(2), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073915586817
37. Vallette d’Osia, A., & Meier, L. L. (2024). Empathy in the workplace: Disentangling affective from cognitive empathy. Occupational Health Science, 8(4), 883–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-024-00197-9
38. Wainio-Theberge, S., & Armony, J. L. (2023). Antisocial and impulsive personality traits are linked to individual differences in somatosensory maps of emotion. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 675. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27880-1
39. Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
40. Yalçın, Ö. N., & DiPaola, S. (2020). Modeling empathy: Building a link between affective and cognitive processes. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(4), 2983–3006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-019-09753-0
41. Yılmaz, H. (2018). Pozitif ve negatif yönelimli bilişsel, duyuşsal ve somatik empati ölçeği: Çocuk ve ergen sürümünün Türk kültürüne uyarlanması çalışması. Life Skills Journal of Psychology, 2(4), 319–344. https://doi.org/10.31461/ybpd.475567