The Empathy Quotient: A cross-cultural comparison of the Italian version
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Empathy Quotient (EQ) is a self-report questionnaire that was developed to measure the cognitive, affective, and behavioural aspects of empathy. We evaluated its cross-cultural validity in an Italian sample. METHODS: A sample of 18- to 30-year-old undergraduate students of both sexes (N=256, males=118) were invited to fill in the Italian version of the EQ, as well as other measures of emotional competence and psychological distress. Results. The EQ had an excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha=.79; test-retest at 1 month: Pearson's r=.85), and was normally distributed. Females scored higher than males, and more males (n=14, 11.9%) than females (n=4, 2.9%) scored lower than 30, the cutoff score that best differentiates autism spectrum conditions from controls. EQ was negatively related to the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) and positively related to the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (SDS). Principal component analysis retrieved the three-factor structure of the EQ. Lower emotional reactivity correlated with higher scores in measures of risk in both the schizophrenia-like (Peters et al. Delusions Inventory) and the bipolar (Hypomanic Personality Scale) spectra. CONCLUSIONS: The Italian version of the EQ has good validity, with an acceptable replication of the original three-factor solution, yielding three subscales with high internal and test-retest reliability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it