Psychometric Analysis of the Czech Version of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empathy is a concept associated with various positive outcomes. However, to measure such a multifaceted concept, valid and reliable tools are needed. Negatively worded items (NWIs) are suspected to decrease some psychometric parameters of assessment instruments, which complicates the research of empathy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the factor structure and validity of the TEQ on the Czech population, including the influence of the NWIs. Data were collected from three surveys. In total, 2239 Czech participants were included in our study. Along with socio-demographic information, we measured empathy, neuroticism, spirituality, self-esteem, compassion and social desirability. NWI in general yielded low communalities, factor loadings and decreased internal consistency. Therefore, in the next steps, we tested the model consisting of their positively reformulated versions. A higher empathy was found in females, married and religious individuals. We further found positive associations between empathy, compassion and spirituality. After the sample was split in half, exploratory factor analysis of the model with reformulated items was followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which supported a unidimensional solution with good internal consistency: Cronbach’s α = 0.85 and McDonald’s ω = 0.85. The CFA indicated an acceptable fit χ2 (14) = 83.630; p < 0.001; CFI = 0.997; TLI = 0.995; RMSEA = 0.070; SRMR = 0.037. The Czech version of the TEQ is a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of empathy. The use of NWIs in Czech or in a similar language environment seems to be questionable and their rewording may represent a more reliable approach.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".