Family Expressiveness and Adolescent Empathy: The Mediating Role of Emotional Awareness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to examine the mediating role of emotional awareness in the relationship between family expressiveness and adolescent empathy. Methods and Materials: A descriptive correlational research design was used, involving 400 Mexican adolescents selected based on the Morgan and Krejcie sampling table. Data were collected using three standardized self-report instruments: the Family Expressiveness Questionnaire (FEQ), the Emotional Awareness Questionnaire (EAQ), and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) for empathy. Pearson correlation analysis was conducted using SPSS-27 to explore bivariate associations, and structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed using AMOS-21 to assess direct, indirect, and total effects among the variables and test the hypothesized mediation model. Findings: The results showed significant positive correlations between family expressiveness and emotional awareness (r = .46, p < .001), family expressiveness and adolescent empathy (r = .38, p < .001), and emotional awareness and adolescent empathy (r = .53, p < .001). The structural model demonstrated a good fit to the data (χ²/df = 1.66, RMSEA = 0.041, CFI = 0.99). Direct effects from family expressiveness to emotional awareness (B = 0.51, β = 0.46, p < .001), from family expressiveness to empathy (B = 0.24, β = 0.28, p < .001), and from emotional awareness to empathy (B = 0.44, β = 0.39, p < .001) were statistically significant. The indirect effect of family expressiveness on empathy via emotional awareness was also significant (B = 0.22, β = 0.18, p < .001), supporting partial mediation. Conclusion: These findings suggest that emotionally expressive family environments foster adolescents' empathy partly by enhancing their emotional awareness. Emotional awareness serves as a key developmental mechanism through which family dynamics shape prosocial emotional outcomes in adolescence.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".