Gaggero Giulia, Brunellière Angèle, Gigliotti Maria Francesca, El Mardi Wassila, Berthoz Sylvie, Nandrino Jean-Louis, Doba Karyn, Grynberg Delphine
Department of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Cognitive and Educational Sciences (CES) Lab, Faculty of Education, Free University of Bolzano-Bozen, Bressanone-Brixen, Italy.
Psychol Belg. 2025 Apr 2;65(1):69-86. doi: 10.5334/pb.1328. eCollection 2025.
The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) is one of the most used self-report measures of empathy, comprising 4 factors assessing both cognitive and affective empathy. Nowadays, three different French adaptations of this instrument co-exist. This research compares the three French adaptations of the IRI scale using both quantitative and qualitative evaluations. In Study 1, a French-speaking sample ( = 339) completed all three French IRI versions at 2-month time intervals in a counterbalanced order. In Study 2, the item wording of the three versions was evaluated by six independent professional translators. Study 1 assessed the items' distribution, the scale's factorial structure, the subscales' internal consistency, and their correlations with alternative measures of empathy (the Empathy Quotient) and other clinically relevant indicators (anxiety, depression). These quantitative analyses highlighted that all three French adaptations can be used for research purposes. They all exhibit acceptable internal consistency, a factorial structure compliant with the 4-factor model originally proposed by Davis, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. However, by combining item quantitative analyses and translators' judgments, we revealed some problematic items in each version. Taken together, the findings suggest that the French IRI adaptations by Guttman & Laporte (2000) and Braun et al. (2015) should be slightly preferred. To improve the overall quality of each French IRI version, we provide some recommendations about how to adapt problematic items.
人际反应指数(IRI)是最常用的共情自陈量表之一,由评估认知共情和情感共情的4个因子组成。如今,该量表有三种不同的法语改编版本同时存在。本研究采用定量和定性评估方法对IRI量表的三种法语改编版本进行比较。在研究1中,一个说法语的样本(n = 339)以平衡顺序在2个月的时间间隔内完成了所有三个法语IRI版本。在研究2中,由六名独立的专业翻译人员对三个版本的项目措辞进行评估。研究1评估了项目分布、量表的因子结构、分量表的内部一致性,以及它们与共情替代测量指标(共情商数)和其他临床相关指标(焦虑、抑郁)的相关性。这些定量分析表明,所有三种法语改编版本均可用于研究目的。它们都具有可接受的内部一致性、符合Davis最初提出的4因子模型的因子结构,以及收敛效度和区分效度。然而,通过结合项目定量分析和翻译人员的判断,我们发现每个版本中都存在一些有问题的项目。综合来看,研究结果表明,Guttman和Laporte(2000年)以及Braun等人(2015年)的法语IRI改编版本应略受青睐。为提高每个法语IRI版本的整体质量,我们针对如何改编有问题的项目提供了一些建议。