Posted: November 16th, 2022

ABSTRACT
Empathy is a broad concept that refers to a person’s cognitive and emotional responses to witnessed events of another person. Empathy has three components, according to renowned psychologists Daniel Goleman and Paul Eckman: cognitive, emotional, and compassionate. Recently, the concept of empathy has been broadened to include additional dimensions. Empathy also Helps us in understanding the emotions and feelings of others so that we can respond appropriately to a situation. It is frequently associated with social behavior, and studies show that higher levels of empathy are associated with more helpful behavior. We can measure empathy in children by relying on other people’s reports, and we can measure empathy in adults by administering various questionnaires associated with various empathy scales. The Toronto empathy questionnaire portrays empathy as primarily an emotional experience. The TEQ demonstrated strong convergent validity in three studies, correlating positively with behavioral measures of social decoding, self-report measures of empathy, and negatively with an Autism symptomatology measure. It also demonstrated good internal consistency and high test-retest reliability. The TEQ is a brief, dependable, and valid instrument for measuring empathy. The TEQ scores correlated negatively with the Autism Quotient. Scores of 45 or higher indicate above-average empathy. The lower your score, the less compassionate you are. The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980, 1983) is a measure of dispositional empathy that is based on the idea that empathy is made up of distinct but related constructs. The instrument includes four seven-item subscales, each of which addresses a different aspect of empathy.

The first study aims to assess the affective and cognitive components of empathy in children aged 8 and 9 years old using the interpersonal reactivity index, a well-validated adult empathy measure. To improve their understanding of the affective/cognitive distinction in empathy, the children must complete the feeling and thinking measure. The second study is attempting to determine empathy levels among medical students at Malaysia’s National Defense University using the Toronto Empathy scale.
STUDY METHOD NO. 1
The study included 435 schoolchildren recruited from four primary schools in Perth, Western Australia. After agreement from the school Principals and appropriate classroom teachers, parental approval was obtained for the children’s participation. At the end of the scale, the kids’ consent was deemed to have been given. The scale was completed by the children in groups in the classroom using the same experimenter, a man. All groups received the same instructions, and Helpance was provided as needed. During the pilot test, children were asked to read the items and indicate whether or not they understood them. As a result, the most difficult items were identified, and subsequent groups were always given detailed instructions that addressed these items.
Research Paper
How is each component is related to the course grade?
Assessment Date of Assessment Weighting
Paper (Outline) November 2nd, 2022 10%
Paper (First Draft) November 16th, 2022 10%
Paper (Peer Review) November 30th, 2022 10%
Paper (Final Draft) Final Exam Time (TBD) 30%
Which format will we be using?
The paper should be in APA format. There are APA manuals online. Please use
the newest edition.
What are the components of the paper?
The write-up needs to be in APA manuscript form and include the following
sections. Here is a very rough guideline for how long each section should be.
Component Pages-ish
Title Page 1
Abstract (150 word maximum, plus 5 keywords)
Introduction 5
Study 1 brief introduction ½
Method 2
Analytic Plan/Results if hypothesis is confirmed 1 + table(s)/figure(s)
Study 2 brief introduction ½
Method 2
Analytic Plan/Results if hypothesis is confirmed 1 + table(s)/figure(s)
General Discussion 3
References (15+ references)
Total: 16-ish
What should you write about?
Here you have the most flexibility so that you can write about something that you
care about! Broadly, take the psychological measurement skills and techniques
you have and are learning in this course and apply them to the measurement of a
construct you care about. This can take so many different forms. For example,
you could propose a set of studies to Assessment the validity of an existing
measure for your construct. You could propose a new scale for a construct and
design studies to evaluate the reliability and validity of your items. You could
compare the measurement properties of two existing measures. You could
propose studies to evaluate the appropriateness of using a certain test instrument
in more applied settings (e.g., a personality test for postal workers, or a
standardized skills test for lawyers). Please contact a member of the teaching
team if you are struggling with what to write about.
Specific Requirements for the outline
The goal of the outline is to sketch out your ideas and provide yourself with some
potential structure for subsequent drafts of you paper. Focus on the big picture,
the details will begin to be filled in as you move from the outline to the rough
draft. Be sure to include helpful citations within your outline so you know what
papers to return to when you begin the rough draft.
Title Page
• Follow APA format (e.g., name institution name)
• Tentative title
Introduction
• Bullet point the big picture about why your topic is important
• Bullet point the major papers, why they are influential, and how
might the be useful for you to talk about what we currently know
about your topic of interest
• Where will you put your hypotheses? How many hypotheses are
appropriate given you intended studies?
Mini-Introduction (for each study)
• Bullet point the study’s specific goal. What is this specific study is
accomplishing?
Method (for each study)
• Participants section outlined in bullet points. This about who will
participate and how they might participate
• Have measures section outlined in bullet points. What are the
measures that you will need to include, what is their citation, bullet
point important features of the measure
• Explanation of your study procedures in bullet points. What will
participants do in your study. You will probably want to bullet point
the procedures section chronologically.
Analysis Plan/results (for each study)
• a) Which analyses will be conducted on the data.
• What are the important pieces of output from those analyses that you
will need to talk about in relation to your hypotheses. For example, if
you are using factor analysis, will you look at a scree plot, patter
matrix, structure matrix, etc.
• The structure of table(s) without numbers in them and/or figures with
axes clearly labeled.
General Discussion
• Outline of strengths, limitations, implications, future directions in
point form.
Specific requirements for rough draft
For the rough draft, you get as much out of this as you put into it. The more
complete the rough draft is, the more the feedback will help, and the less work
will remain for the final draft. Ideally the rough draft you submit to your peers
would be the first full draft of your paper. With that said, the bare minimum that
needs to be completed for the rough draft is the following:
Title Page
• Follow APA format (e.g., name institution name)
• Tentative title
Introduction
• Several paragraphs of your outline for the introduction are filled in.
You might very well change the structure of your intro based on
peer feedback, but there should be some meat on the bones of your
outline
• You should have a full first draft of your hypothesis(es) in
paragraph form.
Mini-Introduction (for each study)
• Replace the outline of the study’s specific goal with paragraphs. What
is this specific study is accomplishing?
Method (for each study)
• First full draft in paragraph form of the methods section.
Analysis Plan/results (for each study)
• a) Full paragraphs about what analyses you are proposing including
choices you would need to make regarding those analyses. For
example, if proposing factor analysis, then what rotations would you
use if any?
• In paragraph form, what would your results be if your hypotheses were
confirmed?
• Your tables and figures must now be filled in. Keep in mind you are
making these numbers up, we aren’t actually collecting data. These
would by the hypothetical values you are interpreting as expected
results.
General Discussion
• At least one strength and limitation for each study is expanded into
paragraph form, as well as the implications.
Feedback Request
• Specify what you want aspects of the paper you want your peers to
prioritize when it comes to feedback. For example, should they
prioritize feedback on the structure of your writing? Or should they
prioritize your methods and results section? This is a place to make
sure you get the feedback that you are looking for.
How will I be evaluated for my rough draft?
Submission that meet the minimum requirements for each component will
received full credit, but I highly encourage you to go beyond the minimum
requirements to have a first full draft of the paper. Submissions that are missing
some components of the rough draft will receive half credit. Failing to submit a
rough draft before the deadline will result in a zero.
Specific requirements for peer review
A big part of writing is helping others with their work. In psychology paper never
get published (even single author papers) unless multiple eyes have gone through
the work. So, we are going to help each other in the same way. Each of you will
review TWO of your peer’s work.
As a bonus, helping others with their writing will improve yours. Sometimes it is
hard to see flaws in your own work until you see those same flaws in someone
else’s work. You will get to see an example of your peer’s style and structure that
might help you will your style and structure.
Feedback for each peer must include filling out the rubric at the end of this
document (the same rubric that the teaching team will use for the final draft) and
attaching that to your assessment in eClass. Please be honest with your
assessment because the feedback won’t be helpful for your peer if you don’t take
this seriously. Your rubric will give them a rough sense of the current standing of
their draft. The points you allocate in the rubric won’t impact their grade in any
way and is for feedback purposes only.
Your peer feedback must include a document that provides written feedback for
the authors with concrete advice on how to improve their paper. The written
feedback should prioritize feedback on the topics the author requested.
How will I be evaluated for peer review?
Providing peer review is worth 10% of your course grade. This is 5% for each peer
submission you will be reviewing. As long as you provide a filled-out rubric and
thoughtful feedback that covers the topics requested by the authors you will get
full marks.
Specific requirements for final draft
Title Page
• Follow APA format (e.g., name institution name)
• Title should communicate the topic of your paper using few words
Abstract
• Components that must be present include:
a) why the problem is important,
b) what problem you will solve,
c) how you solve the problem (your two studies),
d) the implications of your potential results.
Introduction
• Components that must be present include:
a) why the problem is important,
b) what problem you will solve,
c) a summary of the background research in the topic area, including some
of the major, influential papers and papers that evaluate the measurement
properties of scales for your construct.
d) a clear statement of your hypothesis(es)
Mini-Introduction (for each study)
• Brief introduction outlining the study’s specific goal.
Method (for each study)
• Components that must be present:
• a) A clear explanation of the participants:
o how many?
o Demographic information (gender, ethnicity)
o How were they recruited?
o How were they compensated?
o Why you picked the sample and sample size
• b) A clear explanation of the measures you used.
o Which surveys did participants complete?
o How did participants respond to scales or measures (e.g., on a scale
of 1 “not at all” to 5 “very much)?
o How was reaction time measured, or fMRI data, so on
• c) A clear explanation of the procedures.
o Be detailed enough so that another scientist could replicate your
work.
Analysis Plan/results (for each study)
• Components that must be present:
• a) A clear plan for which analyses will be conducted on the data
o What empirical estimates will you use?
o Which assumptions you will test and how?
• b) Example results if your hypotheses would be confirmed
o The example results should include at least one table or figure
o What numbers would you get if your hypothesis is right?
General Discussion
• Address at least two limitations of each study
• Address at least two strengths of each study
• Address implications for the field – what do your findings contribute?
• Outline at least two future directions.
How will I be evaluated on the final draft?
Percent of Total Points
3% Title Page & Abstract
Title page APA format 10
Title should communicate the topic of your paper 5
Abstract 150 word maximum; include 5 keywords 20
Should mention: why the problem is important 25
Stated what problem you will solve 20
Stated how you solve the problem 20
Total title page/abstract points 100
15% Introduction
Stated why the problem is important, 20
Stated what problem you will solve 10
Provided background research summary; included
major, influential papers in the area 50
Provided clear statement of hypotheses 20
Total Intro points 100
15% Study 1
Method A clear explanation of the participants: e.g., N,
demographics, recruitment, compensation. 10
A clear explanation of the measures. 15
A clear explanation of the procedures. 10
Analysis Plan A clear explanation of which analysis will be conducted 10
Appropriateness of those analyses 15
A clear explanation of expected results 15
Figure(s)/table(s) 10
Expected results are appropriately for hypothesis 15
Total study 1 points 100
15% Study 2
Method A clear explanation of the participants: e.g., N,
demographics, recruitment, compensation. 10
A clear explanation of the measures. 15
A clear explanation of the procedures. 10
Analysis Plan A clear explanation of which analysis will be conducted 10
Appropriateness of those analyses 15
A clear explanation of expected results 15
Figure(s)/table(s) 10
Expected results are appropriately for hypothesis 15
Total study 2 points 100
15% General Discussion
Address 2 limitations of both studies 20
Address 2 strengths of both studies 20
Outline at least two future directions 20
implications for the field 20
thoughtfulness 20
Total discussion points 100
7% References 10
10-15 references 100
Total refs & tables points 100
30% Additional criteria
Logical structure and flow overall 40
Quality of writing 60
Total additional criteria points 100

Order | Check Discount