Enhancing Empathy Scale Reliability: A Comprehensive Analysis

Problem Description:

This reliability analysis assignment explores the reliability of a 14-item Empathy scale, examining its internal consistency through various statistical methods. The dataset comprises responses from 517 participants, with a gender distribution of 63.1% females and 36.9% males. The analysis aims to assess the reliability of the scale and identify problematic items affecting its consistency.

Gender Distribution:

The gender distribution is:

• FEMALE: 326 (63.1%)
• MALE: 191 (36.9%)

The table indicates that out of 517 respondents, 63.1% (326) are females, and 36.9% (191) are males.

Empathy Scale - Item Statistics:

The following table shows the item statistics for the 14 items in the Empathy scale, including the mean, standard deviation, and the number of participants (N) in the study:

Table 1: gender distribution of the respondents

Evaluation of Reliability Analysis Assumptions:

Before analyzing the reliability of the Empathy scale, it is crucial to ensure that the assumptions of reliability analysis are met:

• Observations should be independent of each other.
• Errors should be uncorrelated between items.
• Each pair of items should have a bivariate normal distribution.
• Scales should be additive, and each item is linearly related to the others.

Reliability Analysis: Cronbach’s Alpha Method:

Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess the internal consistency and reliability of the 14-item Empathy scale. The results indicate that the scale has poor reliability and internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.685).

Reliability Analysis: Split-Half Method:

The Split-Half method was also employed to determine the scale's reliability and internal consistency. The results show that, even with this method, the Empathy scale has poor reliability (Spearman-Brown coefficient, equal length = 0.594).

Reliability Statistics

Table 2: Reliability statistics for the split-half method

Reliability Analysis by Gender (Male and Female):

Separate analyses by gender reveal the following results:

Females:

• Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.644
• The Empathy scale has poor reliability and internal consistency for female respondents.

Males:

• Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.645
• The Empathy scale also exhibits poor reliability and internal consistency for male respondents.

Split-Half Method by Gender:

Females:

• Spearman-Brown coefficient (equal length) = 0.577
• The Empathy scale shows poor reliability and internal consistency for female respondents even with the Split-Half method.

Males:

• Spearman-Brown coefficient (equal length) = 0.519
• The Empathy scale demonstrates poor reliability and internal consistency for male respondents with the Split-Half method.

Identification of Problematic Items:

By assessing item-total statistics, three items were identified as most adversely affecting reliability for the entire dataset: item 2 (Annoyed by sorry for self-people), item 10 (Hard to see why others are so upset), and item 14 (Difficult to remain cool when excitement is present).

Item-Total Statistics

Table 3: PROBLEM ITEMS ADVERSELY AFFECTING RELIABILITY FOR THE ENTIRE DATASET

Reliability Analysis After Item Deletion:

Reliability Statistics

Table 4: Reliability Analysis After Item Deletion

Reliability Statistics

After removing the three problematic items, the reliability analysis results improved significantly:

• Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the 11-item scale = 0.757
• Spearman-Brown coefficient (equal length) for the 11-item scale = 0.617

Conclusion:

In summary, the initial 14-item Empathy scale displayed poor reliability and internal consistency. However, after removing the three problematic items, the scale's reliability and internal consistency significantly improved. This analysis underscores the importance of evaluating and refining measurement instruments for accurate and reliable results in research and surveys.