An inventory to assess empathic concern for disability and accessibility: development and preliminary psychometric investigation
Cultivating empathy and prosocial attitude towards disability is a first step for university students to become the leaders of society and professions to create accessible environments and inclusive society. Gauging levels of empathy and prosocial attitude towards disability among the students is im...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repositorio: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/111878 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/111878 https://dx.doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v7i2.132 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Empathy -- Study and teaching Empathy Prosocial attitude Reliability Validity Empatia Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Ensenyament i aprenentatge |
| Sumario: | Cultivating empathy and prosocial attitude towards disability is a first step for university students to become the leaders of society and professions to create accessible environments and inclusive society. Gauging levels of empathy and prosocial attitude towards disability among the students is important for evaluating the adequacy of disability training and education. We developed and conducted an initial psychometric validation of a novel inventory in Japanese and English languages to assess Empathic Concern for Disability and Accessibility (ECDA) in Japan and New Zealand. Preliminary psychometric evaluation indicates strong internal consistency in the Japanese sample (α = .96) and the New Zealand sample (α = .93). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated a four-factor solution for both samples. The present study has resulted in the development of the ECDA that demonstrated initial support for internal consistency and construct validity. The ECDA may be used for the cross-cultural comparisons of disability training and education. |
|---|