Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Report . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Report . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Report . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Entwicklung und Validierung des Gießener Empathie-Tests (GET)

Authors: Pelz;

Entwicklung und Validierung des Gießener Empathie-Tests (GET)

Abstract

Abstract Der Beitrag beschreibt die Entwicklung und Validierung des Gießener Empathie-Tests (GET). Ausgangspunkt ist die Beobachtung, dass Empathie in Wissenschaft, Führung und Alltag zwar häufig als Schlüsselkompetenz bezeichnet, jedoch oft unscharf definiert und pauschal mit Erfolg gleichgesetzt wird. Der GET wurde entwickelt, um Empathie differenziert messbar zu machen. Er unterscheidet drei Dimensionen: emotionale Empathie, kognitive Empathie und soziale Empathie. Die finale Kurzform umfasst 15 Items, je fünf pro Dimension, und beruht auf einem mehrjährigen Entwicklungsprozess mit einer Datenbasis von insgesamt 28.806 Teilnehmern bis 2026. Die aktuelle Validierung basiert auf 5.221 Datensätzen; nach Ausschluss besonders auffälliger Fälle umfasst die bereinigte Stichprobe 4.999 Teilnehmer. Die Ergebnisse zeigen gute bis sehr gute Reliabilitätswerte, durchgehend gute Trennschärfen, eine plausible Drei-Faktoren-Struktur und eine hohe Kriteriumsvalidität im Zusammenhang mit dem Erfolgsindikator persönliche Beziehungen. Ergänzend werden ausgewählte Gruppenvergleiche berichtet, unter anderem nach Geschlecht, Führungserfahrung, Alter und Einkommensentwicklung. Die Befunde zeigen, dass der GET nicht nur ein reliables und valides Diagnoseinstrument ist, sondern auch differenzierte empirische Aussagen über empathische Fähigkeiten in Alltag, Beruf und Führung ermöglicht. Schlüsselwörter: Empathie, Gießener Empathie-Test, GET, emotionale Empathie, kognitive Empathie, soziale Empathie, Testentwicklung, Validierung, Reliabilität, Konstruktvalidität, Kriteriumsvalidität, persönliche Beziehungen

Abstract (English) This article describes the development and validation of the Giessen Empathy Test (GET). The starting point is the observation that empathy is frequently described as a key competence in research, leadership, and everyday life, but is often defined imprecisely and equated too generally with success. The GET was developed to measure empathy in a differentiated way. It distinguishes three dimensions: emotional empathy, cognitive empathy, and social empathy. The final short version comprises 15 items, five for each dimension, and is based on a multi-year development process with a total data base of 28,806 participants by 2026. The current validation is based on 5,221 data sets; after excluding particularly conspicuous cases, the cleaned sample comprises 4,999 participants. The results show good to very good reliability, consistently good item discrimination, a plausible three-factor structure, and strong criterion validity in relation to the success indicator personal relationships. In addition, selected group comparisons are reported, including gender, leadership experience, age, and income development. The findings indicate that the GET is not only a reliable and valid diagnostic instrument, but also enables differentiated empirical insights into empathic abilities in everyday life, work, and leadership contexts. Keywords: Empathy, Giessen Empathy Test, GET, emotional empathy, cognitive empathy, social empathy, test development, validation, reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, personal relationships.

Keywords

Empathy/ethics, Empathy, Empathy/classification, Empathy/physiology

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green