This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 10 October 2014, At: 21:16Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
The Journal of Psychology:Interdisciplinary and AppliedPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20
Children's Perception ofParental Empathy as aPrecursor of Children'sEmpathy in Middle and LateChildhoodMaría Cristina Richaud de Minzi aa Interdisciplinary Center of Mathematical andExperimental Psychology Research, National Councilof Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET)Published online: 20 Sep 2013.
To cite this article: María Cristina Richaud de Minzi (2013) Children's Perception ofParental Empathy as a Precursor of Children's Empathy in Middle and Late Childhood,The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 147:6, 563-576, DOI:10.1080/00223980.2012.721811
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2012.721811
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
The Journal of Psychology, 2013, 147(6), 563–576Copyright C© 2013 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Children’s Perception of ParentalEmpathy as a Precursor of Children’s
Empathy in Middle and Late Childhood
MARIA CRISTINA RICHAUD DE MINZIInterdisciplinary Center of Mathematical and Experimental Psychology
Research, National Council of Scientific and TechnicalResearch (CONICET)
ABSTRACT. This study examined: 1) the development of empathy in middle and latechildhood, according to gender; 2) children’s perception of parents’ empathy according togender; and 3) the links between children’s perception of parents’ empathy and children’sempathy. Spanish translation of the Davis’ Interpersonal Reactivity Index and a Measure ofChildren Perception of Parental Empathy were administered to 387 middle class children,aged 8–12 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. In the first place, we have found, as previous studieson the subject, significant differences between boys’ and girls’ empathy, girls being moreempathic than boys. When comparing boys and girls in their perception of mother andfather empathy, they agree in their perception of their mother’s empathy, but girls perceivemore empathy in their father than boys. There is clearly a connection with gender, whichis probably due to cultural factors. As for the relationship between parents’ and children’sempathy, although previous studies showed little correlation in this regard, in the presentstudy, when considering the perception children have of their parents’ empathy, interestingmeaningful connections are found.
Keywords: empathy, parental empathy, gender, culture
THE DEVELOPMENT OF EMPATHY IN MIDDLE AND LATE CHILDHOOD,and its origins, in part, in primary interpersonal relationships, especially withparents is the aim of this article. Regarding this subject we are interested inanalyzing whether children’s perception of Parental Empathy as a result of parentalmodeling can predict empathy in the child.
Empathy is the ability to participate in the feelings or ideas of others, to feelsad about their unhappiness and good about their joy. In order to develop empathy,a child must be able to feel attachment to another person and must care if thatperson is hurting. The development of empathy and of the corresponding guilt
Address correspondence to Marıa Cristina Richaud de Minzi, Tte. Gral. Peron 2158 (1040)Buenos Aires, Republica Argentina; [email protected] (e-mail).
563
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
564 The Journal of Psychology
and shame when one harms or fails to help another person, guarantees pro-socialbehavior and altruism, even and preferably in the absence of external rewards andpunishments.
Empathy includes cognitive processes and emotional experiences, and impliesa mainly cognitive response showing understanding of how another person feelsas well as an emotional communion (Gallo, 1989). Haynes and Avery (1979)described empathy “as the ability to recognize and understand another person’sperceptions and feelings and to carefully express that understanding in an acceptingresponse” (p. 527). The response may be either verbal or nonverbal, or pro-socialbehavior such as sharing or helping.
On the one hand, empathy can be defined cognitively in relation to perspectivetaking or understanding others. For example, Hogan (1969) described empathyas “the intellectual or imaginative apprehension of another’s condition or state ofmind without actually experiencing that person’s feelings” (p. 308). On the otherhand, empathy has also been defined as emotional arousal or sympathy in responseto the feelings or experiences of others (Caruso & Meyer, 1998). For example,Mehrabian and Epstein (1972) defined empathy as “the heightened responsivenessto another’s emotional experience” (p. 526). Last, there is an integrative approachwhich employs both cognitive and emotional modes to the study of empathy.More recently, empathy has been conceived of as a multi-dimensional construct(Davis, 1983; Thornton & Thornton, 1995). Davis (1983) included cognitive andemotional components in his view of empathy, and he believes that it “can bestbe considered as a set of constructs related in that they all concern responsivity toothers but are also clearly discriminable from each other” (p.113).
The development of empathy leading to guilt and shame when one’s actionsharm others is a crucial aspect of emotional development. Early parent-child inter-actions are an important influence on children’s emotional development. Childreninitially learn to express and interpret emotions through interactions with primarycaregivers. In infancy, caregivers influence emotional development through theextent to which they provide emotionally arousing stimuli at appropriate times,reinforce and encourage emotional displays, and respond to subtle variations inthe child’s expressions (Bronson, 2000; Eisenberg, Cumberland, & Spinrad, 1998;Nagin & Tremblay, 2001).
Some studies have found a positive relationship between the mother’s em-pathic caring and children’s altruism (Zahn-Waxler, Radke-Yarrow, & King, 1979).Also, studies on preschool children have found that non-authoritarian and non-punishing mothers have children with higher levels of affective and cognitiveempathy, and pro-social behavior. Eisenberg, Lennon, and Roth (1983) examined,using a longitudinal methodology, the relation between prosocial moral judgmentof children since 4 to 6 years old and both prohibition-oriented moral judgmentand maternal childrearing practices. They found level of prosocial reasoning wasrelated to nonauthoritarian, nonpunitive, empathic, and supportive maternal prac-tices. Also it has been noticed that parental modeling of empathic relationships
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 565
towards their children and others in their presence, is strongly linked to the de-velopment of pro-social attitudes and behavior in children. Zahn-Waxler et al.examined maternal rearing behavior in relation to 1/2-2/2 children’s reparationfor transgressions and altruism as bystanders to distress in others. Distress wassimulated by mothers and investigators. Mothers’ empathic caregiving was ratingduring home visits and was positively associated with children’s reparation andaltruism.
Nevertheless, surprisingly little empirical support exists for a link betweenparent and child empathy.
Strayer and Roberts (1989) find that although children’s emotional empathywas associated with parental perceptions of the child as empathic, it was notrelated to parents’ own empathy. Although mothers reported significantly higherlevels of empathy than did fathers, neither mothers’ nor fathers’ empathy wasrelated to the empathy of daughters or the sons, either as assessed by Bryant’smeasure or by the parents themselves. Some years later, the same authors saidthat in contrast with earlier less comprehensive studies, they had found significantpaths between parents’ and children’s empathy mediated by children’s anger.“These countervailing pathways largely neutralized each other, resulting in thelow correlation usually seen when parents’ and children’s empathy are examinedin isolation. Thus, our findings are an important confirmation and extension of thetheoretically expected link between parents’ and children’s empathy” (Strayer &Roberts, 2004, p. 229). However, they still had to make use of other variables,especially emotional expression mediators.
The studies of Strayer and Roberts (2004) on the influence of parents’ empathyover that of their children have assessed empathy as each one perceives it in himor herself. However, on the basis of social learning and social cognitive theories(Bandura, 1986), specific socialization mechanisms (e.g., observational learning,rewards) have been linked with the acquisition of new behaviors. Accordingto Bandura (1986), children who are exposed to models of specific behaviorwill be more likely to emulate those acts (especially if the model is admiredor closely identified with). In a similar vein, providing children with hands-onexperiences of empathetic acts may facilitate future empathetic behaviors becausesuch experiences provide rehearsal opportunities. Following these notions, onewould expect that parents who model and encourage empathetic behaviors mightpromote empathetic behaviors in their children.
Moreover, Schaefer consider that “a child’s perception of his parents’ be-haviors may be more related to his adjustment than is the actual behavior of hisparents” (1965, p. 413).
According to our work on the influence of parents’ relationships and attach-ment over children coping, social skills, self-control, and emotions (Richaud deMinzi, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010) based on Schaefer’s model, we believe that ratherthan parents-self perceived empathy, it is actually the empathy children perceivein their parents that could really influence the development of their own empathy.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
566 The Journal of Psychology
Repeated evidence was been found about the difference in empathy betweenmales and females, being the latter more empathetic (Garaigordobil & Garcıa,2006; Litvack-Miller, McDougall, & Romney, 1997; Mestre, Frias, & Samper,2004). In the particular case of Argentina, it belongs to the western Christianculture, although it is predominantly Catholic and Latin of Italian and Spanishorigin. Parents’ expectations for girls and boys differ, and girls are expected to bemore nurturing and concerned with social evaluations of others, while boys areexpected to be more autonomous. These different expectations probably influencethe development of empathy in boys and girls.
In the present study, we hypothesize that: 1) there are differences in thedevelopment of empathy between boys and girls, being girls more empatheticthan boys; 2) there are differences in boys and girls perception of their parents’empathy, both girls and boys will perceive more empathy in their mother than intheir father, and only girls will perceive empathic qualities in their fathers; and 3)there is a difference in the influence of mother’s and father’s empathy over thatof boys and girls. Boys’ empathy will be mainly influenced by cognitive empathyperceived in their father and girls will be influenced by both kinds of empathyperceived in both parents.
Methods
Participants and ProceduresWe recruited the sample studied from three public schools in the city of
Buenos Aires, where all the courses corresponding to 4, 5, 6, and 7 grade ofprimary school, participated in the study. The schools were not randomly selectedbut assigned by Educational Authorities of Buenos Aires Town Council. Thesample was composed by 387 Argentine children (190 boys and 197 girls), of 9(n = 61), 10 (n = 108), 11 (n = 114), and 12 years (n = 104) (M = 10.96 years,SD = 1.26 years), middle social class. All of them lived with both mother andfather. 25% of children were only child, 44% had one brother or sister, 21% hadtwo brothers and/or sisters, and the rest had more than two brothers and/or sisters.
We administered the instruments to children at each child’s respective school,in groups of 20 children per session. Three psychologists administered the instru-ments to each group.
Ethical ProceduresWe obtained consent for this project at multiple levels. First, the researchers
asked to discuss the project with the heads of schools at potential research sites.We provided them with a copy of the research proposal and explained the charac-teristics of the research. Once heads of schools gave permission, we sent a letter tothe household of each child explaining the aims of the project and procedures foradministering measures to children. We expressly told them that participation wasvoluntary and anonymous. We obtained a written permission from each father andmother before data collection began. Last, we informed children of the purpose
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 567
of the study. Then we instructed them in data collection procedures and remindedthat they could refuse to answer questions if they chose to.
Measurement toolsThe Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis, 1980)
We have used the Spanish version (Mestre, Frias, & Samper, 2004) of Davis’Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Spanish translation was carried out by a team ofresearchers with experience in the study of empathy and was revised with the authorof the original questionnaire. This version was administered to a pilot sample of174 children to detect possible difficulties in items understanding (Mestre, Frias,& Samper, 2004).
It allows us to assess empathic disposition through four factors, two cogni-tive ones and two emotional ones: Perspective taking (PT), ability to understandanother person’s point of view (α = .74); Fantasy (FS), the tendency to identifywith characters in films and in literature; in other words, it assesses the subject’simaginative capacity to place him or herself in fictitious situations (α = .76);Empathic concern (EC), feelings of compassion, concern and care towards others(α = .69); and Personal Distress (PD), feelings of anxiety and uneasiness shownby the subject upon observing other people’s negative experiences (α = .71).The Index includes of 28 items. For instance, “I sometimes try to understand myfriends better by imagining how things look from their perspective” or “I oftenhave tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me”. Respondentsindicated for each question how well the item described them on a five-point scaleanchored by 1 (does not describe me well) and 5 (describes me very well). Totalscores range between 7 and 35 for each sub-scale.
We administered the Spanish version to a pilot sample of 105 Argentinechildren to check the correct items understanding. Psychometric properties ofthe measure in Argentine population were assessed with an Argentine sample of936 children, both sexes, between 9 and 12 years of age, attending middle classschools in Buenos Aires. We obtained four factors, which could approximately beinterpreted as those found by Davis (1980, 1983), and Cronbach α varied between.69 and .72 (Richaud de Minzi, 2008).
Measure of Children’s Perception of Parental EmpathyWe studied the empathy that children perceive in their parents through two
questionnaires, one for mothers and one for fathers, with 28 items each, cor-responding to the IRI’s 28 items but referred to parents. For example: “I amconcerned and moved by people less lucky than myself.” “My mother is con-cerned and moved by people less lucky than her.” “I find it difficult to see thingsfrom another person’s point of view.” “My father finds it difficult to see thingsfrom another person’s point of view.” We studied these questionnaires in the sameArgentine sample previously described, resulting again in four factors in each case,defined similarly to those of the children. Alphas obtained varied in perception of
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
568 The Journal of Psychology
TABLE 1. Alpha Values Corresponding to Different Empathy Dimensions ofChildren’s Perception of Parents’ Empathy
Empathy dimensions Mother Father
Perspective taking .72 .66Fantasy .64 .72Empathic concern .71 .69Personal Distress .69 .70
mother empathy between .64 and .72 and in perception of father empathy between.66 and .72 (see Table 1).
In order to avoid bias in the answers, we provided these questionnaires togetherwith others, in three one-hour sessions, making sure that each one was administeredin different sessions and days, with approximately one-week intervals.
Statistical ProceduresWe used MANOVAs to examine: 1) differences in empathy between boys and
girls, and 2) differences in boys and girls perception of their parents’ empathy.Multiple regression analyses were used to study the relationship between perceivedparents’ empathy and boys and girls empathy.
We performed multiple linear regression enter method analyses for each of thefour empathy dimensions to test the contribution of child’s perception of father andmother dimensions of empathy to children’s empathy. We performed the analysesfor girls and boys separately. A priori tests of multicollinearity were satisfactorywith all variance inflation factors less than 2.00 and tolerance of variables all near1.00.
Scatter diagrams of regression standardized residuals and regression standard-ized predicted values appear as a point cloud totally randomized. This indicatedthat there were neither tendencies nor patterns in the plots and, therefore, thehypotheses of linearity and constant variance or homoscedasticity were accepted.Because of the relatively large sample size, which results in increased power, alphawas set at p ≤ .01.).
Results
Differences in Empathy Between Boys and GirlsThe MANOVA where boys and girls were compared in all four empathy
dimensions, indicated a significant overall effect of Gender (Hotelling’s F (4, 382)= 7.81; p < .000, η2partial = .076, Observed power = .998). When observing
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 569
TABLE 2. Means, Standard Deviations, and F Univariate Values Correspondingto Empathy Dimensions in Boys and Girls
Boys GirlsEmpathy F Obs. η2
dimensions M SD M SD (1,385) p power partial
Perspectivetaking
3.24 .79 3.62 .76 23.10 .000 .998 .057
Fantasy 2.38 1.10 2.67 1.17 6.21 .013 .700 .016Empathic
concern3.38 .75 3.47 .85 1.18 .278 .192 .003
PersonalDistress
3.19 .70 3.60 .72 29.88 .000 1.000 .072
F Hotelling’s (4,382) = 7.81.p < .000.
univariate analyses of variance, significant differences were found in Personaldistress, Perspective taking, and Fantasy, with girls’ scores being higher in allcases (See Table 2).
Boys and Girls Perception of Their Parents’ EmpathyMANOVA where we compared boys and girls according to their perception of
their mothers’ empathy dimensions indicated that, overall, there are no differencesbetween both gender groups (Table 3).
Last, MANOVA where we compared boys and girls according to their per-ception of their fathers’ empathy dimensions, indicated that, in general, there are
TABLE 3. Means and Standard Deviations Corresponding to Perceived MotherEmpathy Dimensions in Boys and Girls
Boys Girls
Mother Empathy M SD M SD
Perspective taking 3.47 .84 3.68 .86Fantasy 2.59 .94 2.57 .96Empathic concern 3.40 .94 3.44 1.06Personal Distress 2.88 .66 2.86 .74
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
570 The Journal of Psychology
TABLE 4. Means, Standard Deviations, and F Univariate Values Correspondingto Perceived Father Empathy Dimensions in Boys and Girls
Father Boys GirlsEmpathy F Obs. η2
dimensions M SD M SD (1,315) p power partial
Perspectivetaking
3.19 .81 3.51 1.04 9.190 .003 .856 .028
Fantasy 2.06 1.08 2.07 1.07 .010 .934 .051 .000Empathic
concern3.33 .77 3.61 .87 8.78 .003 .084 .027
PersonalDistress
2.54 .74 2.62 .76 .751 .387 .139 .002
F Hotelling’s (4, 312) = 4.86.p < .001.
significant differences (F Hotelling’s (4, 312) = 4.86; p < .001, η2partial = .06,Observed power = .956) between genders.
When observing univariate analyses of variance, the most important differ-ences we found were in Perspective Taking and Empathic Concern: girls perceivedmore Perspective Taking and Empathic Concern in their fathers than boys did (seeTable 4).
Relationship Between Perceived Parents’ Empathy and Boys and GirlsEmpathy
As we have found that the influence of parental styles differs according to thegender of both children and parents, and as we have proven a difference in boys’and girls’ empathy, we studied separately the influence of mothers’ and fathers’empathy over that of boys and girls.
When analyzing the relation of boy’s perception of parents’ empathy dimen-sions with those of boys, we found that the parents’ multidimensional empathyaccounts for 37% of variance in boys’ Personal Distress (R = .61), 43% of vari-ance in boys’ Perspective Taking (R = .66), 36% of boys’ Fantasy (R = .60), and26% of boys’ Empathic Concern (R = .51). The analysis of standardized regres-sion coefficients indicates that the parents’ empathy dimension with the greatestinfluence on boys’ emotional sensitivity is father’s Perspective Taking -that is, theability to place oneself in another person’s place and understand their feelings-(β = .39; p < .000), on boys’ Perspective Taking it is father Perspective Taking(β = .45, p < .000), on boys’ Fantasy, is father Fantasy (β = .50, p < .000) andon boys’ Empathic Concern is mother Empathic Concern (β = .41, p < .000).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 571
As for the relation between girl’s perception of parents’ empathy dimensionswith girls’ empathy, we found that parents’ multidimensional empathy accountsfor 42% of variance in girls’ Personal Distress (R = .64), 39% of variance in girls’Perspective Taking (R = .62), 28% of girls’ Fantasy (R = .53), and 42% of boys’ ofEmpathic Concern (R = .65). The analysis of standardized regression coefficientsindicates that the parents’ empathy dimension with the greatest influence on girls’Personal Distress is mother Perspective Taking (β = .46, p < .000), that on girls’Perspective Taking is mother Perspective Taking (β = .41, p < .000) followed byfather Perspective Taking (β = .27, p < .004), on girls’ Fantasy is mother Fantasy(β = .32, p < .003) followed by father Fantasy (β = .28, p < .005), and on girls’Empathic Concern is mother Empathic Concern (β = .49, p < .000) and fatherEmpathic Concern (β = .27, p < .001).
Discussion
In the first place, we have found significant differences between boys’ andgirls’ empathy, girls being more empathic than boys, especially in the cognitiveaspects of empathy and in the affective aspect of emotional distress. These resultscoincide with those of all previous studies on the subject (see, among others,Broidy, Cauffman, Espelage, Mazerolle, & Piquero, 2003; Carlo, Koller, Eisen-berg, Silva, & Frohlich, 1996; Carlo, Raffaelli, Laible, & Meyer, 1999; Eisenberg& Lennon, 1983; Eisenberg, Zhou, & Koller, 2001; Mestre, Samper, Frıas, & Tur,2009; Toussaint & Webb, 2005).
On the other hand, when comparing boys and girls in their perception ofmother and father empathy, they agree in their perception of their mother’s empa-thy, and differ in their perception of their father’s; girls perceive more PerspectiveTaking and Empathic Concern in their father than boys. Also, these results co-incided with previous studies on the subject (Drevets, Benton, & Bradley, 1996;Harter, 1990; Siegal, 1985) which indicate that both girls and boys perceive moreempathy in their mother than in their father, whereas girls perceive more of theirfather’s empathic qualities. Not only are women more empathic, they are alsomore largely perceived as empathic and, at the same time are more capable ofperceiving empathy. Therefore, there is clearly a connection with gender, whichis probably due to cultural factors (Richaud de Minzi, 2006, 2010). Gender dif-ferences in attachment and related behaviors as empathy are to be expected duein part to differences in parents’ expectations for girls and boys (Kerns & Barth,1995). In general girls are expected to be more careful and concerned with others’needs and paying attention to social evaluations of others, while boys are expectedto be more independent (Blehar & Oren, 1999; Ruble, Greulich, Pomerantz, &Gochberg, 1993). Families develop ways of interaction with their children basedin part on the beliefs and values of their cultural environment (Reebye, Ross, &Jamieson, 1999).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
572 The Journal of Psychology
Gender differences in Argentinean parenting and child outcomes can be at-tributed to larger societal norms. In Argentina, the mother is the central figure infamily life, probably due to Argentina’s Latin and Catholic tradition. As Facio andBatistuta (1998) assert, there is a belief in the moral and spiritual superiority ofwomen as opposed to men. The catholic devotion to Virgin Mary places a highimportance on motherhood: it is expected that women sacrifice themselves on be-half of their children and the rest of their families, and in exchange they are greatlyvenerated and exercise a considerable amount of power at home. Boys and girlstend to forgive their mothers’ faults more than their fathers’, and the relationshipwith her deteriorates only as a consequence of very serious circumstances. Girlsare socialized to be more involved in domestic chores and less involved in jobsthan boys (Facio & Resett, 2006). Children, especially boys, perceive that theirfathers spend little time with them (Richaud de Minzi, 2002, 2005). Children’sperceptions of parental support and availability, within their own unique culturalniche, are likely to affect related social-emotional outcomes such as empathy.
As for the relationship between parents’ and children’s empathy previousstudies showed little correlation in this regard, despite similarity in parent and childempathy measures (Kalliopuska, 1984; Bernadett-Shapiro, Ehrensaft, & Shapiro,1996; Strayer & Roberts, 1989; Hunter & Schmidt, 1990). However, in this study,when considering the perception children have of their parents’ empathy, we foundinteresting meaningful connections.
We worked on the premise that rather than parents’ “objective” behavior, whatmatters in this process is the child’s perception of their parents. On the basis ofthis premise, we found not only that the empathy that children perceive in theirparents explains much of the development of their own empathy, but also that thisinfluence varies greatly according to the gender of both parents and children.
Thus, the perception that boys have of their father’s Perspective Taking isrelated to their Personal Distress and Perspective Taking; father’s Fantasy withboys’ Fantasy, and mother’s Empathic Concern with boys’ Empathic Concern.That is, boys do not perceive emotional empathic qualities in their father, onlycognitive ones.
As to girls, mother’s Perspective Taking influences girls’ Personal Distressand Perspective Taking, mother’s Fantasy influences girls’ Fantasy, and mother’sEmpathic Concern influences girls’ Empathic Concern. However, in the caseof girls, we also find the influence of father’s Perspective Taking, Fantasy, andEmpathic Concern. That is, to say, boys’ empathy is mainly influenced by cognitiveempathy perceived in their father, whereas girls are influenced by both kindsof empathy perceived in both parents. Once again women’s higher empathicperception is underscored.
Implications of the Present Study
The results of this study suggest that without leaving aside the dispositionalroots of empathy, the influence of social interactions, in particular with parents,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 573
is very important in a child’s development. Although children are active in thedevelopment of their own emotional self-regulation, they have to be helped and ledby their caregivers and culture (Sroufe, 1995). In particular, they have to observehands-on experiences of empathetic acts by their parents (Bandura, 1986). Thus,it is necessary to study the children’s perception of parental empathy, which wehypothesized reflects parents’ modeling, because there is a probable gap betweenwhat the parents say and what the parents actually do. On the other hand, thiswork has, once again, found that women are more empathetic that males. As aresult, gender was an important consideration when examining parental empathy’sinfluence on a child’s empathy, especially when taking into account cultural pat-terns that influence gender roles of children and parents. Cultural norms, whichestablish the role of each parent in children’s socialization, are different from oneculture to another. Therefore, in developmental studies of empathy, it is essentialthat we separately examine relationship patterns between children’s perception ofthe mother’s and father’s empathy and son’s and daughter’s empathy. This is par-ticularly important for identifying patterns between perceived parental empathyand children’s empathy that are unique to the father-child and to the mother-child,especially in middle and late childhood.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
A limitation of the present study is its correlational nature, which does notallow exploration of causal relationships. It was carried out within a specificcultural niche and in a specific age range: middle and late childhood. At the sametime, the influence of parental empathy on children’s empathy in families wherechildren lived with two heterosexual parents was the only focus of this study. Futureresearch efforts directed at studying mother and father empathy in the predictionof children’s empathy development within a variety of cultural groups, and infamilies with only one parent, same sex parents, and/or separated parents, will benecessary. The importance of different types of families to establish universal andspecific pathways in the development of children’s empathy cannot be understated.
FUNDING
This study was supported by a grant (PIP 5275/07) from the National Councilof Scientific and Technological Research of Argentina (CONICET). The authorgratefully acknowledges Matilde Bogani and Maximo Eckell for their assistancewith the test administration and evaluation.
AUTHOR NOTE
Marıa Cristina Richaud de Minzi is Superior Researcher at the NationalCouncil of Scientific and Technical Research of Argentina. Her current research in-terests are socioemotional variables (attachment and empathy), positive emotions,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
574 The Journal of Psychology
and cognitive development in children and adolescents, as well as psychology andpoverty.
REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Bernadett-Shapiro, S., Ehrensaft, D., & Shapiro, J. (1996). Father participation in childcareand the development of empathy in sons: An empirical study. Family Therapy, 23,77–93.
Blehar, M. C., & Oren, D. A. (1999). Gender differences in depression. Medscape-MentalHealth, 1(2). Retrieved from: http://www.medscape.com/viewpublication/125 toc?vol=1&iss=2
Broidy, L., Cauffman, E., Espelage, D. L., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (2003). Sexdifferences in empathy and its relation to juvenile offending. Violence and Victims,18(5), 503–516. doi:10.1891/088667003780928143
Bronson, M. B. (2000). Self-regulation in early childhood. New York: Guilford Press.Carlo, G., Koller, S. H., Eisenberg, N., Silva, M. S., & Frohlich, C. B. (1996). A
cross-national study on the relations among prosocial moral reasoning, gender roleorientations, and prosocial behaviours. Developmental Psychology, 32(2), 231–240.doi:10.1037/0012-1649.32.2.231
Carlo, G., Raffaelli, M., Laible, D. J., & Meyer, K. A. (1999). Why are girls less physicallyaggressive than boys? Personality and parenting mediators of physical aggression. SexRoles, 40(9/10), 711–729.
Caruso, D. R., & Mayer, J. D. (1998). A Measure of Emotional Empathy for Adolescentsand Adults. Unpublished Manuscript. Retrieved from http://www.haworthpress.com/store/E-Text/
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy.JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multi-dimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
Drevets, R. K., Benton, S. L., & Bradley, F. O. (1996). Students’ perceptions of parents’ andteachers’ qualities of interpersonal relations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25(6),787–802. doi:10.1007/BF01537454
Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., & Spinrad, T. (1998). Parental socialization of emotion.Psychological Inquiry: An International Journal for the Advancement of PsychologicalTheory, 9(4), 241–273. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0904 1
Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities.Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 100–131. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.94.1.100
Eisenberg, N., Lennon, R., & Roth, K. (1983). Prosocial development: A longitudinal study.Developmental Psychology, 19(6), 846–855. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.27.5.849
Eisenberg, N., Zhou, Q., & Koller, S. (2001). Brazilian adolescents’ prosocial moraljudgment and behavior: Relations to sympathy, perspective taking, gender-role orienta-tion, and demographic characteristics. Child Development, 72(2), 518–534. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00294
Facio, A., & Batistuta, M. (1998). Latins, Catholics and from the far South: Argen-tinian adolescents and their parents. Journal of Adolescence, 21, 49–67. doi: 10.1006/jado.1997.0129
Facio, A., & Resett, S. (2006). Argentina. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), International Encyclopediaof Adolescence (1–15). New York, NY: Routledge.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
Richaud de Minzi 575
Gallo, D. (1989). Educating for empathy, reason and imagination. The Journal of CreativeBehavior, 23(2), 98–115. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.1989.tb00680.x
Garaigordobil, M., & Garcıa, P. (2006). Empatıa en ninos de 10 a 12 anos [Empathy in 10to 12 year children]. Psicothema, 18(2), 180–186.
Harter, S. (1990). Identity and self development. In S. Feldman & G. Elliott (Eds.), Atthe threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 352–387). Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.
Haynes, L. A., & Avery, A. W. (1979). Training adolescents in self-disclosure and empathyskills. Journal of Community Psychology, 26(6), 526–530.
Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology, 33, 307–316. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.26.6.526
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Newbury Park, CA: SagePublications.
Kalliopuska, M. (1984). Relation between children’s and parents’ empathy. PsychologicalReports, 54, 295–299. doi:10.2466/pr0.1984.54.1.295
Kerns, K. A., & Barth, J. M. (1995). Attachment and physical play: Convergence acrosscomponents of parent-child relationships and their relations to peer competence. Journalof Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 243–260.
Litvack-Miller, W., McDougall, D., & Romney, D. M. (1997). The structure of empathyduring middle childhood and its relationship to prosocial behavior. Genetic, Social, &General Psychology Monographs, 123, 303–324.
Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of Person-ality, 4, 525–543.
Mestre, M. V., Frias, M. D., & Samper, P. (2004). La medida de la empatıa: Analisisdel Interpersonal Reactivity Index [Measure of Empathy: Analysis of the InterpersonalReactivity Index]. Psicothema, 16(2), 255–260.
Mestre, M. V., Samper, P., Frıas, M. D., & Tur, A. M. (2009). Are women more empatheticthan men? A longitudinal study in adolescence. The Spanish Journal of Psychology,12(1), 76–83. doi:10.1017/S1138741600001499
Nagin, D. S., & Tremblay, R. E. (2001). Parental and early childhood predictors of persistentphysical aggression in boys from kindergarten to high school. Archives of GeneralPsychology, 58, 389–394. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.58.4.389
Reebye, P. N., Ross, S. E., & Jamieson, K. (1999). A literature review of child–parent/caregiver attachment theory and cross-cultural practices influencing attachment. Re-trieved from http://www.attachmentaccrosscultures.org/research/index.html
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2002). Inventario acerca de la percepcion que tienen los Ninos ylas Ninas de las Relaciones con sus Padres y Madres. Version para 4 a 6 anos [Childrenperception of parents’ relationships Inventory. 4 to 6 year version]. Interamerican Journalof Psychology, 36(1–2), 149–165.
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2005). Estilos parentales y afrontamiento en ninos [Parentalstyles and coping in children]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologıa, 37(1), 47–58.
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2006). Loneliness and depression in children: Its relation-ship with attachment and self competence. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 167(2),189–210.
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2007). Parental styles and attachment in relation with self control,social skills and coping in children at risk for poverty. In D. M. Devor (Ed.), Newdevelopments in parent-child relations (pp. 87–110). Hauppauge, NY: Nova EditorialPublishers, Inc.
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2008). Estudio del IRI de Davis en poblacion infantil argentina[Study of the Davis’ IRI in Argentina child population]. Revista de Investigacion enPsicologıa. Universidad de San Marcos, 11(1), 101–115.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
576 The Journal of Psychology
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2010). Gender and cultural patterns of fathers’ attachment: Linkswith children’s self competence, depression and loneliness in childhood. Early ChildDevelopment and Care, 180(1 & 2), 193–209. doi:10.1080/03004430903415056
Ruble, D. N., Greulich, F., Pomerantz, E. M., & Gochberg, B. (1993). The role of gender-related processes in the development of sex differences in self-evaluation and depression.Journal of Affective Disorders, 29, 97–128. doi:10.1016/0165-0327(93)90027-H
Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children’s reports of parental behavior: An inventory. Child Devel-opment, 36, 413–424. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1965.tb05305.x
Siegal, M. (1985). Mother-child relations and the development of empathy: A short-term longitudinal study. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 16(2), 77–86.doi:10.1007/BF00705942
Sroufe, L. (1995). Emotional development: The organization of emotional life in the earlyyears. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Strayer, J., & Roberts, W. (1989). Childrens’ empathy and role taking: Child and parentalfactors, and relations to prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychol-ogy, 10, 227–239. doi:10.1016/0193-3973(89)90006-3
Strayer, J., & Roberts, W. (2004). Children’s anger, emotional expressiveness, and empa-thy: relations with parents’ empathy, emotional expressiveness, and parenting practices.Social Development, 13(2), 229–254. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2004.000265.x
Thornton, S., & Thornton, D. (1995). Facets of empathy. Personality and Individual Dif-ferences, 19, 765–767. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(95)00112-J
Toussaint, L., & Webb, J. R. (2005). Gender differences in the relationship be-tween empathy and forgiveness. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145(6), 673–685.doi:10.3200/SOCP.145.6.673-686
Zahn-Waxler, C., Radke-Yarrow, M., & King, R. A. (1979). Child rearing and children’sprosocial initiations towards victims of distress. Child Development 50(2), 319–330.doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1979.tb04112.x
Original manuscript received October 20, 2011Final version accepted August 7, 2012
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
onne
ctic
ut]
at 2
1:16
10
Oct
ober
201
4
