Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

An investigation into the efficiency of empathy training program on preventing

bullying in primary schools
Mustafa Şahin ⁎
Karadeniz Technical University, Fatih Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Science, 61335 Söğütlü-Trabzon, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of empathy training as an intervention program
Received 25 November 2011 on bullying exercised by six graders in primary schools. The study, carried out as a true experimental design,
Received in revised form 20 March 2012 used two experiment groups and two control groups. The subjects were 38 students exercising bullying. The
Accepted 23 March 2012
study used Child Form of Bully and Victim Determination Scale and Empathy Index for Children as data
Available online 30 March 2012
gathering tools. As data analysis tool, repeated measures of ANOVA was used to analyze time and
Keywords:
intervention effects of empathetic skills and bullying behaviors of the participants. The study found that
Empathy training bullying behaviors of the participants in the experiment group decreased significantly when compared to the
Bullying subjects in the control group. The study also found that the levels of emphatic skills of the participants in the
Primary school experiment group increased significantly compared to the participants in the control group.
© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In the present study, the effectiveness of empathy training as an
intervention program on bullying behaviors exercised by six graders
in primary schools was investigated. The task was accomplished by
using two experiment groups and two control groups in the form of a
true experimental design. Much of literature on empathy among
children and adolescents dwells on behavioral outputs of empathy. In
some of these studies, participants' levels of empathy reveal a positive
and supporting role on pro-social behaviors and social abilities (Barr
& Higgins-D'Alessandro, 2007; Heran, 2005). Still some others show a
negative relationship between bullying, cyber bullying and violent
behaviors (Ang & Goh, 2010; Munoz, Qualter, & Padgett, 2011;
Nguyen, Clark, & Belgrave, 2011; Yeo, Ang, Loh, Fu, & Karre, 2011) and
disruptive behaviors and crime-involvement (De Kemp, Overbeek, De
Wied, Engels & Scholte, 2007; De Wied, Goudena, & Matthys, 2005;
Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007) and antisocial aptitudes (Schaffer, Clark, &
Jeglic, 2009). Given the positive role of empathy on pro-social and
other positive behaviors, researchers have also conducted many
experimental studies on how to improve empathy among children
and adolescents (Eslea & Smith, 1994; Heran, 2005; Kalliopuska &
Ruokonen, 1993; O'Moore & Minton, 2005; Pecukonis, 1990). In these
studies, it is reported that empathy training increase bullying
behaviors and improve empathetic and social abilities. However, we
can say that these experimental studies, both in number and in
quality, are not sufficient and they do not cover the updated data.
⁎ Tel.: + 90 462 3777074; fax: + 90 462 2487344.
E-mail address: mustafa61@ktu.edu.tr.
Therefore, this experimental study intends to deal with the relation-
ship between empathy training and decreasing bullying behaviors
among school-children using some very updated data.
1.1. Bullying
Peer bullying, a subclass of aggressive behavior, is accepted as a
universal concept although its definition may vary from one culture to
another. Peer bullying is a problem especially in childhood, at the
beginnings of puberty period and at school age. School bullying can be
defined as senior and physically-well-built students' beating, harassing,
and maltreating the ones weaker than them (Olweus, 1993). Swedish
researcher Heinemann came up with the first definition of bullying
attitudes as “mobbing” and took it as a sudden group violence against
an individual (Dölek, 2001). But, much more longitudinal studies were
launched by Dan Olweus in Scadinavian countries in 1970s (Eslea &
Smith, 1994; O'Moore & Minton, 2005). Olweus (1994a, 1994b) defined
peer bullying as the violence observed among peer groups, with no
intention of provocation, willingly and deliberately made by the
physically or psychologically stronger ones against others. He catego-
rized peer bullying in two sections: direct and indirect aggressiveness.
Direct attacks are insulting and humiliating actions which are physically
or verbally carried out while indirect attacks are done by causing
damage against victim's social status and sense of belonging. These
definitions, Mynard and Joseph (2000) added the dimension of causing
damage to personal belongings. The dimension of damaging personal
belongings includes destroying and stealing the victim's belongings. In
another study, peer bullying is undertaken as an attack against victim's
racial origin, cultural values and personality (Verkuynen & Thijs, 1999).
If the cultural and ethnic origins of victims are subjected to bullying, this

0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.03.013
1326 M. Şahin / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330
is defined as “Group Peer Bullying”, if the personal characteristics of
victims are subjected to bullying; this is called as “Personal Peer
Bullying”.
1.2. Empathy
The term empathy has been defined in various ways throughout
the history of science. According to some researchers, empathy is a
basic cognitive function or the ability to be aware of the other's
thoughts and feelings (Barnett, 1990; Borke, 1971). Some others
define empathy as an affective reaction or ability to understand the
other's feelings (Bernadett-Shapiro, Efrensaft, & Shapiro, 1996;
Feshbach & Roe, 1968; Merrabian & Epstein, 1972). Still some others
use both cognitive and affective aspects together successfully (Davis
& Franzoi, 1991; Eisenberg & Strayer, 1990; Hoffman, 1982). Based
upon the variety in definitions and a close research into literature, it
can be said that the definition of the term “empathy” has three
aspects. The first, which was widely used until the end of 1950s, is a
cognitive one. In the 1960s, researchers emphasized another aspect of
empathy: it was an affective function or reaction. Various studies
have demonstrated that empathic ability can be used to inhibit or
decrease aggressive and bullying behaviors (Kaukiainen et al., 1999;
Miller & Eisenberg, 1988; Richardson, Hommock, Smith, Gardner, &
Manuel, 1994).
1.3. Empathy training
Empathy training has been an ongoing topic of discussion and an
area of research since the 1960s. Whether the skill of empathic
awareness is a learned skill or an innate one is a matter of discussion.
According to Tanrıdağ (1992), empathy as an ability cannot be taught;
however, the emphatic potential, which comes from birth, can be
developed through training. Research has divided the techniques used
in empathy training into four major categories: didactic, experiential,
role-playing and modeling (Dalton, Sundbland, & Hylbert, 1973; Fine &
Therrien, 1977; Gladstein & Feldstein, 1989; Greenberg & Goldman,
1988). Additionally, Eisenberg (1982) emphasized the important roles
of social promotions, taking initiations, affective support from the social
environment, reinforcement and ethical judgments in developing
empathic attitudes among children.
1.4. Thesis statement
Based upon the suggestion made by recent research studies cited
above that after taking empathy training children performing bullying
behaviors can be equipped with the ability to establish and maintain
healthy relationships with others, this study aimed to determine the
effectiveness of empathy training as an intervention program on
bullying behaviors exercised by six graders in primary schools. The
study also targeted to improve the emphatic ability inherent in the
nature of bullying children and help them turn into group existence
healthily.
2. Method
The study used a true experimental design, a pretest for the
experimental and control groups, post-test and a follow-up model.
2.1. Sampling
2.1.1. Sampling was carried out in two stages
The first stage, after the administration of The Scale of Identifying
Bully and Victim/Child Form on 1476 six graders in primary schools in
Trabzon in the spring term of the 2009–2010 year, 82 students tended
to exhibit bullying behaviors. Upon examining the points the bully
students got from the scales, the ones showing extreme differentiation
were excluded. Thus, 61 students were identified as subjects. In the
second stage, 38 of these 61 students were included in the study with a
random selection.
2.2. Data gathering instruments
2.2.1. The scale of identifying bullying/child form
The Scale of Identifying Bullying/ Child Form was developed by Pişkin
and Ayas (2007). This scale included 37 items and 5 factors (physical,
verbal, isolation, rumor and damaging belongings) in order to identify
bullying. For the scale to be valid the researcher first consulted to an
expert and then employed a confirming factor analysis. After the first
level confirmatory factor analysis, it was found that adaptation indices
were calculated as RMSEA= 0.046, GFI=O.89, AGFI=0.88, CFI =0.96,
NFI= 0.95 and NNFI=0.96. After the second level confirmatory factor
analysis, adaptation indices were found to be RMSEA=0.049, GFI =O.87,
AGFI=0.86, CFI =0.96, NFI=0.95 and NNFI=0.96. Cronbach alpha
internal consistency coefficient of Bully Scale was calculated for overall
scale as 0.87; for “physical bullying” subscale as 0.71; for “verbal bullying”
subscale as 0.68; for “isolation” subscale as 0.60; for “rumor” subscale as
0.64 and for “damaging belongings” subscale as 0.70. The study used the
total scores gathered by the scale.
2.2.2. The empathy index for children
This scale was developed by Bryant in 1982 and translated into
Turkish by Yılmaz-Yüksel in 2003. In order to check the validity of the
scale, a factor analysis and the principal component analysis were
performed to find a one-factor solution. Scale consisted 20 items with
a factor load of 245 or over. The reliability and coefficient of internal
consistency of empathy scale for children were analyzed test-
repeated test technique. The level of internal consistency of the
Scale Cronbach Alpha Coefficient was calculated as .70. The level of
the stability of the Scale was measured using Pearson moment
correlation coefficient (PMCC) and found to be r = .69 (p b .001).
2.3. Data gathering process
Before starting to collect the required data, the schools constituting
the sampling group were visited to take their consent to get them
involved in the study. Then, the Scale of Identifying Bully\Child Form
devised by Pişkin and Ayas (2007) was applied on 1476 six graders
from all primary schools in the center of Trabzon. The application
process was carried out by the researcher and the teachers in these
schools. Only the students who were willing to participate in the study
were given the questionnaire. Then, the students were informed of
how to fill in the form. After having been filled, the forms were put in
envelopes with the names of the schools. After analyzing the points
each students got from the Scale of Identifying Bully/Child Form, 82
students were determined to exercise bullying behaviors on their
peers. Then, these students were given the Empathy Index for Children
devised by Yılmaz-Yüksel (2003). Upon examining the points these
students got from upon examining the points the bully students got
from the Scale of Identifying Bully/Child Form and the Empathy Index
for Children, the ones showing extreme differentiation were excluded.
Of 61 students whose scores were similar, 38 volunteer students were
included in the study. To work with them efficiently, with a random
selection the researcher got the students into four groups, two of 9
students and the other two of 10. The groups of 9 students were
labeled as A and B groups, and put in another box. Again with a random
selection, two groups of nine students were labeled as experimental
group (B) and control group (A). Using the same method, the other
two groups of ten students were labeled as experimental group (C) and
control group (D). The experimental groups were given the empathy
training program devised by the researcher himself in eleven sessions
of 75-minute. Without being informed of the concept of the control
group and the content of the study, the control groups were involved in
 M. Şahin / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330
30-minute discussion sessions within the period of eleven weeks to
exchange ideas on daily issues. After the training program, both the
experimental group and the control group were given the Scale of
Identifying Bully/ Child Form and the Empathy Index for Children. This
process was repeated 60 days later for the follow-up study. This
research study started on February 25, 2010 with the implementation
of scaling. The empathy training program was conducted from March
10 to May 19 2010. The follow-up study was carried out on July 20
2010 (Table 1).
2.4. Techniques used for empathy training
Focusing on developing bully students' sensitive and cognitive
abilities including empathic reactions, the study used cognitive
features like recognizing, evaluating and naming feelings required in
an empathic process. Didactic, experimental, role playing and
modeling techniques were used in the training program. Additionally,
social promotion, giving responsibility, sensitive support and home
tasks were used to enrich the program. To help them reconstruct their
sensitive and cognitive perspectives, the study devised an activity in
which bully students were asked to create a slogan in compliance
with the subject of each training session. The slogans are presented in
Table 2.
2.5. Content of the empathy training program
The empathy training program was prepared based upon the
research carried out by Özbay and Şahin (2004) on emphatic atmosphere
in psychological counseling and the acquisition of emphatic skills,
making use of the theoretical information from the model developed
by Feshbach (1983) and its experimental applications.
For the first week, an activity in which students, sitting in a “U”
shape with their name tags on, were asked to introduce themselves to
the rest of the participants. They were also asked to tell what their
names meant to them. In this activity, a psychodrama technique was
used in combination with the “shadow game” devised by Altınay
(2003). Then, the researchers delivered a short lecture on empathy and
empathic skills using didactic approach. The second session started with
a piece of information given by the researcher on emotion and states of
emotion. Didactic, demonstration and question-answer techniques
were used. With the help of pictures, the participants were taught
various emotional states like happiness, anger, sadness, fear, courage,
and hatred. Then, they were asked to name sample real life experiences
told by the researcher with these emotional states. This reflected their
awareness of how they and others felt when they experienced different
events in their surroundings. Furthermore, this session uncovered and
made the participants aware of which state(s) of emotion was/were
dominant in their daily lives. Lastly, the participants were given a home
task to pick up pictures from the media which fit and do not fit their
states of emotion. In the third session, based on the assessment of the
home tasks given in the previous session, the participants were helped
to develop an insight. Then, they watched a sketch showing various
states of emotion. Next, they were asked to compare the states of
emotion described in the sketch and those of theirs. This provided the
participants with the opportunity to see themselves in the mirror.
Table 1
Groups and experimental design.
Groups Pre-test Activity
Experimental group The Scale of Identifying Bully and Eleven 75-ninute sessions for
N = 9 (B) Victim/Child Form empathy training program
N = 10 (C) The Empathy Index for Children
Control group The Scale of Identifying Bully and 30-minute sessions for 11 week
N = 9 (A) Victim/Child Form to exchange ideas on daily issues
N = 10 (D) The Empathy Index for Children
1327
Table 2
The sessions in the empathy training program.
Week 1—Meeting, Getting to know about Empathy and Empathetic Skills 75 min
Slogan: Be kind, loving and forgiving to each other to lead a happy life. //
Week 2—Teaching Awareness of Emotional Sensitivity-I
Slogan: Living without the awareness of feelings is like driving a car with //
its brakes on.
Week 3—Teaching Awareness of Emotional Sensitivity-II //
Slogan: One who claims know everything about the universe but nothing //
about himself actually knows nothing.
Week 4—Perceptional Differentiation I
Slogan: We can look at the same thing but view it differently. //
Week 5—Perceptional Differentiation II
Slogan: The ear hears; but the brain gives the meaning. //
Week 6—Getting an Internal Viewpoint
Slogan: What you say is how the others understand it. //
Week 7—Empathetic Atmosphere and Flow of Empathetic Information
Slogan: Eyes are the mirrors of communication. //
Week 8—Developing the Ability of Empathetic Listening
Slogan: If you value humans, regard them as they are. //
Week 9—Developing the Ability of Empathetic Response-I
Slogan: To understand humans is difficult but is a prerequisite to be a //
human being.
Week 10—Developing the Ability of Empathetic Response-II //
Slogan: Ever human being is a world apart and you can't know about it //
without entering.
Week 11—Ending Group Existence
Slogan: Tolerance is the required vitamin for a successful communication.
Finally, the students were asked to create a similar sketches based upon
their real life experiences. The purpose here was to make them aware of
their feelings and emotions. As home task, they were asked to animate
the last state of emotion they experienced in front of a mirror and see
their facial expressions and note them. In session fourth, the group
leader gave a lecture on perception, and factors affecting perception.
Reflecting three pictures with illusions on the wall and asking them to
view them for ten seconds, he then asked the participants to describe
what they saw, what emotion the pictures included, and what they
thought about the painters. Following this, each participant shared his
writings with the rest of the group. The purpose was to teach the
participants that it might be possible for them to view the same thing
differently. As home task, the participants were asked to compare their
perceptions and their parents' perceptions related to the same event
(such as playing games, studying, watching TV etc.)
In the first part of the fifth session, the assessment of the home
task given in the fourth session was made. Then, the participants
listened to three different pieces of music (rhythmic, emotional and
hard rock) and were asked about what they felt about the pieces and
what they thought about the composers. Then they shared their ideas
with the other members of the group. This reflected again that they
might view the same thing differently. As home task, they were asked
to observe perceptual differentiation between themselves and their
friends when applying a rule during a play.
The sixth session started with the evaluation of the previous
session. It went on with a social—promotion as an example due to
their success in doing their home projects. The group leader then gave
a lecture on the awareness of the desires, needs, wants, feelings and
Post-test Follow-up
The Scale of Identifying Bully The Scale of Identifying Bully and
and Victim/Child Form Victim/Child Form
The Empathy Index for Children The Empathy Index for Children
The Scale of Identifying Bully and The Scale of Identifying Bully and
Victim/Child Form Victim/Child Form
The Empathy Index for Children The Empathy Index for Children
1328 M. Şahin / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330

thoughts of the other self in mutual relationships. Later on, the group
members read and analyzed a poem with a focus on its writer, his
feelings, the way he revealed his feeling, both orally and using body
language. This session aimed in the creation of the awareness that
each person might come up with a different idea or feeling as regards
the same issue. As home project, the members were asked to write
about how they perceived their parents warnings or advice. In the
seventh session, as usual, the evaluation of the previous session was
made and the home projects were assessed. The group leader
informed the members of the process of flow of empathic information
through discussion and demonstration. Then, the group members, in
groups of two, were asked to discuss a topic they themselves
determined behind a curtain and face to face. Next, they talked
about their partners' way of communication and discussion. By this,
the members gave some important feedback as to in what way and
condition they were able to understand the others better. This session
revealed that the group members were more successful in face to face
communication. As home assignments, they were asked to write
about how they perceived the behaviors and actions in a classroom
environment by their most problematic friends.
The previous session and home projects were assessed in the first
part of the eighth session. The students were given a lecture on the
difference between hearing and listening. The group members, in
groups of two, were asked to describe a picture behind a curtain and
through face to face communication and to redraw the picture based
upon their partner's descriptions. The outcome of this session was
that the members performed well when the listened to their partners
through face to face communication when compared to hearing them
behind a curtain.
The ninth and tenth sessions, summarizing what was done in the
previous session, the group leader delivered a short seminar on the
steps of empathic response. Then, the members watched a short film
about levels of empathic response. After this, they got in groups of
two. When one of the members narrated a daily experience, the other
was asked the give a feedback to his partners expression in terms of
content and feelings. This was repeated until each member of the
group appeared on the stage. The result was that each group member
said, by realizing the content and feeling in his partner's expression,
they were able to understand others' feelings better.
In the final session, the leader made an evaluation of each of the
previous sessions and told the members that the study was about to
finish. The group members were asked to evaluate the study as a
whole. Then, they filled the scales given to them by the leader. Upon
fixing a time the follow up study, they left with positive feelings and
best wishes.
2.6. Data analysis
Repeated measures ANOVA is conducted to analyze time and
intervention effects of empathy skills and bullying behaviors of
children under investigation. With this method three measurement
points (pretest, posttest, and follow-up) and intervention (experi-
mental and control groups) are treated as independent variable,
empathy skills and bullying behaviors as dependent variables. Data
were screened for the assumptions of multivariate analysis and both
data sets were met these assumptions. All analyses are carried out at
.05 significant level (Fig. 1).
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
Pretest Posttest Follow-up
Experimental 57.95 33.42 35.32
Control 58.42 55.84 53.68
Fig. 1. Time and intervention interaction on bullying behaviors.
decrease on bullying behaviors as a result of empathy training, and
the magnitude of change continued on follow-up measures.
Repeated measure ANOVA is performed to test the time and
intervention effects on empathy and bullying behaviors. Empathy
training as the intervention program in this study revealed significant
effect on students' empathic behaviors at the end of the intervention
and on follow-up, F(2/35) = 333.64, (Wilks' Lambda .05), p b .001. As
seen in Table 3, intervention group as compared to control group tend
to be more empathetic on post intervention and follow-up (Table 4).
4. Discussion and suggestions
In this study, it was observed that applied emphatic education
program was effective on bullying behaviors of primary 6th grade
students. According to the results of statistical analysis, empathy
training program was effective on decreasing bullying behaviors of
experimental group students, whereas no change was observed in
control group students on whom empathy training program was not
applied. In addition, in follow-up study, which was carried out
60 days from the actual application, effects of emphatic training in
experimental group were still being observed. This study also found
that empathy education program made positive impact on develop-
ing empathic skills of bully students. However, no change in control
group was observed as empathy education program was not applied
to students of this group. Effects of empathy training program on
developing empathic skills of children in experimental group were
observed 60 day later from actual application.
Much of literature on empathy among children and adolescents
dwells on behavioral outputs of empathy. In some of these studies,
participants' levels of empathy reveal a positive and supporting role on
pro-social behaviors and social abilities (Barr & Higgins-D'Alessandro,
2007; Heran, 2005). Still some others show a negative relationship
between bullying, cyber bullying and violent behaviors (Ang & Goh,
25,00
20,00
15,00
10,00

3. Results
5,00

Investigation of the effect of empathy training on bullying 0,00

behaviors of school children carried out with repeated measure Pretest Posttest Follow -up
ANOVA. Multivariate analysis yielded significant interaction effect, Experimental 11.89 19.89 19.11
F(2/35) = 168.60, (Wilks' lambda .09), p b .001, as well as main effect Control 11.89 12.32 12.95
of time of measurement, F(2/35) = 226.48, (Wilks' lambda .07),
p b .001. As given in Fig. 2, intervention group made significant Fig. 2. Time and intervention interaction on empathetic skills.
 M. Şahin / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330
Table 3
Repeated measure ANOVA results on bullying behaviors.
Effect Wilks' lambda F df p η2
Time .07 226.48 2/35 .001
Time ∗ intervention .09 168.60 2/35 .001
2010; Munoz et al., 2011; Nguyen et al., 2011; Stravrinides et al., 2010;
Yeo et al., 2011) and disruptive behaviors and crime-involvement (De
Kemp et al., 2007; DeWied et al., 2005; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007 ) and
antisocial aptitudes (Schaffer et al., 2009).
In addition to these studies, there are some others dealing with
levels of empathy among school children. Robert and Strayer (2004)
investigated the relation between empathy levels of school age
children and their anger levels and found out that students with high
emphatic skills acquired low anger, physical and verbal violence
levels and they carried on to do more pro-social behaviors. They also
investigated the empathic development of five year olds and its
relationship with anger and aggressive behavior. They concluded that
children who developed emphatic skills well were less angry, less
aggressive; they have fewer problems with sharing toys and were
able to develop stronger social relationships than other children.
Chisholm and Strayer (1995) found a positive relationship between
anger, empathic and emotional expressions of children and their
parents' emotional expressions and behaviors. Pecukonis (1990)
carried out a study on 24 adolescent girls, who were diagnosed as
aggressive, to examine the effect of empathy education program, and
observed a statistically significant change between pre-test and post-
test. Şahin (2007) found that empathy training developed empathic
thinking skills and increased self esteem. Yılmaz-Yüksel (2003)
examined the effects of empathy training on empathic skills of 4th
graders and determined that levels of empathic skills of children in
experimental group were significantly higher than those in the
control group. Otfinowski (2000) examined the effects of empathy
education on peer appreciation (acceptance) among 3rd graders. As a
result of empathic education and empathic reaction activities, a
significant increase in levels of children's empathy skills was
observed. Kalliopuska and Ruokonen (1993) used music in investi-
gating effects of empathy education on developing empathic skills of
children. In this experimental study, they studied 32 pre-school
children and observed significant high empathic skill developments
in experimental group children compared to children in control
group. These results illustrated that empathy education was highly
effective on developing empathic skills of children. Thus, it can be said
that findings of this study were supported by the related literature.
This result illustrated that empathic education program had effects on
the levels of empathic skills of children. In this sense, the findings of
this study which illustrated the positive effects of empathy education
on decreasing bullying, was supported by other studies carried out in
the field.
In these studies, it is reported that empathy training increase bullying
behaviors and improve empathetic and social abilities. However, we can
say that these experimental studies, both in number and in quality, are
not sufficient and they do not cover the updated data. Therefore, this
experimental study intends to deal with the relationship between
empathy training and decreasing bullying behaviors among school-
children using some very updated data. Also, it is suggested that psycho-
social dimension of empathy training should be taken into account to
prevent bullying in schools. Therefore, schools activities to prevent
Table 4
Repeated measure ANOVA results on empathetic skills.
Effect Wilks' lambda F df p η2
Time .03 518.75 2/35 .001
Time ∗ intervention .05 333.64 2/35 .001
1329
bullying behaviors should be carried out within the frame of school
guidance services. In service training courses on empathy, social skills,
and dealing with anger (anger management) should be designed for
school counseling teachers and classroom teachers in order to improve
.93
.91 their skills and knowledge. More qualitative studies should be carried
out in this field. Detailed data could be gathered if any change in
children's behaviors after applied intervention program is observed in
their natural settings.
5. Limitations of the study
As a result of the fact that scales were self-reported in nature, each
participant reflected his/her perception of personal state on the spot
attitude. Participant students were informed of the study beforehand,
which can be considered another limitation. Still another one was
that the study used experiment group and control group including 19
students for each, but that these groups did not cover the whole
school population.
References
Altınay, D. (2003). Psycho-dramatic group therapy. Istanbul: System Publishing.
Ang, R. P., & Goh, D. H. (2010). Cyberbullying among adolescents: The role of affective
and cognitive empathy, and gender. Child Psychiatry and Human Development,
41(4), 387–397.
Barnett, M. A. (1990). Empathy and related responses in children. In N. Eisenberg, & J.
Strayer (Eds.), Cambridge: Cambringe University Press.
Barr, J. J., & Higgins-D'Alessandro, A. (2007). Adolescent empathy and prosocial
behavior in the multidimensional context of school culture. The Journal of Genetic
Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 168(3), 231–250.
Bernadett-Shapiro, S., Efrensaft, D., & Shapiro, J. (1996). Father participation in childcare
and the development of empathy in sons: An empirical study. Family Therapy, 23,
77–93.
Borke, H. (1971). Interpersonal perception of young children: Egocentrism or empathy?
Developmental Psychology, 5(2), 102–108.
Chisholm, K., & Strayer, J. (1995). Verbal and facial measures of children's emotion and
empathy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59(2), 299–316.
Dalton, R. F., Sundbland, L. M., & Hylbert, K. W. (1973). An applications of principles of
social learning to training in communication of empathy. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 20(4), 378–383.
Davis, M., & Franzoi, S. (1991). Stability and change in adolescent self consciousness
and empathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(1), 70–87.
De Kemp, R. A. T., Overbeek, G., De Wied, M., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Scholte, R. H. J. (2007).
Early adolescent empathy, parental support, and antisocial behavior. The Journal of
Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 168(1), 5–18.
DeWied, M., Goudena, P. P., & Matthys, W. (2005). Empathy in boys with disruptive
behavior disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(8), 867–880.
Dölek, N. (2001). Investigating the Bullying Behaviors Among Primary and Secondary
School Children and the Efficiency of Bullying Prevention Programme. Unpublished
Doctora Thesis, Marmara University, Institute of Educational Sciences.
Eisenberg, N. (1982). Social development. The child development in social context.
London: Addison Publishing Company.
Eisenberg, N., & Strayer, J. (1990). Empathy and its development. : Cambridge University
Press.
Eslea, M., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Anti-bullying work in primary schools. Poster Presented
at the Annual Conference of the Developmental Section of the British Psychological
Society, University of Portsmouth, September, 1994.
Feshbach, N. D. (1983). Learning to care. : Scott, Foreman and Company.
Feshbach, N. D., & Roe, K. (1968). Empathy in Six and seven year olds. Child Development,
39(1), 133–145.
Fine, V. K., & Therrien, M. E. (1977). Empathy in the doctor–patient relationship: Skill
training for medical students. Journal of Medical Education, 52(9), 752–757.
Gladstein, G. A., & Feldstein, J. C. (1989). Using film to increase counselor empathic
experiences. Counselor Education and Supervision, 23(2), 125–131.
Greenberg, L. S., & Goldman, R. L. (1988). Training in experiential therapy. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(5), 696–702.
Heran, W. J. (2005). The Effects of Global Empathy Training on Attachment styles, Social
Competencies and Empathy Deficits with Male Adolescent Sex Offenders in Court-
Ordered Residential Treatment. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, Smith College School for
Social Work.
Hoffman, M. L. (1982). Development of prosocial motivation: Empathy and guilt. In N.
Eisenberg (Ed.), The development of prosocial behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2007). Examining the relationship between Low empathy
and self-reported offending. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12(2), 256–286.
.97 Kalliopuska, M., & Ruokonen, S. (1993). A study with a follow-up of the effects of music
education on holistic development of empathy. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76,
.95
131–137.
1330 M. Şahin / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 1325–1330
Kaukiainen, A., Björkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., Östermen, K., Salmivalli, C., Rothberg, S.,
et al. (1999). The relationships between social intelligence, empathy, and three
types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 25(2), 81–89.
Merrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of
Personality, 40(4), 525–543.
Miller, P., & Eisenberg, N. (1988). The relation of empathy to aggressive and
externalizing antisocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 324–344.
Munoz, L. C., Qualter, P., & Padgett, G. (2011). Empathy and bullying: Exploring the
influence of callous-unemotional traits. Child Psychiatry and Human Development,
42(2), 183–196.
Mynard, H., & Joseph, S. (2000). Development of the multidimensional peer victimization
scale. Aggressive Behavior, 26(2), 169–178.
Nguyen, A. B., Clark, T. T., & Belgrave, F. Z. (2011). Empathy and drug use behaviors
among African-American adolescents. Journal of Drug Education, 41(3), 289–308.
O'Moore, A. M., & Minton, S. J. (2005). Evaluation of the effectiveness of an antibullying
programme in primary schools. Aggressive Behavior, 31(6), 609–622.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do madden. MA:
Blackwell Publishers Ltd..
Olweus, D. (1994). Bullying at school: Long-term outcomes for the victims and an
effective school based intervention program. In L. Rowell Huesmann (Ed.),
Aggressive behavior: Current perspectives (pp. 97–130). New York: Plenum
Press.
Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school
based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35(7),
1171–1190.
Otfinowski, G. A. (2000). Effects of Empathy Training on the Peer Approval of Third
Graders. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, University of Francisco.
Özbay, Y., & Şahin, M. (2004). Emphatic atmosphere in psychological counseling and
developing emphatic ability. Süleyman Demirel University, The Social Sciences
Review of the Faculty of Science and Literature, 11, 137–150.
Pecukonis, V. E. (1990). A cognitive/affective empathy training program as a function
of ego development in aggressive adolescent females. Adolescence Spring, 25(97),
59–76.
Pişkin, M., & Ayas, T. (2007). Developing the scale of identifying bully and victim/child
form. Paper presented at the XVI. National Congress of Educational Sciences, Tokat,
September, 2007.
Richardson, D., Hommock, G., Smith, S., Gardner, W., & Manuel, S. (1994). Empathy as a
cognitive inhibitor of interpersonal aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 20(4), 275–289.
Robert, W., & Strayer, J. (2004). Children's anger, emotional expressiveness, and empathy:
Relations with parents' empathy, emotional expressiveness and parenting practices.
Social Development, 13(2), 229–254.
Şahin, M. (2007). Researching the Efficiency of Empathy Training to Prevent Bullying
Behaviors in Primary Schools. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, Atatürk University,
Institute of Social sciences.
Schaffer, M., Clark, S., & Jeglic, E. L. (2009). The role of empathy and parenting style in
the development of antisocial behaviors. Crime & Delinquency, 55(4), 586–599.
Stravrinides, P., Georgiou, S., & Theofanous, V. (2010). Bullying and empathy: A short-
term longitudinal investigation. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of
Experimental Educational Psychology, 30(7), 793–802.
Tanrıdağ, Ş. (1992). Analysis of the Levels of Empathic Attitude and Ability of Those
Working in Mental Public Health Services Based on Different Variables. Unpublished
Doctora Thesis, Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences.
Verkuynen, M., & Thijs, J. (1999). Peer victimization and self-esteem of ethnic minority
group children. Journal of Community and Applied Psychology, 11(3), 227–234.
Yeo, L. S., Ang, R. P., Loh, S., Fu, K. J., & Karre, J. K. (2011). The role of affective and cognitive
empathy in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression of a Singaporean sample of boys.
The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 145(4), 313–330.
Yılmaz-Yüksel, A. (2003). The Effect of Empathy Training on Primary School Children's
Emphatic Ability. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, Ankara University, Institute of
Educational Sciences.