Indices of fit for two three-factor models.

Compassion has been a subject of extensive scientific research for over two decades. There is clear evidence that our capacity for compassion evolved out of care motivation. Like all motivations it is operated via stimulus response algorithms. For compassion motivation stimulus sensitivity focuses on the processing of indicators of suffering, distress and need, called engagement. The response functions switch attention and processing to what is likely to be helpful in alleviating suffering, distress and need, called action. The Compassion Engagement and Action Scales (CEAS) were developed to measure the S-R algorithm of compassion. Because compassion, like other psychological phenomena can operate interpersonally and intrapersonally, there are three scales that give separate assessments for directing compassion to 1. the self, 2. others and 3. responsiveness to compassion from others. They have been used in many international studies and there is now substantial evidence. The research aimed to validate the CEAS within a Polish population. The three cross-sectional studies involved a total of 1,219 participants from Poland. Confirmatory factor analysis conducted on two separate samples indicates that bifactor models provide the best fit for both the Compassion for Others scale and the Compassion from Others scale. In the first, the model includes a general compassion for others factor alongside specific factors for engagement and actions. Similarly, the second features a general compassion from others factor with the same specific factors. This means that being sensitive to suffering and taking action represent specific components of compassion. However, the bifactor model for Compassion for Self requires further refinement due to lower fit indices and the need for item adjustments. The study results generally support the reliability and validity of the CEAS-PL across diverse samples, aligning with findings from previous studies on the original tool and its language adaptations. Notably, tests of validity—including correlations with emotion regulation, well-being, and attachment styles—highlighted distinct patterns for the three flows of compassion, underscoring their conceptual independence. The CEAS-PL shows promise as a valuable tool for psychological research and practice, especially in the areas of pro-social behaviour and helping people with mental health problems, facilitating the assessment of compassion across different orientations. It may support practitioners in identifying individual competencies and tailoring interventions to enhance compassion-related competencies to address particular difficulties.

近二十余年来，共情（Compassion）已成为学界广泛研究的课题。现有确凿证据表明，人类的共情能力源自关怀动机。与所有动机机制一致，共情通过刺激-反应（stimulus-response, S-R）算法运作。就共情动机而言，刺激敏感性聚焦于对痛苦、窘迫与需求的信号加工，此过程被称为参与（engagement）；而反应功能则会将注意力与认知资源转向那些可有效缓解痛苦、窘迫与需求的举措，此过程被定义为行动（action）。共情参与与行动量表（Compassion Engagement and Action Scales, CEAS）正是为测量共情的刺激-反应算法而开发。由于共情与其他心理现象一样，可在人际间与个体内部运作，因此该量表包含三个维度，分别针对1. 自我指向共情、2. 他人指向共情，以及3. 对来自他人共情的回应性进行独立评估。该量表已被应用于多项跨国研究，现有大量实证证据支撑其可靠性与有效性。本研究旨在波兰人群中验证CEAS的结构效度。三项横断面研究共招募了1219名波兰籍参与者。对两个独立样本开展的验证性因素分析（confirmatory factor analysis）结果显示，双因子模型对他人指向共情量表与来自他人的共情量表均具备最优拟合度。在前者中，模型包含一个通用的他人指向共情因子，以及参与与行动两个特定因子；同理，后者则包含一个通用的来自他人的共情因子，搭配相同的两个特定因子。这表明，对痛苦的敏感性与采取缓解行动，是共情的两个特定组成部分。不过，自我指向共情的双因子模型因拟合指数较低且需要调整题项，仍需进一步优化。本研究结果总体上支持CEAS波兰语版（CEAS-PL）在多样本中的信度与效度，与原版量表及其语言适配版的既往研究结论一致。值得注意的是，包括与情绪调节、幸福感以及依恋风格的相关性在内的效度检验结果，凸显了三种共情流向的独特模式，印证了其概念独立性。CEAS-PL有望成为心理学研究与临床实践中的重要工具，尤其在亲社会行为与心理健康干预领域，可用于评估不同取向的共情水平。其可帮助从业者识别个体的共情能力，并定制针对性干预方案，以提升与共情相关的能力，从而应对特定的心理困境。