Does Formulation of Service Users’ Difficulties Improve Empathy in Forensic Mental Health Services?

Figures & data

Table 1. Frequencies and percentages of participants in the unformulated and formulated groups according to demographic variable categories.

	Total N (%)	Unformulated N (%)	Formulated N (%)	Chi Squared X^2	p
Age				.000	1.00
18–35	77 (50)	38 (50)	39 (50)
36+	77 (50)	38 (50)	39 (50)
Gender				.002	.962
Male	55 (35.7)	27 (35.5)	28 (35.9)
Female	99 (64.3)	49 (64.5)	50 (64.1)
Years of Experience				.917	.338
0–7	83 (54)	38 (50)	45 (57.7)
8–15+	71 (46)	38 (50)	33 (42.3)
Role				.419	.811
Nurse	64 (41.6)	32 (42.1)	32 (41)
Support worker	72 (46.8)	34 (44.7)	38 (48.7)
Other	18 (11.6)	10 (13.2)	8 (10.3)
Hours of contact				.314	.575
0–3	18 (11.6)	10 (13.2)	8 (10.3)
3+	136 (88.4)	66 (86.8)	70 (89.7)
Security				.065	.799
Low	44 (28.6)	21 (27.6)	23 (29.5)
High	110 (71.4)	55 (72.4)	55 (70.5)
Service				.180	.914
A	40 (26)	20 (26.3)	20 (25.6)
B	47 (30.5)	22 (28.9)	25 (32.1)
C	37 (43.5)	34 (44.7)	33 (42.3)
Employment				.981	.612
Full-time	145 (94.2)	72 (94.7)	73 (93.6)
Part-time	6 (3.9)	2 (2.6)	4 (5.1)
Bank	3 (1.9)	2 (2.6)	1 (1.3)
Ethnicity				5.014	.286
White	135 (87.7)	64 (84.2)	71 (91)
Mixed	5 (3.2)	3 (3.9)	2 (2.6)
Black	7 (4.5)	3 (3.9)	4 (5.1)
Asian	3 (1.9)	2 (2.6)	1 (1.3)
Other	4 (2.7)	4 (5.3)	0

Figure 1. Flow chart indicating process of recruiting participants into the current study.

Table 2. Mean scores, standard deviations, and t-tests on the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) subscales, and Empathy Quotient (EQ-SF) in the formulated and unformulated groups.

	TotalM (SD)	Unformulated M (SD)	Formulated M (SD)	t	p
MBI
EE	19.1 (10.4)	19.5 (11.5)	18.7 (9.3)	.528	0.061
DP	5.9 (4.7)	5.8 (4.9)	5.9 (4.6)	.107	0.594
PA	36.4 (6.5)	36.9 (6.3)	35.9 (6.8)	.937	0.501
EQ-SF
Total score	50.5 (9.8)	49.8 (9.5)	51.1 (9.9)	.84	0.56

Note. Burnout measure—MBI (Maslach Burnout Inventory) subscales: EE, emotional exhaustion; DP, depersonalization; PA, personal accomplishment; Baseline empathy measure, EQ-SF (Empathy Quotient Short Form). df = 152.

Table 3. Mean scores, standard deviations, and t-tests on the Adapted Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI-A) subscales in the formulated and unformulated groups.

	Total M (SD)	Unformulated M (SD)	Formulated M (SD)	t	P
IRI-A
EC	19.9	19.3	20.5	1.68	.095
	(4.1)	(4.1)	(4.2)
PT	19.9	19.8	20	.215	.830
	(4.9)	(4.8)	(5)
PD	9.4	9.1	9.7	.581	.562
	(5.4)	(5.4)	(5.4)

Note. State empathy measure—IRI-A subscales: EC, empathic concern; PT, perspective taking; PD, personal distress. df = 152.

Table 4. Linear model of predictors of IRI-A subscales: Empathic concern and perspective taking.

		Variable	b	SE B	Β	p
EC subscale of IRI-A	Model 1	EQ-SF total score	.197	.031	.461	.000
	Model 2	EQ-SF total score	.164	.031	.384	.000
		PA subscale of MBI	.155	.047	.242	.001
PT subscale of IRI-A	Model 1	DP subscale of MBI	−.230	.082	−.220	.006
	Model 2	DP subscale of MBI	−.181	.085	−.173	.035
		EQ-SF total score	.085	.041	.169	.040

Note. IRI-A subscales—state empathy measure (Interpersonal Reactivity Index–Adapted): EC, empathic concern; PT, perspective taking. MBI Subscales—burnout measure (Maslach Burnout Inventory): DP, depersonalization; PA, personal accomplishment. EQ-SF total score—trait empathy measure (Empathy Quotient Sort Form).