Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 485–501 | Cite as

Engaging the Hearts and Minds of Followers: Leader Empathy and Language Style Matching During Appraisal Interviews

  • Annika L. MeineckeEmail author
  • Simone Kauffeld
Original Paper


Leader empathy has received increased scholarly and practical attention in recent years. However, empirical studies that explore the functionality of leader empathy and that disclose which objective micro-level behaviors actually characterize empathic face-to-face interactions remain sparse. This study explores the role of leaders’ empathic communication style in a sample of 48 audiotaped performance appraisal interviews. Our multimethod approach disclosed that ratings of supervisors’ empathic communication style were positively related to employees’ intentions to change and to employees’ perceptions of supervisor likeability. Fine-grained linguistic analyses (N = 358,586 words) further provided insights into the underlying behavioral manifestation of leader empathy: verbal mimicry in the form of language style matching between supervisors and employees was positively related to supervisors’ empathic communication style. Additional analyses showed that supervisors who communicated more empathically used less second-person pronouns (“you”) and agreed more frequently with their employees. Finally, we found differences in the mean percentage use of personal pronouns between supervisors and employees. Specifically, supervisors used significantly more second-person (“you”) and first-person plural (“we”) pronouns and fewer first-person singular (“I”) pronouns than their employees. We discuss how the findings of this field study enhance our theoretical understanding of leader empathy as a functional leadership skill, and we highlight practical recommendations for conducting more effective appraisal interviews.


Appraisal interviews Leadership Leader-follower interactions Leader empathy Linguistic analyses Language style matching 


  1. Asmuß, B. (2008). Performance appraisal interviews: Preference organization in assessment sequences. Journal of Business Communication, 45, 408–429. Scholar
  2. Asmuß, B. (2013). The emergence of symmetries and asymmetries in performance appraisal interviews: An interactional perspective. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 34, 553–570. Scholar
  3. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1981). The empathy cycle: Refinement of a nuclear concept. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 91–100. Scholar
  4. Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beer, M. (1981). Performance appraisal. Dilemmas and possibilities. Organizational Dynamics, 9, 24–36. Scholar
  6. Bell, G. B., & Hall, H. E. (1954). The relationship between leadership and empathy. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 156–157. Scholar
  7. Bernstein, W. M., & Davis, M. H. (1982). Perspective-taking, self-consciousness, and accuracy in person perception. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 1–9. Scholar
  8. Bohart, A. C., Elliott, R., Greenberg, L. S., & Watson, J. C. (2002). Empathy. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 89–108). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Book, H. E. (1988). Empathy: Misconceptions and misuses in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145, 420–424. Scholar
  10. Brown, M., Hyatt, D., & Benson, J. (2010). Consequences of the performance appraisal experience. Personnel Review, 39, 375–396. Scholar
  11. Buie, D. H. (1981). Empathy: Its nature and limitations. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 29, 281–307. Scholar
  12. Burch, G. F., Bennett, A. A., Humphrey, R. H., Batchelor, J. H., & Cairo, A. H. (2016). Unraveling the complexities of empathy research: A multi-level model of empathy in organizations. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Härtel, & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions and organizational governance, Research on emotion in organizations (Vol. 12, pp. 169–189). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Businessolver (2017). 2017 workplace empathy monitor. Retrieved from
  14. Cannava, K., & Bodie, G. D. (2016). Language use and style matching in supportive conversations between strangers and friends. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34, 1–19. Scholar
  15. Cassell, J., Huffaker, D., Tversky, D., & Ferriman, K. (2006). The language of on-line leadership: Gender and youth engagement on the internet. Developmental Psychology, 42, 436–449. Scholar
  16. Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910. Scholar
  17. Chartrand, T. L., & Lakin, J. L. (2012). The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 285–308. Scholar
  18. Christov-Moore, L., Simpson, E. A., Coudé, G., Grigaityte, K., Iacoboni, M., & Ferrari, P. F. (2014). Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior. Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews, 46, 604–627. Scholar
  19. Chung, C., & Pennebaker, J. (2007). The psychological functions of function words. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 343–359). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284–290. Scholar
  21. Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130–135. Scholar
  22. Clifton, J. (2012). Conversation analysis in dialogue with stocks of interactional knowledge: Facework and appraisal interviews. Journal of Business Communication, 49, 283–311. Scholar
  23. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Cuff, M. M. P., Brown, S. J., Taylor, L., & Howat, D. J. (2016). Empathy: A review of the concept. Emotion Review, 8, 144–153. Scholar
  25. Davis, D., & Brock, T. C. (1975). Use of first person pronouns as a function of increased objective self-awareness and performance feedback. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 381–388. Scholar
  26. De Vries, R. E., Bakker-Pieper, A., & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership = communication? The relations of leaders' communication styles with leadership styles, knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 367–380. Scholar
  27. Decety, J., & Jackson, P. L. (2004). The functional architecture of human empathy. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 3, 71–100. Scholar
  28. DeNisi, A. S., & Murphy, K. R. (2017). Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 421–433. Scholar
  29. DeNisi, A. S., & Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance appraisal, performance management and improving individual performance: A motivational framework. Management and Organization Review, 2, 253–277. Scholar
  30. DeNisi, A. S., & Smith, C. E. (2014). Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-level performance: A review, a proposed model, and new directions for future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 8, 127–179. Scholar
  31. DeRue, D. S. (2011). Adaptive leadership theory: Leading and following as a complex adaptive process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 125–150. Scholar
  32. Deutsch, F., & Madle, R. A. (1975). Empathy: Historic and current conceptualizations, measurement, and a cognitive theoretical perspective. Human Development, 18, 267–287. Scholar
  33. Duan, C., & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 261–274. Scholar
  34. Eisenberg, N. (2000). Empathy and sympathy. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 677–691). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  35. Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119.
  36. Elicker, J. D., Levy, P. E., Hall, R. J. (2006). The Role of Leader-Member Exchange in the Performance Appraisal Process. Journal of Management, 32(4), 531–551. Scholar
  37. Fairhurst, G. T. (2008). Discursive leadership: A communication alternative to leadership. Management Communication Quarterly, 21, 510–521. Scholar
  38. Fairhurst, G. T., & Connaughton, S. L. (2014). Leadership: A communicative perspective. Leadership, 10, 7–35. Scholar
  39. Fairhurst, G. T., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2012). Organizational discourse analysis (ODA): Examining leadership as a relational process. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 1043–1062. Scholar
  40. Ferris, G. R., Munyon, T. P., Basik, K., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). The performance evaluation context: Social, emotional, cognitive, political, and relationship components. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 146–163. Scholar
  41. Feshbach, N. D., & Roe, K. (1968). Empathy in six- and seven-year-olds. Child Development, 39, 133–145. Scholar
  42. Fleishman, E. A., & Salter, J. A. (1963). Relation between the leader’s behavior and his empathy toward subordinates. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 1, 79–84.Google Scholar
  43. George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53, 1027–1055. Scholar
  44. Gladstein, G. A. (1983). Understanding empathy: Integrating counseling, developmental, and social psychology perspectives. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 467–482. Scholar
  45. Gonzales, A. L., Hancock, J. T., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). Language style matching as a predictor of social dynamics in small groups. Communication Research, 37, 3–19. Scholar
  46. Gordon, M. E., & Stewart, L. P. (2009). Conversing about performance: Discursive resources for the appraisal interview. Management Communication Quarterly, 22, 473–501. Scholar
  47. Greenson, R. R. (1960). Empathy and its vicissitudes. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 41, 418–424.Google Scholar
  48. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Hatfield, E., Rapson, R. L., & Le, Y. L. (2009). Emotional contagion and empathy. In J. Decety & W. Ickes (Eds.), The social neuroscience of empathy (pp. 19–30). Boston, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  51. Hill, A. D., White, M. A., & Wallace, J. C. (2014). Unobtrusive measurement of psychological constructs in organizational research. Organizational Psychology Review, 4, 148–174. Scholar
  52. Hoffman, E. L., & Lord, R. G. (2013). A taxonomy of event-level dimensions: Implications for understanding leadership processes, behavior, and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 558–571. Scholar
  53. Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, 307–316. Scholar
  54. Hove, M. J., & Risen, J. L. (2009). It’s all in the timing: Interpersonal synchrony increases affiliation. Social Cognition, 27, 949–960. Scholar
  55. Humphrey, R. H. (2002). The many faces of emotional leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 493–504. Scholar
  56. Ireland, M. E., & Henderson, M. D. (2014). Language style matching, engagement, and impasse in negotiations. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 7, 1–16. Scholar
  57. Ireland, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). Language style matching in writing: Synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 549–571. Scholar
  58. Ireland, M. E., Slatcher, R. B., Eastwick, P. W., Scissors, L. E., Finkel, E. J., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). Language style matching predicts relationship initiation and stability. Psychological Science, 22, 39–44. Scholar
  59. Kacewicz, E., Pennebaker, J. W., Davis, M., Jeon, M., & Graesser, A. C. (2014). Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 125–143. Scholar
  60. Kay, E., Meyer, H. H., & French Jr., J. R. P. (1965). Effects of threat in a performance appraisal interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 311–317. Scholar
  61. Kellet, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2002). Empathy and complex task performance: Two routes to leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 523–544. Scholar
  62. Kellet, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2006). Empathy and the emergence of task and relations leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 146–162. Scholar
  63. Kenny, D. A. (2017). MedPower: An interactive tool for the estimation of power in tests of mediation [Computer Software]. Available from
  64. Kenny, G. (2016). Fixing performance appraisal is about more than ditching annual reviews. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from
  65. Kerem, E., Fishman, N., & Josselson, R. (2001). The experience of empathy in everyday relationships: Cognitive and affective elements. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 709–729. Scholar
  66. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  67. Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2015). Advancing research on team process dynamics: Theoretical, methodological, and measurement considerations. Organizational Psychology Review, 5, 270–299. Scholar
  68. Lakin, J. L., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science, 14, 334–339. Scholar
  69. Lawler, E. E., Benson, G. S., & McDermott, M. (2012). What makes performance appraisal effective? Compensation & Benefits Review, 44, 191–200. Scholar
  70. Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Allen, J. A. (2017). Modelling temporal interaction dynamics in organizational settings. Journal of Business Psychology [Advance online publication], 33, 325–344. Scholar
  71. Levelt, W. J. M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78–106. Scholar
  72. Lord, S. P., Sheng, E., Imel, Z. E., Baer, J., & Atkins, D. C. (2015). More than reflections: Empathy in motivational interviewing includes language style synchrony between therapist and client. Behavior Therapy, 46, 296–303. Scholar
  73. Mahsud, R., Yukl, G., & Prussia, G. (2010). Leader empathy, ethical leadership, and relations-oriented behaviors as antecedents of leader-member exchange quality. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 561–577. Scholar
  74. Manson, J. H., Bryant, G. A., Gervais, M. M., & Kline, M. A. (2013). Convergence of speech rate in conversation predicts cooperation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 419–426. Scholar
  75. Maurer, R. E., & Tindall, J. H. (1983). Effect of postural congruence on client's perception of counselor empathy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 158–163. Scholar
  76. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30–46. Scholar
  77. Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of Personality, 40, 525–543. Scholar
  78. Meinecke, A. L., Klonek, F. E., & Kauffeld, S. (2016). Using observational research methods to study voice and silence in organizations. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 30, 195–224. Scholar
  79. Meyer, B., Burtscher, M. J., Jonas, K., Feese, S., Arnrich, B., Tröster, G., & Schermuly, C. C. (2016). What good leaders actually do: Micro-level leadership behaviour, leader evaluations, and team decision quality. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25, 773–789. Scholar
  80. Miller, W. R., & Mount, K. A. (2001). A small study of training in motivational interviewing: Does one workshop change clinician and client behavior? Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29, 457–471. Scholar
  81. Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  82. Miller, W. R., & Rose, G. S. (2009). Toward a theory of motivational interviewing. American Psychologist, 64, 527–537. Scholar
  83. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  84. Neumann, D. L., Chan, R. C. K., Boyle, G. J., Wang, Y., & Westbury, H. R. (2015). Measures of empathy: Self-report, behavioral, and neuroscientific approaches. In G. J. Boyle, D. H. Saklofske, & G. Matthews (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological constructs (pp. 257–289). London, UK: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Nicolai, J., Demmel, R., & Hagen, J. (2007). Rating scales for the assessment of empathic communication in medical interviews (REM): Scale development, reliability, and validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 14, 367–375. Scholar
  86. Niederhoffer, K. G., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Linguistic style matching in social interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 337–360. Scholar
  87. Pelz, J., & Scholl, W. (1990). Entwicklung eines Verfahrens zur Messung von Sympathie, Einwirkung, Macht-Einfluß-Differenzierung und Interesse (SEMI) [Development of a procedure for the measurement of sympathy, social influence, power-influence differentiation, and interest (SEMI method)]. Universität Göttingen: Institut für Wirtschafts- und Sozialpsychologie, IWSP-Bericht 17.Google Scholar
  88. Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  89. Pennebaker, J. W., Francis, M. E., & Booth, R. J. (2001). Linguistic inquiry and word count—LIWC2001. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  90. Pennebaker, J. W., & King, L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296–1312. Scholar
  91. Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language. Use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577. Scholar
  92. Pescosolido, A. T. (2000). Emergent leaders as managers of group emotion. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 583–599. Scholar
  93. Pichler, S. (2012). The social context of performance appraisal and appraisal reactions: A meta-analysis. Human Resource Management, 51, 709–732. Scholar
  94. Pillai, R., Williams, E. A., Lowe, K. B., & Jung, D. I. (2003). Personality, transformational leadership, trust, and the 2000 U.S. presidential vote. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 161–192. Scholar
  95. Pulakos, E. D., Mueller Hanson, R., Arad, S., & Moye, N. (2015). Performance management can be fixed: An on-the-job experiential learning approach for complex behavior change. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 51–76. Scholar
  96. Pulakos, E. D., & O’Leary, R. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, 146–164. Scholar
  97. Rock, D., Davis, J., & Jones, B. (2014). Kill your performance ratings. Strategy + Business. Retrieved from
  98. Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21, 95–103. Scholar
  99. Rogers, C. R. (1975). Empathic: An unappreciated way of being. The Counseling Psychologist, 5(2), 2–10. Scholar
  100. Ruben, B. R., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2016). Leadership as social influence: An expanded view of leadership communication theory and practice. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 23, 467–479. Scholar
  101. Rude, S. S., Gortner, E. M., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 1121–1133. Scholar
  102. Sadri, G., Weber, T. J., & Gentry, W. A. (2011). Empathic emotion and leadership performance: An empirical analysis across 38 countries. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 818–830. Scholar
  103. Sakai, E. Y., & Carpenter, B. D. (2011). Linguistic features of power dynamics in triadic dementia diagnostic conversations. Patient Education and Counseling, 85, 295–298. Scholar
  104. Schulte-Rüther, M., Markowitsch, H. J., Shah, N. J., Fink, G. R., & Piefke, M. (2008). Gender differences in brain networks supporting empathy. NeuroImage, 42, 393–403. Scholar
  105. Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., Paddock, E. L., & Judge, T. A. (2010). A daily investigation of the role of manager empathy on employee well-being. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113, 127–140. Scholar
  106. Segalowitz, S. J., & Lane, K. (2004). Perceptual fluency and lexical access for function versus content words. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 307–308. Scholar
  107. Skinner, C., & Spurgeon, P. (2005). Valuing empathy and emotional intelligence in health leadership: A study of empathy, leadership behaviour and outcome effectiveness. Health Services Management Research, 18, 1–12. Scholar
  108. Smith, A. (2006). Cognitive empathy and emotional empathy in human behavior and evolution. The Psychological Record, 56, 3–21. Scholar
  109. Stel, M., & Vonk, R. (2010). Mimicry in social interaction: Benefits for mimickers, mimickees, and their interaction. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 311–323. Scholar
  110. Sytch, M., & DeRue, D. S. (2010). Ditch performance reviews? How about learn to do them well? Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from
  111. Tausczik, Y. R. (2012). Changing group dynamics through computerized language feedback (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  112. Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54. Scholar
  113. Taylor, P. J., & Thomas, S. (2008). Linguistic style matching and negotiation outcome. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 1(3), 263–281. Scholar
  114. Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654–676. Scholar
  115. Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge area. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298–318. Scholar
  116. Van Vugt, M., & Kameda, T. (2014). Evolution of the social brain: Psychological adaptations for group living. In M. Mikulincer & P. Shaver (Eds.), Mechanism of social connection: From brain to group (pp. 335–355). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Wampold, B. E. (2015). How important are the common factors in psychotherapy? An update. World Psychiatry, 14, 270–277. Scholar
  118. Webb, J. T. (1969). Subject speech rates as a function of interviewer behavior. Language and Speech, 12, 54–67. Scholar
  119. Weiss, M., Kolbe, M., Grote, G., Spahn, D. R., & Grande, B. (2017). We can do it! Inclusive leader language promotes voice behavior in multi-professional teams. The Leadership Quarterly (Advance online publication)., 29, 389–402. Scholar
  120. Westerman, C. Y. K., & Smith, S. W. (2015). Opening a performance dialogue with employees: Facework, voice, and silence. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 29, 456–489. Scholar
  121. Wolf, M., Horn, A. B., Mehl, M. R., Haug, S., Pennebaker, J. W., & Kordy, H. (2008). Computergestützte quantitative Textanalyse: Äquivalenz und Robustheit der deutschen version des linguistic inquiry and word count [computer-aided quantitative textanalysis: Equivalence and reliability of the German adaptation of the linguistic inquiry and word count]. Diagnostica, 54, 85–98. Scholar
  122. Yoder, P., & Symons, F. (2010). Observational measurement of behavior. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  123. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  124. Zhou, Q., Valiente, C., & Eisenberg, N. (2003). Empathy and its measurement. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 269–284). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial/Organizational PsychologyUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Technische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations