Adolescent Empathy in Everyday School Interactions: A Qualitative Study in an Indonesian Junior Secondary School
Abstract
Empathy is a multidimensional social-emotional capacity that is closely connected to adolescents' peer relationships and prosocial conduct, yet its everyday enactment may be constrained by interpersonal and contextual pressures. This qualitative descriptive study explored how students at Susteran Junior High School, Purwokerto, Indonesia, recognized peers' emotional states, translated empathic understanding into social action, interpreted empathy within friendship, and experienced barriers to empathic behavior. Eight students four from Grade 7 and four from Grade 8 participated in face-to-face guided interviews and school-context observations. Interview audio, researcher keyword notes, and observation notes were reviewed through descriptive coding, cross-informant comparison, and thematic grouping. Four themes were identified. Students described recognizing distress through facial expressions, silence, withdrawal, and behavioral change; responding through listening, encouragement, comfort, collaborative help, and problem-solving; and viewing empathy as a basis for safety, acceptance, equality, and mutual support in friendships. At the same time, shyness, fear of being misunderstood, limited self-confidence, academic workload, peer influence, and intensive social-media use were described as barriers to acting empathically. The findings suggest that empathy in this setting is best understood as a context-dependent practice that connects emotional awareness with prosocial action rather than as a uniformly expressed individual trait. Because the study involved eight students in one school and relied mainly on qualitative accounts, the findings are analytically informative but not statistically generalizable. School-based efforts should therefore combine repeated opportunities for perspective taking, supportive peer interaction, reflective dialogue, and adult role modelling while remaining sensitive to the social conditions that enable or inhibit empathic action.
References
1
[1] M. H. Davis, “Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 113–126, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
2
[2] J. Decety and P. L. Jackson, “The functional architecture of human empathy,” Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 71–100, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534582304267187
3
[3] D. Jolliffe and D. P. Farrington, “Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale,” Journal of Adolescence, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 589–611, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010
4
[4] J. Van der Graaff, S. Branje, M. de Wied, S. Hawk, P. A. C. van Lier, and W. Meeus, “Perspective taking and empathic concern in adolescence: Gender differences in developmental changes,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 881–888, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034325
5
[5] M. Allemand, A. E. Steiger, and H. A. Fend, “Empathy development in adolescence predicts social competencies in adulthood,” Journal of Personality, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 229–241, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12098
6
[6] E. A. Crone and M. Achterberg, “Prosocial development in adolescence,” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 44, pp. 220–225, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.09.020
7
[7] J. Van der Graaff, G. Carlo, E. Crocetti, H. M. Koot, and S. Branje, “Prosocial behavior in adolescence: Gender differences in development and links with empathy,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 47, pp. 1086–1099, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0786-1
8
[8] Y. Yin and Y. Wang, “Is empathy associated with more prosocial behaviour? A meta-analysis,” Asian Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 3–22, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12537
9
[9] A. Carrizales, S. Branje, and L. Lannegrand, “Disentangling between- and within-person associations between empathy and prosocial behaviours during early adolescence,” Journal of Adolescence, vol. 93, pp. 114–125, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.10.006
10
[10] C. Silke, B. Brady, C. Boylan, and P. Dolan, “Factors influencing the development of empathy and pro-social behaviour among adolescents: A systematic review,” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 94, pp. 421–436, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.07.027
11
[11] S. Boele, J. Van der Graaff, M. de Wied, I. E. Van der Valk, E. Crocetti, and S. Branje, “Linking parent–child and peer relationship quality to empathy in adolescence: A multilevel meta-analysis,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 48, pp. 1033–1055, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00993-5
12
[12] K. Schoeps, E. Mónaco, A. Cotolí, and I. Montoya-Castilla, “The impact of peer attachment on prosocial behavior, emotional difficulties and conduct problems in adolescence: The mediating role of empathy,” PLOS ONE, vol. 15, no. 1, e0227627, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227627
13
[13] E. Portt, S. Person, B. Person, E. Rawana, and K. Brownlee, “Empathy and positive aspects of adolescent peer relationships: A scoping review,” Journal of Child and Family Studies, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 2416–2433, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01753-x
14
[14] J. A. Durlak, R. P. Weissberg, A. B. Dymnicki, R. D. Taylor, and K. B. Schellinger, “The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions,” Child Development, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 405–432, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
15
[15] R. D. Taylor, E. Oberle, J. A. Durlak, and R. P. Weissberg, “Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects,” Child Development, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 1156–1171, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864
16
[16] H. H.-K. Chan, H. Y. C. Kwong, G. L. F. Shu, C. Y. Ting, and F. H.-Y. Lai, “Effects of experiential learning programmes on adolescent prosocial behaviour, empathy, and subjective well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 709699, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.709699
17
[17] T. Malti, M. P. Chaparro, A. Zuffianò, and T. Colasante, “School-based interventions to promote empathy-related responding in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis,” Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 718–731, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1121822
18
[18] E. Teding van Berkhout and J. M. Malouff, “The efficacy of empathy training: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 32–41, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000093
19
[19] X. Wu, S.-C. Yao, X.-J. Lu, Y.-Q. Zhou, Y.-Z. Kong, and L. Hu, “Categories of training to improve empathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 150, no. 10, pp. 1237–1260, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000453
20
[20] K. Allen, M. L. Kern, D. Vella-Brodrick, J. Hattie, and L. Waters, “What schools need to know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 1–34, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8
21
[21] M.-T. Wang and J. L. Degol, “School climate: A review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 28, pp. 315–352, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1
22
[22] M.-T. Wang, J. L. Degol, J. Amemiya, A. Parr, and J. Guo, “Classroom climate and children’s academic and psychological wellbeing: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Developmental Review, vol. 57, 100912, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2020.100912
23
[23] H. G. M. Vossen and P. M. Valkenburg, “Do social media foster or curtail adolescents’ empathy? A longitudinal study,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 63, pp. 118–124, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.040
24
[24] Y. T. Uhls, M. Michikyan, J. Morris, D. Garcia, G. W. Small, E. Zgourou, and P. M. Greenfield, “Five days at outdoor education camp without screens improves preteen skills with nonverbal emotion cues,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 39, pp. 387–392, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.036
25
[25] L. M. Carrier, A. Spradlin, J. P. Bunce, and L. D. Rosen, “Virtual empathy: Positive and negative impacts of going online upon empathy in young adults,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 52, pp. 39–48, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.026
26
[26] C. Yang, M.-K. Chan, and T.-L. Ma, “School-wide social emotional learning (SEL) and bullying victimization: Moderating role of school climate in elementary, middle, and high schools,” Journal of School Psychology, vol. 82, pp. 49–69, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.08.002
27
[27] M. Sandelowski, “Whatever happened to qualitative description?,” Research in Nursing & Health, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 334–340, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4<334::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G
28
[28] J. Gerring, “Qualitative methods,” Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 20, pp. 15–36, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-092415-024158
29
[29] K. Malterud, V. D. Siersma, and A. D. Guassora, “Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power,” Qualitative Health Research, vol. 26, no. 13, pp. 1753–1760, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
30
[30] A. S. G. Pessoa, E. Harper, I. S. Santos, and M. C. S. Gracino, “Using reflexive interviewing to foster deep understanding of research participants’ perspectives,” International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 18, pp. 1–9, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918825026
31
[31] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77–101, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
32
[32] L. S. Nowell, J. M. Norris, D. E. White, and N. J. Moules, “Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria,” International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 16, no. 1, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
33
[33] S. J. Tracy, “Qualitative quality: Eight ‘Big-Tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative research,” Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 837–851, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
34
[34] A. Tong, P. Sainsbury, and J. Craig, “Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups,” International Journal for Quality in Health Care, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 349–357, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
35
[35] B. C. O’Brien, I. B. Harris, T. J. Beckman, D. A. Reed, and D. A. Cook, “Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations,” Academic Medicine, vol. 89, no. 9, pp. 1245–1251, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388
36
[36] H. M. Levitt, M. Bamberg, J. W. Creswell, D. M. Frost, R. Josselson, and C. Suárez-Orozco, “Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report,” American Psychologist, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 26–46, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000151
Author Biographies
Desy Astri Wardhani
SMP Susteran Purwokerto
Agnes Krista Putri Dina Anggraini
SMP Susteran Purwokerto
Riana Ariyanti
SMP Susteran Purwokerto
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Desy Astri Wardhani , Agnes Krista Putri Dina Anggraini , Riana Ariyanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Article Information
Published
2026-05-26