Psichologijos_zurnalas_22_korektura.indd SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS International Journal of Psychology: Biopsychosocial Approach 2018 / 22 ISSN 1941-7233 (Print), ISSN 2345-024X (Online) https://doi.org/10.7220/2345-024X.22.4 1 Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Ala Petrulytė, Vytau- tas Magnus University, Education Academy, T. Ševčenkos g. 31, LT-03111 Vilnius.  E-mail: ala.petrulyte@vdu.lt. ADOLESCENTS’ SOCIAL EMOTIONAL HEALTH AND EMPATHY IN LITHUANIAN SAMPLE Ala Petrulytė1, Virginija Guogienė Vytautas Magnus University Abstract. Background. Non-decreasing extent of bullying, increasing rates of various dependencies and suicides, high level of adolescents’ behavioural and emotional problems are observed in Lithuanian schools at present. Academic literature sources have revealed that adolescents’ mental health is mainly researched from the deficit- oriented  perspective, i.e. factors under research are related to various impairments, encountered difficulties or their risk. It is particularly important to conduct research on the positive adolescent development, its strengths, emotional and social areas of health that can be developed. The present research emphasizes a positive develop- ment of youth and social emotional aspects of such development. Aim. To investigate differences in adolescents’ social and emotional health and empathy by age and gen- der in the Lithuanian sample. Method. Social and Emotional Health Survey (Furlong et al., 2014) and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis, 1980). The sample: 600 ado- lescents (12–18 year olds) from various Lithuanian schools. Research results and con- clusions. The scores of SEHS–S scales of belief-in-self and engaged living are statistically significantly higher in the group of junior adolescents (12–15 year olds) and those of empathy (IRI) are higher among senior adolescents (16–18 year olds); significantly higher scores of empathy scales are observed in the group of girls compared to boys. The results of the conducted research contribute to the development of expression of school learners’ social and emotional health and empathy. Keywords: social and emotional health; empathy; sample of Lithuanian adolescents; dif- ferences by age and gender. 69 https://doi.org/10.7220/2345-024X.22.4 mailto:ala.petrulyte@vdu.lt 70 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė INTRODUC TION Mental health is one of the more significant aspects of adolescents’ health in Lithuanian schools. According to the opinion of the majority of authors, non-decreasing extent of bullying, increasing rates of various dependencies and suicides, high level of adolescents’ behavioural and emotional problems are observed in Lithuanian schools (Burkauskienė et al., 2008; Civinskas, Levickaitė, & Tamulienė, 2006; Ignatavičienė, 2008; Gintalaitė, Vaitkevičius, & Pilkauskienė, 2013; Nauckūnaitė, Stonkuvienė, Česnavičienė, & Venslovienė,  2010;  Mikėnienė, Polukordienė, Skruibis, & Trofimova, 2012; Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017;  Petruškevičiūtė, 2007; Polukordienė, Skruibis, & Bagdonienė, 2010; Targamadzė, 2010; Šutinie- nė, 2011; Šukytė, 2014). The World Health Organisation defines the concept of health as  a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity (WHO, 1948). However, mental health of adolescents is mainly researched from the  deficit-oriented  perspec- tive, i.e. factors under research are linked to various impairments, en- countered problems or related risks (Kalpokienė, 2005; Ramanauskienė, Matulionienė, & Martinkienė, 2002; Petrulytė & Lazdauskas, 2015 and others). C. Keyes (2006) claims that health and well-being equate with the absence of disease, illness, disability, and malfunctioning. The ab- sence of mental illness does not necessarily imply the presence of mental health. The Mental Health Foundation (Wells, Barlow, & Stewart-Brown, 2003) expanded the definition of mental health and defined it as a com- bination of emotional well-being, social functioning, and a big number of competences that can be developed and improved. The present re- search is based on the holistic approach to mental health emphasizing the positive development of young people, its social emotional aspects and the relation of adolescents’ psychological factors with social envi- ronments – the family, the school, and the peers. It should be pointed out that the research was conducted in cooperation with the psycholo- gists working in the system of education. 71 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample BACKGROUND Adolescents’ social and emotional health and empathy con- structs. The variety of concepts of mental health  (psychological well- being, psychological or subjective well-being, psychological  resilience, and others)  and research on them are available in today’s science, its emotional and social domains have also received more and more atten- tion of researchers  (Valantinas, 2009; Bowers et al., 2010; Furlong, 2014; 2015). It is particularly relevant to investigate the positive development of adolescents especially emphasising their ability to cope with the cri- sis of psychosocial development in adolescence. The more strengths are gained by an adolescent, the more positive his or her development is. The strengths of adolescents lead to an increased sense of happiness and relate to their academic achievements (Park & Peterson, 2008). Heated discussions occur in research studies on which strengths and competences of an individual are more significant and to what extent they link with the positive development of adolescents and adults. The presented research refers to the adolescents’ emotional and so- cial health as to a multi-dimensional construct, which encompasses a combination of a person’s psychological strengths, i.e. his or her posi- tive dispositions. This would include fundamental personal strengths: belief-in-self, belief-in-others, emotional competence, and engaged living (You, Furlong et al., 2015). The main contexts of this concept of adolescent social and emotional health consist of family, school, peer group, and identity under formation together with belief-in-self and self-respect as well as their interaction and synergy. The key advantages of this model are grounded on perceiving the health of a child/an ado- lescent as a multi-dimensional and dynamic construct of emotional and social health as well as on consistency of model conceptualisation with operationalisation. A broad spectrum of possibilities for conducting the research on the trajectories of child/adolescent development in various educa- tional and socio-cultural contexts can be identified. The model of social and emotional health has been successfully tested and now has been implemented through scientific research in the USA, Australia, Japan, Korea, and Turkey (Furlong et al., 2014; You et al., 2015 and others). The 72 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė conducted surveys have shown that the construct of emotional and social health and strengths is related to a high level of mental health, psychological resilience, and well-being. The value of fostering the psychological health of children and ado- lescents is recognized worldwide as a priority topic, i.e. the one that is referred to as a fundamental human right by UNESCO (Furlong, Gilman, & Huebner, 2014). In accordance with the common priority aims of World Health Organisation (WHO) and American Psychology Association (APA) towards monitoring the social and psychological health of the young generation (Furlong, 2015), over the past 10 years M. J. Furlong has been leading theoretical and practical research studies at the University of California (Santa Barbara) striving to create and implement the usage of a universal and convenient psychometric tool for predicting the social and emotional health of adolescents. M. J. Furlong has been showing an interest in piloting and practically using the methodology “Social Emo- tional Health Survey - Secondary” (SEHS-S) in Lithuania. Empathy is perceived as a particularly significant aspect of ado- lescents’ social and emotional health. This aspect is included into the model of emotional social health introduced by M.J. Furlong as one of its sub-scales. However, this dimension is of complex nature and pos- sesses specific aspects of its structure and manifestation. The available research in the field is discussed further. Empathy is understood as a re- action of an individual to another person’s inner state, and as an emo- tional response to the experience of another individual (Wied, Goudena, & Matthys, 2005). Empathy is also an ability to show own feelings and understanding to others (Pukinskaitė, 2006), which can manifest itself as a constant inclination of an individual to respond to emotional state of others (dispositional empathy) or as an evolving affective reaction to a specific situation (situational empathy). This study approaches empathy as a multi-dimensional construct, which embraces emotional and cogni- tive processes (Davis, 1980; Batson, 2009; Decety & Cowell, 2014). Vari- ous studies on empathy define it as one of the most significant factors of individual’s prosocial behaviour and psychosocial development and as a prerequisite for successful communication (Strayer & Roberts, 2004; Denham, 1998; Eisenberg, Fabes, & Spinrad, 2006; Hoffman, 2000). Em- pathy is understood as getting into the inner world of another person 73 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample or as capacity to imagine oneself going through another person’s emo- tions, putting oneself into another’s place, responsiveness and concern (Mehrabian & Epstein, 1972; Davis, 1983; Cohen & Strayer, 1996; Hoffman, 2000), as a sensual response to other people’s experiences. The cogni- tive element of empathy refers to intellectual and analytical ability to identify oneself with others, and to understand feelings of other people on the basis of simple associations (White, 1997). This component also includes more complex cognitive processes such as understanding of the perspective of thoughts, intentions, and behaviour of another per- son (Cliffordson, 2002; Wied et al., 2005) and allows to understand the attitude of others, their internal experiences, and emotional reactions to this process (Davis, 1983). Empathy also embraces the ability to show (pass over) own feelings and understanding to others and it is one of the factors that encourages support to each other (Davis, 1983; Cliffordson, 2002; White, 1997). Expression of adolescents’ empathy is of particular significance. The higher level of adolescents’ empathy creates favourable conditions for adolescents to experience and express positive emotions, contributes to control of anger and other negative feelings, and is a signal of proso- cial behaviour (Roberts & Strayer, 1996; Pukinskaitė & Guogienė, 2010). Introducing social competences and teaching empathy to adolescents enable them to learn to manage own anger (O’Neil, 1996; Suslavičius, 2000). Differences in adolescents’ social emotional health and empa- thy by age and gender. Scholarly literature sources broadly discuss adolescents’ empathy in the context of psychosocial functioning of the individual (Hoffman, 2000; Reynolds & Scott, 1999; Kradin, 2005; Carr & Lutjemeier, 2005; Pukinskaitė, 2006; Van Noorden,  Haselager,  Cil- lessen, &  Bukowski, 2015). Researchers have been further discussing the dimensions of individual’s empathy (Van der Graaff et al., 2016) as well as the development of expression of empathy. It has been identi- fied that boys’ empathy is lower compared to that of girls (Carr & Lutje- meier, 2005; Harrod & Scheer, 2000; Eisenberg, Fabes, & Spinrad, 2006; Karkauskaitė, 2013). The conducted research studies reveal that more expressed empathic abilities and abilities to identify emotions (Schulte- Rüther et al., 2008), perception and awareness of emotions (Katyal & 74 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Awasthi, 2005), and higher scores of emotional intellect indicators (Žukauskienė, Malinauskienė, & Erentaitė, 2011) are characteristic of female adolescents compared to male adolescents. The research car- ried out by A. Balundė and D. Grakauskaitė-Karkockienė (2015) allows to conclude that higher levels of personal distress and empathic con- cern among senior adolescents are identified in the group of young women. However, according to other authors, no differences in expres- sion of certain aspects of empathy have been identified (Mestre et al., 2004; Garaigordobil, 2009). It can be assumed that empathy is one of the integral components of emotional health, and differences in its de- velopment as well as levels of expression of its components are likely to be predetermined by age, gender, and other sociodemographic aspects. M. J. Furlong’s studies reveal that girls show higher rates of emo- tional competence and confidence than boys, but boys have higher rates of confidence about themselves (Furlong, et al., 2014). The study with a non-western sample of Korean adolescents on the SEHS–S for males and females shows that females more strongly endorse  items of belief-in-others  compared to males (Furlong et al., 2016). Signifi- cant differences by gender were found among Turkish adolescents in the SEHS-S scores of engaged living and general index, and no signifi- cant differences by gender were detected in the areas of belief-in-self, belief-in-others, and emotional competence. Thus, some cross-national differences in the SEHS-S profiles between males and females can be observed in general, but differences occur in the small effect-size range (You et al., 2015; Ito et al., 2015; Lee et al., 2016). Generalising, it can be stated that the research studies on development of adolescents’ social emotional health and empathy dimensions as well as on socio-demo- graphic characteristics are still scarce. The aim of the research was to conduct research on adolescents’ social emotional health and empathy dispositions in the Lithuanian sample. The objectives of the research were to evaluate the expression of adolescents’ social emotional health and empathy dispositions, and to compare them by age (junior or senior adolescents) and gender. The following empirical questions are highlighted within the re- search: What are the indicators of the social emotional health research 75 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample tool Social Emotional Health Survey - Secondary (SEHS-S) and Empathy (In- terpersonal Reactivity Index, IRI) in the sample of Lithuanian adolescents? Is there a significant statistical difference among demographical groups of adolescents by age and gender? ME THOD Sample Justifying the choice of the respondents by age and gender, it is important to point out that the main focus is laid on conducting re- search in dispositions of junior and senior adolescents’ social emotional health. Choosing the age limits of the sample in the present research, the age group that M. J. Forlung’s methodology SEHS-S targeted at was considered (12–18 years old adolescents);  the participants of the research were the learners from schools of general education in differ- ent regions and towns of the country. The following age groups were chosen: 300 junior adolescents (12–15 year olds) and 300 senior adoles- cents (16–18 year olds). The proportion between the boys and the girls was approximately equal: 320 boys and 280 girls. The research was con- ducted in nine schools of Lithuania (Vilnius, Anykščiai, Joniškis, Palanga, Šalčininkai, Šakiai, and Švenčionys). The research sample included 600 adolescents. The distribution of the respondents by age was as follows: 15.2% – 12 year olds, 16.7% –13 year olds, 10% – 14 year olds, 8.8% – 15 year olds, 16% – 16 year olds; 16.5% – 17 year olds, and 16.8 % – 18 year olds. It is important to point out that the participants in this re- search were from different towns and schools compared with the previ- ously conducted research (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017). Assessment instruments Social Emotional Health Survey – Secondary (SEHS-S), Furlong et al. (2014). The questionnaire survey includes a wide range of social emo- tional psychological dispositions associated with positive development of young people. The constructive validity of this questionnaire was con- firmed after the factor analysis of its invariance in groups formed on the base of sociocultural and gender principles (You, Furlong et al., 2015). 76 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė The permission to use the questionnaire was granted to A. Petrulytė and V. Guogienė. The double translation was done by A. Petrulytė and J. Bagdonavičiūtė. The questionnaire consists of four dispositions/scales: Belief-in-self, Belief-in-others. Emotional competence, and Engaged living. Each disposition embraces three unique sub-scales of mental health. The first disposition, belief-in-self, consists of three sub-scales: self-efficacy, self-awareness, and persistence. The second disposition, belief-in-others, comprises three sub-scales: school support, peer sup- port, and family support. The third disposition, emotional competence, consists of three sub-scales: emotion regulation, empathy, and behav- ioural self-control. Engaged living embraces three sub-scales: gratitude, zest, and optimism. The SHES-S questionnaire includes 12 sub-scales. This instrument (SEHS-S) was validated using samples of students from California (Furlong et al., 2014; You et al., 2014; You, Furlong, Felix, & O’Malley, 2015), Korea (Lee, You, & Furlong, 2015), and Japan (Ito, Smith, You, Shimoda, & Furlong 2015). M. J. Furlong emphasizes that this re- search is directed to optimal exploration of human functions on the basis of the hypothesis that the combination of the first-order positive psychological dispositions (belief-in-self, belief-in-others, emotional com- petence, and engaged living) builds the second-order synergic metacon- struct of covitality, which is a good tool for understanding of the quality level of teenagers’ and youth’s life as well as forecasting success and well-being in present and later life (Furlong et al., 2014). The internal compatibility of Lithuanian adolescent group (Cronbach’s alpha) is as follows (see: Table 1 and Table 2): Table 1. Cronbach’s alphas indicators of SEHS-S constructs in the Lithuanian adolescent group. SHES-S constructs Cronbach’s alpha Belief-in-self .68 Belief-in-others .75 Emotional competence .76 Engaged living .86 General index .80 77 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample Table 2. Cronbach’s alphas indicators of SEHS-S sub -scales in the Lithuanian adolescent group. SHES-S sub-scales Cronbach’s alpha Self-efficacy .60 Self-awareness .60 Persistence .66 School support .74 Family coherence .88 Peer support .85 Emotion regulation .62 Empathy .77 Self-control .60 Optimism .84 Gratitude .77 Zest .86 Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), (Davis, 1980). The scale investi- gates various aspects of empathy and evaluates emotional reactions to negative experiences of other people. The scale consists of 28 items. The respondents were asked to rate every item on a 4-point scale (from 0 to 4) considering their suitability for characterisation of own attitude and feelings. The respondents evaluated statements while the supervisor was reading additional instructions. The scores of sub-scales were cal- culated summing up the evaluations of all the 7 items. The scale of Inter- personal Reactivity Index (IRI) consists of 4 sub-scales that aim to evaluate different aspects of empathy: 1. Empathic concern scale. The sub-scale assesses emotional empathy, i.e. the ability to feel compassion for others or tenderness to take care of them; 2. Perspective-taking scale. The sub-scale establishes the cognitive as- pect of empathy, i.e. the ability to understand and adopt the attitude of other people; 3. Personal distress scale. The sub-scale evaluates the ability to experi- ence distress and discomfort reacting to the distress of others; 78 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė 4. Fantasy scale. The sub-scale evaluates the ability of respondents to transpose themselves imaginatively into the feelings. The sum of the sub-scales of perspective-taking and empathic con- cern makes up the index of empathy. The author M. H. Davis granted the permission to use the Scale of Empathy to V. Guogienė. The double translation of the scale of Interpersonal Reactivity Index was done by R. Pukinskaitė. The evaluation of the internal compatibility of the Lithu- anian version showed sufficient reliability of sub-scales and their appro- priateness for evaluation of adolescents’ empathy (see: Table 3). Table 3. Cronbach’s alphas indicators of empathy (IRI) in the Lithuanian adolescent group. IRI constructs Cronbach’s alpha Empathic concern .61 Perspective-taking .67 Personal distress .56 Fantasy .66 Empathy index .72 The obtained data were processed using Microsoft Excel 2003, SPSS (Version 17 for Windows). The descriptive statistics was applied. Since the variables were not distributed according to normal distribution (checked by the test of Kolmagorov–Smirnov), statistical methods for non-parameter (rank) criteria were used in the calculations. The Mann- Whitney U test was used for the comparison of means of indicators of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) and empathy (IRI) scales of the re- spondents by gender and age group. RESULTS The following psychometric properties of scales of methodologies applied in the presented research according to the data on the respon- dents were identified: Cronbach alpha of the scales of SEHS-S was .80, and that of IRI equalled to .72. 79 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample The analysis of the scales of adolescents’ social and emotional health and dimensions of empathy was conducted in terms of socio-demo- graphic indicators. Firstly, the dispositions of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) questionnaire of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents were compared by age (see: Table 4). Table 4. Comparison of dispositions/scales of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) SEHS-S main scales Age N Mean Rank Z P Belief-in-self 12-15 years 300 337.91 -5.30 .000 16-18 years 300 263.09 Belief-in-others 12-15 years 300 305.82 -.75 .451 16-18 years 300 295.18 Emotional competence 12-15 years 300 300.56 -.01 .993 16-18 years 300 300.44 Engaged living 12-15 years 300 323.21 -3.21 .001 16-18 years 300 277.79 General index 12-15 years 300 324.50 -3.39 .001 16-18 years 300 276.50 The comparative analysis of the values of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents revealed statistically significant differences in the disposi- tions of belief-in-self (p ≤ .01), engaged living (p ≤0.02), and general index (p ≤ .01), i.e. larger values were characteristic of junior adolescents. The scores of SEHS-S sub-scales were also compared in terms of age (see: Table 5). The comparative analysis of SEHS-S sub-scales of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents disclosed that junior adolescents (12–15 year olds) are distinguished by self-awareness, per- sistence, school support, gratitude, and zest, whereas the scores of peer support, emotion regulation are significantly higher among senior ado- lescents (16–18 year olds). 80 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Table 5. Comparison of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) sub -scales of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) SEHS-S sub-scales Age N Mean Rank Z P Self-efficacy 12–15 years 300 304.80 -.62 .535 16–18 years 300 296.21 Self-awareness 12–15 years 300 329.56 -4.16 .000 16–18 years 300 271.44 Persistence 12–15 years 300 343.20 -6.10 .000 16–18 years 300 257.81 School support 12–15 years 300 335.59 -5.00 .000 16–18 years 300 265.41 Family coherence 12–15 years 300 313.03 -1.84 .066 16–18 years 300 287.07 Peer support 12–15 years 300 267.32 -4.75 .000 16–18 years 300 333.68 Emotion regulation 12–15 years 300 285.87 -2.11 .035 16–18 years 300 315.14 Empathy 12–15 years 300 297.14 -.48 .631 16–18 years 300 303.86 Self-control 12–15 years 300 312.52 -1.72 .085 16–18 years 300 288.48 Optimism 12–15 years 300 308.84 -1.19 .232 16–18 years 300 292.16 Gratitude 12–15 years 300 315.80 -2.18 .029 16–18 years 300 285.20 Zest 12–15 years 300 328.47 -3.98 .000 16–18 years 300 272.53 Seeking to compare the means of empathy (IRI) scales of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 years old) adolescents, the compara- tive analysis was carried out. Significantly higher scores of personal dis- tress (p ≤ .01) and fantasy (p ≤ .03) were identified among 16–18 year 81 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample old adolescents after the analysis of empathy (IRI) scales of junior (12– 15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents (see: Table 6). Table 6. Comparison of empathy (IRI) scales of junior (12–15 year olds) and senior (16–18 year olds) adolescents (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) IRI scales Age N Mean Rank Z P Empathic concern 12–15 years 300 292.42 -1.145 .252 16–18 years 300 308.58 Perspective-taking 12–15 years 300 292.24 -1.172 .241 16–18 years 300 308.77 Fantasy 12–15 years 300 277.83 -3.209 .001 16–18 years 300 323.17 Personal distress 12–15 years 300 273.54 -3.823 .000 16–18 years 300 327.46 The indicators of empathy index of junior (12–15 year olds) and se- nior (16–18 year olds) adolescents were also compared but no statisti- cally significant differences were identified. Generalising, the obtained results partially confirm the research assumption that the values of the dispositions of belief-in-self and en- gaged living of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) of 12–15 year old adolescents are statistically higher than those of 16–18 year old ones. The comparison of separate SEHS-S sub-scales confirmed the results of scale dispositions that self-awareness, persistence, school support, gratitude, and zest are more expressed in junior adolescents (12–15 year olds), whereas the indicators of peer support and emotion regulation among 16–18 year old adolescents are higher compared to their junior counterparts. Senior adolescents (16–18 year olds) are more emphatic and larger values of personal distress and fantasy are more common of 16–18 year old adolescents in comparison with junior adolescents (12–15 year olds). The aspect of gender was also considered comparing adolescents’ emotional and social health (SEHS-S) (see: Table 7). Girls are distinguished by higher means of sub-scales peer support, empathy (p ≤ .01), and self- control (p ≤ .05) compared to boys. 82 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Table 7. Comparison of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) sub -scales in groups of girls and boys (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) SEHS-S sub-scales Gender N Mean Rank Z P Self-efficacy boys 320 300.73 -.04 .972 girls 280 300.24 Self-awareness boys 320 304.04 -.54 .588 girls 280 296.46 Persistence boys 320 288.55 -1.83 .068 girls 280 314.16 School support boys 320 304.00 -.53 .593 girls 280 296.49 Family coherence boys 320 297.78 -.43 .670 girls 280 303.61 Peer support boys 320 244.03 -8.64 .000 girls 280 365.04 Emotion regulation boys 320 297.59 -.45 .653 girls 280 303.83 Empathy boys 320 241.81 -8.98 .000 girls 280 367.57 Self-control boys 320 287.21 -2.04 .042 girls 280 315.69 Optimism boys 320 304.75 -.65 .515 girls 280 295.64 Gratitude boys 320 291.25 -1.41 .159 girls 280 311.07 Zest boys 320 313.20 -1.93 .053 girls 280 285.98 Analysing the differences in the main dispositions of adolescents’ SEHS-S from the perspective of gender, it can be concluded that the values of girls’ belief-in-others and emotional competence and empathy index are statistically significantly larger (p≤0.01) than those of boys (see: Table 8). 83 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample Table 8. Comparison of main scales of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) in groups of girls and boys (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) SEHS-S main scales Gender N Mean Rank Z P Belief-in-self boys 320 293.56 -1.053 .293 girls 280 308.44 Belief-in-others boys 320 270.70 -4.540 .000 girls 280 334.55 Emotional competence boys 320 265.67 -5.277 .000 girls 280 340.31 Engaged living boys 320 305.24 -.717 .473 girls 280 295.09 General index boys 320 281.98 -2.798 .005 girls 280 321.66 The research also aimed to evaluate the differences in main scales of adolescents’ empathy (IRI) with respect to gender (see: Table 9). The comparison of empathy (IRI) main scales of boys and girls allowed to conclude that all the means of sub-scales (empathic concern, perspective- taking, perspective-taking scale fantasy, personal distress) and empathy index are statistically significantly higher in the group of girls (p≤0.01). Table 9. Comparison of empathy (IRI) scales in groups of girls and boys (Mann-Whitney U test was applied) Gender N Mean Rank Z P Empathic concern scale boys 320 234.24 -10.043 .000 girls 280 376.22 Perspective-taking scale boys 320 267.68 -4.975 .000 girls 280 338.01 Fantasy scale boys 320 238.99 -9.309 .000 girls 280 370.80 Personal distress boys 320 239.84 -9.194 .000 girls 280 369.83 Empathy index boys 320 222.66 -11.764 .000girls 280 389.46 84 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė However, it is important to note that further interpretation of the data will not be elaborated on as gender-based norms provided by the authors of original methodologies are not available. Summing up, the set assumption about probable differences in the aspects of social and emotional health between girls and boys was partially confirmed: higher values of the main dispositions of social and emotional health (SEHS-S) (belief-in-others and emotional competence) were identified among girls compared to boys. Similar tendencies were observed in its separate sub-scales: peer support, empathy and self-con- trol. The values of empathy scale (IRI) empathic concern, perspective-tak- ing, fantasy and personal distress, and empathy index are statistically sig- nificantly higher in the group of girls compared to boys. Thus, empathy is more expressed in girls. DISCUSSION The Cronbach’s alpha in the SEHS-S and Empathy (IRI) is sufficient in the Lithuanian sample (see: Table 1, 2, and 3). In addition, the previous research (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017) showed a higher value of SEHS- S Cronbach’s alpha, i.e. .90, but the sample was significantly larger (over 1600). The data of SEHS-S in the group of 12–18 year old Lithuanian adolescents presented in this article coincide with the sample of white Americans in the research conducted by M. J. Furlong et al. (2014; 2015). Comparing the results of the present research with those of the previously conducted one (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017), which embraced more than 1600 school learners in Lithuania, reveal similar re- sults. The analysis of adolescents’ social and emotional health (SEHS-S) according to age showed that the dispositions of belief-in-self and en- gaged living are better expressed among junior adolescents (12–15 year olds) compared to senior adolescents (16–18 year olds) and the data fully coincide with the results of the previous research (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017). The values of such sub-scales of SEHS-S as self- awareness, persistence, school support, gratitude, and zest are statisti- cally significantly higher among junior adolescents (12–15 year olds). In the meantime, a statistically significant difference in peer support and emotion regulation is observed in the group of senior adolescents 85 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample (16 – 18 year olds). This partially complies with the data of the previous research (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017), larger values of peer support and self-efficacy but the values of self-efficacy, family coherence, empathy, self-control, optimism did not reveal any significant differences. The age- related differences obtained in our research comply with the objectives of the development in senior adolescence: the need to adapt to peer groups and an increasing trajectory of the need for peer support and independence (Cheng &Chan, 2004). The comparison of the expression of adolescents’ empathy (IRI) in terms of age showed that the index of empathy did not demonstrate any statistically significant differences comparing the data of junior (12–15 year old) and senior (16–8 year old) adolescents, which coincides with the observations of R. Pukinskaitė (2006) and V. Mestre, D. Frías and P. Samper (2004). However, higher indicators of fantasy and personal distress were established among 16–18 year old adolescents. Similarly, higher scores of personal distress were received in the research con- ducted by R. Karkauskaitė (2013). It can be assumed that the ability to transpose themselves imaginatively into experienced feelings through thoughts and feelings and to react to distress of another person is better expressed in senior adolescents and complies with the consistent pat- terns of their cognitive function formation. The results of comparing the dispositions of adolescents’ social and emotional health (SEHS-S) in terms of gender coincide with the data obtained in the previous research (Petrulytė & Guogienė, 2017), where significantly higher indicators of belief-in-others, emotional com- petence, peer support, and empathy were identified among girls com- pared to those of boys. The previously conducted research revealed sig- nificantly higher values of engaged living among boys compared to girls. No significant difference was identified in the present research within a smaller sample. The acquired research data are in line with the results presented by M. J. Furlong et al. (2014) and S. Lee et al. (2015): the scores of belief-in- self among girls are higher than those among boys, and partially com- ply with the data presented by T. Timofejeva et.al. (2016). The acquired data correspond with consistent patterns of adolescent development: the trajectory of emotional competence and social relations is stronger 86 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė among girls, whereas that of activity and social skills is better expressed among boys (Way & Greene, 2006; Pukinskaitė, 2006; Petrulytė, 2016). Higher values on empathy scales and empathy index were identified in the group of girls after the comparison of adolescents’ empathy (IRI) in terms of gender. The obtained research data that general empathy index of boys is significantly lower than that of girls are in line with those ac- cumulated in the research carried out by R. Pukinskaitė (2006). This fully complies with the results obtained during the research conducted by A. Balundė and D. Grakauskaitė–Karkockienė (2015). The results of the present research coincide with the research conclusions of a big num- ber of other researchers regarding higher expression of emotional in- telligence and emotional competence of women compared to that of men (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2001; Petrides, Frederickson, Sangareau, & Furnham, 2006; Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004; Žukauskienė et al., 2011 ); girls’ better understanding of own feelings, their being playful and able to easier establish conversation and com- municate with surrounding people more frequently (Strayer & Roberts, 2004; Katyal et al., 2005, Schulte-Rüther et al., 2008). The acquired results also concur with the valuable results of longitudinal research conducted by other researchers in the context of adolescent development: the growth of girls’ empathy is more considerable compared to the one of boys. All the above mentioned allows assuming that girls compared to the boys attach more importance to interpersonal relations, sensitivity, emotions in the process of socialisation. The forecasting links between development of adolescent empa- thy and social competence in adulthood (Steiger et al., 2014; Crocetti et al.,  2016). Thus, long-term social consequences of empathy in adoles- cence and importance of its development are emphasised. It should be noticed that even though empathy has been the focus of scientific research lately, its expression in the context of development of junior and senior adolescents and gender differences has been still under- researched. Therefore, this research is an attempt to contribute to such studies. As the research is still undergoing the process of approbation, the authors tend to refrain from final generalisation. Discussing the research perspectives, such factors as family compo- sition, socio-economic status of family, cultural-value aspect, the role of empathy in the person’s moral development and in the context of 87 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample parents’ upbringing and relations with children could be analysed. For example, future research could focus on how parents’ behaviour can elicit different effects for their children depending on the level of their empathy expression, how parents should communicate with children, who possess high level of empathy. It would be important to conduct re- search on how positive dispositions of adolescents are formed and how they relate to their successful adult life. The given research has some limitations: the sample size of the respondents is smaller because the authors of the methodology con- ducted their survey with much larger respondent groups (an average of 4000–6000 of the respondents) (Furlong, 2014); the study involved only adolescents with the Lithuanian language as a mother tongue; their age norms for SEHS-S survey have not been established in Lithuania yet, and this research is considered to be the initial stage of SEHS-S survey adaptation procedures in Lithuania. More precise approbation of the methodology would require a much wider survey of the respondents from Lithuanian cities and regions, including not only general education schools, but also other types of educational institutions. In our opinion, after all approbation and adaptation processes of SEHS-S as a tool in Lithuania, the risk group of respondents (with low SEHS factor) could be detected just as the group with potentially excellent characteristics (with high SEHS factor). This could help school counsellors to develop specific measures to help the group with low SEHS factors and give more oppor- tunities for the development for the group with high SEHS factors. This particular research is to be considered as a part of internationally wide cooperation on SEHS. Also, procedures of adaptation and validation of SEHS-S in Lithuania has a potential lasting value. School psychologists will be able to use the version adapted for Lithuania and monitor adoles- cent psychological health. Finally, the results of the conducted research can be significant in the context of the development of learners’ social and emotional health and empathy. REFERENCES Batson, C. D. (2009). These Things Called Empathy: Eight Related but Distinct Phenomena. In J. Decety & W. Ickes (Eds.). The Social Neuroscience of Empathy. Cambridge: MIT press. 88 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Balundė A., & Grakauskaitė-Karkockienė D. (2015) Vaizduojamojo meno krypties studentų dispozicinės emptijos ir kūrybiškos asmenybės savybių sąsajos [Dispositional Empathy and Creative Personality Traits of Visual Arts Students]. Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia, 34, 105–116. Bowers, E. P.,  Li, Y.,  Kiely, M. K.,  Brittian, A.,  Lerner, J. V.,  & Lerner, R. M. (2010). The Five Cs Model of Positive Youth Development: a Longitudinal Analysis of Confirmatory Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance. Accessed on 18th September, 2018. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/20397040 Burkauskienė, D., Čižienė, I., Gaigalienė, M., Gudelienė, K., Ignatavičienė, K., Kišonienė, R., Rimkevičienė, V., & Valantijienė, S. (2008). Iškritusių iš švietimo sistemos mokinių grąžinimo ir iškritimo iš mokyklos prevencijos modelis ir jo įgyvendinimo rekomendacijos [The Model for Return of Early Leavers of Educational System and School Expulsion Prevention and Recommendations for Its Implementation]. Vilnius: Kronta. Carr, M. B., & Lutjemeier, J. A. (2005). The Relation of Facial Affect Recognition and Empathy to Delinquency in Youth Offenders. Adolescence, 40(159): 601–19. Cheng, S. T., & Chan, A. C. M. (2004). A Brief Version of the Geriatric Depression Scale for the Chinese. Psychological Assessment, 16, 182–186. Civinskas, R., Levickaitė, V., & Tamulienė, I. (2006). Vengiančių lankyti mokyklą vaikų problemos ir poreikiai:monografija. [Problems and Needs of Children Avoiding School: Monograph]. Vilnius, VDU: Garnelis. Cliffordson, C. (2002). The Hierarchical Structure of Empathy: Dimensional Organization and Relations to Social Functioning. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43(1): 49–59. Cohen, D., & Strayer, J. (1996). Empathy in Conduct-disordered and Comparison Youth. Developmental Psychology, 32(6), 988–998. Crocetti,  E., Van der Graaff, J., Moscatelli, S., Keijsers, L.,  Koot, H. M.,  Rubini,  M., Meeus, W., & Branje, S. (2016). A Longitudinal Study on the Effects of Parental Monitoring on Adolescent Antisocial Behaviors: the Moderating Role of Adolescent Empathy. Accessed on 21st September, 2018. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5093142/ Davis, M. H. (1983). The Effects of Dispositional Empathy on Emotional Reactions and Helping: a Multidimensional Approach. Journal of Personality, 51(2): 167–184. Davis, M. H. (1980). A Multidimensional Approach to Individual Differences in Empathy. JSAS Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85. Decety, J., & Cowell, J. M. (2014). The Complex Relation Between Morality and Empathy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 337–339. Denham, S. (1998). Emotional Development in Young Children. New York: Guilford Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5093142/ 89 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A. & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial Development. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner (Eds.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 3: Social, Emotional and Personality Development (6th ed., pp. 646–718). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Furlong, M. J., Gilman, R., & Huebner, E. S. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of Positive Psychology in the Schools, second edition. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis. Furlong, M. J., You, S., Renshaw, T. L., Smith, D. C., & O’Malley, M. D. (2014). Preliminary Development and Validation of the Social and Emotional Health Survey for Secondary Students. Social Indicators Research, 117, 1011–1032. Furlong, M. J. (2015). Social Emotional Health Survey System. University of California, Santa Barbara Center for School-Based Youth Development Counseling, Clinical, and School Psychology Department. Accessed on 12th July, 2018. Available at: http://www.michaelfurlong.info/social-emotional-health.html Gintalaitė, D., Vaitkevičius, R., & Pilkauskienė, I. (2013). Paauglių alkoholio ir kitų narkotikų vartojimo rizikingumo ir asmens, bendraamžių bei šeimos lygmens rizikos ir apsauginių veiksnių ryšys, remiantis socialinio vystymosi modeliu. [The Relationship Between Risk of Alcohol and Other Substance Use Among Adolescents and Individual, Peer and Family Level Risk and Protective Factors on the  Basis of the  Social  Development Model]. Visuomenės sveikata, 1(60), 30–41. Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice. New York University. Cambridge University Press. Accessed on 23rd June, 2018. Available at: http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam032/99029669.pdf Ignatavičienė, K. (2008). Iškritusių iš mokyklos mokinių grąžinimas. [Return of School Drop-outs]. Vilnius: Kronta. Ito, A., Smith, D. C., You, S., Shimoda, Y., & Furlong, M. J. (2015). Validation and Utility of the Social Emotional Health Survey–Secondary for Japanese Students. Contemporary School Psychology, 19, 243–252. Katyal S., & Awasthi E. (2005). Gender Differences in Emotional Intelligence Among Adolescents of Chan-digarh. Journal of Human Ecology, 17, 153–155. Kalpokienė, V. (2005), Paauglių raida ir psichikos sutrikimai Ego psichologijos požiūriu [An Attitude of Ego Psychology Towards Development and Mental Disorders of Adolescents]. Psichologija, 31, 75–85. Karkauskaitė, R. (2013). Paauglių vertybinių orientacijų, empatijos ir prosocialaus elgesio ypatumai bei tarpusavio ryšys. [Peculiarities of Value Orientations, Empathy and Prosocial Behaviour of Teenagers and Their Relationship] (Master’s thesis). LSU, Kaunas. Accessed on 10th August, 2018. Available at: https://vb.lsu.lt/object/elaba:1973179/ Keyes, C. (2006). Mental Health in Adolescence: Is America’s Youth Flourishing? American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(3), 395–402. http://www.michaelfurlong.info/social-emotional-health.html http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam032/99029669.pdf https://vb.lsu.lt/object/elaba:1973179/ 90 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Kradin, R. (2005). The Roots of Empathy and Aggression in Analysis. Journal of Analytical Psychology. 50(4): 431–449. Lee, S., You, S., & Furlong, M. J. (2015). Validation of the Social Emotional Health Survey for Korean School Students. Child Indicators Research, 9(1),73–92. doi:10.1007/s12187-014-9294-y  Mehrabian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A Measure of Emotional Empathy. Journal of Personality, 40, 525–543. Mestre, V., Frías, D., & Samper, P. (2004). La medida de la empatía: análisis del Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Psicothema, 16(2): 255–260. Mikėnienė, V., Polukordienė, K. O., Skruibis P., & Trofimova, I. (2012). Savižudybių prevencija mokykloje [Prevention of Suicides at School]. Kaunas: UAB „Vitae litera”. Nauckūnaitė, Z., Stonkuvienė, I., Česnavičienė, J. & Venslovienė, J. (2010). 12–14 m. mokinių mokymo(si) didaktinės problemos ir kai kurios mokymo(si) motyvacijos silpnėjimo priežastys [Didactic Problems of 12–14 Year Old Schoolchildren’s Teaching/Learning and Some Reasons of Weakening of Their Motivation to Learn]. Accessed 12 July 2018. Available at: http://www.alternatyvusisugdymas.lt/index.php/naujienos/ naujienos/78-kas-lemia-silpnejancia-mokiniu-mokymosi-motyvacija Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D.L., & Sitarenios, G. (2001). Emotional Intelligence as a Standard Intelligence, 1(3): 232–42. Park, N., & Peterson, Ch. (2008). Positive Psychology and Character Strengths: Application to Strengths-Based School Counselling. Professional School Couseling, 12(2), 85–92. Petrulytė A., & Lazdauskas T. (2015). Vaikų ir paauglių psichologinė sveikata: sampratos problematika [Psychological Health of Children and Adolescents: Problems of Conception]. Congress of Lithuanian Psychologists “Search, Discover and Share”: 8–9 May 2015: reviewed proceedings of congress / Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences, Lithuanian Psychological Association, Lithuanian Association of Psychology Students. Vilnius: Lithuanian Psychological Association. Petrulytė, A. (2016). Social and Emotional Health of Adolescents in Lithuania from the Perspective of Positive Psychology. In Škola v kontexte psychológie zdravia apozitívnej psychológie : zborník vedeckých príspevkov, 32–37. Paneurópska vysoká škola, Fakulta psychológie; [zostavovatel Eva Gajdošová]. Praha: Wolters Kluwer. Petrulytė, A., & Guogienė, V. (2017). Paauglių psichologinės sveikatos stiprinimas, vykdant tiriamąją ir prevencinę veiklą mokykloje [Enhamcement of Adolescents’ Psychological Health Using Investigative and Preventive Activities at School]. Pedagogika, 126(2), 99–114. Petrides, K. V., Frederickson, N., & Furnham, A. (2004). The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence in Academic Performance and Deviant Behavior at School. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 277–293.  http://www.alternatyvusisugdymas.lt/index.php/naujienos/ 91 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample Petrides, K. V., Frederickson, N., Sangareau, Y. & Furnham, A. (2006). Trait Emotional Intelligence and Children’s Peer Relations at School. Social Development, 15(3), 537–547. Petruškevičiūtė, A. (2007). Vaikų, iškrentančių iš bendrojo lavinimo sistemos, skaičiaus mažinimas: prevencinių grupių veikla ugdymo institucijose [Reduction of Number of Drop-outs from Education System: Activities of Preventive Groups in Educational Institutions]. Vilnius: UAB Baltijos kopija. Polukordienė, K. O., Skruibis, P., Bagdonienė, M., Rekuč, V., & Skruibienė, I. (2010). Krizių valdymas mokyklose [Crise Management at School]. Methodological Material for Teams of Crisis Management at School. Lithuanian: Youth Psychological Aid Center. Pukinskaitė, R. (2006). Empatijos ir psichosocialinio funkcionavimo ypatybės paauglystėje [Empathy and Psychosocial Functioning in Adolescence]. Socialinis darbas. 5(2): 55–62. Pukinskaitė, R., & Guogienė, V. (2010). Vyresniųjų paauglių pykčio ekspresijos ir kontrolės bei psichosocialinių sunkumų analizė [Analysis of Anger Expression and Control and Psychosocial Problems in Older Adolescents]. Visuomenės sveikata, 2 (49): 104–113. Ramanauskienė, T., Matulionienė, V., & Martinkienė, V. (2002) Paauglių depresiškumas ir savižudybės pavojus (lyginamoji analizė Klaipėdos, Kauno ir Šiaulių miestuose). [Depressive Symptoms and Threat of Suicide Among Adolescents (Comparative Analysis in Klaipėda, Kaunas and Šiauliai)]. Medicina, 38(4): 393–397. Reynolds W. J., & Scott B. (1999). Empathy: a Crucial Component of the Helping Relationship. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 6(5): 363–70. Roberts, W., & Strayer, J. (1996). Empathy, Emotional Expressiveness, and Prosocial Behavior. Child Development, 67, 449–470. Steiger, A. E., Allemand, M., Robins, R. W., & Fend, H. A. (2014). Low and Decreasing Self-esteem During Adolescence Predict Adult Depression Two Decades Later. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 325–338. Strayer J., & Roberts W. (2004). Empathy and Observed Anger and Aggression in Five-year-olds. Social Development, 13(1): 1–13. Strayer, J., & Roberts, W. (2004). Children`s Anger, Emotional Expressiveness, and Empathy: Relations with Parents` Empathy, Emotional Expressiveness, and Parenting Practices. Social development, 13(2): 229–254. Suslavičius, A. (2000). Paremiamoji psichologija kaip įtvirtinti savąjį ego ir išlikti savimi [Supportive Psychology: How to Establish the Own Ego and Remain Yourself ]. Kaunas: Šviesa. Targamadzė, V. (2010). 12–14 m. mokinių mokymo(si) didaktinės problemos ir jų sprendimo galimybės [The Didactic Problems f 12–14 Year Old Schoolchildren’s Teaching/Learning]. The research report.]. Accessed on 12th July, 2018. Available at: http://www.alternatyvusisugdymas.lt/uploads/2009/12/10_09_03_AU_ galimybiu_studija.pdf http://www.alternatyvusisugdymas.lt/uploads/2009/12/10_09_03_AU_ 92 Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Telef, B. B., & Furlong, M. J., (2016). Adaptation and Validation of the Social and Emotional Health Survey-Secondary into Turkish Culture. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology. Published online: 13th Oct. 10.1080/21683603.2016.1234988. 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. Timofejeva, T., Svence, G., & Petrulyte, A. (2016). Theoretical and Practical Study of the Concept of Social and Emotional Health by Michael J. Furlong and Applied to the Selection of Teenagers and Youth. Problems of Psychology in the 21st Century, 10 (2), 98–107. Šukytė, D. (2014). Patyčių problema mokykloje ir prevencija [The Problem of Bullying at School and Its Prevention]. Švietimo problemos analizė, 7(112). Šutinienė, I. (2011). Alkoholio ir kitų narkotikų tyrimas Europos mokyklose [Research on Alcohol and Drugs in European Schools]. ESPAD – 2011. The Report of Research in Lithuania. Accessed on 21st September, 2018. Available at: http://old.ntakd.lt/files/Apklausos_ir_tyrimai/ESPAD_2011_ataskaita_SMM.pdf Valantinas, A. (2009). Socialinis emocinis ugdymas. Kas tai? Kuo gali mums padėti? [Social Emotional Education: What is It? How Can it Help Us?] Švietimo problemos analizė, 10(38). Accessed on 15th September, 2018. Available at: http://www.nmva.smm.lt/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Socialinis-emocinis- ugdymas.-Kas-tai-Kuo-gali-mums-pad%C4%97ti-2009-gruodis.pdf Van, Noorden, T. H.,  Haselager, G. J.,  Cillessen, A. H.,  Bukowski,, & W. M. (2015). Empathy and Involvement in Bullying in Children and Adolescents: a Systematic Review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(3), 637–65. Epub 2014 Jun 4. Accessed on 22nd October, 2018. Available at: https://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24894581 Žukauskienė, R., Malinauskienė, O., & Erentait, R. (2011). Tėvų auklėjimo stiliaus ir emocinio intelekto sąsajos su vyresniųjų paauglių saviveiksmingumu bei saviverte pagal lytį [Effects of Parenting Styles and Emotional Intelligence on Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem in Late Adolescence: Gender Differences]. Psichologija, 44, 22–41. Way, N., & Greene, M. (2006). Trajectories of Perceived Friendship Quality During Adolescence: the Patterns and Contextual Predictors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(2): 293–320. Wells, J., Barlow, J., & Stewart-Brown, S., (2003). A Systematic Review of Universal Approaches to Mental Health Promotion in Schools. Health Education, 103(4): 197–220. White, S. J. (1997). Empathy: a Literature Review and Concept Analysis. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 6(4): 253–257. http://old.ntakd.lt/files/Apklausos_ir_tyrimai/ESPAD_2011_ataskaita_SMM.pdf http://www.nmva.smm.lt/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Socialinis-emocinis-ugdymas.-Kas-tai-Kuo-gali-mums-pad%C4%97ti-2009-gruodis.pdf http://www.nmva.smm.lt/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Socialinis-emocinis-ugdymas.-Kas-tai-Kuo-gali-mums-pad%C4%97ti-2009-gruodis.pdf http://www.nmva.smm.lt/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Socialinis-emocinis-ugdymas.-Kas-tai-Kuo-gali-mums-pad%C4%97ti-2009-gruodis.pdf https://www.ncbi 93 2018, 22, 69–93 p.Adolescents’ Social Emotional Health and Empathy in Lithuanian Sample Wied, M., Goudena, P. P., & Matthys, W. (2005). Empathy in Boys with Disruptive Behavior Disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(8): 867–880. You, S., Furlong, M., Felix, E., & O’Malley, M. (2015).Validation of the Social and Emotional Health Survey for Five Sociocultural Groups: Multigroup Invariance and Latent Mean Analyses. Psychology in the Schools, 52(4): 349–362. We take the opportunity to  express our sincere  thanks  to Prof. M. J. Furlong for encouragement to carry out the research in Lithuania and for consulting while conducting it. PAAUGLIŲ SOCIALINĖ EMOCINĖ SVEIK ATA IR EMPATIJA LIE TUVOS IMT YJE Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Lietuva Santrauka. Problema. Lietuvos mokyklose nemažėja patyčių, savižudybių atvejų, vis dar stebime paauglių įvairių priklausomybių, elgesio ir emocinių sunkumų augimą. Paau- glių psichologinė sveikata daugiau tyrinėjama iš trūkumų perspektyvos, t. y. tiriami veiksniai, susiję pirmiausia su įvairiais sutrikimais, sunkumais ar jų rizika. Itin svarbu tyrinėti paauglio pozityviąją raidą, jos stiprybes ir sveikatos emocinę bei socialinę sritis, kurios gali būti ugdomos. Mūsų tyrime pabrėžiami pozityvios jaunuolių raidos emocinis ir socialinis aspektai. Tyrimo tikslas: ištirti socialinę ir emocinę sveikatą ir empatiją Lietuvos paauglių imtyje bei palyginti pagal paauglių amžių ir lytį. Tyrimo metodai: socialinės ir emocinės sveikatos klausimynas, (You, Furlong et al., 2015) ir Tarpasmeninio reaktyvumo indekso (IRI) skalė (Davis, 1980). Tiriamieji: 600 įvairių Lie- tuvos mokyklų 12–18 metų amžiaus paaugliai. Tyrimo rezultatai ir išvados. SEHS-S pasitikėjimo savimi, bei įsitraukimo ir susidomėjimo gyvenimu labiau išreikšti jaunes- niųjų paauglių (12–15 metų), o empatija (IRI) – vyresniųjų paauglių (16–18 metų), bei mergaičių visų empatijos skalių išreikštumas didesnis nei berniukų (skirtumai statistiš- kai reikšmingi). Atlikto tyrimo rezultatai yra reikšmingi paauglio pozityviosios raidos kontekste, prisideda prie mokinių socialinės ir emocinės sveikatos ugdymo(si). Reikšminiai žodžiai: socialinė ir emocinė sveikata; empatija; lietuvių paauglių imtis. Received: 2018-08-06 Accepted: 2019-01-28 CONTENTS EDITORIAL NOTE SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS Viktorija Cepukiene, Rytis Pakrosnis INTRODUCING UNGUIDED COMPUTERIZED SOLUTION-FOCUSED SELF-HELP INTO UNIVERSITY COUNSELING SERVICES Virginija Klimukienė, Alfredas Laurinavičius, Ilona Laurinaitytė, Laura Ustinavičiūtė, and Mykolas Baltrūnas EXAMINATION OF CONVERGENT VALIDITY OF START: AV RATINGS AMONG MALE JUVENILES ON PROBATION Karina Kravčenko, Laura Šeibokaitė THE EFFECT OF JOY AND ANXIETY ON EGOCENTRIC DECISIONS AMONG YOUNG ADULTS Ala Petrulytė, Virginija Guogienė ADOLESCENTS’ SOCIAL EMOTIONAL HEALTH AND EMPATHY IN LITHUANIAN SAMPLE Kristina Ražauskaitė-Pilipavičienė, Kristina Žardeckaitė-Matulaitienė GENDER DIFFERENCES IN DYADIC DOMINANCE DURING INTERPERSONAL INTERACTION: THE COMPARISON OF FRIENDS’ DYADS AND ROMANTICC OUPLES Lina Cirtautienė, Auksė Endriulaitienė THE INFLUENCE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS FOR LEADER’S EFFICIENCY IN GLOBAL IT COMPANIES Kristina Kovalčikienė, Giedrė Genevičiūtė-Janonė THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE VOCATIONAL TEACHERS’ PERSONALITY TRAITS AND THE WORK MOTIVATION INFORMATION THE 20TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM IN PSYCHOLOGY AT UNK & VDU, DECEMBER 6TH, 2017. ABSTR ACTS THE 21ST INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM IN PSYCHOLOGY AT UNK & VDU, APRIL 25TH, 2018. ABSTR ACTS CONTRIBUTORS REVIEWERS INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS