Empowerment Scale (Rogers)
Also known as: ES, Rogers Empowerment Scale
The Empowerment Scale, developed by Elaine Salisbury Rogers and colleagues in 1997, is a 28-item self-report instrument assessing personal empowerment in individuals with serious mental illness. Empowerment reflects the individual's sense of agency, self-efficacy, and power to make meaningful life choices and participate in community. The scale captures three dimensions: self-efficacy/self-esteem, power/powerlessness, and community activism and autonomy. The Empowerment Scale is widely used in recovery-oriented mental health services to assess and monitor personal agency and control.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
The Empowerment Scale is recommended for recovery-oriented mental health services, particularly peer-support programs, community mental health centers, and rehabilitation initiatives. It is useful for identifying individuals with low empowerment who may benefit from strengths-based interventions, peer mentoring, vocational support, or shared decision-making training. The scale is valuable for monitoring the effects of recovery-oriented program modifications (consumer involvement in governance, choice in services, peer-led groups) and for evaluating empowerment as an outcome in its own right.
Strengths & limitations
- Developed by and for consumers with lived experience, ensuring conceptual validity and relevance.
- Multidimensional structure with three interpretable subscales reflecting distinct empowerment domains.
- Good internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.78–0.88) and test–retest reliability (r=0.75–0.84).
- Responsive to change, supporting outcome evaluation in empowerment-focused interventions.
- Captures empowerment as a process and outcome, aligned with recovery-oriented service values.
- Widely adopted in peer-support and consumer-operated programs.
- Some subscale validity issues; the three-factor structure is not always confirmed across samples.
- No universally accepted clinical cutoffs; interpretation relies on comparative or norm-referenced data.
- Reverse-scored items can introduce confusion if respondents are not carefully instructed.
- Limited validation in non-English-speaking or non-Western populations.
- May be sensitive to social desirability bias, particularly on Self-Efficacy items.
Frequently asked
Which items on the Empowerment Scale are reverse-scored?
Reverse-scored items typically include those with negative wording, such as 'I feel powerless' and 'I feel like I have little power'. The exact reverse-scored items vary by version; consult the original publication (Rogers et al., 1997) or the instrument manual for your specific edition. Common reverse-scored items include those numbered around 5, 6, 11, 16, 20, 24 (depending on version).
What does a high Empowerment Scale score mean clinically?
A high empowerment score (>85) indicates the individual has a strong sense of personal agency, self-efficacy, and confidence in managing their life. They likely feel capable of making decisions, have meaningful community participation, and believe they can influence their circumstances. However, high empowerment does not automatically indicate clinical remission or symptom absence; an empowered person may still manage ongoing symptoms.
Can someone have high empowerment but low recovery on other measures?
Yes. Empowerment is one dimension of recovery; others include hope, meaning, identity, and symptom management. A person might feel empowered and self-directed while struggling with depression, anhedonia, or social isolation. Conversely, someone might have low empowerment despite symptom improvement. Comprehensive recovery assessment should include multiple measures.
Is the Empowerment Scale appropriate for individuals with cognitive impairment?
The Empowerment Scale requires sustained attention and abstract thinking about personal agency and control. For individuals with significant cognitive impairment (dementia, moderate intellectual disability), the scale may be less reliable. In such cases, brief or adapted measures, clinician-rated scales, or observational assessment may be more appropriate.
Sources
- Rogers, E. S., Chamberlin, J., Ellison, M. L., & Crean, T. (1997). A consumer-constructed scale to measure empowerment among users of mental health services. Psychiatric Services, 48(8), 1042-1047. DOI: 10.1176/ps.48.8.1042 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Empowerment Scale (Rogers). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/psychiatric-rehabilitation/empowerment-scale-rogers
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Recovery Assessment ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
- Recovery-Oriented Practices IndexPsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
- Social Inclusion ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare