You’ve probably already heard of the importance of having empathy in your relationships.
Maybe you read about it in a personal development book, or perhaps someone told you about it.
Although the concept of empathy is used extensively among people, the general comprehension of this term — i.e., the ability to understand another person’s feelings and emotions — does not give the full picture of what empathy really is.
In this blog post, I will share with you 5 essential facts about empathy that will help you to better understand what it actually is.
In order to achieve this goal, I will review the study conducted by Cuff et al.¹ (2014), who carried out a detailed analysis on this concept.
Finally, I will share their definition of empathy which, in my opinion, is the best in class.
Let’s get into it.
1. Empathy results from the interaction between trait and situational factors
The first important fact about empathy is that it originates from the interaction between both trait and situational factors.
In fact, although research has confirmed that one’s ability to feel empathy is influenced by anatomical differences², as well as genetic and developmental elements³, it has also demonstrated that it is greatly impacted by situational and environmental factors.
Here are a few examples:
- Mood⁴
- The degree of similarity between the observer and the target⁵ (observer = entity experiencing the empathetic response; target = entity triggering the empathetic response)
- Blame⁶
- How worthy the target is to the observer⁷
- Perceived power⁸
- Perceived need⁹
- Cognitive load¹⁰
The behavior of sex offenders perfectly shows that empathy is the result of a combination of trait and situational factors.
Although it might be easy to conclude that rapists merely lack the ability to feel empathy towards others, this is generally not the case.
As a matter of fact, research has shown that sex offenders typically don’t have a deficit in the capacity to be empathetic, but they are simply able to evade it for certain people or groups of people¹¹.
2. Empathy can be cognitive and/or affective
An empathetic response can be cognitive and/or affective.
Cognitive empathy occurs when the observer comprehends the target’s emotions, while affective empathy arises when the observer experiences emotions similar to those felt by the target.
Although affective and cognitive empathy can be considered separately, it is important to keep in mind the interaction between them.
An interesting viewpoint on the interplay between these two components of empathy is that of Stayer¹² (1987), who states that the affective element makes up the content of empathy, while the cognitive one consititutes the process through which this content is created.
3. Empathy does not need the presence of an emotional other
Another interesting fact about empathy is that the observer (the person experiencing empathy) does not require the presence of an emotional other to have an empathetic response.
Why?
Because empathy can result from other types of emotional triggers¹³, such as your imagination (for example when you feel empathy for a book or movie character) and a third party referral (when a person talks to you about another’s emotional experience).
4. Empathy requires you to recognize that the source of your emotions is external
The fourth component of empathy according to Cuff et al. (2014) is the observer’s awareness that the source of his/her empathetic response is external and does not originate from within him/herself.
This point is essential, as it enables to differentiate between empathetic responses and emotional contagions¹, where the observer is not aware that the emotions he/she feels are not of his/her own but originate from an external stimuli.
5. Empathy is not always automatic
Finally, empathy does not necessarily arise automatically in response to an emotional trigger.
In fact, although neurosicentific research¹⁴ ¹⁵ confirms that empathy can originate spontaneously when we perceive an emotional other, it also supports the idea that it is “a state of mind that we can reflect upon, control, and modify” (Hodges & Wegner, 1997, as cited in Cuff et al., 2014, p. 150).
This means that both the rise and the avoidance of an empathetic response can be influenced by our state mind.
Here are some processes that the brain can use to impact empathetic responses:
- Reframing, i.e. a method to change your viewpoints and cognitions
- Suppression, i.e, “not thinking about the situation” (Cuff et al., 2014, p. 150)
- Exposure control, i.e., how much you expose yourself to emotional situations
The best definition of empathy
Now that you gained a deeper insight into empathetic responses, you have the knoweldge required to fully comprehend the definition of empathy provided by Cuff et al. (2014) which, as previously mentioned, is definitely the best out there.
Here it is:
“Empathy is an emotional response (affective), dependent upon the interaction between trait capacities and state influences. Empathic processes are automatically elicited but are also shaped by top-down control processes. The resulting emotion is similar to one’s perception (directly experienced or imagined) and understanding (cognitive empathy) of the stimulus emotion, with recognition that the source of the emotion is not one’s own.”
Cuff et al., 2014, p.150
I really hope that you enjoyed this blogpost and that it helped you to better understand what empathy is 🙂
If you did, please comment, share, and feel free to check out other posts from my blog!
Here are 2 pieces of content that might interest you:
Also, I’d love to connect with you on Social Media! You can find me on Instagram or Pinterest <3
References
- Cuff et al., 2014. Empathy: A Review of the Concept. Emotion Review, 144–153.
- Banissy et al., 2012. Inter-individual differences in empathy are reflected in human brain structure. Neuroimage, 1053–8119. Retrieved from
- Eisenberg & Morris, 2001. The Origins and Social Significance of Empathy-Related Responding. A Review of Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice by M. L. Hoffman. Social Justice Research, 95–120.
- Pithers, 1999. Empathy: Definition, Enhancement, and Relevance to the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. Sage Journals, 257–284.
- Eklund et al., (2009). “I’ve also experienced loss and fear”: Effects of prior similar experience on empathy — PubMed (nih.gov). Scandinavian Journal of Psychology.
- Rodolph et al., 2004. A meta‐analytic review of help giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation. Cognition and Emotion, 815–848.
- Batson et al., 2007. An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 65–74.
- Galinsky et al., 2006. Power and Perspectives Not Taken. Psychological Science, 1068–1074.
- Lishner et al., 2011. Tenderness and Sympathy: Distinct Empathic Emotions Elicited by Different Forms of Need. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5) 614–625.
- Rameson et al., 2012. The Neural Correlates of Empathy: Experience, Automaticity, and Prosocial Behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24 (1): 235–245.
- Fernandez et al., 1999. The Child Molester Empathy Measure: Description and Examination of Its Reliability and Validity. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17–31.
- Strayer, J. (1987). Affective and cognitive processes in empathy. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 218–244).
- Blair, 2005. Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations. Consciousness and Cognition, 698–718.
- Singer et al., 2004. Empathy for Pain Involves the Affective but not Sensory Components of Pain. Science, 1157–1162.
- Hodges & Wegner, 1997. Automatic and controlled empathy. In W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic accuracy (pp. 311–340).