Current Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Debates on Empathy

Engelen, Eva-Maria; Röttger‐Rössler, Birgitt

doi:10.1177/1754073911422287

Cited by 61 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, there is some ambiguity in how one defines empathy or the act of feeling into another [5]. Some readers may confuse empathy with pity or sympathy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, it is important to understand that empathy is not the same as sympathy or pity. Pitying someone is where you feel sorry for them, whereas sympathy is being in favor of someone [5]. There is no doubt the expression of sympathy can be useful during physicianpatient interactions; but its expression can be modified by the initial vicarious response of the physician as they react to Table 2 for explanation) [13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Being empathic not only benefits the patient, but it also has a positive impact upon the physician who can be more effective and provide better care [4]. Although the distinction between the two can be considered somewhat blurred [5,6], empathy is a multidimensional trait divided into two main definitions or types: vicarious and imaginative. Vicarious empathy is "an individual's vicarious emotional response to perceived emotional experiences of others"; whereas, imaginative empathy is "an individual's ability to imaginatively take the role of another so as to understand and accurately predict that person's thoughts, feelings and actions."…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Who Has Heart? Vicarious Empathy vs. Residency Match

Newton¹,

Clardy²,

Barber³

et al. 2014

Med.Sci.Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are two types of empathy-vicarious and cognitive-and having empathy is critical for establishing a successful physician-patient relationship. A physician who establishes an empathic connection with their patients has greater patient compliance and fewer malpractice suits. We hypothesized students who showed greater vicarious empathy would more likely enter specialties with greater patient contact and continuity of care. This study preferentially examined vicarious empathy using the Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale (BEES). At the start of the medical school senior year, the BEES was given to the 2001-2004 University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences graduating classes. Residency match was also obtained. Specialties were divided into core and non-core categories. The 5 core specialties (family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics/gynecology, and psychiatry) exhibit greater degrees of patient contact and continuity of care; the other 18 specialties were considered noncore with lesser degrees of continuity of patient care. The average BEES score for a normal population is 45. The average BEES score for the combined male and female cohort, for specialties with an n≥7 (14 of 23 specialties), ranged from 49.19 to 15.06 for obstetrics/gynecology and orthopedics, respectively. Four of the five core specialties were the top four in the rank-order list, with combined cohort average BEES scores ranging from 49.19 to 37.15 for obstetrics/gynecology and family medicine, respectively. The core specialty with the lowest combined average BEES score, internal medicine (33.81), was ranked sixth out of 14 specialties. Non-core specialties had combined cohort average BEES scores that ranged from 35.68 (anesthesiology) to 15.06 (orthopedics). Data support the hypothesis; core specialties, characterized by continuity of patient care, are chosen most often by men and women medical students who have higher BEES scores.

show abstract

“…Therefore, there is some ambiguity in how one defines empathy or the act of feeling into another [5]. Some readers may confuse empathy with pity or sympathy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who Has Heart? Vicarious Empathy vs. Residency Match

Newton¹,

Clardy²,

Barber³

et al. 2014

Med.Sci.Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding the operationalization of collective empathy, based on individual-level studies [65,31] and group-level studies [4,50,53,86], we suggest that collective empathy is a multidimensional construct composed of (a) cognitive (i.e., collective perspective taking or the extent to which team members attempt to understand each other by imagining the others' perspective), (b) affective (i.e., collective empathic concern or the extent to which team members feel concern for a person or group of people), and (c) behavioral (i.e., outward display of empathy or affective responsiveness) dimensions. These dimensions are reflective measures, which are observed variables that serve as manifest indicators of the collective empathy of a project team.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antecedents and consequences of collective empathy in software development project teams

Akgün

Keskin

Cebecioglu

et al. 2015

Information & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recent review by Cuff and colleagues (Cuff et al, 2016) revealed that many definitions have adopted Davis's view by including both affective aspects (i.e., feeling what someone else is feeling) and cognitive aspects (i.e., perspective taking). Other related concepts such as empathic concern and empathic accuracy have also emerged as possible components of empathy, each lending a hand to the current understanding (and confusion) of the construct (Blanke, Rauers, & Riediger, 2015;Engelen & Röttger-Rössler, 2012). More recent research has emphasized the neuropsychological foundations of empathy in an effort to describe the intrapersonal processes involved in empathic experience (e.g., De Vignemont & Singer, 2006;Walter, 2012).…”

Section: Defining Empathymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Interpersonal Functions of Empathy: A Relational Perspective

Main¹,

Walle²,

Kho

et al. 2017

Emotion Review

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empathy is an extensively studied construct, but operationalization of effective empathy is routinely debated in popular culture, theory, and empirical research. This article offers a process-focused approach emphasizing the relational functions of empathy in interpersonal contexts. We argue that this perspective offers advantages over more traditional conceptualizations that focus on primarily intrapsychic features (i.e., within the individual). Our aim is to enrich current conceptualizations and empirical approaches to the study of empathy by drawing on psychological, philosophical, medical, linguistic, and anthropological perspectives. In doing so, we highlight the various functions of empathy in social interaction, underscore some underemphasized components in empirical studies of empathy, and make recommendations for future research on this important area in the study of emotion.

show abstract

Current Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Debates on Empathy

Cited by 61 publications

References 15 publications

Who Has Heart? Vicarious Empathy vs. Residency Match

Who Has Heart? Vicarious Empathy vs. Residency Match

Antecedents and consequences of collective empathy in software development project teams

The Interpersonal Functions of Empathy: A Relational Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About