Past adversity protects against the numeracy bias in compassion.

Abstract

Past research has suggested that one problematic limitation of compassion is its seeming resistance to increase in response to growing numbers of targets in distress. This insensitivity to numeracy results in the dampening of compassion when faced with mass suffering. Given that emerging evidence suggests that facing past adversity in life may foster compassion and a general prosocial orientation, we explored whether those who have experienced greater adversity show a resistance to this numeracy bias. In a series of four experiments, we demonstrate not only that those who have experienced greater adversity readily overcome the numeracy bias in compassion, but also that beliefs regarding their ability to be efficacious in helping others underlie this link. Of import, we also show that direct manipulation of such efficacy beliefs can remove the numeracy bias in compassion typically found among those who have not endured significant life adversity. Finally, we explore the ability of adversity to engender prosocial donations to those in need via mechanisms involving compassion and efficacy beliefs.

Recovering the Relational Starting Point of Compassion Training: A Foundation for Sustainable and Inclusive Care

“…In addition to concerns about emotional exhaustion and effort, when people think that they lack the efficacy to address other’s needs, they choose to avoid empathic engagement (Cameron et al, 2019). In contrast, increased confidence in one’s empathic abilities enhances empathic engagement (Cameron et al, 2019; Lim & DeSteno, 2019; Sharma & Morwitz, 2016). Likewise, the belief that empathy is a skill that can grow through one’s efforts increases people’s willingness to empathize when it is challenging (e.g., toward a member of an out-group; Schumann, Zaki, & Dweck, 2014).…”

“… 1. Although emotional exhaustion and lack of self-efficacy are distinct reasons why people avoid empathy, diverse affective and cognitive facets are likely intertwined in acts of prosocial behavior in ordinary life (Zaki & Ochsner, 2012). In support of the latter view, research has demonstrated that self-efficacy partially mediates an increase in compassion for an increasing number of others in need, suggesting additional psychological processes at play (Lim & DeSteno, 2019). Aversive feelings that accompany one’s perception of lacking self-efficacy may also contribute to empathic distress. …”

Recovering the relational starting point of compassion training: A foundation for sustainable and inclusive care.

“…Notes 1 Although emotional exhaustion and lack of self-efficacy are distinct reasons why people avoid empathy, diverse affective and cognitive facets are likely intertwined in acts of prosocial behavior in ordinary life (Zaki & Ochsner, 2012). In support of the latter view, research has demonstrated that self-efficacy partially mediates an increase in compassion for an increasing number of others in need, suggesting additional psychological processes at play (Lim & DeSteno, 2019). Aversive feelings that accompany one's perception of lacking self-efficacy may also contribute to empathic distress.…”

“…In addition to concerns about emotional exhaustion and effort, when people think that they lack the efficacy to address others' needs, they choose to avoid empathic engagement (Cameron et al, 2019). In contrast, increased confidence in one's ability to empathize and meet others' needs enhances empathic engagement (Cameron et al, 2019;Lim & DeSteno, 2019;Sharma & Morwitz, 2016). Also, the belief that empathy is a skill that can grow through one's efforts increases people's willingness to empathize when it is challenging (e.g., toward a member of an out-group; Schumann, Zaki, & Dweck, 2014).…”

When does empathy feel good?

“…6]. Research in a variety of areas indicates that self-efficacy is an important element for inducing prosocial action (e.g., [40,41,42,43]). Importantly, in the context of the Empathy Selection Task, there is no request for action beyond empathizing itself (i.e., there is no one to help).…”