Reply: Spontaneous versus deliberate vicarious representations: different routes to empathy in psychopathy and autism

Keysers, Christian; Meffert, Harma; Gazzola, Valeria

doi:10.1093/brain/awt376

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, in both psychopathy and autism, though individuals may exhibit less automatic empathy, when explicitly instructed to be empathetic (i.e., under effortful control), they are capable of exhibiting significantly higher levels of empathy (Gillespie et al, 2014; Meffert et al, 2013; Senju et al, 2009; related, spontaneous vs. deliberate mimicry in autism: McIntosh et al, 2006; Oberman et al, 2009). Together, these studies suggest that sex differences in empathetic control may play a role in various disorders associated with abnormally high or low levels of empathy, and that the distinction between empathy ability and propensity is particularly relevant for examining individual differences (Keysers and Gazzola, 2014; Keysers et al, 2014). …”

Section: Sex Differences In the Development Of Empathy In Humansmentioning

confidence: 92%

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Christov-Moore

Simpson

Coudé

et al. 2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

769

479

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence suggests that there are differences in the capacity for empathy between males and females. However, how deep do these differences go? Stereotypically, females are portrayed as more nurturing and empathetic, while males are portrayed as less emotional and more cognitive. Some authors suggest that observed gender differences might be largely due to cultural expectations about gender roles. However, empathy has both evolutionary and developmental precursors, and can be studied using implicit measures, aspects that can help elucidate the respective roles of culture and biology. This article reviews evidence from ethology, social psychology, economics, and neuroscience to show that there are fundamental differences in implicit measures of empathy, with parallels in development and evolution. Studies in nonhuman animals and younger human populations (infants/children) offer converging evidence that sex differences in empathy have phylogenetic and ontogenetic roots in biology and are not merely cultural byproducts driven by socialization. We review how these differences may have arisen in response to males’ and females’ different roles throughout evolution. Examinations of the neurobiological underpinnings of empathy reveal important quantitative gender differences in the basic networks involved in affective and cognitive forms of empathy, as well as a qualitative divergence between the sexes in how emotional information is integrated to support decision making processes. Finally, the study of gender differences in empathy can be improved by designing studies with greater statistical power and considering variables implicit in gender (e.g., sexual preference, prenatal hormone exposure). These improvements may also help uncover the nature of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders in which one sex is more vulnerable to compromised social competence associated with impaired empathy.

show abstract

Section: Sex Differences In the Development Of Empathy In Humansmentioning

confidence: 92%

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Christov-Moore

Simpson

Coudé

et al. 2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

769

479

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have suggested that, when compared to observing others in non-painful conditions (neutral condition), observing other's in painful condition triggers stronger activation in a larger set of brain regions, including the anterior insula (AI), anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), amygdala, etc (Keysers, Kaas, & Gazzola, 2010;Keysers, Meffert, & Gazzola, 2014;Lamm, Decety, & Singer, 2011;Rizzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2010). ERP studies, on the other hand, demonstrated more positivity to painful than neutral stimuli in the in N1, N2, and P3 components (Han, Fan, & Mao, 2008;Ibáñez et al, 2011;Meng et al, 2012).…”

Section: Instructions Of Cooperation and Competition Influence The Nementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two hypotheses have been proposed about what is triggered by observing other's pain: the "empathizing hypothesis" and the "threat value of pain hypothesis" (TVPH). The "empathizing hypothesis" suggests that observing other's pain triggers empathic responses, which involve two components: the bottom-up activations of the ACC and AI, supporting the affective resonance (Keysers et al, 2010(Keysers et al, , 2014Lamm et al, 2011;Rizzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2010), and the cognitive component, which is influenced by higher-level, top-down signals originating in the prefrontal cortex (Decety & Lamm, 2006). ERP studies, from the temporal aspect, suggest that the empathy involves two corresponding processes: an early, automatic processing that results in emotional contagion and affective sharing (before 380 ms) and a later, cognitively controlled process that sub-serves by the prefrontal cortex to regulate empathic responses and make a clear selfother distinction (after 380 ms) .…”

Section: Instructions Of Cooperation and Competition Influence The Nementioning

confidence: 99%

Instructions of cooperation and competition influence the neural responses to others’ pain: An ERP study

Cui

Zhu

Duan

et al. 2015

Social Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neural activities triggered by viewing other's in pain have been previously reported to be modulated by various factors. How instructions of cooperation and competition can influence these activities has not been explored yet. In the current study, participants were instructed to play a game cooperatively or competitively with a partner. During the game, pictures showing an anonymous individual's hand or foot in painful or non-painful situations were randomly presented in an oddball style. The event-related potentials (ERPs) when the participants passively observed these pictures under different instructions were compared. We found a significant interaction of Instruction × Picture on the P3 component, where only under competitive instruction did the painful pictures elicit significantly larger amplitudes than the non-painful pictures, but not under the cooperative instruction. This result indicates that the participants were more responsive to other's pain in a competitive context than in a cooperative context.

show abstract

“…Consequently, emotional and cognitive empathy may also be distinguished on the basis of bottom-up versus top-down, also described as automatic versus conscious control (Keysers et al, 2014 distinguish between spontaneous and voluntary empathy).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The brain's mirror system is engaged by actions as well as emotions (Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004) resulting in, for instance, the automatic imitation of others' movements (Chartrand & Bargh, 1999;Mattar et al, 2005). Hence, Keysers et al (2014) refer to 'motor' empathy when subjects vicariously experience activity in their motor cortices while observing action and to 'somatosensory' empathy when subjects experience activity in somatosensory brain regions while viewing others' tactile and haptic sensations (Keysers et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Empathy at the confluence of neuroscience and empirical literary studies

Burke

Kuzmičová

Mangen

et al. 2016

SSOL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this article is to review extant empirical studies of empathy in narrative reading in light of (i) contemporary literary theory, and (ii) neuroscientific studies of empathy, and to discuss how a closer interplay between neuroscience and literary studies may enhance our understanding of empathy in narrative reading. An introduction to some of the philosophical roots of empathy is followed by tracing its application in contemporary literary theory, in which scholars have pursued empathy with varying degrees of conceptual precision, often within the context of embodied/enactive cognition. The presentation of empirical literary studies of empathy is subsequently contextualized by an overview of psychological and neuroscientific aspects of empathy. Highlighting points of convergence and divergence, the discussion illustrates how findings of empirical literary studies align with recent neuroscientific research. The article concludes with some prospects for future empirical research, suggesting that digitization may contribute to advancing the scientific knowledge of empathy in narrative reading.

show abstract

Reply: Spontaneous versus deliberate vicarious representations: different routes to empathy in psychopathy and autism

Cited by 23 publications

References 29 publications

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Instructions of cooperation and competition influence the neural responses to others’ pain: An ERP study

Empathy at the confluence of neuroscience and empirical literary studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About