Examining empathic accuracy in a standardized task and in a naturalistic interaction: Associations, differences, and links with empathy

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Alexandrija Zikic , Thomas H. Khullar , Jonas P. Nitschke , Katya Santucci , Erin Macdonald , Jennifer A. Bartz , Lauren J. Human , Melanie A. Dirks
{"title":"Examining empathic accuracy in a standardized task and in a naturalistic interaction: Associations, differences, and links with empathy","authors":"Alexandrija Zikic ,&nbsp;Thomas H. Khullar ,&nbsp;Jonas P. Nitschke ,&nbsp;Katya Santucci ,&nbsp;Erin Macdonald ,&nbsp;Jennifer A. Bartz ,&nbsp;Lauren J. Human ,&nbsp;Melanie A. Dirks","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2024.113016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Empathic accuracy (EA) – the ability to infer others' emotions accurately – is typically conceptualized as a perceiver-level skill. This perspective implies that performance on different EA tasks should be correlated. Further, EA should be associated with trait empathy, given the theoretical similarity between the constructs, and that EA tasks are often used as behavioural measures of cognitive empathy. We examined the conceptualization of EA as a perceiver-level skill, and as a measure of perceivers' cognitive empathy. We recruited friend dyads (<em>N</em> = 137 dyads, M<sub>age</sub> = 19.61 years, SD<sub>age</sub> = 1.34 years) and tested associations and differences between EA measured with a personal task (rating the affect of a friend following a supportive interaction), and a standardized task (rating the affect of unknown targets discussing emotional events). Additionally, we examined associations between EA and cognitive and affective empathy. Analyses revealed low correspondence in EA between tasks and videos. EA was higher on each of the standard-task videos compared to in the personal task. Finally, greater self-report affective empathy, but not cognitive empathy, was linked to greater EA in both tasks. These findings challenge the notion that EA is a skill of the perceiver. Implications for conceptualizing and measuring empathic accuracy are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"236 ","pages":"Article 113016"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886924004768","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Empathic accuracy (EA) – the ability to infer others' emotions accurately – is typically conceptualized as a perceiver-level skill. This perspective implies that performance on different EA tasks should be correlated. Further, EA should be associated with trait empathy, given the theoretical similarity between the constructs, and that EA tasks are often used as behavioural measures of cognitive empathy. We examined the conceptualization of EA as a perceiver-level skill, and as a measure of perceivers' cognitive empathy. We recruited friend dyads (N = 137 dyads, Mage = 19.61 years, SDage = 1.34 years) and tested associations and differences between EA measured with a personal task (rating the affect of a friend following a supportive interaction), and a standardized task (rating the affect of unknown targets discussing emotional events). Additionally, we examined associations between EA and cognitive and affective empathy. Analyses revealed low correspondence in EA between tasks and videos. EA was higher on each of the standard-task videos compared to in the personal task. Finally, greater self-report affective empathy, but not cognitive empathy, was linked to greater EA in both tasks. These findings challenge the notion that EA is a skill of the perceiver. Implications for conceptualizing and measuring empathic accuracy are discussed.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.70%
发文量
577
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信