Pii: S1053-5357(01)00112-3
نویسندگان
چکیده
It’s not easy being empathic. However, unlike snowboarding or yodeling or decoupage, most people manage to pick up empathy skills naturally without the aid of special lessons or designated practice sessions. Knowing what someone else is thinking and feeling allows people to coordinate their activities, something that is useful and necessary in interpersonal interactions. Like any skill, empathy differs from person to person. We can probably all easily think of individuals in our life who anchor the extreme points on a scale of empathy: the cherished person who consistently seems to have our interest at heart at one end, and the insensitive lout at the other end. However, people who never show empathy or are unable to do so are rare and striking in their inability to fit into normal social interactions. At the same time, people who are extremely empathic are rare also, for good reason: Being constantly sensitive to the thoughts and feelings of others would interfere with the ability to act on one’s own thoughts and feelings. How do people generate and maintain a desirable level of empathy? In this paper, we start with the premise that normal people have some capacity for being empathic and define how that capacity is demonstrated. We then explain why empathy is something that needs to be regulated: Despite the obvious advantages of penetrating another person’s thoughts, empathy does not come without its costs. Next, we address two means of regulating empathy: by regulating exposure to stimuli that produce empathy and by regulating the effort expended in attending to another person’s experience.
منابع مشابه
Pii: S1053-5357(00)00058-5
Three radical worldviews and research approaches are salient in social studies: individualism, holism, and systemism. Individualism focuses on the composition of social systems, whereas holism focuses on their structure. Neither of them is adequate, one because all individuals are interrelated and two because there are no relations without relata. The only cogent and viable alternative is syste...
متن کاملPii: S1053-5357(02)00174-9
This paper describes two fundamental modes of thinking. The experiential mode, is intuitive, automatic, natural, and based upon images to which positive and negative affective feelings have been attached through learning and experience. The other mode is analytic, deliberative, and reason based. I describe recent empirical research illuminating “the affect heuristic” wherein people rapidly cons...
متن کاملPii: S1053-5357(02)00142-7
In the tradition of earlier experimental studies, this paper introduces competing reward standards by letting parties bargain over the distribution of chips. The monetary equivalents of a chip for the bargaining parties can be equal (no competing rewards) or different (competing rewards). The ultimatum game is used as a tool to learn about reward standards in an asymmetric procedure. A major ef...
متن کاملPii: S1053-5357(02)00145-2
When a bank grants a loan, it takes the risk that the borrower will not honor his debt. To reduce this uncertainty, banks have created instrumental evaluation methods in order to try to evaluate the risk more objectively. An analysis of financial counselors’ practices shows the limits of these methods. To obtain information needed for the financial risk evaluation and to reduce the information ...
متن کاملPii: S1053-5357(99)00054-2
Economics views work as merely providing purchasing power. Many economists agree that there is a great deal more to work, but they nonetheless feel comfortable with this narrow description, believing that important aspects of work that they have left out of consideration have no impact on the validity of their analytical conclusions and policy propositions. This paper argues that if economics i...
متن کامل