Suppr超能文献

同理心是一项艰巨的工作:人们选择避免同理心是因为它需要付出认知成本。

Empathy is hard work: People choose to avoid empathy because of its cognitive costs.

机构信息

Department of Psychology.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019 Jun;148(6):962-976. doi: 10.1037/xge0000595. Epub 2019 Apr 18.

Abstract

Empathy is considered a virtue, yet it fails in many situations, leading to a basic question: When given a choice, do people avoid empathy? And if so, why? Whereas past work has focused on material and emotional costs of empathy, here, we examined whether people experience empathy as cognitively taxing and costly, leading them to avoid it. We developed the empathy selection task, which uses free choices to assess the desire to empathize. Participants make a series of binary choices, selecting situations that lead them to engage in empathy or an alternative course of action. In each of 11 studies ( = 1,204) and a meta-analysis, we found a robust preference to avoid empathy, which was associated with perceptions of empathy as more effortful and aversive and less efficacious. Experimentally increasing empathy efficacy eliminated empathy avoidance, suggesting that cognitive costs directly cause empathy choice. When given the choice to share others' feelings, people act as if it is not worth the effort. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

同理心被认为是一种美德,但它在许多情况下都不起作用,这就引出了一个基本问题:人们是否会在有选择的情况下避免产生同理心?如果是这样,为什么?虽然过去的研究集中在同理心的物质和情感成本上,但在这里,我们研究了人们是否认为同理心在认知上是一种负担和代价,从而导致他们回避同理心。我们开发了同理心选择任务,该任务使用自由选择来评估同理心的愿望。参与者进行一系列二元选择,选择能使他们产生同理心或采取替代行动的情境。在 11 项研究(n=1204)和荟萃分析中,我们发现了一种强烈的避免同理心的倾向,这与同理心被认为更费力、更不愉快和效果更差的看法有关。实验性地提高同理心的效果消除了同理心的回避,这表明认知成本直接导致了同理心的选择。当人们有机会分享他人的感受时,他们的行为就好像这并不值得付出努力。(APA 心理学数据库记录(c)2019,保留所有权利)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验