Rum Yonat, Perry Anat
Psychology Department, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Front Psychiatry. 2020 Jun 3;11:457. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00457. eCollection 2020.
Empathy, broadly defined as the ability to understand the other and to share others' emotions, motivates prosocial behavior and underlies successful interpersonal relations. Dysfunctions in this ability may cause fundamental difficulties in social communication. Empathy has been measured in various ways, from self-report questionnaires to laboratory objective performance tests. Empathic accuracy (EA), i.e., the ability to accurately empathize, is measured using more complex and ecological paradigms, such as asking participants to infer filmed interactions, or having people narrate personal emotional stories then assessing the correspondence between the perceiver and the target of empathy as the criteria for empathic ability. This measure is particularly useful in the study of clinical populations, where deconstructing the multifaceted concept of empathy may contribute to a more complete understanding of specific clinical profiles. This paper presents a scoping review of the literature on EA in clinical populations, and on EA and clinical traits and states in nonclinical or high-risk populations. Following an exhaustive literature search, 34 studies were found eligible to be included in this review. The largest category was studies focused on EA in people with schizophrenia (31%; 11 papers), followed by studies focused on EA in autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and autistic traits in a nonclinical population (22%; 8 papers). Studies were also found on EA and depression tendencies, psychopathy, social anxiety, behavior disorders, and personality disorders, and a few other clinical conditions. The included studies varied on research aims, designs, sample sizes, and male:female ratios. The overall synthesized results suggest that EA is reduced in schizophrenia and ASD. In other clinical populations, the number of studies was very limited. We urge researchers to further examine EA in these less-studied populations. The review reveals a general underrepresentation of female participants in studies on EA in clinical populations. We suggest that future research address understudied clinical populations, such as those diagnosed with psychopathy. Subject, target, and situational variables should also be considered, with special attention to gender differences (and similarities), the association between EA abilities and adaptive functioning, and the study of individuals with clinical conditions as targets, not just observers, in EA tasks.
共情,广义上被定义为理解他人并分享他人情感的能力,它激发亲社会行为并构成成功人际关系的基础。这种能力的功能失调可能会导致社会交往中的根本困难。共情已经通过多种方式进行测量,从自我报告问卷到实验室客观表现测试。共情准确性(EA),即准确共情的能力,是使用更复杂和生态化的范式来测量的,例如要求参与者推断拍摄的互动,或者让人们讲述个人情感故事,然后将感知者与共情对象之间的对应程度作为共情能力的标准进行评估。这种测量方法在临床人群的研究中特别有用,在这类研究中,解构多方面的共情概念可能有助于更全面地理解特定的临床特征。本文对临床人群中关于EA的文献,以及非临床或高风险人群中EA与临床特征和状态的文献进行了范围综述。经过详尽的文献检索,发现有34项研究符合纳入本综述的条件。最大的类别是关注精神分裂症患者EA的研究(3占1%;11篇论文),其次是关注自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)患者的EA以及非临床人群中自闭症特征的研究(占22%;8篇论文)。还发现了关于EA与抑郁倾向、精神病态、社交焦虑、行为障碍和人格障碍以及其他一些临床状况的研究。纳入的研究在研究目的、设计、样本量和男女比例方面各不相同。总体综合结果表明,精神分裂症和ASD患者的EA降低。在其他临床人群中,研究数量非常有限。我们敦促研究人员进一步研究这些较少被研究的人群中的EA。该综述揭示,在临床人群中关于EA的研究中,女性参与者普遍代表性不足。我们建议未来的研究关注研究较少的临床人群,如被诊断为精神病态的人群。还应考虑主体、目标和情境变量,特别关注性别差异(和相似性)、EA能力与适应性功能之间的关联,以及在EA任务中将患有临床疾病的个体作为目标而非仅仅作为观察者进行研究。