Mascaro Jennifer S, Florian Marianne P, Ash Marcia J, Palmer Patricia K, Frazier Tyralynn, Condon Paul, Raison Charles
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Graduate Division of Religion, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2020 Oct 2;11:547241. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547241. eCollection 2020.
Over the last decade, empirical research on compassion has burgeoned in the biomedical, clinical, translational, and foundational sciences. Increasingly sophisticated understandings and measures of compassion continue to emerge from the abundance of multidisciplinary and cross-disciplinary studies. Naturally, the diversity of research methods and theoretical frameworks employed presents a significant challenge to consensus and synthesis of this knowledge. To bring the empirical findings of separate and sometimes siloed disciplines into conversation with one another requires an examination of their disparate assumptions about what compassion is and how it can be known. Here, we present an integrated theoretical review of methodologies used in the empirical study of compassion. Our goal is to highlight the distinguishing features of each of these ways of knowing compassion, as well as the strengths and limitations of applying them to specific research questions. We hope this will provide useful tools for selecting methods that are tailored to explicit objectives (methods matching), taking advantage of methodological complementarity across disciplines (methods mixing), and incorporating the empirical study of compassion into fields in which it may be missing.
在过去十年中,关于同情心的实证研究在生物医学、临床、转化医学和基础科学领域迅速发展。多学科和跨学科研究层出不穷,对同情心的理解和衡量也日益精细。自然地,所采用的研究方法和理论框架的多样性给这一知识的共识和整合带来了重大挑战。要使不同学科(有时甚至是相互孤立的学科)的实证研究结果相互交流,就需要审视它们对同情心是什么以及如何认识同情心的不同假设。在此,我们对同情心实证研究中使用的方法进行综合理论综述。我们的目标是突出每种认识同情心方式的显著特征,以及将它们应用于特定研究问题的优势和局限性。我们希望这将为选择适合明确目标的方法(方法匹配)、利用跨学科的方法互补性(方法混合)以及将同情心的实证研究纳入可能缺失该研究的领域提供有用工具。