Interpretation bias for ambiguous scenarios among individuals with high and low levels of empathy

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Asian Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-23 DOI:10.1111/ajsp.12620
Yuanyuan Fang, Ting Xu, Haijiang Li
{"title":"Interpretation bias for ambiguous scenarios among individuals with high and low levels of empathy","authors":"Yuanyuan Fang, Ting Xu, Haijiang Li","doi":"10.1111/ajsp.12620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Empathy is the ability to understand and resonate with the emotions of others, typically requiring individuals to infer others' emotional status through the information around them. However, this information is often ambiguous and it is unknown whether individuals with high empathy have a bias in interpreting contextual information. Therefore, this study investigated how individuals with low and high empathy interpret other‐relevant scenarios in Study 1 (N = 98) and self‐relevant scenarios in Study 2 (N = 95), by using the scenarios task and the Sentence Word Association Paradigm (SWAP) separately. Study 1 observed that, for interpretations of other‐relevant scenarios, the high‐empathy group showed greater likelihood ratings for negative interpretations than those with low‐empathy in both social and non‐social scenarios. Study 2 found that, for interpretations of self‐relevant scenarios, the high‐empathy group differed from the low‐empathy group only on non‐social scenarios but not on social scenarios. Specifically, individuals with high empathy were more likely to report a relationship between a negative word and an ambiguous scenario compared to those with low empathy in self‐relevant non‐social scenarios. The study first revealed a bias for highly empathetic individuals to regard the ambiguous scenarios as negative in other‐relevant and self‐relevant scenarios, except for self‐relevant social scenarios.","PeriodicalId":47394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12620","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Empathy is the ability to understand and resonate with the emotions of others, typically requiring individuals to infer others' emotional status through the information around them. However, this information is often ambiguous and it is unknown whether individuals with high empathy have a bias in interpreting contextual information. Therefore, this study investigated how individuals with low and high empathy interpret other‐relevant scenarios in Study 1 (N = 98) and self‐relevant scenarios in Study 2 (N = 95), by using the scenarios task and the Sentence Word Association Paradigm (SWAP) separately. Study 1 observed that, for interpretations of other‐relevant scenarios, the high‐empathy group showed greater likelihood ratings for negative interpretations than those with low‐empathy in both social and non‐social scenarios. Study 2 found that, for interpretations of self‐relevant scenarios, the high‐empathy group differed from the low‐empathy group only on non‐social scenarios but not on social scenarios. Specifically, individuals with high empathy were more likely to report a relationship between a negative word and an ambiguous scenario compared to those with low empathy in self‐relevant non‐social scenarios. The study first revealed a bias for highly empathetic individuals to regard the ambiguous scenarios as negative in other‐relevant and self‐relevant scenarios, except for self‐relevant social scenarios.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
移情能力高低的个体对模糊情景的解释偏差
移情是一种理解他人情绪并与之产生共鸣的能力,通常要求个体通过周围的信息来推断他人的情绪状态。然而,这些信息往往是模棱两可的,移情能力强的人在解释上下文信息时是否会产生偏差,目前还不得而知。因此,本研究通过分别使用情景任务和句子词语联想范式(SWAP),在研究一(98 人)和研究二(95 人)中调查了移情能力低和移情能力高的个体如何解释与他人相关的情景。研究 1 发现,在解释与他人相关的情景时,无论是在社交情景还是非社交情景中,高移情组都比低移情组表现出更高的负面解释可能性评级。研究 2 发现,对于自我相关情景的解释,高移情组与低移情组仅在非社交情景中存在差异,而在社交情景中则没有差异。具体来说,在与自我无关的非社会性情景中,与低移情能力者相比,高移情能力者更有可能报告负面词语与模糊情景之间的关系。研究首先发现,除了与自我相关的社交情景外,在与他人相关和与自我相关的情景中,高移情能力者都倾向于将模糊情景视为负面情景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Social Psychology publishes empirical papers and major reviews on any topic in social psychology and personality, and on topics in other areas of basic and applied psychology that highlight the role of social psychological concepts and theories. The journal coverage also includes all aspects of social processes such as development, cognition, emotions, personality, health and well-being, in the sociocultural context of organisations, schools, communities, social networks, and virtual groups. The journal encourages interdisciplinary integration with social sciences, life sciences, engineering sciences, and the humanities. The journal positively encourages submissions with Asian content and/or Asian authors but welcomes high-quality submissions from any part of the world.
期刊最新文献
Internationalising imperatives and decolonising aspirations: Navigating social psychology teaching in Asia Past, present and future: Colonial comparative victimhood hinders reconciliation with Chinese Indonesians through prejudice among natives Embodied spatial metaphor of cultural concept from the perspective of cultural tightness–looseness: Cultural compatibility concept is closer to the body From marital conflict to life satisfaction: How basic psychological need satisfaction operates—A dyadic analysis study Hierarchical drift‐diffusion modelling uncovers differences of valenced self‐evaluation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1