作者回复:同理心和创造力:方法论的尾巴摇概念的狗的危险

IF 3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Emotion Review Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1177/17540739221108220
Brett A. Murphy, Sara B. Algoe
{"title":"作者回复:同理心和创造力:方法论的尾巴摇概念的狗的危险","authors":"Brett A. Murphy, Sara B. Algoe","doi":"10.1177/17540739221108220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The three commentaries on “Why We Should Reject the Restrictive Isomorphic Matching (RIM) Definition of Empathy” mostly concurred with our critique of that widely adopted definition of empathy. Yet, commenters also raised important questions relating to the clarity and operationalizability of our recommended alternative: returning to a classical conceptualization of empathy as a dynamic, functionally oriented, multi-faceted unfolding process. To help contextualize these issues, we provide an extended analogy between empathy research and creativity research, areas of study which are conceptually linked and have faced similar conceptual and methodological obstacles. In doing so, we highlight the challenge of (a) distilling empathy down to a firm operationalizable definition without (b) losing sight of the general meaning and real-world value of the construct.","PeriodicalId":48064,"journal":{"name":"Emotion Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"189 - 193"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Authors Reply: Empathy and Creativity: Dangers of the Methodological Tail Wagging the Conceptual Dog\",\"authors\":\"Brett A. Murphy, Sara B. Algoe\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17540739221108220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The three commentaries on “Why We Should Reject the Restrictive Isomorphic Matching (RIM) Definition of Empathy” mostly concurred with our critique of that widely adopted definition of empathy. Yet, commenters also raised important questions relating to the clarity and operationalizability of our recommended alternative: returning to a classical conceptualization of empathy as a dynamic, functionally oriented, multi-faceted unfolding process. To help contextualize these issues, we provide an extended analogy between empathy research and creativity research, areas of study which are conceptually linked and have faced similar conceptual and methodological obstacles. In doing so, we highlight the challenge of (a) distilling empathy down to a firm operationalizable definition without (b) losing sight of the general meaning and real-world value of the construct.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emotion Review\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"189 - 193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emotion Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17540739221108220\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emotion Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17540739221108220","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于“为什么我们应该拒绝移情的限制性同构匹配(RIM)定义”的三篇评论大多与我们对广泛采用的移情定义的批评一致。然而,评论者也提出了与我们推荐的替代方案的清晰度和可操作性有关的重要问题:回归移情的经典概念,将其视为一个动态的、功能导向的、多方面的展开过程。为了帮助将这些问题置于情境中,我们在移情研究和创造力研究之间进行了扩展的类比,这两个研究领域在概念上有联系,并面临着类似的概念和方法障碍。在这样做的过程中,我们强调了以下挑战:(a)在不忽视结构的一般意义和现实世界价值的情况下,将同理心提炼为一个可操作的坚定定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Authors Reply: Empathy and Creativity: Dangers of the Methodological Tail Wagging the Conceptual Dog
The three commentaries on “Why We Should Reject the Restrictive Isomorphic Matching (RIM) Definition of Empathy” mostly concurred with our critique of that widely adopted definition of empathy. Yet, commenters also raised important questions relating to the clarity and operationalizability of our recommended alternative: returning to a classical conceptualization of empathy as a dynamic, functionally oriented, multi-faceted unfolding process. To help contextualize these issues, we provide an extended analogy between empathy research and creativity research, areas of study which are conceptually linked and have faced similar conceptual and methodological obstacles. In doing so, we highlight the challenge of (a) distilling empathy down to a firm operationalizable definition without (b) losing sight of the general meaning and real-world value of the construct.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Emotion Review
Emotion Review PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Emotion Review is a fully peer reviewed scholarly journal. It adheres to a blinded peer review process in which the reviewer"s name is routinely withheld from the author unless the reviewer requests a preference for their identity to be revealed. All manuscripts are reviewed initially by the Editors and only those papers that meet the scientific and editorial standards of the journal, and fit within the aims and scope of the journal, will be sent for outside review. Emotion Review will focus on ideas about emotion, with "emotion" broadly defined. The Review will publish articles presenting new theories, offering conceptual analyses, reviewing the literature, and debating and critiquing conceptual issues.
期刊最新文献
Comment: A New Typology of Nostalgia: Its Promise and a Limitation Shame is Personal, Not Ontological Emotion in Nonverbal Communication: Comparing Animal and Human Vocalizations and Human Text Messages Arousal: Reports of Its Demise May Be Premature Affective Influences on the Intensity of Mental Effort: 25 Years of Programmatic Research
×
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