Keywords
empathy
compassionate emotions
attribution of responsibility
individual differences
How to Cite
Abstract
The goal of this research was to determine whether individual differences in empathy and personal distress were robust predictors of compassionate emotions and whether compassionate emotions mediated the effect of attribution of responsibility on intention to help. Four hypotheses about direct and indirect associations between these variables were tested. We manipulated normative attribution of responsibility in an experimental scenario in which the participant is asked to help an individual catch up on missed lectures. Participants (N=627), were randomly assigned to one of the two attribution conditions. The results showed that empathy was a robust predictor of compassionate emotions and that compassionate emotions mediated the effect of attribution of responsibility on intention to help. Importantly, we found that empathy was a stronger predictor of compassionate emotions than attribution of responsibility. The results confirmed our hypothesis that prosocial dispositional variables predict whether an individual will experience compassionate emotions in certain situations. We conclude that models of prosocial decision-making and attributions in social situations should consider prosocial traits, such as empathy, as antecedents of compassionate emotions.
Asendorpf, J. B., Conner, M., Fruyt, F. D. E., Houwer, J. D., Denissen, J. J. A., Fiedler, K., … Vanaken, M. A. G. (2013). Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality, 27, 108–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.1919
Barraza, J. A., & Zak, P. J. (2009). Empathy toward strangers triggers oxytocin release and subsequent generosity. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1167, 182–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04504.x
Baumann, D. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (1981). Altruism as hedonism: Helping and self-gratification as equivalent responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(6), 1039–1046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.6.1039
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
Carlson, M., & Miller, N. (1987). Explanation of the relation between negative mood and helping. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), 91–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.102.1.91
Champely, S. (2012). pwr: Basic functions for power analysis. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/package=pwr
Cialdini, R. B., Schaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman, A. L. (1987). Empathy-based helping: Is it selflessly or selfishly motivated? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 749–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.749
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.44.1.113
De Vignemont, F., & Singer, T. (2006). The empathic brain: How, when and why? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 435–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.008
De Waal, F. B. M. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 279–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625
Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., & Penner, L. A. (2006). The social psychology of prosocial behavior. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eisenberg, N. (2010). Empathy-related responding: Links with self-regulation, moral judgment, and moral behavior. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 129–148). Washington: American Psychological Association.
Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Cumberland, A., Murphy, B. C., Shepard, S. A., Zhou, Q., & Carlo, G. (2002). Prosocial development in early adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 993–1006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.993
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Paciello, M., Fida, R., Cerniglia, L., Tramontano, C., & Cole, E. (2013). High cost helping scenario: The role of empathy, prosocial reasoning and moral disengagement on helping behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(1), 3–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.004
Pavey, L., Greitemeyer, T., & Sparks, P. (2011). Highlighting relatedness promotes prosocial motives and behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(7), 905–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167211405994
Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained volunteerism: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 447–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00270
Penner, L. A., Fritzsche, B. A., Craiger, J. P., & Freifeld, T. R. (1995). Measuring the prosocial personality. In J. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 10, pp. 147–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Penner, L. A., & Orom, H. (2010). Enduring goodness: A person-by-situation perspective on prosocial behavior. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature. (pp. 55–72). Washington: APA.
Perugini, M., Conner, M., & O’Gorman, R. (2011). Automatic activation of individual differences: A test of the gatekeeper model in the domain of spontaneous helping. European Journal of Personality, 25(6), 465–476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.826
Perugini, M., & Prestwich, A. (2007). The gatekeeper: Individual differences are key in the chain from perception to behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 21(3), 303–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.633
Pilati, R., Ferreira, M. C., Porto, J. B., de Oliveira Borges, L., de Lima, I. C., & Lellis, I. L. (2015). Is Weiner's attribution-help model stable across cultures? A test in Brazilian subcultures. International Journal of Psychology, 50(4), 295–302. doi:10.1002/ijop.12100
Pilati, R. (2011). Cenários experimentais: Efeito sobre a emoção e o comportamento pró-social [Experimental simulations: Effect over emotions and prosocial behavior]. Estudos de Psicologia (Natal), 16(2), 163–170. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/epsic/v16n2/v16n2a07
Pilati, R., Leão, M., Vieira, J. N., & Fonseca, M. D. M. (2008). Efeitos da atribuição de causalidade e custo pessoal sobre a intenção de ajuda [Effects of causal attribution and personal cost on helping intention]. Estudos de Psicologia (Natal), 13(3), 213–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-294X2008000300004
R Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org/
Rabelo, A. L. A., Hees, M. A. G., & Pilati, R. (2012). A moderação da prosocialidade entre o priming e a intenção de gentileza [The Moderation of prosociality between the priming and the intention of kindness]. Psico (PUCRS. Online), 43(2), 163–173. Retrieved from http://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/revistapsico/article/view/11694/8040
Rabelo, A. L. A., & Pilati, R. (2013). Adaptação e evidências de validade da Bateria de Personalidade Prosocial [Adaptation and evidence of validity of the Prosocial Personality Battery]. Psico-USF (Impresso), 18(3), 455–468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-82712013000300012
Rudolph, U., Roesch, S. C., Greitemeyer, T., & Weiner, B. (2004). A meta-analytic review of help giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation. Cognition and Emotion, 18(6), 815–848. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930341000248
Sampaio, L. R., & Menezes, I. G. (2011). Estudos sobre a dimensionalidade da empatia: Tradução e adaptação do Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) [Studies on the dimensionality of empathy: Translation and adaptation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI)]. Psico (PUCRS. Online), 42(2), 67–76. Retrieved from http://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/revistapsico/article/view/6456/6302
Saslow, L. R., Willer, R., Feinberg, M., Piff, P. K., Clark, K., Keltner, D., & Saturn, S. R. (2013). My brother’s keeper? Compassion predicts generosity more among less religious individuals. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 31–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550612444137
Stocks, E. L., Lishner, D. A., & Decker, S. K. (2009). Altruism or psychological escape: Why does empathy promote prosocial behavior? European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(5), 649–665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.561
Sze, J. A., Gyurak, A., Goodkind, M. S., & Levenson, R. W. (2012). Greater emotional empathy and prosocial behavior in late life. Emotion, 12(5), 1129–1140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025011
Weiner, B. (1980a). A cognitive (attribution) - Emotion - Action model of motivated behavior: An analysis of judgments of help-giving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 186–200. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=fulltext.journal&jcode=psp&vol=39&issue=2&page=186&format=PDF
Weiner, B. (1980b). May I borrow your class notes? An attributional analysis of judgments of help giving in an achievement-related context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(5), 676–681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.72.5.676
Weiner, B. (2012). An attribution theory of motivation. In P. van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 135–155). Newbury Park: Sage.
Zhang, A., Rivkin, I., & An, N. (2013). Responsibility judgments and responses to people living with AIDS in China: Testing an attributional perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(5), 1029–1039. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12066
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights. Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.