Complex post-traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) stemming from childhood sexual abuse (CSA) is characterized by profound interpersonal difficulties in later life. Despite the crucial role empathy plays in social functioning, the specific deficits in emotional and cognitive empathy in CPTSD remain understudied. This study employs a rich, naturalistic empathy task to investigate empathic responses among women with CPTSD following childhood sexual abuse. Female participants with CPTSD following CSA and female controls viewed autobiographical videos containing emotional pain, while providing dynamic ratings of their own distress and post-viewing assessments of their own and the targets' emotions. The results showed that the CPTSD group had higher levels of baseline and sustained anxiety compared to the controls, which is consistent with their heightened distress and hyperarousal clinical profiles. Emotional empathy, operationalized as synchrony between participants' and targets' distress ratings, was significantly lower in the CPTSD group, indicating diminished alignment with others' emotional experiences. Cognitive deficits were evident in the systematic underestimation of targets' anger. This study significantly contributes to the understanding of empathy deficits in CPTSD following CSA and potentially informs therapeutic strategies targeted for this population. Specifically, the findings suggest that interventions aimed at improving emotional attunement and fostering the recognition and expression of anger may enhance social functioning and therapeutic outcomes for women with complex trauma stemming from childhood sexual abuse.

Understanding how LLM provide emotional support differently from humans is crucial given the prevalence of AI emotional support. We focused on a highly researched emotion regulation strategy, cognitive reappraisal, the ability to reinterpret emotional situations to impact their intensity (N = 3,740). We compared trained humans and GPT-4 in their ability to perform reappraisal of vignettes (Study 1) and in real-time interactions rated by the person experiencing the reappraisal (Study 2), showing that GPT-4 outperformed humans. Incentivizing humans to produce better reappraisals led to increased time spent on the task but did not close the gap (Study 3). Labeling the reappraisals as produced by AI reduced participants’ evaluation of the effectiveness of the reappraisal, though GPT-4 was still considered more effective (Study 4). Language analysis revealed differences in specific language use that were associated with quality. These results advance our understanding of emotional support provided by humans and AI.

Empathy plays a central role in human emotional relationships. Empathic accuracy, the ability to accurately infer another person’s emotional state, varies by informational modality and, in humans, is often intertwined with emotional and motivational processes. This study examines whether state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) - GPT-4, Claude, and Gemini - demonstrate empathic accuracy, and how their accuracy compares to that of humans when presented with only the semantic content (transcripts of recorded videos) of ecological, complex autobiographical emotional narratives. We compared the empathic accuracy of LLMs to that of human participants (N = 127, randomly sampled students, both in-lab and online) who either read the same transcripts or watched the original videos, which enabled them to use facial and bodily expressions, as well as paralinguistic cues, in addition to semantics. LLMs were able to infer emotional states from semantic content alone with a precision that is equal to or surpasses human performance. This was true both generally and when analyzing positive and negative emotions separately. Theoretically, these findings suggest that semantic information alone can support high empathic accuracy, though humans may not fully leverage this potential. Practical implications are discussed regarding the use of LLMs in introspective and emotional contexts, while raising critical concerns about privacy, ethical risks, and the potential reshaping of emotional understanding, intimacy, and human connection in an increasingly AI-mediated world.

Artificial Intelligence models can generate emotional support messages that people perceive to be highly empathic; however, people also perceive less empathy if they believe that messages were AI-generated. This new focus on how the empathy recipient perceives human-written versus AI-generated empathic responses has recently gained attention.

We review and synthesize recent empirical work using meta-analyses, clarify claims and limitations, and highlight future directions. This emerging literature carries significant implications for fundamental research on empathy, for public discourse as the use of AI for emotional supportrapidly grows, and for policymakers considering regulation and ethical guidance.

In our digitally connected world, interpersonal interactions increasingly occur through online platforms offering varied information channels. This research investigates the unique contribution of visual cues to emotional communication, examining both cognitive and affective aspects. We categorize affective experiences into three domains and explore how visual feedback enhances each and promotes prosocial behavior. Across three ecological dyadic studies on Zoom (N = 710), findings show that while visual information does not significantly enhance emotion-assessment accuracy, it shapes the affective experience of communication. Visual cues increased perceptions of listening, togetherness, and empathy, primarily influencing storytellers' perceptions. Active engagement through body gestures and eye gaze proved crucial in fostering positive interactions, even in online settings. Visual feedback also enhanced prosocial behavior, suggesting that visual elements not only enhance the experience of “being seen,” but motivate altruistic actions as well. The results reveal a complex interplay between visual and auditory cues, with vocal responsiveness only partially compensating for absent visual feedback. These findings have significant implications for social relations in a digital world, as the absence or presence of visual cues can profoundly shape the outcomes of our social interactions.

Inequity aversion is a fundamental social preference. Concern for others’ welfare is yet another fundamental social preference. What do people prefer when maximizing others’ welfare creates an inequality that disadvantages them? Prior research has shown that people’s preferences depend on their level of agency, that is, their control over the allocation. Behaviorally, agentic decision makers have been shown to be more likely to prefer allocations that give another person more than them, compared to non-agentic ones. However, the cognitive processes underlying this shift of preference remain unclear. Here, we used mouse-tracking and reaction times to investigate how agency shapes social preferences in such cases. We examined decision conflict, the level of conflict experienced in arriving at a given choice, as a way to uncover whether different underlying social preferences are at play when one has versus does not have agency. We predicted an interaction effect of agency and choice on conflict, where choosing the prosocial option would be associated with less conflict in the Agency condition compared to the No-Agency condition, and that the opposite would be true for the equitable option. In our task, on each of trial, participants were presented with two allocation options: an equitable option (e.g., 50 cents for self, 50 cents for other) and an inequitable and prosocial option, favoring the other participant over oneself (e.g., 50 cents for self, 70 cents for other). Agentic participants chose one option to be implemented, whereas non-agentic participants indicated their preference, knowing that the lab manager had already made the decision. In two studies (N = 586), including a preregistered one, an interaction effect emerged in both mouse trajectory and reaction time analyses. These results suggest that agency alters social preferences during the decision-making process, and challenge traditional inequity aversion models claiming that people inherently dislike inequitable outcomes. Granting agency may be a powerful tool for maximizing social welfare in situations where equity and prosocial behavior are at odds.

This study investigates the effects of disclosing an autism diagnosis on non-autistic listeners' empathy and social interest towards the autistic discloser. In Study 1, participants (non-autistic students in the social sciences/humanities [n = 99; 70% female]) watched a video of an autistic adult sharing an autobiographical story and reported how they believed the storyteller felt, following an introduction in which the storyteller did or did not disclose their diagnosis. Their evaluation of the storyteller's emotions was compared to the storyteller's own reports, resulting in an empathic accuracy measure. Participants reported how empathic they felt towards the storyteller and how socially interested they were in them. Studies 2 and 3 replicated the same procedure with STEM students (n = 96; 40% female), and with non-student adults (n = 76; 50% female) from diverse professional/occupational backgrounds, with an additional question about working together. In Study 1, participants in the self-disclosure condition demonstrated higher empathic accuracy, reported more empathy, and greater social interest in the storyteller. Study 2 showed a similar trend of higher empathy in the self-disclosure condition but no differences in social interest measures. Interest in working with the storyteller was higher in the self-disclosure condition. In Study 3, participants in the self-disclosure condition demonstrated higher empathy and greater interest in hearing another story and working with the storyteller. An individual's self-disclosure of an autism diagnosis improved others' ability to empathize with them and willingness to work with them. We discuss the complex effect of self-disclosure on social interest in an autistic person.

 

Intergroup emotions play an integral part in conflicts, as they shape both intragroup and intergroup behaviors. These emotions mobilize societies in favor of either war or peace (Cohen-Chen et al., 2014b; Halperin et al., 2011). Lines of research have demonstrated that discrete emotions have been associated with specific outcomes of war/peace processes (Gayer et al., 2009; Halperin et al., 2013; Spanovic et al., 2010). Based on the valence of the emotion, and later on the valence of the outcome associated with it (Cohen-Chen et al., 2020), emotions were divided into constructive and destructive emotions, regardless of the power status of the group, which remains an understudied factor. For example, anger has been considered a destructive emotion motivating violence, whereas empathy had been seen as a constructive emotion mobilizing support for peace (Cheung-Blunden & Blunden, 2008; Maoz & McCauley, 2005). In this chapter, we challenge the oversimplistic approach by offering a novel framework that incorporates group power status in the categorization of the instrumentality of emotions.

 

Previous literature shows that differing realities in asymmetrical conflict also influence group goals and interests (Leshem & Halperin, 2020). Both high- and low-power groups aim to end war and bloodshed, but power dynamics lead the high-power group to prioritize harmonious relationships and maintain the status quo and, thus, may oppose compromises. This approach safeguards privileges and minimizes resistance. Conversely, the disadvantaged group prioritizes justice, having endured unequal circumstances and seeking to change the status quo by their own means, such as collective action.

The main implication of the fact that high- and low-power groups in conflicts have different goals and aspirations is that, for each group, different emotions play different roles in promoting these goals and aspirations, and consequently, in mobilizing them toward war or peace. To address that complexity, we propose a novel theoretical framework in which these desirable goals have underlying emotions that could be categorized into three units: constructive, destructive, and differential emotions. This model serves as the foundation to develop adjusted intervention tools that take into account the group power status, thus better tackling inequality and fostering peace and social justice among groups in asymmetrical conflicts. For example, by considering the differential effect of anger depending on the power status of the group, intervention tools can be developed to help attain social equality by facilitating concessions among the advantaged and by fostering a quest for equality attainment among the disadvantaged.

Poor sleep is pervasive in modern society. Poor sleep is associated with major physical and mental health consequences, as well as with impaired cognitive function. Less is known about the relationship between sleep and emotional and interpersonal behavior. In this work, we investigate whether poor sleep impairs empathy, an important building block of human interaction and prosocial behavior. We aimed to capture the effects of poor sleep on the various aspects of empathy: trait and state, affect and cognition.

Study 1 (n = 155) assessed daily habitual sleep over several days, and global sleep quality in the past month. Participants who reported worse sleep quality exhibited lower empathic caring and perspective-taking traits. Study 2 (n = 347) induced a one-night disruption of sleep continuity to test a causal relationship between sleep and empathy. Participants in the sleep disrupted condition had to briefly wake up five times over the night, whereas the sleep-rested controls slept normally. In the next morning, participants’ empathy and prosocial intentions were assessed. Participants in the sleep disruption condition exhibited lower empathic sensitivity and less prosocial decision-making than sleep-rested controls.

The main contribution of this work is in providing a robust demonstration of the multi-faceted detrimental effects of poor sleep on trait and state empathy. Our findings demonstrate that poor sleep causally impairs empathic response to the suffering of others. These findings highlight the need for greater public attention to adequate sleep, which may impact empathy on a societal level.

Three preregistered studies (N = 533) investigated the relationship between intellectual humility (IH) and cognitive and emotional empathy. Study 1 (n = 212) revealed a positive association between IH and empathic accuracy (EA), especially toward the outgroup. Study 2 (n = 112) replicated the significant association between IH and EA. Study 3 (n = 209) employed a manipulation to enhance IH to demonstrate causality. We found evidence for an indirect effect, wherein the manipulation increased state IH, which was associated with greater EA. A mini meta-analysis revealed that, on average, individuals with higher levels of IH exhibit increased EA, showing a greater understanding of others’ emotional states. Moreover, IH predicts empathic resilience—buffering against personal distress while maintaining or increasing empathic concern for others. These findings highlight the positive influence of IH on empathy, emphasizing its potential for fostering deeper connections and better understanding in social interactions.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and specifically large language models demonstrate remarkable social–emotional abilities, which may improve human–AI interactions and AI’s emotional support capabilities. However, it remains unclear whether empathy, encompassing understanding, ‘feeling with’ and caring, is perceived differently when attributed to AI versus humans. We conducted nine studies (n = 6,282) where AI-generated empathic responses to participants’ emotional situations were labelled as provided by either humans or AI. Human-attributed responses were rated as more empathic and supportive, and elicited more positive and fewer negative emotions, than AI-attributed ones. Moreover, participants’ own uninstructed belief that AI had aided the human-attributed responses reduced perceived empathy and support. These effects were replicated across varying response lengths, delays, iterations and large language models and were primarily driven by responses emphasizing emotional sharing and care. Additionally, people consistently chose human interaction over AI when seeking emotional engagement. These findings advance our general understanding of empathy, and specifically human–AI empathic interactions.

Research in psychology has long underscored the significance of contextual influence on social cognition processes and behavior. However, the exploration of sexual interactions as a unique context affecting these processes has largely been neglected by previous research, despite their prominent role in our daily lives and potentially consequential outcomes. We outline the relevance of various basic social cognition processes to sexual interactions and propose a line of research integrating theoretical insights and methodologies from social cognition research with those from sex and relationship research. We elaborate on theoretical and applied contributions to both fields

The present research utilized the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study to explore the motives driving individuals to adhere to recommended health standards. One month into the first lockdown and eight months before the availability of vaccinations, a large sample of 1,263 individuals completed measures of empathic concern and personal distress in response to a person who contracted the virus. In addition, we measured their COVID-related behaviors, relating to benefitting another person (i.e., donation), the self (i.e., physical hygiene), or both self and other (i.e., physical distancing). Consistent with the Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis (Batson et al., 2015), we found that individuals who experience higher empathic concern, maintain greater physical distance and physical hygiene and act more generously. We further found that individuals who experienced high personal distress were less likely to act generously, albeit more likely to maintain personal hygiene and physical distance. These findings suggest that compliance with health recommendations can be encouraged by eliciting empathic concern or personal distress. Yet, compliance per se is not prosocial behavior. Any intervention aiming to increase prosocial motivation should focus on enhancing empathic concern while minimizing personal distress.

In the pursuit of mental and physical health, effective pain management stands as a cornerstone. Here, we examine a potential sex bias in pain management. Leveraging insights from psychological research showing that females’ pain is stereotypically judged as less intense than males’ pain, we hypothesize that there may be tangible differences in pain management decisions based on patients’ sex. Our investigation spans emergency department (ED) datasets from two countries, including discharge notes of patients arriving with pain complaints (N = 21,851). Across these datasets, a consistent sex disparity emerges. Female patients are less likely to be prescribed pain-relief medications compared to males, and this disparity persists even after adjusting for patients’ reported pain scores and numerous patient, physician, and ED variables. This disparity extends across medical practitioners, with both male and female physicians prescribing less pain-relief medications to females than to males. Additional analyses reveal that female patients’ pain scores are 10% less likely to be recorded by nurses, and female patients spend an additional 30 min in the ED compared to male patients. A controlled experiment employing clinical vignettes reinforces our hypothesis, showing that nurses (N = 109) judge pain of female patients to be less intense than that of males. We argue that the findings reflect an undertreatment of female patients’ pain. We discuss the troubling societal and medical implications of females’ pain being overlooked and call for policy interventions to ensure equal pain treatment.

Recent breakthroughs in artificial intelligence (AI) language models have elevated the vision of using conversational AI support for mental health, with a growing body of literature indicating varying degrees of efficacy. In this paper, we ask when, in therapy, it will be easier to replace humans and, conversely, in what instances, human connection will still be more valued. We suggest that empathy lies at the heart of the answer to this question. First, we define different aspects of empathy and outline the potential empathic capabilities of humans versus AI. Next, we consider what determines when these aspects are needed most in therapy, both from the perspective of therapeutic methodology and from the perspective of patient objectives. Ultimately, our goal is to prompt further investigation and dialogue, urging both practitioners and scholars engaged in AI-mediated therapy to keep these questions and considerations in mind when investigating AI implementation in mental health.

 

Empathy, the capacity to share others’ emotional experiences, has been proposed as a key motivation for altruistic behavior in both humans and animals. Sharing another’s emotional experience may generate a self-embodied simulation of their emotional state, fostering understanding and promoting prosocial behavior. Vicarious pain responders report sensing physical pain when observing others in pain. Whether this ability extends to emotional experiences remains unexplored. Using both questionnaires and ecologically valid behavioral tasks, we explored whether vicarious pain responders differ from nonresponders in empathic abilities and prosocial behavior. Participants watched video clips of people describing a negative emotional life event. We operationalized several empathic abilities and responses (empathic accuracy, affective synchrony, emotional reaction, and empathic motivation) based on participants’ and targets’ responses during and after watching the videos. Participants were also engaged in a donation task measuring tendency for prosocial behavior. Findings reveal that compared to nonresponders, vicarious pain responders exhibit enhanced empathic accuracy, intensified emotional reactions to others’ emotional pain, and a greater motivation to communicate with the target. This study marks the first behavioral evidence showcasing vicarious pain responders’ empathic abilities, reactions, and motivation in response to nonphysical pain of others, expanding our knowledge of this phenomenon and its association with broader empathic abilities.

Abstract

Intragroup empathy is vital for resilience. However, it is often impaired in advantaged-dominated environments when one adopts advantaged-group characteristics to climb the social ladder. The current work examines contextual factors that may affect intragroup empathy: the motivation behind adopting the advantaged-group characteristics, and negative encounters with members of the advantaged group. We hypothesized that coercively, versus willingly, adopting advantaged-group characteristics will increase intragroup empathy both when the outcomes are negative and positive. We further hypothesized that a negative encounter with an advantaged-group member would increase intragroup empathy, compared to no encounter. In three studies, Palestinian students in Israeli academia were assigned to read scripts depicting the academic experience of a Palestinian student adopting advantaged-group characteristics. We tested (a) the effects of motivation following a negative outcome (N = 182); (b) the effects following a positive outcome (N = 205); and (c) the interaction between a negative encounter with an advantaged-group member and motivation, and its effect on intragroup empathy (N = 282). Intragroup empathy was higher in the coerced condition compared to the free-willing condition both for negative and positive outcomes. A negative encounter with an advantaged-group member increased intragroup empathy in the willing condition. By illuminating contextual variables that shape intragroup empathy, this research shows that impairment in intragroup empathy is not inevitable. This work may serve as a foundation for future interventions.

Groups of people in pain evoke our empathic reactions. Yet how does one empathize with a group? Here, we aim to identify psychological mechanisms that underlie empathic reactions to groups. We theorize that because empathy is an egocentric process routed through the self, people are strongly attuned to the impact on each individual, and less so to the number of individuals affected. In five pre-registered experiments, involving different types of stimuli and valences of the outcomes, we repeatedly find that participants' level of empathy depends on the pain experienced by each individual, but not on the number of individuals in the group. The experiments support our hypothesis. They also add to alternative explanations such as psychophysical numbing and strategic regulation of negative emotions, providing valuable insights into the phenomenon of scope insensitivity. The findings also bear implications for the ongoing debate on the role of empathy in public policy decisions.