Jon Rose, Ph.D. David J. McIntyre, B.A. Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.<\/p>[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″] Jon Rose, Ph.D. VA Palo Alto Health Care System andSan Francisco State University David J. McIntyre, B.A.Pacific Graduate School of Psychology Preface \u00a0Much of our interest in news media may arise from feeing a sense of relatedness to the people portrayed.\u00a0 The popularity of People Magazine attests to how much people want to now about […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"parent":2236,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"original_author":[150],"publication_date":[168],"volume":[167],"number":[43],"class_list":["post-8178","article","type-article","status-publish","hentry","original_author-jon-rose","publication_date-168","volume-167","number-43"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/8178","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/article"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/8178\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/2236"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8178"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"original_author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/original_author?post=8178"},{"taxonomy":"publication_date","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication_date?post=8178"},{"taxonomy":"volume","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/volume?post=8178"},{"taxonomy":"number","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adpca.org\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/number?post=8178"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/strong>VA Palo Alto Health Care System and
San Francisco State University<\/p>\n
<\/strong>Pacific Graduate School of Psychology<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]Preface<\/h2>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Much of our interest in news media may arise from feeing a sense of relatedness to the people portrayed.\u00a0 The popularity of People Magazine<\/em> attests to how much people want to now about and understand people who are in the news.\u00a0 Conveying an impression of human understanding helps to boost TV news ratings and helps to sell newspapers (Bagdikian, 1992).\u00a0 News media stories about crime, heroism, fame and infamy are more compelling to obtain when we imagine we know how those in the news must have felt when the event presented occurred, but how accurate can such attempts at empathy be?\u00a0 Is it possible to empathize with someone we only know about through the news?\n\nWhen we say that we empathize with someone, or that a client empathizes with someone, what do we mean?\u00a0 What does empathy mean, and under what circumstances can it reliably exist?\u00a0 Is personal contact a requirement for empathy, or can it exist based on a conversation, a narrative, or from a series of news stories?\n\nIt can be argued that empathy requires personal communication with reliable feedback, or some other access to the inner workings of the person being empathized with.\u00a0 Without such an interaction, what is achieved may be internally satisfying to the perceiver, but not an accurate reflection of the perceived, and therefore not empathy as understood by client-centered therapy.[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]
Empathy<\/h2>\nThe word empathy comes from the German word, Einfuhlung<\/em>, meaning \u201cfeeling into\u201d, that describes the process of art appreciation by assigning a visceral feeling to a work of art \u2013 essentially projecting one\u2019s own emotions onto the artwork (Bennett, 2001; Myers, 1999).\u00a0 Levenson and Reuf (1992) distinguish between empathy, described as knowing or feeling what another person is feeling, and sympathy, described as a compassionate response to another\u2019s distress.\u00a0 This range of definitions echoes the sentiments of Reik (1948, as cited in Myers, 1999) who lamented that the term empathy was bandied about in such a manner as to make it devoid of meaning. If, however, we want to look at the utility of empathy in the context of client-centered therapy, it is helpful to narrow the definition.\u00a0 Rogers (1980) described empathy as being not a state, but rather a process \u2013 a process of becoming intimately aware of what the other person is feeling, or even barely feeling, moment-to-moment, without judgment.\u00a0 Rogers described part of this process as frequently checking in with the person to ensure that the perceiver\u2019s perceptions are accurate, and then being guided by the responses received (Cohen, 1994).\u00a0 Raskin and Rogers (1989) listed empathy as one of the tenets of client-centered therapy, and described it as reflecting \u201can attitude of profound interest in the client\u2019s world of meanings and feelings as the client is willing to share this world\u201d (p 157).\u00a0 They described a key component in this process as a \u201cwillingness to be corrected\u201d (p 171).\u00a0 Raskin and Rogers went on to describe this interaction as a dance, with the client leading and therapist following.\u00a0 This concept of the empathic process was echoed by Bohart (1988), who stated that in client-centered therapy<\/strong>, empathy represents an in-the-moment understanding of the client\u2019s internal experience that is devoid of judgment.\u00a0 This lack of judgment was one of the distinctions that Bennett (2001) made between empathy and sympathy.\n\nUnlike psychoanalytic psychotherapy where the purpose of empathy is to understand the client in order to formulate an intervention, in client-centered therapy the effect is to help the client deepen his experience of the moment (Bohart 1988; Raskins & Rogers, 1989; Rogers, 1980).\u00a0 Brodley (1992) clearly distinguished between the effect of communicated empathy focusing or deepening the client\u2019s experience and the therapist\u2019s goal to acceptantly understand.\n\nLevenson and Reuf (1992) explored physiological correlates of perceived empathy.\u00a0 Comparing heart rates between listeners and speakers, they found that empathic accuracy was higher for negative affect when there was a greater physiological co-variance between the listener and the speaker.\u00a0 For positive affect, empathic accuracy increased when the listener exhibited lower cardiac arousal, regardless of how aroused or calm the speaker became.\u00a0 These findings were interpreted to mean that, at least for negative affect, empathy includes both knowing and actually feeling what another person is feeling.[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]
Conditions Necessary for Empathy<\/h2>\nEmpathy is not a \u201cskill or a power,\u201d according to Myers (1999, p. 148), but rather something that is derived from the process of communication between client and therapist, echoing the sentiments of Rogers (1980).\u00a0 This concept of empathy as a process was supported by Marangoni, Garcia, Ickes, and Teng (1995) who created videotapes of simulated psychotherapy sessions with female subjects, on the theory that females would be more expressive and open.\u00a0 Students (perceivers) viewed the videotapes and were asked to describe the interview subjects\u2019 (targets) internal thoughts at the relevant moments.\u00a0 Marangoni et al. found that cross-target consistency was high (a = .86), indicating that empathic accuracy represented a stable individual difference in the perceivers.\u00a0 When this is combined with the finding that accuracy increased with exposure, Marangoni et al. noted that this implies that empathic accuracy is a skill that can be learned.\u00a0 They also found evidence that the characteristics of the target had an effect on empathic accuracy in their study.\u00a0 One target who was ambiguous was very difficult to interpret and almost impossible to interpret without feedback. \u00a0Furthermore, Marangoni et al. found that the perceivers were unable to accurately judge their own empathic accuracy.\u00a0 In short, empathic accuracy increased with exposure to the subject and increased more quickly when feedback was provided.\n\nThis supports the idea that certain conditions need to be met in order to achieve a level of understanding of another individual that we can call \u201cempathy.\u201d\u00a0 First, empathic accuracy increases with time.\u00a0 The less information that the perceiver has about the person he seeks to understand, the less likely that the interpretation will be correct.\u00a0 Second, empathic accuracy increases with feedback of internal processes.\u00a0 This was especially important when the person being interviewed was ambiguous or conflicted in her statements.\u00a0Lastly (and possibly most importantly) if individuals are poor judges of their own empathic accuracy then, absent feedback or some other access to the person\u2019s internal processes, they do not really know if their perception of the observed person\u2019s internal process is accurate or not.\n\nIf various modes of human communication are examined using these criteria for empathic understanding, it is then possible to develop a framework for determining where it is probable that empathic understanding can be achieved.\u00a0 It is also possible to determine where empathic understanding is possible, but the probability of accuracy is so low that the result should be termed something other than empathy.\u00a0 Empathic understanding is most probable in a face-to-face (or comparable) setting of some significant duration, where the perceiver has the opportunity to present the target (person she wants to understand) with the perceiver\u2019s conceptualization of the target\u2019s internal state, and then receive confirmatory or corrective feedback as to that interpretation.\u00a0 In this way the perceiver is able to work with the target in shaping the perceiver\u2019s understanding of the target\u2019s internal process until there is mutual agreement that a correct interpretation has been achieved.\u00a0 The less information that is available to the perceiver, the less confidence the perceiver should have in the accuracy of her interpretation.\u00a0 For example, a phone conversation would deny the perceiver of relevant information from the target\u2019s body language, and written communication (e.g., letters, e-mail, or chat rooms) would further deny the perceiver access to voice inflections.\u00a0 It should be noted that a lengthy face-to-face conversation does not guarantee empathic accuracy, as the target may lack sufficient openness or insight to communicate their internal state effectively, and\/or the perceiver may lack empathic skills and\/or the frame of reference necessary to understand the target (Cohen, 1994).\n\nA different level of empathic accuracy can be achieved through works of literature or performing arts such novels, autobiographies, biographies, theater, etc.\u00a0 While the perceiver does not have the ability to interact with the target (say, the main character in a novel) the perceiver (in this case the reader), does have unfettered access to whatever internal processes of the main character that the author deems appropriate.\u00a0 For example, the author has the option of presenting the reader with not only the external fa\u00e7ade that the main character presents to the other characters in the book, but also the main character\u2019s inner thoughts and emotions.\u00a0 The same can occur in theater, where the character pierces the fourth wall and speaks directly to the audience.\u00a0 It should be recognized, however, that these characters are not real people and therefore lack whatever complexity the author has chosen to omit, or is unable to convey.\u00a0\u00a0 The same would hold true for subjects of biographies or autobiographies, as, while the presentation of the subject may be extensive, the information presented will likely be edited to conform to an image that the author wishes to present.\u00a0 The readers\u2019 empathic understanding of a character can even be confirmed by the author later in the work, or in interviews and commentaries about the work.\n\nAt the far end of the spectrum would be subjects of brief reports such as newscasts or newspaper articles.\u00a0 Especially in today\u2019s compressed media savvy environment, any information presented should be eyed warily in terms of being used as a basis for accurate empathy.\u00a0 This is both because of the paucity of information available as well as interference from the media\u2019s agendas.\n\nOne example could be the reporting of any well-publicized crime.\u00a0 The prosecution and the victim will be painting a picture of a sympathetic victim and an odious perpetrator.\u00a0 The defense will be painting a picture of a sympathetic perpetrator and an odious victim, and\/or judicial system, and\/or society.\u00a0 Political, religious, and social groups will be making statements for or against any of the parties mentioned above as suits their own agenda, which may have little to do with the facts of the case or the people involved.\u00a0 Each news source may present information designed to lead the media consumer to believe that he understands what it was like to be a particular person in the news story.\u00a0 Feeling empathic, those consumers may be more inclined to act (vote, write, protest, etc.) in a way that supports the speaker.\u00a0 The news media will then ostensibly provide the public with objective presentations and\/or interpretations of the information flowing from these disparate sources.\u00a0 Bagdikian (1992) would argue that, while in the past the media would have slanted the reporting to meet their own agenda, their focus now is to report in such a way as to maximize advertising revenue through increased readership \u2013 achieved through a combination of sensationalism and non-offensiveness.\u00a0 In this situation, while it is possible that a media consumer might have an accurate understanding of the internal condition of the person in the news (be it victim or perpetrator), the likelihood of it being accurate can be no greater than chance.\u00a0 The consumer has no access to the person, limited information on the person\u2019s statements let alone thoughts, and no opportunity for feedback to determine if her assessments are correct.\u00a0 The perceiver may have sympathy for the person, but the perceiver\u2019s perception of the target\u2019s internal processes are more likely to be more a product of projection than any real understanding of the person\u2019s internal reality.\u00a0 At this end of the spectrum, the perceiver may be experiencing something close to Einfuhlung<\/em>, a projection of the perceiver\u2019s own internal state onto the person, but they will not be experiencing empathy as it is understood in client-centered therapy.[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]
Future Research and Implications<\/h2>\nThe notion that empathic perceptions derived from news media presentations of people are inaccurate is a testable hypothesis.\u00a0 An article or series of articles could be selected about a public figure, the target.\u00a0 The target\u2019s internal state could then be ascertained either directly from an interview or autobiographical sources.\u00a0 The researcher would be matching the target\u2019s private thoughts and feelings with statements from the news accounts.\u00a0 For example, the article might describe a specific incident from which thoughts and feelings could be inferred, or the article might explicitly assign specific thoughts and emotions \u2013 e.g., \u201cJane Doe was saddened by\u2026X.\u201d\u00a0 The first level of inquiry would be to simply determine if the target feels he was accurately represented in the news coverage.\u00a0 The second stage would be to have subjects (perceivers) read the news articles, and, where specified by the researcher, tell what they think the target was thinking and feeling.\u00a0 These assertions could then be matched to the target\u2019s previously stated thoughts and feelings, and the perceivers\u2019 accuracy could then be determined.\n\nIt is important, when discussing empathy, to understand how the word is defined, otherwise, as Reik (1948, as cited in Myers, 1999) feared, the word has no meaning.\u00a0 In client-centered therapy, the meaning is precise, albeit complex, referring to an intimate, moment-to-moment understanding of the target\u2019s deep internal experiences that is derived from the feedback-laden interaction between target and perceiver, and that is free from judgment (Rogers, 1980).\u00a0 When defined as such, empathy is a powerful tool that allows the client (target or perceived) to feel understood, that draws attention to and deepens the client\u2019s own understanding of their self, and can thereby be a mechanism of therapeutic change.\n\nIf empathy is understood to mean something different from this, or if the meaning of empathy is unclear, then what is labeled as empathy may be nothing more than the projections of the perceiver \u2013 having little or nothing to do with the internal state of the client or target.\u00a0 Therefore, when writing about empathy it is helpful to clearly operationalize the term and, if possible, to firmly embed it within a well-understood frame of reference.\u00a0 This serves the dual purposes of making the meaning of empathy as referred to in the text clear as well as making the text relevant to a larger body of work.[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.8.1″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]
References<\/h2>\n