Updated Psychological Dynamics of Empathy Exam 2 Content

what are 2 species that are often looked at when trying to determining if ToM is uniquely human?

primates and canines

what is the story of CoCo the gorilla?

-good 'friends' with Robin Williams, spent a lot of time together.

-when RW died, the trainer communicated this to CoCo through sign language.

-Coco looked really sad, and the idea was that CoCo felt empathy for the loss of her friend RW

what are other things that CoCo the gorilla could have been responding to?

-matching the attitude of the trainer (some form of empathy, but different rom understanding abstractly that the person has died)

-word "dead" can provoke sad emotions- could be responding to the WORD, not the situation

who was Danny Povinelli

famous researcher to study ToM in Apes

describe the premise

(Basic idea 1) of Povinelli's studies with Apes

-primates raised in captivity that are used to this, know trainers, etc.

-if you are raising chimps in captivity, they really like bananas, and will reach out for food whether or not its there, as they know the trainer provides food

-would they reach out even if the TRAINER cannot see the chimp? (would indicate ToM if they do not, as they can understand that the trainer cant see them)

what are Basic ideas 2-4 in Povinelli's studies?

BI 2: hungry chimp with 2 trainers- familiar trainer 1 and 2 both facing towards chimp, chimp is equally likely to reach out to either one

BI 3: if one is facing the other way, which one will the chimp reach out to?

BI4: the researchers developed several carefully controlled variations on this paradigm

what are the new carefully controlled variations to the experiment?

- forwards and backwards

-bucket over head vs bucket next to head

-covering eyes vs ears

-blindfold over eyes or mouth

what question is being asked and what is the DV?

-will the be able to understand the perspective of the humans?

-DV: who they reach out to

what was the only trial that the Apes performed above chance? how was this further questioned and what did it show?

-facing forward vs backward

-both facing forward, one with eyes open vs closed

-both forward, one looking at, one looking away

-> results: equally likely to reach out to either (not about the EYES)

what 2 rules did Povinelli believe the Apes could be following? how was each tested?

H1: "gesture to the forward FACING trainer" - he held everything constant except whether her face was facing the apes. results: they were equally likely to go toward each trainer, whether the face was forward or back

H2: "body facing forward"

-chimps naturally oriented to pay attention to the trainer whose body is most frontally oriented towards trainer

-trainer 1 facing forward with eyes closed vs trainer 2 positioned away from chimp but looking towards with eyes opened --> more likely to reach for trainer 1

in summary, what rule do chimps and apes use and why? do they have ToM?

they use H2, the body facing forward rule. this is what works for them in the real world -- about the BODY, not the FACE

-chimps do NOT have ToM skills, but they do have skills that are really useful in the real world

what was the study performed by Udell et al, 2011, to test canine perspective taking?

-Method: canine had to choose between an attentive 'seer' vs non attentive human "blind" whose visible attention was blocked in 1 of 4 ways

-looking to see if the canines picked the individual that was able to see them

what were the 4 conditions for the people in the Udell experiment and the 4 conditions for the dogs?

people: back turned or not, book covering face or not, camera in front of face or not, bucket in front of face or not

canine: pet dogs indoors and outdoors, strays indoor, and tame wolves outdoors

what are the key findings of the Udell dog experiment?

-all groups passed the back turned vs not turned experiment-- this worked no matter where they are, meaning they have learned it because it caused their benefit

-for the book in front of the face, only domesticated dogs responded correctly, meaning that they have learned that if their owner has something like a book in front of their face that they are attending to that and not the dog -- this is a learned skill specific to domesticated dogs as pets (shelter and wolves don't know this rule)

-no differences between camera and bucket trial, as they have not had to learn it.

summarize the results of the canine experiment

all canines know:

human turned towards me- approach

human turned away from me- don't approach

(note parallel to chimp study)

pet dogs have learned:

if human has face in book- dont approach

rules that NONE of the canines seem capable of learning b/c of little or no experience with them:

human facing dog with camera in front of face or bucket over head

what is the major result from the chimp and dog studies

neither have theory of mind, but noth do what benefits them/ what they have learned

describe the history of clinical psychology

-for centuries, mental illness was regarded as a sign of evil- oftentimes, they would have a hole drilled in their heads to release the evil spirits

-in western Europe, "madhouses" began to proliferate in the mid 1800's -> designed to keep insane people away from the population

-then, there was a shift from asylums to mental hospitals- represented a shift in wanting to keep away to wanting to treat/cure

describe practices in mental hospitals in the early 1900's and what they thought was humanitarian intervention

-lobotomies

-shock therapy

-forced sterilization

(often ineffective, far worse, harmful, and unethical)

who invented psychoanalysis/talk therapy and why

Josef Breuer and Sigmund Freud because they wanted to seek a more humane approach to mental illness

what are 2 main aspects of psychoanalysis that might appear as somewhat related to empathy, defined broadly

-transference relationship

-countertransference

define transference relationship

clients transfer or generalization of feelings to the analyst (e.g. anger towards father is transferred to therapist).

-considered essential to psychoanalysis

-therapist is a surrogate or standing for the anger

describe countertransference

the analyst transfer feelings or attitudes that THEY have (e.g. analysts anger towards their own father) towards the client

-NOT supposed to do that in psychoanalysis- meant to leave your own issues at home

-therapists supposed to avoid inserting their own personal background/feelings into the session

did Freud say much about empathy?how were Freud and his patients positioned? why was the setup as such?

- freud and his disciples said almost nothing about empathy

-freud would be on a chair facing forward, and the client would be in a couch facing AWAY from therapist

-idea that if the client was facing away, they would feel less inhibited; however, this seems like a generally not empathic situation

what are the problems with Freudian theory and analysis

-everything can be 'confirmed' by the theory

-theory isnt falsifiable

-doesn't take strong stances on predictions

describe Gestalt psychotherapy and give an example of the main person involved

psychodynamic, but more 'present oriented' than Freud

Fritz Perls

describe Cognitive oriented therapy and give an example of the main person involved

focuses on specific problems and offers solutions, Albert Ellis, Aaron Beck

describe Humanistic, client oriented therapy and give an example of the main person involved

focuses on encouraging the client, being a listener

famously Carl Rodgers

what were behavioral approaches to therapy based off of and what were the 3 components

-based off the concepts advanced by B.F. Skinner

- systematic desensitization through increasing 'scariness'

-modeling correct behaviors

-token economy that directly rewards good behavior

describe Rogerian therapy and why its special

-first to really incorporate empathy into clinical practices

-client centered or humanistic approach

style:

-be non-directive

-be genuine

-be accepting

-be empathic

-showing empathy through "active listening"

what does it mean to be "non-directive"

have the insight and goals come from the client alone

what is unconditional positive regard, what is its paradox

-help the client learn to accept themselves despite a weakness

-intentionally non-skeptical, leads to trust-- caring isn't about stupidity

-to sense the clients world as if it were your own, but without ever losing the "as if" quality -- leads to better communication and understanding

-paradox: when i begin to accept myself as i am, i can begin to change

what are the parts of active listening

-summarize/ paraphrase (so, your father wasn't around much?)

-invite clarification and elaboration (when you say 'anxiety,' what does that feel like to you?)

-reflect feelings (it seems like you are disappointed; am i right?)

what are the gloria tapes?

-woman named gloria consented to meet with 3 different therapists, had sessions recorded o see the differences in differing kinds of psychoanalysis

-met with Carl Rogers, Fritz Perls, and Albert Ellis

how do Carl Rogers, Fritz Perls, and Albert Ellis all differ from a Freudian was of psychoanalysis

all focus on the PRESENT, here and now, not the past.

what are the key points for rogerian therapy

-no advice giving, lots of mirroring techniques

-rogerian therapy is non-directive, but not directionless; it is about helping the individual to self-direct

-trying to find inner wisdom and confidence to make more constructive and healthier choices

what are the arguments for the Rogerian approach

-provides a foundation for any therapeutic session, including:

-genuine, attentive listening

-empathic concern (can be powerful and comforting to most)

-encourages clarification of clients concerns and goals

what are the concerns with the Rogerian approach

-too passive

-patient problems occur when they have learned (explicitly and implicitly) dysfunctional behaviors and need to be taught by the therapist appropriate skills/behavior

-overemphasizes effectiveness of "self-actualization." Deep understanding of oneself is good, but clients need advice and guidance

-RT emphasizes unconditional positive regard, but where do we draw the line?

what did rogers say to the concern that unconditional positive regard should not be given to psychopaths who spend hours in therapy providing insight into their morbid and inhumane delights and such? whats a caviat to this?

suggests that his approach isn't good for individuals with psychopathy, schizophrenia, etc.

in real life, however you cant always 'choose' who your clients are (think, if someone walks into your clinic, you can't choose if they have mental illness, and you should still treat them)

what are some of the key parts/elements of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)

-no single theory of CBT

-despite the label, emotions are NOT completely ignored

-approach largely focused on cognition and how thoughts influence emotions and behavior

-future oriented (in contrast to psychoanalytical approach like Freud)

-therapist will typicallly play a very active role in helping client find new/more adaptive ways of thinking and acting

-problem focused and action oriented, teaching new information-processing skills

what are the arguments for CBT

stark alternative to RT: therapist offers clear guidance of how to modify behavior/thoughts

-"gets to the heart of the matter": the need for therapy almost always involves need to change dysfunctional behavior/thought. 'lets make a plan'

what are the arguments against CBT

-runs the risk of client feeling lack of true compassion from the therapist

-problem solving approaches can be fine, but sometimes effective therapy requires additional elements (e.g. more explicit empathy for the client)

what is the standard in looking at effectiveness of treatment in ares other than psychotherapy

gold standard- fully randomized, double blind design with placebo

define double blind

both the patient and doctor don't know who has been assigned to which condition

what is the standard protocol for experiments in terms of timeline, condition reveal, and special circumstances

-standard protocol is to let the study run for a pre-specified period of time

-after study is over, condition then revealed to the experimenters; data analyzed as a function of group (drug or placebo) (usually Ps also told their group, but not always)

-sometimes there will be a preliminary analysis of the 2 groups; if the real drug is much more effective than the placebo, the researchers may stop the study and give everyone the real drug (however, knowing when to stop can be very difficult to decide)

what are the challenges of testing psychotherapy effectiveness

in theory, researchers likely want to compare effectiveness of differnt therapies, however, studied that randomly assign Ps to different therapies are almost unheard of

why is random assignment of therapies unheard of

Unethical-- what if the patient doesn't WANT to be treated by a Freudian?

Pragmatic challenges-- random assignment is much harder than it looks in this case

Confounding factors-- 2 different therapists with 2 different approaches likely to differ in a near infinite ways (if you find a difference, whats the explanation?)

Little to no possibility of a meaningful "placebo group" for this type of endeavor

what kinds of studies have been done to test psychotherapy effectiveness and what is the key component

key component: waitlist control

-patients matched on a variety of variables (demographics, severity of psychological problem)

-initially 1/2 patients receive therapy, 1/2 placed on waitlist

-all do baseline assessment, treatment groups gets treatment for x amount of time then a second baseline at time y. control gets no therapy for time x then also gets baseline at time y. (waitlist controls for natural changes over time)

what is the FAMOUS attempt to compare effectiveness of different therapies (names and describe results)

smith and grass 1977

-suggests that most legitimate therapies do offer some benefits relative to waitlist controls

-few, if any difference between DIFFERENT types of therapies

what must be remembered from the result of the smith and grass study that says there is no difference between different types of therapies

patients 'self selected' themselves to different types of therapies -- its unethical to decide what type of therapist to see-- choosing their own treatment method

what's another factor about the therapists themselves that was interesting in the smith and grass study

-type and level of training/background of the therapist did not seem to make a significant difference

(e.g. on average, therapists with MSM were no worse or better than those with PhD's. 1 year vs 25 years of experience made no difference)

in the smith and grass study, was there evidence that empathic concern orientation of the therapist was a good predictor for success

SOME evidence, but measurment of that construct is harder than it might seem

what may happen in clinical practice if you are too emotionally involved/ caught up wih your patient?

can go back onto the client, you wont be able to effectively help them

what is a potential downside to being very empathetic in clinical practice

experiencing empathy burnout/ compassion fatigue

why can empathy be viewed as a double edged sword?

there is a very fine line as to how much empathy to give-- its good to be empathetic, but being too empathetic or emotionally involved can have negative impacts on the potential to help clients.

whats a good analogy to describe empathetic burnout

if there is nothing left in the emotional gas tank, then you won't be able to help your client

what are the three related dimensions to empathy burnout

-emotional exhaustion

-depersonalization

-decreased sense of personal accomplishment

define emotional exhaustion

-emotional and sometimes physical depletion

-feeling over-extended, unable to offer emotional support to others

define depersonalization

"impersonal" response towards recipients of one's care

define decreased sense of personal accomplishment

an increasingly negative view of oneself, particularly in relation to one's work with service users

give an example of DPA

"i cant do this anymore, i'm not helping my clients"

would physicians/clinicians in high or low dispositional empathy be more likely to experinece burnout? whats the case for both

still unsure which

high:

-those naturally inclined to feel the pain of others are more likely to eventually experience burnout

-they're very effective at first but after a while they run out of gas

low:

-they dont have much gas in the tank in the first place (low empathy, even when they start)

-non-empathic people who enter the profession aren't very good at dealing with other people's emotions, even at the beginning

define what we mean when we say that a consequence of burnout is dehumanization

-doesn't mean literally

-refer to the possibility that doctors/clinicians start to distance themselves from their patients (case 48 or gallbladder in room 5A)

describe the study of Neurological down regulation of pain responses with doctors and controls

-Decety et al 2010

- similar to the q tip and needle study we saw earlier with psychopaths, but now focusing on doctors

-2 types of participants, chinese doctors and non doctors

-both presented randomly with a (chinese) person getting painful or non painful stimulation

-results: doctors show LESS neurological responsiveness to painful stimulation compared to controls

-doctors downgrade their emotions towards their patients (can be caused by several different things)

describe the second study of the same paper regarding down-regulation of pain responses

DV was how doctors respond when listening to patients talk about their own pain

-patients pain intensity rated 1-10

-nondoctors tend to show greater activation in their brain

-doctors don't do as much- as pain intensity goes up, their activation doesn't go up as much, stays in around the same place

what are the main, large takeaways from these studies

-physicians and clinicians are 'down regulating' their own emotional responses, through inhibition

-it is not that their brains are incapable of resonating with the pain of others. rather, the results suggest (cognitively) effortful suppression of 'shared pain'

is down regulation a bad thing?

not necessarily, depends on how far this goes with the doctor -- some emotional distancing may be good, but too much distancing is not good

describe the study by Cogoni et al that looked at the objectification of women and if there was a neurological down regulation of emotional response

-had 2 groups, either a woman in a regular shirt or a provocative bikini

- tested with men and women participants

-results showed dampened neurological responses to sexualized female targets

-effects were the same regardless of whether participants were male or female

what are the 4 cases in which people typically have neurological down regulation of emotional responses?

-when responding to an outgroup member

-when responding to people (often women) portrayed in an objectified manner

-when the perceiver is in a profession (medical practice) that requires frequent down regulation

-with psychopaths

out of the big five, which aspect of ones personality is the best predictor of empathic listening skills (ELS)

Agreeableness by far,

second is openness, but significantly smaller contributor

what is one potential issue with this predictor?

ELS was self reported --agreement of "I am sensitive to what others are saying" ; however, more agreeable people can be more likely to report

what does it mean to be a good listener

-active listening

-giving full attention

list the active listening techniques

-be in listening, not judging mode

-watch impulse to offer advice; best to wait for them to ask

be 'present' in the conversation-different people are comfortable in different (physical) settings while you talk

-if there is something important that you don't understand, gently ask for clarification, but wait for a natural pause or opening

-unless you're literally their therapist, be their friend, not their therapist

-dont mentally 'rehearse' your response while the other person is talking

- be 'upfront' and honest about your own emotions if they're impacting the conversation

-if you have (what you believe to be) some good advice, ask the other person if they'd be open to some possible ideas/suggestions

what does it mean to be 'present' in a conversation

-have realistic grasp of you own abilities to focus

-give active listening cues (head nods)

-eyes contact is important, but dont go overboard

What are Gottmans "four horsemen the apocalypse"

4 methods of communication in relationships that can indicate (to Gottman) how likely the couple is to stay together

what are the 4 negative/ maladaptive communication styles

-criticism

-contempt

-defensiveness

-stonewalling

(all 4 are REAL barriers to relationships)

what are the 4 more constructive communication styles of Gottman's

-gentle startup

-build culture of appreciation

-take responsibility

-psychological self-soothing

describe Gottman's "soft (gentle) start ups"

Gottman (pretty accurately) could tell within the FIRST 60 SECONDS of conflict between married couples was a reliable predictor of whether they would stay together or divorce

what is Gottman's advice to have a soft start up in a conversation/disagreement

-avoid negative, harsh, overly general, or critical startups;

-avoid any sentence that prominently features the word "you"

what is an example of a soft startup

i would like it if you listened to me

what is an example of a harsh start up

you're not listening to me

is there evidence that highly empathic percievers are more accurate when inferring feelings/thoughts of others

-has not been consistently supported

-highly empathic perceivers can be accurate, but only if social targets are sufficiently expressive

what happens if social targets arent expressive

empathic people aren't mind readers- don't do better than normal people-- need something to work with.

describe the graph presented in class with level of emathy a person holds and level of expression from a target individual

if the person isn't expressive, whether you are high or low on empathy scale doesn't matter. if target is giving perceiver cues, perceiver tends to be accurate

describe perspective taking vs perspective getting

trying to imagine how someone feels (TAKING their perspective) is often not enough. in fact, this can marginally increase INACCURACY

- motivation to see things from another vantage point may be plausible, but many people end up guessing what others are thinking and feeling

what is the solution to avoid perspective taking

just ask the person what they are thinking or how they are feeling

how can empathy be facilitated by behavioral immersion

by "trying out someone else's life" (like going to visit a homeless shelter) and by cultivating curiosity about strangers life (without being intrusive or creepy) allows you to better understand their true situation

what are the 3 main roadblocks to empathy (4th briefly mentioned)

1. not paying attention

2. feeling the emotion of the other person but not knowing how or when to communicate empathetically

3. knowing intellectually that you need to communicate empathically, but not feeling the other persons emotion

(4. emotional burnout)

what are some ways that people looked at empathy in everyday life, specifically with couples

authors built off the idea of empathic concern and perspective taking, altering the IRI for couples

how would the sentence " when I see someone being taken advantage of, I feel kind of protective towards them" be altered for the IRI for couples

"when i see my partner being taken advantage of, i feel kind of protective towards them"

what are the main findings of the IRI for couples study

-IRI for coupled was moderately correlated with their own relationship satisfaction

(straight and gay relationships)

what is the problem with the IRI study

does not account for partner satisfaction, only self satisfaction

how is the study with cohabitating couples different and what were the findings

-accounts for partner satisfaction

-females with high empathy have correlation between their own and their partners empathy

-males have a positive correlation with self satisfaction, but negative correlation with partner satisfaction

-Asymmetry for males