Interaction between valence of empathy and familiarity: is it difficult to empathize with the positive events of a stranger?

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 34 - Trang 1-9 - 2015
Yuki Motomura1,2,3,4, Akira Takeshita5, Yuka Egashira5, Takayuki Nishimura6, Yeon-kyu Kim4, Shigeki Watanuki4
1Department of Psychophysiology, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo, Japan
2Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Tokyo, Japan
3Integrative Brain Imaging Center, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo, Japan
4Faculty of Design, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
5Graduate School of Integrated Frontier Science, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
6Department of Public Health, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan

Tóm tắt

Empathy in humans is thought to have evolved via social interactions caused by the formation of social groups. Considering the role of empathy within a social group, there might be a difference between emotional empathy for strangers and familiar others belonging to the same social group. In this study, we used the global field power (GFP) index to investigate empathic brain activity during observation of a cue indicating either a negative or positive image viewed by a stranger or close friend. Sixteen healthy participants observed a partner performing an emotional gambling task displayed on a monitor. After the partner's choice-response, a frowning or smiling face symbol was simultaneously presented to the participant’s monitor while a negative or positive emotional image was presented to the partner’s monitor. All participants observed a control condition (CT) showing a computer trial, a stranger-observation condition (SO) showing the trial of a stranger, and a friend-observation condition (FO) to observe the trial of a close friend. During these observations, participants’ event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded to calculate GFP, and after the task, a subjective assessment of their feelings was measured. Positive emotion was significantly larger under the FO compared to the CT and the SO. Significantly larger negative emotion was found under the SO and FO compared to the CT. In response to a positive cue, significantly larger GFP during 300 to 600 ms was observed under the FO compared to the CT and SO. In response to a negative cue, significantly larger GFP was observed under the FO and SO compared to the CT. A significantly larger GFP under the SO was found in response to only a negative cue. Topographic map analysis suggested that these differences were related to frontal-occipital dynamics. GFP was significantly correlated with empathic trait. These results revealed that familiarity with another person has different effects depending on the valence of empathy. Negative empathy, including the danger perception function, might easily occur even among strangers, whereas positive empathy related to nursing and supporting an inner group does not happen easily with strangers.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Davis MH. Empathy: a social psychological approach. Brown & Benchmark: Madison, WI; 1994. Rumble AC, Van Lange PAM, Parks CD. The benefits of empathy: when empathy may sustain cooperation in social dilemmas. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2010;40:856–66. Lakin JL, Chartrand TL. Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychol Sci. 2003;14:334–9. Batson CD, Ahmad N. Empathy-induced altruism in a prisoner’s dilemma II: what if the target of empathy has defected? Eur J Soc Psychol. 2001;31:25–36. Knafo A, Zahn-Waxler C, Van Hulle C, Robinson JL, Rhee SH. The developmental origins of a disposition toward empathy: genetic and environmental contributions. Emotion. 2008;8:737–52. Roth-Hanania R, Davidov M, Zahn-Waxler C. Empathy development from 8 to 16 months: early signs of concern for others. Infant Behav Dev. 2011;34:447–58. Sagi A, Hoffman ML. Empathic distress in the newborn. Dev Psychol. 1976;12:175–6. de Waal FB. Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy. Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:279–300. Nieuwenhuis S, Aston-Jones G, Cohen JD. Decision making, the P3, and the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system. Psychol Bull. 2005;131:510–32. Leng Y, Zhou X. Modulation of the brain activity in outcome evaluation by interpersonal relationship: an ERP study. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:448–55. Gehring WJ, Willoughby AR. The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses. Science. 2002;295:2279–82. Ma Q, Shen Q, Xu Q, Li D, Shu L, Weber B. Empathic responses to others’ gains and losses: an electrophysiological investigation. Neuroimage. 2011;54:2472–80. Singer T, Seymour B, O’Doherty J, Kaube H, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain. Science. 2004;303:1157–62. Meyer ML, Masten CL, Ma Y, Wang C, Shi Z, Eisenberger NI, et al. Empathy for the social suffering of friends and strangers recruits distinct patterns of brain activation. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2013;8:446–54. Lehmann D, Skrandies W. Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1980;48:609–21. Pourtois G, Thut G, Grave De Peralta R, Michel C, Vuilleumier P. Two electrophysiological stages of spatial orienting towards fearful faces: early temporo-parietal activation preceding gain control in extrastriate visual cortex. Neuroimage. 2005;26:149–63. Murray MM, Brunet D, Michel CM. Topographic ERP analyses: a step-by-step tutorial review. Brain Topogr. 2008;20:249–64. Doi H, Shinohara K. Unconscious presentation of fearful face modulates electrophysiological responses to emotional prosody. Cereb Cortex. 2015;25(3):817–32. Fan Y, Duncan NW, de Greck M, Northoff G. Is there a core neural network in empathy? An fMRI based quantitative meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav R. 2011;35:903–11. Singer T. The neuronal basis and ontogeny of empathy and mind reading: review of literature and implications for future research. Neurosci Biobehav R. 2006;30:855–63. Chakrabarti B, Bullmore ET, Baron-Cohen S. Empathizing with basic emotions: common and discrete neural substrates. Soc Neurosci-UK. 2006;1:364–84. Bernasconi F, Schmidt A, Pokorny T, Kometer M, Seifritz E, Vollenweider FX. Spatiotemporal brain dynamics of emotional face processing modulations induced by the serotonin 1A/2A receptor agonist psilocybin. Cereb Cortex. 2014;24(12):3221–31. Shinoda H, Skrandies W. Topographic changes in event-related potentials because of learning of meaningful Kanji characters. Neuroreport. 2013;24:555–9. Hiessl AK, Skrandies W. Evaluation of multisensory stimuli–dimensions of meaning and electrical brain activity. Neuropsychologia. 2013;51:1330–5. Yeung N, Holroyd CB, Cohen JD. ERP correlates of feedback and reward processing in the presence and absence of response choice. Cereb Cortex. 2005;15:535–44. Spielberger CD, Gorssuch RL, Lushene PR, Vagg PR, Jacobs GA. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., 1983 Tobari M. The development of empathy in adolescence: a multidimensional view. Jpn J Dev Psychol. 2003;14:136–48. Davis MH. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology. 1980;10:85. Woosnam KM. The inclusion of other in the self (IOS) scale. Ann Tourism Res. 2010;37:857–60. Luck SJ, Heinze HJ, Mangun GR, Hillyard SA. Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. II. Functional dissociation of P1 and N1 components. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1990;75:528–42. Johannes S, Munte TF, Heinze HJ, Mangun GR. Luminance and spatial attention effects on early visual processing. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1995;2:189–205. Fontenelle LF, Soares ID, Miele F, Borges MC, Prazeres AM, Range BP, et al. Empathy and symptoms dimensions of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Psychiatr Res. 2009;43:455–63. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;44:113–26. Singer T, Seymour B, O’Doherty JP, Stephan KE, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others. Nature. 2006;439:466–9. Dunbar RI. The social brain hypothesis and its implications for social evolution. Ann Hum Biol. 2009;36:562–72.