| Title |
I suffer more from your pain when you act like me: Being imitated enhances affective responses to seeing someone else in pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13415-013-0168-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lize De Coster, Bruno Verschuere, Liesbet Goubert, Manos Tsakiris, Marcel Brass |
| Abstract |
Social-psychological research has suggested that being imitated changes the way that we experience others: We like someone who imitates us more, and the interaction with this person runs more smoothly. Whether being imitated also affects basic social reactions, such as empathy for pain, is an open question. Empathy for pain refers to the observation that perceiving another person in pain results in pain-related brain activation in the observer. The aim of the present study was to combine the two lines of research, to investigate whether being imitated can influence empathy for pain. To this end, we developed an experimental approach combining an imitation task with a pain perception task. Subjective reports, as well as physiological responses, indicated that being imitated enhances affective responses to seeing someone else in pain. Furthermore, using rubber hand illusion measures, we provided evidence for the role of shared representations in the sensory and motor domains as a core underlying mechanism. In this way, our study integrated social-psychological research on being imitated with cognitive research on empathy for pain. This has broad implications, since imitation plays a crucial role in our daily social interactions, and our study provides insights into a basic cognitive mechanism that might underlie these social situations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 16% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 25 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 73 | 54% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,977,154
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#346
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,617
of 195,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#9
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 195,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.