↓ Skip to main content

The role of empathy in choosing rewards from another's perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
28 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The role of empathy in choosing rewards from another's perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00174
Pubmed ID
Authors

Garret O'Connell, Anastasia Christakou, Anthony T. Haffey, Bhismadev Chakrabarti

Abstract

As social animals, we regularly act in the interest of others by making decisions on their behalf. These decisions can take the form of choices between smaller short-term rewards and larger long-term rewards, and can be effectively indexed by temporal discounting (TD). In a TD paradigm, a reward loses subjective value with increasing delay presumably because it becomes more difficult to simulate how much the recipient (e.g., future self) will value it. If this is the case, then the value of delayed rewards should be discounted even more steeply when we are choosing for someone whose feelings we do not readily simulate, such as socially distant strangers. Second, the ability to simulate shows individual differences and is indexed by trait empathy. We hypothesized that individuals high in trait empathy will more readily simulate, and hence discount less steeply for distant others, compared to those who are low on trait empathy. To test these predictions, we asked 63 participants from the general population to perform a TD task from the perspectives of close and distant others, as well as their own. People were found to discount less steeply for themselves, and the steepness of TD increased with increasing distance from self. Additionally, individuals who scored high in trait empathy were found to discount less steeply for distant others compared to those who scored low. These findings confirm the role of empathy in determining how we choose rewards for others.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Indonesia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 99 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 27%
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 8 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 16 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 51 49%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 18 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 23 July 2013.
All research outputs
#1,239,758
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#562
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,584
of 293,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#87
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 293,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.