Improving Empathy through Narrative: A Neuropsychology Approach

:speech_balloon: Speaker: Stephanie Preston @prestos

:classical_building: Affiliation: University of Michigan

Title: Improving Empathy through Narrative: A Neuropsychology Approach

Abstract: People struggle to empathize with disparate others. The neuropsychology of empathy and altruism has grown tremendously in the last half-century. In the basic science of empathy, researchers often use stories as a controllable way to elicit empathy and altruism in the laboratory. Meanwhile, in the science of literature and narrative, researchers test whether reading real stories increases trait empathy or empathy for characters and the people like them. Combining the expertise of these fields, we can predict and measure when people are most engaged in stories and take the other’s perspective–but also aim to help as a result.


:movie_camera:

:newspaper: Long abstract

Modern society has been described as suffering from a paucity of empathy. The science of empathy grew tremendously in the last half-century, across subfields of psychology and neuroscience. This growth spanned from understanding empathy as a personality, as a state, in development, in the brain, and as an impairment in psychopathology. We can apply this trove of knowledge to improve empathy in the real world, particularly toward disparate others. This goal would be facilitated by combining the basic science of empathy with the science of literature and narrative. These two subfields often hold similar aims and employ similar methods, while largely proceeding in parallel, in silos that do not connect with one another. For example, empathy researchers use stories to convey a target’s situation and their emotional response to it, but not because they are interested in stories per se, but because stories offer a convenient, controllable way to elicit prosocial responses in the laboratory. Conversely, research on literature and narrative is inherently interested in the story, but similarly examines whether reading increases trait empathy, perspective taking, and support for disparate others (e.g., a different race, gender, ethnicity). Combining the expertise of these two fields, we can predict and measure which features of stories best engage readers and render them likely to help in the real world. This theoretical presentation will describe how the perception-action model (PAM) of empathy can be combined with the altruistic response model (ARM) to explain when narrative and literature do—and do not—bridge the gap between self and other in a productive way. This is particularly important because of concerns with so called, “trauma porn” or with sympathy during reading as an aesthetic enterprise, wherein readers are drawn into suffering, but mostly use the experience to consider their own suffering or to enjoy sympathizing, rather than to change how they see the world or when they want to help. It is time to apply our extensive empirical understanding of empathy to bridge the gap between us and them.

de Waal, F. B., & Preston, S. D. (2017). Mammalian empathy: Behavioural manifestations and neural basis. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(8), 498-509.

Preston, S. D. (2013). The origins of altruism in offspring care. Psychological Bulletin, 139(6), 1305.

Preston, S. D., & de Waal, F. B. (2002). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(1), 1-20.

6 Likes

What a fascinating and inspiring talk—highly relevant for our community! I really hope your interaction with researchers in IGEL will spark exciting new hypotheses. There’s so much potential for collaborative work that could speak directly to some of the core questions in our field—and hopefully enrich your own research as well.

One great topic for further conversation might be the quality of the prose. It’s something we have an abundance of theories about, from ancient rhetorical techniques designed to stir emotion, to more recent ideas about foregrounding, narrative perspective, and structure—each offering insights into how style draws readers (or viewers) in. I’d love to keep that conversation going, and therefore look forward to your presentation and Q&A.

P.S. Here is just one of the articles that I was reminded of when listening to your paper: Koopman, E. M. E. (2016). Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts , 10 (1), 82.

1 Like

How kind. I look forward to reading this paper and your shared work with Koopman on empathy and reflection. I am particularly interested in using this approach for pro-environmental motivation, so I will also get a copy of the book, Empirical Ecocriticism. I would love to collaborate with experts in the field, since I am expert in empathy, but new to the scientific study of literature. Hope to connect at the meeting. -sp

1 Like

This is a topic very close to my heart—it would be wonderful if we could find a way to join forces at some point. Over the past few years, we’ve had several discussions around ‘empirical ecocriticism’ that might be of interest to you as well. I’d be happy to share more if you’re interested! Here is one. And this one at the present conference.

What a great talk! Really inspiring, thank you very much Stephanie! I was particularly inspired by the model of Altruistic Response you presented, where an altruistic response requires the victim to have specific characteristics and the “potential helper” to have not only the ability to help but also the knowledge on how to help the victim and the availability to the resources necessary to help. I can see a possible connection with situation where the victim is “imperfect” and non-stereotypical (e.g., a resilient, strong victim) and the lack of empathy and altruistic response, for example in the case of sexual abuse. Thank you for your talk and I am really looking forward to our discussion.

That is a great insight. I think a lot of cases of victim blaming probably fall under this banner, where victims are not seen as vulnerable but as taking risks or seeking or failing to avoid trouble. Look forward to talking with you more!

1 Like

Hello Stephanie,
I really enjoyed your talk. Very scientific proof of the emotional response to Narrative and therefore proof, if we need same, of the value of teaching Narrative Medicine ( See professor Rita Charon, Columbia).
I am a medical doctor and writer and am very interested in your work. I also occasionally teach Narrative Medicine and feel it’s extremely important to teach empathy in an increasingly technological and litigation threatened profession.
Congratulations on your work.
Nuala o Farrell

Thank you so much! Narrative Medicine is an important field! I was happy to see yesterday how many people in the group are working on using writing, reading, and reflection with doctors and medical students!

Your talk was so interesting for us Stephanie, showing us the potential underlying reasons for why people can find it hard to connect or empathise with ‘imperfect’ (or in other words, many) victims. And we know from sexual violence research that ‘good victim’ stereotypes negatively affect disclosure and securing convictions.

1 Like