Trust your gut or think carefully? Examining whether an intuitive, versus a systematic, mode of thought produces greater empathic accuracy.
Trust your gut or think carefully? Examining whether an intuitive, versus a systematic, mode of thought produces greater empathic accuracy.
复制标题
相信你的直觉还是仔细思考？
DOI：
10.1037/pspi0000063
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
7.6
通讯作者：
Lerner, Jennifer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ma-Kellams, Christine;Lerner, Jennifer
培养成功的个人和职业关系需要能够准确推断他人的感受，即准确地共情。有些人在这方面比其他人更擅长，这种差异可以部分用思维方式来解释。具体来说，共情准确的人在感知他人时可能更倾向于依赖直觉而不是系统思维。或者情况可能恰恰相反：系统思考可能会提高共情的准确性。为了确定哪种观点得到证据支持，我们进行了 4 项研究，考察思维模式（直觉与系统）和共情准确性之间的关系。研究 1 揭示了一种外行信念，即共情准确性源自直觉思维模式。研究 2 至 4 均以高管级别的专业人士为参与者，结果表明，与外行的看法相反，倾向于依赖直觉思维的人也往往表现出较低的共情准确性。当参与者根据 (a) 与伴侣面对面的互动（研究 2）以及 (b) 面部线索有限的图片（研究 3）来推断他人的情绪状态时，这种模式就成立了。研究 4 证实了这种关系是因果关系：通过实验诱导系统（而不是直觉）思维可以提高共情准确性。总而言之，关于这 4 个职业人士样本中的个人和社会过程的证据一致得出这样的结论：与外行的看法相反，共情准确性更多地来自系统思维，而不是直觉。（PsycINFO 数据库记录 (c) 2019 APA，保留所有权利）
Cultivating successful personal and professional relationships requires the ability to accurately infer the feelings of others—that is, to be empathically accurate. Some are better at this than others, a difference which may be explained in part by mode of thought. Specifically, empathically accurate people may tend to rely more on intuitive rather than systematic thought when perceiving others. Or it may be the reverse: systematic thought may increase empathic accuracy. To determine which view is supported by the evidence, we conducted 4 studies examining relations between mode of thought (intuitive vs. systematic) and empathic accuracy. Study 1 revealed a lay belief that empathic accuracy arises from intuitive modes of thought. Studies 2 through 4, each using executive-level professionals as participants, demonstrated that, contrary to lay beliefs, people who tend to rely on intuitive thinking also tend to exhibit lower empathic accuracy. This pattern held when participants inferred others’ emotional states based on (a) in-person face-to-face interactions with partners (Study 2) as well as on (b) pictures with limited facial cues (Study 3). Study 4 confirmed that the relationship is causal: experimentally inducing systematic (as opposed to intuitive) thought led to improved empathic accuracy. In sum, evidence regarding personal and social processes in these 4 samples of working professionals converges on the conclusion that, contrary to lay beliefs, empathic accuracy arises more from systematic thought than from gut intuition.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)