Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alison Jane Martingano, Sara Konrath, Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan, Mark H. Davis, Judith A. Hall, Mollie A. Ruben, Justin J. Sanders, Rachel Schwartz
Format: Artículo Open Access
Published: Wiley 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.70093
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1867019905500446720
author Alison Jane Martingano
Sara Konrath
Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan
Mark H. Davis
Judith A. Hall
Mollie A. Ruben
Justin J. Sanders
Rachel Schwartz
author_facet Alison Jane Martingano
Sara Konrath
Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan
Mark H. Davis
Judith A. Hall
Mollie A. Ruben
Justin J. Sanders
Rachel Schwartz
Alison Jane Martingano
Sara Konrath
Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan
Mark H. Davis
Judith A. Hall
Mollie A. Ruben
Justin J. Sanders
Rachel Schwartz
collection Wiley Open Access
contents Seven Empathy Myths: Correcting Misconceptions About a Complex Construct Alison Jane Martingano Sara Konrath Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan Mark H. Davis Judith A. Hall Mollie A. Ruben Justin J. Sanders Rachel Schwartz Social and Personality Psychology Compass ABSTRACT The term empathy has become a buzzword in recent decades, and the concept has received both scholarly attention and has also been the focus of public interest, professional trainings, and policy initiatives. However, misconceptions about its nature persist. Our aim is to rectify these misunderstandings by highlighting claims about empathy that have been empirically refuted. We address seven myths about empathy: #1 People mean the same thing when they say “empathy,” #2 Empathy increases burnout, #3 Empathy cannot be measured, #4 Empathy comes effortlessly, #5 Empathy cannot be learned, #6 More recent generations lack empathy, #7 Women are naturally more empathic. These myths, selected due to their considerable implications, often contain a grain of truth but are usually exaggerated or misapplied, typically by generalizing findings from one narrow empathy definition to all empathy constructs. The term “empathy” is an umbrella term encompassing lower‐order constructs like compassion, personal distress, emotional congruence, perspective taking, and accurate interpersonal perception. We specify for which lower‐order empathy constructs each myth holds, for which constructs it is debunked (based on empirical evidence), and for which lower‐order constructs sufficient or consistent evidence exists to offer a conclusive verdict. We illuminate the complexities involved in discussing and studying empathy while debunking these prevalent misunderstandings. Our goal extends beyond merely refuting these myths; we strive to avert their potentially harmful impact on policies and society. 10.1111/spc3.70093 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
doi_str_mv 10.1111/spc3.70093
format Artículo Open Access
id wiley_oa_10_1111_spc3_70093
institution Wiley Open Access
license_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
publishDate 2025
publisher Wiley
record_format wiley_oa
spellingShingle Seven Empathy Myths: Correcting Misconceptions About a Complex Construct
Alison Jane Martingano
Sara Konrath
Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan
Mark H. Davis
Judith A. Hall
Mollie A. Ruben
Justin J. Sanders
Rachel Schwartz
Social and Personality Psychology Compass
Seven Empathy Myths: Correcting Misconceptions About a Complex Construct Alison Jane Martingano Sara Konrath Danielle Blanch‐Hartigan Mark H. Davis Judith A. Hall Mollie A. Ruben Justin J. Sanders Rachel Schwartz Social and Personality Psychology Compass ABSTRACT The term empathy has become a buzzword in recent decades, and the concept has received both scholarly attention and has also been the focus of public interest, professional trainings, and policy initiatives. However, misconceptions about its nature persist. Our aim is to rectify these misunderstandings by highlighting claims about empathy that have been empirically refuted. We address seven myths about empathy: #1 People mean the same thing when they say “empathy,” #2 Empathy increases burnout, #3 Empathy cannot be measured, #4 Empathy comes effortlessly, #5 Empathy cannot be learned, #6 More recent generations lack empathy, #7 Women are naturally more empathic. These myths, selected due to their considerable implications, often contain a grain of truth but are usually exaggerated or misapplied, typically by generalizing findings from one narrow empathy definition to all empathy constructs. The term “empathy” is an umbrella term encompassing lower‐order constructs like compassion, personal distress, emotional congruence, perspective taking, and accurate interpersonal perception. We specify for which lower‐order empathy constructs each myth holds, for which constructs it is debunked (based on empirical evidence), and for which lower‐order constructs sufficient or consistent evidence exists to offer a conclusive verdict. We illuminate the complexities involved in discussing and studying empathy while debunking these prevalent misunderstandings. Our goal extends beyond merely refuting these myths; we strive to avert their potentially harmful impact on policies and society. 10.1111/spc3.70093 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
title Seven Empathy Myths: Correcting Misconceptions About a Complex Construct
topic Social and Personality Psychology Compass
url https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.70093