| Title |
Study of the combinatorial impact of empathy and emotion on the processing of conflicts of interest with the event-related potential technique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s124224 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoli He, Ni Zhang |
| Abstract |
Studies have found that empathy is important in moral development and violence suppression, and emotion also affects empathy. However, the combinatorial effect of emotion and empathy on the processing of conflicts is not known. A total of 44 undergraduate students (23 in low-empathy group and 21 in high-empathy group) were enrolled in this study. They were subjected to positive, negative, and neutral emotion evoking, as well as conflicting or nonconflicting proposals. Event-related potential technology was used to study the combinatorial effects of empathy and emotion on the processing of conflict of interest. We found that under the influence of a positive emotion, both low- and high-empathy groups exhibited lower rejection rates. In the context of conflict, individuals in the high-empathy group showed fewer refusals under positive emotion. In the low-empathy group, there was no significant difference between responses to different emotions, but conflicting proposals induced more negative medial frontal negativity than nonconflicting proposals. Individuals in the low-empathy group showed different late positive potentials when responding to different types of proposals under both neutral and negative emotions, whereas those in the high-empathy group only showed different late positive potentials responding to different types of proposals under negative emotion. Our results indicate that under positive emotion, individuals with low empathy show less difference in processing either conflicting or nonconflicting proposals, whereas under negative emotion, individuals with high empathy show enhanced motivation toward nonconflicting proposals. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 8 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,583
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,180
of 330,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#67
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 330,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.