In a time of unprecedented displacement, hostility toward refugees is widespread. Two common strategies refugee advocates pursue to counter hostility and promote inclusion are perspective-getting exercises and providing information that corrects misperceptions. In this study, we evaluate whether these strategies are effective across four outcomes commonly used to measure outgroup inclusion: warmth toward refugees, policy preferences, behavior, and beliefs about a common misperception concerning refugees. Using three studies with nearly 15,000 Americans, we find that information and perspective-getting affect different outcomes. We show that combining both interventions produces an additive effect on all outcomes, that neither strategy enhances the other, but that bundling the strategies may prevent backfire effects. Our results underscore the promise and limits of both strategies for promoting inclusion.

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a highly stigmatised mental disorder. A variety of research exists highlighting the stigma experienced by individuals with BPD and the impacts of such prejudices on their lives. Similarly, much research exists on the benefits of engaging in compassionate acts, including improved mental health recovery. However, there is a notable gap in understanding how stigma experienced by people with BPD acts as a barrier to compassion and by extension recovery. This paper synthesises these perspectives, examining common barriers to compassionate acts, the impact of stigma on people with BPD, and how these barriers are exacerbated for individuals with BPD due to the stigma they face. The synthesis of perspectives in the article highlights the critical role of compassion in supporting the recovery of individuals with BPD, while also revealing the significant barriers posed by stigma. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive understanding of the intersection between compassion and stigma, informing the development of targeted interventions to promote well-being and recovery for individuals with BPD.

If being asked to give to charity stimulates an emotional response, like empathy, that makes giving difficult to resist, a natural self-control mechanism might be to avoid being asked in the first place. We replicate a result from a field experiment that points to the role of empathy in giving. We conduct an experiment in a large superstore in which we solicit donations to charity and randomly allow shoppers the opportunity to avoid solicitation by using the other door. We find the rate of avoidance by store entrants to be 8.9 %. However, we also find that the avoidance effect disappears in very cold weather, suggesting that avoidance behavior is sensitive to its cost.

Empathy plays a crucial role in psychosocial and psychological interventions, greatly impacting rapport building, patient adherence, and satisfaction with treatment. Empathetic interactions enhance patient’s self-reflection and the delivery of more personalized therapeutic interventions tailored to the unique needs of each patient, thereby improving the overall quality of care. Despite empathy being central to psychosocial interventions, there are currently no valid and reliable patient-centered tools that assess the lay-therapist empathy that they show and/or exhibit toward their patients.

In this study, the patient-rated Empathy Scale for Lay Therapists was developed to assess empathy in community health workers delivering psychosocial interventions. Psychometric validation was based on a cross-sectional study embedded in a non-inferiority cluster randomized trial of the Thinking Healthy Programme for perinatal depression in Pakistan.

Community testing with perinatal women confirmed the scale’s understandability and logical structure, highlighting its face validity. Among the 980 trial participants, a high level of agreement with the Empathy Scale for Lay Therapists (mean score 2.616) was observed, indicating effective communication and empathy from health workers. The scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.96). Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed a unidimensional structure, capturing 87.81% of the total variance, with strong factor loadings.

European countries have been important supporters of Ukraine since the 2022 invasion by Russia. Responding to the invasion, however, was not the only challenge facing these countries in 2022. A tough domestic economic situation caused by high inflation and skyrocketing energy prices gave rise to public resentment accusing governments of favoring Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees over their own citizens. Yet, communicating governments’ policies on Ukraine efficiently and having the public on board matters because lack of public support may endanger the countries’ ability to help Ukraine in the war. Given the importance of political communication, we use the case of Czechia to explore the role of empathy in political communication between Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees. We build on existing studies which suggest that empathy in communication has the potential to decrease polarization of public opinion and that candidates using empathetic communication are viewed more positively. First, in a rhetorical analysis, we demonstrate that empathy with citizens’ concerns is not a part of the government’s defense of its refugee policy. Then, in an original survey experiment, we show that contrary to expectations, expressing empathy with citizens’ concerns does not significantly increase public support for help to refugees.

What’s the good of getting angry with a person? Some would argue that angry emotions like indignation or resentment are intrinsically good when they are an apt response. But many think this answer is not fully satisfactory. An increasing number of philosophers add that accusatory anger has value because of what it communicates to the blamee, and because of its downstream cultivating effects on the blamee.

Mediators and conflict resolution strategists share an interest with philosophers in the value of reactive attitudes for interpersonal communication, but prominent thinkers from those fields arrive at rather different verdicts about the effects of accusatory anger. On a more therapeutic approach to interpersonal conflict, angry accusation is commonly understood to obfuscate mutual understanding and to have bad downstream effects on the blamee.

Below, I discuss how the compassionate communication approach casts doubt on the purported valuable effects of angry accusation, and I provide empirical support for this worry. I argue that philosophers should reconsider their empirical assumptions about the human psychology of discord, and hypothesize that accusatory anger is unlikely to have the communicative and cultivating effects that it is purported to have. I conclude by highlighting further empirical and ethical questions this hypothesis generates.

The H* ~ L + H* pitch accent contrast in English has been a matter of lengthy debate, with some arguing that L + H* is an emphatic version of H* and others that the accents are phonetically and pragmatically distinct. Empirical evidence is inconclusive, possibly because studies do not consider dialectal variation and individual variability. We focused on Standard Southern British English (SSBE), which has not been extensively investigated with respect to this contrast, and used Rapid Prosody Transcription (RPT) to examine differences in prominence based on accent form and function. L + H*s were rated more prominent than H*s but only when the former were used for contrast and the latter were not, indicating that participants had expectations about the form–function connection. However, they also differed substantially in which they considered primary (form or function). We replicated both the general findings and the patterns of individual variability with a second RPT study which also showed that the relative prioritization of form or function related to participant differences in empathy, musicality and autistic-like traits. In conclusion, the two accents are used to encode different pragmatics, though the form–function mapping is not clear-cut, suggesting a marginal contrast that not every SSBE speaker shares and attends to.

Recruiting and retaining research participants is challenging because it often requires overcoming structural barriers and addressing how histories of mistrust and individuals’ lived experiences affect their research engagement. We describe a pilot workshop designed to educate clinical research professionals on using empathy skills to recognize and mitigate bias to improve recruitment and retention. In a post-workshop survey (22/31 participants completed), 94% agreed the workshop helped them practice perspective-taking, recognize implicit bias, and identify opportunities for empathy. Participants reported increased confidence in key recruitment and retention skills (p < 0.05). Future studies will evaluate whether this translates into improved recruitment.

We often seek empathy from others by asking them to listen to our stories. But what exactly is the role of listening in empathy? One might think that it is merely a means for the empathizer to gather rich information about the empathized. We shall rather argue that listening is an embodied action, one that plays a significant role in empathic perspective-taking. We make our case via a descriptive analysis of a paradigm case of empathy mediated by listening or what we can call empathy through listening. On our view, empathy through listening involves three distinctive features: (1) dynamic unfolding, (2) collaboration, and (3) mutual perspective reshaping. Listening contributes to this process by initiating and sustaining a feedback loop of receptivity that occurs between empathizing and empathized agents.