That is, would instrumental empathy run counter to the definition of empathy or would instrumentally driven empathy be something else entirely?
Empathy is defined as experiencing the same emotion as another person following an occurrence that happened to the other person. Put differently, for an emotional response to be empathetic, there must be a congruence in the emotional responding of an observer and an individual experiencing the occurrence to said occurrence.
Wondra and Ellsworth (2015) postulate that the emotional response is mediated by appraisal, wherein both the observer and observed appraise a given situation in the same manner. Furthermore, they argue that when the emotions of an observer and the observed do not match–so-called empathy failure–the underlying mechanism is due to differing appraisals of the event that occured.
Many theorists conceive of all emotions as an experience relating to personal goals or personal well-being. However, this definition becomes muddy when we consider empathy; experiencing the same feeling as someone else does not self-evidently align with our personal goals or own well-being. For example, the benefits of two different individuals feeling anxious/fearful are not obvious… it can impair effective responding in difficult situations.
As an example, in a therapeutic setting, feeling the same emotion as a patient may impair our ability to effectively guide treatment. However, a mismatch between our own appraisal and the appraisal of our client negates the usage of the term empathy. Nevertheless, to provide therapy and support to an anxious client, empathetic understanding is the hallmark that facilitates the process (see for example Carl Rogers: A Way of Being).
Wondra and Ellsworth solve this partly by pointing to so-called nonmatching vicarious emotional experiences, wherein disparate appraisals underlie different emotional experiences. Another partial explanation may lie in how the term empathy is haphazardly used. If empathy encapsulates only those experience where the appraisal of an observer and target are equivalent, then the preceding example is indeed not empathy but an example of a nonmatching vicarious emotion.
That’s a lot of words but still no answer to whether empathy can be instrumental… what’s the hold up?
Well dear reader, by my estimation empathy can be instrumental… and that’s a good thing!
It can however be cataclysmic when people masquerade as empathetic to use other people for their own benefit. But then that wouldn’t be empathy! It would be a facade!
Empathy can, and should, be strategically employed to foster social connections, for example to understand your friend better or your mother’s suffering, or even (if you’re a clinician) to build a theraputic alliance!
References
Wondra, J. D., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2015). An appraisal theory of empathy and other vicarious emotional experiences. Psychological Review, 122(3), 411–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039252
The post Can empathy be instrumental? first appeared on Jón Ingi Hlynsson.