The Empathy Gym  🔗 **Source:** [The Empathy Gym](https://share.snipd.com/episode/91bc3641-f49f-4cd5-8e30-d3f3baa13c2b) ## Highlights - **Text Alone Makes Dehumanization Easier** - Online text-only interactions remove human cues and increase dehumanization compared with hearing someone's voice. - Juliana Schroeder's study showed people dehumanize political opponents more when reading transcripts than when hearing audio. Transcript: Shankar Vedantam Is the internet. And when you look at some of the changes that have unfolded and the timetable of those changes, they do coincide at least correlationally with the rise of internet technologies. And I'm wondering, is there reason to imagine that there's a connection between these two things, that the connections we have with one another online and on Twitter or social media, Where we often don't know whom we're communicating with or who's listening or who's not listening, could this in some ways be behind this decline in empathy? Jamil Zaki It certainly is possible. You know, I think that the internet and social media, I don't think of them as inherently antisocial. In a way, you can think of the internet as humanity's greatest empathic opportunity ever, right? We have the chance to connect with people around the world at any time on their own terms and respond with compassion. I mean, I think if you go back and read Wired, you know, 10 or 15 years ago, people were waxing poetic about the way that the internet could bring us all together into a global community. I think in some obvious ways that hasn't always occurred. And I think that has to do in part with some of the ways that we tend to use the internet that might not be empathy positive. So for instance, oftentimes online, we don't have a chance to see each other's faces and voices in sort of real-time interactions, kind of richness that we have when we hang out offline. Instead, we see avatars and strings of text, and those might not be great triggers for empathy. There's a great study by Juliana Schroeder and her colleagues where they had people describe their political opinions sort of in an audio recording. They then had a separate group of people listen to those audio recordings or read a transcript of them. And what they found was that people were more likely to dehumanize the person whose opinion they were reading about if they were only reading it. Whereas if they were hearing the person's voice, they were less likely to dehumanize that individual. So it's almost as though we're leaving behind when we go online some of the cues that allow us to detect each other's real humanity. Shankar Vedantam And there's a deep irony there, isn't there, Jameel? I mean, when we live in these big cities, we're living cheek by jowl with lots of other people, but in some ways we're not connecting with them. And the same goes with the internet. We have the capacity to connect with large numbers of other people, but we're connecting in often the superficial way instead of this deeper way. It ([Time 0:14:43](https://share.snipd.com/snip/853c2166-0cfc-4c72-84a0-fceafb84745a)) - **Empathy Often Favors Your Tribe** - Empathy is often parochial: increasing care for insiders can reduce concern for outsiders. - Zaki cites oxytocin studies where boosting bonding increased in-group care but decreased concern for out-groups. Transcript: Jamil Zaki Think that Paul is right in certain ways. Absolutely, empathy sort of begins parochially. Our instinctive empathy might be more driven towards people in our tribe than outside of it. I often think of oxytocin, you know, this chemical that sort of causes us to bond to other people, right? We often think of oxytocin as the love drug or the cuddle hormone. But it turns out that if you give people oxytocin intranasally, for instance, they become more caring about people in their group, but less caring about people outside their group. In essence, sort of turning up people's empathy in that case means turning up their parochialism. I think a big place where Paul and I differ is on what we do with this So Paul, I think, believes that, okay, empathy tends to be parochial and biased towards insiders versus outsiders, So we should give up on it altogether. I think differently. I think that that's a problem with how empathy tends to operate, but I try to focus us on the fact that we can control how we empathize and make choices about the way that we deploy our caring. ([Time 0:23:31](https://share.snipd.com/snip/09612c27-d2ab-4bd5-a1d4-0916dd79bc2f)) - **Temporarily Dial Down Group Loyalty To Hear Outsiders** - When in-group empathy blocks compromise (e.g., police protecting officers), check whether your loyalty to the group is preventing perspective-taking. - Zaki suggests first reducing excessive empathy for your group before attempting to empathize with outsiders. Transcript: Shankar Vedantam You've done some very interesting work with police officers where you brought to bear this insight that you just talked about. Tell me about that work and tell me about how sometimes the right recommendation might actually be to tell people, behave a little less empathetically. Jamil Zaki Yeah. So for the book, I profiled Washington State's Criminal Justice Training Center. Although these officers were very empathic towards citizens, they were even more empathic towards fellow police officers. And that included fellow police officers who had engaged in potential police misconduct, right? So while I was there, there was a case of police officers who had shot an unarmed man named Antonio Zambrano Montes. And during my visit to CJTC, the officers involved in that shooting, they're not indicted at all. So that seemed like a travesty of justice to many people in Washington state. But the people at CJTC were adamant that these were good guys who had just made a mistake. That level of empathy for people in their own group, I feel, and this is just my perspective, might have interfered with their ability to understand how the rest of the world saw what Had happened. And in fact, this is consistent with research by my friend Emil Bruneau. He's studied sort of parochial empathy in a lot of different intergroup contexts. And what he finds is that sometimes if you want to predict when someone will be willing to be aggressive towards outsiders or unwilling to compromise with someone on the other side of A conflict, it's not enough to measure whether they empathize with the people on the outside. You have to also measure how empathic they are to their own group. And it turns out that people who are extraordinarily empathic towards people in their group, even if they're also empathic towards outsiders, are unwilling to compromise, unwilling To do anything that could threaten their own tribe. So what this suggests is that sometimes if we want to open ourselves up to other cultures, to people on the other side of a political or racial divide, maybe what we should start out doing Is not just trying to get to know them and empathize more with them, but to recognize if we're empathizing so much with our group that we'll be unable to be flexible emotionally. ([Time 0:25:00](https://share.snipd.com/snip/75aa483d-2e92-44b2-a324-d6c89dc9c075)) - **Too Much Empathy Can Burn Out Caregivers** - High empathic exposure in caring professions can cause burnout and defensive dehumanization where caregivers emotionally shut down. - About half of oncologists report intense heartbreak delivering bad news; clinicians may avoid empathy to function. Transcript: Shankar Vedantam Want to talk about another paradox of empathy. You say that about 50% of oncologists report feeling intense heartbreak when they communicate bad news to patients. So even as empathy is this very powerful driver of positive outcomes in medical settings, for example, it also seems to come at some personal cost. Jamil Zaki Yeah. In fact, even having medical students simulate delivering bad news makes them anxious, makes their palms start to sweat and their hearts start to race. Empathy is hugely beneficial, including in medical contexts, for the people who receive it. But it can be an occupational hazard for the people who give it. Shankar Vedantam I understand that a friend of yours is a psychotherapist and she avoids scheduling depressed patients at the end of the day for in some ways the same reason? Jamil Zaki Yeah, yeah, because she feels as though their negative mood will seep into her and sort of leave her unable to interact well with her family. And I think this is part of the double-edged sword of empathy for people in caring professions. On the one hand, many of these people are driven to their work by a preternatural care for others. But on the other hand, that same care can cause them to lose themselves, especially if they're in really intense medical settings where they're surrounded by sort of chronically surrounded By other people's deep suffering. And as a result, oftentimes I think people in caring professions feel like they're stuck in a double bind between caring for other people adequately, but potentially grinding themselves Down or turning themselves off. This is something that is called in the medical profession, defensive dehumanization. ([Time 0:27:31](https://share.snipd.com/snip/3a47b3b3-33dc-471e-914d-b242332c2d7b)) - **Use Immersion To Expand Empathy For Distant Groups** - Use immersive experiences to broaden empathy for distant groups by simulating their lived experience. - Zaki's VR homelessness simulation reduced dehumanization and increased support for affordable housing even one month later. Transcript: Jamil Zaki So we had a simulation where people went through a series of scenes. These are sort of virtual reality scenes of what it might be like to become homeless. So in one scene, they've been evicted from their apartment, and they're trying to figure out what they can sell to make ends meet and stay in their apartment just one more month. In the second scene, they've failed to stay in their apartment and are now sort of sleeping in their car, which is then impounded. And then in a third scene, on a local bus line, which in fact in the Bay Area, there is a bus line that homeless individuals often take to for shelter during the night. So again, this showed people in an interactive, immersive way the process that an individual might go through when they become homeless. What we found was that this short simulation powerfully affected people's empathy for the homeless. Even a month later, people who had gone through that simulation, as opposed to a control condition, were less likely to dehumanize homeless individuals. And they were more supportive of policies that would produce affordable housing for people in the Bay Area, which is a very sort of hot-button issue around here. So again, this suggests that by putting ourselves into the story of people who on the surface appear different from us, we can recognize, as you put it nicely, our common humanity with Them, and that can trigger empathy in a really natural way. ([Time 0:38:34](https://share.snipd.com/snip/7f1b25da-019c-445f-9bac-1d9a03add175)) - **Acting And Fiction Build Empathy Muscles** - Practice acting or reading narrative fiction to strengthen empathy muscles by embodying others' inner lives. - Talia Goldstein's studies found acting training boosted adolescents' empathy more than visual arts training. Transcript: Shankar Vedantam And one of the things you mention in the book is the idea of the theater. How does being an actor in some ways prompt you to develop the muscle of empathy? Jamil Zaki Yeah, I mean, if you think about what acting is, that you really immerse yourself so deeply in the character that you stop being yourself and start being them for a little while. I mean, I'd say it's more than walking a mile in their shoes. You're almost walking a mile in their skin. And as a result, there's some evidence, at least, that acting, in fact, bolsters people's empathy. So in a great set of studies, Talia Goldstein looked at adolescents who were in performing arts high schools and compared them, you know, at the beginning and end of the year to students Who were being trained in visual arts. And what she found is that sort of acting, training in acting, improved kids' empathy more than training in a different type of art. Which is not to say that training in the visual arts doesn't have advantages. I'm sure it does. ([Time 0:40:14](https://share.snipd.com/snip/c4a1eea1-6f60-4da2-a504-8b544ac78966)) - **Broaden Identity To Expand Who Deserves Empathy** - Expanding which in-group identity you activate broadens empathy; shifting from 'fan' to 'soccer lover' increased help for rival supporters. - Mark Levine's Manchester United study showed writing about the broader shared identity increased helping across rival lines. Transcript: Jamil Zaki Yeah, I love this study from Mark Levine and his colleagues. So they recruited rabid Manchester United fans. And, you know, fandom in UK soccer is very important. And they asked them to write about why they loved Manchester United so much, and then told them that they would go to a different building on campus to watch film of Man U playing. While they were on their way across campus, they came across a jogger who appeared to twist his ankle and fall to the ground, writhing in pain. This person was in fact an actor, and the trick here was that the psychologists made it such that sometimes that actor was wearing a Manchester United jersey. Sometimes they were wearing a jersey of Liverpool, which at the time was Manchester United's most hated rival. And other times they were wearing a blank jersey. And what they found was that Man U fans were more than willing to help fellow Man U fans, but also more than willing to basically step over a Liverpool fan as they sort of writhed on the ground In pain. This is sort of classic tribalism in terms of our empathy and generosity. But what I love about this study is that the psychologists ran a second version of it. And here, instead of asking Man U fans to write about why they loved the team, they asked them to write about why they loved soccer, why it is such a beautiful game. And then they put them in the same scenario. What they found was that after writing about how much they loved soccer, individuals were not just willing to help fellow Man U fans, but also willing to help Liverpool fans. They still didn't help the person in the blank jersey, which I guess suggests that it's better to be part of any tribe than part of none. But I think there's a deeper takeaway from this study, which is that, yes, it's easier to empathize with people who are like us than unlike us. But all of us have many different selves inside us at any given moment. And each self carries with it a different group, maybe of a different size. So if I think of myself, for instance, as a Stanford person, well, then people at UC Berkeley are my mortal enemy, especially during the big game. But if I think of myself as a Californian, then my in-group, the people who deserve my empathy and who it's easy to empathize with, that group grows. And if I can think of myself as, I don't know, an American or a human being, then that group will grow even further. ([Time 0:43:44](https://share.snipd.com/snip/85f9b1aa-1797-4c6d-8e8e-15f44a6d67a8)) - **Reveal A Little To Build Trust And Reciprocity** - Share sensitive information selectively to build trust; vulnerability signals that you trust the other person and encourages reciprocity. - Leslie John emphasizes revealing a bit more makes people feel known and strengthens relationships and leadership trust. Transcript: Leslie John Oh, there's so many benefits. The core benefit is trust. When we open up to others, when we share something a bit sensitive and personal, we are actually modeling that we trust the person. We're implicitly saying, I'm telling you this because I trust you to not make a fool out of me. And so that in turn is so powerful. It makes them trust us. And trust is really the kernel of all social relationships, right? Which are so important for human flourishing. There are mental and physical wellbeing benefits to revealing. Revealing wisely and opening up a little bit more makes us feel closer to our spouses, to our friends. It makes us feel known for who we really are. ([Time 0:53:48](https://share.snipd.com/snip/668e798e-3c18-4e41-b955-0af459276933)) - **Lead With Disclosure To Encourage Others To Reveal** - Use the 'hurting effect' by disclosing first: people are likelier to reveal when they know others did too. - John's online study showed people admitted sensitive behaviors more when told many others had already disclosed. Transcript: Leslie John Yeah. So what we did in this study was we asked people a bunch of questions that varied in how sensitive they were. Like, have you ever eaten meat, poultry, or fish? That's like a softball question that went all the way up to like, have you ever had sex with a friend's spouse? So like way the whole range. And what we found was that this hurting effect whereby if you know that other people have admitted to something or revealed something, it makes you more comfortable revealing back. And the interesting thing about this study is that it wasn't a face-to conversation where you may feel kind of socially compelled. Rather, it was this bare bones online survey where we just asked people questions and we told them how other people had ostensibly answered the questions. And basically, when we told them that many people had admitted to calling in sick when they weren't sick, for example. People were more likely themselves to admit that relative to another version where we said almost nobody is ever calling in sick when not sick. So it's easier to reveal when you know that you're not alone. ([Time 0:56:45](https://share.snipd.com/snip/e8fb6bf3-59d4-4d80-95ea-90e4b8169b8e)) - **Ask For The Response You Need When You Reveal** - To avoid reciprocity fails, disclose in person or by phone and state what response you need. - John suggests saying, 'This is hard for me; I'm hoping you can tell me how you feel,' to prompt reciprocation. Transcript: Leslie John So exactly. A reciprocity fail is when you feel you've put yourself out there and be vulnerable and you kind of get shot down or you don't get a welcoming response or a reveal back. And that's what Abigail is describing here. Is vulnerability over text messaging and email, non-face or non-phone. I think that's really tough. That's a tough setup because it's so hard to interpret emotions when you're communicating virtually like that. So the number one thing is, first, to set yourself up for success is to talk on the phone or in person because then your emotion translates. The second is, I think that we, this is a perfect example of how we often expect someone to react in a certain way or want them to react in a certain way. And when, then when they don't, we get really disappointed. Well, what might be, we'd be able to do to change that. We can actually say what we need. We can actually be proactive and say, I feel terrible about this. This is a hard thing for me to say. And I'm hoping that you can tell me how you feel after hearing this, right? ([Time 1:00:18](https://share.snipd.com/snip/7b75e5df-0584-41e2-aa7e-edfd60913bb2)) - **Validate Courage First Before Problem Solving** - When someone courageously confesses, validate rather than immediately problem-solve; recognize their bravery and feelings. - John recommends simple validation phrases like 'I hear you, that must be so hard,' which reduce stress and foster clarity. Transcript: Leslie John Yes. We think way too much about the content and not enough about the gesture of disclosure. And when we're on the receiving end, it's hard for us to empathize with just how hard it is, especially when there's power imbalances, as there was in Jeremy's example. And so I think when someone says that, think of it as a gift and say, thank you for sharing that. Truly, even if it's something that you're dissatisfied with, you can recognize that this took courage. And there's actually been some really interesting studies on what can, when you're on the receiving end of someone's sensitive disclosure, what is the best way to help them? And again, and again, the best thing to do is validation. So we often think that we should problem solve, right? Like in this example, like, what are you going to do about it? But actually less is more just like recognizing their disclosure and saying, I hear you, that must be so hard. I would feel the same way too. These are forms of validation. And that is so comforting to people. ([Time 1:05:51](https://share.snipd.com/snip/9b0ebd84-396d-41a1-b041-0a0254b94b36)) - **Rehearse And Curate Your Audience For Sensitive Disclosures** - Curate your audience and rehearse disclosures privately before telling others, especially in hostile or high-stakes contexts. - John advises testing the words out loud and starting with a close, trusted person before wider sharing. Transcript: Leslie John How does that feel, right? And then try saying them to someone that is really close with you. Yeah. Shankar Vedantam I mean, I'm also reflecting that one of the things that Alison was doing was she was trying to frame her disclosures in the context of, you know, a very tense political situation. And I'm wondering whether Alison might have had more success if she was in a situation where even if she was with people who disagreed with her politically, she's finding some kind of A common, you know, activity or an event that people are interested in, and then sharing her self-disclosure in that context where it's not going to be interpreted through a political Lens. Leslie John Yeah, totally. I mean, the context massively shapes the interpretation of the self-disclosure, for sure. Another thing that comes to mind is, if she was here, what I would love to ask her more about is her why, like what's her purpose, what's her motive for revealing, because a story of mine, It's not a terrible event like what Allison experienced. But, um, you know, when I was first pregnant with our first little guy, I was overjoyed. And I, in a spirit of warmth and transparency, I kind of blurted it out to our landlord. Well, that sent a series of chain reactions that basically ended with us having to move out. It was definitely a disclosure that came back to bite me. Everything worked out in the end, but you know, and in hindsight, I'm like, why did I do that? Well, I wanted to get coups and love and was my landlord really the right person to do that? Absolutely not. ([Time 1:14:36](https://share.snipd.com/snip/cb925d0c-f28f-4cb1-8590-d482314e9bc3)) - **Share Achievements Thoughtfully Without Humble Bragging** - When sharing proud achievements, avoid humble-bragging by timing appropriately and telling the struggle story to reduce envy. - Leslie John advises outright honest sharing about effort and choosing moments that won't highlight others' vulnerabilities. Transcript: Leslie John It can be hard because you don't want to make your loved ones and friend ones feel badly. You don't want to spark envy, right? You don't want them to feel jealous. And so oftentimes then what we end up doing is we end up just like not sharing the thing. And that's also problematic. This reminds me of my colleague Oval Cesar's work where on humble bragging, where what we try to do is we try to then often coach the, take the edge off the brag by coaching it with a display Of humility. Like, oh my gosh, I can't believe my boss asked me to lead this meeting. Right? Or it's so hard when I get so many text messages from all my friends, it's really hard to respond to all that. And it's just like mega eye roll, right? And so don't humble brag. It's better to outright brag. And by that, I mean, say the positive thing. But there's ways of being like really thoughtful about it. Like you got to consider the timing. You don't want to tell your bestie that you got a promotion when your bestie had a really bad day and is feeling down. Another thing you can do is reveal like the story of how you got there, like that you worked really hard and you've been thinking about this a long time. So it's not oh, hey, I got promoted. Like I'm the best. It's so easy. So you can reveal kind of the struggle. I think we need to be very careful about the timing, the recipient and the context. ([Time 1:18:32](https://share.snipd.com/snip/8cde3c7b-3fec-4ca4-a7bb-4f55f84ba754)) - **A Disclosure That Revealed A Partner's Limits** - Janet disclosed a 20-year-old abusive relationship to her long-term partner and he left silently, ending their romantic closeness. - Leslie John framed that reaction as informative: it revealed the partner couldn't handle that vulnerability. Transcript: Speaker 4 I had not shared with him that I was in a very seriously damaging relationship about 20 years ago. Police were involved. It was pretty bad. And I just felt like I wanted to share it with him. It was something that he should know about me. So we were having a conversation about vulnerability. And I said, there's something I'd like to share with you. And and it's not going to be easy for me to tell you. And you may judge me, but I feel like I need to tell you. So I told him the story. And he sat and listened. And when it was all done, there was just silence. I didn't know what to do, so I just sat there. And ultimately, we ended the conversation, and he decided to get up and leave and go home. And from that point forward, our relationship changed pretty profoundly. We still see each other as friends occasionally, but that's it. So that's the story. Shankar Vedantam So Leslie, it looks like Janet was punished for being vulnerable in disclosing something that happened to her in the past. How should we think of these moments when we put ourselves out there and the other person has a negative or awkward reaction to our disclosure? Leslie John I think it's information, right? As hard as it is, and I feel so badly for Janet, I admire her courage and it just sucks so bad when someone doesn't even know what to do with it and leaves. That said, it is a very clear signal, right? Like this person can't handle it. I mean, especially if, unless there's like a day or a few later that he comes back, he's like, oh my gosh, I'm so sorry. Like this was overwhelming, right? Like, but if it's not paired with some kind of hugely rectifying behavior like that, I know this is going to sound crazy, but it's a bit of a gift because this person revealed himself to Her. Now, it happened after six years, I think, she said, which is, that's incredibly hard to take. It's one of those things that's just self-disclosure. ([Time 1:24:14](https://share.snipd.com/snip/3299030a-69ae-4334-b280-9c178778ae03)) - **Use Meta-Disclosure And Rituals To Resolve Social Tension** - For conflict-prone relationships, use meta-disclosure and structured rituals (talking piece, dedicated space) to defuse tension and invite joint problem-solving. - Nora's talking-circle style invite led to mutual revelation and long-term bonding with a previously chilly acquaintance. Transcript: Speaker 4 And I guess we were picking up on each other's hesitance or weird vibes. So things just went wonky from the very beginning. But anyway, we ended up bonding over that and a number of other things. We may have even cried together at some point. But from that day on, we've had this incredible connection and fondness for each other that continues today. Shankar Vedantam So Leslie, that story might be the poster child for the benefits of disclosure. To talk about the risks and benefits of being vulnerable with someone that you are in conflict with. Leslie John I love this. This is so beautiful. There's two things that really stand out to me about this. The first is the self-awareness, right? The, ooh, I feel weird around this person. There's something, right? Identifying that instead of brushing it to the side, identifying it. The second thing I love about it is the nature of the disclosure. It's a meta disclosure. It's like, I'm feeling this thing. What is it? And it's kind of, now you're engaging that person in a, in a joint problem solving task, right? So it's not, it's not like a, you're like this and I'm like this and how are we different? The frame there is, is making the whole thing collaborative, which is very beautiful. But you can think of like revealing sensitive things about yourself, like political affiliation. And like, I'm thinking of my in-laws where we have different political affiliations and it can easily be conflictual, these conversations. Curiosity. We still disagree, but I understand better and I empathize more. And so if you can get to that point, which takes practice, I think I have found it takes practice. And as we've been saying, feeling understood for who you really are is the key part of connection. I also wanted to say, I thought of one anecdote as you were describing this, one of my father's greatest moments. So when we were a kid, my parents had tons of dinner parties and there was this one dinner party. I just remember this because I was sitting in the other room watching TV and things got really heated. They were like arguing. I don't even know what they were arguing about. The record player. And he puts on, what is it? Monty Python's, are we having an argument? This is not how to buy an argument. How do I know you put it on full blast and it just completely cut the ice. And so it's one of these like meta comments, right? It's commenting on the situation. It's like, oh, this is feeling really conflictual and we don't hate each other. What's going on? And when he put that on, it was just like everyone burst out and laughing. Shankar Vedantam Noro also had a practical suggestion on how we might go about having a conversation like this. And I wanted to play what she shared with us. Speaker 4 When I invited her over, I had created a special space that I learned from doing talking circles, where we sat across from each other on the floor and had a talking piece that we passed Back and forth, which I think really helped set an intention of really hearing each other and wanting to heal this thing between us. Like if we had just met for coffee or sat at a kitchen table, I'm not sure the outcome would have been the same. Shankar Vedantam So, Leslie, what do you make of the technique that Nora used? And are there other techniques like this that can help us be more open with others? Yes. Leslie John Really important things are receiving the person's disclosure well, listening, making eye contact, and less is more. Your job is not to fix. Usually, it's to listen and make them feel heard. And to do that, you validate, right? You say, you repeat back what they're saying. You say, I hear you're feeling frustrated. That makes sense. It makes sense that you would feel that way. Those things, I know it sounds like therapy speak, but this has been showed in many, many studies that validation is the single best thing you can do when you receive people's disclosures. But you also want to, you know, if you're like in a, just like Nora's situation, this rule of reciprocity, right? You want to share your feelings and you want to invite the other to share theirs and you want to kind of go back and forth like this. And so really the process really, really matters. Shankar Vedantam I mean, it's a dance. That's what you're saying. Leslie John It's a dance. Yeah, exactly. ([Time 1:29:54](https://share.snipd.com/snip/386487c1-51b6-427c-889d-93a8f3d3e66d))