Advertisement

PSN

, 3:16 | Cite as

Une anatomie de l’empathie

  • Jean Decety
Psychologie Et Neuropsychiatrie Cognitives

Résumé

L’empathie est fondée sur notre capacité à reconnaître implicitement qu’autrui est semblable à soi mais sans confusion entre soi-même et l’autre. Elle peut être déclenchée intentionnellement en se mettant à la place de l’autre. L’empathie implique non seulement un partage affectif avec l’autre mais aussi une compréhension des états mentaux de cette personne. Cet article propose un modèle multidimensionnel de l’empathie dont la résponance affective, la flexibilité mentale pour adopter le point de vue subjectif d’autrui, la régulation des émotions constituent les composantes de base. Ces composantes sont modulées par des processus motivationnels et attentionnels et sont sous-tendues par des systèmes neuro-cognitifs distribués et dissociables (dans le cortex préforntal et pariétal de l’hémisphère droit). On peut, à partir de ce modèle fonctionnel, prédire des troubles de l’intersubjectivité et de l’emphathie distincts selon que l’un ou l’autre des composants est endommagé ou non opérationnel.

Mots-Clés

Empathie Régulation émotionnelle Flexibilité mentale Théorie de l’esprit 

An anatomy of empathy

Abstract

Empathy refers to an emotional response that emanates either from the emotional state of another individual or from adopting another’ psychological point of view without losing sight of whose feelings belong to whom. This response is contingent on emotional as well as cognitive factors. Empathy involves not only the affective experience of the other person’s actual or inferred emotional state but also some minimal recognition and understanding of another’s emotional state. This article proposes, in the light of multiple levels of analysis ranging from clinical psychology, cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology, a model of empathy that involves parallel and distributed processing in a number of dissociable computational mechanisms (in the prefrontal and parietal cortices of the right hemisphere). Affective sharing, self-awareness, mental flexibility and emotion regulation constitute the basic macro-components of empathy, which are underpinned by specific neural systems. This functional model is used to make specific predictions about the various empathy deficits that can be encountered in different forms of social and neurological disorders.

Keywords

Empathy Emotion regulation Mental flexibility Theory of mind 

Références

  1. 1.
    Adolphs R., Damasio H., Tranel D. 2000. A role for somatosensory cortices in the visual recognition of emotion as revealed by three-dimensional lesion mapping.Journal of Neuroscience 20: 2683–2690.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baldissera F., Cavallari P., Craighero L., Fadiga L. 2001. Modulation of spinal excitability during observation of hand actions in humans.European Journal of Neuroscience 13: 190–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barsalou L.W., Niedenthal P.M., Barbey A., Ruppert J. 2003. Social embodiment.In Ross B.H. (ed.).The Psychology of Learning and Motivation vol. 43. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 43–92.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Basch M.F. 1983. Empathic understanding: A review of the concept and some theoretical considerations.Journal of the American Psychanalytic Association 31: 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Batson C.D. 1991.The Altrusim Question. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blair R.J.R. 1999. Psychophysiological responsiveness to the distress of others in children with autism.Personality and Individual Differences 26: 477–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blair R.J.R. 2001. Neurocognitive models of aggression, the antisocial personality disorders and psychopathy.Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 71: 727–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blakemore S.-J., Decety J. 2001. From the perception of action to the understanding of intention.Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2, 561–567.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brass M., Zysset S., von Cramon D.Y. 2001. The inhibition of imitative response tendencies.Neuroimage 14: 1416–1423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buccino G.et al. 2001. Action observation activated premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: an fMRI study.European Journal of Neuroscience 13: 400–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calder A.J., Keane J., Manes F., Antoun N., Yong A.W. 2000. Impaired recognition and experience of disgust following brain injury.Nature Neuroscience 3: 1077–1078.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Calder A.J.,Lawrence A.D., Young A.W. 2001. Neuropsychology of fear and loathing.Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2: 352–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carlozzi A.F., Bull K.S., Stein L.B., Ray K., Barnes L. 2002. Empathy theory and practice: A survey of psychologists and counselors.The Journal of Psychology 136: 161–170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Corona C., Dissanayake C., Arbelle A., Wellington P., Sigman M. 1998. Is affect aversive to young children with autism?Child Development 69: 1494–1502.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Damasio A.R. 1995.L’erreur de Descartes. Paris: Editions Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davidson R.J. 2002. Anxiety and affective style: role of prefrontal cortex and amygdala.Biological Psychiatry 51, 68–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis H.M. 1996.Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. Madison, Wisconsin: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Decety J., Chaminade T. 2003. Neural correlates of feeling sympathy.Neuropsychologia 41: 127–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Decety J., Sommerville J. 2003. Shared representations between self and other: a social cognitive neuroscience view.Trends in Cognitive Neuroscience 7: 527–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Decety J., Jackson P. 2004. The functional architecture of human empathy.Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews 3: 71–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Decety J., Hodges S.D. 2005. The social neuroscience of empathy.In Lange P.A. (ed.).Bridging Social Psychology: Benefits of Transdisciplinary Approaches. Nahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, in press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dimberg U., Thunberg M., Elmehed K. 2000. Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facial expressions.Psychological Science 11: 86–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dijksterhuis A., Bargh J.A. 2001. The perception-behavior expressway: automatic effects of social perception on social behavior.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 33: 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eisenberg N. 2000. Emotion, regulation, and moral development.Annual Review in Psychology 51, 665–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ekman P. 1992. Facial expressions of emotion: New findings, new questions.Psychological Science 1: 34–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eslinger P.J., Parkinson K., Shamay S.G. 2002. Empathy and social-emotional factors in recovery from stroke.Current Opinion in Neurology 15: 91–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Farrer C., Franck N., Georgieff N., Frith C.D., Decety, J., Jeannerod, M. 2003. Modulating the experience of agency: A PET study.NeuroImage 18: 324–333.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Freud S. 1905.Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious. Standard Edition, 8. London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gallagher H.L., Frith C.D. 2003. Functional imaging of theory of mind.Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7, 77–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gallup G.G. 1998. Self-awareness and the evolution of social intelligence.Behavioural Processes 42: 239–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gordon R.M. 1986. Folk psychology as simulation.Mind and Language 7: 104–119.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Greenwald A.G. 1980. The totalitarian ego.Psychological Review 35: 603–618.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Happé F., Brownell H., Winner E. 1999. Acquired mind-blindness following stroke.Cognition 70: 211–240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hare R.D. 1993.Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among us. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hatfield E., Cacioppo J., Rapson R. 1994.Emotional Contagion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Henry T.R., Wang S. 1998. Effect of early stress on adult affiliative behavior.Psychoneuroendocrinology 23: 863–875.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hobson R.P. 1989. On sharing experiences.Development Psychopathology 1: 197–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hobson R., Lee A. 1999. Imitation and identification in autism.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 10: 649–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ickes W. 1997.Empathic Accuracy. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Insel T.R., Winslow J.T. 1998. Serotonin and neuroppeptides in affiliative behaviors.Biological Psychiatry 44, 207–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jackson P.L., Decety J. 2004. ba Motor cognition: A new paradigm to study self other interactions.Current Opinion in Neurobiology 14: 259–263.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jackson P.L., Meltzoff A.N., Decety J. 2005. How do we perceive the pain of others: A window into the neural processes involved in empathy.NeuroImage, in press.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Jackson P.L., Brunet E., Decety J. 2005. Difference in the hemodynamic activity between assessing pain from our own vs. someone else’s perspective. Poster presented at the Twelve Cognitive Neuroscience Society, New York, April.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kiehl K.A. et al., 2001. Limbic abnormalities in affective processing by criminal psychopaths as revealed by functional magnetic imaging.Biological Psychiatry 50, 677–684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kihlstrom J.F., Glisky M.L., Angiulo M.J. 1994. Dissociative tendencies and dissociative disorders.Journal of Abnormal Psychology 103: 117–124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Krueger J. 1998. On the perception of social consensus.In Zanna M.P. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 30. San Diego: Academic Press, 164–290.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lakin J.L., Chatran T.L. 2003. Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport.Psychological Science 14: 334–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Leslie A.M. 1987. Pretence and representation: The origins of ‘theory of mind’.Psychological Review 94, 412–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Markus H.R., Smith J. 1981. The influence of self-schemata on the perception of others.In Cantor N., Kihlstrom J.F. (eds.).Personality, Cognition, and Social Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 233–262.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Martin G.B., Clark R.D. 1987. Distress crying in neonates: species and peer specifically.Developmental Psychology 18: 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Meltzoff A.N., Gopnik A. 1993. The role of imitation in understanding persons and developing theories of mind.In Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg H., Cohen D. (eds.).Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Autism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 335–366.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Meltzoff A.N., Decety J. 2003. What imitation tells us about social cognition: a rapprochement between developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London: Biological Sciences 358: 491–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Nadel, J., Potier C. 2001. Imitez, imitez, il en restera toujours quelque chose: le status dévelopmental de l’imitation dans le cas d’autisme.Enfance 1: 76–85.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Reik T. 1948.Listening with the Third Ear: the Inner Experience of the Psychoanalyst. New York: Grove.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rizzolatti G., Fogassi L., Gallese V. 2001. Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and the imitation of action.Nature Review Neuroscience 2, 661–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rogers C. 1980.A Way of Being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rogers S.J., Pennington B.F. 1991. A theoretical approach to the deficits in infantile autism.Development and Psychopathology 3: 137–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ruby P., Decety J. 2001. Effect of subjective perspective-taking during simulation of action: a PET investigation of agency.Nature Neuroscience 4: 546–550.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ruby P., Decety J. 2003. What you believe versus what you think they believe: A neuroimaging study of conceptual perspective taking.European Journal of Neuroscience 1: 2475–2480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ruby P., Decety J. 2004. How would you feelversus how do you think she would feel?Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16: 988–999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Snowden J.S.et al. 2003. Social cognition in frontotemporal dementia and Huntington’s disease.Neuropsychologia 41: 688–701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wicker B., Keysers C., Plailly J., Royet J.P., Gallese V., Rizzolatti G. 2003. Both of us disgusted in my insula: the common neural basis of seeing and feeling disgust.Neuron 40: 655–664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.laboratoire Social Cognitive Neuroscience, Etats-UnisSeattle
  2. 2.Institute for Learning and Brain SciencesUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations