- Email: [email protected]
Toward a systematic study of empathy
Toward
a Systematic By
Study o f E m p a t h y
ALEXANDER Z. GUXORA
I N G E T H E B E G I N N I N G of r e c o r d e d h i s t o r y m a n h a s c o n s i s t e n t l y t r i e d t o a c q u i r e a n atta:ibute o r i g i n a l l y d e n i e d t o h i m . B i b l i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n h a s it t h a t m a n w a s c r e a t e d i n G o d ' s o w n i m a g e . H e c o u l d c o m m u n i c a t e i n t e l l i g e n t l y , h e w a s g i v e n t h e g i f t o f c o n c e p t - f o r m a t i o n ( f o r h e w a s able: to n a m e mad c l a s s i f y a l l l i v i n g t h i n g s ) , a n d h e w a s g i v e n t h e g i f t of l o v e . B u e c o m p r e hending was denied to him. One often wonders whether the beautiful mad c o n c i s e Story, o f G e n e s i s d o e s n o t p r e s a g e a n e s s e n t i a l , e v e r - r e c u r r i n g s t r u g g l e of m a n k i n d - - a n e t e r n a l s t r u g g l e , so it s e e m s , o f m a n t o a c q u i r e t h e g o d l y att r i b u t e o f c o m p r e h e n d i n g , a n e f f o r t t h a t o f t e n t i m e s is u n d o n e b y his very." a m b i . v a l e n e o t o w a r d g a i n i n g c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f h i m s e l f a n d his f e l l o w b e i n g s . "~Vhat, i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e r m s , d o e s c o m p r e h e n d i n g c o n n o t e ? O n e m i g h t s a y t h a t c o m p r e h e n d i n g is t h e m a k i n g o f a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s . X~qaat t h e n is j u d g m e n t ? R a p a p o r t , in a p e n e t r a t i n g p a s s a g e , s a y s :
S
It appears that Hie concept "'judgment" is one of those many concepts which are used without t h e i r having attained a sulticient conceptual clarification. "Judgment" evidently reters to a function on the b r o a d e r line Of intellectual and emotional functions. Though one shoMd be inclined to state flatly that t h e r e are no emotional functions without intellectual components, and vice versa, there are some functions which we are accustomed to label as intellectual, inasmuch ,as they come to consciousness more in intellectual terms; and others which we label as emotional inasmuch as they come to cor~seiousness more in emotional terms . . . . "'Judg~nent" appears to r e f e r to t h e emotionally ~relevant us0 of one's assets in regard to the reality situation where, though intellectual and logical correctness are implied, lhey play a rather subordinate role. One m i g h t argue that good judgment is the outcome of irdallibly logical thinMng and conduct. It is dit/icult to refute such an argument. One can only reply that a conscious logical process which would prepare an action of good judgment would hax'e to consider such an infinite multiplicity of facts and conditions pertaining to the situat:io~l that the temporal factor alone would make it impossible.1 If you prefer brev-ity, Rapaport's position may best be summarized in Sehafer's w o r d s : " ~ C o m p r d a e n s i o n is u n d e r s t o o d t o r e f e r t o a p r o c e s s w i t h e q u a l I y i m p o r t a n t C o g n i t i v e a n d a f f e e t i v e aspects.'"-" T h e e m p h a s i s o n a f f e e t i v e a s p e c t s m a y a c c o u n t f o r t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e a m o u n t o f a m b i v a l e n c e e n c o u n t e r e d in m a n ' s e f f o r t to g a i n f o r h i m s e l f t h e g o d l y g i f t o f c o m p r e h e n d i n g . M a y m a n v o i c e s t h e c o n c e r a l a n d t h e h o p e of m a n y w h e n h e says t h a t t h e clinician " ' . . . m u s t de~,elop a p p r o p r i a t e t e c h n i q u e s for t h e s t u d y of his o w n 'intuitive" w o r k i n g processes, t e c h n i q u e s t o p r y into mad m a k e explicit t h e i n t r i c a t e n e t w o r k of i n f e r e n c e i n o r d e r t h a t h e b e a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h c o n v i n c i n g l y t h e intrinsic reasonal)Ieness of s o m e i n f e r e n c e s ( a n d t h e intrinsic arbitrm'iness T h e rest;arch reported herein w a s p e r f o r m e d pursuant to a contract, with th,z U. S. D e p a r t m e n t of t I E , V , Office o[ Educalion, under the provisions of P. L. 83-531, Cot~perativ¢ Research, and t h e provisions" of Title VI, P. L. 85-864, as a m e n d e d . AU-zx,AxOEI~ Z. G'olon:~, 1)~.]3.: Associate Pro/cs~.'or el Psychololztj, Departmes~ts oJ Psychiatry ttl~ri P,~'!lcholog~j; ChieJ Pstlchologixl, Nettropsychiatric Institute; ~lember, Center for l~esearch o~ Lttngttage atzel L a n g u a g e Behavior, University of 3tichigatt, A n n Arbor, 3lich.
375 (;O.~IlqlEIIENNIVI.: PSYCIIIA'IilY, ~'()[.. 8, N(). 5 ( O(,q'OIIl~:il ), 1967
376
ALI'2XANI)EII Z. (;UIOI:iA
of others.) Surely, in time, clinical psychology will b e able to demonstrate conclusively both the objective a n d the verifiable nature of its interpretive processes, b u t that d a y has not yet arrived. ":~ Clinical work in both diagnosis and t r e a t m e n t is based on the assumption-wh'ich is ,seldom s u b m i t t e d to critical a n a l y s i s - - t h a t interaction b e t w e e n obs e r v e r and observed results in an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the observed. I n otheiwords, the a s s m n p t i o n i s m a d e t h a t there is a sequentSal and causal relationship b e t w e e n information i n p u t ( b y the observed) a n d information o u t p u t ( b y the observer). Similarly, it is assmned t h a t information o u t p u t is relevant mad specific to information input. A third assumption is t h a t the relevance a n d specificity of information o u t p u t are d e p e n d e n t on certain characteristics of the observerT-i,e. , perception, memory,, experience, intelligence, and a vague catch-all called "personality varmbles. It is the role of dais last item (personality variables) that seems to be the most nebulous and l e a s t understood. Vague references to, and conflicting descriptions of, its nature a n d importance have become the h a l h n a r k of the subject and the despair of researchers. T h e elusive quality of these personality variables i s attested to b y the ill-defihed concepts used to denote the processes dttributed t o them. I am referring to terms such as " e m p a t h y " and "'intuition.'" In a series of communications 4-~ I have suggested that, if we are to explore intelligently the puzzling process between information i n p u t and information output, w e ought to d e f i n e clearly the different modes of Comprehending and delineate one form from the other as distinctly as w e are able to do it. To this aim I proposed that there are at le,~t three distinct modes of comprehending-inference, e m p a t h y a n d intuition--and I submitted t h a t thesb processes can be separated, identified, and thus r e n d e r e d more rese,'u'chable. On the following pages I wish to summarize the theoretical position develo p e d in these earlier communications, to report on research--completed and ongoing--derived from the p r e s e n t e d position, a n d to suggest some lines of f u r t h e r investigation. F o r the purpose of this paper, the major focus will be on t h e m o d e of comprehension t e r m e d "empathy." °
,,
Q
Dza~NrrJo~'s To restate briefly, the three modalities of compreheflsion were defined as t%llows ~: " i n f e r e n c e is a cognitive process of c o m p r e h e n d i n g , c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y derivation of cond u s i 0 n s f r o m a given set of d a t a or premises in c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e rules o f AristotelJan
logic.'"
" E m p a t l w is a process of c o m p r e h e n d i n g in w h i c h a t e m p o r a r y fusion of self-object boundaries, as i n t h e earliest p a t t e r n of object relation, permits an i m m e d i a t e emotional a p p r e h e n s i o n of the affective experience of another, this sensing b e i n g used by the cognitive tunctions to gain n n d e r s t a n d i n g of the other.'" " A n e x a m p l e of an input-out-put circuit, w h e r e the conditions of all .three assumptions are hil/illed, is. that of a p a t i e n t p r e s e n t i n g s y m p t o m s of nausea a n d vomiting, m u s c l e spasms, fever, a n d h i g h l e u k o c y t e c o u n t ( i n f o r m a t i o n i n p u t ) a n d a physician offering a diagnosis of acalte appendicitis ( i n f o r m a t i o n output. )
Tov~rAI:{D A SYNTENIATIC STUDY Olz I'2~X'II'ATt't[Y
377
"'[ntalition is a m o d e of c o m p r e h e n d i n g in whirls external cues normally i n a d e q u a t e for logical j u d g m e n t ' a n d / o r prediction give rise t o apparently direct, innnediate, a n d a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t a n d / o r predictioia through the m e d i a t i o n of idiosyncratic associations organized according to al]ological principles.'" REVYEV¢ OF E3~I?ATI1Y I ~ E S E A R C I t a
A1Hmugh a sizable a m o u n t of research h a s b e e n done on e m p a t h y , th e r e has b e e n surprisingly little innovation in r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e or m e t l m d . Dymond's article r relating e m p a t h y to i n s i g h t seems to b e the first r e s e a r c h att e m p t in the area. She asked subjects to tell stories to T A T cards a n d a n a l y z e d their stories in terms o f interpersonal relations. E m p a t h y was defined as the ability to e x p e r i e n c e a n d describe the thoughts a n d feelings of the figures dep i c t e d in tile given stories. In 1949 D y m o n d s reported on a scale s h e d e v i s e d for the m e a s u r e m e n t of e m p a t h i c ability. She noted, " . . . this is the only test p u r p o r t i n g to m e a s u r e e m p a t h i c ability w h i c h is k n o w n to the a u t h o r . . . . ' " T h e test seeks to m e a s m ' e tlae ability to p r e d i c t the opinions, attitudes a n d self-concept of a n o t h e r b y eliciting ratings on six terms referring, respeetivel}5 to traits c ha r a c te r iz ed b y the terms self-confidence, superior-inferior, selfish-ttnselfish, friendly-ul~friendly, leader-Jollower, and sense of humor. T h e same six traits are r a t e d u n d e r four conditions: ( a ) self-rating, ( b ) r a t i n g b y a n o t h e r person, ( c ) rati n g of the other as the rater believes the other w o u l d rate himself, a n d ( d ) self-rating as the rater believes t h e other w o u l d r a te him. T h e m e a s u r e of a n y rater's e m p a t h i c ability is derive d b y d e t e r m i n i n g h o w closely h i s predictions of another's ratings (conditions c a n d d) correspond to the other's actual ratings (conditions a a n d b as r a t e d b y the othe r ) . This operational m e a s u r e of e m p a t h y as used b y Dymond--i.e., a c c u r a c y in the p r e d i c t i o n of the responses of other persons--derives p r i m a r i l y from the theory of i n t e r p e r s o n a l relations proposed b y S u l l i v a n y l / e s e a r e h s u b s e q u e n t to D y m o n d ' S w o r k has be e n n o t a b l y l a c k i n g in innovation. Such research essentially repeats D y m o n d ' s m o d e l of p r e d i c t i v e skill, w i t h different proeedtwes of "'getting to know" the other ,as the m a j o r source of variation. A m o n g such variations used are predictions of Q-sorts of persons seen in a 2 - m i n u t e film extract, J-° changes i n the a m o u n t of inte r pe r sona l contact p r e e e d i n g m e a s u r e m e n t of pr e dic tive skill, ~ a f te r xdewing a 15-minute interxdew session, x-" a n d prediction of other's responses to an i n t e r p e r s o n a l cheekli/t following g r o u p discussion. ~s H a t c h ~ m a d e use of an actual field situation in m e a s m ' i n g managers" abilities to p r e d i c t the attitudes of their salesmen. M a h o n e y ~s devised a literature e m p a t h y test in w h i e h his subjects p r e d i c t e d , after getting a "feel'" for four i n d i v i d u a l s of m a r k e d l y different personalities p o r t r a y e d in four selections from/~etion, h o w these fletional persons w o u l d r e sp ond to 20 m u l t i p l e - e h o i e e i n c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e items. Thei criterion for correct response was the j u d g m e n t s o f 23 psychologists pre~dously considered to be " e m p a t h i c individuals.'" A sound film of an intern,levy Mtnation *I am i n d e b t e d to ~lrs. L i n d a Taylor. a g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t in clinical psychology at the University of Michigan, for h e r efforts lit the preparation of this review.
~]7S
ALi~X,-~NI)ER Z. (;UJOI~A
was u s e d by C l i n e a n d Itichards, '~ w i t h t h e subjects r e q u i r e d to p r e d i c t subseq u e n t b e h a v i o r opinions, i n c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e responses, trait ratings, a n d a d j e c t i v e checklist ratings. T h e E m p a t h y Test a n d P r i m a r y E m p a t h i c A b i l i b, Te st d e s i g n e d b y K e r r a n d Speroff lr are also b a s e d on p r e d i c t i v e skill. T h e s e tests m e a s u r e "'the subjects" a b i l i b - tO "anticipate"
q'OXVAIU) A
SYSqq_~3IA'I'IC STUDY
01;"
E~.fPATHY
379
feelings, a n d t h e v e r b a l f a c i l i t y to c o m m u n i c a t e this u n d e r s t a n d i n g in a lang u a g e a t t u n e d to t h e p a t i e n t ' s c u r r e n t f e e l i n g s . " l q e s e a r c h w h i c h a t t e m p t s t o m e a s u r e a n d u n d e r s t a n d h o w o n e person c o m e s to k n o w a n o t h e r i n v o l v e s u n d e n i a b l e c o m p l e x i t i e s ; H a m m o n d , H u r s c h , a n d T o d d 21 p o i n t to a f e w of t h e issues o f concel~n i n r e s e a r c h o n : i n t e r p e r s o n a l p e r c e p t i o n . T h e y e m p h a s i z e d t h a t e n v i r o m n e n t a l d e t e r m i n a n t s of t h e o t h e r ' s b e h a v i o r l n u s t b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , a s w e l l as t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f ' t h e o t h e r , tlie role of t h e l e a r n e r ' s r e s p o n s e i n v a r i a n c e , t h e i n f l u e n c e of s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e l e a r n e r a n d o t h e r in t h e a c c u r a c y o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l pereeption~ a n d t h e g e n e r a l i t y of t h e l e a r n e r ' s p r e d i c t i v e success. T h e s e f a c t o r s a r e e q u a l l y imp o r t a n t f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n in t h e t y p i c a l r e s e a r c h on e m p a t h y , T h e r e s e e m s to b e l i t t l e critical r e v i e w of; a n d little c o n t r o v e r s y over, t h e r e s e a r c h d o n e s p e c i f i c a l l y on e m p a t h y . Ma1~ve]I~ ~ p o i n t s to t w o issues i n D y m o n d ' s m e t h o d w h i c h s e e m to c a u s e P r o b l e m s . H e s a y s t h e D y m o n d ' s sLx traits l i m i t t h e e m p a t h i z e r . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t o n e m a y b e a b l e t o e m p a t h i z e w i t h c e r t a i n : b e h a v i o r s b u t n o t w i t h others. V a r i a t i o n s i n r e l a t i o n to d i f f e r e n t i a l a s p e c t s of e m p a t h y a r e n o t d e a l t w i t h in t h e l i t e r a t u r e o r in r e s e a r c h findings. M a r w e l l also p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e r a t i n g scales u s e d in s u c h r e s e a r c h t e n d to e 0 n f u n d r e s u l t s : "'People m a y u s e a c e r t a i n r a n g e o f t h e r a t i n g s c a l e a n d alt h o u g h t h e y h a v e g r a s p e d t h e p a t t e r n t h e p r e d i c t i o n s a r e w r o n g . " Cronbach-"'-' c o n c u r s t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a l u s e of t h e r a t i n g s c a l e m a y b e a s o u r c e of error. H e a d d s t h a t i n r e a c h i n g sirnilarity scores in this t y p e o f r e s e a r c h , s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s a r e c o m b i n e d b u t n o t d i f f e r e n t i a t e d . F o r e x a m p l e , it b e c o m e s difficult to s e e w h i c h p a r t o f t h e j u d g f n e n t r e p r e s e n t s a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of o t h e r s as distinct from stereotype or self-reference. I n t h e i r r e s e a r c h on p e r s o n cognition, B e a c h a n d VVertheimer "-'s a l l o w e d o p e n - e n d e d d e s c r i p t i o n s of t h e o t h e r a n d c o d e d t h e s e i n t o d e s c r i p t i v e classes. T h e y criticize c e r t a i n o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t s in w h i c h s u b j e c t s a r e a s k e d to j u d g e o t h e r s o n n o n s ~ i e n t d i m e n s i o n s , i.e., n e i t h e r a p p l i c a b l e n o r r e l e v a n t . T h e i r criticism is x6tally p e r t i n e n t to t h e b u l k of r e s e a r c h on e m p a t h y . T h e t h e o r e t i c a l definitions of e m p a t h y e m p h a s i z e a n a b i l i t y to s h a r e a f e e l i n g t h a t is i m m e d i a t e f o r t h e other,'-',i',z*,-"5 t h e k e y p o i n t s b e i n g feeling a n d immediate. B y t r a n s l a t i n g this in t h e s u p e r f i c i a l s e n s e of " p u t t i n g y o u r s e l f in t h e role of t h e o t h e r , " t h e o p e r a t i o n a l definition i n a c c u r a t e l y b e c o m e s t h a t of p r e d i c t i n g h o w t h e o t h e r will think, get, feel, o r r e s p o n d on a n ~ d i m e n s i o n t h e r e s e a r c h e r chooses. T h e d i s c r e p a n c y f r o m t h e o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n is clear, a n d it is i m p o r t a n t to b e a w a r e of this d i s c r e p a n c y if s u c h t e r m s as "'intuition," " i n f e r e n c e , " a n d " e m p a t h y " a r e to b e m e a n i n g f u l a n d useful. A c c o r d i n g to t h e a b o v e criticism a n d definitions, the: rese~'trch on "'predictive e m p a t h y , " as b a s e d on D y m o n d ' s m o d e l , a p p e a r s to follow m o r e closely t h e definition o f i n t u i t i o n r a t h e r t h a n e m p a t h y . T o p r e d i c t n o n s a l i e n t , h y p o t h e t i c a l r e s p o n s e s , t h e s u b j e c t m u s t r e l y on subtle, p r e c o n s c i o u s c u e s h e h a s p i c k e d u p in i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h t h e other. I f the c u e s a n d t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s to t h e m w h i c h p r o d u c e his p r e d i c t i o n s a r e remote- a n d his c o n c l u s i o n s n o t l o g i c a l l y d e d u c i b l e , his p r e d i c t i o n s w o u l d s e e m to test i n t u i t i v e t m d e r s t a n d i n g rather than e m p a t h i c understanding. If he can identify the facts h e u s e d to m a k e t h e p r e d i c t i o n a n d trace' t h e m to a logical conclusion, t h e test w o u l d b e of i n f e r e n t i a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g . I t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t
380
AI,EXANDElt Z. GUIOI~,V
t t a t e h '~ r e p o r t s tile f o l l o w i n g f r o m r e s e a r c h on p r e d i c t i v e e m p a t h y : "The acc u r a c y of m a n a g e r s ' p r e d i c t i o n b e h a v i o r w a s i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d to t h e a m o u n t of i n f e r e n c e d e m a n d e d b y t h e p r e d i c t i o n s i t u a t i o n , " A reviewer of t h e K e e r S p e r o f f e m p a t h y test states, " T h e t e s t is m o r e a m e a s t t r e of g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n a n d p r e d i c t i o n of opinions t h a n of intmI]el;sona] e m p a m ) . ' P e r h a p s it w o u l d b e m o r e c o r r e c t t o s a y t h a t s u c h p r e d i c t i v e studies, alt h o u g h i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o m e a s u r e e m p a t h y , a r e c o n - e c t l y de.signed f o r p e r s o n ix~reeption r e s e a r c h w h e r e tile goal is b r o a d l y Stated as k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e o t h e r p e r s o n . T o u s e s u c h a de.sign a n d c r e d i t the results e n t i r e l y to e m p a t h i c a b i l i t y s e e m s s t r e t c h i n g t h e point, PI~ESENT STUI)IES
Previous: w o r k in t h e a r e a of e m p a t h y r e s e a r c h suffers f r o m txvo m a j o r w e a k nesses.. T h e definitional f o r m u l a t i o n s u s e d a r e n o t specific e n o u g h , a n d , m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e w a y t h e s e definitions a r e operationalized d o e s n o t a l l o w for a h i g h level o f c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y . I n m o s t i n s t a n c e s e m p a t h y h a s b e e n o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d e i t h e r ir~ t e r m s of t h e r a p e u t i c b e h a v i o r t o b e r a t e d a n d j u d g e d b y ot4her t h e r a p i s t s o r in t e r m s of a r a t h e r g l o b a l p e r s o n - p e r c e p t i o n model. A s y s t e m a t i c a n d e m p i r i c a l "investigation of e m p a t l a y r e q u i r e s t h a t the conc e p t b e r e p h r a s e d in o p e r a t i o n a l terms, a n d in s u c h a w a y as to a s s u r e m a x i m u m c o n s t r u c t validity. Since t h e s p r i n g of 1¢J66 m y e o l l e a ~ m s a n d I at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of N l i e h i g a n h a v e b e e n e n g a g e d in a n eftort to d e v e l o p a r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y t h a t w o u l d c o r r e c t t h e w e a k n e s s e s a s c r i b e d to p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h in the field of e m p a t h y . T h e first t a s k t h e n w a s to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e t h e c o n c e p t o f e m p a t h y - - a s s t a t e d above--in such a w a y that m a x i m u m construct-validity would be assured, a n d t h e n to d e v e l o p a n a p p r o p r i a t e m e a s u r e of t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d b e h a v i o r . I t w a s f e l t t h a t , c o n t r a r y to p r e v i o u s w o r k in t h e a r e a , t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d •b e h a v i o r h a d to b e o u t s i d e t h e p s y e h o t h e r a p e n t i c r e a l m . T h e hypothesis gene r a t e d in t h e clinical s e t t i n g h a d to b e "'lifted o u t " a n d t r a n s p o s e d to a b e h a v i o r a l r e a l m w h e r e m o r e rigorous; r e p r o d u c i b l e , r e l i a b l e a n d v a l i d experim e n t a t i o n w a s feasible. T h e position a d o p t e d b y u s is s i m i l a r to r e c e n t t r e n d s in ex-periments w i t h a n i m a l s . I a m r e f e r r i n g to t h e i n c r e a s i n g t w o - w a y i n t e r a c tion b e t w e e n ecologists a n d l a b o r a t o r y p s y c h o l o g i s t s . J u s t as in a n i m a l p s y c h o l o g y o b s e r v a t i o n s o b t a i n e d in t h e n a t u r a l s e t t i n g inspil-e e x p e r i m e n t a l w o r k in t h e laboratory, mad, c o n v e r s e l y , l a b o r a t o r y findings a r e e x a m i n e d in light of n a t u r a l i s t i c o b s e r v a t i o n , w e p o s i t e d t h a t o n c e a h y p o t h e s i s g e n e r a t e d in t h e eliaaieal (nat-uralistie) s e t t i n g c o u l d b e t e s t e d o u t in t h e l a b o r a t o r y ( t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d b e h a v i o r ) , w e c o u l d t h e n h o p e to r e a p p l y o u r laboratory, findings to t h e original c i r c u m s t a n c e . T h e b e h a v i o r a l r e a l m c h o s e n b y u s w a s t h a t of l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o r . T h e r e a s o n for this c h o i c e w a s in a s e n s e f o r t u i t o u s , b u t n o t e n t i r e l y so. L a n g u a g e is t h e m o s t e x p r e s s i v e a n d m o s t h i g h l y d e v e l o p e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n m o d a l i t y a n d t h e m o s t essential i n s t n l m e n t in t h e clinical r e a h n . F u r t h e r m o r e , l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o r p r o v i d e s us w i t h a b e h a v i o r a l r e a h n t h a t l e n d s itself to r e p r o d u c i b l e e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n . O n ~Im o t h e r h a n d , clinical r e s e a r c h c a n p r o v i d e t h e ]angamgo sciences w i t h n e w insights a n d n e w vistas. XVc, ~hus h o p e t h a t o u r - r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y will h a v e h e u r i s t i c v a l u e for b o t h disciplines.
T()XVAIll) A SYS'I'lgi~IATIC STUDY O F I~II'A'II-IY
38],
\ ¥ h a t follows is a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e pilot s t u d y a n d the r a t i o n a l e f o r its r e s e a r c h designY c' S p e a k e r s of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e m a y differ g r e a t l y in t h e i r a u t h e n t i c ' i t y of pronunciation, even when they have similar backgrounds, training and prot i e i e n e y . U n s y s t e m a t i e a t t e m p t s to a c c o u n t for this d i f f e r e n c e h a v e a t t r i b u t e d s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s in a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n e i a t i o n ~o d i f f e r e n c e s in i n t e l l i g e n c e , language, a p t i t u d e , d i s c i q m i n a t i v e c a p a c i t y or a n a t o m i c a l c a p a b i l i t i e s . O u r sy2dy e n d e a v o r e d t%ex~91ore a r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t possibility: t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y diffc.rences--more speei~ieally, d l3t'erenees in e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y - - m a y p l a y a m a j o r r o l e in t h e o b s e r v e d d i f f e r e n c e s in a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n c i a t i o n . F o r t h e p u r p o s e of t h e s t u d y it w a s d e s i r a b l e to define a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n e i a t i o n so as to e x c l u d e v a r i o u s r e l a t e d c o m p o n e n t s of s p o k e n fluency, in a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . * I n a d d i t i o n , it w a s e n m i a l to reeogqaize t h a t e a c h s u b j e c t h a d l o n g a g o m a s t e r e d t h e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r "e p e r t o l r e of his n a t i v e l a n g u a g e a n d tlmt t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of a n t h e n t i e i t y in a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e r e q u i r e d t h e inclusion into this n a t i v e r e p e r t o i r e of n o v e l s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e units. I t w a s flu'ther, a s s u m e d t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n s i i n d e r w h i c h one's n a t i v e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e is b£1ilt u p i m p o r t a n t l y d e t e r / n i n e s t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t will f a v o r l a t e r n o v e l i n c l u s i o n s p e r t i n e n t to s e c o n d l a n g u a g e authenticity_ T h e r e is e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e b e g i n s to d e v e l o p as e a r l y as f o u r m o n t h s of age, w i t h a u t h e n t i c i m i t a t i o n of f r a g m e n t s 0f i n t o n a t i o n c o n t o u r s . "-'7I t has also b e e n sho~ql t h a t r e d , y o u n g i n f a n t s a r e h i g h l y r e s p o ~ s i v o in m o d i f y i n g t h e i r b e h a v i o r , i n c l u d i n g x,o c a l i z a t i o n , d e p e n d i n g on c e r t a i n k i n d s of i n t e r p e r s o n a l s t i m u l a t i o n ; s u c h s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s as smiling, b o d y c o n t a e t a n d t h e m o t h e r ' s voice h a v e all b e e n s h o w n to a c t as r e i n f o r c e r s in s h a p i n g i n f a n t b e h a v i o r . ~s M o w r e r ~',' s u g g e s t e d s o m e y e a r s a g o t h a t c h i l d r e n l e a r n the s o u n d s of t h e i r l a n g x m g e ( h e n c e a m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e ) p r e cisely t h r o u g h a f f e e t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e m o t h e r . T h e p r e c i s e w a y in w h i c h s o u n d p r o d u c t i o n in t h e child d e p e n d s on i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e m o t h e r h a s not b e e n estal)lis]md. T h e i m p o r t a n t s u g g e s t i o n h e r e is t h a t affective r e l a t i o n s to the m o t h e r m a y in s o m e w a y b e t h e v e h i c l e J0r the initial d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e mi~fimal e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e . I f this is t h e case, t h e n the fm-ther d e v e l o p m e n t of this r e p e r t o i r e for t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e m a y r e q u i r e c a p a c i t i e s closely r e l a t e d t o t h a t affective vehicle. T h i s h y p o t h e s i s has s e v e r a l - i m p l i c a t i o n s ; o n e i m p l i c a t i o n is t h a t e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y , as d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y , ha.~ s o m e t h i n g to do w i t h l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n . T h e m a t r i x of e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y m a y ~,c v i e w e d as P r e c i s e l y t h e c o r r e l a t e of the atfeetive r e l a t i o n to the m o t h e r t h a t I ]lave s u g g e s t e d is t h e vehicle for t h e d o v e h ~ p m e n t of original p r o n u n c i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y . T h e e m p a t h i c p e r s o n s h o u l d , C o n s e q u e n t l y , h a v e a n a d v a n t a g e in e n l a r g i n g his m i n i m a l ee!~oic rer/ertoire 1o i n c l u d e ~units of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . T h e h y p o t h e s i s , then, is t h a t t h e m o r e en~pathie ( i n t e r m s of o u r d e f i n i t i o n ) a p e r s o n is, t h e morelik~.ly he is to a c q u i r e a u t h e n t i c p r o n u n c i a t i o n of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . As a first s t e p in a s s e s s i n g this h y p o t h e s i s , w e r e c r u i t e d ' a s a m p l e of 14 h i g h school t e a c h e r s of F r e n c h w h o w e r e r e a s o n a b l y h o m o g e n e o u s in [ h e i r p r o " l " o r a (h'taile¢l d i s c u s s i o n o f p r o m m c i a t i o n a u H m n t i e i t y a n d r e l a t e d l i n g u i s t i c is~lms, the r e a d e r is r e f e r r e d to the full r e p o r t o f this r e s e a r c h . : ' ;
3~
ALEXANDEI1 Z . G U I O I 1 A
h c l e n e y ill the [;'tenth l a n g u a g e . I h(.,s~, subjects were. s e l e c t e d on tile basis of the results of t h e M o d e r n L a n g u a g e P r o f i c i e n c y Test (French) arid a p e r s o n a l irff(irmation q u e s h o n n a i r o , f r o m 40 h i g h school t e a c h e r s of F r e n c h w h o w e r e p a r t i c i p a t i n g in a n N D E A summt~r institute.: A n ext&r~sive b a t t e r y of tests w a s a d m i n i s t e r e d to t h e s e subjects, c o n s i s t i n g o[: v a r i o u s m e a s u r e s in such a r e a s as intelligence, p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , i n t e r e s t p a t l d r n s , g e n e r a l a p t i t u d e s , a n d perc e p t u a l fu)actioning, h ) c l u d e d in t h e test b a t t e I y w e r e t h e P e n s a c o l a Z, Scale, t h e M M P I , t h e I t o r s e h a c h T e s t , t h e A]Iport-Vernon S c a l e , t h e S t r o n g Vocat i o n a l I n t e r e s t Test, t h e M i l l e r A n a l o g i e s Test, t h e ~.Veehsler A d u l t I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale, t i l e ~-loden] L a n g u a g e A p t i t u d e Test, t h e K r a m e r A f f e c t q.~6st, t h e Closu r e Flexil)ility Test, a n d a m e a s u r e of t h e prcceive-d i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y o f E n g l i s h w h e n s p o k e n w i t h a f o r e i g n accent. In o r d e r to o b t a i n o u r d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e - - i , e . , a m e a s u r e of p r o n u n c i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y - - w e r e c o r d e d t w o s p o k e t r s a m p l e s of e a c h o f ottr subjects" F r e n c h - - o n e w h e n th.e s u b j e c t w a s a s k e d to deserj'be a series of p i c t u r e s , a n d a n o t h e r w h e n h e r e a d a s e l e c t e d p a s s a g e . T h e s e s a m p l e s w e r e e x c e r p t e d so t h a t u t t e r a n t e s c o m t ? a n t b l e in Content c o u l d b e r e c o r d e d a n d p r e s e n t e d to a p a n e l of n a t i v e F r e n c h j u d g e s f o r r a t i n g . T h d * r a t i n g s c a l e a l l o w e d r a t i n g of e a c h s a m p l e on a n 8 - p o i n t s c a l e of p r o n u n c i a t i o n authenti~2ity. Initial e x p e r i m e n t s with t h e scale d e m o n s t r a t e d s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h i n t e r j u d g e a n d i n t r a j u d g e reliability to w a r r a n t i t s use. F o r a m e a s u r e of e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y w e d e v i s e d a n i n s t r u m e n t t h a t d e r i v e d f r o m a r e c e n t r e p o r t b y H a g g a r d a n d I s a a c s , a" w h i c h s t a t e d t h a t w h e n strips of film of p s y c h o t h e r a p e t l t i e s e s s i o n s a r e s h o w n a t r e d u c e d s p e e d ( f r o m 24 f r a m e s p e r see. io 4 f r a m e s p e r s e e . ) , facial expressions d e n o t i n g affective s t a t e s b e c o m e d i s c e n ] i b l e . "lqaese t r a n s i t o r y facial expressions a r e c a l l e d N 1 M E ~ ( m i c r o - m o m e n t a r y e x p r e s s i o n s ) . \Ve h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t t h e a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e m i n i m a l - c u e s in i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n is a n i m p o r t a n t c o m p o n e n t of e~rip a t h i c c N ) a e i t y a n d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l differenct:s in the t h r e s h o l d level for t h e p e r c e p t i o n ot: M M E ' s w()uld reflect c o r r e s p o n d i n g differences in e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y . . X V c s e l e c t e d a strip o f film-in w h i c h J t a g g a r d a n d I s a a c ' s j u d g e s d e t e c t e d o n l y a f e w M M E ' S at n o r m a l s p e e d b u t m a n y at s l o w e r speeds, a n d w e p r e s e n t e d this film t() o u r s u b j e c t s in a d e s c e n d i n g o r d e r of s p e e d s . T h e sul)jercts w e r e i n s t r u c t e d to m a k e a lick m a r k on a s h e e t of p a p e r e a c h t i m e t h e y s a w a n M M E . T h e n u m b e r of re'arks m a d e b y e a c h s u b i e c t d u r i n g tI~e s h o w i n g of t h e fihn at e a c h s p e e d w e r e tallied. T h e s c o r e a s s i g n e d to e a c h subject-for, this test w:-~s his a v e r a g e d e v i a t i o n f r o m the m e a n i m m l ) e r of M M E ' s s e e n 1)v o u r s a m p l e p o p u l a t i o n a t e a c h Speed; thus, s o m e s u b j e c t s w e r e identitied its e x c e p t i o n a l l y h i g h M M E p e r c e i v e r s a n d s o m e as e x c e p t i o n a l l y low ones. "/7he 14"subjects in t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p w e r e t h e n r a n k e d as to t h e i r prun u n e i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y , a n d this r a n k - o r d e r w a s t o n ' e l a t e d with scores f r o m e a c h of the i n d e p e n d e n t test m e a s u r e s d e s c r i b e d M)ove. A n a l y s i s of the d a t a s h o w e d t h a t tile p s y c h o l o g i c a l test scores d i d n o t c o r r e l a t e significantly w i t h scores on t h e m e a s u r e s of a u t h e n t i c i t y . O n e notew¢)rthy ex(x;I)tion to this gene r a l i z a t i o n w a s t h e significant relation f o t m d (ra.nk o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n of .6) m e a s u r e s of e m l ) a t h l"e eal)acitv, . as (lc'seril)ed at>eve, a n d those of proi)el* w .c,(,n " n u n c i a t i o n m~thentieity.
T()~VARI)
A SYS'I'I~N'IAT1C S T U D Y
OF
I';~II'ATJtY
383
C u r r e n t l y , w e a r e r e p l i c a t i n g ( j o i n t l y w i t h I A n d a T a y l o r ) the s t u d y w i t h s o m e variations in tech!~ique. T h e subjects for t h e n e w s t u d y a r e two g r o u p s of 15 college s t u d e n t s , w i t h s a m p l e selection c o n t r o l l e d for age, sex, y e a r s of schooling, n u m b e r of l a n g u a g e s spoken, i n t e l l i g e n c e , language, a p t i t u d e , a n d visual acuity. T h e subjects w i l l b e taugllt c o n v e r s a t i o n a l J a p a n e s e in 12 sessions, s p r e a d over a o n e - m o n t h period. F o l l o w i n g this t h e y will b e r a t e d . o n t h e i r a u t h e n ticity o f p r o n u n c i a t i o n in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e t e c h n i q u e u s e d in the, pilot study. T h e i r score on the a u t h e n t i c i t y scale will b e c o n ' e l a t e d w i t h t h e e m p a t h y measure, the h y p o t h e s i s b e i n g t h a t h i g h e m p a t h i z e r s will a c h i e v e a h i g h e r a u t h e n t i c i t y score t h a n l o w e m p a t h i z e r s . T h e e m p a t h y m e a s u r e d e s c r i b e d a b o v e will b e m o d i f i e d for this s t u d y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m a n n e r . \Ve h a v e s e l e c t e d at f i h n e d i n t e r v i e w ~ q t h a psychiatlSe p a t i e n t from w h i r l s w e h a v e e x t r a c t e d a p o r t i o n in W h i c h t h e f a c i a l expressions n o t i c e a b l e at slower s p e e d s are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i t f e r e n t fi'om those n o t i c e a b l e at n o r m a l s p e e d s . A g r o u p of e x p e r i e n c e d clinicians, a i d e d b y t h e a u d i o c o n t e n t of the film, will r e c o r d c h a n g e s i n facial expressions, b o t h at r e d u c e d a n d norreal speeds. T h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p will b e s h o w n t h e s e l e c t e d p o r t i o n of the fihn w i t h out the a u d i o part. T h e s e . s u b j e c t s w i l l b e a s k e d to c o u n t t h e n u m b e r of M M E ' s seet~ at Various s p e e d s a n d also to i d e n t i f y t h e affect a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p a r t i t u l a r e x p r e s s i o n s noted. Performanc~ ~. on these two tasks w i l l constitute t h e m e a s u r e of i n d i v i d u a l differences in "empathy. It is h o p e d that this s t u d y w i l l yield ~'t m o r e refined m e a s u r e o f erf~pathy for use in c ~ n t i n u i n g stxldies. A n o t h e r Study cun-ently in progress ( i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h ~[olm C. C a t f o r d a n d Jolm J. H a r ~ m a n ) a t t e m p t s ' t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e t h e role p l a y e d l')y e m p a t h y in s e c x m d - l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n f r o m tim i n f l u e n c e of certain o t h e r p e r s o n a l i t y variables. The, e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s in this s t u d y a r e 50 N e g r o m a l e c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s fi'om a ]mrge i n t e g r a t e d u n i v e r s i t y in the N o r t h a n d 50 N e g r o m a l e s t u d e l l t s f r o m a p r e d o m i n a n t l y N e g r o s4"laool in the South. T h e g r o u p s are, c o n t r o l l e d for various s o c i o e c o n o m i c v a r i a b l e s a n d o t h e r v a r i a b l e s s u c h as e d u c a t i o n , a r e a of birth, a r e a of parents" b i r t h , years in the North, d a r k n e s s of p i g m e n t a t i o n , intelligence, l a n g u a g e a p t i t u d e , a n d visual acuity. B a s e d on a p h o n e t i c a n a l y s i s of chm'acteristie N o r t h e n a - w h i t e a n d Southern-Negl-o s p e e c h , a r a t i n g scale will b e c o n s t r u c t e d on w h i c h the subjects will b e r a t e d as to t h e d e g r e e ~ f t h e i r closeness to t h e - m o d a l Norther~a w h i t e accent. There. are two t h e o r e t i c a l concepts w h i c h w e a s s m n e are r e l e v a n t to the Negro A m e r i c a n ' s a c q u i s i t i o n of N¢~rthern-white accent. T h e first is e m p a t h y , a n d we h y p o t h e s i z e t h a t h i g h e m p a t h i z e r s will h a v e a s s i m i l a t e d t l m N o r t h e r n w h i t e at'cent b e t t e r t h a n l o w e m p a t h i z e r s . H o w e v e r , w e also a s s u m e that a pcrs¢m m a y also a s s i m i l a t e a N o r t h e r n - w h i t e a c c e n t not on the basl,; of an e m p a t l f i c capacity, b u t as a result of i m i t a t i o n b a s e d on an identific~di¢,n w i t h tl~e a g g r e s s o r . '~Ve p r o p o s e to ~ s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n these two m o d e l s 1)3, c o m p a r i n g scores on our e m p a t h y m e a s u r e with those of two a d d i t i o n a l t~Rges of m e a s u r e m e n t . ()n~, is the l~s~: eft t h e T A T stories to explore the m a n n e r in w h i c h md~jects ImlKIle aggrcssiv~ i m p u l s e s a n d t,n iden',ify differences in self-esteem, i n t r a -
384
ALEXANI)F.I1 Z. (;UIOtlA
punitive tendencies a n d types of identification processes. The other measure is Rotter'sal internal-external control sea/e, with an additional scale devised by Gurin a'-" t o m e a s u r e the acceptance of responsibility. It is anticipated that a combination of these psychological measures will p e m l i t differentiation bct~veen the two language adaptations postulated. To conclude, on t h e basis of a theoretical position developed tlu-ough clinical observation, a researell strategy, has been devised tlmt enables rigorous empirical investigation. Admittedly, our re.search is at its very beginning. Results obtained so far are eneouragi~ag in that they seem to b e a r out the original premise r e g a r d i n g the value of operationalizing the concept of e m p a t h y in terms of behavior outside of the Clinical reahn, promise a high dega-ee of construct-validity and, most importantly, point to a broadening area of-research possibilities hitlierto neglected. I t is m y belief that a systematic step-by-step expioration of personality variables in language behavior similarly will yield invaluable information toward a b e t t e r n n d e r s a n d i n g of the concepts of empaathy, inference, a n d intuition, a i l d , ultimately, to a greater comprehension of the totality of the processes by which one person "'encounters" another. REFERENCES 1. 1~apaport, D., et al: Diagnostic Psychological Testing: Chic~lgo, T h e Year Book Pul~lishers. Inc., 194.5. 2. Schafer, R.: G e n e r a t i v e e m p a t h y in the t r e a t m e n t situation. Psychiat. Quart. 23:342-373, 1959. 3. Nlayman, 3I.: T o w a r d a science of clinical ilfference. Contemp. Psychol. 6:1 ° , 1961. 4. Guiora, A . Z.: On clinical diagnosis a n d prediction. Psychol. ReD. 17:779-784, 1965. 5. Ouiora, A. Z., Bolin, R. K., Dutton, C, E., a n d ~'leer, B.: i n t u i t i o n , a prelimina~, statement, l~sychiat. Quart. Suppl. 39:1 I 0 - I 2 2 , 1965. 6. Guiora, A. Z.: Diagnosis a n d t r e a t m e n t in psychiatr),. Guest lecture in tim Dep a r t m e n t of Psych'iat~,, TeI-Aviv UItiv. NIc~d. School, Aug'ust 18, 1965. 7. D y m o n d , It. A.: A prelianinary investigation of the relation of insight and e m p a t h y . J. Consult. Psydlol. 12:'928z3o, 1948. 8. D y m o n d , II. A.: A scale /'or the measurement of empathic ability. J. Consult. Psyehol. 13:127-133, 1949. 9. Cottrell, L., a n d D y m o n d , I/. A.: T h e e m p a t h i c responses. Psychiatry 12:3.55359, 1959. 10. Baker, B., and Block, J.: A c c u r a c y of interpersonal, prediction as a f u n c t i o n of j u d g e a n d object characteristics. J. A bnonl~. See. Psyehol. 5,1:37, 1957.
11. Sten~berg, D.: T h e growd~ of e m p a t h y , an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the relationship bet w e e n sm~sitivity to the self-perception of others as a fianction of f r e q u e n c y of interpersonal c o n t a c t and • certain selected personality variables. Dissert. Abstr. 6 2 : 3 2 9 0 , 1962. 1:2. Speal, S.:. T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of p h e n o m enological e m p a t h y to certain personality a n d interl~ersona| v ariabh's. Dissert. Abstr. 60:2734¢ 1960. 13. Coldstein, L.: E m p a t h y e n d its relationship to personality factors "and personality organization. Dissert. Abstr. 62: 1419, 1961. 14. Hatct',, 1/. S.: An evaluation of a forcedchoice differential a c c u r a c y a p p r o a c h to t h e m e a s u r e m e n t of supervisory empadw. Dissert.. Abstr. 62:3110, 1961. 15. ,Mahoney, S. C.: T h e literature e m p a t h y te~t: d e v e l o p m e n t of a 19rocedm'e for dilIerentiating b e t w e e n "'good e m p a t h ~z~.rs a n d "poor empathizers.'" DisserI. Abstr. 60:2677, 1960. 16. CIine, V., a n d IUehards, J.: A c c u r a c y of interpersonal perception~a general trait? J. A b n o n n . See. Ps-ychol. 60:17, 1960. 17. Bnros, O. ( E d . ) : T h e SLxth Mental Measurement.Yearbook, H i g t d a n d l'ark, N. J., Or~qphon Press, 1965. 18. Stnlpp, H . : . P s y c h o t h e r a p i s t in Action. N e w York, Gruno & ,qtratton, 1960.
T()\VAIII)
,,\
SYS'I'ENIATIC
STUI)Y
OF
E),IPAT~tlY
]9. Wallach, "M., and Strupp, H.: Psychotherapists" clinical Judgments and atti• S tudes toward patients. J..Con.'nlt, Psychol. 10:256-268, 1963. 20. Truax, C.: Effective ingredients in psychotherapy: an approach to unraveling the patient-therapist interaction. J. Counsel. PsychoI. 10:256-268, 1963. 21. Hammond, K. R., Hursch, C. J., and Todd, F. j.: Analyzing the components of clinical inference. Psychol)llev. 71: 438-4"56, 1964. '22. Cronbach, L. J.: Processes affecting scores on understandmo of others'" and :'assmned similarity." Psychol. Bull..~2:1 ~7-193, 1955. 23. Beach, L., and Wertheimer, M.: A free response approach to the stt~dy of person cognition. J. Abnonn. Soc, Psychol. "~'~ 6"'--:364-374, 1961. 24, Fliess, R.: Countertransference and counteridentification. Amer. Psychiat. Ass. J. 1:268-284, 1953. 25. Fi'omnl-Reichman, F.: "Principles of Intensive Psychotherapy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1950. 26. C,uiora, A. Z., Lane, H. L., and Bosworth, L. A.: An exploration of some personality variables in authentic
385
pronunciation of a second language. In: Studies in Language an(] Language Behavior (H. L. Lane and E. M. Za]e, Eds,). 4:510-514, 1967. 27. qkmkova-Yampolskaya, R. V.: Initial stages of speech fi)rmation in children. Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deiat. 351-356, 1966. 28. Rheingold, H. L., (,ewirtz, J. L., and Ross, IJ. ~V.: Social conditioning of vocalizations in the irffant. J~. Comp. Physiol. Psyclml. 52:68-73, 1959." 29. Mowrer, O, H.: Learning Theory" and the Symbolic Process, New York, John \Viley & Sons, 1960. 30. Haggard, L. A., and Isaac's, R. S.: Micromomentary facial expressions as indicators of ego mechanisms in psychotherapy. In: Methods of Research in Psychotherapy (L. A. Gottscha]k and A. H. Auerbach, Eds.). New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966. :31. Rotter, J. B.: Generalized expectancies fi~r internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychol. Monogr. 80: 1-28, 1966. 3 "9,. Gurin, Patricia, and Katz, D.: Motivation and Aspiration in the Negro College. Ann Arbor, Mich., Sun, ey Research Center, Instihae for Social Research, 1966,
a Systematic By
Study o f E m p a t h y
ALEXANDER Z. GUXORA
I N G E T H E B E G I N N I N G of r e c o r d e d h i s t o r y m a n h a s c o n s i s t e n t l y t r i e d t o a c q u i r e a n atta:ibute o r i g i n a l l y d e n i e d t o h i m . B i b l i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n h a s it t h a t m a n w a s c r e a t e d i n G o d ' s o w n i m a g e . H e c o u l d c o m m u n i c a t e i n t e l l i g e n t l y , h e w a s g i v e n t h e g i f t o f c o n c e p t - f o r m a t i o n ( f o r h e w a s able: to n a m e mad c l a s s i f y a l l l i v i n g t h i n g s ) , a n d h e w a s g i v e n t h e g i f t of l o v e . B u e c o m p r e hending was denied to him. One often wonders whether the beautiful mad c o n c i s e Story, o f G e n e s i s d o e s n o t p r e s a g e a n e s s e n t i a l , e v e r - r e c u r r i n g s t r u g g l e of m a n k i n d - - a n e t e r n a l s t r u g g l e , so it s e e m s , o f m a n t o a c q u i r e t h e g o d l y att r i b u t e o f c o m p r e h e n d i n g , a n e f f o r t t h a t o f t e n t i m e s is u n d o n e b y his very." a m b i . v a l e n e o t o w a r d g a i n i n g c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f h i m s e l f a n d his f e l l o w b e i n g s . "~Vhat, i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e r m s , d o e s c o m p r e h e n d i n g c o n n o t e ? O n e m i g h t s a y t h a t c o m p r e h e n d i n g is t h e m a k i n g o f a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s . X~qaat t h e n is j u d g m e n t ? R a p a p o r t , in a p e n e t r a t i n g p a s s a g e , s a y s :
S
It appears that Hie concept "'judgment" is one of those many concepts which are used without t h e i r having attained a sulticient conceptual clarification. "Judgment" evidently reters to a function on the b r o a d e r line Of intellectual and emotional functions. Though one shoMd be inclined to state flatly that t h e r e are no emotional functions without intellectual components, and vice versa, there are some functions which we are accustomed to label as intellectual, inasmuch ,as they come to consciousness more in intellectual terms; and others which we label as emotional inasmuch as they come to cor~seiousness more in emotional terms . . . . "'Judg~nent" appears to r e f e r to t h e emotionally ~relevant us0 of one's assets in regard to the reality situation where, though intellectual and logical correctness are implied, lhey play a rather subordinate role. One m i g h t argue that good judgment is the outcome of irdallibly logical thinMng and conduct. It is dit/icult to refute such an argument. One can only reply that a conscious logical process which would prepare an action of good judgment would hax'e to consider such an infinite multiplicity of facts and conditions pertaining to the situat:io~l that the temporal factor alone would make it impossible.1 If you prefer brev-ity, Rapaport's position may best be summarized in Sehafer's w o r d s : " ~ C o m p r d a e n s i o n is u n d e r s t o o d t o r e f e r t o a p r o c e s s w i t h e q u a l I y i m p o r t a n t C o g n i t i v e a n d a f f e e t i v e aspects.'"-" T h e e m p h a s i s o n a f f e e t i v e a s p e c t s m a y a c c o u n t f o r t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e a m o u n t o f a m b i v a l e n c e e n c o u n t e r e d in m a n ' s e f f o r t to g a i n f o r h i m s e l f t h e g o d l y g i f t o f c o m p r e h e n d i n g . M a y m a n v o i c e s t h e c o n c e r a l a n d t h e h o p e of m a n y w h e n h e says t h a t t h e clinician " ' . . . m u s t de~,elop a p p r o p r i a t e t e c h n i q u e s for t h e s t u d y of his o w n 'intuitive" w o r k i n g processes, t e c h n i q u e s t o p r y into mad m a k e explicit t h e i n t r i c a t e n e t w o r k of i n f e r e n c e i n o r d e r t h a t h e b e a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h c o n v i n c i n g l y t h e intrinsic reasonal)Ieness of s o m e i n f e r e n c e s ( a n d t h e intrinsic arbitrm'iness T h e rest;arch reported herein w a s p e r f o r m e d pursuant to a contract, with th,z U. S. D e p a r t m e n t of t I E , V , Office o[ Educalion, under the provisions of P. L. 83-531, Cot~perativ¢ Research, and t h e provisions" of Title VI, P. L. 85-864, as a m e n d e d . AU-zx,AxOEI~ Z. G'olon:~, 1)~.]3.: Associate Pro/cs~.'or el Psychololztj, Departmes~ts oJ Psychiatry ttl~ri P,~'!lcholog~j; ChieJ Pstlchologixl, Nettropsychiatric Institute; ~lember, Center for l~esearch o~ Lttngttage atzel L a n g u a g e Behavior, University of 3tichigatt, A n n Arbor, 3lich.
375 (;O.~IlqlEIIENNIVI.: PSYCIIIA'IilY, ~'()[.. 8, N(). 5 ( O(,q'OIIl~:il ), 1967
376
ALI'2XANI)EII Z. (;UIOI:iA
of others.) Surely, in time, clinical psychology will b e able to demonstrate conclusively both the objective a n d the verifiable nature of its interpretive processes, b u t that d a y has not yet arrived. ":~ Clinical work in both diagnosis and t r e a t m e n t is based on the assumption-wh'ich is ,seldom s u b m i t t e d to critical a n a l y s i s - - t h a t interaction b e t w e e n obs e r v e r and observed results in an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the observed. I n otheiwords, the a s s m n p t i o n i s m a d e t h a t there is a sequentSal and causal relationship b e t w e e n information i n p u t ( b y the observed) a n d information o u t p u t ( b y the observer). Similarly, it is assmned t h a t information o u t p u t is relevant mad specific to information input. A third assumption is t h a t the relevance a n d specificity of information o u t p u t are d e p e n d e n t on certain characteristics of the observerT-i,e. , perception, memory,, experience, intelligence, and a vague catch-all called "personality varmbles. It is the role of dais last item (personality variables) that seems to be the most nebulous and l e a s t understood. Vague references to, and conflicting descriptions of, its nature a n d importance have become the h a l h n a r k of the subject and the despair of researchers. T h e elusive quality of these personality variables i s attested to b y the ill-defihed concepts used to denote the processes dttributed t o them. I am referring to terms such as " e m p a t h y " and "'intuition.'" In a series of communications 4-~ I have suggested that, if we are to explore intelligently the puzzling process between information i n p u t and information output, w e ought to d e f i n e clearly the different modes of Comprehending and delineate one form from the other as distinctly as w e are able to do it. To this aim I proposed that there are at le,~t three distinct modes of comprehending-inference, e m p a t h y a n d intuition--and I submitted t h a t thesb processes can be separated, identified, and thus r e n d e r e d more rese,'u'chable. On the following pages I wish to summarize the theoretical position develo p e d in these earlier communications, to report on research--completed and ongoing--derived from the p r e s e n t e d position, a n d to suggest some lines of f u r t h e r investigation. F o r the purpose of this paper, the major focus will be on t h e m o d e of comprehension t e r m e d "empathy." °
,,
Q
Dza~NrrJo~'s To restate briefly, the three modalities of compreheflsion were defined as t%llows ~: " i n f e r e n c e is a cognitive process of c o m p r e h e n d i n g , c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y derivation of cond u s i 0 n s f r o m a given set of d a t a or premises in c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e rules o f AristotelJan
logic.'"
" E m p a t l w is a process of c o m p r e h e n d i n g in w h i c h a t e m p o r a r y fusion of self-object boundaries, as i n t h e earliest p a t t e r n of object relation, permits an i m m e d i a t e emotional a p p r e h e n s i o n of the affective experience of another, this sensing b e i n g used by the cognitive tunctions to gain n n d e r s t a n d i n g of the other.'" " A n e x a m p l e of an input-out-put circuit, w h e r e the conditions of all .three assumptions are hil/illed, is. that of a p a t i e n t p r e s e n t i n g s y m p t o m s of nausea a n d vomiting, m u s c l e spasms, fever, a n d h i g h l e u k o c y t e c o u n t ( i n f o r m a t i o n i n p u t ) a n d a physician offering a diagnosis of acalte appendicitis ( i n f o r m a t i o n output. )
Tov~rAI:{D A SYNTENIATIC STUDY Olz I'2~X'II'ATt't[Y
377
"'[ntalition is a m o d e of c o m p r e h e n d i n g in whirls external cues normally i n a d e q u a t e for logical j u d g m e n t ' a n d / o r prediction give rise t o apparently direct, innnediate, a n d a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t a n d / o r predictioia through the m e d i a t i o n of idiosyncratic associations organized according to al]ological principles.'" REVYEV¢ OF E3~I?ATI1Y I ~ E S E A R C I t a
A1Hmugh a sizable a m o u n t of research h a s b e e n done on e m p a t h y , th e r e has b e e n surprisingly little innovation in r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e or m e t l m d . Dymond's article r relating e m p a t h y to i n s i g h t seems to b e the first r e s e a r c h att e m p t in the area. She asked subjects to tell stories to T A T cards a n d a n a l y z e d their stories in terms o f interpersonal relations. E m p a t h y was defined as the ability to e x p e r i e n c e a n d describe the thoughts a n d feelings of the figures dep i c t e d in tile given stories. In 1949 D y m o n d s reported on a scale s h e d e v i s e d for the m e a s u r e m e n t of e m p a t h i c ability. She noted, " . . . this is the only test p u r p o r t i n g to m e a s u r e e m p a t h i c ability w h i c h is k n o w n to the a u t h o r . . . . ' " T h e test seeks to m e a s m ' e tlae ability to p r e d i c t the opinions, attitudes a n d self-concept of a n o t h e r b y eliciting ratings on six terms referring, respeetivel}5 to traits c ha r a c te r iz ed b y the terms self-confidence, superior-inferior, selfish-ttnselfish, friendly-ul~friendly, leader-Jollower, and sense of humor. T h e same six traits are r a t e d u n d e r four conditions: ( a ) self-rating, ( b ) r a t i n g b y a n o t h e r person, ( c ) rati n g of the other as the rater believes the other w o u l d rate himself, a n d ( d ) self-rating as the rater believes t h e other w o u l d r a te him. T h e m e a s u r e of a n y rater's e m p a t h i c ability is derive d b y d e t e r m i n i n g h o w closely h i s predictions of another's ratings (conditions c a n d d) correspond to the other's actual ratings (conditions a a n d b as r a t e d b y the othe r ) . This operational m e a s u r e of e m p a t h y as used b y Dymond--i.e., a c c u r a c y in the p r e d i c t i o n of the responses of other persons--derives p r i m a r i l y from the theory of i n t e r p e r s o n a l relations proposed b y S u l l i v a n y l / e s e a r e h s u b s e q u e n t to D y m o n d ' S w o r k has be e n n o t a b l y l a c k i n g in innovation. Such research essentially repeats D y m o n d ' s m o d e l of p r e d i c t i v e skill, w i t h different proeedtwes of "'getting to know" the other ,as the m a j o r source of variation. A m o n g such variations used are predictions of Q-sorts of persons seen in a 2 - m i n u t e film extract, J-° changes i n the a m o u n t of inte r pe r sona l contact p r e e e d i n g m e a s u r e m e n t of pr e dic tive skill, ~ a f te r xdewing a 15-minute interxdew session, x-" a n d prediction of other's responses to an i n t e r p e r s o n a l cheekli/t following g r o u p discussion. ~s H a t c h ~ m a d e use of an actual field situation in m e a s m ' i n g managers" abilities to p r e d i c t the attitudes of their salesmen. M a h o n e y ~s devised a literature e m p a t h y test in w h i e h his subjects p r e d i c t e d , after getting a "feel'" for four i n d i v i d u a l s of m a r k e d l y different personalities p o r t r a y e d in four selections from/~etion, h o w these fletional persons w o u l d r e sp ond to 20 m u l t i p l e - e h o i e e i n c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e items. Thei criterion for correct response was the j u d g m e n t s o f 23 psychologists pre~dously considered to be " e m p a t h i c individuals.'" A sound film of an intern,levy Mtnation *I am i n d e b t e d to ~lrs. L i n d a Taylor. a g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t in clinical psychology at the University of Michigan, for h e r efforts lit the preparation of this review.
~]7S
ALi~X,-~NI)ER Z. (;UJOI~A
was u s e d by C l i n e a n d Itichards, '~ w i t h t h e subjects r e q u i r e d to p r e d i c t subseq u e n t b e h a v i o r opinions, i n c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e responses, trait ratings, a n d a d j e c t i v e checklist ratings. T h e E m p a t h y Test a n d P r i m a r y E m p a t h i c A b i l i b, Te st d e s i g n e d b y K e r r a n d Speroff lr are also b a s e d on p r e d i c t i v e skill. T h e s e tests m e a s u r e "'the subjects" a b i l i b - tO "anticipate"
q'OXVAIU) A
SYSqq_~3IA'I'IC STUDY
01;"
E~.fPATHY
379
feelings, a n d t h e v e r b a l f a c i l i t y to c o m m u n i c a t e this u n d e r s t a n d i n g in a lang u a g e a t t u n e d to t h e p a t i e n t ' s c u r r e n t f e e l i n g s . " l q e s e a r c h w h i c h a t t e m p t s t o m e a s u r e a n d u n d e r s t a n d h o w o n e person c o m e s to k n o w a n o t h e r i n v o l v e s u n d e n i a b l e c o m p l e x i t i e s ; H a m m o n d , H u r s c h , a n d T o d d 21 p o i n t to a f e w of t h e issues o f concel~n i n r e s e a r c h o n : i n t e r p e r s o n a l p e r c e p t i o n . T h e y e m p h a s i z e d t h a t e n v i r o m n e n t a l d e t e r m i n a n t s of t h e o t h e r ' s b e h a v i o r l n u s t b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , a s w e l l as t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f ' t h e o t h e r , tlie role of t h e l e a r n e r ' s r e s p o n s e i n v a r i a n c e , t h e i n f l u e n c e of s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e l e a r n e r a n d o t h e r in t h e a c c u r a c y o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l pereeption~ a n d t h e g e n e r a l i t y of t h e l e a r n e r ' s p r e d i c t i v e success. T h e s e f a c t o r s a r e e q u a l l y imp o r t a n t f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n in t h e t y p i c a l r e s e a r c h on e m p a t h y , T h e r e s e e m s to b e l i t t l e critical r e v i e w of; a n d little c o n t r o v e r s y over, t h e r e s e a r c h d o n e s p e c i f i c a l l y on e m p a t h y . Ma1~ve]I~ ~ p o i n t s to t w o issues i n D y m o n d ' s m e t h o d w h i c h s e e m to c a u s e P r o b l e m s . H e s a y s t h e D y m o n d ' s sLx traits l i m i t t h e e m p a t h i z e r . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t o n e m a y b e a b l e t o e m p a t h i z e w i t h c e r t a i n : b e h a v i o r s b u t n o t w i t h others. V a r i a t i o n s i n r e l a t i o n to d i f f e r e n t i a l a s p e c t s of e m p a t h y a r e n o t d e a l t w i t h in t h e l i t e r a t u r e o r in r e s e a r c h findings. M a r w e l l also p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e r a t i n g scales u s e d in s u c h r e s e a r c h t e n d to e 0 n f u n d r e s u l t s : "'People m a y u s e a c e r t a i n r a n g e o f t h e r a t i n g s c a l e a n d alt h o u g h t h e y h a v e g r a s p e d t h e p a t t e r n t h e p r e d i c t i o n s a r e w r o n g . " Cronbach-"'-' c o n c u r s t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a l u s e of t h e r a t i n g s c a l e m a y b e a s o u r c e of error. H e a d d s t h a t i n r e a c h i n g sirnilarity scores in this t y p e o f r e s e a r c h , s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s a r e c o m b i n e d b u t n o t d i f f e r e n t i a t e d . F o r e x a m p l e , it b e c o m e s difficult to s e e w h i c h p a r t o f t h e j u d g f n e n t r e p r e s e n t s a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of o t h e r s as distinct from stereotype or self-reference. I n t h e i r r e s e a r c h on p e r s o n cognition, B e a c h a n d VVertheimer "-'s a l l o w e d o p e n - e n d e d d e s c r i p t i o n s of t h e o t h e r a n d c o d e d t h e s e i n t o d e s c r i p t i v e classes. T h e y criticize c e r t a i n o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t s in w h i c h s u b j e c t s a r e a s k e d to j u d g e o t h e r s o n n o n s ~ i e n t d i m e n s i o n s , i.e., n e i t h e r a p p l i c a b l e n o r r e l e v a n t . T h e i r criticism is x6tally p e r t i n e n t to t h e b u l k of r e s e a r c h on e m p a t h y . T h e t h e o r e t i c a l definitions of e m p a t h y e m p h a s i z e a n a b i l i t y to s h a r e a f e e l i n g t h a t is i m m e d i a t e f o r t h e other,'-',i',z*,-"5 t h e k e y p o i n t s b e i n g feeling a n d immediate. B y t r a n s l a t i n g this in t h e s u p e r f i c i a l s e n s e of " p u t t i n g y o u r s e l f in t h e role of t h e o t h e r , " t h e o p e r a t i o n a l definition i n a c c u r a t e l y b e c o m e s t h a t of p r e d i c t i n g h o w t h e o t h e r will think, get, feel, o r r e s p o n d on a n ~ d i m e n s i o n t h e r e s e a r c h e r chooses. T h e d i s c r e p a n c y f r o m t h e o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n is clear, a n d it is i m p o r t a n t to b e a w a r e of this d i s c r e p a n c y if s u c h t e r m s as "'intuition," " i n f e r e n c e , " a n d " e m p a t h y " a r e to b e m e a n i n g f u l a n d useful. A c c o r d i n g to t h e a b o v e criticism a n d definitions, the: rese~'trch on "'predictive e m p a t h y , " as b a s e d on D y m o n d ' s m o d e l , a p p e a r s to follow m o r e closely t h e definition o f i n t u i t i o n r a t h e r t h a n e m p a t h y . T o p r e d i c t n o n s a l i e n t , h y p o t h e t i c a l r e s p o n s e s , t h e s u b j e c t m u s t r e l y on subtle, p r e c o n s c i o u s c u e s h e h a s p i c k e d u p in i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h t h e other. I f the c u e s a n d t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s to t h e m w h i c h p r o d u c e his p r e d i c t i o n s a r e remote- a n d his c o n c l u s i o n s n o t l o g i c a l l y d e d u c i b l e , his p r e d i c t i o n s w o u l d s e e m to test i n t u i t i v e t m d e r s t a n d i n g rather than e m p a t h i c understanding. If he can identify the facts h e u s e d to m a k e t h e p r e d i c t i o n a n d trace' t h e m to a logical conclusion, t h e test w o u l d b e of i n f e r e n t i a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g . I t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t
380
AI,EXANDElt Z. GUIOI~,V
t t a t e h '~ r e p o r t s tile f o l l o w i n g f r o m r e s e a r c h on p r e d i c t i v e e m p a t h y : "The acc u r a c y of m a n a g e r s ' p r e d i c t i o n b e h a v i o r w a s i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d to t h e a m o u n t of i n f e r e n c e d e m a n d e d b y t h e p r e d i c t i o n s i t u a t i o n , " A reviewer of t h e K e e r S p e r o f f e m p a t h y test states, " T h e t e s t is m o r e a m e a s t t r e of g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n a n d p r e d i c t i o n of opinions t h a n of intmI]el;sona] e m p a m ) . ' P e r h a p s it w o u l d b e m o r e c o r r e c t t o s a y t h a t s u c h p r e d i c t i v e studies, alt h o u g h i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o m e a s u r e e m p a t h y , a r e c o n - e c t l y de.signed f o r p e r s o n ix~reeption r e s e a r c h w h e r e tile goal is b r o a d l y Stated as k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e o t h e r p e r s o n . T o u s e s u c h a de.sign a n d c r e d i t the results e n t i r e l y to e m p a t h i c a b i l i t y s e e m s s t r e t c h i n g t h e point, PI~ESENT STUI)IES
Previous: w o r k in t h e a r e a of e m p a t h y r e s e a r c h suffers f r o m txvo m a j o r w e a k nesses.. T h e definitional f o r m u l a t i o n s u s e d a r e n o t specific e n o u g h , a n d , m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e w a y t h e s e definitions a r e operationalized d o e s n o t a l l o w for a h i g h level o f c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y . I n m o s t i n s t a n c e s e m p a t h y h a s b e e n o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d e i t h e r ir~ t e r m s of t h e r a p e u t i c b e h a v i o r t o b e r a t e d a n d j u d g e d b y ot4her t h e r a p i s t s o r in t e r m s of a r a t h e r g l o b a l p e r s o n - p e r c e p t i o n model. A s y s t e m a t i c a n d e m p i r i c a l "investigation of e m p a t l a y r e q u i r e s t h a t the conc e p t b e r e p h r a s e d in o p e r a t i o n a l terms, a n d in s u c h a w a y as to a s s u r e m a x i m u m c o n s t r u c t validity. Since t h e s p r i n g of 1¢J66 m y e o l l e a ~ m s a n d I at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of N l i e h i g a n h a v e b e e n e n g a g e d in a n eftort to d e v e l o p a r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y t h a t w o u l d c o r r e c t t h e w e a k n e s s e s a s c r i b e d to p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h in the field of e m p a t h y . T h e first t a s k t h e n w a s to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e t h e c o n c e p t o f e m p a t h y - - a s s t a t e d above--in such a w a y that m a x i m u m construct-validity would be assured, a n d t h e n to d e v e l o p a n a p p r o p r i a t e m e a s u r e of t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d b e h a v i o r . I t w a s f e l t t h a t , c o n t r a r y to p r e v i o u s w o r k in t h e a r e a , t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d •b e h a v i o r h a d to b e o u t s i d e t h e p s y e h o t h e r a p e n t i c r e a l m . T h e hypothesis gene r a t e d in t h e clinical s e t t i n g h a d to b e "'lifted o u t " a n d t r a n s p o s e d to a b e h a v i o r a l r e a l m w h e r e m o r e rigorous; r e p r o d u c i b l e , r e l i a b l e a n d v a l i d experim e n t a t i o n w a s feasible. T h e position a d o p t e d b y u s is s i m i l a r to r e c e n t t r e n d s in ex-periments w i t h a n i m a l s . I a m r e f e r r i n g to t h e i n c r e a s i n g t w o - w a y i n t e r a c tion b e t w e e n ecologists a n d l a b o r a t o r y p s y c h o l o g i s t s . J u s t as in a n i m a l p s y c h o l o g y o b s e r v a t i o n s o b t a i n e d in t h e n a t u r a l s e t t i n g inspil-e e x p e r i m e n t a l w o r k in t h e laboratory, mad, c o n v e r s e l y , l a b o r a t o r y findings a r e e x a m i n e d in light of n a t u r a l i s t i c o b s e r v a t i o n , w e p o s i t e d t h a t o n c e a h y p o t h e s i s g e n e r a t e d in t h e eliaaieal (nat-uralistie) s e t t i n g c o u l d b e t e s t e d o u t in t h e l a b o r a t o r y ( t h e o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d b e h a v i o r ) , w e c o u l d t h e n h o p e to r e a p p l y o u r laboratory, findings to t h e original c i r c u m s t a n c e . T h e b e h a v i o r a l r e a l m c h o s e n b y u s w a s t h a t of l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o r . T h e r e a s o n for this c h o i c e w a s in a s e n s e f o r t u i t o u s , b u t n o t e n t i r e l y so. L a n g u a g e is t h e m o s t e x p r e s s i v e a n d m o s t h i g h l y d e v e l o p e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n m o d a l i t y a n d t h e m o s t essential i n s t n l m e n t in t h e clinical r e a h n . F u r t h e r m o r e , l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o r p r o v i d e s us w i t h a b e h a v i o r a l r e a h n t h a t l e n d s itself to r e p r o d u c i b l e e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n . O n ~Im o t h e r h a n d , clinical r e s e a r c h c a n p r o v i d e t h e ]angamgo sciences w i t h n e w insights a n d n e w vistas. XVc, ~hus h o p e t h a t o u r - r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y will h a v e h e u r i s t i c v a l u e for b o t h disciplines.
T()XVAIll) A SYS'I'lgi~IATIC STUDY O F I~II'A'II-IY
38],
\ ¥ h a t follows is a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e pilot s t u d y a n d the r a t i o n a l e f o r its r e s e a r c h designY c' S p e a k e r s of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e m a y differ g r e a t l y in t h e i r a u t h e n t i c ' i t y of pronunciation, even when they have similar backgrounds, training and prot i e i e n e y . U n s y s t e m a t i e a t t e m p t s to a c c o u n t for this d i f f e r e n c e h a v e a t t r i b u t e d s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s in a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n e i a t i o n ~o d i f f e r e n c e s in i n t e l l i g e n c e , language, a p t i t u d e , d i s c i q m i n a t i v e c a p a c i t y or a n a t o m i c a l c a p a b i l i t i e s . O u r sy2dy e n d e a v o r e d t%ex~91ore a r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t possibility: t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y diffc.rences--more speei~ieally, d l3t'erenees in e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y - - m a y p l a y a m a j o r r o l e in t h e o b s e r v e d d i f f e r e n c e s in a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n c i a t i o n . F o r t h e p u r p o s e of t h e s t u d y it w a s d e s i r a b l e to define a u t h e n t i c i t y of p r o n u n e i a t i o n so as to e x c l u d e v a r i o u s r e l a t e d c o m p o n e n t s of s p o k e n fluency, in a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . * I n a d d i t i o n , it w a s e n m i a l to reeogqaize t h a t e a c h s u b j e c t h a d l o n g a g o m a s t e r e d t h e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r "e p e r t o l r e of his n a t i v e l a n g u a g e a n d tlmt t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of a n t h e n t i e i t y in a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e r e q u i r e d t h e inclusion into this n a t i v e r e p e r t o i r e of n o v e l s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e units. I t w a s flu'ther, a s s u m e d t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n s i i n d e r w h i c h one's n a t i v e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e is b£1ilt u p i m p o r t a n t l y d e t e r / n i n e s t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t will f a v o r l a t e r n o v e l i n c l u s i o n s p e r t i n e n t to s e c o n d l a n g u a g e authenticity_ T h e r e is e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e b e g i n s to d e v e l o p as e a r l y as f o u r m o n t h s of age, w i t h a u t h e n t i c i m i t a t i o n of f r a g m e n t s 0f i n t o n a t i o n c o n t o u r s . "-'7I t has also b e e n sho~ql t h a t r e d , y o u n g i n f a n t s a r e h i g h l y r e s p o ~ s i v o in m o d i f y i n g t h e i r b e h a v i o r , i n c l u d i n g x,o c a l i z a t i o n , d e p e n d i n g on c e r t a i n k i n d s of i n t e r p e r s o n a l s t i m u l a t i o n ; s u c h s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s as smiling, b o d y c o n t a e t a n d t h e m o t h e r ' s voice h a v e all b e e n s h o w n to a c t as r e i n f o r c e r s in s h a p i n g i n f a n t b e h a v i o r . ~s M o w r e r ~',' s u g g e s t e d s o m e y e a r s a g o t h a t c h i l d r e n l e a r n the s o u n d s of t h e i r l a n g x m g e ( h e n c e a m i n i m a l e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e ) p r e cisely t h r o u g h a f f e e t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e m o t h e r . T h e p r e c i s e w a y in w h i c h s o u n d p r o d u c t i o n in t h e child d e p e n d s on i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e m o t h e r h a s not b e e n estal)lis]md. T h e i m p o r t a n t s u g g e s t i o n h e r e is t h a t affective r e l a t i o n s to the m o t h e r m a y in s o m e w a y b e t h e v e h i c l e J0r the initial d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e mi~fimal e c h o i c r e p e r t o i r e . I f this is t h e case, t h e n the fm-ther d e v e l o p m e n t of this r e p e r t o i r e for t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e m a y r e q u i r e c a p a c i t i e s closely r e l a t e d t o t h a t affective vehicle. T h i s h y p o t h e s i s has s e v e r a l - i m p l i c a t i o n s ; o n e i m p l i c a t i o n is t h a t e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y , as d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y , ha.~ s o m e t h i n g to do w i t h l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n . T h e m a t r i x of e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y m a y ~,c v i e w e d as P r e c i s e l y t h e c o r r e l a t e of the atfeetive r e l a t i o n to the m o t h e r t h a t I ]lave s u g g e s t e d is t h e vehicle for t h e d o v e h ~ p m e n t of original p r o n u n c i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y . T h e e m p a t h i c p e r s o n s h o u l d , C o n s e q u e n t l y , h a v e a n a d v a n t a g e in e n l a r g i n g his m i n i m a l ee!~oic rer/ertoire 1o i n c l u d e ~units of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . T h e h y p o t h e s i s , then, is t h a t t h e m o r e en~pathie ( i n t e r m s of o u r d e f i n i t i o n ) a p e r s o n is, t h e morelik~.ly he is to a c q u i r e a u t h e n t i c p r o n u n c i a t i o n of a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . As a first s t e p in a s s e s s i n g this h y p o t h e s i s , w e r e c r u i t e d ' a s a m p l e of 14 h i g h school t e a c h e r s of F r e n c h w h o w e r e r e a s o n a b l y h o m o g e n e o u s in [ h e i r p r o " l " o r a (h'taile¢l d i s c u s s i o n o f p r o m m c i a t i o n a u H m n t i e i t y a n d r e l a t e d l i n g u i s t i c is~lms, the r e a d e r is r e f e r r e d to the full r e p o r t o f this r e s e a r c h . : ' ;
3~
ALEXANDEI1 Z . G U I O I 1 A
h c l e n e y ill the [;'tenth l a n g u a g e . I h(.,s~, subjects were. s e l e c t e d on tile basis of the results of t h e M o d e r n L a n g u a g e P r o f i c i e n c y Test (French) arid a p e r s o n a l irff(irmation q u e s h o n n a i r o , f r o m 40 h i g h school t e a c h e r s of F r e n c h w h o w e r e p a r t i c i p a t i n g in a n N D E A summt~r institute.: A n ext&r~sive b a t t e r y of tests w a s a d m i n i s t e r e d to t h e s e subjects, c o n s i s t i n g o[: v a r i o u s m e a s u r e s in such a r e a s as intelligence, p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , i n t e r e s t p a t l d r n s , g e n e r a l a p t i t u d e s , a n d perc e p t u a l fu)actioning, h ) c l u d e d in t h e test b a t t e I y w e r e t h e P e n s a c o l a Z, Scale, t h e M M P I , t h e I t o r s e h a c h T e s t , t h e A]Iport-Vernon S c a l e , t h e S t r o n g Vocat i o n a l I n t e r e s t Test, t h e M i l l e r A n a l o g i e s Test, t h e ~.Veehsler A d u l t I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale, t i l e ~-loden] L a n g u a g e A p t i t u d e Test, t h e K r a m e r A f f e c t q.~6st, t h e Closu r e Flexil)ility Test, a n d a m e a s u r e of t h e prcceive-d i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y o f E n g l i s h w h e n s p o k e n w i t h a f o r e i g n accent. In o r d e r to o b t a i n o u r d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e - - i , e . , a m e a s u r e of p r o n u n c i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y - - w e r e c o r d e d t w o s p o k e t r s a m p l e s of e a c h o f ottr subjects" F r e n c h - - o n e w h e n th.e s u b j e c t w a s a s k e d to deserj'be a series of p i c t u r e s , a n d a n o t h e r w h e n h e r e a d a s e l e c t e d p a s s a g e . T h e s e s a m p l e s w e r e e x c e r p t e d so t h a t u t t e r a n t e s c o m t ? a n t b l e in Content c o u l d b e r e c o r d e d a n d p r e s e n t e d to a p a n e l of n a t i v e F r e n c h j u d g e s f o r r a t i n g . T h d * r a t i n g s c a l e a l l o w e d r a t i n g of e a c h s a m p l e on a n 8 - p o i n t s c a l e of p r o n u n c i a t i o n authenti~2ity. Initial e x p e r i m e n t s with t h e scale d e m o n s t r a t e d s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h i n t e r j u d g e a n d i n t r a j u d g e reliability to w a r r a n t i t s use. F o r a m e a s u r e of e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y w e d e v i s e d a n i n s t r u m e n t t h a t d e r i v e d f r o m a r e c e n t r e p o r t b y H a g g a r d a n d I s a a c s , a" w h i c h s t a t e d t h a t w h e n strips of film of p s y c h o t h e r a p e t l t i e s e s s i o n s a r e s h o w n a t r e d u c e d s p e e d ( f r o m 24 f r a m e s p e r see. io 4 f r a m e s p e r s e e . ) , facial expressions d e n o t i n g affective s t a t e s b e c o m e d i s c e n ] i b l e . "lqaese t r a n s i t o r y facial expressions a r e c a l l e d N 1 M E ~ ( m i c r o - m o m e n t a r y e x p r e s s i o n s ) . \Ve h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t t h e a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e m i n i m a l - c u e s in i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n is a n i m p o r t a n t c o m p o n e n t of e~rip a t h i c c N ) a e i t y a n d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l differenct:s in the t h r e s h o l d level for t h e p e r c e p t i o n ot: M M E ' s w()uld reflect c o r r e s p o n d i n g differences in e m p a t h i c c a p a c i t y . . X V c s e l e c t e d a strip o f film-in w h i c h J t a g g a r d a n d I s a a c ' s j u d g e s d e t e c t e d o n l y a f e w M M E ' S at n o r m a l s p e e d b u t m a n y at s l o w e r speeds, a n d w e p r e s e n t e d this film t() o u r s u b j e c t s in a d e s c e n d i n g o r d e r of s p e e d s . T h e sul)jercts w e r e i n s t r u c t e d to m a k e a lick m a r k on a s h e e t of p a p e r e a c h t i m e t h e y s a w a n M M E . T h e n u m b e r of re'arks m a d e b y e a c h s u b i e c t d u r i n g tI~e s h o w i n g of t h e fihn at e a c h s p e e d w e r e tallied. T h e s c o r e a s s i g n e d to e a c h subject-for, this test w:-~s his a v e r a g e d e v i a t i o n f r o m the m e a n i m m l ) e r of M M E ' s s e e n 1)v o u r s a m p l e p o p u l a t i o n a t e a c h Speed; thus, s o m e s u b j e c t s w e r e identitied its e x c e p t i o n a l l y h i g h M M E p e r c e i v e r s a n d s o m e as e x c e p t i o n a l l y low ones. "/7he 14"subjects in t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p w e r e t h e n r a n k e d as to t h e i r prun u n e i a t i o n a u t h e n t i c i t y , a n d this r a n k - o r d e r w a s t o n ' e l a t e d with scores f r o m e a c h of the i n d e p e n d e n t test m e a s u r e s d e s c r i b e d M)ove. A n a l y s i s of the d a t a s h o w e d t h a t tile p s y c h o l o g i c a l test scores d i d n o t c o r r e l a t e significantly w i t h scores on t h e m e a s u r e s of a u t h e n t i c i t y . O n e notew¢)rthy ex(x;I)tion to this gene r a l i z a t i o n w a s t h e significant relation f o t m d (ra.nk o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n of .6) m e a s u r e s of e m l ) a t h l"e eal)acitv, . as (lc'seril)ed at>eve, a n d those of proi)el* w .c,(,n " n u n c i a t i o n m~thentieity.
T()~VARI)
A SYS'I'I~N'IAT1C S T U D Y
OF
I';~II'ATJtY
383
C u r r e n t l y , w e a r e r e p l i c a t i n g ( j o i n t l y w i t h I A n d a T a y l o r ) the s t u d y w i t h s o m e variations in tech!~ique. T h e subjects for t h e n e w s t u d y a r e two g r o u p s of 15 college s t u d e n t s , w i t h s a m p l e selection c o n t r o l l e d for age, sex, y e a r s of schooling, n u m b e r of l a n g u a g e s spoken, i n t e l l i g e n c e , language, a p t i t u d e , a n d visual acuity. T h e subjects w i l l b e taugllt c o n v e r s a t i o n a l J a p a n e s e in 12 sessions, s p r e a d over a o n e - m o n t h period. F o l l o w i n g this t h e y will b e r a t e d . o n t h e i r a u t h e n ticity o f p r o n u n c i a t i o n in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e t e c h n i q u e u s e d in the, pilot study. T h e i r score on the a u t h e n t i c i t y scale will b e c o n ' e l a t e d w i t h t h e e m p a t h y measure, the h y p o t h e s i s b e i n g t h a t h i g h e m p a t h i z e r s will a c h i e v e a h i g h e r a u t h e n t i c i t y score t h a n l o w e m p a t h i z e r s . T h e e m p a t h y m e a s u r e d e s c r i b e d a b o v e will b e m o d i f i e d for this s t u d y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m a n n e r . \Ve h a v e s e l e c t e d at f i h n e d i n t e r v i e w ~ q t h a psychiatlSe p a t i e n t from w h i r l s w e h a v e e x t r a c t e d a p o r t i o n in W h i c h t h e f a c i a l expressions n o t i c e a b l e at slower s p e e d s are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i t f e r e n t fi'om those n o t i c e a b l e at n o r m a l s p e e d s . A g r o u p of e x p e r i e n c e d clinicians, a i d e d b y t h e a u d i o c o n t e n t of the film, will r e c o r d c h a n g e s i n facial expressions, b o t h at r e d u c e d a n d norreal speeds. T h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p will b e s h o w n t h e s e l e c t e d p o r t i o n of the fihn w i t h out the a u d i o part. T h e s e . s u b j e c t s w i l l b e a s k e d to c o u n t t h e n u m b e r of M M E ' s seet~ at Various s p e e d s a n d also to i d e n t i f y t h e affect a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p a r t i t u l a r e x p r e s s i o n s noted. Performanc~ ~. on these two tasks w i l l constitute t h e m e a s u r e of i n d i v i d u a l differences in "empathy. It is h o p e d that this s t u d y w i l l yield ~'t m o r e refined m e a s u r e o f erf~pathy for use in c ~ n t i n u i n g stxldies. A n o t h e r Study cun-ently in progress ( i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h ~[olm C. C a t f o r d a n d Jolm J. H a r ~ m a n ) a t t e m p t s ' t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e t h e role p l a y e d l')y e m p a t h y in s e c x m d - l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n f r o m tim i n f l u e n c e of certain o t h e r p e r s o n a l i t y variables. The, e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s in this s t u d y a r e 50 N e g r o m a l e c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s fi'om a ]mrge i n t e g r a t e d u n i v e r s i t y in the N o r t h a n d 50 N e g r o m a l e s t u d e l l t s f r o m a p r e d o m i n a n t l y N e g r o s4"laool in the South. T h e g r o u p s are, c o n t r o l l e d for various s o c i o e c o n o m i c v a r i a b l e s a n d o t h e r v a r i a b l e s s u c h as e d u c a t i o n , a r e a of birth, a r e a of parents" b i r t h , years in the North, d a r k n e s s of p i g m e n t a t i o n , intelligence, l a n g u a g e a p t i t u d e , a n d visual acuity. B a s e d on a p h o n e t i c a n a l y s i s of chm'acteristie N o r t h e n a - w h i t e a n d Southern-Negl-o s p e e c h , a r a t i n g scale will b e c o n s t r u c t e d on w h i c h the subjects will b e r a t e d as to t h e d e g r e e ~ f t h e i r closeness to t h e - m o d a l Norther~a w h i t e accent. There. are two t h e o r e t i c a l concepts w h i c h w e a s s m n e are r e l e v a n t to the Negro A m e r i c a n ' s a c q u i s i t i o n of N¢~rthern-white accent. T h e first is e m p a t h y , a n d we h y p o t h e s i z e t h a t h i g h e m p a t h i z e r s will h a v e a s s i m i l a t e d t l m N o r t h e r n w h i t e at'cent b e t t e r t h a n l o w e m p a t h i z e r s . H o w e v e r , w e also a s s u m e that a pcrs¢m m a y also a s s i m i l a t e a N o r t h e r n - w h i t e a c c e n t not on the basl,; of an e m p a t l f i c capacity, b u t as a result of i m i t a t i o n b a s e d on an identific~di¢,n w i t h tl~e a g g r e s s o r . '~Ve p r o p o s e to ~ s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n these two m o d e l s 1)3, c o m p a r i n g scores on our e m p a t h y m e a s u r e with those of two a d d i t i o n a l t~Rges of m e a s u r e m e n t . ()n~, is the l~s~: eft t h e T A T stories to explore the m a n n e r in w h i c h md~jects ImlKIle aggrcssiv~ i m p u l s e s a n d t,n iden',ify differences in self-esteem, i n t r a -
384
ALEXANI)F.I1 Z. (;UIOtlA
punitive tendencies a n d types of identification processes. The other measure is Rotter'sal internal-external control sea/e, with an additional scale devised by Gurin a'-" t o m e a s u r e the acceptance of responsibility. It is anticipated that a combination of these psychological measures will p e m l i t differentiation bct~veen the two language adaptations postulated. To conclude, on t h e basis of a theoretical position developed tlu-ough clinical observation, a researell strategy, has been devised tlmt enables rigorous empirical investigation. Admittedly, our re.search is at its very beginning. Results obtained so far are eneouragi~ag in that they seem to b e a r out the original premise r e g a r d i n g the value of operationalizing the concept of e m p a t h y in terms of behavior outside of the Clinical reahn, promise a high dega-ee of construct-validity and, most importantly, point to a broadening area of-research possibilities hitlierto neglected. I t is m y belief that a systematic step-by-step expioration of personality variables in language behavior similarly will yield invaluable information toward a b e t t e r n n d e r s a n d i n g of the concepts of empaathy, inference, a n d intuition, a i l d , ultimately, to a greater comprehension of the totality of the processes by which one person "'encounters" another. REFERENCES 1. 1~apaport, D., et al: Diagnostic Psychological Testing: Chic~lgo, T h e Year Book Pul~lishers. Inc., 194.5. 2. Schafer, R.: G e n e r a t i v e e m p a t h y in the t r e a t m e n t situation. Psychiat. Quart. 23:342-373, 1959. 3. Nlayman, 3I.: T o w a r d a science of clinical ilfference. Contemp. Psychol. 6:1 ° , 1961. 4. Guiora, A . Z.: On clinical diagnosis a n d prediction. Psychol. ReD. 17:779-784, 1965. 5. Ouiora, A. Z., Bolin, R. K., Dutton, C, E., a n d ~'leer, B.: i n t u i t i o n , a prelimina~, statement, l~sychiat. Quart. Suppl. 39:1 I 0 - I 2 2 , 1965. 6. Guiora, A. Z.: Diagnosis a n d t r e a t m e n t in psychiatr),. Guest lecture in tim Dep a r t m e n t of Psych'iat~,, TeI-Aviv UItiv. NIc~d. School, Aug'ust 18, 1965. 7. D y m o n d , It. A.: A prelianinary investigation of the relation of insight and e m p a t h y . J. Consult. Psydlol. 12:'928z3o, 1948. 8. D y m o n d , II. A.: A scale /'or the measurement of empathic ability. J. Consult. Psyehol. 13:127-133, 1949. 9. Cottrell, L., a n d D y m o n d , I/. A.: T h e e m p a t h i c responses. Psychiatry 12:3.55359, 1959. 10. Baker, B., and Block, J.: A c c u r a c y of interpersonal, prediction as a f u n c t i o n of j u d g e a n d object characteristics. J. A bnonl~. See. Psyehol. 5,1:37, 1957.
11. Sten~berg, D.: T h e growd~ of e m p a t h y , an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the relationship bet w e e n sm~sitivity to the self-perception of others as a fianction of f r e q u e n c y of interpersonal c o n t a c t and • certain selected personality variables. Dissert. Abstr. 6 2 : 3 2 9 0 , 1962. 1:2. Speal, S.:. T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of p h e n o m enological e m p a t h y to certain personality a n d interl~ersona| v ariabh's. Dissert. Abstr. 60:2734¢ 1960. 13. Coldstein, L.: E m p a t h y e n d its relationship to personality factors "and personality organization. Dissert. Abstr. 62: 1419, 1961. 14. Hatct',, 1/. S.: An evaluation of a forcedchoice differential a c c u r a c y a p p r o a c h to t h e m e a s u r e m e n t of supervisory empadw. Dissert.. Abstr. 62:3110, 1961. 15. ,Mahoney, S. C.: T h e literature e m p a t h y te~t: d e v e l o p m e n t of a 19rocedm'e for dilIerentiating b e t w e e n "'good e m p a t h ~z~.rs a n d "poor empathizers.'" DisserI. Abstr. 60:2677, 1960. 16. CIine, V., a n d IUehards, J.: A c c u r a c y of interpersonal perception~a general trait? J. A b n o n n . See. Ps-ychol. 60:17, 1960. 17. Bnros, O. ( E d . ) : T h e SLxth Mental Measurement.Yearbook, H i g t d a n d l'ark, N. J., Or~qphon Press, 1965. 18. Stnlpp, H . : . P s y c h o t h e r a p i s t in Action. N e w York, Gruno & ,qtratton, 1960.
T()\VAIII)
,,\
SYS'I'ENIATIC
STUI)Y
OF
E),IPAT~tlY
]9. Wallach, "M., and Strupp, H.: Psychotherapists" clinical Judgments and atti• S tudes toward patients. J..Con.'nlt, Psychol. 10:256-268, 1963. 20. Truax, C.: Effective ingredients in psychotherapy: an approach to unraveling the patient-therapist interaction. J. Counsel. PsychoI. 10:256-268, 1963. 21. Hammond, K. R., Hursch, C. J., and Todd, F. j.: Analyzing the components of clinical inference. Psychol)llev. 71: 438-4"56, 1964. '22. Cronbach, L. J.: Processes affecting scores on understandmo of others'" and :'assmned similarity." Psychol. Bull..~2:1 ~7-193, 1955. 23. Beach, L., and Wertheimer, M.: A free response approach to the stt~dy of person cognition. J. Abnonn. Soc, Psychol. "~'~ 6"'--:364-374, 1961. 24, Fliess, R.: Countertransference and counteridentification. Amer. Psychiat. Ass. J. 1:268-284, 1953. 25. Fi'omnl-Reichman, F.: "Principles of Intensive Psychotherapy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1950. 26. C,uiora, A. Z., Lane, H. L., and Bosworth, L. A.: An exploration of some personality variables in authentic
385
pronunciation of a second language. In: Studies in Language an(] Language Behavior (H. L. Lane and E. M. Za]e, Eds,). 4:510-514, 1967. 27. qkmkova-Yampolskaya, R. V.: Initial stages of speech fi)rmation in children. Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deiat. 351-356, 1966. 28. Rheingold, H. L., (,ewirtz, J. L., and Ross, IJ. ~V.: Social conditioning of vocalizations in the irffant. J~. Comp. Physiol. Psyclml. 52:68-73, 1959." 29. Mowrer, O, H.: Learning Theory" and the Symbolic Process, New York, John \Viley & Sons, 1960. 30. Haggard, L. A., and Isaac's, R. S.: Micromomentary facial expressions as indicators of ego mechanisms in psychotherapy. In: Methods of Research in Psychotherapy (L. A. Gottscha]k and A. H. Auerbach, Eds.). New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966. :31. Rotter, J. B.: Generalized expectancies fi~r internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychol. Monogr. 80: 1-28, 1966. 3 "9,. Gurin, Patricia, and Katz, D.: Motivation and Aspiration in the Negro College. Ann Arbor, Mich., Sun, ey Research Center, Instihae for Social Research, 1966,