Cited by 217Action Observation and SynchronizationChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFace Recognition and Perception

Functional relations of empathy and mentalizing: An fMRI study on the neural basis of cognitive empathy

Schnell, Knut, Bluschke, Sarah, Konradt, Brigitte, Walter, Henrik·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

This fMRI study was set up to explore how cognitive empathy, i.e. the cognitive inference on another person's affective state, can be characterized as a distinct brain function relating to pre-existing neurofunctional concepts about mentalizing and empathy. In a 3 Tesla MRI scanner 28 healthy participants were presented with four different instructions randomly combined with 32 false-belief cartoon stories of 3 subsequent pictures free of direct cues for affective states, like e.g. facial expressions. Participants were instructed to judge affective or visuospatial changes from their own (1st person perspective) or the protagonists' (3rd person perspective, 3rdpp) perspective. 3rdpp-judgements about affective states differed from visuospatial 3rdpp judgements by a significantly higher activation of the anterior mentalizing network (dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, anterior superior temporal sulcus, temporal poles) and the limbic system (left amygdala and hippocampus). Analysis of main effects revealed that the anterior part of the mentalizing network was activated significantly stronger by affective compared to visuospatial content. In contrast, the temporoparietal junction was rather activated by 3rdpp visuospatial judgements. After all, our results demonstrate a functional dissociation between cognitive empathy and cognitive visuospatial perspective taking. The simultaneous activation of the cortical mentalizing network and the amygdala indicates that cognitive empathy actually involves reference to own affective states in the observer. Notably, the cognitive reference to own affective states activated the mentalizing network as well. Moreover our results support pre-existing ideas about a functional anterior-posterior subdivision of the mentalizing network, depending on affective content and 3rd person perspective of cognition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.024

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schnell, K., Bluschke, S., Konradt, B., & Walter, H.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
  • University Hospital Bonn (DE)
  • University of Bonn (DE)
Corresponding author
Schnell, Knut
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
1743-1754
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111210591
Cited by
217
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 12
FWCI
13.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
cognitive empathy, mentalization, false belief, perspective taking, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, temporal pole, amygdala, hippocampus, temporoparietal junction, self-referential processing
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Empathy, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Theory of Mind

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review