Cited by 421Action Observation and SynchronizationChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Dissecting the social brain: introducing the EmpaToM to reveal distinct neural networks and brain-behavior relations for empathy and theory of mind

Kanske, Philipp, Böckler, Anne, Trautwein, Fynn-Mathis, Singer, Tania·2015·NeuroImage

Abstract

Successful social interactions require both affect sharing (empathy) and understanding others' mental states (Theory of Mind, ToM). As these two functions have mostly been investigated in isolation, the specificity of the underlying neural networks and the relation of these networks to the respective behavioral indices could not be tested. Here, we present a novel fMRI paradigm (EmpaToM) that independently manipulates both empathy and ToM. Experiments 1a/b (N=90) validated the task with established empathy and ToM paradigms on a behavioral and neural level. Experiment 2 (N=178) employed the EmpaToM and revealed clearly separable neural networks including anterior insula for empathy and ventral temporoparietal junction for ToM. These distinct networks could be replicated in task-free resting state functional connectivity. Importantly, brain activity in these two networks specifically predicted the respective behavioral indices, that is, inter-individual differences in ToM related brain activity predicted inter-individual differences in ToM performance, but not empathic responding, and vice versa. Taken together, the validated EmpaToM allows separation of affective and cognitive routes to understanding others. It may thus benefit future clinical, developmental, and intervention studies on identifying selective impairments and improvement in specific components of social cognition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.082

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • The activation of the supramarginal gyrus and temporoparietal junction in complex empathy and Theory of Mind paradigms corresponds with the crucial role of self-other distinction for both capacities.

    “The activation of SMG and TPJ in complex empathy and ToM paradigms, respectively [25 ], corresponds with the crucial role of self-other distinction for both capacities.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kanske, P., Böckler, A., Trautwein, F.-M., & Singer, T.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Corresponding author
Singer, Tania
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
122
Pages
6-19
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1048662888
Cited by
421
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 2
FWCI
47.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Research Council under the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (205557)
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 › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
empathy, theory of mind, social cognition, anterior insula, resting-state functional connectivity, brain-behavior relationship, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Empathy, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Parietal Lobe, Temporal Lobe, 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