From emotion resonance to empathic understanding: A social developmental neuroscience account
Abstract
The psychological construct of empathy refers to an intersubjective induction process by which positive and negative emotions are shared, without losing sight of whose feelings belong to whom. Empathy can lead to personal distress or to empathic concern (sympathy). The goal of this paper is to address the underlying cognitive processes and their neural underpinnings that constitute empathy within a developmental neuroscience perspective. In addition, we focus on how these processes go awry in developmental disorders marked by impairments in social cognition, such as autism spectrum disorder, and conduct disorder. We argue that empathy involves both bottom-up and top-down information processing, underpinned by specific and interacting neural systems. We discuss data from developmental psychology as well as cognitive neuroscience in support of such a model, and highlight the impact of neural dysfunctions on social cognitive developmental behavior. Altogether, bridging developmental science and cognitive neuroscience helps approach a more complete understanding of social cognition. Synthesizing these two domains also contributes to a better characterization of developmental psychopathologies that impacts the development of effective treatment strategies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 shared anchor of different definitions of empathy is the matching relation between the emotions of two people.
“Decety and Meyer [35] also identified that the shared anchor of different definitions of empathy is the matching relation between the emotions of two people.”
From A Taxonomy of Social Errors in Human-Robot Interaction (2021) · cites this paper as [35]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 218 · Cited by 597
- Authors
- Decety, J., & Meyer, M.
- Affiliations
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- ORCID
- Meyer, Meghan
- Venue
- Development and Psychopathology
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1053-1080
- ISSN
- 0954-5794 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-2198
- OpenAlex
- W2163150496
- Cited by
- 597
- References
- 218
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 31.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Development and Psychopathology (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 › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
- Keywords
- empathy, empathic concern, social cognition, autism spectrum disorder, conduct disorder, top-down and bottom-up processing, neural dysfunction, developmental psychopathology, intersubjectivity, treatment options
- MeSH terms
- Awareness, Mental Disorders, Child, Child Development, Developmental Disabilities, Psychology, Child, Child, Preschool, Cognition, Emotions, Empathy, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Motivation, Neurosciences, Social Behavior, Social Perception
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