Cited by 441Action Observation and SynchronizationPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Treatment

The Compassionate Brain: Humans Detect Intensity of Pain from Another's Face

Saarela, M. V., Hlushchuk, Y., Williams, A. C. d. C., Schurmann, M., Kalso, E., Hari, R.·2006·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

Understanding another person's experience draws on "mirroring systems," brain circuitries shared by the subject's own actions/feelings and by similar states observed in others. Lately, also the experience of pain has been shown to activate partly the same brain areas in the subjects' own and in the observer's brain. Recent studies show remarkable overlap between brain areas activated when a subject undergoes painful sensory stimulation and when he/she observes others suffering from pain. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we show that not only the presence of pain but also the intensity of the observed pain is encoded in the observer's brain-as occurs during the observer's own pain experience. When subjects observed pain from the faces of chronic pain patients, activations in bilateral anterior insula (AI), left anterior cingulate cortex, and left inferior parietal lobe in the observer's brain correlated with their estimates of the intensity of observed pain. Furthermore, the strengths of activation in the left AI and left inferior frontal gyrus during observation of intensified pain correlated with subjects' self-rated empathy. These findings imply that the intersubjective representation of pain in the human brain is more detailed than has been previously thought.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cercor/bhj141

Cites

55 of 55 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 TPJ is engaged when assessing false beliefs, detecting deception, and more generally when shifting attention away from invalid cues.

    “The TPJ is engaged when assessing false beliefs (14), detecting deception (32), and more generally when shifting attention away from invalid cues (34).”

    From The neural bases of empathic accuracy (2009) · cites this paper as [32]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saarela, M. V., Hlushchuk, Y., Williams, A. C. D. C., Schurmann, M., Kalso, E., & Hari, R.
Affiliations
  • Aalto University (FI)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Helsinki University Hospital (FI)
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2006-02-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
230-237
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2095962545
Cited by
441
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 31
FWCI
39.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
pain intensity estimation, pain observation, mirror system, intersubjectivity, empathy, anterior insula, anterior cingulate cortex, inferior parietal lobule, inferior frontal gyrus, chronic pain patients, facial pain
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Chronic Disease, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Empathy, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Pain, Photic Stimulation

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