Compassion vs. empathy: designing for resilience
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Compassion is a wellbeing-supportive outcome mediated by the three basic needs (largely relatedness, but also autonomy and competence), which differentiates compassion from empathic distress.
“Likewise, the wellbeing determinant, “compassion” which we've elaborated on in previous work (Peters and Calvo, 2014), is also a wellbeing-supportive outcome which is itself mediated by the three basic needs (largely relatedness, but also autonomy and competence which differentiate compassion from empathic distress (Peters and Calvo, 2014).”
From Designing for Motivation, Engagement and Wellbeing in Digital Experience (2018) · cites this paper as Peters and Calvo, 2014
The paper’s “COMPASSION AS RESILIENCE” section says compassion can increase well-being through social connectedness and stress reduction, and contrasts its response with empathic distress. “UNDERSTANDING COMPASSION” also distinguishes compassion by its motivation to care and act. Neither section says compassion’s well-being benefit is mediated by the three basic needs, or that relatedness, autonomy, and competence are what differentiate it from empathic distress. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Compassion: an evolutionary analysis and empirical review
Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0018807 · Cited by 2,200 · see citing works
Loving-Kindness and Compassion Meditation: Potential for Psychological Interventions
Hofmann, S. G., Grossman, P., & Hinton, D. E. (2011) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.003 · Cited by 960 · see citing works
Lutz, A., Brefczynski-Lewis, J., Johnstone, T., & Davidson, R. J. (2008) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001897 · Cited by 942 · see citing works
Functional Neural Plasticity and Associated Changes in Positive Affect After Compassion Training
Klimecki, O. M., Leiberg, S., Lamm, C., & Singer, T. (2013) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs142 · Cited by 634 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Singer, T. and Lamm, C. The social neuro- science of empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1156, 1 (2009), 81-96.
- Belman, J. and Flanagan, M. Designing games to foster empathy. International Journal of Cognitive Technology 15, 1 (2010), 11.
- Hoffman, M.L. Is altruism part of human nature? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40 (1981), 121-137.
- Rosenberg, R.S., Baughman, S.L., and Bailenson, J.N. Virtual superheroes: Using superpowers in virtual reality to encourage prosocial behavior. PloS one 8, 1 (2013), e55003.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Designing for Motivation, Engagement and Wellbeing in Digital Experience
Peters, D., Calvo, R. A., & Ryan, R. M. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00797 · Cited by 797 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Peters, D., & Calvo, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Sydney
- Venue
- Interactions
- Published
- 2014-09
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 48-53
- ISSN
- 1072-5520
- 1558-3449
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 4
- Language
- en
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
