CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 442Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Short-term compassion training increases prosocial behavior in a newly developed prosocial game

Open access
Leiberg, Susanne, Klimecki, Olga, Singer, Tania·2011·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0017798PMC PMC3052380
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Compassion has been suggested to be a strong motivator for prosocial behavior. While research has demonstrated that compassion training has positive effects on mood and health, we do not know whether it also leads to increases in prosocial behavior. We addressed this question in two experiments. In Experiment 1, we introduce a new prosocial game, the Zurich Prosocial Game (ZPG), which allows for repeated, ecologically valid assessment of prosocial behavior and is sensitive to the influence of reciprocity, helping cost, and distress cues on helping behavior. Experiment 2 shows that helping behavior in the ZPG increased in participants who had received short-term compassion training, but not in participants who had received short-term memory training. Interindividual differences in practice duration were specifically related to changes in the amount of helping under no-reciprocity conditions. Our results provide first evidence for the positive impact of short-term compassion training on prosocial behavior towards strangers in a training-unrelated task.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Short-term compassion training increased prosocial helping toward strangers in a newly developed Zurich Prosocial Game (ZPG), whereas memory training did not. The ZPG also showed sensitivity to reciprocity, helping cost, and distress cues, and compassion training effects were observed two to five days after training.

Key findings

  • In Experiment 1 (N = 68), helping in the ZPG was higher in reciprocity trials, low-cost trials, and distress-cue trials: main effects were reciprocity, F(67) = 73.22, p < .001, partial η² = .52; cost, F(67) = 73.78, p < .001, partial η² = .52; distress, F(67) = 7.02, p = .01, partial η² = .10.
  • ZPG helping correlated with dictator-game giving, ρ(65) = .35, p = .004, but not with memory-task performance, ρ(64) = .06, p > .05, supporting convergent and divergent validity.
  • In Experiment 2, compassion training significantly increased helping from pre- to post-training, t(26) = 1.85, p = .04, one-sided, while memory training did not, t(31) = −1.20, p = .24; the time × training interaction was F(1,57) = 4.09, p = .05, partial η² = .07.
  • Reported compassion practice hours correlated with increased helping in no-reciprocity trials, ρ(17) = .39, p = .05, one-sided, but not with total helping, ρ(17) = .27, p = .13. Dictator-game giving did not change after training, F(1,56) = .02, p = .89.

Methods

  • Two experiments with healthy female volunteers: Experiment 1 validated the ZPG in 68 participants; Experiment 2 tested compassion versus memory training in 69 participants, with 27 compassion and 32 memory participants in the reported samples.
  • The ZPG used a 2 × 2 × 2 within-subjects design: reciprocity (no reciprocity, reciprocity), cost (low, high), and distress (no distress cues, distress cues); participants navigated a maze, could help an ostensible co-player by donating keys, and could collect stars to control for attention.
  • Experiment 2 compared a one-day, six-hour compassion meditation workshop with a one-day method-of-loci memory workshop; pre-test occurred one to two weeks before training and post-test two to five days after training. Analyses used repeated-measures ANOVAs, t-tests, and correlations.

Limitations

  • The paper states that future research with longer training and bigger sample sizes is needed to determine how long-lasting the effects are and who benefits; it also notes that the study was not designed to test the distinction between compassion-based and norm-based prosocial behavior.
  • The paper states that self-reported practice data were available only from a subset of participants (n = 19 compassion, n = 22 memory), and that mechanisms such as relaxation or perceived self-other overlap were not isolated.
  • Evident from the text: both experiments included only healthy female volunteers aged 18–35 from the University of Zurich and surrounding community, limiting generalizability; the compassion-training effect was tested one-sided based on directional hypotheses.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0017798

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 25 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    In Experiment 2 pre-training, the main effects of reciprocity and cost were qualified by a significant interaction between the two factors.

    “As in Experiment 1, these main effects were qualified by a significant interaction between the two factors”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The ZPG is sensitive to the influence of reciprocity, helping cost, and distress cues on helping behavior.

    “which allows for repeated, ecologically valid assessment of prosocial behavior and is sensitive to the influence of reciprocity, helping cost, and distress cues on helping behavior.”
    • Also stated in: § Experiment 1 · hedged
      “Thus, the ZPG indeed seems to be sensitive to the three operationalizations of the influencing factors”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Short-term memory training does not reliably change helping behavior in the ZPG from pre- to post-training.

    “While there was no reliable change in helping from pre- to post-training for the memory training group, t(31) = −1.20, p = .24”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In Experiment 1, participants helped significantly more in reciprocity trials than in no-reciprocity trials.

    “participants helped significantly more in reciprocity trials, in trials with a low cost of helping, and in trials in which the co-player's virtual character expressed distress”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In Experiment 1, increasing the cost of helping resulted in a larger decrease in prosocial behavior in no-reciprocity trials compared with reciprocity trials.

    “Increasing the cost of helping resulted in a larger decrease in prosocial behavior in the no-reciprocity compared to the reciprocity trials”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 27
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 34
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a significant main effect of time on compassionate feelings (F(1,54) = 5.84, p = .02, partial η2 = .10), qualified by a marginally significant time x training interaction (F(1,54) = 3.61, p = .06, partial η2 = .06).

    “A significant main effect of time, F(1,54) = 5.84, p = .02, partial η2 = .10, was revealed for compassionate feelings that was qualified by a marginally significant interaction between time and training, F(1,54) = 3.61, p = .06, partial η2 = .06.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In Experiment 2 pre-training, participants helped significantly more in reciprocity trials and in low-cost trials.

    “The analysis again revealed main effects of reciprocity, and cost (see Table 1). Participants helped significantly more in reciprocity trials and in trials with a low cost of helping.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In Experiment 2, participants reported being very engaged in the game (mean 4.04, SD 1.07), with no difference between compassion and memory groups.

    “Participants in experiment 2 also reported to be very engaged in the game (range: 1–5; mean: 4.04, SD = 1.07). There was no differences between participants in the compassion and memory training group in the engagement with the game, t(52) = 1.78, p>.05”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    At pre-training, helping in low-cost and high-cost trials did not differ between the compassion and memory groups.

    “at pre-training, helping in the low-cost, t(57) = 1.21, p = .23, and high-cost trials, t(57) = .55, p = .58, did not differ between the compassion and the memory group”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Negative mood decreased in the compassion-training group (t(23) = −1.94, p = .03, one-sided) and marginally significantly increased in the memory-training group (t(23) = 2.02, p = .05).

    “While negative mood decreased in the compassion-training group, t(23) = −1.94, p = .03, one-sided, it marginally significantly increased in the memory-training group, t(23) = 2.02, p = .05.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    In Experiment 1, participants reported being very engaged in the ZPG (mean 4.15, SD 0.74).

    “on average participants indicated that they were very engaged in the game (range: 2–5; mean: 4.15, SD: 0.74)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Participants rated their involvement in the game on average 4 on a 1-to-5 scale and reported finding the game very enjoyable.

    “Furthermore, the game is very engaging (on average participants rate their involvement in the game with 4 on a 1-to-5-scale and report later that they find the game very enjoyable)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Helping in no-reciprocity trials, but not in reciprocity trials, was related to interindividual differences in reported training hours in the compassion group.

    “helping in no-reciprocity trials, but not helping in reciprocity trials, was related to interindividual differences in reported training hours in the compassion group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' self-reported time spent practicing outside of training accurately reflects their actual practice duration.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Giving in the dictator game did not change from pre- to post-training in either group, and modal giving at pre-training was 50%.

    “This is further supported by our finding that giving in the dictator game did not change from pre- to post-training in either group and that the modal giving at pre-training was 50%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The ZPG minimizes the influence of strategic considerations and task-affordances and maximizes the influence of emotion-driven, fast decisions.

    “the ZPG is more ecologically valid than, for example, monetary exchange games, as it minimizes the influence of strategic considerations, minimizes effects of task-affordances due to explicit instructions and maximizes the influence of emotion-driven, fast decisions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The compassion meditation technique (Metta) aims to foster an attitude of loving kindness, emotional positivity, benevolence, and friendliness towards oneself and others.

    “This compassion meditation technique (called “Metta” in Pali) aims to foster an attitude of loving kindness, emotional positivity, benevolence, and friendliness towards oneself and others [20], [58].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [20] JW Carson, 2005, Loving-kindness meditation for chronic low back pain: Results from a pilot trial., J Holist Nurs source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [58] S Salzberg, 1995, Loving-kindness: The revolutionary art of happiness.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationown data

    Compassion training had longer-lasting effects on prosocial behavior than momentary empathic concern induction, as the post-test was completed two to five days after training.

    “Here we show for the first time that compassion training had longer-lasting effects on prosocial behavior as the post-test was completed two to five days after training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Compassion training aims at permanently changing one's motivation and attitude towards others in general, in contrast to a momentary induction of empathic concern.

    “In contrast to a momentary induction of empathic concern through instruction to feel for a specific person in distress in a specific situation, compassion training aims at permanently changing one's motivation and attitude towards others in general.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The more time participants spent training, the stronger the reduction in interleukin-6 release, suggesting a dose-dependent effect of compassion training.

    “The more time participants had actually spent training, the stronger the reduction in interleukin-6 release, suggesting a dose-dependent effect of compassion training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] TWW Pace, 2009, Effect of compassion meditation on neuroendocrine, innate immune and behavioral responses to psychosocial stress., Psychoneuroendocrinology source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The Zurich Prosocial Game (ZPG) allows for repeated assessment of prosocial behavior and for parsing the influence of reciprocity, cost, and distress on prosocial behavior.

    “A novel game, the Zurich Prosocial Game (ZPG), was developed that allows for repeated assessment of prosocial behavior and for parsing the influence of reciprocity, cost, and distress on prosocial behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The dictator game was used to assess the convergent validity of the ZPG.

    “To assess the convergent validity of the ZPG, participants played the dictator game [31].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] E Hoffman, 1994, Preferences, property rights, and anonymity in bargaining games., Games Econ Behav source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Experiment 2, 35 participants entered the compassion-training group and 34 entered the memory-training group; 28 compassion and 32 memory participants completed the study, and one compassion participant was excluded from analysis due to missing ZPG data.

    “35 participants entered the compassion-training group and 34 participants entered the memory-training group. 28 participants from the compassion group and 32 participants from the memory group completed the study. One participant of the compassion group was eliminated from the analysis as data on the ZPG was missing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The present results support the notion that training of compassionate motivation leads to increases in prosocial behavior, similar to situation-specific induction of empathic concern.

    “The present results support the notion that similar to situation-specific induction of empathic concern for a specific person in need [8], [49], the training of compassionate motivation leads to increases in prosocial behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [8] CD Batson, 1991, The altruism question: Towards a social-psychological answer.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [49] N Eisenberg, 1987, The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors., Psychol Bull source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Experiment 2, participants were not informed about the specific content of the study before the training.

    “On the phone, participants were given information about the timing but, importantly, in case of Experiment 2, not about the specific content of the study and underwent a structured psychological interview”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The compassion meditation training should ultimately lead to an attitude of emotional positivity, benevolence, and friendliness towards oneself and others.

    “Ultimately, this should lead to an attitude of emotional positivity, benevolence, and friendliness towards oneself and others [58].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [58] S Salzberg, 1995, Loving-kindness: The revolutionary art of happiness.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants in Experiment 2 were not allowed to have prior experience with mental compassion training or the method of loci.

    “Importantly, possible participants of Experiment 2 were additionally not allowed to have prior experience with mental compassion training or the method of loci.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The method of loci is a technique used to memorize items in an ordered sequence.

    “The memory control group underwent a one-day training workshop in the method of loci, a technique used to memorize items in an ordered sequence [59], [60].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] GH Bower, 1970, Analysis of a mnemonic device., Am Sci

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [60] P Verhaeghen, 1996, On the mechanisms of plasticity in young and older adults after instruction in the method of loci: Evidence for an amplification model., Psychol Aging source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Engagement with the game was assessed on a five-point scale; high engagement would indicate immersion and diminish the probability that demand effects and strategic decision-making influenced prosocial behavior in the ZPG.

    “Participants were asked after playing the game to indicate on a five-point scale how engaged they were when playing the game. A high engagement of the participants would indicate that they were emerged in the game and diminish the probability that demand effects and strategic decision-making influenced prosocial behavior in the ZPG.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the ZPG, the two players do not share paths or compete for the same treasure, so the game can be played while completely ignoring the other player.

    “Importantly, the two players do not share the same paths in the maze and do not compete for the same treasure. Thus, in principle, the game can be played while completely ignoring the other player.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Risk preferences were assessed to control for the possibility that interindividual differences in high-cost trials were due to differences in risk perception.

    “As interindividual differences in the behavior in the high cost trials could be brought on by differences in risk preferences, i.e., participants differ in their perception of the risk of not reaching the treasure in the high cost trials, we assessed risk preferences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Six to seven weeks of meditation-based compassion training result in increases in positive mood and life satisfaction.

    “Six to seven weeks of meditation-based compassion training result in increases in positive mood and life satisfaction [21]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21] BL Fredrickson, 2008, Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources., J Pers Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The game is fast and engaging, making strategic considerations difficult.

    “Furthermore, the game is very engaging (on average participants rate their involvement in the game with 4 on a 1-to-5-scale and report later that they find the game very enjoyable) and fast, thus making strategic considerations difficult.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    As in compassion-focused therapy, compassion is trained as a skill.

    “Thus, as in compassion-focused therapy [7], compassion here is trained as a skill.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7] P Gilbert, 2010, Compassion-focused therapy. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Giving in the dictator game is likely driven by fairness norms and not by kindness.

    “Giving in the dictator game is likely driven by fairness norms and not by kindness [35].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [35] GE Bolton, 1998, Dictator game giving: Rules of fairness versus acts of kindness., Int J Game Theory source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Advertisements for Experiment 2 asked for people interested in mental training but never mentioned the word compassion.

    “The advertisements for Experiment 2 asked for people interested in mental training but never mentioned the word compassion.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the ZPG, participants are never told that the purpose of the game is to help the co-player; the instructed aim is to reach the treasure quickly to optimize monetary winnings, reducing demand effects.

    “Importantly, to reduce demand effects, participants are never told that the purpose of the game is to help the co-player. Instead, the instructed aim of this computer game is to reach a goal, the treasure, in a short amount of time to optimize monetary winnings.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    People help more often if the costs of helping are low.

    “if the costs of helping are low [41]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [41] JF Dovidio, 1991, The arousal-cost-reward model and the process of intervention: A review of the evidence.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A differentiation between norm-based and compassion-based prosocial behavior has been suggested.

    “only recently a differentiation between norm-based and compassion-based prosocial behavior has been suggested [2].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] T Singer, 2009, Differential roles of fairness- and compassion-based motivations for cooperation, defection, and punishment., Ann NY Acad Sci source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The correlation between helping in the ZPG and giving in the dictator game was modest, suggesting the two measures tap into different aspects of prosocial behavior.

    “Moreover, the correlation between helping in the ZPG and giving in the dictator was modest suggesting that the two measures tap into different aspects of prosocial behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Trial types appeared in random order, with the restriction that the first reciprocity trial could appear no earlier than the third trial, to reduce the likelihood of an anchoring effect.

    “Trial types appeared in random order with the restriction that the first reciprocity trial could appear at the earliest as the third trial. This restriction was introduced to reduce the likelihood of an anchoring effect (helping agreed upon behavior) being introduced by experiencing a helpful co-player right away.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Short-term compassion training may have benefits not only for the practitioner's health and subjective well-being but also for other people and society by increasing the propensity to act prosocially even towards strangers.

    “The present study adds to these findings by showing that even a short-term compassion training may not only have benefits for the practitioner's health and subjective well-being but also for other people and society in general as it increases the propensity to act prosocially even towards people one has never met.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants were told they would play interactive computer games via the internet with other participants in different research institutes across Europe, but in reality there were no co-players; the ostensible co-players' behavior was pre-programmed.

    “They were told that they would play interactive computer games via the internet with other participants in different research institutes across Europe in order to investigate cross-cultural differences in interpersonal behaviors. In reality, there were no co-players; the ostensible co-players' behavior was pre-programmed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To offset individual differences in speed and proficiency, the individual time limit for all trials was set at the average time the individual required to reach the treasure in four practice trials plus 5 s.

    “To offset individual differences in speed and proficiency with computer games, the individual time limit for all trials of a given game was set at the average time the individual required to reach the treasure in the four practice trials plus 5 s.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    People help more often if they have been helped before.

    “It has been shown that people help more often if they have been helped before [39], [40]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [39] A Falk, 2006, A theory of reciprocity., Games Econ Behav source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [40] H Wilke, 1970, The obligation to help: The effects of amount 41. of prior help on subsequent helping behavior., J Exp Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Six to seven weeks of meditation-based compassion training result in a reduction of interleukin-6 release in response to a psychosocial stressor.

    “as well as a reduction of interleukin-6 release in response to a psychosocial stressor [23].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] TWW Pace, 2009, Effect of compassion meditation on neuroendocrine, innate immune and behavioral responses to psychosocial stress., Psychoneuroendocrinology source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Momentarily inducing feelings of empathic concern for a person in need increases prosocial behavior towards that person.

    “it has been demonstrated [10] that momentarily inducing feelings of empathic concern for a person in need by having participants focus on the person's feelings increases their prosocial behavior towards that person.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] CD Batson, 2007, An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need., J Pers Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    A memory task was used to assess the divergent validity of the ZPG.

    “To assess the divergent validity of the ZPG, we used a memory task that was later used as an outcome measure for the memory training group in the intervention experiment.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    People help more often if they are confronted with signs of distress.

    “if they are confronted with signs of distress [42], [43].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [42] CD Batson, 1981, Empathy: A source of altruistic motivation for helping?

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [43] G Carlo, 1991, The altruistic personality: When is it apparent?, J Pers Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A very brief (7-min) compassion meditation exercise results in a more positive attitude towards the target of the exercise.

    “Hutcherson et al. [25] report that a very brief (7-min) compassion meditation exercise results in a more positive attitude towards the target of the exercise.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] CA Hutcherson, 2008, Loving-kindness meditation increases social connectedness., Emotion source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Framing the game as a treasure hunt with monetary gains reduces demand effects induced by the content of the training compared to other prosocial tasks.

    “Importantly, as the game is framed as a treasure hunt with monetary gains, demand effects induced by the content of the training should be less strong than in other prosocial tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The majority of dropout in the compassion group (5/7) occurred before the training.

    “The majority of the dropout in the compassion group (5/7) occurred before the training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants answered five questions testing their comprehension of the game, and the experimenter checked the answers to ensure they fully understood the rules.

    “Participants then answered five questions testing their comprehension of the game. The experimenter then checked the answers to ensure that participants fully understood the rules of the game.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The compassion group and the memory group did not differ in age, years of education, prosocialness, empathic concern, alexithymic symptoms, depressive symptoms, or distribution of education type.

    “The compassion group and the memory group did not differ in age, t(57) = 1.98, p>.05, years of education, t(57) = .64, p>.05, prosocialness, t(54) = 1.91, p>.05, empathic concern, t(54) = .1, p>.05, alexithymic symptoms, t(57) = .89, p>.05, or depressive symptoms, t(57) = .87, p>.05. There was also no difference in the distribution of type of education between the samples (χ2 = 3.06, p>.05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Women have better performance in emotional tasks and higher self-reported empathy than men.

    “Only female participants were included in Experiments 1 and 2 because of better performance in emotional tasks [53] and higher self-reported empathy in women [54].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [53] AM Kring, 1998, Sex differences in emotion: Expression, experience, and physiology., J Pers Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [54] S Baron-Cohen, 2004, The empathy quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences., J Autism Dev Disord source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The ZPG was assessed in the context of several other non-helping tasks, which further helped to reduce possible demand effects of the compassion training.

    “Thus, the newly developed Zurich Prosocial Game was assessed in the context of several other non-helping tasks, which further helped to reduce possible demand effects of the compassion training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The method of loci was chosen as the control because it contains most elements also needed in the compassion training workshops (active inner mental processing, mental images, associations), differing only in focusing on cognitive rather than affective skills.

    “This particular mnemonic technique was chosen for the control group as it contains most elements also needed in the compassion training workshops: People need to actively engage in inner mental processing and to create active mental images and specific associations between items. The difference is that the memory group focuses purely on improving cognitive rather than affective skills.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
51 of 51

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Compassion training has effects on compassion-based prosocial behavior (and not on norm-based prosocial behavior).

    “Based on the suggested distinction between compassion-based and norm-based prosocial behavior, and on the assumption that the compassion training has effects on the former this correlation could possibly only arise for non-reciprocity trials.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants' self-reported time spent practicing outside of training accurately reflects their actual practice duration.

    “we calculated the correlation between participants' self-reported time spent praticing outside of the training and the change in helping from pre- to post-training (self-report data could only be obtained from a subset of the samples: n compassion = 19, n memory = 22).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants believed the cover story that they were playing with real co-players in other research institutes.

    “They were told that they would play interactive computer games via the internet with other participants in different research institutes across Europe in order to investigate cross-cultural differences in interpersonal behaviors. In reality, there were no co-players; the ostensible co-players' behavior was pre-programmed.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The compassion and memory training workshops were equivalent in all aspects other than the trained skill, including teacher characteristics and participant expectations.

    “This particular mnemonic technique was chosen for the control group as it contains most elements also needed in the compassion training workshops: People need to actively engage in inner mental processing and to create active mental images and specific associations between items. The difference is that the memory group focuses purely on improving cognitive rather than affective skills.”
4 of 4

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?

  • Loving-kindness meditation is a useful tool during the COVID-19 pandemic because it promotes social interactions and builds resilience by cultivating positive emotions and social connection, increasing motivation to access and provide social support, and engendering prosocial behaviors.

    “LKM is a useful tool during the COVID-19 pandemic because it promotes social interactions and builds resilience by cultivating positive emotions and social connection, increasing motivation to access and provide social support, and engendering prosocial behaviors (Leiberg, Klimecki & Singer, 2011).”

    From Stress and coping in the time of COVID-19: Pathways to resilience and recovery (2020) · cites this paper as Leiberg, Klimecki & Singer, 2011

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Short-term contemplative training in compassion increases helping, even when it is costly.

    “Short-term contemplative training in compassion increases helping, even when it is costly [51].”

    From On the interaction of social affect and cognition: empathy, compassion and theory of mind (2018) · cites this paper as [51]

  • Short-term training of loving-kindness and compassion is associated with increases in prosocial behavior.

    “Behavioral research has shown that short-term training of loving-kindness and compassion is associated with increases in daily positive affect (Kok et al., 2013), prosocial behavior (Leiberg et al., 2011;Weng et al., 2013), resilience (Fredrickson et al., 2008) and empathy (Mascaro et al., 2013).”

    From Compassion-based emotion regulation up-regulates experienced positive affect and associated neural networks (2015) · cites this paper as Leiberg et al., 2011

  • Training compassion can foster prosocial behavior.

    “prosocial behavior (Leiberg et al., 2011)”

    From Differential pattern of functional brain plasticity after compassion and empathy training (2014) · cites this paper as Leiberg et al., 2011

  • The frequency of helping behavior can be increased with a similar short-term compassion training.

    “Accordingly, it has recently been shown that the frequency of helping behavior can indeed be increased with a similar short-term compassion training (Leiberg et al., 2011).”

    From Differential pattern of functional brain plasticity after compassion and empathy training (2014) · cites this paper as Leiberg et al., 2011

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(1, 67) = 17.73reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1,67) = 17.73, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 68) = 1.89reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .174

    “F(1,68) = 1.89, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(52) = 1.78reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .081

    “t(52) = 1.78, p > .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 54) = 23.47reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1,54) = 23.47, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 54) = 5.84reported p = .02 · recomputed p = .019

    “F(1,54) = 5.84, p = .02”

  • ConsistentF(1, 54) = 3.61reported p = .06 · recomputed p = .063

    “F(1,54) = 3.61, p = .06”

  • Consistentt(23) = 2.66reported p = .01 · recomputed p = .014

    “t(23) = 2.66, p = .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 68) = 6.11reported p = .016 · recomputed p = .016

    “F(1,68) = 6.11, p = .016”

  • Consistentt(23) = -1.94reported p = .03 · recomputed p = .065

    “t(23) = −1.94, p = .03”

    The paper states a one-tailed test

  • Consistentt(23) = 2.02reported p = .05 · recomputed p = .055

    “t(23) = 2.02, p = .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 57) = 4.09reported p = .05 · recomputed p = .048

    “F(1,57) = 4.09, p = .05”

  • Consistentt(31) = -1.2reported p = .24 · recomputed p = .239

    “t(31) = −1.20, p = .24”

  • Consistentt(26) = 1.85reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .076

    “t(26) = 1.85, p = .04”

    The paper states a one-tailed test

  • ConsistentF(1, 57) = 6.76reported p = .01 · recomputed p = .012

    “F(1,57) = 6.76, p = .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 57) = 4.55reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .037

    “F(1,57) = 4.55, p = .04”

  • Consistentt(57) = 1.21reported p = .23 · recomputed p = .231

    “t(57) = 1.21, p = .23”

  • Consistentt(57) = 0.55reported p = .58 · recomputed p = .584

    “t(57) = .55, p = .58”

  • Consistentt(57) = 3.07reported p = .003 · recomputed p = .003

    “t(57) = 3.07, p = .003”

  • Consistentt(57) = 2.27reported p = .03 · recomputed p = .027

    “t(57) = 2.27, p = .03”

  • ConsistentF(1, 56) = 0.02reported p = .89 · recomputed p = .888

    “F(1,56) = .02, p = .89”

  • ConsistentF(1, 56) = 1.63reported p = .21 · recomputed p = .207

    “F(1,56) = 1.63, p = .21”

  • Consistentt(32) = 0.57reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .573

    “t(32) = .57, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = 1.75reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .090

    “t(32) = 1.75, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = -0.81reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .424

    “t(32) = −.81, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = 1.7reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .099

    “t(32) = 1.70, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = -0.75reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .459

    “t(32) = −.75, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = -0.79reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .435

    “t(32) = −.79, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = -0.99reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .330

    “t(32) = −.99, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = 1.42reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .165

    “t(32) = 1.42, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(32) = -0.06reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .953

    “t(32) = −.06, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(57) = 1.98reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .053

    “t(57) = 1.98, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(57) = 0.64reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .525

    “t(57) = .64, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(54) = 1.91reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .061

    “t(54) = 1.91, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(54) = 0.1reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .921

    “t(54) = .1, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(57) = 0.89reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .377

    “t(57) = .89, p > .05”

  • Consistentt(57) = 0.87reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .388

    “t(57) = .87, p > .05”

36 of 36

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Incorrect percentage for memory-group education

    Minor

    The table lists one apprenticeship participant in a memory-training sample of 32. One out of 32 is 3.125%, not 6.3%.

    Reported 6.3 · recomputed 3.125

  • Negative-mood ANOVA degrees of freedom exceed the sample size

    Minor

    For a two-group repeated-measures ANOVA, a denominator degree of freedom of 68 requires at least 70 participants. Experiment 2 enrolled only 69, even before any incomplete data are excluded.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. H Rockliff, 2008, Heart rate variability and salivary cortisol responses to compassion-focused imagery., J Clin Neuropsychiatry, 5, 132

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Leiberg, S., Klimecki, O., & Singer, T.
Affiliations
University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Leiberg, Susanne
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2011-03-09
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
e17798
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0017798
PMC
PMC3052380
OpenAlex
W1973616877
Cited by
442
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 15
FWCI
19.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (FP7/2007-2013)
  • Mind and Life Institute
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (FP7/2007-2013)
  • Universität Zürich
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (205557)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
compassion training, prosocial behavior, helping behavior, reciprocity, memory training, individual differences, practice duration, helping strangers
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Empathy, Female, Games, Experimental, Helping Behavior, Humans, Memory, Social Behavior, Time Factors, Young Adult

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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