Summary of:
Smith, A. (2006). Cognitive empathy and emotional empathy in human behavior and
evolution. The Psychological Record, 56(1), 3-21.
Summary by: Jenn Hoy, Taylor Biegler, and Nicole Wong
For Dr. Mills’ Psyc 452 class, Fall, 2014
In his article, “Cognitive Empathy and Emotional Empathy in Human Behavior and
Evolution” Adam Smith divides empathy into two distinct and separable components: cognitive
empathy (CE) and emotional empathy (EE). If these two components can be separated, Smith
postulates, they can exist in varying strength across people and the two can vary in strength
within a person. Smith examines the various combinations of CE and EE and offers insight into
how a deficit, surfeit or imbalance of the two can shed light on four different psychological
disorders: autism, antisocial personality disorder, schizoid personality disorder and Williams
syndrome.
Smith begins by defining empathy as a “sensitivity to, and understanding of, the mental
states of others (Smith, 2006, p. 3). In synthesizing definitions of empathy offered by several
other researchers and theorists, Smith notes that “empathy has been used to refer to two related
human abilities: mental perspective taking (cognitive empathy, CE) and the vicarious sharing of
emotion (emotional empathy, EE) (Smith, 2006, p.3). He goes on to postulate that, if empathy
can be involved in prosocial behavior, a lacuna of empathy may be at the core of certain
antisocial behaviors.
The evolutionary selection of empathy is broken into two main branches, according to
Smith (2006). Cognitive empathy (CE) is important for social functioning. With CE we are able
to predict the behaviors of those around us, communicate effectively with others and parents are
better able to nurture their children. CE also enables us to manipulate the behavior of others in
order to gain advantage and to recognize when others are lying to us (Smith, 2006). Emotional
empathy (EE) underpins altruistic behavior. The selection of EE may be found in kin selection,
sexual selection and having friends who are reliable reciprocators (Smith, 2006).
Developmentally, infants are shown to exhibit EE as early as one day old.
Provided that empathy can be divided into EE and CE, the interaction and relative
strength of each element is important to understand from an evolutionary perspective. EE,
exposes the individual to both positive and negative emotional forces. It is evolutionarily
advantageous to increase the positive emotions in those around us and decrease the negative.
Indiscriminate EE would be selected against as EE extended to competitors, disloyal friends and
out-group members would be harmful to the individual. EE responsiveness must, therefore, be
discriminate. The existence of CE with reduced EE also offers a selective advantage. The ability
to anticipate the behavior of others without being overwhelmed by their emotions would lead to
greater survival and reproduction. In the extreme, strong CE in the absence of EE, would lead to
selfish and competitive behavior. EE with reduced CE moderation promotes inclusive fitness as
it allows for spontaneous empathy. With integration of the two complementary processes, “EE
could make us feel like helping someone else and CE could clarify what sort of help is
appropriate” (Smith, 2006, p. 5). The variation in CE and EE must have led to mental
differences, which in turn manifested as behavioral differences and the impact of natural
selection can help to predict the relationship between CE and EE (Smith, 2006). Smith offers the
model of empathy as being CE and EE, two separable and complementary systems (Smith, 2006,
p. 5).
The role of sex difference in the separability of EE and CE is also discussed from an
evolutionary perspective. Previous research has been mixed in finding greater empathic
response in one gender over another although there may be some evidence that females are the
more empathic gender. Smith argues that, if CE and EE are distinct processes, they will
necessarily develop differently across individuals. During the course of human evolution
separability of the two aspects of empathy would have been linked to sex (Smith, 2006).
Women, as the primary caretaker of the young and men, as the more competitive gender would
display varying strengths of EE and CE with women having more EE than CE and men
displaying more CE than EE. Smith offers that using simple tasks involving EE and CE could
readily test this hypothesis.
Accepting the premise that CE and EE are separable and distinct, then the possibility of
imbalances between the two, and resultant pathology, exists. Smith breaks down the 4 potential
imbalances by writing:
1. Cognitive empathy deficit disorder (CEDD), consisting of low CE ability but high
EE sensitivity.
2. Emotional empathy deficit disorder (EEDD), consisting of low EE sensitivity but
high CE ability.
It also predict the existence of two general empathy disorders:
1. General empathy deficit disorder (GEDD), consisting of low CE ability and low
EE sensitivity.
2. General Empathy Surfeit disorder (GESD), consisting of high CE ability and high
EE sensitivity. (Smith, 2006, p.9)
He further hypothesizes that the existence of disorders reflective of the imbalances would be
proof that CE and EE are separable systems.
A person with CEDD would have an EE dominated cognitive imbalance (Smith, 2006).
A lack of CE would make it difficult for these people to understand duplicity and be very easily
taken in. They would likewise be unaware of how others perceive them and may behave in
atypical fashion. A strong EE sensitivity would lead to a great sensitivity to the unexpressed
emotions of others. Without the moderation of CE, their world would be very unpredictable and
overwhelming. They might need to isolate themselves from these unintelligible stimuli and their
withdrawal could be misconstrued as an insensitivity to the emotions of others.
The EEDD person would have a strong cognitive appreciation of the emotional state of
those around him. They may be seen as socially adept, but their lack of EE may lead to an
exploitation of the emotional states of others. The resultant behavior might look like
“manipulation, pretense and deception” (Smith, 2006, pg.10).
GEDD, because they have an impaired ability to understand the emotional states of others
on any level, would likely shy away from social contact. A lack of empathy of any sort may
result in their harming others.
A surfeit of both CE and EE in the GESD person would look like a very socially adept
and sensitive person with excellent communication skills. Such strong empathy may result in
that person being burdensome to others and the investment in empathy may eclipse or block the
development of other mental facilities.
Smith postulates that, given that males have a greater likelihood of empathy imbalance,
disorders involving the imbalance would be more prevalent in males. Additionally, if problems
are caused by an imbalance in empathy, CEDD and EEDD represent greater pathology than
GEDD and GESD. He suggests that Autism involves CEDD, Antisocial Personality Disorder
(APD) involves EEDD, Schizoid Personality Disorder involves GEDD and Williams Syndrome
involves GESD.
Smith acknowledges that the belief that people with autism have CE impairment is
“unoriginal” (Smith, 2006, p. 11). Where Smith’s theory diverges from the traditional
formulation of autism is in his belief that autism is not simply a deficit of CE, it is also a high
Emotional Empathy sensitivity. Smith notes that autistic people report that they do share the
emotions of others and parents do describe their autistic children as being affectionate. Smith
suggests that “they may rely on avoidant behavior to try to prevent overwhelming empathic
connections from forming” (Smith, 2006, p. 12). He cautions that avoidance of EE should not be
confused with insensitivity. He goes on to say that the CEDD understanding of autism is crucial
in integrating the motivational analysis and theory of mind hypothesis of autism because there is
hypersensitive EE without the moderating force of CE. The autistic person is drawn towards
positive emotion and avoids negative emotion. They experience the will to connect with others
but lack the understanding of how. Their world thus becomes chaotic and they seek either to
withdraw or develop stereotypical behaviors in order to avoid the motivational conflict. Smith
cites the work of Capps et al who noted, in laboratory study, that autistic people seemed to
appear happy during happy vignettes and upset during upsetting vignettes. Further, they
appeared to be confused even though they demonstrated proper EE. This, suggests Smith,
speaks to an empathy imbalance.
Antisocial Personality Disorder is characterized by lying and emotional cruelty in a
person who seeks to rationalize his or her behavior and appear to be charming. This, notes
Smith, is the hallmark of EEDD. Smith offers that previous research underestimates the level of
CE in APD as those with APD and high CE may likely better monitor their behavior and not
commit criminal behavior or get caught or they may be likely to please the experimenter due to
their heightened EE (Smith, 2006). Smith differentiates EE sensitivity in autistic people and
APD by noting that autistic patients exhibit sensitivity to both positive and negative emotion in
others whereas APD patients appear sensitive to neither.
Schizoid Personality Disorder is marked by a strong preference for being alone. GEDD,
with a deficit in CE and lack of EE sensitivity, would lead a person to avoid contact as they can
neither conform to social conventions nor understand social interaction. Smith suggests that a
differential diagnosis between Asperger syndrome and APD may best be seen through the
examination of the patient’s level of empathy.
The involvement of GESD in Williams syndrome is seen in the high level of compassion,
concern with justice and preoccupation with the welfare of others, including strangers. While
Williams syndrome and Autism are often seen as overlapping disorders, Smith asserts that, while
they share an EE sensitivity, the sociability of Williams syndrome stands in contrast to the
hyposociability of Autism, likely linked to varying levels of CE.
The following chart serves to summarize the information presented:
CE
Emotional
empathy deficit
disorder
(EEDD)
General
empathy
surfeit disorder
(GESD)
EE
General
empathy deficit
disorder
(GEDD)
Cognitive
empathy
deficit
disorder
(CEDD)
In conclusion, Smith states that he has “presented arguments about how one might expect
natural selection to act on empathic individuals” (Smith, 2006, p. 17). From this idea he restates
that there are four possible disorders of empathy imbalance. He acknowledges that he uses the
notion of the relationship of CE and EE to make predictions. Those predictions include the
increased separability of the two components in males. He lays out his theories in hopes that
empirical researchers will carry forward these ideas and test them.
Outline
I.
Introduction:
A. The term empathy refers to sensitivity to, and understanding of, the mental
states of others
i. Refers to two related and divisible human abilities:
1. mental perspective taking: cognitive empathy (CE)
2. vicarious sharing of emotion: emotional empathy (EE)
B. 2 main arguments for how empathy evolved
i. CE selected for because it enhances social functioning by enabling
humans to understand and predict the behavior of others, guide
nurturing behavior, and better communication
1. CE aids in social manipulation and deception that is
advantageous as well as enables us to recognize when others
are lying to us
ii. The selection of EE could be found in kin selection, sexual selection,
and having friends who are reliable reciprocators
II.
III.
1. EE motivates altruistic behavior towards kin, mates, and allies
2. May underpin moral development
C. True empathy integrates CE and EE and functions through the interaction and
regulation of the two abilities
The 7 Models of Seperability
A. Model 1. CE and EE as inseparable aspects of a unitary system
B. Model 2. CE and EE as two separable systems
C. Model 3. EE system as a potential extension of E system
D. Model 4. CE system as a potential extension of EE system
E. Model 5. EE system as a potential extension of CE system with feedback
F. Model 6. CE system as a potential extension of EE system with feedback
G. Model 7. CE and EE as two separable, complementary systems
i. Appears to evolutionarily stable
ii. Enables CE and EE to act as one integrated system in many instances
but be separable in key instances of functional and evolutionary
significance
iii. Manages a balance between altruistic and selfish behavior
iv. Article based on the hypothesis that human empathy resembles model
7
H. Role of sex difference in the seperability of EE and CE from an evolutionary
perspective
i. Mixed finding from previous research but there is arguably strong
evidence that females tend to be more empathetic
ii. Suggested that seperability varies across individuals
iii. Reduced seperability may facilitate successful childcare and bonding
while increased seperability may facilitate competitive, aggressive,
and violent behavior
1. Assuming that women tended to be more involved in childcare
in evolutionary history and men tended towards more
competitive behavior, the extent of seperability may have
become linked to sex based on parental investment theory
Predicted Empathy Disorders
A. Model 7 raises possibility of 4 potential empathy imbalances
i. Cognitive empathy deficit disorder (CEDD), consisting of low CE
ability but high EE sensitivity
1. Person would have EE dominated cognitive imbalance making
them susceptible to duplicity
ii. Emotional empathy deficit disorder (EEDD), consisting of low
sensitivity but high CE ability
1. Strong cognitive appreciation of the emotional state of those
around him
iii. General empathy deficit disorder (GEDD), consisting of low CE
ability and low EE sensitivity
1. Impaired ability to understand the emotional states of others
iv. General Empathy Surfeit disorder (GESD), consisting of high CE
ability and high EE sensitivity
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
1. Very socially adept and sensitive person with excellent
communication skills
B. Predicated that due to increases seperability of the systems, the empathy
imbalance disorders should develop more frequency in males
Autism and CEDD
A. Hypothesized that CEDD tends to be a part of autism
i. Autistic people report sharing emotions but lack understanding how to
cope with the emotions and become overwhelmed
APD and EEDD
A. Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is characterized by deception and
emotional cruelty in a person who seeks to rationalize his or her behavior and
appear to be charming
i. Lack of EE results in a disregard for others
B. Previous research underestimates the level of CE in APD
i. High CE is likely the mechanism that makes the manipulation
observed in APD possible
Schizoid Personality Disorder and GEDD
A. Marked by strong preference for being alone
B. Deficit in CE and lack of EE sensitivity is responsible for social withdrawal
Williams Syndrome and GESD
A. The relationship between the two is seen in the high level of compassion,
concern with justice and preoccupation with the welfare of others, including
strangers
Conclusion
A. Empathy is seperable into two component parts: cognitive and emotional
empathy
i. The interaction and comparative levels of these forms of empathy can
lead to specific pathologies
B. Presented arguments about expectations of how natural selection, kin
selection, reciprocation, and sexual selection would act on the two forms of
empathy
Test Questions
1. Cognitive Empathy refers to:
A. vicarious sharing of emotion
B. mental perspective taking
C. sensitivity to and understanding of, the mental states of others
(answer: B)
2. True or False: Empathy can be divided into 2 distinct and separable components. (answer:
true)
3. The Evolutionary Selection of Empathy may be found in:
A. kin selection
B. sexual selection
C. friends who are reliable reciprocators
D. all of the above
(answer: D)
4. True or false: It is hypothesized that females are the more empathic gender.
(answer: true)
5. The two separable components of Empathy are:
A. Evolutionary Empathy and Cognitive Empathy
B. Emotional Empathy and Behavioral Empathy
C. Cognitive Empathy and Emotional Empathy
(answer: C)
6. True or False: Schizoid Personality Disorder is characterized by lying and emotional cruelty
in a person who seeks to rationalize his or her behavior and appear to becharming
(answer: false)