Past research showed that empathic responses are confounded with social desirability. The present research aims at illuminating this confound. In a first step, it is examined how a measure typically implemented to screen, for response, biases based on social desirability (i.e., the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding) relate to classical measures of interindividual differences in empathic responses (i.e., the Interpersonal Reactivity Index). Moreover, it is investigated what happens to empathic responses under conditions of reduced opportunity to behave socially desirable. Results of two correlational studies indicate that impression management (IM) as well as self-deceptive enhancement as facets of a socially desirable response bias is related to self-reported empathic responses. Results of an additional experiment show that introducing conditions reducing opportunity for IM lowers empathic responses toward a person in need. Implications for research on self-reported empathy and empathy-induced prosocial behavior are discussed.
BatsonC. D.BatsonJ. G.GriffittC. A.BarrientosS.BrandtJ. R.SprengelmeyerP.BaylyM. J. (1989). Negative-state relief and the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 922–933. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.6.922
2.
BatsonC. D.BatsonJ. G.SlingsbyJ. K.HarrellK. L.PeeknaH. M.ToddR. M. (1991). Empathic joy and the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 413–426. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.413
3.
BatsonC. D.ChangJ.OrrR.RowlandJ. (2002). Empathy, attitudes and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1656–1666. doi:10.1177/014616702237647
4.
BatsonC. D.EklundJ. H.ChermokV. L.HoytJ. L.OrtizB. G. (2007). An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 65–74. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.65
5.
BatsonC. D.ShawL. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism : Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 107–122. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1
BuhrmesterM.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980
8.
CameronC. D.PayneB. K. (2011). Escaping affect: How motivated emotion regulation creates insensitivity to mass suffering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 1–15. doi:1037/a0021643
9.
CialdiniR. B. (1991). Altruism or egoism? That is (still) the question. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 124–126. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0202_3
10.
CialdiniR. B.BrownS. L.LewisB. P.LuceC.NeubergS. L. (1997). Reinterpreting the empathy-altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 481–494. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.481
11.
CialdiniR. B.SchallerM.HoulihanD.ArpsK.FultzJ.BeamanA. L. (1987). Empathy-based helping: Is it selflessly or selfishly motivated?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 749–758. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.749
12.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
13.
CokeJ. S.BatsonC. D.McDavisK. (1978). Empathic mediation of helping: A two-stage model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 752–766. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.7.752
14.
DavisM. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113–126. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
15.
DavisM. H.HullJ. G.YoungR. D.WarrenG. G. (1987). Emotional reactions to dramatic film stimuli: The influence of cognitive and emotional empathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 126–133. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.1267
16.
DavisM. H.OathoutH. A. (1987). Maintenance of satisfaction in romantic relationships: Empathy and relational competence. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 53, 397–410. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.2.397
17.
EisenbergN.MillerP. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.91
18.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
19.
GächterS.HerrmannB.ThöniC. (2010). Culture and cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365, 2651–2661. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0135
20.
GrantA. M.MayerD. M. (2009). Good soldiers and good actors: Prosocial and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 900–912. doi:10.1037/a0013770
21.
HamamuraT.HeineS. J.PaulhusD. L. (2008). Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectical thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 932–942. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.034
22.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
23.
HoldenR. R. (2007). Socially desirable responding does moderate personality scale validity both in experimental and in nonexperimental contexts. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 39, 184–201. doi:10.1037/cjbs2007015
24.
KimS. S.KaplowitzS.JohnstonM. V. (2004). The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 27, 237–251. doi:10.1177/0163278704267037
25.
McAuliffeW. H. B.ForsterD. E.PhilippeJ.McCulloughM. E. (2018). Digital altruists: Resolving key questions about the empathy–altruism hypothesis in an Internet sample. Emotion, 18, 493–506. doi:0.1037/emo0000375
26.
MillhamJ.KelloggR. W. (1980). Need for social approval: impression management or self-deception?Journal of Research in Personality, 14, 445–457. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(80)90003-3
27.
MüllerS.MoshagenM. (2018). Overclaiming shares processes with the hindsight bias. Personality and Individual Differences, 134, 298–300. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.035
28.
MüllerS.MoshagenM. (2019). True virtue, self-presentation, or both? A behavioral test of impression management and overclaiming. Psychological Assessment, 31, 181–191. doi:10.1037/pas0000657
29.
NederhofA. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 263–280. doi:10.1007/BF02020187
30.
NookE. C.OngD. C.MorelliS. A.MitchellJ. P.ZakiJ. (2016). Prosocial conformity: Prosocial norms generalize across behavior and empathy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1045–1062. doi:0.1177/0146167216649932
31.
PaulhusD. L. (1986). Self-deception and impression management in test responses. In AngleitnerA.WigginsJ. S.. (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires. Berlin, Germany: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-70751-3_8
32.
PaulhusD. L. (1994). Balanced inventory of desirable responding: Reference manual for BIDR Version 6. Vancouver, Canada: Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia.
33.
PaulhusD. L. (1998). The balanced inventory of desirable responding. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
34.
PaulhusD. L. (2011). Overclaiming on personality questionnaires. In ZieglerM.MacCannC.RobertsR. D. (Eds.). New perspectives on faking in personality assessment (pp. 151–164). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
35.
PaulhusD. L.HarmsP. D.BruceM. N. (2003). The over-claiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 890–904. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.89
36.
PaulhusD. L.JohnO. P. (1998). Egoistic and moralistic biases in self-perception: The interplay of self-deceptive styles with basic traits and motives. Journal of Personality, 66, 1025–1060. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00041
37.
PfattheicherS.SassenrathC.SchindlerS. (2016). Feelings for the suffering of others and the environment: Compassion fosters proenvironmental tendencies. Environment and Behavior, 48, 929–945. doi:10.1177/0013916515574549
38.
PlantE. A.DevineP. G.BrazyP. C. (2003). The bogus pipeline and motivations to respond without prejudice: Revisiting the fading and faking of racial prejudice. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 187–200. doi:10.1177/1368430203006002004
39.
PreacherK. J. (2015). Advances in mediation analysis: A survey and synthesis of new developments. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 825–852. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015258
40.
PrestonS. D.HofelichA. J. (2012). The many faces of empathy: Parsing empathic phenomena through a proximate, dynamic-systems view of representing the other in the self. Emotion Review, 4, 24–33. doi:10.1177/1754073911421378
41.
RoeseN. J.JamiesonD. W. (1993). Twenty years of bogus pipeline research: A critical review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 363–375. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.363
42.
SassenrathC.PfattheicherS.KellerJ. (2017). I might ease your pain, but only if you’re sad: The impact of the empathized emotion in the empathy-helping association. Motivation and Emotion, 41, 96–106. doi:10.1007/s11031-016-9586-2
43.
SassenrathC.WagnerM.KellerJ.SassenbergK. (2018). It’s a challenge! Empathizing with sad but not with angry individuals results in cardiovascular reactivity consistent with a challenge motivational state. Emotion. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/emo0000515
44.
SchallerM.CialdiniR. B. (1988). The economics of empathic Helping: support for a mood management motive. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 163–181. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(88)90019-4
45.
SigallH.MillsJ. (1998). Measures of independent variables and mediators are useful in social psychology experiments: But are they necessary? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 218–226. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_5
46.
SigallH.PageR. (1971). Current stereotypes: A little fading, a little faking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 247–255. doi:10.1037/h0030839
47.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845–851. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845
48.
StoeberJ.DetteD. E.MuschJ. (2002). Comparing continuous and dichotomous scoring of the balanced inventory of desirable responding. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 370–389. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7802_10
49.
TangneyJ. P.StuewigJ.MashekD. J. (2007). Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 345–372. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070145
TracyJ. L.ChengJ. T.RobinsR. W.TrzesniewskiK. H. (2009). Authentic and hubristic pride: The affective core of self-esteem and narcissism. Self and Identity, 8, 196–213. doi:10.1080/15298860802505053
52.
UzielL. (2010). Rethinking social desirability scales: From impression management to interpersonally oriented self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 243–262. doi:10.1177/1745691610369465
ZettlerIHilbigB. E.MoshagenM.de VriesR. E. (2015). Dishonest responding or true virtue? A behavioral test of impression management. Personality and Individual Differences, 81, 107–111. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.007
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
