Reappraisal and empathic perspective-taking – More alike than meets the eyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion regulation and empathy represent highly intertwined psychological processes sharing common conceptual ground. Despite the wealth of research in these fields, the joint and distinct functional nature and topological features of these constructs have not yet been investigated using the same experimental approach. This study investigated the common and distinct neural correlates of emotion regulation and empathy using a meta-analytic approach. The regions that were jointly activated were then characterized using meta-analytic connectivity modeling and functional decoding of metadata terms. The results revealed convergent activity within the ventrolateral and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex as well as temporal regions. The functional decoding analysis demonstrated that emotion regulation and empathy were related to highly similar executive and internally oriented processes. This synthesis underlining strong functional and neuronal correspondence between emotion regulation and empathy could (i) facilitate greater integration of these two separate lines of literature, (ii) accelerate progress toward elucidating the neural mechanisms that support social cognition, and (iii) push forward the development of a common theoretical framework for these psychological processes essential to human social interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".