Linking Blood Pressure-Associated Emotional Dampening to Trait Empathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gradual and sustained increases in resting blood pressure are accompanied by gradual and sustained reductions in the capacity to consciously experience several affective and somatosensory processes. Burgeoning theory suggests that this phenomenon, termed cardiovascular emotional dampening, contributes to heart disease risk by interfering with our ability to effectively respond to environmental demands. Interpersonal relationships are contexts in which this risk cascade likely occurs, but prior researchers have paid little attention to how emotional dampening might influence these relationships. As empathy is a construct used to describe facets of emotion-linked responding that facilitate interpersonal relationships, if emotional dampening influences interpersonal relationships, then we might expect resting blood pressure to covary with measures of empathy as it does with other previously studied aspects of affective responding. We recruited 175 healthy undergraduate college student participants (120 Women; M age = 19.17, SD age = 2.08) to complete a counterbalanced procedure in which we measured resting blood pressure and related it to participants’ responses on the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy, and a demographic survey. Bivariate comparisons revealed a significant inverse relationship between average resting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and cognitive empathy, as well as a significant inverse relationship between SBP and affective empathy. Multiple regression analyses revealed that SBP remained a significant predictor of cognitive empathy, but not affective empathy, after controlling for related covariates (i.e., sex, age, and alexithymia). SBP predicted cognitive empathy such that higher SBP was associated with lower cognitive empathy. Thus, people with higher resting blood pressures might experience increased interpersonal distress because of a reduced capacity for empathetic accuracy and perspective-taking. We discuss the implications and future directions of these findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".