Relationship Between Empathy and Prosocial Behavior
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on the relationship between empathy and prosocial behavior among individuals aged between 18 to 30 years old . The sample consisted of 90 individuals, including both students and working professionals. The study used the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) to assess empathy and the Prosocialness Scale for Adults (PSA) was used to measure behavior with the aim of establishing if there exists a notable correlation, between these distinct factors. The study found a significant positive correlation (r = 0.847, p<.001) between empathy and prosocial behavior, suggesting that individuals with higher empathy are more likely to engage in prosocial acts. These results offer supporting evidence for establishing theories like the Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis and the Emotional Contagion Theory, which propose that empathy plays a crucial role in motivating altruistic behavior. According to the study, developing empathy in young people may improve prosocial behavior, resulting in more compassionate and socially responsible communities.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it