MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404811369 · doi:10.29173/eureka28810

Exploring Empathy and the Right Hemisphere: From Neurological Foundations to Clinical Insights

2024· article· en· W4404811369 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vanishta Tancoo

Bibliographic record

VenueEureka · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyRight hemispherePsychologyCognitive psychologyCognitive sciencePsychoanalysisSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empathy, a multifaceted construct encompassing affective responsiveness, cognitive perspective-taking, and emotional regulation, is fundamental to human relationships and societal cohesion. This review examines the right hemisphere's role in mediating empathic processes, drawing upon evidence from neuroimaging, lesion studies, and investigations of gender differences. Findings demonstrate that the right hemisphere is critical for processing emotional cues, such as facial expressions and tone of voice, which are essential for recognizing and responding to others' emotions. Damage to this region significantly impairs emotional recognition and empathetic behaviour, with implications for interpersonal interactions and broader societal dynamics. Furthermore, empathy is not static but evolves throughout life, influenced by biological, cognitive, emotional, and environmental factors. By synthesizing current research, this review highlights the right hemisphere's pivotal role in the neural underpinnings of empathy, providing insights into its developmental trajectory and potential therapeutic targets for enhancing emotional and social functioning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurekaSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207