THEORETICAL PRINCIPLES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF EMPATHY IN WOMEN MANAGERS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/psy-visnyk/2024.4.16Keywords:
empathy, empathic response, cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, mentalization, emotional intelligence, female managers, management, psychology of managersAbstract
The article presents the results of a theoretical analysis of the phenomenon of empathy, provides a definition of empathy and describes its structure. The main approaches to the study and explanation of the essence of empathy are analyzed. Empathy is defined as the ability to recognize and understand other people’s emotions, feelings, and states. Three types of empathy are distinguished, which include emotional empathy, cognitive and mentalization. Emotional empathy involves the ability to emotionally infect and share the emotional state of another person. Cognitive empathy is manifested through the ability to understand the causes of certain emotional reactions and experiences in other people. At the same time, mentalization implies the influence of empathy on interpersonal interaction. Neurobiological mechanisms underlying the ability to manifest empathy are characterized, which are based on sensorimotor response and affective exchange. Empathic reaction is seen as a cyclical process that is part of emotional exchange during social interaction. The importance of empathy in management activities is emphasized. It is emphasized that the ability to use soft power in management implies openness to other people, their thoughts, emotions and feelings, a friendly attitude and manifestations of care by taking into account the needs of employees in the process of making and implementing decisions. Methods for developing the capacity for empathy and each of the components of empathic response based on knowledge of the neurobiological principles of perception and understanding of other people’s emotions are presented. In particular, the influence of watching videos and movies, reading books and watching role-playing games in the development of the ability to identify the emotions, feelings and states of other people is explained. The importance of using role-playing and situational games in the development of empathy of managers is emphasized. Attention is focused on the need to develop the ability to reflect on the previous topic of empathy classes. Increasing the level of awareness, ability to identify bodily sensations, differentiation of own and other people’s emotions and feelings, distancing from other people’s experiences, self-control at the emotional and behavioral levels, as well as the ability to cause certain emotions and feelings in other people are also necessary for an empathic leader.
References
Vuving A. The Logic of Attraction: Outline of a Theory of Soft Power. 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3637662
Nye J. The Powers to Lead. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2008. 248 p.
Nye J. The Future of Power. Public Affairs : New York, 2011. 320 p.
Smith A. The theory of moral sentiments. A. Millar, London, 1790. 322 p.
Preston S. D., de Waal F. B. Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2002. № 25(1). Pp. 1–20. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x02000018.
Decety J., Meyer M. From emotion resonance to empathic understanding: A social developmental neuroscience account. Development and Psychopathology. 2008. № 20(4). Pp. 1053–1080.
Batson C. D. These things called empathy: Eight related but distinct phenomena. In J. Decety & W. Ickes (Eds.), The social neuroscience of empathy. Boston Review. 2009. Pp. 3–15. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262012973.003.0002
Battaly H.D. Is empathy a virtue? In: A. Coplan and P. Goldie (Eds.), Empathy. Philosophical and psychological perspectives Oxford University Press. 2011. Pp. 277–301.
Decety J., Ickes W. (Eds.). The social neuroscience of empathy. Boston Review. 2009. 272 p. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262012973.001.0001
Jacob P. The direct-perception-model of empathy: A critique. Review of Philosophy and Psychology. 2011. № 2(3). Pp. 519–540.
Moran D. From empathy to intersubjectivity: The phenomenological approach. In A. Bortolan, E. Magri (Eds.), Empathy, intersubjectivity, and the social world. The continued relevance of phenomenology. Essays in honour of Dermot Moran. DeGruyter. 2022. Pp. 23–46.
Belin P., Zatorre R.J., Lafaille P., Ahad P., Pike B. Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex. Nature. 2000. № 403(6767). Pp. 309–312.
Pernet C.R., McAleer P., Latinus M., et al. The human voice areas: spatial organization and inter-individual variability in temporal and extra-temporal cortices. Neuroimage. 2015. № 119. Pp. 164–174.
Kanwisher N., McDermott J., Chun M.M. The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience. 1997. № 17(11). Pp. 4302–4311.
Posamentier M.T., Abdi H. Processing faces and facial expressions. Neuropsychology Review. 2003. № 13(3). Pp. 113–143.
Pernet C.R., McAleer P., Latinus M., et al. The human voice areas: spatial organization and inter-individual variability in temporal and extra-temporal cortices. Neuroimage. 2015. № 119. Pp. 164–174.
Singer T., de Vignemont F. The empathic brain: How, when and why? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2006. № 10 (10). Pp. 435–441.
Zaki J., Williams W. C. Interpersonal emotion regulation. Emotion. 2013. № 13. Pp. 803–810. doi: 10.1037/a0033839
Morelli S. A., Lieberman M. D., Zaki J. The emerging study of positive empathy. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2015. № 9. Pp. 57–68. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12157
Atzil S., Gao W., Fradkin I., Barrett L. F. Growing a social brain. Nat Hum Behav. 2018. № 2. Pp. 624–636. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0384-6
Rizzolatti G., Craighero L. The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004. № 27. Pp. 169–192. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230.
Singer T., Seymour B., O’Doherty J., et al. Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain. Science. 2004. № 303. Pp. 1157–1162. doi: 10.1126/science.1093535.
Carr L., Iacoboni M., Dubeau M. C., et al. Neural mechanisms of empathy in humans: a relay from neural systems for imitation to limbic areas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003. № 100. Pp. 5497–5502. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0935845100.
Decety J., Lamm C. Human empathy through the lens of social neuroscience. ScientificWorldJournal. 2006. № 6. Pp. 1146–1163. doi: 10.1100/tsw.2006.221.
Gonzalez-Liencres C., Shamay-Tsoory S. G., Brüne M. Towards a neuroscience of empathy: ontogeny, phylogeny, brain mechanisms, context and psychopathology. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013. № 37. Pp. 1537–1548. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.05.001
Eisenberg N., Eggum N. D., Di Giunta L. Empathy-related responding: associations with prosocial behavior, aggression, and intergroup relations. Soc Issues Policy Rev. 2010. № 4. Pp. 143–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
Hastings P. D., Zahn-Waxler C., McShane K. We are, by nature, moral creatures: Biological bases of concern for others. In: Killen M, Smetana J, editors. Handbook of moral development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Mahwah, NJ, 2006. Pp. 483–516.
