Imaging, Empathy, and Causal Attribution.

Abstract Three studies were conducted to test whether imagery accounts for the effects of empathy on attributions, that is, whether attributers construct and scan a mental image of social scenarios the same way that actual participants scan a real environment. According to this interpretation, attributers “see” the world as the participant does and make vicarious attributions. An alternative interpretation holds that subjects base vicarious attributions on recreating the motivations and affect of the actor, so that imaging is irrelevant to empathy and attributions. In the first study, subjects who imagined a story from the perspective of a particular character later showed differential recall of story details as a function of role, but not differential attributions. In Experiment 2, role-taking subjects showed clear effects of imaged perspective on recall for story details, but no effects on attributions of causality for an accident. Further, recall and attribution were uncorrelated. In the last study, empathy and imagery role-taking instructions produced independent effects: imagers showed pronounced perspective-relevant recall and empathizers did not. Neither showed unambiguous vicarious attributions. Recall and attribution were again uncorrelated. These studies suggest that the imagery explanation of empathy effects is untenable, and imply that the recall of perspective-relevant details is unlikely to mediate attributions of causality in imaginary scenarios.

[1]  L. Z. McArthur,et al.  Figural emphasis and person perception. , 1977 .

[2]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Recall of Previously Unrecallable Information Following a Shift in Perspective. Technical Report No. 41. , 1977 .

[3]  M. Ross,et al.  Egocentric Biases in Availability and Attribution , 1979 .

[4]  D T Regan,et al.  Empathy and attribution: turning observers into actors. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  R. Abelson Script processing in attitude formation and decision making. , 1976 .

[6]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  A Processing Approach to the Dual Coding Hypothesis , 1976 .

[7]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Imagery, propositions, and the form of internal representations , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Point of view and perceptions of causality. , 1975 .

[9]  John H. Lingle,et al.  Cognitive Organization of Person Impressions. , 1979 .

[10]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge , 1974 .

[11]  Stephen Michael Kosslyn,et al.  Information representation in visual images , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  R. Galper,et al.  Turning observers into actors: Differential causal attributions as a function of “empathy” , 1976 .

[13]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Representation of Knowledge: Non-Linguistic Forms Do We Need Images and Analogues? , 1975, TINLAP.

[14]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  What the Mind’s Eye Tells the Mind’s Brain: A Critique of Mental Imagery , 1973 .

[15]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Salience, Attention, and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena , 1978 .

[16]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Effects of concomitant verbal recall on order effects in personality impression formation , 1963 .

[17]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. , 1972 .

[18]  S. Kosslyn Scanning visual images:Some structural implications , 1973 .

[19]  M. D. Storms,et al.  Videotape and the attribution process: reversing actors' and observers' points of view. , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.