What is it that provides us an accurate window into the thoughts and feelings of others? Although, intuitively, it might seem as though trait empathy would enhance this ability, research has produced decidedly mixed results, ultimately failing to uncover robust, systematic relationships between the two. Recent research has suggested, however, that different facets of empathy—emotional contagion, on the one hand, and empathic concern, on the other—are psychologically distinct and result in different behavioral tendencies (Jordan, Amir, & Bloom, 2016). In 5 preregistered studies involving nearly 2,600 participants, we assessed the opposing contributions of these distinct facets of empathy to empathic accuracy. We found that whereas trait concern is beneficial to empathic accuracy, trait contagion is, paradoxically, detrimental. These patterns emerged across 4 different measures of empathic accuracy that involve emotional and mental states communicated through the eyes (Study 1), paralinguistic cues in the voice (Study 2), facial expressions (Studies 2 and 4), and cues presented during a mock interview (Study 3). Moreover, in Study 4, we identified rational thinking style as a mechanism for these opposing effects. Whereas those who exhibit contagion tend to be less rational, those who exhibit concern tend to be more rational. These differences in cognitive style mediate the opposing relationships of contagion and concern with interpersonal accuracy. Our studies thus highlight the value of empirically separating psychologically distinct facets of empathy to more accurately characterize their independent contributions to interpersonal processes.