Recently, social psychologists have given considerable attention to the possibility that empathy can be used to improve intergroup attitudes and relations. For this possibility to bear practical fruit, it is important to know what is meant by empathy because different researchers use the term to refer to different psychological states. It is also important to understand how each of these empathy states might affect intergroup relations by reviewing theory and research on the psychological processes involved, and it is important to consider the limitations of each form of empathy as a source of improved intergroup relations. Finally, it is important to consider the role of different empathy states in existing programs designed to improve intergroup relations, whether in protracted political conflicts, in educational settings, or via media. In this article, we pursue each of these goals.

A conceptual analysis is offered that differentiates four types of motivationIn The Prince, Machiavelli (1513/1908) imagined himself offering counsel to a public official who wished to provide the best life for his people. The worldly wisdom that Machiavelli provided has stood the test of time. We have no illusions that we can give advice that is as wise or enduring, but we borrowed Machiavelli's literary device and tried to imagine ourselves in a similar situation. A local civic leader-the mayor, let us say-comes to us for help. The mayor is genuinely concerned about the quality of life in town. People seem too absorbed in meeting their own needs, in securing their share of the good life. The mayor worries about

What if participants in a one-trial prisoner's dilemma know before making their decision that the other person has already defected? From the perspective of classic game theory, a dilemma no longer exists. It is clearly in their best interest to defect too. The empathy-altruism hypothesis predicts, however, that if they feel empathy for the other, then a dilemma remains: self-interest counsels defection; empathyinduced altruism counsels not. This motivational con¯ict should lead at least some empathically aroused individuals not to defect. To test this prediction, we placed 60 undergraduate women in a onetrial prisoner's dilemma in which they knew the other had already defected. Among those not induced to feel empathy, very few (0.05) did not defect in return. Among those induced to feel empathy for the other, almost half (0.45) did not defect. These results underscore the power of empathy-induced altruism to affect responses in a prisoner's dilemma.

Do we humans ever, in any degree, care about others for their sakes and not simply for our own? Psychology has long assumed that everything humans do, no matter how nice and noble, is motivated by self-interest. However, research over the past three decades suggests that this assumption is wrong. This research has focused on the empathy—altruism hypothesis, which claims that empathic concern—an other-oriented emotional response elicited by and congruent with the perceived welfare of a person in need—produces altruistic motivation—motivation with the ultimate goal of increasing another's welfare. Results of the over 30 experiments designed to test this hypothesis against various egoistic alternatives have proved remarkably supportive, leading to the tentative conclusion that feeling empathic concern for a person in need does indeed evoke altruistic motivation to see that need relieved. Sources of altruistic motivation other than empathy also have been proposed, but as yet, there is not compelling research evidence to support these proposals. Two additional forms of prosocial motivation have also been proposed: collectivism and principlism. Collectivism—motivation with the ultimate goal of benefiting some group or collective as a whole—has been claimed to result from group identity. Principlism—motivation with the ultimate goal of upholding some moral principle—has long been advocated by religious teachers and moral philosophers. Whether either is a separate form of motivation, independent of and irreducible to egoism, is not yet clear. Research done to test for the existence of empathy-induced altruism may serve as a useful model for future research testing for the existence of collectivism and principlism. Theoretical and practical implications of the empathy-altruism hypothesis are briefly considered.

No abstract