Objectives Kindness and compassion are prosocial constructs aimed at benefiting others, with the former focused on happiness and the latter on suffering. Despite these distinctly different motivations, kindness and compassion are often used interchangeably. If compassion and kindness are different processes, they should respond differently to the same facilitators and inhibitors, with a key moderator being likeability. Methods We used a cross-sectional survey design to examine whether a target that differed in terms of likeability (liked versus disliked) influenced willingness to engage in kind acts compared to compassionate acts, and the emotional patterns experienced. We recruited 150 participants (83 men, 66 women, 1 other; Mage = 27.85, SD = 10.21) using an online survey platform. Results Participants reported less willingness to engage in acts of kindness compared to acts of compassion regardless of target likeability. However, this reduction in willingness was markedly greater for disliked targets. Compassionate acts towards liked targets were associated with significantly higher levels of negative emotions (e.g., irritation, sadness, anger, anxiety, and disgust) when compared to kind acts. Conversely, compassionate acts towards disliked targets elicited less feelings of irritation and anger compared to kind acts. Conclusions These findings indicate that kindness and compassion result from separable motivational systems, differing in both the emotions elicited and the willingness to act. Reluctance in helping disliked others is reduced when the action is aimed at reducing suffering.
Objectives. As social creatures, we monitor our relative rank and/or status with others via social comparisons. Whilst research has identified perceptions of inferiority or 'low rank' relative to others is a robust predictor of depressive, anxious, and stress symptomology, to date individual differences have been ignored. We wish to provide empirical evidence to outline how differences across personality traits may interact with social rank variables to buffer or predispose towards depressive symptomology.Methods. Across three independent samples (N = 595), we replicated a social rank model of mental health, and with our third sample (N = 200), we sought to investigate attenuating roles for neuroticism versus compassion with multiple moderated regression models.Results. Neuroticism predicted greater levels of rank-associated depression, and compassion failed to function as a protective factor for rank-associated depression. However, a closer inspection of the original Big-5 factor structure positions this scale as a measure of 'interpersonal submissiveness' or 'conflict appeasement' rather than genuine compassion.Conclusions. Whilst it is necessary to delineate the conditions where compassion is appropriate and able to lead to positive mental health outcomes, we argue this cannot be addressed with the Big-5 measure of trait compassion. We call for future work to consider valid and reliable measures for compassion, such as the self-compassion scale, submissive compassion scale, and fears of compassion scale, to more fully address how compassion may protect against both rank-based comparisons and severity of depression.
Two studies examined the change in self-efficacy of practitioners after attending Triple P training and the moderators that affect training outcomes. Study 1 used a large multidisciplinary sample of health, education, and welfare practitioners (N = 37,235) came from 30 countries around the world, which all participate in a Triple P professional training course during 2012–2019. This study assessed practitioners’ overall self-efficacy and their consultation skills efficacy prior to training, immediately following training, and at six- to eight-weeks follow-up. Participants reported significant improvements of their overall self-efficacy and their consultation skills self-efficacy. There were significantly small differences based on practitioners’ gender, disciplines, education levels, and country location. Study 2 examined the training outcomes of videoconference-based training (following the COVID-19 pandemic) compared to in-person training (N = 6867). No significant differences were found between videoconference and in-person training on any outcome measure. Implications for the global dissemination of evidence-based parenting programs as part of a comprehensive public health response to COVID-19 was discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.