We used experience sampling to examine perceptions of empathy in the everyday lives of a group of 246 U.S. adults who were quota sampled to represent the population on key demographics. Participants reported an average of about nine opportunities to empathize per day; these experiences were positively associated with prosocial behavior, a relationship not found with trait measures. Although much of the literature focuses on the distress of strangers, in everyday life, people mostly empathize with very close others, and they empathize with positive emotions 3 times as frequently as with negative emotions. Although trait empathy was negatively associated only with well-being, empathy in daily life was generally associated with increased well-being. Theoretically distinct components of empathy—emotion sharing, perspective taking, and compassion—typically co-occur in everyday empathy experiences. Finally, empathy in everyday life was higher for women and the religious but not significantly lower for conservatives and the wealthy.

Some people believe that willpower relies on a limited resource and that performing cognitive work (such as using self-control) results in mental fatigue. Others believe that willpower is nonlimited and that performing cognitive work instead prepares and energizes them for more. These differing lay theories of willpower determine whether or not one's self-control performance actually does decrease or increase after use, with only limited willpower theorists showing a decrease (the ego depletion effect). Due to the self-control requirements of everyday life, willpower theories also predict outcomes across domains of academics, health, goal progress, interpersonal relationships, and well-being. Generally, limited willpower theorists' belief in their limited capacity results in poorer outcomes, particularly during times of high demand. By understanding how willpower theories form and function, interventions that encourage nonlimited willpower theories may be created to improve people's performance and well-being.

We used experience-sampling to examine perceptions of empathy in the everyday lives of a group of 246 U.S. adults, quota-sampled to represent the population on key demographics. Participants reported an average of about 9 opportunities to empathize per day, with these experiences being positively associated with prosocial behaviour; a relationship not found with trait measures. While much of the literature focuses on the distress of strangers, in everyday life, people mostly empathize with very close others; and they empathize with positive emotions three times as frequently as with negative emotions. Though trait empathy was only negatively associated with well-being, empathy in daily life was generally associated with increased well-being. Theoretically distinct components of empathy—emotion sharing, perspective taking, and compassion—typically co-occur in everyday empathy experiences. Finally, empathy in everyday life was higher for women and the religious, but not significantly lower for conservatives or the wealthy.

Abstract. Ego depletion is under scrutiny for low replicability, possibly reflecting the limited statistical power available in between-subject designs. In response, we created a within-subject, repeated-measures ego-depletion paradigm that repeatedly alternated depletion and recovery manipulations. Each manipulation was followed by measuring subjective fatigue, mood, and self-control performance. Across 12 studies (N = 754), participants reliably reported having lower energy and mood after depleting manipulations compared to after recovery manipulations. Depletion manipulations did not consistently affect behavioral self-control, although the depletion effect was meta-analytically significant (d = .045). Furthermore, unintended fatigue and practice effects occurred over the course of the paradigm, systematically interfering with the intended depletion effects. We recommend that depletion research takes advantage of within-subject designs across multiple sessions to avoid spillover effects between measurements.

No abstract

No abstract

Although providing support in romantic relationships is important for the well-being of both partners, providing support can be effortful. People have varying implicit theories about the exertion of effort; limited willpower theorists believe that mental resources become exhausted with use, while nonlimited willpower theorists believe that exerting effort can even prepare you for future exertion. While limited willpower theorists are more likely to experience depletion and limitations themselves, they may also be more likely to perceive and empathize with the depletion and limitations of their romantic partners. We conducted a daily diary study ( N = 363; 1,429 observations) to examine how willpower theories relate to participants’ intentions to support their romantic partners in the evenings. We find that limited theorists report their partners as more tired (predicting more intention to support)—however, limited theorists also report more fatigue and lower mood themselves (predicting less intention to support). Overall, limited willpower beliefs were associated with less, not more, intent to support one’s partner for the rest of the evening. Even if limited willpower theories improve people’s abilities to perceive their partner’s fatigue, at the end of the day, they may not feel they have the mental resources to support their romantic partners.

The ego-depletion effect is currently under scrutiny for low replicability, possibly reflecting the limited statistical power available in between-subject designs. In response, we created a within-subject, repeated-measures ego-depletion paradigm that repeatedly alternated depletion and recovery manipulations. Each manipulation was followed by measuring subjective fatigue, mood, and self-control performance. Across twelve studies (N = 754), participants reliably reported having less energy and lower mood after depleting manipulations compared to after recovery manipulations. Depletion manipulations did not consistently affect behavioral self-control, although the small effect was meta-analytically significant (d = .045). Furthermore, unintended fatigue and practice effects occurred over the course of the paradigm, systematically interfering with the intended depletion effects. We recommend that depletion research take advantage of within-subject designs without using repeated-measures.