Unlearning the Empathy Stereotype

The notion that we can step into another person’s experience and use intuition alone to understand them isn’t helpful — it’s hubris.

I know because I used to be that person. I used to feel like empathy was my superpower because I conformed to the stereotype of what an empath was supposed to be. But now — I’m convinced I was wrong.

Stereotypical Empathy is Confirmation Bias

In 2020, I got a book deal to write about empathy on a highly technical level. Once I dove into the details and followed the research, I realized how my lifelong idea of being an empath was incredibly problematic.

The more I relied on my intuition to understand others, the more I identified with being an empath. But really, my confidence came from interpreting my abilities incorrectly. I was succumbing confirmation bias, which is favoring information that supports your existing beliefs.

Exuding confidence in my abilities to “read” others gave me a sense of pride. I rarely questioned my intuition because I felt there was no need. I consistently received feedback about how I could sense what people needed without words. My social circles were filled with other empaths. When I “walked in someone else’s shoes,” I often imagined what I would do in their situation. I was following the golden rule?(treating others how I wanted to be treated) instead of the platinum rule (treating others how they wanted to be treated).

Swapping Psychic Abilities for Pragmatism

Today, I’m trying to be a better empath. A pragmatic empath. Someone who stops treating inferences as fact. Someone who validates assumptions and gathers data. Someone who tests ideas, conducts experiments, and gets excited when I get a surprise result. I’m okay with being wrong.

Switching my mindset to pragmatism has been life-changing. I’ve become a better friend, communicator, leader, co-worker, partner, parent, and community member. I’m calmer, set better boundaries, and can more easily collaborate with people who approach the world differently than I do.

That’s why I’ve started this newsletter. I feel compelled to share what I’ve learned. For folks like me, I want you to recognize why stereotypical empathy isn’t really what empathy is. For folks who don’t fit the current empathy stereotype, I want to empower you and show you that you’re probably better at empathy than you believe. For everyone, I want to provide practical practices to help us all collaborate better together.

Stereotypes Have Sway

So, where do we get our ideas that empaths have psychic abilities? Well, it’s ingrained in our culture — particularly in science fiction/fantasy and superhero genres, with Jedis, Wonder Woman, Yondu, Deanna Troi, Starfox, and Professor X, as just a few examples.

These genetically gifted telepaths sense other people’s thoughts with certainty and use their psychic abilities to enter (or even control) another person’s mind. Once you notice this trope, you’ll start to see it everywhere. No wonder empathy is touted as a superpower —?we’ve been cognitively primed to think of it this way.

These cultural stereotypes hold significant power. They are signals of identity and belonging. If we want to observe their power, we can look to an example that is well documented —?cultural stereotypes play a significant role in whether girls even give computer science a try.

This was me 100%. When I read the research, it feels like someone has opened my personal journal where I bear my insecurities. I strongly identified with the “girls are bad at math” trope, which tanked my motivation and confidence. When it came to selecting a major in college, I never even considered software development as something I could study. I assumed I wouldn’t be good, not because I actually had a competency deficit, but because the cultural signaling was so strong.

As more research emerges, we are starting to discover that the same principle is likely true for empathy stereotypes. In the Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science, Erika Weisz reports how “When people fail to empathize, they may conclude that they are unable to empathize or that they are not empathic people.”

Sound familiar? To me, the “nerds are bad with people” trope is just the other side of the same coin as the “girls are bad at math” trope. If this is something you’ve identified with, chances are your empathic capacity is just fine, and you can develop empathy-related skills with the right motivation, training, and practice.

Failure Is the Norm

Stereotypical empathy significantly skews our ideas of accuracy. When empathy is presented as a psychic power, it would seem that empaths have a nearly 100% accuracy rate, which simply isn’t the case. According to Willam Ickes, who has been studying empathic accuracy in humans for several decades, failure is the norm.

• Strangers infer each other’s thoughts and feelings with an average accuracy score of about 20%
• Close friends make these inferences with an average accuracy score of about 30%
• Married couples achieve average accuracy scores that usually range no higher than 35%.
• It is rare for an individual to achieve an accuracy score of above 50%

These findings have significant implications. For people who feel like empathy is their superpower, these statistics should be a huge piece of humble pie. For people who have traditionally been outside of the stereotypical empathy ideal, these statistics should help you realize that you’re not a failure because failure is the norm. If you find it challenging to identify and name emotions, place more weight on what’s explicitly stated than what’s implied, or need time to process social information, you don’t have an empathy deficit —?you have an empathy difference.

More Empathy Mythbusting

As you continue to follow the research, you’ll find that the empathy as a superpower stereotype is just the beginning. There are many more myths that get dispelled. As it turns out, empathy isn’t in our genes or a single brain region. It’s nearly ubiquitous among humans, even though it doesn’t look the same for everyone. We can’t reliably interpret people’s emotions through facial expressions, so that’s not empathy either. While there are hormonal and neurological differences between how men and women process empathy, there are no consistent gender differences in empathy ability. Our ability to empathize well is highly dependent on our capacity, calmness, context, motivation, and skill. Empathy doesn’t happen in big dramatic displays. It’s in the small and seemingly mundane interactions we experience in everyday life. Empathy requires dialogue, and imagining ourselves in another person’s experience often causes more harm than good.

Shed the Stereotype with a Scientific Mindset

If you’re like me, these findings were enlightening. They challenged me to rethink my ideas of empathy and think like a scientist —?not a psychic. If you’re ready to shed the empathy stereotypes, too, here are some habits that will serve you.

Be Humble

You don’t know everything —?and that’s okay. No one else does either. Empathy works best when we recognize that we’re wrong more than we’re right. When we approach empathy with humility, we open ourselves up to the opportunity for new understanding.

Stay Curious

Scientists are constantly questioning the world around them, recognizing that there really isn’t a finish line in the pursuit of understanding. New revelations bring about new questions to be explored. As we seek to understand people, this same idea applies. We will never fully understand another person’s experience, but that doesn’t mean we can’t stay curious and keep trying to learn more.?

Embrace Doubt

Scientists are skeptical. They question their assumptions. They look for reasons they could be wrong instead of looking for confirmations of why they must be right. When new information is discovered, they update their understanding and ask new questions. A good scientist recognizes cognitive biases and logical fallacies and does their best to guard against them.

Research, Research, Research

A good scientist recognizes that one or two data points can’t make a trend. The more data, the better the understanding. The bigger the claim, the more evidence is required to support it. Good scientists also take care to note the quality of their data sources, too. Anecdotes and casual observations may be intriguing and provoke our curiosity, but they are rarely considered useful for drawing conclusions.?

Treat Inferences as Hypotheses

When we observe another person’s behavior, we make an inference. It’s just an educated guess. If we see someone scowl, we might assume they are upset, but that doesn’t guarantee they are. Pragmatic empathy means treating an inference as a hypothesis, not a fact. It’s our best guess at what another person is experiencing. To find out if our analysis is accurate, we need to collect data. Assertions in the absence of data are merely assumptions.

Include Abductive Reasoning

When it comes to reasoning about people, the pursuit of perfection can often impede our efforts. Individual’s inner worlds can’t be deduced like a mathematical proof. Similarly, we can’t guarantee individuals adhere to a pattern in the population because there is always variation. This means we need to use a different type of reasoning that helps us gather insights about incomplete data. Abductive reasoning helps us turn intuition into an observable and logical process that helps us figure out which evidence we should collect to learn more.

1. State several possible inferences that could be true.?
2. Choose one inference that is the best fit, given the information you have.
3. Turn the inference into a workable hypothesis.
4. Collect evidence.
5. Update your internal dataset and repeat.?

With pragmatic empathy, we do our best to uncover the truth while also recognizing that we will never be able to confidently verify the truth.?

Think in Systems

Empathy, emotions, and behavior aren’t linear. They can’t be derived from a single cause. Environment, physiology, past experience, motivation, and more all play a role. Inner reasoning can only be understood through a holistic, systems point of view. Adopting a reductionist, cause/effect mentality doesn’t lead us to empathy; it leads us to blame. By embracing systems thinking, we grow our capacity for empathy.