Empathy Davis (1994) multidimensional approach: Perspective taking (PT): adopt the viewpoint of others (“I sometimes attempt to understand my friends by imagining how things look from their perspective”) Emotional concern (EC): experience compassion for unfortunate others (“I have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me”) Personal distress (PD): experience distress in response to distress in others (“Being in a tense emotional situation scares me”) Fantasy (F): imaginatively transpose oneself into fictional situations (“When reading an interesting story, I imagine how I would feel if the events were happening to me”)

Empathy and Values (Perspective taking): +UN (BEN), - POW, SEC (Riska, 2003,Finnish adults (Red Cross volunteers), SVS, IRI; the same for both sexes) (Emotional:)+ BEN (UN), - POW, (ACH), (SEC), HED, SD (above sample; Myyry & Helkama, Educ. Psychol. 2001, SVS, QMEE (university students); Kallionpää (13-16-year- olds): strong for men, weak for fem.)

Guilt, Shame and Values Guilt: negative evaluation of specific behaviour + tendency to take reparative actions Shame: negative evaluation of global self + desire to escape or hide Tangney TOSCA (1992): scenarios, e.g. ”You make a big mistake on an important project at work. People were depending on you and your boss criticizes you” Rate the likelihood of reacting with: -”I want to hide” (shame) - ”I should have done a better job” (guilt)

guilt, shame and values (cntd) TOSCA guilt : consistently correlated with perspective taking and empathic concern (Tangney & Dearing, 2002; Silfver, submitted, Finnish university and high school students) TOSCA shame: + personal distress, - other oriented empathy TOSCA guilt and values: + BEN, UN, CONF, - POW (???) (Silfver, submitted, Finnish high school students, PVQ, adolescent TOSCA) Problem with TOSCA guilt: most scenarios involve consequences for human beings. How about norm violations without such (immediate) consequences?

Norm-related guilt Add scenarios with actions having no immediate consequences to others (crossing against red, not paying TV licence)

Hypotheses Perspective-taking is related: + UN (BEN), - others Empathic concern is related: + BEN (UN), - others TOSCA guilt is related: + UN, BEN, CONF, - others Norm guilt is related: + CONF, TRAD, SEC, - ST, HED Connections are weaker in countries where conformity is more important (high hierarchy, power distance)

Cross-cultural variation Countries: Finland, Bulgaria, Portugal Schwartz Hierarchy: High: Bulgaria (2.7), Low: Finland (1.8), Portugal (2.1) (M= 2.3) Hofstede Power Distance: High: Bulgaria (70), Portugal (63), Low: Finland (33)

METHOD Samples Social science/psychology students, women Helsinki, n=131, Sofia, n=111, Coimbra n= 176 Measures Schwartz PVQ Davis IRI Tangney TOSCA -plus norm guilt:

Means and standard deviations in values FinlandBulgariaPortugalp-value Universalism1.24 (0.19) (0.14) (0.14) 3.<.001 Benevolence1.21 (0.14) (0.16) (0.13) 1.<.001 Self-direction1.20 (0.18) (0.17) (0.16) 2.ns. Hedonism1.08 (0.24) (0.27) (0.23) 4.ns. Security1.01 (0.18) (0.17) (0.14) 5.ns. Stimulation0.97 (0.22) (0.29) (0.24) 6.<.01 Achievement0.95 (0.22) (0.21) (0.20) 7.<.001 Conformity0.89 (0.20) (0.17) (0.18) 8.ns. Power0.72 (0.20) (0.26) (0.20) 10.<.001 Tradition0.71 (0.19) (0.23) (0.19) 9.<.001

Means and standard deviations in guilt, shame and empathy FinlandBulgariaPortugalp-value TOSCA-guilt4.31 (0.40)4.29 (0.46)4.16 (0.43)<.01 TOSCA-shame2.86 (0.71)2.92 (0.66)2.75 (0.50)ns. Norm-related guilt3.18 (0.68)3.18 (0.81)3.32 (0.61)ns. Empathic concern2.88 (0.54)2.88 (0.58)3.10 (0.49)<.001 Perspective-taking2.56 (0.56)2.43 (0.64)2.64 (0.55)<.05 Personal distress1.83 (0.60)2.28 (0.74)2.34 (0.72)<.001 Fantasy2.80 (0.61)2.44 (0.82)2.66 (0.74)<.01

Correlations between TOSCA-guilt and values TOSCA-guilt FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism.11.21*.04 Benevolence.13.30**.05 Tradition Conformity Security Power-.19*-.30**.06 Achievement Hedonism ***.06 Stimulation *.02 Self-direction

Correlations between norm-related guilt and values Norm-related guilt FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism Benevolence.06.28**.00 Tradition.12.35***.08 Conformity.29**.36***.21** Security.06.22*-.01 Power **-.02 Achievement Hedonism-.29**-.46***-.15* Stimulation-.29**-.35***-.20** Self-direction **-.21**

Correlations between shame and values Tosca-shame FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism Benevolence Tradition.29** Conformity.20* Security Power-.19* Achievement Hedonism **-.04 Stimulation Self-direction-.20* *

Correlations between empathic concern and values Empathic concern FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism.26** Benevolence.24**.46***.23** Tradition.10.21*.13 Conformity Security.09.19*.03 Power-.20*-.39***-.11 Achievement-.30**-.32**-.20** Hedonism Stimulation Self-direction *-.23**

Correlations between perspective-taking and values Perspective- taking FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism.14.37***.20** Benevolence.22*.31**.25** Tradition Conformity Security.23** Power-.28**-.39***-.19* Achievement-.23**-.33***-.10 Hedonism *-.11 Stimulation Self-direction

Correlations between personal distress and values Personal distress FinlandBulgariaPortugal Universalism Benevolence Tradition.26**.41***.21** Conformity.09.40***.06 Security.07.29**.12 Power-.22*-.25**.00 Achievement *.07 Hedonism *.03 Stimulation ***-.17* Self-direction-.21*-.32**-.30***

Conclusions Support for two motivational systems: (1) UN, BEN associated with empathy (perspective- taking & empathic concern), However, not so clearly with guilt (empathy-based guilt in particular; problems with measure) (2) CONF, TRAD associated with guilt over norm violations, and also with shame (in Finland only) Unexpected: TRAD predicted personal distress (TRAD as a means of coping with distress?)

Conclusions continued Contrary to hypotheses, associations stronger in a high hierarchy country (Bulgaria) and weaker in low hierarchy countries (Finland, Portugal). However, the 3 countries showed no differences on conformity. Possible (speculative) explanations: Bulgaria the most ”individualistic” sample (high ACH), where UN & BEN non-normative); Portugal highest scoring on Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance -> traditional gender roles, not value priorities, regulate reports on empathy and guilt