P the main impact of cultural group,F (p p remained significant when controlling for p perceived pain. The direction in the findings did not alter as these reported inside the outcomes of Study . Intensity and impact valence ratings for Chinese video target equaled and ,respectively. For Chinese video target ,intensity and have an effect on valence ratings equaled and ,respectively.StudyTo examine whether or not an ingroup benefit effect explains the cultural variations observed in empathic responses reported so far,we asked a group of British and Chinese participants to report (a) their own affective state even though watching the videos (as in Studies and,(b) their empathic concern for the target in the video (as in Study,(c) inferences of the target’s emotional stateHOW CULTURE SHAPES EMPATHIC RESPONSESfrom the stimulus improvement phase in the present study (Chinese targets) and also the two videos chosen in the stimulus improvement phase in Study (British targets). As participants watched the videos,they constantly indicated their own individual affective state employing the have an effect on rating dial applied in the previous two research. Participants then completed the PANAS things as did targets in the stimulus development phase,with guidelines to judge the target’s feelings because the target was recalling the occasion Linolenic acid methyl ester site within the video. Finally,participants completed a subset of emotional adjectives taken from the ERQ (Coke et al to indicate their feelings of empathic concern. As soon as participants had watched all of the videos and indicated their responses on all the measures,they were thanked,debriefed and paid for their participation. Impact rating. As in Research and ,affect rating was measured continuously in the course of every video presentation utilizing a rating dial (see Study for details). Empathic concern. The ERQ was utilised to assess feelings of empathic concern participants experienced when watching every single in the videos (targetCH: BR CH , targetCH; BR CH , targetBR: BR CH , targetBR: BR CH) (see Study for details). The identical products utilized in Study had been applied within the present study. Perceived pain. Perceived pain scores were obtained employing precisely the same measure used in Research and . Empathic accuracy. The exact same process described in Study was used to compute absolute difference scores among every PANAS emotion score reported by the targets in the videos and those reported by the participants. All feelings had been then collapsed to make empathic accuracy scores in response to each and every target (targetCH: BR CH , targetCH: BR , targetBR: BR CH , targetBR: BR CH CH). As in Study ,every single typical empathic accuracy scores was multiplied by in order that a lower score reflected reduce empathic accuracy as well as a larger score reflected higher empathic accuracy.ResultsAs in the earlier studies,we 1st examined whether the two cultural groups perceived comparable levels of discomfort in video targets. Subsequent,we analyzed cultural differences in the outcome measures PubMed ID:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22050343 in response to observing social pain videos (see Table for descriptive statistics). To this purpose,we performed separate repeatedmeasures ANOVAs with perceived discomfort,have an effect on rating,empathic concern,and empathic accuracy as dependent variables. In each and every ANOVA,cultural group (British vs. Chinese) was entered as the betweensubjects variable and video target (video targetBR vs. video targetBR vs. video targetCH vs. video targetCH) was entered as the withinsubjects variable. Preliminary analyses that integrated sex as an more aspect revealed no significant major effects or interac.