Emile Bruneau
Supervisors: Rebecca Saxe and Emily Falk
Phone: 857-203-2080
Address: Annenberg School for Communication
3620 Walnut St.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Phone: 857-203-2080
Address: Annenberg School for Communication
3620 Walnut St.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (7)
Uploads
Papers by Emile Bruneau
of anatomical and functional constraints. In this study, we compare three social cognitive localizer tasks,
designed to efficiently identify regions in the “Pain Matrix,” recruited in response to a person's physical pain,
and the “Theory of Mind network,” recruited in response to a person's mental states (i.e. beliefs and emotions).
Participants performed three tasks: first, the verbal false-belief stories task; second, a verbal task including stories
describing physical pain versus emotional suffering; and third, passively viewing a non-verbal animated movie,
which included segments depicting physical pain and beliefs and emotions. All three localizers were efficient in
identifying replicable, stable networks in individual subjects. The consistency across tasks makes all three tasks
viable localizers. Nevertheless, there were small reliable differences in the location of the regions and the pattern
of activity within regions, hinting at more specific representations. The new localizers go beyond those currently
available: first, they simultaneously identify two functional networks with no additional scan time, and second,
the non-verbal task extends the populations inwhomfunctional localizers can be applied. These localizerswill be
made publicly available.
directly compared neural responses to others’ physical pain and emotional suffering by presenting participants (n = 41) with
96 verbal stories, each describing a protagonist’s physical and/or emotional experience, ranging from neutral to extremely
negative. A separate group of participants rated ‘‘how much physical pain’’, and ‘‘how much emotional suffering’’ the
protagonist experienced in each story, as well as how ‘‘vivid and movie-like’’ the story was. Although ratings of Pain,
Suffering and Vividness were positively correlated with each other across stories, item-analyses revealed that each scale was
correlated with activity in distinct brain regions. Even within regions of the ‘‘Shared Pain network’’ identified using a separate
data set, responses to others’ physical pain and emotional suffering were distinct. More broadly, item analyses with
continuous predictors provided a high-powered method for identifying brain regions associated with specific aspects of
complex stimuli – like verbal descriptions of physical and emotional events.
toward out-group relative to in-groupmembers, but also by increased counter-empathic responses: Schadenfreude and Gluckschmerz (Experiment 1). Comparing responses to in-group and out-group targets against responses to unaffiliated targets in this competitive context suggests that intergroup empathy bias may be better characterized by out-group antipathy rather than extraordinary in-group empathy (Experiment 2). We also find that intergroup empathy bias is robust to changes in relative group standing—feedback indicating that the out-group has fallen behind (Experiment 3a) or is no longer a competitive threat (Experiment 3b) does not reduce the bias. However, reducing perceived in-group and out-group entitativity can significantly attenuate intergroup empathy bias (Experiment 4). This research establishes the boundary conditions of intergroup empathy bias and provides initial support for a more integrative framework of group-based empathy.
research, we found that reading stories about others' emotional suffering, by contrast, recruits a different group of brain regions mostly associated with thinking about others' minds. In the current study, we examined the neural circuits responsible for deliberately regulating empathic responses to others' pain and suffering. In Study 1, a sample of college-aged participants (n = 18) read stories about physically painful and emotionally distressing events during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), while either actively empathizing with the main character or trying to remain objective. In Study 2, the same experiment was performed with professional social workers,who are chronically exposed to human suffering (n=21). Across both studies activity in the amygdala was associated with empathic regulation towards others' emotional pain, but not their physical pain. In addition, psychophysiological interaction (PPI) analysis and Granger causal modeling (GCM) showed that amygdala activity while reading about others' emotional pain was preceded by and positively coupled with activity in the theory of mind brain regions, and followed by and negatively coupled with activity in regions associated with physical pain and bodily sensations. Previous work has shown that the amygdala is critically involved in the deliberate control of self-focused distress — the current results extend the central importance of amygdala activity to the control of other-focused empathy, but only when considering others' emotional pain.
of anatomical and functional constraints. In this study, we compare three social cognitive localizer tasks,
designed to efficiently identify regions in the “Pain Matrix,” recruited in response to a person's physical pain,
and the “Theory of Mind network,” recruited in response to a person's mental states (i.e. beliefs and emotions).
Participants performed three tasks: first, the verbal false-belief stories task; second, a verbal task including stories
describing physical pain versus emotional suffering; and third, passively viewing a non-verbal animated movie,
which included segments depicting physical pain and beliefs and emotions. All three localizers were efficient in
identifying replicable, stable networks in individual subjects. The consistency across tasks makes all three tasks
viable localizers. Nevertheless, there were small reliable differences in the location of the regions and the pattern
of activity within regions, hinting at more specific representations. The new localizers go beyond those currently
available: first, they simultaneously identify two functional networks with no additional scan time, and second,
the non-verbal task extends the populations inwhomfunctional localizers can be applied. These localizerswill be
made publicly available.
directly compared neural responses to others’ physical pain and emotional suffering by presenting participants (n = 41) with
96 verbal stories, each describing a protagonist’s physical and/or emotional experience, ranging from neutral to extremely
negative. A separate group of participants rated ‘‘how much physical pain’’, and ‘‘how much emotional suffering’’ the
protagonist experienced in each story, as well as how ‘‘vivid and movie-like’’ the story was. Although ratings of Pain,
Suffering and Vividness were positively correlated with each other across stories, item-analyses revealed that each scale was
correlated with activity in distinct brain regions. Even within regions of the ‘‘Shared Pain network’’ identified using a separate
data set, responses to others’ physical pain and emotional suffering were distinct. More broadly, item analyses with
continuous predictors provided a high-powered method for identifying brain regions associated with specific aspects of
complex stimuli – like verbal descriptions of physical and emotional events.
toward out-group relative to in-groupmembers, but also by increased counter-empathic responses: Schadenfreude and Gluckschmerz (Experiment 1). Comparing responses to in-group and out-group targets against responses to unaffiliated targets in this competitive context suggests that intergroup empathy bias may be better characterized by out-group antipathy rather than extraordinary in-group empathy (Experiment 2). We also find that intergroup empathy bias is robust to changes in relative group standing—feedback indicating that the out-group has fallen behind (Experiment 3a) or is no longer a competitive threat (Experiment 3b) does not reduce the bias. However, reducing perceived in-group and out-group entitativity can significantly attenuate intergroup empathy bias (Experiment 4). This research establishes the boundary conditions of intergroup empathy bias and provides initial support for a more integrative framework of group-based empathy.
research, we found that reading stories about others' emotional suffering, by contrast, recruits a different group of brain regions mostly associated with thinking about others' minds. In the current study, we examined the neural circuits responsible for deliberately regulating empathic responses to others' pain and suffering. In Study 1, a sample of college-aged participants (n = 18) read stories about physically painful and emotionally distressing events during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), while either actively empathizing with the main character or trying to remain objective. In Study 2, the same experiment was performed with professional social workers,who are chronically exposed to human suffering (n=21). Across both studies activity in the amygdala was associated with empathic regulation towards others' emotional pain, but not their physical pain. In addition, psychophysiological interaction (PPI) analysis and Granger causal modeling (GCM) showed that amygdala activity while reading about others' emotional pain was preceded by and positively coupled with activity in the theory of mind brain regions, and followed by and negatively coupled with activity in regions associated with physical pain and bodily sensations. Previous work has shown that the amygdala is critically involved in the deliberate control of self-focused distress — the current results extend the central importance of amygdala activity to the control of other-focused empathy, but only when considering others' emotional pain.