Is Cognitive Empathy More Important than Affective Empathy? A Response to "Who Helps Natural‐Disaster Victims?"

In: Analyses of social issues and public policy, Band 12, Heft 1, S. 268-271

Abstract

Some social science research pays more attention to affective than cognitive empathy and much of the practitioner literature advises fundraisers to privilege emotion over reason when appealing to donors. "Who Helps Natural‐Disaster Victims" (Marjanovic, Struthers, & Greenglass, 2011. Who helps natural‐disaster victims? Assessment of trait and situational predictors. Analyses of Social and Public Policy, on‐line access.) challenges the assumption that emotions are most important and finds that cognitive empathy or perspective taking is more important than affective empathy in predicting actual helping behaviors after natural disasters. This comment argues that cognitive empathy is important because it helps potential donors avoid blaming the victim in human‐caused disasters. It suggests that nonprofits can use cognitive empathy to construct fundraising appeals using arguments based on reason and justice, which may be more effective with educated donors than emotion‐based appeals.