Skip to main content
Log in

Sympathy, empathy, and physician resource utilization

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective:To test the hypothesis that physicians preferring a sympathetic over an empathetic response to a hypothetical patient’s misfortune will utilize more health care resources in the care of their patients.

Design:Physicians were asked to select either the sympathetic response or the empathetic response to a hypothetical patient’s misfortune (death of a spouse) and to state their preferences for intubation of a hypothetical end-stage lung-disease patient. For each physician, hospital records were retrospectively reviewed to assess the mean number of laboratory tests ordered per clinic patient and the mean duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitations he or she performed before declaring his or her efforts unsuccessful.

Setting:General medicine clinic at a large urban hospital.

Participants:101 physicians above the postgraduate year-1 level who attended the general medicine clinic.

Measurements and main results:As hypothesized, physicians selecting the sympathetic option (n=58) had a greater mean preference for intubation (p<0.02), ordered more laboratory tests per patient in clinic (p<0.03), and performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation for longer periods of time before declaring their efforts unsuccessful (p<0.06) than did physicians selecting the empathetic option (n=38).

Conclusions:These data suggest that the constructs of sympathy and empathy reflect psychological aspects of physicians that have a measurable influence on their practice behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wispé L. The distinction between sympathy and empathy. To call forth a concept, a word is needed. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50:314–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nightingale SD. Risk preference and laboratory use. Med Decis Making. 1987;7:168–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Nightingale SD, Grant M. Risk preference and decision making in critical care situations. Chest. 1988;93:684–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pearlman RA, Inui TS, Carter WB. Variability in physician bioethical decision making. A case of euthanasia. Ann Intern Med. 1982;97:420–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Magnusson D. Test theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Stevens J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Reynolds HT. The analysis of cross classifications. New York: Free Press, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eisenberg JM. Physician utilization. The state of research about physicians’ practice patterns. Med Care. 1985;23:461–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wennberg JE. The paradox of appropriate care. JAMA. 1987;258:2568–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation (SES-8822337).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nightingale, S.D., Yarnold, P.R. & Greenberg, M.S. Sympathy, empathy, and physician resource utilization. J Gen Intern Med 6, 420–423 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02598163

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02598163

Key words

Navigation