Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34621207›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Exploring the Question: "Does Empathy Work in the Same Way in Online and In-Person Therapeutic Settings?"

Raffaele Sperandeo, Valeria Cioffi, Lucia Luciana Mosca, Teresa Longobardi, Enrico Moretto, Yari Mirko Alfano, Cristiano Scandurra, Benedetta Muzii, Daniela Cantone, Carmela Guerriera and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Computational Methods in Psychotherapy: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Raffaele SperandeoPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Valeria CioffiPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Lucia Luciana MoscaPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Teresa LongobardiPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Enrico MorettoPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Yari Mirko AlfanoPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Cristiano ScandurraDepartment of Neurosciences and Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Benedetta MuziiDepartment of Humanistic Studies, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Daniela CantoneDepartment of Psychology, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy.
Carmela GuerrieraDepartment of Psychology, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy.
Marco ArchitravoPostgraduate School of Integrated Gestalt Psychotherapy, Torre Annunziata, Italy.
Nelson Mauro MaldonatoDepartment of Neurosciences and Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Providing remote psychotherapy using technology is a growing practice, especially since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Even if in numerous studies video conferencing psychotherapy (VCP) was found to be clinically effective, some doubts continue to exist about how the psychotherapeutic alliance works in the online setting, and the characteristics of the empathic process are still poorly understood. This is an exploratory study aimed at analyzing the degree of empathy between the psychotherapist and client pair, and the degree of support perceived by the client who shall be referred to as the patient interchangeably in this study, comparing the sessions in person with those online, during the current pandemic, in order to discriminate the impact of empathy in the digital setting. The sample analyzed was composed of 23 patients with different severity of pathology engaged in online and in-person therapeutic sessions with five psychotherapists of different theoretical leanings. The scores of the support and empathy scale, obtained by both members of the psychotherapeutic couple in the two settings, were analyzed and compared. The test used belongs to an Italian adaptation of the Empathic Understanding (EU) of the Relationship Inventory. What emerged from comparing the scores was interesting: Unlike the psychotherapists, the patients perceived their therapists as significantly more empathic and supportive in the remote setting. These are rather important data, because the literature documents that client empathic perception measures represent a more accurate measure of the empathic relationship and, in general, can predict a good treatment outcome. Although these results need further investigation, they represent an important contribution in filling the scientific gap in the understanding of digital empathy. Also, this study provides new insights for future research on the characteristics and impact empathy has on the practice of remote psychotherapy.

Indexed as

digital empathyelectronic-based therapyin-person therapeutic settingsonline therapeutic settingsremote clinical psychologytelepsychologyvideo conferencing psychotherapy

Identifiers

PMID34621207
PMCPMC8490728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.