Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41034375›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Cultural differences in self-reported empathy in Indonesia.

Sarah Nila, Christine Webb, Bambang Suryobroto, Alecia Carter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Sarah NilaDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Stockton Rd, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK. sarahnila88@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3985-4949
Christine WebbDepartment of Human Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Bambang SuryobrotoDepartment of Biology, IPB University, Dramaga, Indonesia.
Alecia CarterDepartment of Anthropology, University College London, 14 Taviton St, London, WC1H 0BW, UK. alecia.carter@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

Templeton World Charity Foundation (Templeton World Charity Foundation, Inc.) TWCF0439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Empathy, comprising cognitive and affective components, is linked to numerous individual and societal benefits, including enhanced well-being and prosocial behaviours. However, empathy might also hinder societal flourishing due to biases resulting from factors like social closeness. This study explored cultural variation in empathy within Indonesia, a non-WEIRD context with diverse ethnicities, religions, and social structures. We hypothesized that cultural factors such as ethnicity, primary residence, religious beliefs, and social class would predict empathy differences. Using standardised questionnaires, we assessed helping behaviour, situational empathic concern, directed empathic concern, and personal distress in 2869 Indonesian adults. Regression analyses revealed that gender, age, ethnicity, residence, religion, and perceived social class significantly predicted empathy components. Notably, Javanese and Sundanese participants reported higher empathy levels than Minangkabau, and Muslims showed more empathy than other religious groups. Additionally, higher perceived social status correlated with increased helping behaviour and emotional empathy, but it also correlated with lower personal distress. These findings highlight the complex interplay of cultural factors in shaping empathy, with implications for understanding socioemotional dynamics across diverse societies.

Indexed as

EmpathyAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsCross-Cultural ComparisonCultureFemaleHumansIndonesiaMaleMiddle AgedReligionSelf ReportSex FactorsSocial ClassCross-cultural empathyIndonesiaNon-WEIRD societyProsociality

Identifiers

PMID41034375
PMCPMC12488945

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.