Does mindfulness meditation increase empathy? An experiment

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive statistics per condition.

	Mindfulness (n = 54)		Relaxation (n = 51)		Control (n = 53)
	M	(SD)	M	(SD)	M	(SD)
Age	23.17	(4.29)	22.18	(3.35)	22.28	(3.87)
AQ	56.89	(8.35)	54.35	(8.89)	55.77	(9.05)
NPI-16	4.69	(3.01)	5.12	(3.18)	5.62	(2.64)
Pre-intervention
Attention	68.98	(22.10)	73.02	(18.58)	65.30	(23.04)
Relaxation	64.59	(25.37)	64.59	(21.02)	56.00	(24.78)
Affect	64.98	(18.24)	68.94	(17.62)	62.32	(20.80)
Post-intervention
Attention	72.72	(20.84)	73.80	(16.70)	58.81	(25.46)
Relaxation	79.78	(20.31)	84.25	(14.16)	77.36	(20.27)
Affect	73.06	(19.10)	79.35	(14.47)	71.79	(20.38)
MAAS-state	18.69	(4.44)	21.69	(4.21)	16.19	(3.76)
Empathy
Mind reading accuracy	25.89	(3.82)	26.14	(3.62)	25.45	(3.50)
Empathic phrases	3.71	(2.14)	3.58	(1.93)	3.25	(1.69)
Global empathy score	3.48	(0.97)	3.44	(1.11)	3.26	(1.07)
Proportion of throws to excluded player	0.53	(0.16)	0.51	(0.14)	0.47	(0.13)

Note. AQ = Autism Quotient, NPI-16 = Narcissistic Personality Inventory 16 items, MAAS-state = Mindfulness Attention and Awareness Scale – State.

Table 2. Correlation coefficients (Pearson’s r) between autistic traits, narcissistic traits, mindful awareness, and empathy variables.

	AQ	NPI-16	MAAS-state	Mind reading accuracy	Empathic phrases	Global empathy score
AQ
NPI-16	−.09
MAAS-state	−.22^**	−.17^*
Mind reading accuracy	−.00	−.01	.11
Empathic phrases	−.11	−.15	.12	.08
Global empathy score	−.11	−.06	.06	.06	.70^**
Proportion of throws to excluded player	.22^**	−.00	−.01	−.06	−.04	.02

Note. AQ = Autism Quotient, MAAS-state = Mindfulness Attention and Awareness Scale – State version, NPI-16 = Narcissistic Personality Inventory 16 items.

^* p < .05

^** p < .01.

Figure 1. Interaction effect between narcissistic traits and condition on mind reading accuracy, for narcissistic (M + 1 SD) and non-narcissistic (M – 1 SD) individuals. Control = pooled relaxation and control condition.