Do you know what the hot-cold empathy gap is? It is a cognitive bias through which we underestimate the influence of visceral (emotional) impulses on our own behaviour, preferences and attitudes. This bias was coined by George Loewenstein, a psychologist at Carnegie Mellon University.

In this article we tell you what this bias is, what typologies of it exist and how it can influence our decision-making.

Hot-Cold Empathy Gap

The bias of the hot-cold empathy gap has to do with what we feel ; thus, our understanding of things depends on the state in which we are immersed. That is, if we are angry, it is difficult for us to imagine being calm, but also if we are in love; in this case, it is difficult for us to imagine not being so in the future.

In other words, what we feel determines our understanding of things, and makes it difficult for us to see them differently at that very moment.

In this line, the cold-hot empathy gap translates into an inability to foresee how we will behave in a given emotional (or even passionate) state, even if we have lived it before . This bias may lead us to make mistakes, or to make decisions that we later regret.

Bias directions

On the other hand, the cold-hot empathy gap can take two directions. Let’s analyze each one of them:

1. Hot to cold

People are said to be in a “hot state” when they are influenced by an emotional state (that is, when visceral factors come into play).

Under this state, they have difficulty fully understanding the extent to which their behavior is being driven by what they are feeling . Instead, they think that what they actually do in the short term is determined by what they want in the long term.

2. From cold to hot

In the opposite state, from cold to hot, people are placed in a “cold state”. But what does this mean? That they have difficulty imagining themselves in “hot states” (emotional).

Thus, contrary to the previous case, they underestimate the strength of their visceral impulses in their behaviour or decision making . What are the consequences of this? A lack of preparation when emotional impulses arise.

Types

The cold-hot empathy gap, moreover, can be classified according to two parameters: its “location” in time (past or future) and according to whether the events are intrapersonal or interpersonal.

1. Intrapersonal Prospective

In this case, we talk about the difficulties people have in predicting their own future behaviour , when they are in a different emotional state than they would be in the future.

In other words, and with a simple example; if we are very sad now, it is hard to imagine being very happy in the future.

2. Intrapersonal Retrospective

In this second type, retrospective, the temporal location is located in the past; thus, it is about the difficulties that we manifest to remember (or understand) certain behaviors that we had in the past , in a different state from the current one.

That is, if these behaviors occurred in a different emotional state than now, we may have difficulty remembering or even understanding them.

3. Interpersonal

Finally, the third case of the hot-cold empathy gap, according to the interpersonal parameter, would be the following: the attempts we make to evaluate both the behaviours and the preferences of others, in a different state from our own . Well, according to this bias, we would have difficulties to evaluate them.

Visceral factors

We have talked about visceral factors (or visceral impulses) to explain the hot-cold empathy gap. But, what exactly are these factors?

The word visceral comes from viscera, from the Latin “viscera”, which means “entrails”. It also denotes other meanings, such as “maternal womb” (uterus), “the innermost part of the heart” or “the instincts”. Visceral also means intense and irrational, and is often related to primitive emotional states.

Thus, visceral factors include different states, such as: sexual excitement, thirst, hunger, pain, strong emotions… When we make decisions, visceral factors influence much more than we think (that is why it is often better to stop, calm down and wait for that state to “pass”, in order to decide more serenely and more in accordance with what we really want).

When we are immersed in a visceral state, we speak of being in a state of heat (as we have already mentioned); it is under this type of state that our mind will tend to ignore many of the stimuli needed to make sensible decisions.

We must bear in mind that hot states are also related to hasty decision making, impulsiveness and the possibility of losing control.

How do we deal with the hot-cold empathy gap?

Anticipating it, or rather, the hot or cold state in which we will find ourselves. The fact of anticipating, will allow us to foresee how we could behave in such a situation , and even take action before immersing ourselves in such a state.

Sexuality in the youngest

We find it interesting to answer this question, because this bias is of great importance in issues such as sexuality (especially among adolescents and young people).

Doesn’t the fact that we are about to have sex plunge us into a state of passion, and that many young people, faced with this state, “let themselves go” and do not use condoms? That is why the solution is to always carry it with us, and to think that we should use it before reaching this visceral state.

In a cold state (far from the sexual moment) we can think that we will act in a certain way in the hot state (in the moment of the sexual act), but it is difficult to foresee, and that is exactly what the gap of cold-hot empathy talks about.

In short; we will never act the same from a cold state as from a hot one , and what we may think we will do in each of these states will always be far from reality.

Final Reflection

In short, what denotes the hot-cold empathy gap, as its name indicates, is a lack of empathy in certain situations . Thus, what this bias says, is that in a “cold” state, we do not anticipate too effectively how we would react in a “hot” situation, and vice versa. In this sense we will have a hard time being right.

Surely most of us have experienced this bias at some time, since, let’s not fool ourselves; it’s not the same to hypothesize about something we feel at the moment, as it is to hypothesize about what we would do in a different state than at present (for example, what would you do if you got pregnant very young? Would you have an abortion? Who knows… this bias may be influencing you).

Bibliographic references:

  • Ariely, D. (2017). The traps of desire. Mexico: Booket
  • Loewenstein, George (2005). “Cold/Hot Empathy Gaps and Medical Decision Making” (PDF) . Health psychology . 24(4, Suppl.): S49 – S56.
  • Cut from Kohan, N. & Macbeth, G.(2006). Cognitive biases in decision making. Argentine Catholic University. Faculty of Psychology and Education. Department of Psychology, 2(3).
  • Nordgren, Loran F.; Banas, Kasia; MacDonald, Geoff (2011). “Empathy gaps for social pain: why people underestimate the pain of social suffering”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology . 100 (1): 120–128.
  • Van Boven, sheet; Loewenstein, George; Dunning, David; Nordgren, Loran F. (2013). “Changing places: a double-judgement model of empathy gaps in emotional perspective taking” (PDF) . In Zanna, Mark P.; Olson, James M. (eds.). Advances in experimental social psychology . 48 . Academic Press pp. 117-171.

    • .