ArticlePloS one2026
Feel what you read: Specific aspects of empathy modulate semantic retrieval processes and representational content of emotion-label, emotion-laden, and neutral abstract words.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Building on evidence for experience-specific grounding of word meaning and interindividual differences therein, this study investigated how specific aspects of empathy modulate the processing and representation of abstract emotional words. We investigated single-trial N400 amplitudes as a measure of semantic retrieval in 78 healthy adults during a delayed lexical decision task with emotion-label, emotion-laden, and neutral abstract words. We further measured the participants' levels of empathic concern, fantasy, personal distress, and perspective taking. Additionally, ratings on valence, arousal, and emotional experience quantified the words' emotional representational content. While direct comparison yielded no evidence for N400 differences between word types, N400 amplitudes in response to emotion-label words decreased with increasing fantasy scores, with this modulation being stronger than for emotion-laden and neutral words. Additionally, participants with higher fantasy scores rated emotional words higher in absolute valence. The observed N400 reductions thus seem to reflect fantasy-driven processing facilitation graded by the words' emotionality level. In contrast, we found no evidence for N400 modulations by empathic concern, personal distress, or perspective taking while affective ratings on all scales increased with increasing empathic concern scores. Our findings suggest that fantasy facilitates emotion-label word processing, and empathic concern enriches emotional word meaning representations, demonstrating interindividual differences in the experiential grounding of emotional abstract concepts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.