Placing Compassion in a Neurobiological and Evolutionary Framework

Stephanie L. Brown
Center for Medical Humanities, Compassionate Care, and Bioethics Preventive Medicine SUNY-Stony Brook & Research Center for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research & Psychology, University of Michigan

What is compassion?

Compassion motivates us to help others

Connecting compassion to scientific theories of helping

n If
n

compassion
can be thought of as part of the motivational basis for helping others we may be able to learn more about compassion through the lens of Selective investment theory
(Brown & Brown, 2006, Psychological Inquiry Target Article)
n

n Then
n

A theory about the motivation for helping others

Selective investment theory (SIT) recasts the functional significance of close relationships
n

TRADITIONAL VIEW:

Connections with others (social bonds) represent a motivational system for helping us stay close to those we need, to get more resources for ourselves to help us survive and reproduce.

SIT (whats in it for someone other than me?):

n

social bonds represent a motivational system for helping us GIVE AWAY away what we need to help others survive and reproduce.

Evolutionary origin of this motivation to give is parenting

Compassion may exist in nonhumans

What we know about parenting mechanisms might teach us something about human compassion

Brain circuits(Numan, 2006) that drive parenting

n

What do we know?

Directed by:
n

Medial preoptic area of the hypothalamus actives neural circuitry that results in releasing motor programs for helping behavior Inhibition of competing stress response ALSO, Inhibition of competing reward-seeking drives Maternal experience

Mediated by:
n n

Moderated by
n

Towards a neurobiological framework for understanding compassion and prosocial behavior (Brown & Preston, revise and resubmit,
Perspectives in Psychological Science)
Relationship Variables MOFC, ACC, (Relase of OT from PVN) Stress Regulation and Health (e.g., decreased coupling of Amy-PAG, reduced inflammation)

Cues for Helping (Amygdala, sgACC)

CAREGIVING MOTIVATION (Hypothalamus)

Individual Differences
Self Efficacy (HabenulaDA & Serotonin) Secure Attachment Style (OT and AVP polymorphisms) Safety Cues (Vagal Tone)

Prosocial Behavior OTHER SOURCES OF MOTIVATION (OFC--Nucleus Accumbens)

We have found...
n The

existence of hormonal correlates of relationship variables that reduce stress and trigger helping behavior (Carter, 1998; Brown, Fredrickson, et al.,
2009)

n Helping

behavior under conditions of closeness and compassion accelerates recovery from stress (Brown, Johnson, Fredrickson, et al., in
preparation)

StudySchultheiss, Smith, in preparation)Lopez. Seng, Konrath, Carter, Example (Brown, Fredrickson,

n

Hypothesis
n

OT is highest when individuals help someone they care about, but not when individuals help someone who is objectified. 60 Female Participants randomly assigned to help partner (Batson & Weeks, 1986) under conditions of closeness and perspective-taking (Aron/Batson) or no-closeness/ objective perspective, or to a control group with no helping.

Design
n

Measures
n Stress

reactivity and recovery (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure, RSA) n Oxytocin (in blood samples) n Progesterone (in saliva) n Immune Function (blood samples)

Oxytocin levels as a function of condition

5.7 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 5 4.9 4.8 OT1 OT2 Help/Closeness Help/No Closeness No Help

Transforming Growth Factor Beta (Tgf-B) over time as a function of condition

2.9 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 tgfb (t1) tgfb (t2) tgfb (t3) Help/No Closeness Help/Closeness

Il-8 over time as a function of condition

4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 IL-8 (t1) Il-8 (t2) Il-8 (t3) Help/No Closeness Help/Closeness

Implications for Physical Health

n Prosocial

behavior should improve physical

health
n n

n n

Providing support and mortality (Brown et al., 2003) Independent replication with morbidity among older adults (W. Brown, et al., 2005) Providing support and mortality among dialysis patients (McClellan, Stanwyk, & Anson, 1993) Volunteering and Mortality (for a review Oman, 2007; Okun & Brown, in preparation) Caretaking and mortality in primates (Allman et al., 1998) Caregiving and mortality risk (Brown et al., 2009)

Further Implications for Physical Health

n

The benefits of prosocial behavior for health should be (1) strongest amoung those exposed to chronic stress, and (2) who help others out of compassion
n

Prosocial behavior predicts reduced mortality risk after exposure to a stressful life event (Poulin, Brown,
Dillard, & Smith , in press, American Journal of Public Health)

Volunteering reduces mortality risk, but only when motives for volunteering are otherfocused (Konrath et al., 2012, Health Psychology)

Broader Implications
n

Economics and Utility:

n

reward-seeking drives for the self, which are targeted in economic models of consumptive behavior, are only part of the story. Could it be important to study the economic implications of human caring capacities

Social Poblems: (e.g., ethnic and cultural conflict, corruption on

Wall Street and Government, environmental protection)

This framework suggests tremendous power in the media and our social systems to turn off (or on) compassion

Collaborators
n n n n n n n n

R. M. Brown, Psychology, Pacific n Lutheran University n Barbara Fredrickson, Psychology, UNC n Emily Heaphy, Business School, UM n Michelle Heisler, VA, UM n Jim House, Survey Research Center, n UM William Lopez, Public Health, Universityn of Michigan Sara Konrath, ISR, UM Julia Seng, Nursing, UM

Kareem Johnson, Psychology, Temple Kenneth Langa, General Medicine, UM Randolph Nesse, Psychology, UM Michael Poulin, Psychology, SUNY Oliver Schultheiss, Psychology, UM Dylan Smith, Preventive Medicine, SUNY Andrew Flescher, Preventive Medicine, SUNY

Supported by NSF grants 0719629; 0820609