Steps to reproduce:
Upload pdf [attached], compare both the initial summary and response to the question "how many participants in each study"
Expected behavior:
Direct comparison with claude.ai, which gave me this summary:
Here are a few key points from the abstract:
The study examines barriers to cross-party empathy and whether these differ for liberals and conservatives.
Across 4 studies (total N = 4,737), U.S. and U.K. participants showed less empathy for suffering political opponents than allies.
These empathy biases were stronger among liberals than conservatives. Conservatives consistently showed more empathy for liberals than vice versa.
The asymmetry was partly explained by liberals making harsher moral judgments of conservatives.
Liberals also saw conservatives as more harmful than vice versa, which contributed to the empathy asymmetry.
Implications for reducing political divides through empathy are discussed.
In summary, the studies found an ideological asymmetry in empathy and moral judgments between liberals and conservatives. Liberals showed stronger biases against conservatives, which was linked to perceiving conservatives as more harmful and immoral. The authors suggest addressing moral judgments on both sides to improve cross-party empathy and reduce polarization.
And this response:
Here are the sample sizes for each of the 4 studies:
Study 1:
- 549 participants total
- 270 conservatives, 279 liberals
Study 2:
- 958 participants total
- 455 conservatives, 503 liberals
Study 3:
- 1,372 participants total
- 698 Democrats, 674 Republicans
Study 4:
- 1,874 participants total
- 1,004 Democrats, 870 Republicans
So the total N across all 4 studies was 4,737 participants. The studies had fairly large sample sizes, ranging from 549 in Study 1 to 1,874 in Study 4. This allowed the researchers to have adequate statistical power to detect differences between liberals and conservatives in empathy biases. Let me know if you need any clarification on the sample sizes!
KAGI RESPONSE:
Summary:
- Liberals tend to be more morally critical of conservatives than vice versa, seeing them as more harmful and immoral. This contributes to liberals feeling less empathy for conservatives.
- Conservatives are generally more sensitive to threat, less tolerant of uncertainty, and less open to experience than liberals. These traits may make them less empathic toward opponents.
- One study found liberals have less empathy for unspecified political opponents, while conservatives showed no difference in empathy across targets.
- Perceptions of group harm and moral judgments of targets can explain asymmetries in political empathy, with liberals feeling less empathy for conservatives.
- People feel less empathy for political opponents due to seeing them as more immoral and harmful to their group.
- Conservatives had more favorable views of liberals than vice versa, leading conservatives to feel more empathy for suffering liberals.
- Perceptions of greater outgroup harm correlated with seeing targets as less moral and feeling less empathy, especially for liberals.
- Addressing perceived harms caused by opposing groups may help build trust and empathy across political divides.
- Affective political polarization poses challenges to promoting goodwill toward suffering opponents.
- Behavioral measures of empathy in addition to self-reports could provide further insights into political empathy asymmetries.
Some of my frustration with this is the numbering issue which I think you are addressing in response to a different issue, but it doesn't seem as articulate. But worse:
Here are the number of participants in each study mentioned in the sources:
Study 1: 549 participants
- 276 female, 267 male, 6 gender diverse
- 441 White, 24 Asian, 20 Black, 64 other ethnicities
Study 2: 1,388 participants
Study 3: 2,728 participants
Study 4: 1,874 participants
- 984 female, 869 male, 21 gender diverse
- 1,501 White, 138 Hispanic/Latinx, 128 Asian, 121 Black
The sample sizes and demographics were provided for Studies 1, 3, and 4. The specific number of participants was not mentioned for Study 2, only that it had "thousands" of participants.
These numbers are hallucinations, it was wrong this morning also.
Debug info:
<Browser/OS/Active Kagi region setting/What Kagi server you connect to (found in control center, top right icon)>
iOS, Safari, Variant: Expert
Image/Video:
<Copy/paste or drag and drop to upload images or videos (up to 20MB)>
