Skip to main content
2024 BMES Annual Meeting Main banner
Icon Legend
This session is not in your schedule.
This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.

Biomedical Engineering Education

Biomedical Engineering Education - Poster Session A

Poster E9 - A Systematic Literature Review on Empathy in Biomedical Engineering Education

Thursday, October 24, 2024
10:00 AM - 11:00 AM EST
Location: Exhibit Hall E, F & G

Introduction:  Cognitive psychology, social psychology and neuroscience extensively explore various interpretations of empathy. Subsequently, social workers and nurses receive training to develop empathetic skill sets and practice empathy in their fields. Biomedical engineers pursue work adjacent to nursing because their products affect patients and medical personnel. Engineers encounter increasingly interdisciplinary, international, and diverse teams and users. Biomedical engineering (BME) professionals must often interact with both patients and engineering teams, motivating why student would benefit from learning empathy. However, empathy appeared frequently in engineering education literature only within the last decade, and even so, the definition of empathy within the field remains elusive. Neuroscience and psychology define two subcategories of empathy: affective and cognitive. Affective empathy refers to the ability to feel similar emotions to another, and cognitive empathy is the thought process connected to taking another’s perspective. The subcategories of empathy form a richer understanding of the phenomenon within learning environments designed to enhance their ability to empathize with teammates and users. This paper aims to explore what is known regarding empathy in engineering education research (EER), which motivates the following research questions:

RQ1: How is empathy defined in engineering EER?

RQ2: What activities foster conditions for undergraduate engineering students, particularly in BME, to develop empathy towards their user groups and team members?

Materials and

Methods:  To answer the research questions, we conducted a systematic literature review (citation). We looked at seven journals that published EER. For each journal, we used the following search terms to gather a baseline set of articles to analyze: “biomedical engineering” and “engineering education” or “stem education” and “empathy” or “empathy and care”. The search results included full text journal articles and only peer reviewed results as a measure of quality for the collected data. We noticed a marked increase in empathy publications within the past decade, so we excluded studies published prior to 2013 to focus on this surge. The protocol provided 62 search results. After multiple rounds of exclusion, only 11 articles were left in the literature search. Because the search terms yielded so few articles, the initial search was expanded to include empathy in applications other than BME, including other engineering disciplines, social work, and nursing. In total the search yielded 40 total articles. We performed a categorical analysis on the final set of 40 articles based on trends by author, study population, framework, method, research method, research questions, conclusions, limitations, definition of empathy used or learning activity studied. The reviewed articles allowed us to sort and identify trends within the literature.

Results, Conclusions, and Discussions: First, the results of the literature review defined empathy as affective and cognitive empathy motivating thoughts and/or behaviors. Each study references empathy with one of the four different definitions: (1) empathy and care; (2) cognitive, affective and behavioral empathy; (3) cognitive and affective empathy, and (4) cognitive/affective empathy in relation to the self/other. When EER applies empathy, the definition of empathy becomes fluid, making it difficult to explicitly define what practicing empathy looks like across various educational contexts. When assessing changes in empathy, clearly identifying what aspects to measure establishes a foundation to choose an appropriate tool. Assessing empathetic skills from studies with inconsistent definitions of empathy creates a challenge in comparing results and building knowledge across different institutional contexts. Clear, consistent definitions of empathy can enable educational programs to build programs for empathetic skills suited for qualified, adaptable professionals.

Secondly, the literature review yielded learning activities fostering empathy in post-secondary education: collaborative project-based learning (PBLs), service learning, role play, discussions, reflections, mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), and mentorship. These learning activities apply to BME programs because students can begin to develop empathetic skills to practice in both medical and engineering contexts. Engineering often follows team-based approaches, so implementing PBLs develops essential communication skills needed to empathize with teammates. Similarly, role play, discussions, and reflections construct an opportunity for students to learn perspective taking, a skill associated with cognitive empathy. By contrast, service-based learning generates an environment for students to connect with their users’ during situations their designs affect. Empathy towards users empowers engineers to contextualize their designs. Classifying learning activities with associated emphatic skills based on a common structure of empathy creates a reference for educational programs to collectively guide students in becoming holistic, empathic engineers.

Ultimately, the literature review revealed examples of learning activities affecting students’ empathy, but definitions of empathy across the literature still vary. A common definition of empathy sets a premise for engineering students to learn empathic skills that best connect them with the populations they interact with as professionals. Future research should identify the relevant empathetic skills and assess which learning activities best foster them.

Acknowledgements (Optional):