Emotion decoding competence can be addressed in different ways. In this study, clinical psychology, nursing, or social work students narrated a 2.5–3 min story about a self-experienced emotional event and also listened to another student’s story. Participants were video recorded during the session. Participants then annotated their own recordings regarding their own thoughts and feelings, and they rated recordings by other participants regarding their thoughts and feelings [empathic accuracy, EA, task]. Participants further completed two emotion recognition accuracy (ERA) tests that differed in complexity. The results showed that even though significant correlations were found between the emotion recognition tests, the tests did not positively predict empathic accuracy scores. These results raise questions regarding the extent to which ERA tests tap the competencies that underlie EA. Different possibilities to investigate the consequences of method choices are discussed.

情感解码能力可以通过不同的方式解决。在这项研究中，临床心理学，护理或社会工作专业的学生讲述了一个2.5到3分钟的故事，讲述了一个自我体验过的情感事件，还听了另一个学生的故事。与会者在会议期间录制了视频。然后，参与者对自己关于自己的想法和感受的录音进行注释，然后对其他参与者关于自己的想法和感受的录音进行评分[移情准确性，EA，任务]。参与者进一步完成了两个复杂度不同的情绪识别准确性（ERA）测试。结果表明，即使在情绪识别测试之间发现显着的相关性，这些测试也不能积极预测移情准确性分数。这些结果引发了有关ERA测试在多大程度上利用了EA基础能力的疑问。讨论了调查方法选择结果的不同可能性。