Research on empathy has increased 10-fold over the last two decades. Controversy has accompanied this growth, with some claiming there are more definitions of empathy than there are researchers on the topic. Yet, a recent study found that these differences have been exaggerated by the narcissism of small differences and fuelled by the publish or perish ethos within academia.

If we couldn’t reconcile the definitions of empathy, the serious problems related to the concept’s ambiguity would be destined to persist. For example, it would remain difficult to choose between the plethora of methods for measuring empathy, or interpret and implement studies of empathy’s benefits. Equally, blurred boundaries between empathy and related concepts such as compassion and sympathy would persist. Worse, in the absence of an agreed definition, the door remains open for people to hand pick definitions of empathy that lead to paradoxical inferences about its benefits or harms.

Fortunately, it seems that existing definitions of therapeutic empathy share more similarities than differences. Starting with a …