Key Takeaways
- The Thinking–Feeling divide shapes nearly every aspect of empathy. Across all 12 survey items, the Thinking–Feeling trait was the most consistent predictor of how people experience, express, and manage empathy. Feeling types reported higher emotional engagement on almost every measure.
- Feeling types struggle more with shared joy; Thinking types struggle more with shared sorrow. INFJs and INFPs were most likely to say empathizing with someone’s happiness is harder, while ENTPs and ESTPs found shared sadness more difficult. This reversal suggests that emotional attunement doesn’t make every kind of empathy easier.
- Over 90% of INFPs feel strong empathy for fictional characters. Diplomat types dominated the fictional empathy results, with INFPs at 92% and INFJs at 90%. ESTPs were the least likely to report this experience at just 31%, creating one of the widest personality-driven gaps in the survey.
- Thinking types actively limit empathy to protect their well-being. About 71% of INTJs said they deliberately restrict their empathy for others, compared to just 25% of ESFJs. Notably, many Feeling types who reported high emotional sensitivity were still reluctant to set these kinds of boundaries.
- Understanding emotions and showing sympathy are not the same thing. Nearly half of ISTPs and INTJs said they typically do not show sympathy even when they understand how someone feels. Meanwhile, over 95% of ESFJs and ENFJs said they almost always express it outwardly.
Introduction
Empathy is often treated as something people either have or don’t. But our survey of over 9,000 respondents paints a more complex picture. How people experience empathy, when they express it, and whom they feel it for vary greatly depending on personality type.
In our study, "Walking in Someone Else's Shoes" we asked respondents about a wide range of empathy-related topics: whether it’s harder to share in someone’s joy or their grief, how they read other people’s emotions, whether they feel empathy for fictional characters, and more. The results revealed striking patterns along the Thinking–Feeling divide, though other personality traits shaped the data in important ways as well.
From Diplomats who reported near-constant empathy for the people around them to Analysts who deliberately limit their emotional engagement, this survey reveals just how varied the empathy experience can be. The sections that follow break down each finding in detail, exploring what these differences mean for how personality types understand and connect with one another.
A note on this survey: Our respondents are people who visited our website – not a balanced mix of the wider population. All results are self-reported, and personality is just one of many factors (alongside age, culture, and more) that shape responses. Think of what follows as a starting point for reflection, not a scientific conclusion.
Sharing Joy vs. Sharing Sorrow
Agreement with "In which situation is it more difficult for you to empathize with someone?"
When asked whether it’s harder to share in someone else’s happiness or their sorrow, respondents split along a clear emotional line. INFJ personality types (Advocates) were the most likely to say that feeling truly happy for someone else is the bigger challenge, at 72%. INFP personalities (Mediators) were close behind at 70%. Across all Feeling types, this pattern held firm – shared sorrow seemed to come more naturally than shared joy.
The results were more nuanced among Thinking types. Extraverted Thinking types leaned most strongly toward shared sadness as the harder experience – ENTP personality types (Debaters) chose it at 65%, and ESTP personalities (Entrepreneurs) at 62%. But INTJs and INTPs were nearly evenly divided, with about 52% of each group saying that shared happiness was actually harder. The sharpest divide, then, wasn’t strictly between Thinking and Feeling personalities. It ran between Feeling types and the more outgoing Thinking types – while Introverted Analysts appeared to find both kinds of emotional sharing equally challenging.
Empathizing with Unfamiliar Experiences
Agreement with "Do you find it easy to empathize with a person who has gone through something you never have?"
Can you truly empathize with someone whose experience you’ve never shared? The answer appears to depend on how you process emotions. Diplomat types led the way, with ENFP personalities (Campaigners), INFJs, and ENFJ personality types (Protagonists) all agreeing at roughly 83–84%. These Intuitive, Feeling types seem to draw on imagination and emotional attunement to bridge gaps in lived experience, connecting with others even when the specific circumstances are unfamiliar.
The results looked very different for Thinking types. ISTP personality types (Virtuosos) agreed at just 22% – the lowest of any type – while ISTJ personalities (Logisticians) came in at 25%. Even among the more socially engaged Thinking types, agreement stayed well below 50%. For types that prize firsthand evidence and logical analysis, empathy without shared experience may feel uncertain or incomplete. This doesn’t necessarily reflect a lack of caring – rather, it may point to a different, more evidence-based standard for what genuine empathy means.
Which Personalities Empathize More with Animals?
Agreement with "Do you empathize with animals more than you do with people?"
More than half of INTP personalities (Logicians) – 56% – said they empathize more with animals than with people, making them the type most likely to favor their four-legged companions. INTJ personality types (Architects) were close behind at 54%, and ISTPs came in at 53%. The pattern is notable: Introverted Thinking types, who may find human social dynamics draining or puzzling, seem to appreciate the straightforward emotional world that animals offer.
Extraverted Feeling types landed on the opposite end of the spectrum. ENFJs agreed at just 24%, while ESFJ personality types (Consuls) and ESFP personalities (Entertainers) were only slightly higher. For these naturally sociable types, human connection tends to come easily, which may explain why animals don’t hold the same emotional pull. This doesn’t necessarily mean Thinking types care less about people – it may simply reflect where their empathy flows most freely when given a choice.
How Personality Shapes Emotional Support
Agreement with "Do you try to give emotional support to friends the way you would want it, or the way you think they want it?"
When a friend is struggling, do you support them the way you’d want to be supported – or the way you think they need? Feeling types overwhelmingly chose to tailor their approach. INFJs led at 73%, and the pattern held across nearly every Feeling type, with ISFP personalities (Adventurers), ENFPs, and ISFJ personality types (Defenders) all clustering around 71%. This other-centered approach was consistent regardless of whether these types were Introverted or Extraverted, Observant or Intuitive.
The response among Thinking types was more divided. ESTJ personalities (Executives) were the most likely to give support the way they’d want it themselves, at 60%, and ENTPs felt similarly at 59%. Even among Thinking types who chose the other-centered option, margins were thin – INTJs and INTPs were nearly split at around 50-50. This suggests that Thinking personality types tend to default to a "golden rule" approach, offering the same kind of support they’d appreciate receiving rather than trying to gauge what the other person might prefer.
Reading Emotions Through Body Language
Agreement with "What helps you identify someone’s emotional state most?"
Across all personality types, body language and appearance were the most popular way to read someone’s emotional state – but the margin varied widely. Feeling types leaned heavily on nonverbal cues, with ENFPs choosing body language at 69% and INFJs at 68%. Most other Feeling types landed in a similar range, suggesting a strong instinct for picking up on facial expressions, posture, and other visual signals.
For Thinking types, however, the balance shifted. While body language still topped their lists, they relied on it far less and gave much more weight to words. ISTJs stood out, with 34% selecting words as their primary cue – nearly triple the rate of some Feeling types. INTPs and ISTPs were also notably higher in their reliance on verbal communication, at around 26% each. For personality types that value clarity and directness, spoken language may simply feel like the most dependable window into what someone is really feeling.
Empathy Across Age and Personality
Agreement with "Who do you think you empathize with most?"
Most respondents said they empathize most with people around their own age, and this held true across every type. Still, the strength of this peer-focused empathy varied. ESTPs, ESFPs, and ESFJs clustered at the top, with roughly 67–69% choosing their own age group. These Observant types tend to be grounded in their immediate social world, naturally orienting their empathy toward the people and situations closest to them.
Analyst types, however, stood out for their relatively high empathy with older people. INTJs were the most likely to say they empathize most with those older than themselves, at 32%. INTPs came in at 28%, and ENTJ personality types (Commanders) at 27%. One possible explanation is that Analyst personalities tend to value the wisdom and depth of experience that older people bring, feeling a natural connection with those who have had more time to reflect on life’s bigger questions. This is consistent with these types’ broader tendency to seek intellectual engagement over social familiarity.
Hinting for Empathy Turns Personalities Off
Agreement with "Do you empathize less with people who seem to be “hinting” towards it?"
Do people lose empathy when they feel like someone is fishing for it? For Thinking types, the answer was a resounding yes. INTJs were the most likely to say they empathize less with people who seem to be "hinting" for sympathy, at 72%. ISTPs agreed at 69%, and ENTPs at 68%. This response aligns with these personality types’ general preference for authenticity and directness – if someone wants support, Thinking types would rather they simply ask for it.
Feeling types were much less put off by indirect approaches. INFPs and ENFPs both agreed at only 38%, while ENFJs were at 41%. For these types, an indirect plea for emotional support isn’t necessarily a turnoff – it may even be a cue to lean in and offer care. This difference highlights a broader tension in how people express and receive empathy. What Thinking personalities may read as manipulation or game-playing, Feeling personalities often interpret as vulnerability that deserves a compassionate response.
Solving vs. Listening by Personality Type
Agreement with "Is offering possible solutions to someone’s suffering an important part of sympathizing?"
When someone is suffering, should you offer solutions – or simply listen? Thinking types overwhelmingly favored the problem-solving approach. ENTJs agreed at 89% that offering possible solutions is an important part of sympathizing, and ENTPs were nearly identical at 89%. INTJs weren’t far behind at 86%. For these personality types, empathy without action can feel hollow – they tend to believe that the most helpful response is pointing someone toward a way out.
Among Feeling types, agreement was notably lower. ISFPs were the least likely to see solutions as a key part of sympathy, at 63%, and INFPs were just above them at 64%. This doesn’t mean Feeling personalities reject practical help altogether. But they may view emotional validation and simply being present as equally important – if not more so. The gap reflects a fundamental difference in what people expect when they turn to someone for comfort: some want answers, while others just want to feel heard.
Feeling Empathy for Fictional Characters
Agreement with "Do you often feel strong empathy for fictional characters?"
Few survey items revealed as dramatic a split as this one. INFPs led the way, with 92% saying they often feel strong empathy for fictional characters. All four Diplomat types scored between 84% and 92%, well ahead of most other personality types. For these Intuitive, Feeling personalities, the emotional worlds crafted by writers and storytellers can feel every bit as real and moving as events in daily life.
ESTPs landed at the opposite extreme, with just 31% reporting strong empathy for fictional characters. Observant, Thinking types in general were the least moved by fiction – a pattern that held across both Introverted and Extraverted personalities sharing those traits. This doesn’t suggest that these types can’t enjoy stories – only that they’re less likely to feel deeply stirred by a character’s struggles. With a gap of more than 60 percentage points between the highest and lowest types, fictional empathy stands out as one of the clearest personality-driven divides in the entire survey.
Do Personality Types Show Sympathy Differently?
Agreement with "Do you usually show your sympathy when you understand how someone feels?"
Understanding how someone feels is one thing – showing it is another. Among Feeling types, the two tend to go hand in hand. ESFJs agreed at 96% that they usually show their sympathy when they understand someone’s emotions, and ENFJs were nearly as high at 95%. ENFPs and ESFPs reported similar rates. For these personality types, empathy is not a private experience but something to be expressed, whether through words, gestures, or simply being visibly present.
Thinking Introverts painted a strikingly different picture. ISTPs agreed at just 50%, and INTJs and INTPs were only slightly higher at around 53–54%. In other words, roughly half of these types understand what someone is feeling but choose – or struggle – not to show it. This doesn’t mean they’re indifferent. Rather, Thinking Introverted personalities may view emotional displays as unnecessary, or they may simply lack confidence in expressing sympathy in a way that feels genuine to them. The result is a quiet empathy that others may not always see or recognize.
Guarding Against Empathy Overload
Agreement with "Do you try to limit your empathy for others to safeguard your own emotional well-being?"
Do some people deliberately dial down their empathy to protect themselves? Among Thinking types, the answer is frequently yes. INTJs were the most likely to say they try to limit empathy for others to safeguard their own emotional well-being, at 71%. ENTJs, ISTJs, and ISTPs all followed closely in the mid-to-upper 60s. For personality types that prioritize rational analysis, keeping emotions at arm’s length may feel less like coldness and more like a sensible boundary – a deliberate strategy to prevent unchecked emotional absorption from clouding their judgment or draining their energy.
Feeling types were far less inclined to put up these walls. ESFJs were the least likely to limit their empathy, at just 25%, and ENFPs weren’t far behind at 28%. Even INFPs and INFJs – types known for deep emotional sensitivity and a real risk of burnout – agreed at only around 32–35%. This is particularly striking given how often these Introverted Feeling personality types report being overwhelmed by others’ emotions. It suggests that for many Feeling types, empathy isn’t something they feel comfortable rationing, even when it comes at a personal cost. Where Thinking types see a faucet worth adjusting, Feeling types seem to see something closer to a defining part of who they are.
Feeling Deep Empathy Right Now
Agreement with "Are you currently feeling strong empathy for someone in your life?"
When asked whether they were currently feeling strong empathy for someone in their life, ENFPs stood out at 81%, making them the most likely of all types to say yes. The rest of the Diplomat Role wasn’t far behind, with both ENFJs and INFJs exceeding 76%. For these Feeling personality types, emotional engagement with the people around them doesn’t appear to be an occasional event – it’s something woven into their daily experience. Feeling types outside the Diplomat Role, such as ESFJs and ISFJs, reported notably high agreement as well, reinforcing just how central active empathy is to the Feeling trait.
The contrast with Thinking Introverts was sharp. ISTPs reported the lowest agreement at just 19%, and several other Thinking personality types fell below 30%. The gap between the highest and lowest types exceeded 60 percentage points, making this one of the most dramatic divides in the entire survey. This doesn’t necessarily mean these types lack empathy altogether – earlier results showed they do understand others’ emotions. But feeling that empathy actively and intensely in the present moment appears to be a fundamentally different experience depending on where someone falls on the Thinking-Feeling spectrum. Understanding someone’s pain and carrying it with you, it seems, are two very different things.
Conclusion
If one theme runs through this data, it’s that empathy is not a single, universal experience. How people feel it, show it, and manage it differs enormously by personality type. The Thinking–Feeling divide was the most consistent predictor across nearly every question, but traits like Introversion and Extraversion also played important roles.
Lower scores on these items don’t necessarily point to a lack of caring. Many Thinking types said they understand others’ emotions but choose not to express sympathy outwardly, or they deliberately limit emotional engagement to protect their own well-being. These aren’t signs of indifference – they reflect different strategies for handling the emotional weight of human connection.
At the same time, the deep emotional engagement reported by Feeling types comes with its own challenges. Many of the personality types showing the highest empathy also showed reluctance to set emotional boundaries, even when it might benefit them. Understanding these patterns can help people of all types find a healthier balance – one that honors both their natural approach to empathy and their personal needs.
Comments
No comments yet. Please to join the discussion.