# PWR-170 — Cognitive empathy: learner worksheet Release: Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition Estimated time: Estimated 17 min reading and worksheet pass Difficulty: Intermediate Equipment: Basic stationery or digital tools — The six-line dialogue below; The built-in fact, inference, and repair columns; The supplied classification and repaired-model key; Paper, audio, text, or another accessible method Space: Desk / seated Automated structural checklist: 10 of 10 structural checks present Evidence quality/context: G1; Deep research depth Automated method-quality band: Established Method-rating basis: Structure coverage, instruction/check specificity, alternative distinctness, source troubleshooting, comparison depth and whether purpose/check fields are authored rather than derived. Editorial review: Pending manual editorial sign off ## Before you begin - [ ] I read the tutorial authority and stop conditions. - [ ] I have the required equipment/space or a declared accessible alternative. ## Canonical source context Cognitive empathy is accurate perspective-taking without pretending to read a mind. This pack supplies a fictional meeting dialogue, fact-inference worksheet columns, a neutral question, and a correction. The learner keeps direct statements separate from guesses, generates an alternative explanation, reflects tentatively, and updates without requiring agreement. Target outcome: Define cognitive empathy without inheriting mythology or broader claims. Explain what the current evidence supports and what it does not establish. Use the declared measurement boundary and recognise misleading proxies. Complete only the separately governed capability practice inside its declared limits. Make a retention, transfer, maintenance, provider or stop decision without overclaiming. ### Authority and setup conditions - Use only the fictional exchange. Do not covertly test a real person, diagnose motives or neurotype, pressure disclosure, or analyse a sensitive conflict. - With a willing participant, consent, correction, access, refusal, and their own words take priority. - Understanding does not require agreement, compliance, disclosure, or surrender of either person's boundary. ### Required or supplied materials - The six-line dialogue below - The built-in fact, inference, and repair columns - The supplied classification and repaired-model key - Paper, audio, text, or another accessible method ### Supplied fixture Opening dialogue only. Complete the fact/inference fields, alternative, confidence and neutral question before opening staged L4–L6. | Line id | Speaker | Opening dialogue | Learner fact entry | Learner inference entry | Learner alternative or neutral question | Learner confidence in inference | Learner own view kept separate | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | L1 | Alex | I turned my camera off because the connection kept freezing. | [copy stated content] | [tentative inference] | [alternative/question] | [0–100] | [separate or not relevant] | | L2 | Alex | I would rather post my update in chat so I can stay in the meeting. | [copy stated content] | [tentative inference] | [alternative/question] | [0–100] | [separate or not relevant] | | L3 | Sam | I thought the camera and silence meant you were disengaged. | [copy stated content] | [identify Sam's inference] | [lock neutral question] | [0–100 before key] | [separate or not relevant] | ## 1. Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields. Attributed speech remains ‘Alex states…’, not independently verified fact. Why: “Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields” creates the auditable value, condition or statement needed for the tutorial’s later comparison and conclusion. Success check: A legible entry directly completes “Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields. Attributed speech remains ‘Alex states…’, not independently verified fact.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A legible entry directly completes “Read L1–L3 and copy stated or observable content into fact fields” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 2. Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative… Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative and record confidence from 0 to 100. Why: “Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative and record confidence from 0 to 100” fixes the exact Cognitive empathy configuration or decision before later observations are compared. Success check: A legible entry directly completes “Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative and record confidence from 0 to 100” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative and record confidence from 0 to 100.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A legible entry directly completes “Place Sam's disengagement idea in inference, generate at least one connection/access alternative and record confidence from 0 to 100” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 3. Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock… Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock it before opening the staged key. Why: “Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock it before opening the staged key” creates the auditable value, condition or statement needed for the tutorial’s later comparison and conclusion. Success check: A legible entry directly completes “Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock it before opening the staged key” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock it before opening the staged key.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A legible entry directly completes “Write one neutral clarification question that does not assume disengagement, then lock it before opening the staged key” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 4. Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's… Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's correction, update inference confidence and rewrite the model without defending the first inference. Why: “Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's correction, update inference confidence and rewrite the model without defending the first inference” creates the auditable value, condition or statement needed for the tutorial’s later comparison and conclusion. Success check: A legible entry directly completes “Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's correction, update inference confidence and rewrite the model without defending the first inference” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's correction, update inference confidence and rewrite the model without defending the first inference.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A legible entry directly completes “Open the staged L4–L6 key, compare your question with L4, record Alex's correction, update inference confidence and rewrite the model without defending the first inference” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 5. Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field; understanding another perspective does not require agreement. Why: “Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field” creates the auditable value, condition or statement needed for the tutorial’s later comparison and conclusion. Success check: A legible entry directly completes “Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field; understanding another perspective does not require agreement.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A legible entry directly completes “Write the learner's own agreement, disagreement or preference in a separate field” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## Reflection What changed? ________________________________________________________________________________ What remains difficult? ________________________________________________________________________________ What will I repeat, adapt, ask for help with, or stop? ________________________________________________________________________________ --- Completion of this worksheet demonstrates tutorial participation only. It does not establish capability, qualification, safety clearance, diagnosis, treatment or independent validation.