CAEI Model
Understanding Empathy Infrastructure
What the CAEI Measures
The CAEI (Capacity Architecture for Emotional Integration) is the first instrument designed to assess empathy infrastructure integrity—the biological and cognitive substrate that maintains narrative coherence.
Unlike traditional empathy measures that assess traits or behavioral tendencies, CAEI measures capacity-determining infrastructure: the four interdependent components that enable coherent selfhood.
Critical distinction: CAEI measures infrastructure capacity, not cultural expression. The same intact infrastructure supports Western narrative identity, Buddhist non-self awareness, and collectivist relational coherence. Low scores indicate damage requiring intervention—regardless of cultural context.
The Four Components
Core Authenticity (C) Self-knowledge clarity, genuine expression capacity, internal-external alignment, vulnerability comfort, autonomous desire recognition.
When compromised: performance anxiety, impostor syndrome, chronic self-monitoring, loss of self-knowledge
Attachment Security (A) Relational trust, connection capacity, emotional dependence comfort, closeness response patterns, abandonment resilience.
When compromised: hypervigilance, relationship instability, isolation under distress, avoidance or anxious attachment
Expression Freedom (E) Emotional range access, expression safety, forbidden emotion recognition, alexithymia resistance, emotional vocabulary breadth.
When compromised: emotional numbing, suppression costs, limited affect range, inability to name feelings
Integration Coherence (I) Narrative consistency, identity continuity, temporal coherence, contradiction tolerance, dissociation resistance.
When compromised: identity fragmentation, dissociation, narrative gaps, feeling like different people across contexts
How Components Interact
The C→A→E→I Cascade
These components don’t operate independently. They form an interdependent system where damage to one cascades across others following a predictable sequence:
- Core Authenticity fragments first — Identity destabilizes under sustained stress
- Attachment Security erodes second — Without stable identity, relational templates destabilize
- Expression Freedom constricts third — Without secure attachment, expression feels unsafe
- Integration Coherence collapses fourth — Without authentic expression, narrative fragments
The A→E→I→C Restoration
Healing follows the reverse sequence—not because damage reverses, but because upstream components require downstream stability to rebuild:
- Attachment Security restored first — Therapeutic relationship provides secure base
- Expression Freedom restored second — Safety enables authentic expression
- Integration Coherence restored third — Expression enables narrative reconnection
- Core Authenticity restored fourth — Integrated experience enables stable identity
Clinical implication: Skills training during active overload fails because it targets downstream components while upstream damage persists.
Content-Neutrality: Infrastructure Serves Multiple Optimization Strategies
A Buddhist practitioner achieving non-self awareness and a Western individual constructing robust narrative identity both require intact empathy infrastructure—they simply deploy it toward different ends.
EST proposes that C-A-E-I maintains processing coherence, not content coherence. The infrastructure is substrate; cultural expression is deployment.
| Population | Infrastructure (Substrate) | Expression (Deployment) |
|---|---|---|
| Western individual | High C-A-E-I | Strong personal narrative |
| Advanced meditator | High C-A-E-I | Minimal personal narrative |
| Collectivist culture | High C-A-E-I | Relational-network coherence |
What this means clinically:
- Low deployment score ≠ pathology (may reflect different optimization strategy)
- Low substrate score = infrastructure damage requiring intervention regardless of culture
- Assessment must distinguish substrate capacity from cultural expression
This content-neutral architecture enables cross-cultural validity without imposing Western optimization strategies as universal norm.
Universal CAEI 2.0 Assessment
The CAEI 2.0 implements substrate-deployment architecture through modular design:
CAEI 2.0 ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
│
├── CAEI-S: Substrate Assessment (64 items)
│ └── Always administered
│ └── Measures universal processing capacity
│ └── Low score = infrastructure damage (any culture)
│
└── CAEI-D: Deployment Modules (64 items each)
├── CAEI-D-W: Western Narrative
├── CAEI-D-C: Contemplative/Non-Self
└── CAEI-D-R: Relational/CollectivistCAEI-S (Substrate Module) Measures universal processing capacity present across all cultures: signal recognition, signal flow, relational resonance, coherence maintenance. Administered to all individuals regardless of cultural context.
CAEI-D (Deployment Modules) Measures how intact infrastructure expresses within specific cultural optimization strategies. Clinician selects appropriate module based on individual’s cultural context and goals.
| Score Pattern | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| High substrate + High deployment | Healthy functioning within cultural frame |
| High substrate + Low deployment | Different optimization strategy, NOT pathology |
| Low substrate + Any deployment | Infrastructure damage requiring intervention |
| Low substrate + Low deployment | Address substrate first; deployment assessment premature |
Assessment Formats
Full Battery (Research/Comprehensive Clinical)
- CAEI-S: 64 items (~15-20 minutes)
- CAEI-D: 64 items (~15-20 minutes)
- Total: ~30-40 minutes
Screening Battery
- CAEI-S Brief: 16 items (~5 minutes)
- Identifies infrastructure strain for further assessment
Clinical Interview
- Semi-structured protocol
- 45-60 minutes
- Clinician-rated with behavioral observation
Why This Matters
For Clinicians:
- Assess infrastructure, not just symptoms
- Target intervention to mechanism
- Avoid cultural misdiagnosis
- Track restoration sequence
For Researchers:
- Operationalize EST constructs
- Test cascade/restoration predictions
- Enable cross-cultural validation
- Distinguish capacity from expression
For Individuals:
- Understand what’s actually compromised
- Realistic expectations for healing sequence
- Validation that struggle reflects infrastructure, not character