Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25238674›Full record

ReviewIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2015

Imagine the Feeling: An Aesthetic Science of Psychology.

Fernando Quigua, Joshua W Clegg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fernando QuiguaThe Graduate Center, 365 Fifth Avenue, Room 6304.01, New York, NY, 10016, USA, fquigua@gc.cuny.edu.
Joshua W Clegg
John Jay College of Criminal Justice · USThe Graduate Center, CUNY · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We claim that static trait models have dominated contemporary personality psychology but fail to reflect adequately the persons they depict. Beginning from, but moving well beyond, this critique of the five factor model (and the personality psychology field over which it reigns), we shine an aesthetic and critical light on psychology's wider failings. We review the linguistic and methodological features that have undermined the discipline's faithful understandings of human beings and their experience. In its place, we champion an aesthetic (as opposed to an an-esthetic) science of the person, one that is responsive in spirit and in practice to the emotional and imaginative life of participants and to the contexts in which they move. Specifically, we suggest that the images of fantasy and of ordinary metaphor may afford poetic understandings of participant experience that surpass those produced by literal, discursive description. We also hold that these images may offer us the most sensitive and faithful expressions of how social and environmental contexts-and so-called structural and discursive realities-are felt. The paper concludes by sketching several methodological trajectories that may stimulate researcher imagination and empathy, making research more faithful to participants and the reaches of their experience. Research practices informed by feeling and image in this way may generate new knowledge as well as new obligations.

Indexed as

EmotionsImaginationMetaphorPersonalityBehavioral ResearchHumans

Identifiers

PMID25238674
OpenAlexW2078363967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.