ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
A New, Better BET: Rescuing and Revising Basic Emotion Theory.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social Attention in Electronic Picture Books with Social Scenes for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Insights from Eye-Tracking Studies.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The positive energy of netizens: development and application of fine-grained sentiment lexicon and emotional intensity model.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Editorial: Uncertainty Induced Emotional Disorders During the COVID-19.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Neurotransmitters and Electrophysiological Changes Might Work as Biomarkers for Diagnosing Affective Disorders.Disease markers · 2021Article
- Preserving Right Pre-motor and Posterior Prefrontal Cortices Contribute to Maintaining Overall Basic Emotion.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Article
- In the face of stress: Interpreting individual differences in stress-induced facial expressions.Neurobiology of stress · 2019Review
- A Model for Basic Emotions Using Observations of Behavior inFrontiers in psychology · 2019Review
- An Integrative Way for Studying Neural Basis of Basic Emotions With fMRI.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Basic Emotion Theory, or BET, has dominated the affective sciences for decades (Ekman, 1972, 1992, 1999; Ekman and Davidson, 1994; Griffiths, 2013; Scarantino and Griffiths, 2011). It has been highly influential, driving a number of empirical lines of research (e.g., in the context of facial expression detection, neuroimaging studies and evolutionary psychology). Nevertheless, BET has been criticized by philosophers, leading to calls for it to be jettisoned entirely (Colombetti, 2014; Hufendiek, 2016). This paper defuses those criticisms. In addition, it shows that we have good reason to retain BET. Finally, it reviews and puts to rest worries that BET's commitment to affect programs renders it outmoded. We propose that, with minor adjustments, BET can avoid such criticisms when conceived under a radically enactive account of emotions. Thus, rather than leaving BET behind, we show how its basic ideas can be revised, refashioned and preserved. Hence, we conclude, our new BET is still a good bet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.