ReviewCognition & emotion2019
Embracing integration and complexity: placing emotion within a science of brain and behaviour.
Review in Cognition & emotion, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping the Process of Engagement With Digital Health Interventions: A Cross-Case Synthesis.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2025Article
- Symptomatic Emotional Responses and Changes in Networks Elicited by Direct Electrical Stimulation.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Article
- The conceptualisation and measurement of engagement in digital health.Internet interventions · 2024Article
- Piecing together the puzzle of emotional consciousness.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2023Review
- Temporal dynamics of affect in the brain: Evidence from human imaging and animal models.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2022Review
- Quantum core affect. Color-emotion structure of semantic atom.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Emotions as Abstract Evaluation Criteria in Biological and Artificial Intelligences.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2021Article
- A Systems View of Emotion in Socio-political Context.Affective science · 2021Review
- Impulsive Responses to Positive and Negative Emotions: Parallel Neurocognitive Correlates and Their Implications.Biological psychiatry · 2020Review
- Neural dynamics of emotion and cognition: From trajectories to underlying neural geometry.Neural networks : the official journal of the International Neural Network Society · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The present paper addresses conceptual issues that are central to emotion research. What is emotion? What are its defining characteristics? The field struggles with questions like these almost constantly. I argue that definitions, and deciding what is the proper status of emotion, are not a requirement for scientific progress - in fact, they can hinder it. Therefore, "emotion" researchers should strive to develop a science of complex behaviours, and worry less about their exact nature. But for interesting behaviours, is most of the explaining that is needed present at the level of isolated systems (perception, cognition, etc.) or at the level of interactions between them? I suggest that the level of interactions is where most of the work is needed. Accordingly, I advocate that it is important to embrace integration, and not to strive to necessarily disentangle the multiple contributions underlying behaviours. More generally, it is argued that we need to revise models of causation adopted when reasoning about the mind and brain. Instead, a "complex systems" approach is required where the interactions between multiple components lead to system-level - emergent - properties that cannot be isolated or attributed to more elementary parts.
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.