Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32413047›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

The Affective Ising Model: A computational account of human affect dynamics.

Tim Loossens, Merijn Mestdagh, Egon Dejonckheere, Peter Kuppens, Francis Tuerlinckx, Stijn Verdonck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A model of mood as integrated advantage.Psychological review · 2022
    Article
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

6 authors.

Tim LoossensDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7587-1922
Merijn MestdaghDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5077-861X
Egon DejonckheereDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7219-7506
Peter KuppensDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2363-2356
Francis TuerlinckxDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1775-7654
Stijn VerdonckDepartment of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2199-1072

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human affect system is responsible for producing the positive and negative feelings that color and guide our lives. At the same time, when disrupted, its workings lie at the basis of the occurrence of mood disorder. Understanding the functioning and dynamics of the affect system is therefore crucial to understand the feelings that people experience on a daily basis, their dynamics across time, and how they can become dysregulated in mood disorder. In this paper, a nonlinear stochastic model for the dynamics of positive and negative affect is proposed called the Affective Ising Model (AIM). It incorporates principles of statistical mechanics, is inspired by neurophysiological and behavioral evidence about auto-excitation and mutual inhibition of the positive and negative affect dimensions, and is intended to better explain empirical phenomena such as skewness, multimodality, and non-linear relations of positive and negative affect. The AIM is applied to two large experience sampling studies on the occurrence of positive and negative affect in daily life in both normality and mood disorder. It is examined to what extent the model is able to reproduce the aforementioned non-Gaussian features observed in the data, using two sightly different continuous-time vector autoregressive (VAR) models as benchmarks. The predictive performance of the models is also compared by means of leave-one-out cross-validation. The results indicate that the AIM is better at reproducing non-Gaussian features while their performance is comparable for strictly Gaussian features. The predictive performance of the AIM is also shown to be better for the majority of the affect time series. The potential and limitations of the AIM as a computational model approximating the workings of the human affect system are discussed.

Indexed as

AffectModels, PsychologicalComputer SimulationEmotionsFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID32413047
PMCPMC7255618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.