Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34918224›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2022

PDSTD - The Portsmouth Dynamic Spontaneous Tears Database.

Dennis Küster, Marc Baker, Eva G Krumhuber

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dennis KüsterDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Bremen, Enrique-Schmidt Str. 5, 28359, Bremen, Germany. dkuester@uni-bremen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8992-5648
Marc BakerDepartment of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
Eva G KrumhuberDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBUniversity of Bremen · DEUniversity of Portsmouth · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The vast majority of research on human emotional tears has relied on posed and static stimulus materials. In this paper, we introduce the Portsmouth Dynamic Spontaneous Tears Database (PDSTD), a free resource comprising video recordings of 24 female encoders depicting a balanced representation of sadness stimuli with and without tears. Encoders watched a neutral film and a self-selected sad film and reported their emotional experience for 9 emotions. Extending this initial validation, we obtained norming data from an independent sample of naïve observers (N = 91, 45 females) who watched videos of the encoders during three time phases (neutral, pre-sadness, sadness), yielding a total of 72 validated recordings. Observers rated the expressions during each phase on 7 discrete emotions, negative and positive valence, arousal, and genuineness. All data were analyzed by means of general linear mixed modelling (GLMM) to account for sources of random variance. Our results confirm the successful elicitation of sadness, and demonstrate the presence of a tear effect, i.e., a substantial increase in perceived sadness for spontaneous dynamic weeping. To our knowledge, the PDSTD is the first database of spontaneously elicited dynamic tears and sadness that is openly available to researchers. The stimuli can be accessed free of charge via OSF from https://osf.io/uyjeg/?view_only=24474ec8d75949ccb9a8243651db0abf .

Indexed as

FemaleHumanscryingdatabasedynamicemotionfacial expressionsadness

Identifiers

PMID34918224
PMCPMC9729121
OpenAlexW4200390453

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.