Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37308555›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Experiments on real-life emotions challenge Ekman's model.

Sara Coppini, Chiara Lucifora, Carmelo M Vicario, Aldo Gangemi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Sara CoppiniDepartment of Philosophy and Communication, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Chiara LuciforaInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, National Research Council, Rome, Italy. chiara.lucifora@istc.cnr.it.
Carmelo M VicarioDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Aldo GangemiInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, National Research Council, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ekman's emotions (1992) are defined as universal basic emotions. Over the years, alternative models have emerged (e.g. Greene and Haidt 2002; Barrett 2017) describing emotions as social and linguistic constructions. The variety of models existing today raises the question of whether the abstraction provided by such models is sufficient as a descriptive/predictive tool for representing real-life emotional situations. Our study presents a social inquiry to test whether traditional models are sufficient to capture the complexity of daily life emotions, reported in a textual context. The intent of the study is to establish the human-subject agreement rate in an annotated corpus based on Ekman's theory (Entity-Level Tweets Emotional Analysis) and the human-subject agreement rate when using Ekman's emotions to annotate sentences that don't respect the Ekman's model (The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows). Furthermore, we investigated how much alexithymia can influence the human ability to detect and categorise emotions. On a total sample of 114 subjects, our results show low within subjects agreement rates for both datasets, particularly for subjects with low levels of alexithymia; low levels of agreement with the original annotations; frequent use of emotions based on Ekman model, particularly negative one, in people with high levels of alexithymia.

Indexed as

EmotionsGriefConcept FormationHumansIntentionLinguistics

Identifiers

PMID37308555
PMCPMC10261107

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.