ReviewAffective science2023
We (Still!) Need to Talk About Valence: Contemporary Issues and Recommendations for Affective Science.
Review in Affective science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Second Database of Emotional Videos from Ottawa (DEVO-2): Over 1300 brief video clips rated on valence, arousal, impact, and familiarity.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Latent Profiles of Childhood Maltreatment and Their Associations with Emotional Reactivity, Alexithymia, and Emotion Regulation in Chinese College Students.Psychology research and behavior management · 2025Article
- An Integrative Framework for Capturing Emotion and Emotion Regulation in Daily Life.Affective science · 2024Review
- Feelings are Messy: The Feelings We Study in Affective Science Should Be Too.Affective science · 2024Review
- Affectivism and the Emotional Elephant: How a Componential Approach Can Reconcile Opposing Theories to Serve the Future of Affective Sciences.Affective science · 2024Article
- Frontal alpha asymmetry during emotion regulation in adults with lifetime major depression.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Valence is central to the experience of emotion. However, to the detriment of affective science, it is often ill-defined and poorly operationalized. Being more precise about what is meant by valence would make for more readily comparable emotion stimuli, methodologies, and results, and would promote consideration of the diversity, complexity, and function of discrete emotions. This brief review uses prior literature and an informal survey of affective scientists to illustrate disagreements in conceptualizing valence. Next, we describe issues of valence in affective science, particularly as they pertain to the emotion process, the functions of emotion, and precision in empirical research. We conclude by providing recommendations for the future of valence in affective science.
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.