Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38743712›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Susceptibility to positive versus negative emotional contagion: First evidence on their distinction using a balanced self-report measure.

Anton K G Marx, Anne C Frenzel, Daniel Fiedler, Corinna Reck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Anton K G MarxDepartment of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9611-9759
Anne C FrenzelDepartment of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9068-9926
Daniel FiedlerDepartment of Music Education, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Corinna ReckDepartment of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Susceptibility to emotional contagion is defined as the disposition of how susceptible someone is to catch others' emotions and it has long been studied in research on mental health, well-being, and social interaction. Given that existing self-report measures of susceptibility to emotional contagion have focused almost exclusively on negative emotions, we developed a self-report measure to assess the susceptibility to emotional contagion of both positive and negative emotions (2 scales). In two studies, we examined their factor structure, validity, and reliability using exploratory factor analysis (Study 1, N = 257), confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2, N = 247) and correlations. Our results confirmed the two-factor structure and demonstrated good internal consistencies. Regarding external validity, our scales showed diverging correlational patterns: While susceptibility to negative emotional contagion was linked to mental health problems and negative emotions, susceptibility to positive emotional contagion was linked to interpersonal functioning and prosocial tendencies. In conclusion, our scales appear to be internally/externally valid and a promising tool for future research.

Indexed as

EmotionsSelf ReportAdolescentAdultFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38743712
PMCPMC11093349

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.