SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025
A scoping review of emotional contagion research with human subjects: identifying common trends of previous research and potential areas for future research.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emotion recognition in cross-linguistic legal context: a comparison between human-based and computational approaches.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Implicit leadership and multidimensional imitation: a structural pathway model among Chinese university students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Emotional contagion (EC) involves the automatic mimicry and synchronization of expressions, vocalizations, and movements, resulting in emotional alignment between individuals. Despite consistent scholastic explorations of the various nuances and tenets associated with emotional contagion processes and outcomes, there has yet to be a thorough review of human subjects-based emotional contagion research. Methods: This review examines human subjects EC research trends, analyzing 277 articles (published from 1992 to 2022) to identify common conceptualizations, triggers, and measurement methods. Results: Analyses indicated that Hatfield et al.'s classic conceptualization is the most cited, and common triggers include facial expressions in images and videos, and real-time interactions - though many studies did not stimulate EC. While many studies did utilize validated EC scales, about 28% of the studies reviewed used non-validated questions to measure EC. Moreover, the EC research reviewed heavily relies on college-aged, predominantly white participants, indicating a need for more diverse samples. Discussion: Future EC research should explore processes and nuances associated with EC among older adults, minoritized groups, and diverse contexts (e.g., healthcare, schools), using novel triggers and multiple measurement methods.
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.