ArticleAffective science2025
Investigating the Structure of Emotion: Tools, Pitfalls and Recommendations.
Article in Affective science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative neuroanatomy of emotion expression: from flies to humans.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People use hundreds of words to describe emotions and related mental states. Yet a large psychological literature and our own intuition argue for a simpler structure that underlies these attributions, since most of the words are antonyms or synonyms that map onto a few basic dimensions or categories. However, there is surprisingly little agreement on their number or interpretation: core affect is generally thought to be two-dimensional; emotion categories vary from six to over twenty; and according to some theories emotion concepts are much higher dimensional since they flexibly incorporate context. Although many of these debates originate in theoretical disagreements, we here focus on methodological sources: how stimuli are selected, tasks are chosen, and dimensionality reduction algorithms are used. We provide a survey of popular methods, their advantages and limitations, and recommendations for best practices.
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.