↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Semantic Emotion Space Using a 3D Hypercube-Projection: An Innovative Analytical Approach for the Psychology of Emotions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modeling Semantic Emotion Space Using a 3D Hypercube-Projection: An Innovative Analytical Approach for the Psychology of Emotions
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00522
Pubmed ID
Authors

Radek Trnka, Alek Lačev, Karel Balcar, Martin Kuška, Peter Tavel

Abstract

The widely accepted two-dimensional circumplex model of emotions posits that most instances of human emotional experience can be understood within the two general dimensions of valence and activation. Currently, this model is facing some criticism, because complex emotions in particular are hard to define within only these two general dimensions. The present theory-driven study introduces an innovative analytical approach working in a way other than the conventional, two-dimensional paradigm. The main goal was to map and project semantic emotion space in terms of mutual positions of various emotion prototypical categories. Participants (N = 187; 54.5% females) judged 16 discrete emotions in terms of valence, intensity, controllability and utility. The results revealed that these four dimensional input measures were uncorrelated. This implies that valence, intensity, controllability and utility represented clearly different qualities of discrete emotions in the judgments of the participants. Based on this data, we constructed a 3D hypercube-projection and compared it with various two-dimensional projections. This contrasting enabled us to detect several sources of bias when working with the traditional, two-dimensional analytical approach. Contrasting two-dimensional and three-dimensional projections revealed that the 2D models provided biased insights about how emotions are conceptually related to one another along multiple dimensions. The results of the present study point out the reductionist nature of the two-dimensional paradigm in the psychological theory of emotions and challenge the widely accepted circumplex model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 29%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Lecturer 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 22%
Computer Science 8 18%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,317,110
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,163
of 29,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,452
of 299,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#403
of 430 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 430 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.