Affectivism and the Emotional Elephant: How a Componential Approach Can Reconcile Opposing Theories to Serve the Future of Affective Sciences

IF 2.1 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Daniel Dukes, David Sander
{"title":"Affectivism and the Emotional Elephant: How a Componential Approach Can Reconcile Opposing Theories to Serve the Future of Affective Sciences","authors":"Daniel Dukes,&nbsp;David Sander","doi":"10.1007/s42761-024-00272-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article discusses how the <i>affectivism framework</i> and the <i>componential approach</i> to emotion may serve the future of affective sciences. A particular aim of the article is to show that an appraisal-based componential approach to emotion can help reconcile opposing theories. It begins by contextualizing the evolution of emotion science within the framework of affectivism, acknowledging that the significant epistemological differences between various theories have paradoxically spurred interest in studying emotion across various perspectives and disciplines. If affectivism is regarded as the pursuit of a deeper understanding of not only emotions and other affective processes but also cognitive and behavioral processes, then its success can be partly attributed to the existence of multiple approaches, allowing each discipline and perspective to advance using the most suitable theory and methodology. We contend that a componential approach reveals that the five principal theories of emotion have each focused on one of five components of emotion. Overall, based on the analysis of several articles published in the <i>special issue on the future of affective science,</i> we argue that affective scientists are well equipped not only to build a future in which conceptual and methodological tools will be used to test diverging hypotheses between competing theories but also to acknowledge and celebrate where such theories converge.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72119,"journal":{"name":"Affective science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461373/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Affective science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42761-024-00272-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article discusses how the affectivism framework and the componential approach to emotion may serve the future of affective sciences. A particular aim of the article is to show that an appraisal-based componential approach to emotion can help reconcile opposing theories. It begins by contextualizing the evolution of emotion science within the framework of affectivism, acknowledging that the significant epistemological differences between various theories have paradoxically spurred interest in studying emotion across various perspectives and disciplines. If affectivism is regarded as the pursuit of a deeper understanding of not only emotions and other affective processes but also cognitive and behavioral processes, then its success can be partly attributed to the existence of multiple approaches, allowing each discipline and perspective to advance using the most suitable theory and methodology. We contend that a componential approach reveals that the five principal theories of emotion have each focused on one of five components of emotion. Overall, based on the analysis of several articles published in the special issue on the future of affective science, we argue that affective scientists are well equipped not only to build a future in which conceptual and methodological tools will be used to test diverging hypotheses between competing theories but also to acknowledge and celebrate where such theories converge.

情感主义与情感之象:互补法如何调和对立理论,为情感科学的未来服务。
本文讨论了情感主义框架和情感构成方法如何为情感科学的未来服务。文章的一个特别目的是要说明,以评价为基础的情感构成方法有助于调和对立的理论。文章首先介绍了情感科学在情感主义框架内的演变,承认各种理论之间在认识论上的显著差异激发了人们从不同角度和学科研究情感的兴趣。如果情感主义被视为不仅追求对情绪和其他情感过程的深入理解,而且还追求对认知和行为过程的深入理解,那么它的成功可以部分归功于多种方法的存在,使每个学科和视角都能利用最合适的理论和方法取得进展。我们认为,从构成要素的角度来看,五种主要的情绪理论都各自侧重于情绪的五个构成要素之一。总之,根据对情感科学未来特刊中发表的几篇文章的分析,我们认为情感科学家不仅有能力建设一个未来,在这个未来中,概念和方法论工具将被用来检验相互竞争的理论之间的不同假设,而且也有能力承认和庆祝这些理论的交汇点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信