Beyond Right and Wrong: Fostering Connection in Emotion Theory Debates

IF 10.5 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Perspectives on Psychological Science Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1177/17456916251319042

Karlijn van Heijst, Annemie Ploeger, Mariska E. Kret

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Basic emotion theories (BETs) and the theory of constructed emotion (TCE) have both made significant contributions to the field of affective science despite a persistent divide between the two camps. We argue that focusing on which camp is right hampers possibly fruitful collaborations between affective researchers working within different theoretical frameworks. The TCE and BETs can complement each other because they focus on different features of and questions about affective processes. Clearly defining and operationalizing these questions is crucial to further elucidating the evolutionary basis of emotion and feeling.

查看原文本刊更多论文

超越对错：在情感理论辩论中促进联系

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

Perspectives on Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-

CiteScore

22.70

自引率

4.00%

发文量

111

期刊介绍： Perspectives on Psychological Science is a journal that publishes a diverse range of articles and reports in the field of psychology. The journal includes broad integrative reviews, overviews of research programs, meta-analyses, theoretical statements, book reviews, and articles on various topics such as the philosophy of science and opinion pieces about major issues in the field. It also features autobiographical reflections of senior members of the field, occasional humorous essays and sketches, and even has a section for invited and submitted articles. The impact of the journal can be seen through the reverberation of a 2009 article on correlative analyses commonly used in neuroimaging studies, which still influences the field. Additionally, a recent special issue of Perspectives, featuring prominent researchers discussing the "Next Big Questions in Psychology," is shaping the future trajectory of the discipline. Perspectives on Psychological Science provides metrics that showcase the performance of the journal. However, the Association for Psychological Science, of which the journal is a signatory of DORA, recommends against using journal-based metrics for assessing individual scientist contributions, such as for hiring, promotion, or funding decisions. Therefore, the metrics provided by Perspectives on Psychological Science should only be used by those interested in evaluating the journal itself.