Scholarlink

<p>Research linking facial muscle movement to emotion and other affective experience has been central to affective science throughout the field’s history. Though the study of facial affect has often been contentious, it is possible that researchers currently working in this field agree on more than is commonly recognized. In the present study, 55 actively publishing facial affect researchers indicated their agreement, agreement with reservations, or disagreement with 23 statements regarding the nature of and best practices for research on facial affect, generated through a process akin to the Delphi method for developing consensus statements. Agreement (with or without reservations) exceeded 95% of participants for 11 statements, and 90% for four more. Participants also provided thoughtful, nuanced, mechanism-oriented comments on the statements, indicating strikingly high agreement on many fundamental theoretical and methodological issues. Implications for future research are discussed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

On What Can We Agree?: Principles Endorsed by Facial Affect Researchers across Theoretical Perspectives and Subdisciplines of Psychology and Neuroscience

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月13日

查看全文
  • Michelle N. Shiota,
  • Carley Vornlocher,
  • Rachael E. Jack,
  • Elizabeth B. daSilva,
  • José-Miguel Fernández-Dols,
  • Sarah R. Holley,
  • Jeff T. Larsen,
  • Michele Morningstar,
  • Pierre Plusquellec,
  • Nicole A. Roberts,
  • Jose A. Soto,
  • Virginia E. Sturm

摘要

Research linking facial muscle movement to emotion and other affective experience has been central to affective science throughout the field’s history. Though the study of facial affect has often been contentious, it is possible that researchers currently working in this field agree on more than is commonly recognized. In the present study, 55 actively publishing facial affect researchers indicated their agreement, agreement with reservations, or disagreement with 23 statements regarding the nature of and best practices for research on facial affect, generated through a process akin to the Delphi method for developing consensus statements. Agreement (with or without reservations) exceeded 95% of participants for 11 statements, and 90% for four more. Participants also provided thoughtful, nuanced, mechanism-oriented comments on the statements, indicating strikingly high agreement on many fundamental theoretical and methodological issues. Implications for future research are discussed.