From our theory we deducted two main hypotheses for empirical examination. The essence of the first one is that the main dimensions of discrimination among the emotions of daily life (moods, feelings, etc.) which are manifested through facial expressions, converge with the main basic emotions of the evolutional theories of emotion: happiness, surprise, interest, fear,anger, disgust, sadness.
The essence of the second is that the main dimensions of discrimination among the variety of words which express many different emotions, and are used to describe the introspected emotions of daily life, converge with the three abstract bi-polar dimensions of emotion (or the connotative meaning of Osgood, 1964) namely: evaluation, potency, activity.)
The first hypothesis was supported in the main. The theoretical implications of what was found to be in accord with this hypothesis and the implication of that which was in contradiction or neutral to it are enormous. The results enrich the empirical support of the evolutionary theories using data drawn from daily life. This was very much needed by these theories for the validation of claims about the role of basic emotions in man.
The second hypothesis was refuted. It was found that the dimensions of discrimination among the words also converge with the basic emotions and slightly so (if at all) with the abstract ones. Our effort to reconcile the two contending approaches failed. However, the efforts were not in vain.
Though we can be relatively sure that the variable examined is related to the specific domain which is studied, it is not easy to trace the reason or the causes for the multiple correlations.
One possible reason can be that the axis-dimensions of the mathematical solution were rotated because of none systematic or irrelevant variance found in the data. Another reason can be that the correlated dimensions converge because of basic component(s) of the variables examined which are common to both, as variables may be compounds (and not pure or primary ones). A third reason can be that there is significant interaction between the variables studied despite the assumption that they are independent of one another.
The following paragraphs reveal the main indications found in our study for the convergence between the main dimensions of discriminations among the emotions of daily life and inborn structures of emotion. (Not according to the order of appearance in the empirical finding.)
The content of one pole of the first dimension converges with the content of the well known inborn structure sadness or its higher intensity level - distress. It was studied extensively as the Separation Distress (see Bowlby, 1969-81). The content of the second pole of the first dimension converges with the content of the well studied content of happiness-contentment that was thought to be another inborn structure.
The facial expressions that fit the two poles of this structure are the quiet and open smile for the positive side (and not the face of laughter that is somewhat associated with it because of the open mouth with uncovered teeth and positive content). The facial expression for the other pole is the `crying face'. It seems that each analyses of the central nervous system of date is monitored intensively by this inborn structure. Therefore it is easy to "abstract" the concrete content of this structure and to name it "the evaluation dimension".
This dimension has a significant correlation with the surprise dimension of the facial expressions. It seems that the core of the second dimension of words and at least part of that of the fifth dimension of the facial expression is concentrated attention on the environment.
In primate groups, one of the most common signs for submission is a ritual of pseudu-sexual-receptivity - individuals of both sexes demonstrate this to any threatening dominant figure in order to prevent an expected attack. This relation between the two is the cause of blushing that is a pseudo-sign for sexual arousal. This phenomenon is in essence the reason for the similarity between shame, and shyness-coyness it simulate.
The difference between the words and the facial expressions seems to be an equivalent to the differences between tests with an obvious content and projective tests. The inborn structure of fear which is one of the four whose brain structure is already clear (see Fonberg, 1986), monitors the expected damaging factors of the environment.
It seems that the consistency of this mood is not independent of other emotions: The intensity of patience - the eighth dimension of the words is negatively correlated to anger. On the other end, the highest positive correlation of the anger (versus patience) dimension of the words is with the pride (versus shame and embarrassment) dimension of the words. The higher is one in the social hierarchy the more he can afford to feel anger.
It seems that the items of surprised faces used in this study and those used by others are not really "clean" from the outcome of the unexpected. There is a difference whether the outcome is of positive or of neutral or is of negative value. It is also different when the assimilation of the unexpected is swift or slow. It seems that the expression of the elevation of alertness in the items that are faces of surprise is the cause of the correlation between the two dimensions.
The facial dimension of surprise is also correlated with the "longing stupefaction": r=-0.16, p<.022. (Stupefaction is mainly with the same content as surprise but of higher intensity.) It is also negatively correlated with the seventh dimension of the words, that contain in it the regularity aspect. It seems that the "startled face" is the most suitable for the expression of the high intensity of this structure.
The significant correlation between the facial dimension and the verbal alertness dimension is mainly due to the nature of unfinished business. There is not ample clear evidence for the existence of a unique expression of it and for the specific dynamics of this basic emotion. However, Darwin (1872) was sure of its existence and brings evidence to support it. Tomkins (1982) claims that guilt is emotionally identical to shame. Our findings are in accord with Darwin's.
Few obstacles can be overcome with the methodology used in this study:
The first one is the about the choice of a suitable research strategy. This study enable now the recognition that the discovering of new categories of emotion that have their own facial expressions and the ability to discriminate among them is not fit for studying the entire inventar of the primary variables of the emotional domain.
In spite of the fact that the primary variables of this domain act in relatively independent of each other, only multivriate and especially multidimensional paradigms are fit for the study of it. And this so, because these variables are active in parallel all the time.
Izard's (1971) claim that the multidimensional methodologies do not fit to deal with this domain is unfounded. It is the only methodology that can tackle so easily with a domain which has so many primary variables which are relatively independent of one another but active simultaneously.
However, even when one uses multidimensional approach one can be trapped by
ignorance about the problematic flaws of the specific techniques of this
approach. The first and the most important is the relation between the data
collecting stage of the study and the interpretation of the results.
The proponents of the "parsimonious-cognitive" approach get their two or three- dimensional results, at least partly, due to the above problem.
The second main problem of previous studies is that of the task of the subjects. As demonstrated by Hirschberg (1980) subjects can use different sets of variables when doing their task - even during the same session and while they work with the same items. When one studies the primary variables of a domain which requires being analyzed by multidimensional (or factor) analyses, one cannot rely on the old methodologies of pre multidimensional scaling.
The "new" approach of Guttman (1957, 1968) culminated in the methodology of the "facet analyses" and the mapping sentence, stress the need (in certain cases) for a scale with a common direction for all the items intended for an analysis. This common scale is also the best way to overcome the problem of finding a collection of representative scales, the problem of research bias in the collection or building of scales.
It is the only logical way to solve the logical contradiction of the need to know the main results in advance in order to include in a study all the relevant items and scales. Guttman's solution for that problem culminated in this study in the scale of "how much the emotion expressed in ... [and here comes the specific item] is similar to your present mood or feelings". The above scale allows the subjects to use all the dimensions of discrimination that are relevant to them. (Those that are common to a significant number of subjects, are reconstructed by the multidimensional analysis.)
The essence of those techniques is the computation of subjects' dimensional scores (equivalent in a way to subjects' factor scores). Those subjects score can be correlated or used in other statistical tests and analysis to yield a meaningful and objective interpretation of the mathematical multidimensional solutions.
The above technique enables one to use items that are natural mixtures of the basic variables of the study as one does not need to know their meaning in advance in order to interpret the meaning of the dimensions or the directions of the domain.
Though, even while using this technique there is some subjective influence in the interpretation of the results, it is usually restricted by the availability of a lot of objective data that can be open to the critical reader.
The rotation of the axis (dimensions) of the mathematical solutions in a systematic way is not easy to obtain or control yet. Therefore, part of the systematic variance is "lost" and it is difficult to test the measure of the relative independence of directions in the mathematical solutions. However, any primary variable of an examined domain, which is relatively independent of the others, and is represented in the data by a systematic variance, will have its special impact on the results. That impact can always be traced - at list partially.
Ekman et al. (1982) conclude that all previous studies failed in their treatment of this problem. As found in this study, even Ekman and Friesen's (1975) technique did not solve the problem. It seems that the best solution of this problem is the use of emotions induced by hypnosis in relatively young models whose faces do not have significant chronic expressions of emotion.
Another error usually done in the study of the emotional domain as a whole is the reliance on a too small number of items and variables. The number of the main items of this study is 253 and even this seems to be too small. When one studies a domain with so many basic variables and dimensions one cannot be "parsimonious".
In this study, about 14 basic emotions were encountered and those are (according to few theorists) are only the most prominent ones. In research of phenomena of this kind, all the studies which used only a few dozen items each, did not have a chance of finding the full collection of basic emotions. In these studies, even the finding of all the main ones has only a small chance.
The main contributions of this study is the identification of problems in the methodological domain as the source of the above contradiction. By doing so we also obtained a most significant support for the evolutional groups of theories.
This study clarifies and enrich our knowledge of the dynamics of emotional daily life and especially with regard to the moods and feelings of mild intensities.
This study can be a prototype for the development of a new convenient technique for the measurement of human emotions.
APENDIX No. 1:
The list of 148 words of materials: 2 and their subgroups,
"C" Words that have the letter "C" to their left, are words of emotion that
were included for control and are not part of the basic list of 96.
"*" Words that have the asterisk "*" to their left, are names of dimensions
and variables that were found in previous studies and are not emotions.
"R" Words that have the letter "R" to their left, are included in the basic
list of 96 and were taken from Russell (1980) - 25 out of his 28 words.
activity decisiveness haughtiness restrained adoration R delighted helplessness * restraint alarm * dependence hope right(ness) alertness R depression humiliation * rigor R anger desire indifference routine animosity despair inferiority R sadness R annoyance * dimness * initiative R satisfaction R anxiety disappointment * intensity R satisfied * appetite disgust interest scepticism * approval * disqualification * intricacy scorn * artificiality disregard involvement R serenity astonishment disrespect joy servility R at ease R distress leniency shame attraction C droopy loneliness * sharpness * balanced embarrassment longing C shyness belonging embitterment C love * simplicity C bitterness enjoyment * meditative * sincerity R bliss C envy C mirth * sleepy * blur * exaggeration R misery * slumber boldness R excitement C mockery sorrow R boredom R fatigue * naturalness * stability R calmness R fear nervousness stubbornness caution firmness pain suffering * clearness * frankness panic C superiority compassion fondness * passiveness surprise * complexity C friendly patience suspiciousness C concern R frustration pity sympathy conciliated C gaiety R pleasure tenderness confidence C generosity * posing R tension * constraint C gloom pride tolerance * confusion grateful quiscence R tranquillity contempt C greediness regret C uneasiness R contentment grievance R relaxed * unstable courage guilt relief * vigilance C craving R happiness repulsion * weakness * criticism * haste C respect wory curiosity hate C restlesness yearning
Materials 1a - The 48 items of Szondi test were arranged according to their original numerical order in the free grading, and according to the standard of the test in the Q-sort.
Materials 1b and 1c - The 57 artificial basic emotions and combinations were arranged in the Q-sort, in two to three row on a plates according to the number of items on a plate.
The plates: I - VI are of the Szondi Test (1a); VII - X are of the 33 items of basic emotions (1b), XI and XII are of the 24 artificial mixtures of emotion taken from Ekman & Friesen (1975) (1c).
An Anger Ha Happiness Cn Control D Down No. Number
Co Contempt In Interest Sc Scepticism U Up p Page
Dg Disgust Sa Sadness Qu Questioning L Left 71 Izard(1971)
Dt Distress Sh Shame Ne Neutral M Middle 77 Izard (1977)
Fe Fear Su Surprise Mx Mixed R Right 75 Ekman & Friesen (1975)
VII(11) VIII IX X
1.Ha 75 p112 L | 8.In 77 p85 No.5 |17.Ha 75 p112 R |22.In 71 p329 R
2.Su 75 p42 L | 9.Ha 71 p236 No.2 |18.Su 75 p45 L |23.Ha 71 p328 M
3.Fe 75 p181 R U |10.Su 71 p236 No.3 |19.Fe 75 p62 R |26.Su 71 p328 L
4.An 75 p185 L D |11.Dt 71 p236 No.4 |20.An 75 p42 R |27.Sa 75 p127 R(12)
5.Dg 75 p30 R |12.An 71 p237 No.6 |21.Dg 75 p30 L |28.An 77 p88 No.9
6.Sa 75 p193 L D |13.Sh 71 p237 No.7 |22.Sa 75 p127 L |29.Sh 71 p329 L
7.Co 75 p183 L D |14.Fe 71 p330 L |23.Co 75 p25 R U |30.Dt 75 p122 R
|15.Dg 71 p328 R | |31.Fe 77 p91 No.1
|16.Ha 71 p237 No.9 | |32.Dg 71 p237 No.5
|33.Co 71 p330 M
XI XII
1.Ne p38 L | 7.An+Fe p96 R || 13.Su+Qu p177 R D | 19. Mx p86 R D
2.Su+Fe p59 R D| 8.An+Cn p97 L || 14.Ne p51 L | 20.Ha+Su p197 L U
3.Su+Dg p73 D | 9.Ha+Su p108 L || 15.Co+An p185 R U | 21.Ha+Su p197 R U
4.Sc+D p74 L |10.Ha+An p110 L || 16.Co+Dg p72 R D | 22. Ha+Co p109 D
5.Mx p86 L U|11.Sa+Fe p122 L || 17.Sc+Dg p74 R | 23.Sa+Dg p125 L
6.An+Dg p93 D |12.Sa+An p123 D || 18.Fe+Dg p75 D | 24.Sa+Ha p126 L
_____________________________
(11) The Roman numerals indicate the plates. The Arabic numerals indicate
the items in their respective group - a\II and a\III
(12) This item is of Distress according to Izard (1977). But he took it
from Ekman & Friesen (1975) who made it represent Sadness.
Abstract - Hebrew a Introduction 1 Theoretical background 4 Types of variables discovered 5 The two main approaches 7 The main problems of previous research 13 What is emotion 17 What is the universe of emotional phenomena 28 What is the subjective experiance of emotion 32 The main discriminatios among the emotions 34 On the methology of the research in field of emotion 64 The theory of this study 83 The hypothesis 94 The method 97 The subjects 97 The tools 98 The procedure 102 The computation of the dimensional scores for the subjects 110 Results 113 The subjects 113 The items and their scores 114 Directions of the space of discriminations among facial expression 136 The content of the ten dimensions of the 48 mixed emotions' space 163 The dimrensions of discrimination ammong the 96 words of emotion 172 The relations between the words' dimensions and the facials'ones 183 Discussion 188 Appendices 231 References 234 Abstract - English I
Clore, G.L. & Ortony, A. (1984) Some issues for a cognitive theory of emotion. Cahires de Psychologie Cognitive, Vol. 4, 53-57.
Darwin, C. (1872) The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals. (London: John Murray's edition of 1964).
Descartes, R. (1649) Treatise On the Passions Of the Soul. (In The Philosofical Works Of Descartes: E.S. Halden & G.R.T. Ross, Trans., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967).
Ekman, P., and Friesen, W.V. (1971) Constants accross cultures in face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 124-129.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V. (1975) Unmasking the face. Engelwood Cliffs N.J.: Prentice- Hall.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V., and Elsworth, P. (1982) Research foundations In P. Ekman (Ed.), Emotions in the Human Face. London: Cambridge University Press.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V., and Elsworth, P. (1983) Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotions. Science, 221, 1208-1211.
Ekman, P., Sorenson, E.R. and Friesen, W.V., (1969) Pan-cultural elements in facial displays of emotions. Science, 165 (3875), 86-88.
Fonberg,E. (1986) Amygdala, emotions, motivation, an depressive states. In R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.), Emotion _ Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, Vol 3.
Guttman, L. A. (1957) Introduction to facet analysis. Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress of Psychology, Brussels 1957. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co. .
Guttman,L.A. (1968) A generalized nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for configuration of points. Psychometrica, 33,469.
Hirschberg, N. (1980) Individual differences in social judgment: a multivariate approach.In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in Social Psychology. Hilsdale, N.J. Lawrence and Erlbaum Associates.
Izard, C.E. (1971) The face of Emotion. New York: Meredith.
Izard, C. E. (1977) Human Emotions. New York: Plenum Press.
Izard, C.E. (1984) Emotion-cognition relationships and human development. In C.E. Izard, J. Kagan & R.B. Zajonc (Eds.). Emotion, Cognition and Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laird, J.D. (1974) Self-attribution of emotion: The effects of expressive behavior on the quality of emotional experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 475-486.
Laird, J.D. (1984) The real role of facial response in the experience of emotion: a reply to Tourangeau and Ellsworth, and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 646-675.
Leventhal, H.A. (1979) Perceptual-motor procession model of emotion. In P. Plinter, K.R. Blakstein and I.M. Spigel (Eds.), Perception of Emotion in self and others. New York: Plenum Press.
Lingoes, J. C. (1973) The Guttman-Lingoes Non metric Program series. Michigan: Mathesis Press.
Osgood, C.E. (1952) The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological Buletin, 49, 197-237.
Osgood, C.E. (1959) The cross-cultural generality of visual-verbal sinesthetic tendencies. Behavioral Science, 146-169.
Osgood, C.E. (1959b semantic space revisited. word, 15, 192-200.
Osgood, C.E. (1964) Semantic Differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. American Anthropologist, 66, 171-200.
Osgood, C.E. (1969) Introduction. In J.G. Snider & C.E. Osgood (Eds.), (1969) Semantic Differential Technique. Chicago: Aldine.
Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., and Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957) The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Panksepp, J. (1981) The ontogeny of play in ruts. Developmental Psychology, 14, 327-332.
Panksepp, J. (1986) The anatomy of emotions. In R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, Vol 3.
Piajet, J. (1965) The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: International Universities Press.
Plutchik, R. (1980) Emotion a Psycho-Evolutionary Synthesis. New York: Harper.
Plutchik, R. (1980b) in R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.),(1980-1986) Emotion: Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1-3.
Plutchik, R.. and Kelerman, H. (Eds.), (1980-1986) Emotion: Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1-3.
Plutchik, R. (1982) A psycho evolutionary theory of emotions. Social Science Information, Vol. 21, 529-553.
Rosman, I.J. (1984) Cognitive determinants of emotion: A structural theory. Review of Personality & Social Psychology, No. 5, 11-36.
Russell, J.A. (1980) A Circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161-1178.
Schachter, S. (1964) The interaction of cognitive and physiological determinants of emotional states. In L. Berkovitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press.
Scherer, K.R. (1986) Studying emotion empirically: issues and a paradigm or research. In K.R. Scherer, H.G. Wallbott & A.B. Summerfield (Eds.), Experiencing Emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scherer, K.R. (1984) Les emotions: fonnctions et composantes. Cahires de Psychologie Cognitive, 4, 9-39.
Scott, J.P. (1980) The function of emotions in behavioral systems: a systems theory analysis. In R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press.
Shalif, I., Lerner, Y. and Dasberg, H. (1981) A symptom profile analysis of anti psychotic drug treatment: nonparametric multidimensional technique. Psychiatry Research, 4, 1-12.
Snider, J. G. and Osgood, C. E.(Eds.), (1969) Semantic Differential Technique. Chicago: Aldine.
Spinoza, B. (1677) Ethics. (Amsterdam: Wereldbiblioteek; English trans. J.H. Frijda, 1979.)
Szondi, L. (1947) Experimental Diagnosis of Drives. Bern: Hans Huber. (Translated by G. Hull, New York: Grune and Stratton, 1953.)
Szondi, L., Moser, U. and Webb, M.W. (1959) The Szondi Test in Diagnosis and Treatment. Philadelphia: J.P. Lippincott.
Takane, Y., Young, F. W. & DeLeeuw, j. (1977) Nonmetric individual differences, multidimensional scaling. Psychometrica, 42, 7-67.
Tomkins, S.S. (1962/3) Affect, Imagery, Consciousness. Vol.1, Vol.2, New York: Springer.
Tomkins, S.S. (1982) Affect theory. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Emotions in the Human Face. London: Cambridge University Press.
Vargha, A. (1979) An experimental study of the factors of the Szondi Test. Magyar Pszichologiai Szamele, Vol. 36, 498-511.
Weinrich, J.D. (1980) Toward a sociological theory of the emotions. In R. Plutchik &, H. Kelerman, (Eds.). Emotion: Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1.
Winton, W. M. (1986) The role of facial response in self-reports of emotions: A critique of Laird. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 808-812.
Woodworth, R.S. (1938) Experimental Psychology. New York: Holt.
For suggestions and complains click on: ilan@shalif.com