Emotion Review 2 (4):371-372 (2010)

Abstract
The effort to define the term “emotion” has a long history in the discipline of psychology. Izard’s survey (2010) canvassed prominent emotion theorists and researchers on their working definitions of emotion. The particular assumptions about emotion reported, as well as the conclusion that the term “emotion” lacks a consensus definition, both have historical precedent. In this commentary, I place Izard’s findings in this historical context and discuss the implications of his survey for the future of emotion research
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/1754073910374669
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,393
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What's Basic About Basic Emotions?Andrew Ortony & Terence J. Turner - 1990 - Psychological Review 97 (3):315-331.
Measures of Emotion: A Review.Iris B. Mauss & Michael D. Robinson - 2009 - Cognition and Emotion 23 (2):209-237.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Emotion as a Student Resource in Higher Education.Brendan Bartram - 2015 - British Journal of Educational Studies 63 (1):67-84.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Do Discrete Emotions Exist?Yang-Ming Huang, Maria Gendron & Lisa Feldman Barrett - 2009 - Philosophical Psychology 22 (4):427-437.
Narcissism in Emotion.David Pugmire - 2002 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1 (3):313-326.
“Emotion”: The History of a Keyword in Crisis.Thomas Dixon - 2012 - Emotion Review 4 (4):1754073912445814.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-11-02

Total views
148 ( #71,583 of 2,448,950 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #223,322 of 2,448,950 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes