World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article


Article Id: WHEBN0006153215
Reproduction Date:

Title: Emotionality  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Gender differences in eyewitness memory, Test anxiety, Psychology of religious conversion, Behavioral neuroscience, Jill Taylor
Collection: Behavioral Neuroscience, Emotion
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia


Emotionality is the observable behavioral and physiological component of emotion, and is a measure of a person's emotional reactivity to a stimulus.[1] Most of these responses can be observed by other people, while some emotional responses can only be observed by the person experiencing them.[2] Observable responses to emotion (i.e., smiling) do not have a single meaning. A smile can be used to express happiness or anxiety, a frown can communicate sadness or anger, and so on.[3] Emotionality is often used by psychology researchers to operationalize emotion in research studies.[1]


  • Examples 1
  • Early theories of emotion 2
    • Emotion as irrational 2.1
    • Emotion as physiological 2.2
  • Theories of emotional response 3
    • James-Lange theory of emotion 3.1
    • Cannon-Bard theory of emotion 3.2
    • Schachter-Singer theory of emotion 3.3
  • Gender differences 4
  • Expression of emotion across cultures 5
  • See also 6
  • References 7


Smile, depicting joy (Ximena Navarrete, Miss Universe 2010)
Wide eyes and raised eyebrows, common indicators of surprise[4] (Figure 20 from Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals)
  • Facial expressions
    • Smile
    • Frown
    • Creased forehead
    • Raised eyebrows
    • Wide eyes
  • Physiological responses
  • Observable behavior
    • averted gaze
    • avoidance
    • excitement
    • fidgeting
    • gasping

Early theories of emotion

By the late 1800s, many high-quality contributions had been made to the theory of emotion by psychologists and scientists such as cognitive components. William McDougall thought of emotion as the articulation of a natural response built on instinct. Other psychologists reasoned that although gestures express emotion, this is not the entirety of their function. Wundt analyzed that emotion portrays both expression and communication.[2]

Emotion as irrational

One of the oldest issues of emotion is the one that believes emotion indicates inferiority. In early psychology, it was believed that passion (emotion) was a part of the soul inherited from the animals and that it must be controlled. Solomon identified that in the Romantic movement of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, reason and emotion were thought to be opposites.[2]

Emotion as physiological

Physiological responses to emotion originate in the central nervous system, the autonomic nervous system, and the endocrine system. Some of the responses include: heart rate, sweating, rate and depth of respiration, and electrical activity in the brain. Many researchers have attempted to find a connection between specific emotions and a corresponding pattern of physiological responses, although it is said that these attempts have rendered unsuccessful conclusions.[2]

Theories of emotional response

The significant theories of emotion can be divided into three primary categories: physiological,[5] neurological,[6] and cognitive.[7] Physiological theories imply that activity within the body can be accountable for emotions.[8] Neurological theories suggest that activity within the brain leads to emotional responses.[6] Lastly, cognitive theories reason that thoughts and other mental activity have a vital role in the stimulation of emotions.[7] Common-sense suggests that people first become consciously aware of their emotions and that the physiological responses follow shortly after.[9] Below are a few well-known theories which contradict this common-sense theory:

James-Lange theory of emotion

The James-Lange theory of emotion was proposed by psychologist William James and physiologist Carl Lange. This theory suggests that emotions occur as a result of physiological responses to outside stimuli or events. For example, this theory suggests that if someone is driving down the road and sees the headlights of another car heading toward them in their lane, their heart begins to race (a physiological response) and then they become afraid (fear being the emotion).[8]

Cannon-Bard theory of emotion

The Cannon-Bard theory, which was conceptualized by Walter Cannon and Phillip Bard, suggests that emotions and their corresponding physiological responses are experienced simultaneously. Using the previous example, when someone sees the car coming toward them in their lane, their heart starts to race and they feel afraid at the same time.[6]

Schachter-Singer theory of emotion

Stanley Schachter and Jerome Singer proposed a theory also known as the two-factor theory of emotion, which implies emotion have two factors: physical arousal and cognitive label. This suggests that the physiological activity occurs first, then it must cognitively be distinguished as the cause of the arousal and labeled as an emotion. Using the example of someone seeing a car coming towards them in their lane, their heart would start to race and they would identify that they must be afraid if their heart is racing, and from there they would begin to feel fear.[7]

Gender differences

The opposition of rational thought and emotion is believed to be paralleled by the similar opposition between male and female. A traditional view is that "men are seen as rational and women as emotional, lacking rationality."[2] However, in spite of these ideas, and in spite of gender differences in the prevalence of mood disorders, the empirical evidence on gender differences in emotional responding is mixed.[10]

When engaging in social interaction, studies show that women smile significantly more than men do. Although the results are meaningful, it is still difficult to determine the exact difference between males and females to explain this disparity. It is possible that the best explanation for this difference in expression of emotions could be due to societal influences and conformity to gender roles. However, this cannot fully explain the opposition between the two sexes or how it came to be against social norms for men to frequently smile during social interaction. One approach to this suggests the male gender role involves characteristics such as strength, expert knowledge, and a competitive nature, and that smiling can be stereotypically associated with weakness. Therefore, men may feel that if they succumb to this act of "weakness," it may contradict their attempts to show strength and other traits of the male gender role. Another broad explanation for the contrast in male and female gender expression is that women have reported to experience greater levels of emotional intensity than men, in both positive and negative aspects, which could naturally lead to greater emotional response.[3] This is not to say that men do not feel emotion. It is simply evident that men are less likely to express the emotions they feel than women may be. It has also been reported that men are more likely to confide in female companions, revealing their emotions and intimacy, while females are typically comfortable confiding in both genders. This suggests that men are simply more particular about how they express the emotions they feel, potentially relating back to the gender roles mentioned earlier.[11]

Expression of emotion across cultures

It is believed that there are six universal emotions which expand across all cultures. These emotions are: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, surprise, and disgust. There is some argument that contempt should be combined with disgust, though it is not as widely accepted.[12] According to Ekman (1992), each of these emotions have universally corresponding facial expressions as well.[13] In addition to the facial expressions that are said to accompany each emotion, there is also evidence to suggest that certain autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity is associated with the three emotions of fear, anger, and disgust. Ekman (1992) theorizes that these specific emotions are associated with the universal physiological responses due to evolution. It would not be expected to observe the same physiological responses for emotions not specifically linked to survival, such as happiness or sadness.[12]

Ekman's theories were early challenged by James A. Russell, and have since been tested by a variety of researchers, with ambiguous results. This would seem to reflect methodological problems relating to both display rules and to the Components of emotion.[14] Current thinking favors a mix of underlying universality combined with significant cultural differences in the articulation and expression of emotion.[15] The fact that emotions serve different functions in different cultures must also be taken into account.[16]

See also


  1. ^ a b
  2. ^ a b c d e
  3. ^ a b
  4. ^
  5. ^
  6. ^ a b c
  7. ^ a b c
  8. ^ a b
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^
  12. ^ a b
  13. ^
  14. ^ J. W. Berry et al eds., Cross-Cultural Psychology (2011) p. 169-73
  15. ^ J. W. Berry et al eds., Cross-Cultural Psychology (2011) p. 173-7
  16. ^ P. Philipott et al eds., The Social Context of Nonverbal Behaviour (1999) p. 39
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.