Toward an implicit measure of emotions: ratings of abstract images reveal distinct emotional states

Abstract

Although implicit tests of positive and negative affect exist, implicit measures of distinct emotional states are scarce. Three experiments examined whether a novel implicit emotion-assessment task, the rating of emotion expressed in abstract images, would reveal distinct emotional states. In Experiment 1, participants exposed to a sadness-inducing story inferred more sadness, and less happiness, in abstract images. In Experiment 2, an anger-provoking interaction increased anger ratings. In Experiment 3, compared to neutral images, spider images increased fear ratings in spider-fearful participants but not in controls. In each experiment, the implicit task indicated elevated levels of the target emotion and did not indicate elevated levels of non-target negative emotions; the task thus differentiated among emotional states of the same valence. Correlations also supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the implicit task. Supporting the possibility that heuristic processes underlie the ratings, group differences were stronger among those who responded relatively quickly.

The effect of specific emotions on conformity

“…One caveat to mention is that participants in the anger condition reported mixed feelings with a similar level of sadness as those in the sadness condition. Although somewhat dismaying, these findings are consistent with past research using the same anger induction method (e.g., Gross & Levenson, 1995;Hewig et al, 2005) and could be explained by limitations of self-reports to distinguish between similarly valenced emotions (e.g., Abercrombie et al, 2005;Bartoszek & Cervone, 2017;Polivy, 1981;Quirin et al, 2009). Further, as suggested by some authors (e.g., Fayant et al, 2017;Sigall & Mills, 1998), when the results on the main dependent variable are in line with predictions (as is the case here where conformity systematically varies depending on theoretical appraisal tendencies of each target emotion), and there is no plausible alternative explanation, manipulation checks should be given a diminishing role in explaining the findings.…”

I can see that you’re happy but you’re not my friend

“…Thus, although no participants expressed any suspicion about the aim of the study, there is no guarantee that they did not alter their responses to conform to social demands (e.g., were reluctant to admit that they felt positive affect after they saw the sad sender). Future research might be supplemented with other measures that go beyond emotional expressions but are less biased than self-reports (e.g., implicit measures of affect; Bartoszek & Cervone, 2016; Quirin, Kazen, & Kuhl, 2009). Fourth, the conclusions concerning the role of the social context are limited because they are based on the indirect comparison of participants’ reactions to two different targets: the videotaped man and their partner sitting in the adjacent room.…”

Group-based emotion in group processes and intergroup relations

“…The most promising techniques may well be emotional adaptations of implicit affect (the IPANAT; Quirin, Kazén, & Kuhl, 2009) and of well-established social cognition tests of implicit evaluation (the Implicit Association Test [IAT], Egloff, Weck, & Schmukle, 2008; the Affect Misattribution Procedure [AMP], Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005; and stem completion, DeWall & Baumeister, 2007; Gawronski & De Houwer, 2014). One possible avenue is suggested by work from Bartoszek and Cervone (2016), who have shown that ratings of emotion expressed in abstract paintings reflect raters’ current acutely induced or chronically activated emotional state (at least sadness, joy, and fear). Another direction worth exploring is implied by embodiment approaches, the idea that emotions are for action.…”