MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105234643 · doi:10.1177/1354067x06061590

Are There Emotional Universals? Evidence from the Native American Language East Cree

2006· article· en· W2105234643 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture & Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotiveShameFeelingAngerPsychologyLinguisticsLinguistic universalProblem of universalsEthnocentrismLiteral and figurative languageTurkishSyntaxSocial psychologySociologyTheoretical linguisticsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In her study on emotions across languages and cultures, Wierzbicka proposed a set of eleven working hypotheses on emotional universals. We test each of these hypotheses against data newly collected from the Native American language East Cree. Eight of these eleven hypotheses are confirmed, thus giving support to their universality. We offer cross-cultural comparison of anger-like, fear-like and shame-like concepts, and discuss the Cree expression of good and bad feelings, cry and smile, and Cree emotive interjections. Our findings indicate that not all languages commonly use figurative bodily images (‘my heart sank’) or bodily sensations (‘when I heard this, my throat went dry’) to describe cognitively based feelings. The Cree data also cast some doubt on a straightforward universal syntax for combining the primes, as proposed in the current Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) framework. However, we conclude that, for researchers interested in avoiding ethnocentric bias, the NSM approach is on the right track as a tool for cross-cultural, cross-linguistic research on emotions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it