The Relation Between Valence and Arousal in Subjective Experience Varies With Personality and Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While in general arousal increases with positive or negative valence (a so-called V-shaped relation), there are large differences among individuals in how these two fundamental dimensions of affect are related in people's experience. In two studies, we examined two possible sources of this variation: personality and culture. METHOD: In Study 1, participants (Belgian university students) recalled a recent event that was characterized by high or low valence or arousal and reported on their feelings and their personality in terms of the Five-Factor Model. In Study 2, participants from Canada, China/Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and Spain reported on their feelings in a thin slice of time and on their personality. RESULTS: In Study 1, we replicated the V-shape as characterizing the relation between valence and arousal, and identified personality correlates of experiencing particular valence-arousal combinations. In Study 2, we documented how the V-shaped relation varied as a function of Western versus Eastern cultural background and personality. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that the steepness of the V-shaped relation between valence and arousal increases with Extraversion within cultures, and with a West-East distinction between cultures. Implications for the personality-emotion link and research on cultural differences in affect are discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".