Lindquist, Siegel, Quigley, and Barrett (2013) critiqued our recent meta-analysis that reported the effects of discrete emotions on outcomes, including cognition, judgment, physiology, behavior, and experience (Lench, Flores, & Bench, 2011). Lindquist et al. offered 2 major criticisms-we address both and consider the nature of emotion and scientific debate. Their 1st criticism, that the meta-analysis did not demonstrate emotion-consistent and emotion-specific changes in outcomes, appears to have been based on a misunderstanding of the method that we employed. Changes in outcomes were coded according to predictions derived from a functional discrete emotion account. Their 2nd criticism, that the findings are consistent with a psychological constructionist approach to emotion, is partially supported by the data and our statements in Lench et al. (2011). However, only 1 meta-analytic finding is relevant to this hypothesis, and it does not offer unequivocal evidence. Further, we contend that no modern discrete emotion theories would make the claims described by Lindquist et al. as representing a "natural kind" perspective and that viewing a scientific debate as a war has negative implications for the ability to evaluate evidence.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029296 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Can the Participant Speak Beyond Likert? Free-Text Responses in COVID-19 Obesity Surveys.
Obesity (Silver Spring)
December 2020
ConscienHealth, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Liraglutide and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.
N Engl J Med
August 2017
From KfH Kidney Center, Munich, and Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen, Erlangen - both in Germany (J.F.E.M.); Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark (D.D.Ø., K.B.-F., S.R., K.T.); University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (S.P.M.); Imperial College London, London (N.R.P.); Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mt. Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto (B.Z.); and University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill (J.B.B.).
Background: In a randomized, controlled trial that compared liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk who were receiving usual care, we found that liraglutide resulted in lower risks of the primary end point (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) and death. However, the long-term effects of liraglutide on renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown.
Methods: We report the prespecified secondary renal outcomes of that randomized, controlled trial in which patients were assigned to receive liraglutide or placebo.
Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.
N Engl J Med
July 2016
From the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (S.P.M.); Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (G.H.D.); Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark (K.B.-F., P.K., L.S.R., M.S.); Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen, Erlangen (J.F.E.M.), and St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University, Bochum (M.A.N.) - both in Germany; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland (S.E.N.); London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Medical Statistics Unit (S.P.) and Imperial College London (N.R.P.), London; George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC (W.M.S.); Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mt. Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto (B.Z.); International Diabetes Center at Park Nicollet, Minneapolis (R.M.B.); and the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill (J.B.B.).
Background: The cardiovascular effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, when added to standard care in patients with type 2 diabetes, remains unknown.
Methods: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk to receive liraglutide or placebo. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke.
Efficacy and safety of the anti-IL-12/23 p40 monoclonal antibody, ustekinumab, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis despite conventional non-biological and biological anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy: 6-month and 1-year results of the phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised PSUMMIT 2 trial.
Ann Rheum Dis
June 2014
Allergy, Immunology & Rheumatology Division, University of Rochester Medical Center, , Rochester, New York, USA.
Objective: Assess ustekinumab efficacy (week 24/week 52) and safety (week 16/week 24/week 60) in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) despite treatment with conventional and/or biological anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents.
Methods: In this phase 3, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial, 312 adults with active PsA were randomised (stratified by site, weight (≤100 kg/>100 kg), methotrexate use) to ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg at week 0, week 4, q12 weeks or placebo at week 0, week 4, week 16 and crossover to ustekinumab 45 mg at week 24, week 28 and week 40. At week 16, patients with <5% improvement in tender/swollen joint counts entered blinded early escape (placebo→45 mg, 45 mg→90 mg, 90 mg→90 mg).
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!