The DOI matches its Crossref record; 789 of the 799 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 27 of the 126 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review
Open accessAbstract
Researchers have wondered how the brain creates emotions since the early days of psychological science. With a surge of studies in affective neuroscience in recent decades, scientists are poised to answer this question. In this target article, we present a meta-analytic summary of the neuroimaging literature on human emotion. We compare the locationist approach (i.e., the hypothesis that discrete emotion categories consistently and specifically correspond to distinct brain regions) with the psychological constructionist approach (i.e., the hypothesis that discrete emotion categories are constructed of more general brain networks not specific to those categories) to better understand the brain basis of emotion. We review both locationist and psychological constructionist hypotheses of brain-emotion correspondence and report meta-analytic findings bearing on these hypotheses. Overall, we found little evidence that discrete emotion categories can be consistently and specifically localized to distinct brain regions. Instead, we found evidence that is consistent with a psychological constructionist approach to the mind: A set of interacting brain regions commonly involved in basic psychological operations of both an emotional and non-emotional nature are active during emotion experience and perception across a range of discrete emotion categories.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
72 Own result · 58 Own interpretation · 25 No full text of the sources · 13 Sources not found · 12 Not checked yet · 8 Partly supported · 6 Supported · 6 Supported so far · 5 No basis given · 4 Own method · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A functioning peripheral nervous system is not necessary for a person to experience a core affective state (e.g., Critchley et al. 2001) as long as they have some prior experiences to provide them with central nervous system representations of bodily states.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Critchley et al. 2001 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) says that people with acquired peripheral autonomic failure may avoid major emotional deficits partly because established representations can reduce dependence on direct peripheral feedback. But the study concerns autonomic failure, not loss of a functioning peripheral nervous system altogether; it also identifies intact non-autonomic sensory pathways and other bodily responses as reasons emotional deficits may be limited. Prior experience alone is therefore not established as sufficient. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The ACC-sadness hypothesis, similarly to the OFC-anger hypothesis, derives support from prior meta-analyses of the neuroimaging literature (e.g., Murphy et al. 2003; Phan et al. 2002).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Murphy et al. 2003 source
In “A General Role for Anterior Cingulate and Medial Prefrontal Cortices in Emotion,” the meta-analysis reports that the rostral supracallosal ACC was among the regions most consistently activated in studies targeting sadness. It also cautions that this activity was not specific to sadness; it appeared for happiness and other emotions too. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Phan et al. 2002 source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“These anatomical connections can explain why the aMCC is part of an intrinsic brain network that shows increased activity when stimuli in the environment are personally salient (Seeley et al. 2007).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Seeley et al. 2007 source
The ICA section places the dorsal anterior cingulate/paracingulate cortex in the intrinsic salience network. The Introduction says the dACC and frontoinsula respond to personal salience, and the Functional significance section says these regions coactivate in response to varied forms of salience. The anatomical explanation is the citing authors’ framing, rather than a separate finding attributed to Seeley et al. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In locationist accounts, language is thought to be epiphenomenal to discrete emotion (Ekman & Cordano, in press), although recent behavioral studies show that categorical perception of discrete emotion is supported by language (Fugate et al. 2010; Roberson & Davidoff 2000; Roberson et al. 2007).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Fugate et al. 2010 source
The Discussion reports that participants who learned chimpanzee expression categories with verbal labels showed an overall categorical-perception advantage, whereas those who learned without labels did not. This supports the attributed claim that language supports categorical perception of emotion. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites Roberson & Davidoff 2000 source
Experiment 5 tested facial expressions depicting happiness, fear, and anger. Its Discussion reports that verbal interference completely removed the cross-category recognition advantage, supporting the claim that language contributes to categorical perception of these emotional expressions. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites Roberson et al. 2007 source
The Abstract reports that verbal interference removed categorical perception of facial expressions under specified experimental conditions. It also describes a model in which a verbal emotion label activates category knowledge, supporting the claim that language contributes to categorical perception of emotional expressions. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Even rats do many things within a single emotion category: in the face of a threat, rats can freeze (e.g., LeDoux et al. 1990), flee (Vazdarjanova & McGaugh 1998), or engage in “defensive treading,” in which they kick bedding in the direction of a known threat (Reynolds & Berridge 2002; 2003; 2008).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.8. The periaqueducal gray
What the sources say
- Supportedcites LeDoux et al. 1990 source
The LeDoux et al. citation is attached specifically to rats freezing, not to fleeing or defensive treading. The results section reports that sham-lesioned rats froze during most of the conditioned stimulus, and the Figure 7 caption (p. 1063) describes freezing as a measure of fear conditioning. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Supportedcites Vazdarjanova & McGaugh 1998 source
The citation is attached to the claim that rats can flee. In the Results (page unavailable), rats previously given footshocks in a maze arm entered that arm during a later test but quickly escaped. This supports the cited example of flight from a learned threat, though the test involved no immediate shock. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites Reynolds & Berridge 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “GABAergic defensive treading, affect, and fear” section describes rats kicking sand toward targets and building protective mounds, and compares this with natural responses to threats. But it says the treading observed in this study was directed at parts of the chamber in the absence of actual threats, so it does not establish the claim’s specific description of bedding kicked toward a known threat. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Portions of the intrinsic networks for “personal salience” (e.g., Seeley et al. 2007) and “executive control” (e.g., Corbetta & Shulman 2002; Seeley et al. 2007) appear anatomically similar to brain regions that we observed within our meta-analyses as well.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Seeley et al. 2007 source
The Abstract identifies a salience network anchored in the dorsal anterior cingulate and orbital frontoinsular cortices, and an executive-control network linking dorsolateral frontal and parietal cortices. Seeley et al. thus supports the cited identification and anatomy of the networks; the comparison with the citing authors’ meta-analyses is their own observation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Corbetta & Shulman 2002 source
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“There is well-documented evidence for the anatomical circuitry underlying specific actions such as vocalizations (Jürgens 2009), maternal behavior (e.g., pup retrieval, grooming, nest building, and nursing; Numan 2007), freezing (Fanselow & Poulos 2005), startle (Davis et al. 2008; Lang et al. 2000), attack (Blanchard & Blanchard 2003) and appetitive behavior (Berridge & Kringelbach 2008; Shultz 2”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jürgens 2009 source
- Supportedcites Numan 2007 source
The citation to Numan (2007) is attached to maternal behavior, not the other actions listed. The section on virgin sensitization identifies pup retrieval, grooming, nest building, and nursing as components of maternal behavior in rats; the medial preoptic area section reports evidence linking neural circuitry to those behaviors. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fanselow & Poulos 2005 source
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Different discrete emotion categories are not distinguished by distinct patterns of peripheral physiology (Cacioppo et al. 2000; Mauss & Robinson 2009), facial muscle movements (Cacioppo et al. 2000; Russell, Bachorowski & Fernandez-Dols 2003), vocal acoustics (Bachorowski & Owren 1995; Barrett 2006a; Russell, Bachorowski & Fernandez-Dols 2003) or by subcortical circuits in the mammalian brain (”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cacioppo et al. 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Mauss & Robinson 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Autonomic Measures of Emotion summary says that evidence for distinct autonomic signatures of discrete emotions has not fared well. But the same section reports that a small set of measures reliably distinguished particular emotion pairs and leaves open whether combinations of measures might show specificity. The claim's categorical wording therefore goes beyond the review. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“an instance of disgust that occurs when watching others eat repulsive food involves a different brain state than an instance of disgust that occurs when watching surgical operations (Harrison et al. 2010).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.2. Future directions in the search for the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Harrison et al. 2010 source
The Materials and Methods (Stimuli and behavioral data analysis; page not provided) identify the two videos as actors eating repulsive food and clips of surgical operations. The Results (Neural correlations of experienced disgust; page not provided) report different patterns of brain activation for the two types of disgust. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, we found evidence that is consistent with a psychological constructionist approach to the mind: a set of interacting brain regions commonly involved in basic psychological operations of both an emotional and non-emotional nature are active during emotion experience and perception across a range of discrete emotion categories.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > Abstract
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 32
- It may state two separate claims as one. 47
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Executive attention is the fourth operation that is particular to our psychological constructionist approach (Barrett 2009a; Barrett et al. 2004).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barrett 2009a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Barrett et al. 2004 source
The paper’s “Executive Attention and Control” discussion describes attention control as a mechanism for managing the activation of representations. Calling it the fourth operation in “our psychological constructionist approach” is the citing authors’ own framing, not a claim attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Importantly, executive attention need not be volitional or effortful and can operate well before subjective experience is generated (Barrett et al. 2004).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Barrett et al. 2004 source
The passage labeled Abstract (page not provided) says attention control need not involve a feeling of conscious deliberation or choice and can operate at early perceptual stages, well before subjective experience is generated. The passage headed “On the Preconscious Nature of Control” also distinguishes controlled processing from the subjective experience of control or will. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Consistent with the idea that the OFC unites internal and external sensory information, the lateral OFC and the medial OFC have been linked to associative learning (Rolls et al. 1994; 1996) decision making (e.g., Bechara et al. 1996; 2000; Koenigs et al. 2007) and reversal learning, in which the reward values associated with choice options are reversed and animals must learn the current reward”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.3. The orbitofrontal cortex
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Rolls et al. 1994 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper links the orbitofrontal cortex to learning associations between sensory stimuli and rewards, and the Discussion reports impaired reversal of those associations after ventral frontal damage. It does not distinguish lateral from medial orbitofrontal cortex, so it does not establish the claim for both subdivisions. The decision-making citations in the citing sentence point to other works, not Rolls et al. (1994). (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bechara et al. 1996 source
- Supportedcites Chudasama & Robbins 2003 source
The Introduction (page unavailable) links orbitofrontal cortex to associative learning, decision-making tasks, and reversal learning. It also describes distinct roles for medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex in learning a new stimulus–reward association and inhibiting a previously rewarded response during reversal. This supports the citing sentence’s broad claim that these regions have been linked to those functions. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“This set of brain regions has also been called the “episodic memory network” (e.g., Vincent et al. 2006) or the “default network” (e.g., Raichle et al. 2001) and is active when people recall the past (e.g., Buckner & Carroll 2007; Schacter et al. 2007; see McDermott et al. 2009 for a meta-analysis), imagine the future (e.g., Addis et al. 2007; see Hassabis & Maguire 2009; Moulton & Kosslyn 2009;”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vincent et al. 2006 source
- Supportedcites Raichle et al. 2001 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Buckner & Carroll 2007 source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In fact, even infants routinely use the phonological form of words to make conceptual inferences about novel objects that share little perceptual similarity (Dewar & Xu 2009; Ferry et al. 2010; Xu 2002) and we believe that adults do the same thing.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dewar & Xu 2009 source
- Partly supportedcites Ferry et al. 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page unavailable) report that 3- and 4-month-olds hearing labeling phrases showed evidence of object categorization, whereas those hearing tones did not. But the Discussion (page unavailable) suggests that speech may promote attention and says the relevant auditory features remain unknown; it does not establish that infants use words’ phonological form to infer a shared category for objects with little perceptual similarity. The statement about adults is the citing authors’ belief, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites Xu 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Finally, pACC is implicated in pain, perhaps because it supports the feeling of “suffering” (cf. Vogt 2005).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Vogt 2005 source
The paper’s conclusion identifies unpleasantness as the aspect of pain processing mediated by pACC. Its discussion of nociceptive responses also reports increased pACC activity when pain unpleasantness was manipulated, supporting the citing sentence’s hedged description of a role in the feeling of suffering. (LLM, conf=0.91)
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The ATL supports language as a heteromodal association area involved in the representation of concepts (Lambon Ralph et al. 2009; Pobric et al. 2007; Rogers et al. 2004) and the right ATL has been implicated in the representation of abstract social concepts (e.g., Zahn et al. 2009).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Lambon Ralph et al. 2009 source
The Introduction describes the ATLs as forming amodal semantic representations through connections with areas processing different modalities. The General Discussion identifies the ATL as a critical part of the semantic language network. The separate claim about right-ATL representation of abstract social concepts is attributed to Zahn et al., not to this source. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites Pobric et al. 2007 source
The paper describes the anterior temporal lobes as supporting amodal concept representations across verbal and nonverbal modalities, consistent with the clause citing Pobric et al. The separate claim about right-ATL representation of abstract social concepts cites Zahn et al., not Pobric et al. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites Zahn et al. 2009 source
The citation to Zahn et al. (2009) is attached to the right-ATL claim, not the preceding language claim. The Conclusions state that superior anterior temporal lobe regions represent abstract social concepts, and the Results identify an effect in the right superior anterior temporal lobe. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The pACC and sACC have known affective function and are thought to instantiate the visceromotor responses observed during classical conditioning, pain, and affective behaviors (Devinksy et al. 1995; Vogt 2005).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Devinksy et al. 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Vogt 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s discussion of ACC subregions links sACC to autonomic function and classical conditioning, and links both sACC and pACC to affective activity. But it distinguishes their roles in pain: visceral nociceptive activity is associated mainly with pACC, which it says is not an autonomic integrative center like sACC. It therefore does not support attributing the same visceromotor role across classical conditioning, pain, and affective behavior to both subregions. (LLM, conf=0.87)
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Consistent with this functional connectivity, bilateral DLPFC is known to be involved in working memory (e.g., Champod & Petrides 2007; Constantinidis et al. 2002) and in the goal-directed control of attention (e.g., Rainer et al. 1998; see Miller 2000).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.7. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Champod & Petrides 2007 source
Champod and Petrides is cited for the working-memory part of the sentence; the attention-control part has separate citations. The Results report increased activity in the middorsolateral prefrontal cortex during working-memory tasks and state that this activity was bilateral. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Constantinidis et al. 2002 source
- Not matchedcites Rainer et al. 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“means that these regions are not specific to emotion per se, and are also involved in constituting other cognitive and perceptual events”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Grezes & Decety 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Svoboda et al. 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.1 describes an autobiographical-memory network involving emotional and perceptual processes alongside domain-general processes such as attention and working memory. Section 3.6 also reports that emotional-memory studies share a network with standard autobiographical-memory studies. The paper does not establish the claimed overlap with meta-analyses of other task domains, and it describes some additional activations as emotion-specific. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Krain et al. 2006 source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“the “default network” that is active when a person is not probed by an external stimulus in fMRI experiments (Buckner & Vincent 2007; Raichle et al. 2001) is not only important to constructing representations of the past and the future, but also for constructing representations of emotion experience and perception in the moment.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Buckner & Vincent 2007 source
- Supportedcites Raichle et al. 2001 source
The citation is attached to the identification of the default network as active when a person is not engaged by an external task, not to the citing authors’ later claim about constructing emotion representations. In “A default mode of brain function,” the paper describes a resting baseline and areas whose activity decreases during goal-directed behavior. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We did not find evidence for functional specificity with respect to any emotion category in our analyses (i.e., every region that was activated for one emotion category was activated for at least one other category).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion > 4.1. Analysis strategy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our χ2 analysis revealed that only four of the voxels identified in the density analysis showed functional selectivity for instances of disgust perception (Table 2), however, and increased activity in the right insula was not specific to instances of disgust perception (Fig. 6).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.2. The anterior insula
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As compared to other brain regions, two voxels in the left anterior insula also had more consistent increases in activation during instances of anger experience than during the experience of any other emotion (Table 1; only one voxel showed functional selectivity, see Table 2).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.2. The anterior insula
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased activity in the sACC was marginally (p < 0.09) likely when participants were evaluating their feelings, again consistent with this area's role as a visceromotor regulation site.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“χ2 analyses revealed that a subset of the voxels identified in the density analysis were functionally selective for instances of disgust perception (Table 2), although they were not specific to instances of disgust (Fig. S3).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our density analyses revealed that as compared to voxels within other brain regions, voxels within the right VLPFC had more consistent increases during instances of disgust perception than during the perception of any other emotion category; these findings were confirmed with a logistic regression (Table 1; Table S6).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our χ2 analyses indicated that some of these voxels were functionally selective to instances of anger perception (Table 2), although they were not specific to perceiving anger (Fig. S3).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.7. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In psychological construction, all mental states, whether they are experienced as an instance of a discrete emotion category or not, are realized by more basic psychological operations or “ingredients” of the mind.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These basic psychological operations are not functionally specific to any discrete emotion category, or even to the category emotion itself.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A person can make the situated conceptualization that core affect is a physical symptom (e.g., a racing heart), a simple feeling (e.g., feeling tired or wound up), or an instance of a discrete emotion category (e.g., anger vs fear).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Conceptualization is the process by which stored representations of prior experiences (i.e., memories, knowledge) are used to make meaning out of sensations in the moment (Wilson-Mendenhall et al. 2011).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wilson-Mendenhall et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Changes in core affect are a homeostatic barometer – the body's way of representing whether objects in the environment are valuable or not in a given context.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our psychological constructionist model, called the “conceptual act model,” emotions emerge when people make meaning out of sensory input from the body and from the world using knowledge of prior experiences.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the past, most researchers who found brain correlates of emotion merely assumed that their results were consistent with a locationist approach (e.g., the basic emotion approach) because these were the only models to map psychological states to a biological level of analysis in a way that was linked to evolution.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our model, we do not propose any new or unique mental processes that cause emotion; instead, we propose a mechanism (categorization) that has been well documented in the psychological and cognitive neuroscience literature.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After updating our database to include papers from 2006 and 2007, we exclusively sampled studies that focused on discrete emotion experiences or perceptions to increase the likelihood that we would find consistent and specific brain localizations corresponding to these categories, should they exist”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion > 4.1. Analysis strategy
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given the popularity of locationist models of emotion, we made analysis choices that favored a clear and unbiased test of the locationist approach, even though it disadvantaged us in testing the full scope and power of the psychological constructionist approach.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion > 4.1. Analysis strategy
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our meta-analytic findings were inconsistent with a locationist hypothesis of amygdala function but were more consistent with the psychological constructionist hypothesis.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.1. The amygdala
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are ongoing debates about how categorization works, but the fact that it works is not in question.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In our view, emotion categories are abstract categories that are socially constructed (Barrett 2009a).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barrett 2009a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, the functional networks that instantiate basic psychological operations during emotion experiences and perceptions form the “neural reference space for discrete emotion.””
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings are consistent with the psychological constructionist hypothesis that the amygdala responds to salient perceptual stimuli because contrasts in our database that assessed the perception of fear and experience of disgust tended to use visual stimuli that are novel or unfamiliar to participants.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.1. The amygdala
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The contrasts in the database that assessed fear perception and disgust experience tended to use visual stimuli that were novel or unfamiliar to participants.
In the paper
“This finding replicates prior meta-analytic evidence (Costafreda et al. 2008) and is consistent with our hypothesis that the amygdala responds preferentially to salient exteroceptive (vs. interoceptive) sensations.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.1. The amygdala
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Costafreda et al. 2008 source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A brain region might be functionally selective for a given emotion category in a given instance, however, because it helps realize a more basic operation that contributes to the emergent state.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our meta-analytic findings were inconsistent with the locationist account that the anterior insula is the brain seat of disgust but were more consistent with the psychological constructionist account that insula activity is correlated with interoception and the awareness of affective feelings.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.2. The anterior insula
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, our findings only speak to functional selectivity.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion > 4.1. Analysis strategy
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The inability to properly integrate exteroceptive and interoceptive information will result in behavior that is inappropriate to that context, explaining the altered non-aggressive social behavior (e.g., Beer et al. 2003; Eslinger & Damasio 1985; Saver & Damasio 1991; see Damasio et al. 1990) and aggression (Grafman et al. 1996) observed in individuals with OFC damage.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.3. The orbitofrontal cortex
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Beer et al. 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Grafman et al. 1996 source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Categorization (or conceptualization) is a fundamental process in the human brain that functions like a chisel, leading people to attend to certain features in a sensory array and to ignore others.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our hypothesized psychological operations, as they currently stand, are associated with assemblies of neurons within distributed networks (rather than a one-to-one mapping of ingredient to network).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Executive attention can also control which exteroceptive sensory representations are favored for additional processing, or if core affect is consciously represented in awareness.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Conceptualization can be said to produce cognitive appraisals realizing emotion (Barrett et al. 2007c), where such appraisals are descriptions of the features or properties of emotional experience (Clore & Ortony 2008).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barrett et al. 2007c
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Clore & Ortony 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our model proposes two additional operations that are important to the psychological construction of emotion.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 3. A psychological constructionist account of the brain basis of emotion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also conducted a number of statistical analyses with the potential to yield evidence in favor of a locationist account”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 4. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on emotion > 4.1. Analysis strategy
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Areas of the VLPFC on the other hand, are implicated in semantic processing tasks (e.g., Gitelman et al. 2005), categorization of objects (e.g., Freedman et al. 2001), representation of feature-based information for abstract categories (e.g., Freedman et al. 2002; see Miller et al. 2002), selection amongst competing response representations (e.g., Badre & Wagner 2007; Schnur et al. 2009), and”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Our findings indicate that the conceptualization network is integral in the experience and perception of discrete emotions, and are consistent with the hypothesis (in Barrett 2006b; 2009a, b) that prior episodic experience helps shape experienced or perceived affect into meaningful instances of emotion.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.5. Dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, medial temporal lobe, and retrosplenial cortex/posterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barrett 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Barrett 2009a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The aMCC (Fig. 2, panel B, dusty pink) is hypothesized to play a role in executive attention and motor engagement during response selection (Mansouri et al. 2009; Rushworth et al. 2007).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mansouri et al. 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rushworth et al. 2007 source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Our psychological constructionist hypothesis draws on the neuroscience literature showing that pACC, sACC, and the more dorsal anterior midcingulate cortex (aMCC) (Vogt 1993; Vogt et al. 2003) take part in distinct psychological operations related to realizing core affect.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The amygdala, which responds to motivationally salient exteroceptive sensory stimuli (see 5.1 The amygdala), projects to this area of aMCC (Vogt & Pandya 1987), so it is possible that increased activity here reflects response preparation to salient stimuli in the environment.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vogt & Pandya 1987 source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our meta-analytic evidence is inconsistent with the locationist account that the ACC is the brain basis of sadness, but more consistent with a psychological constructionist hypothesis of ACC function.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Patients with semantic dementia have focal atrophy to the ATL, difficulty utilizing semantic knowledge, and exhibit deficits in emotion perception (Rosen et al. 2004) and empathy (Rankin et al. 2006).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cognitive load typically occurred in studies in which participants were asked to attend to core affective feelings (e.g., focus on their feelings, rate their feelings) or affective stimuli (e.g., focus on an affective stimulus, rate a stimulus’ emotional value) and, therefore, it is possible that this finding is indicative of the sACC's role in instantiating core affective feelings.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This finding is more likely to be related to the encoding of salient stimuli in memory than simulating prior experiences, as the amygdala also had increased activity during instances of fear perception and is known to have functional connectivity with the hippocampus during encoding of salient stimuli (Kensinger & Corkin 2004).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.5. Dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, medial temporal lobe, and retrosplenial cortex/posterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kensinger & Corkin 2004 source
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By extension, as a visceromotor (i.e., autonomic) control area sACC/pACC might be involved in resolving which sensory inputs influence the body when there are multiple sources of sensory input that can influence an organism's body state.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In the behavioral neuroscience literature, pACC has been linked to sadness because of its role in producing the vocalizations that infant animals make when separated from their mother (e.g., MacLean & Newman 1988; see Panksepp 1998; 2007); the link between infant vocalizations and unpleasant affect are in question, however (Blumberg & Sokoloff 2001).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is therefore not clear that the VLPFC's role is functionally specific to language, but it is certainly functionally selective for language in certain instances.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The hypothesized role of sACC in regulating somatovisceral states could explain why sACC is involved in the affective changes that accompany both depression (e.g., Drevets et al. 1992; see Gotlib & Hamilton 2008) and mania (e.g., Fountoulakis et al. 2008), and why electrical stimulation of this region helps to relieve chronic depression (Mayberg, et al. 2005).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the pACC were involved in instantiating instances of sadness, then lesions to this structure should abolish the tendency to cry at sad events. These findings are therefore more consistent with the idea that pACC regulates instances of sadness.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Clinical depression is marked by structural and functional changes in sACC (see Gotlib & Hamilton 2008 for a review), although clinical depression involves many symptoms above and beyond the experience of sadness (Coyne 1994).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Just as perception of others and self-referential thinking involve overlapping yet distinct aspects of DMPFC (Ochsner et al. 2004a), some aspects of DMPFC might be functionally selective for conceptualization during emotion perception whereas others support conceptualization during emotion experience.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.5. Dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, medial temporal lobe, and retrosplenial cortex/posterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ochsner et al. 2004a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Electrical stimulation of the sACC relieves intractable depression by reducing feelings of apathy and anhedonia, normalizing sleep disturbances, and decreasing gross motor impairments (e.g., Mayberg et al. 2005).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.4. The anterior cingulate cortex
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mayberg et al. 2005 source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The periaqueducal gray (PAG) is involved in regulating the autonomic substrates that allow for behavioral adaptations such as freezing, fleeing, vocalization, and reproductive behavior (e.g., Carrive et al. 1989; Behbehani 1995; Gregg & Siegel 2001; Kim et al. 1993; Lovick 1992; Mobbs et al. 2007; Van der Horst & Holstege 1998) and also sends projections back to cortical sites involved in the”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.8. The periaqueducal gray
What the sources say
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This finding is consistent with the hypothesis that language is brought to bear when constructing emotional percepts from exteroceptive sensations.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“these findings perhaps point to differences in the contents of mental states”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This hypothesis is consistent with a large body of EEG evidence associating the left PFC with the experience of instances of anger (Harmon-Jones & Allen 1997; Harmon-Jones & Sigelman 2001) and approach motivation more generally”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion
What the sources say
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A locationist approach has linked the PAG to distinct circuits corresponding to several emotion categories: rage, fear, joy, distress, love and lust (Panksepp 1998).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.8. The periaqueducal gray
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Panksepp 1998 source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The VLPFC also helps comprise the ventral frontoparietal network that is thought to be involved in directing attention to salient stimuli in the environment (Corbetta & Shulman 2002; Corbetta et al. 2008), suggesting a more general role for this region in executive attention.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.6. Anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings hint that brain regions in the left PFC might be candidates for a network involved in approach motivation because regions in the left lateral PFC (including the anterior and mid-insula, VLPFC, DLPFC and OFC) were consistently observed during instances of the experience of anger.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In a previous meta-analysis, we found that the PAG was most likely to have increased activity during unpleasant emotions (Wager et al. 2008).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.8. The periaqueducal gray
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wager et al. 2008
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The DLPFC is part of the dorsal frontoparietal network that is thought to be involved in top-down, goal-directed selection for responses (Corbetta & Shulman 2002; Corbetta et al. 2008).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.7. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
What the sources say
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our view, these are just another set of basic operations and are not, in and of themselves, evidence that there is distinct anatomical circuitry for complex psychological categories such as sadness, love, fear, anger, or greed”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the view suggests that core affect, conceptualization, and executive attention (and perhaps other psychological operations) cooperate to realize a behavioral outcome.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 7. Unifying the Mind
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Brain states that occur during instances of fear and anger are best described by an interaction between the content of the experience (e.g., whether the state is labeled fear vs. anger) and the context in which it occurred (e.g., a physical vs. social context) (Wilson-Mendenhall et al. in press).”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.2. Future directions in the search for the brain basis of emotion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wilson-Mendenhall et al. in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“many different behaviors can be associated with a given discrete emotion category; there is variety in the behaviors and the autonomics that populate any given emotion category.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 6. Conclusion > 6.1. Alternate interpretations
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Animals produce actions in a way that maximizes their outcome in a specific context.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If a psychological constructionist approach to the mind is correct, then some of psychology's time-honored folk distinctions become phenomenological distinctions.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 7. Unifying the Mind
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Core affect is not psychologically meaningful unless it is attached to an object; it is made meaningful via a second basic psychological operation.
“We assume that core affect is not psychologically meaningful unless it is attached to an object; it is made meaningful via a second basic psychological operation, which we describe next.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The instances of any emotion category (e.g., anger) that are created from affective feelings do not have strong statistical regularities in the real world or firm natural category boundaries.
“Emotion words are essential to our model because we assume that the instances of any emotion category (e.g., anger) that are created from affective feelings do not have strong statistical regularities in the real world or firm natural category boundaries (for a discussion of the empirical evidence, see Barrett 2006a; 2009; Barrett et al. 2007a).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The psychological function of individual brain regions is determined, in part, by the network of brain regions it is firing with.
“As in the neural context hypothesis, it assumes that the psychological function of individual brain regions is determined, in part, by the network of brain regions it is firing with (McIntosh 2004).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The contrasts in the database that assessed fear perception and disgust experience tended to use visual stimuli that were novel or unfamiliar to participants.
“because contrasts in our database that assessed the perception of fear and experience of disgust tended to use visual stimuli that are novel or unfamiliar to participants.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
In a psychological construction approach, a given dedicated circuit for a specific behavioral adaptation will be active across a range of emotion categories, and different dedicated circuits within the periaqueductal gray will be active within instances of a single emotion category depending on which behavioral adaptation is more relevant for the immediate context.
“In a psychological construction approach, the assumption is that a given dedicated circuit for a specific behavioral adaptation (e.g., withdrawal) will be active across a range of emotion categories (e.g., a person can withdraw in instances of both fear and anger), and different dedicated circuits within the PAG (e.g., fight, flight) will be active within instances of a single emotion category”
The paper relies on this without support.
Humans do many things during instances of anger, such as yelling, hitting, remaining still, and smiling.
“Humans (like other mammals) do many things during instances of anger, for example. Sometimes humans yell, sometimes they hit, sometimes they remain very still, and sometimes they smile.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The periaqueductal gray is necessary for motivated action patterns in animals.
“The PAG is necessary for motivated action patterns in animals”
The paper relies on this without support.
Animals produce actions in a way that maximizes their outcome in a specific context.
“Animals produce actions in a way to maximize their outcome in a specific context.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This would give the cerebellum a major role in allostasis, concept generation, and the construction of emotion (e.g. see meta-analytic evidence in Kober et al., 2008; Lindquist et al., 2012; Wager et al., 2015).”
From The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization (2016) · cites this paper as Lindquist et al., 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, both groups acknowledge that in many instances feelings are a discernable component/constituent of an emotional response (which tends to more complex).”
From Physiological feelings (2019) · cites this paper as Lindquist et al., 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, many other regions are involved in emotion (Kober et al. 2008;Vytal and Hamann 2010;Lindquist et al. 2012).”
From Cognitive Reappraisal of Emotion: A Meta-Analysis of Human Neuroimaging Studies (2014) · cites this paper as Lindquist et al. 2012
In the citing paper
“These regions, particularly the striatum, midbrain and amygdala, are typically considered highly involved in reward and emotion-related processes.40, 41, 42”
From Intranasal oxytocin enhances intrinsic corticostriatal functional connectivity in women (2017) · cites this paper as [42]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.3. The orbitofrontal cortex
“χ2 analyses indicated that there was some functional selectivity for instances of disgust experience and perception in the voxels in the right and and left lateral OFC that were respectively identified in the density analysis.”
§ The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review > 5. Testing hypotheses of brain–emotion correspondence > 5.3. The orbitofrontal cortex
“voxels within the left lateral OFC had more consistent increases in activation during instances of disgust experience than during the experience of other emotion categories (Table 1). Voxels within the right lateral OFC, as compared to voxels within other brain regions, had more consistent increases in activation during instances of disgust perception than during the perception of other emotion categories (Table 1).”
Citations
Cites
James, W. (1891) · Personality Culture Society · doi:10.1037/11059-000 · Cited by 25,876
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Morvan, C., & O’Connor, A. (2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,284
Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain
Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn755 · Cited by 12,881
An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167 · Cited by 12,803 · cited 1×
“According to a psychological constructionist account, networks supporting executive attention (see Miller & Cohen 2001; Petrides 2005; for a meta-analysis, see Wager & Smith 2003) should consistently show increased activity during instances of emotion experience and perception because executive…”
Mead, G. H., Joas, H., Huebner, D. R., & Morris, C. W. (2015) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226112879.001.0001 · Cited by 12,419
A default mode of brain function
Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.676 · Cited by 12,190
The expression of the emotions in man and animals.
Darwin, C. D. (1872) · J. Murray eBooks · doi:10.1037/10001-000 · Cited by 12,120
The descent of man and selection in relation to sex
チャールス, ダ., & 茂穂, 田. (1907) · Tokyo Jinrui Gakkai zasshi · doi:10.1537/ase1887.22.495 · Cited by 10,909
Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. B
Press, H. (1886) · Cited by 10,087
The Brain's Default Network: Anatomy, Function, and Relevance to Disease
Buckner, R. L., Andrews‐Hanna, J. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2008) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1196/annals.1440.011 · Cited by 9,761
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Tomkins, 1963, Affect imagery consciousness: Vol. 2: The negative affects
- Wager, 2008, Handbook of emotions
- Moriguchi, 2010, Differential hemodynamic response in affective circuitry with aging: Novely, valence and arousal, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23
- Cacioppo, 2000, Handbook of emotions, 173
- Rozin, 2008, The handbook of emotions, 757
- Gendron M. , Lindquist K. A. , Wager T. D. , Bliss-Moreau E. , Kober H. & Barrett L. F. (in preparation) Seeing with feeling: A meta-analytic review of visual cortex activity in emotion.
- Clore, 2008, Handbook of emotions, 628
- 10.1037/a0019017 · DOI · Paper page
- James, 1890, Principles of psychology
- de Bruin, 1990, Social behavior in the prefrontal cortex, Progress in Brain Research, 85, 495
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Spreng, R. N., Mar, R. A., & Kim, A. S. N. (2009) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.21029 · Cited by 2,143
Cognitive Reappraisal of Emotion: A Meta-Analysis of Human Neuroimaging Studies
Buhle, J. T., Silvers, J. A., Wager, T. D., Lopez, R., Onyemekwu, C., Kober, H., Weber, J., & Ochsner, K. N. (2014) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bht154 · Cited by 1,896
“…question, given that partially overlapping prefrontal regions have been shown in prior work to support emotion generation, perception, experience, and regulation (Kober et al. 2008; Fusar-Poli et al. 2009; Ochsner et al. 2009; Vytal and Hamann 2010; Gross and Barrett 2011; Lindquist et al. 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationEmotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements
Barrett, L. F., Adolphs, R., Marsella, S., Martinez, A. M., & Pollak, S. D. (2019) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100619832930 · Cited by 1,748
Self-citationThe theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization
Barrett, L. F. (2016) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsw154 · Cited by 1,426
“Human neuroimaging: task-related data (Vytal and Hamann, 2010; Lindquist et al., 2012)”
InfluentialSelf-citationNeural network of cognitive emotion regulation—an ALE meta-analysis and MACM analysis
Kohn, N., Eickhoff, S. B., Scheller, M., Laird, A. R., Fox, P. T., & Habel, U. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.001 · Cited by 956
“These areas are involved in emotion processing (Lindquist et al., 2011; Phan et al., 2002;Wager et al., 2003), which is also reflected by our functional characterization.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lindquist, K. A., Wager, T. D., Kober, H., Bliss-Moreau, E., & Barrett, L. F.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Northeastern University (US)
- Venue
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2012-05-23
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 121-143
- ISSN
- 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-1825
- PMC
- PMC4329228
- OpenAlex
- W2105931454
- Cited by
- 2,320
- References
- 799
- Citations by year
- 2026: 117 · 2025: 185 · 2024: 147 · 2023: 124 · 2022: 175 · 2021: 193 · 2020: 215 · 2019: 219 · 2018: 155 · 2017: 173 · 2016: 155 · 2015: 149 · 2014: 160 · 2013: 97 · 2012: 38
- FWCI
- 11.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0631637)
- Harvard University
- National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
- National Institutes of Health (DP1OD003312)
- National Institute on Aging (AG030311, R01AG030311)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH076136)
- National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024986)
- National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (IRC2MD004767-01)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
- Keywords
- brain networks, emotion categories, emotion perception, emotional experience, affective neuroscience, neuroimaging of emotion
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Emotions, Humans, Radiography, Neuroimaging
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
