Cited by 943Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Emotion and motivation II: Sex differences in picture processing.

Bradley, Margaret M., Codispoti, Maurizio, Sabatinelli, Dean, Lang, Peter J.·2001·Emotion

Abstract

Adhering to the view that emotional reactivity is organized in part by underlying motivational states--defensive and appetitive--we investigated sex differences in motivational activation. Men's and women's affective reactions were measured while participants viewed pictures with varied emotional and neutral content. As expected, highly arousing contents of threat, mutilation, and erotica prompted the largest affective reactions in both men and women. Nonetheless, women showed a broad disposition to respond with greater defensive reactivity to aversive pictures, regardless of specific content, whereas increased appetitive activation was apparent for men only when viewing erotica. Biological and sociocultural factors in shaping sex differences in emotional reactivity are considered as possible mediators of sex differences in emotional response.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.300

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Empirical evidence on gender differences in emotional responding is mixed, and negative findings are surprisingly common.

    “However, despite lay convictions and psychiatric considerations, the empirical evidence on gender differences in emotional responding is mixed (Bradley, Codispoti, Sabatinelli, & Lang, 2001; Fujita, Diener, & Sandvik, 1991; Grossman & Wood, 1993; Labouvie-Vief, Lumley, Jain, & Heinze, 2003; Seidlitz & Diener, 1998), and negative findings are surprisingly common (Wager, Phan, Liberzon, & Taylor, 2”

    From Gender Differences in Emotion Regulation: An fMRI Study of Cognitive Reappraisal (2008) · cites this paper as Bradley, Codispoti, Sabatinelli, & Lang, 2001

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bradley, M. M., Codispoti, M., Sabatinelli, D., & Lang, P. J.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Venue
Emotion
Published
2001
Volume
1
Issue
3
Pages
300-319
ISSN
  • 1528-3542 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-1516
OpenAlex
W1989486988
Cited by
943
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 66 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 46
FWCI
3.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Emotion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh043975-12)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH052384, MH 43975, MH37757, P50 MH 52384)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
sex differences, emotional reactivity, motivational states, image processing, threats, mutilation, erotic literature, arousal, emotional responses, sociocultural factors
MeSH terms
Adult, Electromyography, Emotions, Facial Muscles, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Male, Motivation, Sex Factors, Reflex, Startle, Visual Perception

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.

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