CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 543Mental Health Research TopicsPersonality Traits and PsychologyPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Feelings change: Accounting for individual differences in the temporal dynamics of affect.

Kuppens, Peter, Oravecz, Zita, Tuerlinckx, Francis·2010·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0020962
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

People display a remarkable variability in the patterns and trajectories with which their feelings change over time. In this article, we present a theoretical account for the dynamics of affect (DynAffect) that identifies the major processes underlying individual differences in the temporal dynamics of affective experiences. It is hypothesized that individuals are characterized by an affective home base, a baseline attractor state around which affect fluctuates. These fluctuations vary as the result of internal or external processes to which an individual is more or less sensitive and are regulated and tied back to the home base by the attractor strength. Individual differences in these 3 processes--affective home base, variability, and attractor strength--are proposed to underlie individual differences in affect dynamics. The DynAffect account is empirically evaluated by means of a diffusion modeling approach in 2 extensive experience-sampling studies on people's core affective experiences. The findings show that the model is capable of adequately capturing the observed dynamics in core affect across both large (Study 1) and shorter time scales (Study 2) and illuminate how the key processes are related to personality and emotion dispositions. Implications for the understanding of affect dynamics and affective dysfunctioning in psychopathology are also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0020962

Cites

136 of 136 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?

  • Owing to the variability of psychological processes such as affective and emotional dynamics, ambulatory assessment can more precisely determine the fluctuation of symptoms.

    “Owing to the variability of psychological processes such as affective and emotional dynamics [4], AA can more precisely determine the fluctuation of symptoms.”

    From Studies of Social Anxiety Using Ambulatory Assessment: Systematic Review (2024) · cites this paper as [4]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kuppens, P., Oravecz, Z., & Tuerlinckx, F.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2010-12
Volume
99
Issue
6
Pages
1042-1060
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/a0020962
OpenAlex
W2047116924
Cited by
543
References
136
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 20
FWCI
19.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
KULeuven Research Council (GOA/05/04)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
affect dynamics, individual differences, core affect, affective variability, diffusion models, ecological momentary assessment, emotion regulation, personality, psychopathology
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Belgium, Emotions, Female, Humans, Individuality, Male, Models, Psychological, Personality, Temperament, Time Factors, Nonlinear Dynamics

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