Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 409

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Affective science and health: The importance of emotion and emotion regulation.

DeSteno, David, Gross, James J., Kubzansky, Laura·2013·Health Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0030259
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article is to provide insight into how recent findings from affective science may be translated into the health arena. METHODS: We first review definitional issues related to the key concepts of emotion and stress. We then review relevant research that informs our understanding of the affect-health relationship. Subsequently, we highlight findings that are the most informative and also ripe for translation into the domains of health and health-related behaviors. RESULTS: We identify several domains of affect-relevant processes (e.g., emotion-regulation, stress response) that would benefit from increased elaboration. Three themes may guide how best to broaden our understanding across multiple domains: the need to use a differentiated emotion-based approach, the need to consider potential synergistic and oppositional effects of emotion that can occur in parallel, and the need to examine the impact of emotions with respect to regulation and coping at both the intra- and interindividual levels. Building on insights derived from these themes, we suggest a broad integrative framework for use with future investigations. This framework categorizes potential emotion-related effects on health according to whether they influence health directly (e.g., shaping physiological responses) or indirectly (e.g., guiding decision making and behavior). Using this approach will allow researchers to examine systematically the often simultaneous and sometimes opposing influences of emotion on distinct health-relevant cognitive and physiological mechanisms, and to integrate across potentially disparate findings. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude by suggesting opportunities for future work that we see as most fruitful based on the presented framework.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0030259

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
DeSteno, D., Gross, J. J., & Kubzansky, L.
Venue
Health Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2013-05
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
474-486
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
DOI
10.1037/a0030259
OpenAlex
W2000428819
Cited by
409
References
35
FWCI
27.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.