The relation between valence and arousal in subjective experience.
Abstract
Affect is basic to many if not all psychological phenomena. This article examines 2 of the most fundamental properties of affective experience--valence and arousal--asking how they are related to each other on a moment to moment basis. Over the past century, 6 distinct types of relations have been suggested or implicitly presupposed in the literature. We critically review the available evidence for each proposal and argue that the evidence does not provide a conclusive answer. Next, we use statistical modeling to verify the different proposals in 8 data sets (with Ns ranging from 80 to 1,417) where participants reported their affective experiences in response to experimental stimuli in laboratory settings or as momentary or remembered in natural settings. We formulate 3 key conclusions about the relation between valence and arousal: (a) on average, there is a weak but consistent V-shaped relation of arousal as a function of valence, but (b) there is large variation at the individual level, so that (c) valence and arousal can in principle show a variety of relations depending on person or circumstances. This casts doubt on the existence of a static, lawful relation between valence and arousal. The meaningfulness of the observed individual differences is supported by their personality and cultural correlates. The malleability and individual differences found in the structure of affect must be taken into account when studying affect and its role in other psychological phenomena.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 properties of affect-valence and arousal-are basic features of consciousness and are not unique to instances of emotion.
“the properties of affect—valence and arousal (Barrett and Russell, 1999; Kuppens et al., 2013)—are basic features of consciousness (Damasio, 1999; Dreyfus and Thompson, 2007; Edelman and Tononi, 2000; James, 1890/2007; Searle, 1992, 2004; Wundt, 1897) that, importantly, are not unique to instances of emotion.”
From The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization (2016) · cites this paper as Kuppens et al., 2013
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 146 · Cited by 583
- Authors
- Kuppens, P., Tuerlinckx, F., Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Boston College (US)
- Northeastern University (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 139
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 917-940
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2102628289
- Cited by
- 583
- References
- 146
- Citations by year
- 2026: 61 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 21.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- KU Leuven (GOA/10/02, OT/11/031)
- Sponsor name not included (G.0534.09N, G.0935.12)
- National Institutes of Health (DP1OD003312)
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
- Keywords
- valence, arousal, emotional experience, individual differences, personality, cultural differences, momentary affect, affective structure
- MeSH terms
- Affect, Arousal, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Individuality, Models, Psychological, Statistics as Topic, Pleasure, Self Report
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