Emotion Review 2 (2):182-183 (2010)
AbstractWilliams and DeSteno (2010) and Gladkova (2010) question the validity, utility, and theoretical support for the bifurcation of pride into hubristic and authentic facets. Though these commentators highlight unanswered questions and important directions for future research, we argue that the broad, evolutionarily informed framework for the two facets, presented in our target article nonetheless provides the best fit and explanation for the existing pattern of evidence. We offer several empirical suggestions for future studies addressing the questions raised by the commentators, and emphasize the need for emotion researchers to hew closely to empirical data in developing theoretical accounts
Similar books and articles
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
What are emotions and how are they created in the brain?Kristen A. Lindquist, Tor D. Wager, Eliza Bliss-Moreau, Hedy Kober & Lisa Feldman Barrett - 2012 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (3):172-202.
Neuroscience findings are consistent with appraisal theories of emotion; but does the brain “respect” constructionism?Klaus R. Scherer - 2012 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (3):163-164.
The role of the amygdala in the appraising brain.David Sander, Kristen A. Lindquist, Tor D. Wager, Hedy Kober, Eliza Bliss-Moreau & Lisa Feldman Barrett - 2012 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (3):161.
The sleeping brain and the neural basis of emotions.Roumen Kirov, Serge Brand, Vasil Kolev & Juliana Yordanova - 2012 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (3):155-156.
Further Thoughts on the Evolution of Pride’s Two Facets: A Response to Clark.Azim F. Shariff, Jessica L. Tracy, Joey T. Cheng & Joseph Henrich - 2010 - Emotion Review 2 (4):399-400.