Not Facial Expression, nor Fingerprint – Acknowledging Complexity and Context in Emotion Research for Human-Centered Personalization and Adaptation
Pages 325 - 330
Abstract
While research on emotion has emerged as a crucial area in studying this relationship, the use of classical psychological concepts in human emotion detection and sentiment analysis has been challenged by the cognitive sciences and psychology. This paper argues that the uncritical adoption of concepts that overlook the complexity and context of emotions may hinder progress in this field. To overcome this limitation, the theory of constructed emotion is reviewed, which suggests that emotions are not distinct categories but rather dimensions that require dynamic, rather than static, contextualized models. By prioritizing digital wellbeing in emotion studies and acknowledging complexity and context, future research can develop more effective models for emotion detection and sentiment analysis. The aim is to provide valuable insights for researchers seeking to advance our understanding of the relationship between technology and wellbeing for human centered-adaptation and personalization.
Supplemental Material
PDF File
Proceeding
- Download
- 415.11 KB
References
[1]
Alaa Alslaity and Rita Orji. 2022. Machine learning techniques for emotion detection and sentiment analysis: current state, challenges, and future directions. Behaviour & Information Technology (2022), 1–26.
[2]
Müslüm Atas, Alexander Felfernig, Seda Polat-Erdeniz, Andrei Popescu, Thi Ngoc Trang Tran, and Mathias Uta. 2021. Towards psychology-aware preference construction in recommender systems: Overview and research issues. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 57 (2021), 467–489.
[3]
Shir Atzil, Wei Gao, Isaac Fradkin, and Lisa Feldman Barrett. 2018. Growing a social brain. Nature Human Behaviour 2, 9 (2018), 624–636.
[4]
Lisa Feldman Barrett. 2017. The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience 12, 1 (2017), 1–23.
[5]
Lisa Feldman Barrett. 2022. Context reconsidered: Complex signal ensembles, relational meaning, and population thinking in psychological science.American Psychologist 77, 8 (2022), 894.
[6]
Lisa Feldman Barrett, Ralph Adolphs, Stacy Marsella, Aleix M Martinez, and Seth D Pollak. 2019. Emotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements. Psychological science in the public interest 20, 1 (2019), 1–68.
[7]
Daniel Black. 2021. Facial analysis: automated surveillance and the attempt to quantify emotion. Information, Communication & Society (2021), 1–14.
[8]
Christopher Burr, Mariarosaria Taddeo, and Luciano Floridi. 2020. The ethics of digital well-being: A thematic review. Science and engineering ethics 26, 4 (2020), 2313–2343.
[9]
Rafael A Calvo, Dorian Peters, Karina Vold, and Richard M Ryan. 2020. Supporting human autonomy in AI systems: A framework for ethical enquiry. Ethics of digital well-being: A multidisciplinary approach (2020), 31–54.
[10]
Cornelia Schroll and Brigitte Huber. 2022. Assessing Levels and Forms of Incivility and Deliberative Quality in Online Discussions on COVID-19: A Cross-Platform Analysis. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.814002.s001
[11]
Alan S Cowen and Dacher Keltner. 2017. Self-report captures 27 distinct categories of emotion bridged by continuous gradients. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 114, 38 (2017), E7900–E7909.
[12]
Alan S Cowen, Dacher Keltner, Florian Schroff, Brendan Jou, Hartwig Adam, and Gautam Prasad. 2021. Sixteen facial expressions occur in similar contexts worldwide. Nature 589, 7841 (2021), 251–257.
[13]
Kate Crawford. 2021. The atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
[14]
Paul Ekman. 2004. Emotions revealed. Bmj 328, Suppl S5 (2004).
[15]
Bruce Ferwerda, Li Chen, and Marko Tkalčič. 2021. Psychological Models for Personalized Human-Computer Interaction (HCI)., 673092 pages.
[16]
Keith Grint. 2022. Critical Essay: Wicked problems in the Age of Uncertainty. human relations (2022), 00187267211070770.
[17]
MV Koroteev. 2021. BERT: a review of applications in natural language processing and understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.11943 (2021).
[18]
Tuan Le Mau, Katie Hoemann, Sam H Lyons, Jennifer MB Fugate, Emery N Brown, Maria Gendron, and Lisa Feldman Barrett. 2021. Professional actors demonstrate variability, not stereotypical expressions, when portraying emotional states in photographs. Nature communications 12, 1 (2021), 5037.
[19]
Richard C Lewontin. 2000. The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Harvard University Press.
[20]
Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis. 2020. Insights for AI from the human mind. Commun. ACM 64, 1 (2020), 38–41.
[21]
Pansy Nandwani and Rupali Verma. 2021. A review on sentiment analysis and emotion detection from text. Social Network Analysis and Mining 11, 1 (2021), 81.
[22]
Tetsuya Nasukawa and Jeonghee Yi. 2003. Sentiment analysis: Capturing favorability using natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Knowledge capture. 70–77.
[23]
Andrew Ortony. 2022. Are all “basic emotions” emotions? A problem for the (basic) emotions construct. Perspectives on psychological science 17, 1 (2022), 41–61.
[24]
Robert Rosenthal and Kermit L Fode. 1963. Psychology of the scientist: V. Three experiments in experimenter bias. Psychological Reports 12, 2 (1963), 491–511.
[25]
Richard M Ryan and Edward L Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.American psychologist 55, 1 (2000), 68.
[26]
Richard M Ryan and Edward L Deci. 2017. Self-determination theory. Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness (2017).
[27]
Jonathan Stray, Ivan Vendrov, Jeremy Nixon, Steven Adler, and Dylan Hadfield-Menell. 2021. What are you optimizing for? aligning recommender systems with human values. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.10939 (2021).
[28]
Marko Tkalcic and Li Chen. 2015. Personality and recommender systems. Recommender systems handbook (2015), 715–739.
[29]
Sherry Turkle. 2022. The Empathy Diaries: A Memoir. Penguin.
[30]
Wouter Van Atteveldt, Mariken ACG Van der Velden, and Mark Boukes. 2021. The validity of sentiment analysis: Comparing manual annotation, crowd-coding, dictionary approaches, and machine learning algorithms. Communication Methods and Measures 15, 2 (2021), 121–140.
[31]
Wouter van Atteveldt, Mariken A. C. G. van der Velden, and Mark Boukes. 2021. The Validity of Sentiment Analysis: Comparing Manual Annotation, Crowd-Coding, Dictionary Approaches, and Machine Learning Algorithms. Communication Methods and Measures 15, 2 (April 2021), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1869198 Publisher: Routledge.
[32]
Hannes Werthner. 2020. The Vienna Manifesto on Digital Humanism. In Digital Transformation and Ethics. Ecowin, 338–357.
Index Terms
- Not Facial Expression, nor Fingerprint – Acknowledging Complexity and Context in Emotion Research for Human-Centered Personalization and Adaptation
Recommendations
Detecting implicit expressions of emotion in text: A comparative analysis
Sentiment analysis is one of the recent, highly dynamic fields in Natural Language Processing. Most existing approaches are based on word-level analysis of texts and are mostly able to detect only explicit expressions of sentiment. However, in many ...
Emotion quantification techniques for cognitive reappraisal: a systematic review and scientometric analysis
AbstractCognitive reappraisal intends to study the significance of an event concerning any emotional reaction. Understanding the efficacy of cognitive reappraisal in emotion regulation requires reliable and valid techniques for quantifying emotions. ...
Analyzing Learners’ Emotion from an HRI Experiment Using Facial Expression Recognition Systems
Learning and Collaboration TechnologiesAbstractIn this study, we analyzed the facial expressions of the participants from a study where 63 students were learning about Climate Change using Betty’s Brain, half with robotic agents and the other half with on-screen based agents using a Facial ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2023
446 pages
ISBN:9781450398916
DOI:10.1145/3563359
Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 16 June 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Data Availability
Conference
UMAP '23: 31st ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
June 26 - 29, 2023
Limassol, Cyprus
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 162 of 633 submissions, 26%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 370Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)238
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)20
Reflects downloads up to 18 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in