↓ Skip to main content

Bodily maps of emotions

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 46,820)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
1137 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
Title
Bodily maps of emotions
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2013
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1321664111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauri Nummenmaa, Enrico Glerean, Riitta Hari, Jari K. Hietanen, L. Nummenmaa, E. Glerean, R. Hari, J. K. Hietanen

Abstract

Emotions are often felt in the body, and somatosensory feedback has been proposed to trigger conscious emotional experiences. Here we reveal maps of bodily sensations associated with different emotions using a unique topographical self-report method. In five experiments, participants (n = 701) were shown two silhouettes of bodies alongside emotional words, stories, movies, or facial expressions. They were asked to color the bodily regions whose activity they felt increasing or decreasing while viewing each stimulus. Different emotions were consistently associated with statistically separable bodily sensation maps across experiments. These maps were concordant across West European and East Asian samples. Statistical classifiers distinguished emotion-specific activation maps accurately, confirming independence of topographies across emotions. We propose that emotions are represented in the somatosensory system as culturally universal categorical somatotopic maps. Perception of these emotion-triggered bodily changes may play a key role in generating consciously felt emotions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,360 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 37 3%
Germany 17 1%
United Kingdom 17 1%
Spain 16 1%
Italy 13 1%
France 13 1%
Japan 9 <1%
Brazil 7 <1%
Netherlands 7 <1%
Other 60 5%
Unknown 941 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 284 25%
Researcher 208 18%
Student > Master 173 15%
Student > Bachelor 88 8%
Other 76 7%
Other 308 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 451 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 135 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 90 8%
Computer Science 70 6%
Unspecified 65 6%
Other 326 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1982. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2017.
All research outputs
#332
of 8,416,340 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#16
of 46,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15
of 185,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#1
of 913 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,416,340 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 185,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 913 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.