↓ Skip to main content

Nencki Affective Picture System: Cross-Cultural Study in Europe and Iran

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nencki Affective Picture System: Cross-Cultural Study in Europe and Iran
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00274
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Riegel, Abnoos Moslehi, Jarosław M. Michałowski, Łukasz Żurawski, Marko Horvat, Marek Wypych, Katarzyna Jednoróg, Artur Marchewka

Abstract

Although emotions have been assumed conventionally to be universal, recent studies have suggested that various aspects of emotions may be mediated by cultural background. The purpose of our research was to test these contradictory views, in the case of the subjective evaluation of visual affective stimuli. We also sought to validate the recently introduced Nencki Affective Picture System (NAPS) database on a different cultural group. Since there has been, to date, no attempt to compare the emotions of a culturally distinct sample of Iranians with those of Europeans, subjective ratings were collected from 40 Iranians and 39 Europeans. Each cultural group was asked separately to provide normative affective ratings and classify pictures according to discrete emotions. The results were analyzed to identify cultural differences in the ratings of individual images. One hundred and seventy NAPS pictures were rated with regard to the intensity of the basic emotions (happiness, sadness, fear, surprise, anger, and disgust) they elicited, as well as in terms of affective dimensions (valence and arousal). Contrary to previous studies using the International Affective Picture System, our results for Europeans and Iranians show that neither the ratings for affective dimensions nor for basic emotions differed across cultural groups. In both cultural groups, the relationship between valence and arousal ratings could be best described by a classical boomerang-shaped function. However, the content of the pictures (animals, faces, landscapes, objects, or people) had a significant effect on the ratings for valence and arousal. These findings indicate that further studies in cross-cultural affective research should control for the content of stimuli.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 36%
Neuroscience 5 13%
Computer Science 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 March 2017.
All research outputs
#16,665,631
of 24,520,187 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,518
of 33,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,749
of 314,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#383
of 510 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,187 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,050 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 510 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.