Indirect scaling methods for testing quantitative emotion theories

Abstract

Two studies investigated the utility of indirect scaling methods, based on graded pair comparisons, for the testing of quantitative emotion theories. In Study 1, we measured the intensity of relief and disappointment caused by lottery outcomes, and in Study 2, the intensity of disgust evoked by pictures, using both direct intensity ratings and graded pair comparisons. The stimuli were systematically constructed to reflect variables expected to influence the intensity of the emotions according to theoretical models of relief/disappointment and disgust, respectively. Two probabilistic scaling methods were used to estimate scale values from the pair comparison judgements: Additive functional measurement (AFM) and maximum likelihood difference scaling (MLDS). The emotion models were fitted to the direct and indirect intensity measurements using nonlinear regression (Study 1) and analysis of variance (Study 2). Both studies found substantially improved fits of the emotion models for the indirectly determined emotion intensities, with their advantage being evident particularly at the level of individual participants. The results suggest that indirect scaling methods yield more precise measurements of emotion intensity than rating scales and thereby provide stronger tests of emotion theories in general and quantitative emotion theories in particular.