Emotional Contagion¶
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional Contagion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2(3), 96-100.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Emotional Contagion
- The transfer is not a metaphor borrowed from epidemiology but a genuine structural kinship — a state propagating through a coupling network with amplification — which is why the contagion vocabulary travels so cleanly from disease to affect, as Hatfield and colleagues (1993) argue in their primitive-emotional-contagion account of automatic afferent feedback.
This sourceConcise statement of primitive emotional contagion via automatic mimicry/synchrony and afferent feedback — supports the marker-362 'contagion vocabulary travels because it is genuine structural kinship' claim.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Identifies emotional contagion as a real interpersonal transmission phenomenon with evidence from several disciplines, but the abstract says nothing of a structural kinship with disease epidemiology or of network amplification.
“This phenomenon, known as emotional contagion, is identified here, and compelling evidence for its affect is offered from a variety of disciplines - social and developmental psychology, history, cross-cultural psychology, experimental psychology, and psychopathology.”
- The transfer is not a metaphor borrowed from epidemiology but a genuine structural kinship — a state propagating through a coupling network with amplification — which is why the contagion vocabulary travels so cleanly from disease to affect, as Hatfield and colleagues (1993) argue in their primitive-emotional-contagion account of automatic afferent feedback.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:9730f142f735 · see in the full table