* THE EMOTIONS AND THE DIMENSIONS

                         OF DISCRIMINATION AMONG THEM

                                IN DAILY LIFE


                                     by


                                Ilan Shalif
                        ** Department of Psychology
                                Ph.D. Thesis***

Originally written in Hebrew by the author and assistance of associates
                 Copyright and responsibility - I. Shalif

Submitted by I. Shalif
                      E-Mail gshalif@netvision.net.il
                      Home Page <http://www.netvision.net.il/php/gshalif>
              Snail-mail: Ilan Shalif  P.O.B. 13331 Tel-Aviv 61132 ISRAEL

  The right to copy sections of this text or even all of it is granted 
     to all, on condition that it is done without textual or spelling 
         errors and with no commercial intent or monetary profit. 
            In copying or quoting, the source may be mentioned 
                         but it is not mandatory.

Dr. Ilan Shalif says:
     Pay attention to the pleasant and unpleasant 
        bodily sensations... and the troubles
             will take care of themselves.
                  




_______________________________________________________________________
  * This work was carried out under the supervision of professor Isaac Lewin.
 ** This paper is a somewhat abbreviated and nonprofessional translation of one
    of the first drafts.
*** An advanced draft was submitted to the Senate of Bar-Ilan University
    Ramat-Gan, Israel on August 1988.The final draft was approved by the Senate
    on 1.1.1991


                              TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract                                                                      I
Introduction                                                                  1
The theoretical background                                                    5
   What kinds of phenomena are included in the emotional domain ?             7
   What is the subjective feeling of emotion                                  7
   The discrimination among the emotional phenomena                           8
   On the methodology of basic research the emotional domain                  9
The theory                                                                   12
The hypothesis                                                               24
The mapping sentence                                                         24
The method                                                                   25
   The subjects                                                              25
   The materials                                                             25
   The procedure                                                             26
   Contacting the subjects                                                   26
   Data collecting procedure                                                 26
   The computation of subjects' dimensional scores                           29
Results                                                                      32
   The subjects                                                              32
   The items' scores                                                         32
   Validity and reliability of items and their scores                        33
   The direction of the basic emotions in their multidimensional scaling
                                                                      space  45
   The correlations between the dimensions and the items of basic emotions   49
   The correlations between the 10 dimensions and the 148 words              50
   The correlations between the dimensions and the 9 subgroups of basic
                                                                   emotions  51
   The direction of the emotions in the space of the S.S.S.A-I solution      54
   The content of the ten dimensions of the 48 unmanipulated  emotional
                                                                   mixtures  61
   The dimensions of discrimination among the 96 words of emotion            67
   On the relations between the dimensions of the words and those of faces   75
Discussion                                                                   78
Appendices                                                                   90
References                                                                   94



                                  -I-
                                 ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to examine a theory about the principal emotional
variables in daily life. This theory was supposed to settle the controversy
between the two main approaches to emotion research - the evolutionary-genetic
approach and the parsimonious-cognitive one.
The major divergence between the two approaches concerns the substance of the
main primary emotional variables which combine in various forms to produce
subjective experience and the broad spectrum of emotional phenomena.

Those theories who can be related to the genetic approach usually proceed from
a common evolutionary point of departure which is the `serviceable associated
habits' principle of the theory of Darwin (1872) on human and animal emotions.
The primary emotional variables, according to this approach, are basic
emotions - each of them having a concrete content and a unique facial
expression. Many of the proponents of those theories claim that every one of
these variables is involved in each emotional phenomenon. In their view, this
also holds even in circumstances where the relative weight of some of these
variables is small or almost negligible.
According to Ekman et al. (1982), previous research results indicate that
there are at least 7 such variables, namely: happiness, interest, surprise,
fear, anger, sorrow, disgust.

The theorists of the second approach cannot be characterized by a common point
of departure. In general, they do not put forward a specific theory for the
field of emotion. What is common to these theorists is the attempt to deduce
from various superior thought processes, dimensions for distinction which will
enable us to achieve a better conceptualization for the emotional system.

                                  -II-
In most cases, (as appropriate to the second approach), the papers which
relate to dimensions of distinction between emotions indicate the existence of
2 or 3 variables with abstract content, which appear repeatedly in many
studies. sometimes there appear 1) "evaluation/enjoyment" and 2) "Dynamism".
Even more frequently, the "Dynamism" splits into 2) "potency" and 3)
"activity". Other variables with an abstract and a concrete content were to be
found only in some of the studies and in these cases, it is not clear whether
the same variables are referred to in all the studies.

In this paper, a theory is presented dealing with basic emotional variables
having a concrete content and with emotional variables having an abstract
content. The theory is intended to reconcile the contradictions and unify the
findings with regard to the two types of variables into a single theoretic
framework.

In a study carried out at the end-of-academic-year examinations period
(1986-7), 202 subjects (101 male and 101 female resident students)
participated. The subjects were asked to judge/ assess/ evaluate to what
extent their emotional state of the time of the testing matched/ fitted/
suited the emotions expressed in 105 photographed facial expressions and 148
words.
The photographs included 48 facial expressions of mixed emotions in daily life
(without intentional external manipulation), 33 artificial expressions of
basic emotions (2-4 items for each of 9 emotions) and 24 artificial
expressions of combinations of basic emotions.
The words consisted of a wide variety of 96 words of emotion and 52 words for
control of response sets and a few other processes encountered in previous
studies.
The procedure of judging the facial expressions was carried out twice:
Once by means of structured scaling - each expression separately - on a fixed
scale of 6 grades.

                                 -III-
The second time - after the assessment of each of the 148 words on the same
scale - by means of forced choice (Q-SORT). In this task, the photographs were
divided into groups of 7-12 items. The judgment was here expressed by ordering
the items within each group according to the relative congruence between what
was expressed in the items and the emotion of the subject at the moment.
The first hypothesis was that in the task of judging the facial expressions of
mixed emotions from daily life, there would be a convergence between the
content of the main dimensions of discrimination and the content of the seven
concrete emotional variables from Ekman et al.'s list.
The second hypothesis was that in the task of judgment of the emotional words,
the content of the main dimensions of discrimination would correlate/converge
with the content of the 3 emotional variables/ dimensions of abstract content
which were found/ encountered in previous studies.

The first hypothesis was supported in the main: it was found that there was
congruence/good fit between the first five dimensions (out of an analysis of
10 dimensions) and five of the seven basic emotions. But, the content of one
of the seven - disgust - correlated only the content of the tenth dimension of
the analysis. Furthermore, the direction of the emotion happiness was found to
be directly opposite to the direction of the emotion sorrow and not
independent (as was expected). It was also found that the direction of the
emotion interest was relatively ambiguous because of the insufficient content
validity of its items.

The second hypothesis was clearly invalidated: in the analysis of two and
three dimensions it was found that the dimensions had a concrete emotional
content:

The first dimension was found to have the content of the contradiction between
depression & distress, and serenity & content. Therefore it matches the
bi-polar activity of the emotional structure "separation distress".
The content of the second dimension was found to match the contradiction
between alertness & boldness, and indifference & complacency. Thus it matches
the activity of the emotional structure "interest/ wariness/ vigilance".

                                   -IV-
The content of the third dimension matches the contradiction between
haughtiness & pride, and weariness & caution. Therefore it matches the content
of the bi-polar emotional structure of shame versus pride. In the analysis of
the 10 dimensions the seven remaining dimensions also have a concrete
emotional content.
The support given to the first hypothesis and the invalidation of the second -
refute our theoretical effort to settle the controversy between the two main
approaches to emotion. This result is a significant contribution and an
important support to the modern genetic theories of emotion. It refute in
addition, the claim of the parsimonious-cognitive ones that their dimensions
are also dimensions of subjective experience of emotion.
The main implications of this study: a) An explanation - based on the
methodological domain - of the contradictions between the genetics and the
parsimonious-cognitivists becomes available. This explanation is more
economical than the solution presented in the theory on which this study is
based. b) Sharpening the differences between the cognitive distinctions and
evaluations, and the emotional ones. c) A modern research paradigm for the
multidimensional approach was adapted successfully to the emotional phenomena.
d) The reservations about using verbal communication in emotional research
were to a great extent eliminated. e) This study can be a kind of a model or a
guide to the building of a multidimensional tool for measuring daily life
emotional feelings and moods.
Results also revealed the bipolarity nature of the basic emotions and their
subjective experience which is more in accord with Darwin's second principal
than with the "fight or flight" bipolarity of basic emotions.

                                   -1-
                              INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the study was to examine an evolutionary theory about the
principal emotional variables in daily life. This theory is concerned with the
activity of the inborn emotional structures having a concrete content (such as
happiness, fear and anger) with the discrimination among them and with the
main differences between those and the abstract variables / structures of
emotion (such as evaluation, potency and activity).
The aim of the theory was to reconcile the controversy between the two main
approaches to emotion research - the evolutionary approach and the
parsimonious-cognitive one. The major divergence between the two approaches
lies in the substance of the main primary emotional variables which combine in
various forms to produce the broad spectrum of emotional phenomena.
Those theories which can be associated with the evolutionary approach usually
proceed from a common evolutionary point of departure namely, the theory and
research of Darwin (1872) on human and animal emotions. According to the
theorists of this approach, the subsystem of emotion is of great value to the
survival of the human species.
They claim that this system consists mainly of a small number of primary
emotions. Those emotions are inborn structures. Each of them has four main
functions components: a) an expressive-communicative component which is based
mostly on a unique facial expression; b) an organismic activation (or
deactivation) pattern; c) an inborn perceptual component for perceiving the
patterns of stimuli that are relevant for that emotion; d) a subjective
experience.
The activities of these inborn structures, according to this approach, can be
found and identified in research as a group of variables which are commonly
called basic emotions which have a concrete content. Many of the proponents of
those theories claim that every one of these variables is involved in each
emotional phenomenon. In their view, this also holds good even under
circumstances where the relative weight of some of these variables is small or
almost negligible. According to Ekman et. al. (1982), results of previous
research indicate that there are at least 7 such variables, namely: happiness,
interest, surprise, fear, anger, disgust, sorrow.

                                    -2-
The theorists of the second approach cannot be characterized by a common point
of departure. In general, they do not put forward a specific theory for the
field of emotion. What is common to these theorists is the attempt to deduce
from various superior thought processes, dimensions for distinction which will
enable us to achieve a better conceptualization for the emotional system.
Usually, they offer two or three-dimensional models consisting of more or less
the same abstract content. The bi-dimensional models offer the dimensions: 1)
"evaluation/ enjoyment" and 2) "Dynamism". The three dimensional models,
frequently, split the "Dynamism" into 2) "potency" and 3) "activity".
Few of the publications of the second group deal with the gap between the
small number of dimensions and the vast number of specific emotions
encountered in daily life. Usually, they trace the source of the
need-for-added-information, to the domain of cognitive processes.
There is a small minority among the theorists of the field of emotion who,
like Leventhal (1979), put forward a theory which contains the two kinds of
variables - the basic- inborn ones and the abstract-cognitive ones. But, no
publication is at present available which clarifies this point of view or
confirms these synthetic theories.

                                   -3-
Four main kinds of studies can be found in the publications of the first
approach: the first one is concerned with the finding of new basic emotions -
cross-cultural studies are preferred. The second kind is about the emotions of
subjects with special handicaps that prevent learning of certain expressions
of emotion. The third is about the emotionality of infants and young children.
The fourth is about the components of emotional experiences of adults.
Three main groups of studies can be found in the publications of the second
approach: the most prominent one is the huge group of studies on the semantic
differential of Osgood (1952). Another nearly homogeneous group is that of the
"Circumplex" approach which strives to build bi-dimensional models for various
aspects of human life (see Wiggins, 1982). The third group is not really a
group with a common denominator but the result of the common use of factor
analysis in any research (including the emotional domain) where the effect of
simultaneous activity of various variables are suspected.
In most cases, as appropriate to the second approach, the papers which relate
to dimensions of distinction between emotions indicate the existence of 2 or 3
variables (such as Russell, 1980; and Osgood, 1952) with the same abstract
content, which appear repeatedly in many studies. sometimes there appear 1)
"evaluation/ enjoyment" and 2) "Dynamism". Even more frequently, the
"Dynamism" splits into 2) "potency" and 3) "activity". (Seldom, as in
Schachter, 1964, only one dimension of emotion is found.)
Other variables with an abstract and a concrete content were to be found only
in some of the studies and in these cases, it is not clear whether the same
variables are referred to in all the studies.
The findings which are the base for the two or three-dimensional models are
actually in contradiction to all the evolutionary theories of emotion. It is
so because, if the basic emotions are what they are supposed to be -
relatively independent of each other - then the dimensions of discrimination
among emotion must approximate those basic emotions.
Though Ekman, et al. (1982) suggest that there is enough empirical evidence of
emotional domain/space having more than three dimensions, a theory that can
reconcile the contradiction between the two main contending approaches to
emotion has not yet been presented.

                                    -4-
The publications of those who have found cross-cultural lists of basic
emotions are not, in themselves, a testimony to the existence of a parallel
list of inborn structures. It might be that subjects can discriminate between
points or phenomena which lie along the same continuum (or circle).

In this paper, a theory is presented dealing with basic emotional variables
having a concrete content and with emotional variables having an abstract
content. The theory is intended to reconcile the contradictions and unify the
findings with regard to the above two types of variables and processes into a
single theoretical framework.

The main material used for this unification is the observation that the two
kinds of variables are usually identified in two different kinds of research.
The concrete variables are mainly encountered in research involving facial
expression of emotions. The few abstract variables are mainly encountered in
research involving verbal items of emotion.

The core of the theoretical solution is that different kinds of input activate
different kind of structures i.e. the facial expressions activate the inborn
structures of the concrete basic-emotions and the verbal communication of
emotion activates the structures with the abstract content.

                                    -5-
                         THE THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
What is emotion ?
Nearly every essay on emotion tries to answer this question, usually claiming
that there is not any generally accepted definition for this concept. Those
who do attempt to define emotion base their definition on their own theory or
meta-theory, while others usually use an implicit definition to be guessed at
by the reader.
Descartes (1649) defined emotions as the passions of the soul. He claimed that
there are six such simple ones namely: wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy, and
sadness. In his view, other emotions are composed of combinations of some of
these six. He might be regarded as one of the first modern proponents of the
basic-emotion-approach of the evolutionary theories.
Spinoza (1677) presented a more economical theory with only three variables
namely: desire, joy and sadness. He may be regarded as one of the first of the
modern proponents of abstract-three-dimensional approaches.
Darwin (1872), who is the founder of the evolutionary approach to emotion,
pointed to the importance of the emotional system for the survival of the
human species. He treated emotions as mainly communications or means for that
purpose.
Osgood (1952), who is the founder of the "Semantic Differential" technique,
led the research of the three abstract dimensions of emotion which he
preferred to call "Connotative Meaning". He was aware (Osgood, 1959b) that
there are more than three such variables and warned (Osgood, 1969) blind
followers from depending too much on the trinity of evaluation, activity and
potency.
Tomkins (1962/3, 1982), Plutchik (1962, 1980, 1982) and Izard (1971, 1977,
1984), developed similar versions of evolutionary theories of emotions. They
claimed that emotions are a group of similar processes of certain brain
structures and that each of these has a unique concrete emotional content.

                                    -6-
Furthermore, they said that each of those variables has unique inborn
perceptual, organismic and expressive components. All three authors stressed
the importance of the facial expression of the expressive component.
It is hard to find in the writings of the evolutionists any detailed
explanation for the specific mechanisms - physiological or of information
processing - of the emotional system. It is also hard to find in them a
detailed explanation on the development of the emotional system during the
various stages of life. The version of the evolutionary theory that is
presented in the following chapter uses Bowlby (1969-81) - somewhat more
detailed explanations on this matter.

The cognitivists too refrain from detailed specifications of the work of the
cognitive (abstract emotional) variables. Osgood (1952, 1964, 1969) suggested
that the connotative meaning is crystallized (each time and in each specific
case) as a point on each of the bipolar experiential continua i.e. on the
evaluation, potency and activity continua.
The small integrative trend which is represented here by Leventhal (1979,
1982) usually treats the emotional system as a subsystem of the cognitive
(information procession) functions of the brain. Various publications with
this approach give detailed explanation only to scattered parts of this
subsystem. Leventhal (1979), uses cognitive concepts like schemata (without
detailed explanations of their structure and function), and discriminates
between three kinds namely: a) primary structures - which are inborn and are
parallel to the basic emotions of the evolutionists); b) concrete structures -
which are unique to this approach and are similar, in a way, to Bowlby's
supra-emotional-plan, each of those, being a schema for the automated
reconstruction of specific mixtures of primary emotions; c) schemata of a
higher order - which are parallel to Osgood's (1964) bi-polar abstract
continua of emotional-connotative meaning.

                                    -7-
The integration of the evolutionary trend and the parsimonious cognitive one
that lies at the root of this study is, in a way, similar to that of Leventhal
(1979).

What kinds of phenomena are included in the emotional domain ?
In every language there is a cluster of words which defines various kinds of
emotional phenomena. There are concrete names (anger, fear etc.); there are
words which describe typical emotional behavior of individuals (weeping,
laughing etc.); and there are also words that describe certain kinds of
emotion i.e. moods, feelings, sensations etc.
Usually, authors define the emotional domain according to their theories -
implicit or explicit. Many of these definitions exclude important parts of the
emotional domain. Woodworth (1938) criticized those who excluded certain kinds
of emotions having special names like moods and feelings etc. He argued that
semantic reasons for the exclusion of phenomena from the emotional domain are
not good enough . Weinrich (1980) argued, in the same widening trend, that
even needs and drives are part of the emotional domain and are excluded due to
linguistic curiosities.
According to the theory presented in this work, the definition of the
emotional domain is based on the emotional processes themselves i.e. the
emotional domain is supposed to include all the processes directly executed or
activated by the various parts of the emotional subsystem (of the basic
emotions).

What is the subjective feeling of emotion ?
The divergence between theorists of emotion include disagreements about the
part of the subjective feeling of emotion in the stream of emotion -the
emotional ongoing processes.
Clore & Ortony (1984) claimed that the subjective experience follows emotional
processes but is not part of them. Tomkins (1962/3) argued that the subjective
feeling of emotion is the result of feedback from the facial muscles that are
involved in the expression of emotion.

                                    -8-
Leventhal (1979) claimed that the subjective feelings and the facial
expressions are parallel sub-processes. He pointed to certain neuronal
clusters of the brain-stem as the source which feed (concurrently) both the
facial muscles and the mechanism of subjective feelings at the same time.
Izard (1984) claimed that the subjective quality of emotional experience is
invariant throughout life.

The cognitivists usually refrain from involvement with concrete emotional
phenomena. Those who do deal with this subject tend to regard the main
processes that are related to the discrimination among those phenomena as
those of labeling (like Schachter, 1964).
Our explanation for the subjective experience of emotion is part of the
general presentation of the theory of emotion - internal signaling (or
communication) system for the organization of life.

The discrimination among the emotional phenomena
Those of the cognitive approach treat the problem of discrimination among the
emotional phenomena as an emotional-cognitive process. According to this
approach, the discrimination is done by the abstract emotional variables to
which other cognitive processes are enjoined.
According to the evolutionary theories the problem has not yet been completely
clarified. It is stated by some that each emotion includes a perceptual
component, but it is not stated which emotional occurrences are fit to be
discerned by those components. It was even said by Izard (1971) that
multidimensional methodology is not appropriate for the research of this
problem.
Many studies of the past revealed that subjects can discriminate among
emotional items (mostly verbal ones) along the abstract emotional continua.
Other studies revealed that subjects can discriminate between intense basic
(concrete) emotions, with relative ease, when items are facial expressions of
emotion. However, sometimes the discrimination among verbal items revealed (as
in Osgood et. al., 1957) dimensions of discrimination which had concrete
content and sometimes the discrimination among facial expressions of emotion
followed an abstract continua.

                                 -9-
Hirschberg (1980) had showed that the dimensions of discrimination implemented
by subjects in research are greatly influenced by the instructions given. She
demonstrated how discrimination among the same collection of facial
expressions by the same subjects differed in a systematic way, according to
the changes in the instructions.
The theory that was tested by this study was supposed to advance a theoretical
solution to this question.

On the methodology of basic research in the emotional domain
Few basic paradigms with a lot of variations were implemented in the search
for the primary variables of emotion (and the structures they represent).
The most common paradigm is the "Semantic Differential" technique with the
original bi-polar scales - or their like. Results from factor analysis of the
data tend to bring fourth common denominators of the items used in the study
and included in the analysis. At best, those factors represent the common
denominators of that part of emotional domain which is included in both the
items and scales.
Another common paradigm is the application of factor analysis to any
collection of items. As data usually consists of unknown sampling coverage of
the emotional domain it is never clear what is the relevance of the findings
to the problem of extracting the entire collection of emotion basic variables.
An old methodology of direct scaling of items is still in use (as in Russell,
1980). This methodology is very cumbersome where the number of items is big
and as Hirschberg (1980) demonstrated subjects can discriminate between items
along dimensions that are irrelevant to emotion.

                                  -10-
Much of the research was done using items that are facial expressions of
emotion. However, research with those items was usually restricted to the task
of discrimination between artificial expressions of relatively strong
emotions. These studies cannot shed light on the activity of an emotional
system in daily life.
Criticism of all previous research on the structure of the emotional domain
can be found in Ekman, et al. (1982).
It is nearly impossible to include all the relevant dimensions of
discrimination of the said domain in one research when one uses the usual
methodologies. There are three main obstacles: a) the problem of the items; b)
the problem of the scales; c) the problem of the research manipulation.
When, as in the emotional domain, the full collection of dimensions of
discrimination is not yet known there is only one good solution: i.e. to
include all of them - or to find another field for research. The problem of
the rating scales is the most difficult to solve in the usual methodology.
A collection is always biased by the one who selects the items and their
scales. Always unknown parts of the domain of research are lacking. The only
verified solution to this problem is the "facet analysis" approach of Guttman
(1968). This methodology can let the subjects use all the relevant dimensions
of discrimination concerned. (A more didactic explanation for this methodology
is adduced in the following chapters.)
Since the verbal communication channel in emotional research has been found
wanting (see Plutchik, 1980), two parallel sets of items - verbal and non
verbal i.e. facial expressions of emotions - should be included as a sound
precaution.
The manipulation of emotion being found to be unreliable (Ekman et. al.,
1982), the best way appears to be the building of a paradigm based on the
natural occurrence of emotion in daily life.

                                  -11-
As there is usually a very difficult and subjective stage in the
interpretation of the factors or the dimensions of the mathematical
statistical solution - one can use the "Unfolding Model" of Hirschberg (1980)
or "INDSCALL" of Takane et al. (1977) or the Shalif et al. (1981) version of
the "S.S.A.P-I" of the Guttman-Lingoes series (Lingoes, 1973). These new
computerized techniques enable the user to compute the subjects' dimensional
scores (like subjects' factor scores), and then use these scores to find
relations (via correlations, for instance) between these dimensions and other
data of the study. Since the building of artificial facial expressions of
emotion is problematic - one can rely on unmanipulated photographs of people
with chronic facial expressions. (Tomkins, 1962/3, wrote about this
phenomenon. He pointed out the facts and variables which are related to
permanent or semipermanent expressions of emotion that can be found on certain
peoples' faces.
In the next chapter we present the theory that was tested in this study and in
the chapters on "methods" and "results", the new methodology of this study
will be clarified.
                                     -12-
                                  THE THEORY
The newborn human baby is equipped with a central nervous system. This system
is incessantly fed by input of the sensorium which consists of a wide variety
of sense-organs and receptors. This input is perceived, analyzed and
elaborated by the "central nervous system". The ongoing results of those
processes are various integrations - on the level of the single nerve-cell and
on higher levels of multi-nerve centers.
The inborn structures whose function is regarded as emotion are a group of
multi-nerve centers of this kind. Their integrations are for inputs from
receptors of the same sense or modality that originate in different parts of
the body, for inputs from different senses and modalities, and also for inputs
from previous integrations (memories included) or inputs from non emotional
centers of integration.
Many theoreticians (evolutionists) call a certain group of multi-nerve
integrations (centers) "basic emotions" (analogous to the three basic colors -
green, blue, yellow). This concept has several nearly synonymous versions and
names used by various authors: i.e. "inborn emotional "structures", "emotional
brain activation patterns", "inborn emotional schema" "primary activation
plans of emotion", etc. All of them will be referred to as "basic emotions" in
this paper.
According to most theorists who use these concepts, each of the basic emotions
have five main components: a) a perceptual component; b) an intra organismic
activation component, c) a behavioral component, d) a subjective experience
component and e) an expressive component.
The wide spectrum of specific emotions (thousands according to Ekman, et al.,
1982) is composed of different combinations of a small number of basic
emotions. According to Tomkins, 1962/3, 1982; Izard, 1971, 1977, 1984;
Plutchik (1962, 1980, 1982) the number of basic emotions is about eight to
ten. According to Ekman et al. (1982), the review of 40 years research reveals
seven basic emotions which have already been established. (Only one more then
Descartes', 1649, six passions of the soul.) This list (of seven) has been
adopted as the basic list for the empirical verification of this theory.
                                  -13-
According to the lists of some theorists, the number of basic emotions is
larger than ten - Scott (1980) assessed that the number is between 18 to 20,
Rosman (1984) preferred a list of 13. We claim that research which will be
able to extract all the basic emotions has not yet been done.
Those basic emotions are a kind of control-mechanisms that are on a higher
level of evolutional-development then the I.R.M. (Inborn Releasing
Mechanisms), though they act like the I.R.M. at the beginning of the life of
the individual. The basic emotions are more adaptable and more flexible than
the I.R.M. in the same ways (lines) that the I.R.M. are more adaptable and
flexible than the inborn reflexes of the body.
Each of the basic emotions are, according to Leventhal (1982), both a control
mechanism and a monitor for one of the main aspects of human life (such as
security, belonging etc.). They act directly through the intra organismic,
behavioral end expressive functions and indirectly by supplying input to other
(none emotional) subsystems of the brain. For instance, "fear" monitors the
state of the security or hazards to the existence, anger monitors the
obstacles put out by others which hinder activities undertaken for the
implementation of aims.
Usually it is hard to find a situation where the effect of one basic emotion
is so dominant that the effect of the others is negligible. We can regard this
kind of a rare situation as one of pure expression of a particular basic
emotion.
Even in the first hours of life, one can see the difference between the
patterns of stimuli which activate different basic emotions. For instance,
sudden stimulations of high intensity (vision, sound, or touch) cause an
increase in the activity of the basic emotion "fear"; while other patterns
(restriction of movement, pricking of the skin, bad food) consistently cause
the activation of other basic emotions.

                                   -14-
The most prominent and unique expression of the higher levels of activation of
fear is the expression conveyed in the face as an automatic response. This
expression is common to all healthy human newborn infants and to a great
extent to all other ages. Each of the other basic emotions has one
international-unique-facial-expression of its own. (The best known
cross-cultural studies which support this claim are those of Darwin, 1872;
Ekman, 1969, 1971 and Izard,1971.)
At the beginning of life (and with the first appearance of each of the inborn
emotions which need certain maturation in order to become effective), one can
see the strong and direct connection between a small number of patterns of
stimuli and the activity of each basic emotion. In this period, the "primary
emotional plans" (in Bowlby, 1969-81, terminology) which control the
multi-neuronal integrations, called here basic emotions, act constantly and
almost the same as reflexes. Each basic emotion has its inborn primary plan.

When there is a relevant change in the perceptual processes of a basic
emotion, the input supplied by it to the integration process of that basic
emotion is changes as well. The integration process, which does not
necessarily include cognitive appraisals (according to Panksep, 1986 p119)
directly activates the intra-organismic, behavioral and expressive action of
that basic emotion. All those processes feed input to the component of the
subjective feelings of that basic emotion. (According to Fonberg, 1986, the
brain-site in which reside these components of the basic emotions which
convert the emotional processes to subjective experience is the Amigdala of
the Limbic system.)

                                     -15-
If one examines the effect of a specific stimulus on the activity of the
emotional- primary-plan of any basic emotion in the newborn - one can observe
how the end of one stage of the plan activates the following one. One sees,
according to Bowlby (1969), that the perception stage of the plan activates
the integrative stage of that same plan and how that stage (when completed)
activates the three behavioral parts (intra-organismic, external behavior, and
expressive activity).
The subjective feeling component is in interactive relation with the
equivalent components of the other basic emotions. But, as each of these
components is relatively independent of the others, the specific subjective
experience of an individual in a specific instant comprises the sum of the
activities of the subjective-feeling-components of all the basic emotions.
As the activity of each basic emotion is relatively independent, one can
discern at any point on the continuum of time, the specific contribution of
each basic emotion (according to Izard, 1971, 1977,1984).
The relative intensity of each basic emotion varies nearly incessantly and
this is what creates the specific emotional quality of the moment. Sometimes
the level of activity of one of the basic emotions becomes - for a short time
- very intense. When this happens, it seems as if the individual experiences
only one emotion. (According to Ekman, et al., 1982, it usually last no more
then ten seconds. According to Scherer et al., 1986, it very seldom lasts more
than an hour.)
Usually, the emotional excitements are milder and the activity of the three or
four more active emotions can easily be discerned. However, the basic emotions
are parts of the living organism, and each of them has a specific life area to
monitor (and a specific brain structure - as pointed at by Fonberg, 1986, and
Panksep, 1986). Therefore, they never cease their activation although, for
various time spans, several of the basic emotions may act as a kind of
background for others.

                                  -16-
Variation in the levels of the subjective experience of the basic emotions is
one of the most direct ways in which the ongoing emotional processes of
integration of information change their mode of activity from the background
to the foreground or even to the center of awareness.
Throughout the years from birth onward, the central nervous system matures.
Memories, experiences and knowledge are accumulated. Cognitive and emotional
schemes (in the Piajetian meaning of this concept) are constructed and
reconstructed. These schemes are of a wide spectrum and of various levels of
abstraction. As a result of this development, the primary plans of the basic
emotions become dominated by plans of a higher level.
These super-plans enable (or enforce), in certain situations, systematic
deviations from the inborn patterns of the primary plans.
(According to Ekman & Friesen, 1975, the most prominent deviations are in the
facial expressions of the expressive component of adults who are in specific
social situations.)
Due to the activity of these super-plans (in Bowlby, 1969-81, terminology),
the integrative processes can be fed and activated by perceptions, memories,
and other cognitions which are very different from the original pattern of
stimuli. Due to their activity, the ability of the original pattern of stimuli
to activate the integrative processes of the basic emotions in a
reflexive-like way diminish greatly. The connections between the integrative
processes and the other three components (organismic activity, behavior,
subjective experience) diminish to an even greater extent.
During his life, the individual acquires (learns) new components which
integrate with the super-plans as additions, variations or substitutions for
the original or other components of older versions. He acquires proficiency
that enables him to activate the other three components of these plans -
intentionally or unintentionally, with awareness or without it - in ways that
are very different from those of the original patterns. Even without the aid
of the integrative component.

                                    -17-
Even the component of the subjective experience is greatly influenced by these
super- plans. "Defence-mechanisms" are usually a group of super plan
components (routines and subroutines or schemes) which act unconsciously or
unwillingly and cause deviations of the subjective experience from its
original course. Intentional activation of the facial muscles are the most
common means used for volitional intervention in the activities of the basic
emotions (as pointed out by Ekman, et al., 1983, Laird, 1974, 1984, and
Winton, 1986).
However, these super-plans cannot abolish or suppress entirely the activity of
the original primary plans even for very short durations of time. Ekman &
Friesen (1975) point to the signs of the breakthrough of the results of the
activity of those plans in spite of the masking of learned activation plans,
for the artificial creation of facial expressions. Those leaks are important
input (clues) for the perceptual activities of the abstract-verbal- sequential
cognitive processes and to the intuitive-parallel-perceptual-processes of the
basic emotions perceptual components.
During maturation of the individual, the automatic and reflex-like relations
between the various parts of the emotional plans of the basic emotions, become
weaker. In spite of the weakening which occurs in these strong relationships,
there is still a strong tie between each of these components and the original
pattern of the spontaneous facial expression of each basic emotion. The same
holds true for the activity of the perceptual inborn component of each of the
basic emotions. Izard (1984) argued that this is true even for the subjective
feeling of each basic emotion.
Consequently, the adult retains those two functions very near to their
original inborn state. As a result, facial expressions (of emotion) can act as
a very rich inter-personal channel of communication. (The subjective
experience of emotion acts like an intra-personal channel of communication.)

                                   -18-
As a result, items that are facial expressions of emotion are both convenient
and indispensable in research of the emotional domain.
During maturation, the individual learns how to identify and consciously
classify the main facial expressions of emotion and the verbal labels for part
of these emotions. According to Izard (1971), most of the learning of the
facial expressions occurs between the ages of 3 to 6 and that of the verbal
labels between ages 7 to 11.
Many factors hinder the learning of verbal labels for emotions. The main ones
are: a) The variety of observed emotions is bigger than the variety of words
which can be used to label them. b) It is difficult for the observer to
diagnose the subjective experience of emotion of another.
Therefore, it is difficult to receive help in learning the names of the
various emotions. c) As learning the precise names for the various emotional
states is not considered very important in modern life, little is done to
improve the precision of labels used by people.
Consequently, learning brings bout a relatively weak tie between any specific
mixture of the basic emotions (of daily life) and its verbal label. Even the
learning of the names of the basic emotions themselves is not perfect and many
use them incorrectly. Approximately 20% - according to Izard, 1971.
Because of these problems, the publications of previous research in the
emotional field which used verbal labels of emotion are inconsistent and at
times may contradict each other. For this reason, Plutchik (1980b) criticized
so much the practice by scientists of relying on verbal communication alone in
their research into the domain of emotions.
In most areas of human life, the system of verbal conceptualization becomes
dominant. This system (the second signal system of Pavlov and the system of
abstract cognitive scheme of Piajet, 1965) subjugates the cognitive system of
the early years of life (the first signal system of Pavlov and the system of
concrete cognitive scheme of Piajet).

                                    -19-
Many things combine to prevent this transition in the emotional system, the
main reasons being:
a) The ties between a verbal label and the its specific emotion are not strong
because of learning problems, as previously mentioned. Therefore, the
interaction between the two systems is not intensive, so the
abstract-cognitive-processes often fail, in attempting to dominate the
emotional subsystem - even where there is a label available for the said
emotion.
b) One of the results of the limited number of emotional labels (whilst there
are hundreds of labels available for the naming of tens of thousand of
emotional mixtures - according to Ekman, et al., 1982) is that many common
concrete emotions (mixtures of basic emotions) have no verbal label. In those
cases it is even harder to subjugate the emotional subsystem to the abstract
cognitive subsystem.
c) Every culture has emotional areas or subjects that are not a legitimate
topic for conversation. Therefore, the higher cognitive processes of
individuals of a specific culture are especially handicapped in the
implementation of controls on those emotions.
d) The parallel processing of all the components of the all the basic emotions
(especially the perception and integration components) are usually at an
advantage compared to the higher cognitive processes which are mainly
sequential and need concentration and attention. This advantage is most
prominent in the following situations: 1) During the intensive input of
information conveyed by spontaneous facial expressions and voice intonations.
2) when one observes another and needs to rely on information that is near the
threshold of perception. 3) When one needs to screen out the intentional and
the non intentional distortions in the emotional communications of others.
e) The ability of the emotional subsystem to act in a reflexive-like mode in
an emergency is vital to the survival of the human individual.

                                    -20-
f) The survival ability of mankind is greatly dependent on the use of the
inborn emotional communication channel when bringing up a new generation -
especially in its pre linguistic first years.
g) Fluent bi directional emotional communication is vital for the orderly
continuity of satisfying interpersonal relations. This communication cannot
rely solely on verbal communication of emotion as its tendency to occur in
daily life is not frequent and, when it does occur, is generally very
cumbersome.

For these reasons (and others not mentioned here), in most waking hours, the
basic emotions are the most dominant group of active emotional processes. They
act simultaneously and concurrently to other ongoing cognitive processes in
the moment to moment stream of an adult's life.

Parallel to the above subsystem, however, the abstract emotional processes
subsystem is also active. In certain circumstances - to be detailed and
explained later - these abstract variables are used as the main dimensions of
discrimination among incoming input (information). Russell's(1980) findings
about the bi-dimensional conceptualization of emotion is one of many examples
to be found in the relevant publications.

In many hundreds of studies which are related to the emotional domain, the
same two or three variables are encountered - the "abstract emotional
dimensions". They were usually found when Osgood's semantic differential
technique was implemented. Those studies were carried out in a variety of
contexts and cultures (see Snider & Osgood, 1969). Thus, one can generalize
from these to all mankind and to all emotional states.
These dimensions are the expressions of relative highly abstract integrations
typical of the verbal domain. These dimensions are in congruence with
Leventhal's (1979) abstract emotional supra-scheme and Osgood's (1964) bipolar
experiential continuum along which the connotative (abstract emotional)
meaning is crystallized.

                                   -21-
As a matter of fact, it is impossible to convey the concrete emotional quality
when combinations of the abstract dimensions only are being used. This task
requires dimensions of description and discrimination that have a concrete
content which is compatible with the content of the basic emotions. Osgood
(1959) scrutinized in detail the difference between the abstract dimensions of
the connotative meaning and the concrete dimensions of the "denotative"
meaning. According to him, only the use of the denotative dimensions enable
one to discriminate between concrete contents. One of the main claims of this
present theory is that the basic emotions identified so far are (in the
terminology of Osgood) the main denotative dimensions of the emotional domain.
This statement is in accord with Leventhal's (1979) claim that the inborn
emotional structures (which he called - primary schemes) are active in an
adult's life. It also accord with all the evolutionary theories that claim
that the basic emotions are inborn, that their main importance is their
contribution to smoother intra-group relations and to interpersonal
communication. Those two functions can be performed by the basic emotions as
each of these structures include within them components which function both as
the creators of the communication and as the perceivers of this kind of
communication. The most common and rich channel of this kind of communication
is the wide spectrum of spontaneous facial expressions.
We claim that the perceptual processes (which build the internal
representations - in the terminology of cognitive theories) are activated
mainly by the appropriate perceptual components of the basic emotions, without
needing the participation of the abstract emotional processes. These processes
might act in parallel and with levels of intensity to suit the circumstances.

                                   -22-
Throughout most of the hours of the day and in most interpersonal relations,
the perception of the measure in which the emotion of the other is near that
of oneself usually sensed intuitively.
Decisions about the interpersonal distance are made according to the
difference between the internal representation of the other and the internal
representation of oneself at that moment. The assessment is done by parallel
information processing procedures that are not based on verbal thought
processes.
These perceptual processes can usually be very successful in the task of
deciphering the true emotional state of the other from his facial expression.
Therefore, in daily life, when one is receiving non verbal communications of
emotion from another the main dimension of discrimination among them
correlates to the main basic emotions. This holds true - even though more
difficult - when the other tries to conceal them by means of systematic
distortions that stem from his culture and personality. Hirschberg, (1980)
demonstrated the flexibility of the subjects in the use of different sets of
dimensions of discrimination among facial expressions. Each time their task
changed they concentrated on different variables and disregarded the
irrelevant ones.
When information about the other is less suitable for the above perceptual
processes, one relies more on the abstract emotional scheme and consequently,
the main dimensions of discrimination correlate to the three well known
abstract dimensions of the connotative meaning.

The main difference is not between the verbal communications and processes of
perception (on one side) and information processing and the non verbal ones
(on the other).
The main difference is rather between information that fits or
does not fit being analyzed by the perceptual components of the basic
emotions.
                                   -23-
More precisely - the difference is between what fits more and what
fits less along a continuum. For instance, a suitable verbal communication
like a poem or a sentimental story or a very important verbal communication,
can be immediately relevant and available to the activity of the basic
emotions. The opposite can occur with non verbal communications of information
if it is not relevant enough to the basic emotions. This can be so when facial
expressions are too obvious in content or too blurred. In the first case the
perceiver acts with strongly learned habits which are heavily influenced by
consciousness, in the second case only very generalized assessment can be made
and abstract processes are more suitable.

In daily life, the individual experiences a complex mixture of basic emotions.
Usually, a certain mood continues for hours or even for longer periods with
small variations. During the evolving hours, deviations of short duration
occur many times. Those deviations can reach high intensities and are then
called emotions. According to Ekman, et al. (1982) those emotions last up to
ten seconds. Afterwards, the general mood of the time is regained.

It seems that the subjective experience of emotions is a summons for
attention. The strong and short emotions are emergency calls for attention.
The more enduring moods are like notices on a signboard and are about what is
on the agenda or what is important for longer durations of time.
As moods are the sum of the subjective-experience-components of the basic
emotions, the dimensions of discrimination among these daily moods must
correlate with the activities of the basic emotions.

In daily life, people usually assess the measure in which the emotions and
moods of the others differ from theirs, according to non verbal
communications, mainly facial expressions. Therefore, the main dimensions of
discrimination among the emotions and the moods of the others correlate with
the content of the main basic emotions and especially so when the
discrimination is based solely on facial expressions.

                             - 24-
                     THE HYPOTHESES OF THIS STUDY

The first hypothesis - Facial expressions:
The hypothesis was that multidimensional analysis of subjects' assessments of
the measure in which their ongoing mood of the time of judgment is different
from that of facial photographs, will reveal dimensions the content of which
will correlate with that of the main basic emotions i. e. Happiness, Surprise,
Interest, Fear, Anger, Sadness, Disgust.

The second hypothesis - about the words of emotion
The hypothesis was that multidimensional analysis of subjects' assessments of
the measure in which their ongoing mood at the time of judgment is different
from the content of words with emotional content, will reveal dimensions the
content of which will correlate with that of the three abstract dimensions of
emotion i. e. Evaluation, Activity, Potency.

The mapping sentence for this study, presented below is a kind of short
summary of the theory, the hypotheses and the methods. It is based on
Guttman's (1968) facet analysis approach.

                        THE MAPPING SENTENCE
  Subject N assesses the measure in which item I which is a facial expression
of the basic emotion: happiness  and  surprise  and interest  and   fear   and
                     |highly so |     |highly.|     |highly.|     |highly.|
                     |  down    |     | down  |     | down  |     | down  |
                     |   to     |     |  to   |     |  to   |     |  to   |
                     |negligible|     |neglig.|     |neglig.|     |neglig.|

  anger  and  sadness  and  disgust; and item W which is a word of emotion with
|highly.|    |highly.|     |highly.|
| down  |    | down  |     | down  |
|  to   |    |  to   |     |  to   |
|neglig.|    |neglig.|     |neglig.|
                                                                  TheÊrange
the content of evaluation and activity  and potency  as being of |very high|
               |positive|    |activity |   |strength|            |  down   |
               |   to   |    |   to    |   |   to   |            |   to    |
               |negative|    |passivity|   |weakness|            |very low |

similarity to his own present feelings or mood.

                                -25-
                           THE METHODS
The subjects
The subjects were 202 resident students (101 female and 101 male) who were not
studying in the department of psychology. All had been of good eye sight and
were fluent in Hebrew - the language of the verbal materials.

The materials
1) 105 photographs of facial expressions from three main sources:
a) 48 unmanipulated mixtures of emotion - the entire set of items of the
Szondi test (Szondi, 1947; Szondi et al., 1959). These mixed expressions cover
a very wide spectrum (not intended by Szondi) as was found by Vargha (1979)
and by Shalif (1980 - unpublished).
b) 33 manipulated facial expressions of basic emotions taken from Izard (1971,
1977) and Ekman & Friesen (1975). For happiness, surprise, fear, anger,
disgust and contempt (the last included for control purposes) - 4 items for
each; for sadness, three items: for distress (a version of sadness?), interest
and shame (the last included for control purposes) - two for each.
c) 24 manipulated mixtures of basic emotions taken from Ekman & Friesen (1975).

All the photographs were black and white and of the same size.
The photographs were arranged in two parallel sets (of 105). In one of the
sets, each photograph was mounted on a white card measuring 7 by 10
centimeters and all were attached to a Rolex revolving drum of
telephone-number-cards. In the second set the photographs were mounted on
plates, in groups of 7 to 12. The detailed list of the origin of each
photograph and its place on the drum and the plates is in appendix number one.

2) 148 words in the Hebrew language, printed in alphabetic order in four
columns of one page. To the left of each word was the following scale of six
grades and five intermediate grades (the lines between the numbers):
 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  .
-----------------------

                                    -26-
The words were taken from various studies and were translated into Hebrew. The
list consisted of:
a) 96 words of indubitably emotional content to be analyzed by
multidimensional scaling. b) 35 words naming dimensions and variables found in
the publications of previous research as causes for systematic changes of item
content to non emotional domains.
c) 17 words of emotion that relate to the 96-word-list but differ in a
systematic way (intensity or frequency), which were included for control
purposes.

                                THE PROCEDURE
Contacting the subjects
In the end-of-academic-year examinations period (1986-7), posters were put up
at students' dormitories of two neighboring universities, inviting students to
take part in a doctoral research. Anonymity, fees that double the minimum and
explanations were assured.
The examiner contacted students from several buildings and made efforts to
include in the study a high percentage of each. (This and the content of the
posters was arranged in order to minimize the effects of self selection.)

Data collecting procedure
Data was collected in the subjects' room (or an unoccupied room of a neighbor)
at a table facing the wall or a window. This location was chosen for two main
reasons: 1) to decrease the deviation of the emotional mood of the subjects
from their mood of that day and hour; 2) to decrease the percentage of
refusers - (see results).
At the beginning of the session the subject was told that anonymity was
assured and that explanations would be given at the end. Then the subject was
asked which was his/her dominant hand - left-handers were sat to the left of
the examiner and right-handers to his right.

                               -27-
The first task:
First, the Rolex drum with the 105 photographs was taken out of its box
(without any visible photograph). Then the subject was given a booklet of
instructions opened at those for the first task. A page with 105 numbered
scales like this:__1_|_2_|_3_|_4_|_5_|_6_ was given as well. At the top and at
the bottom of the page, verbal labels of the six grades were written.

Then, the examiner read aloud the following instructions for the first task
while the subject followed them with his eyes: "Photographs of facial
expressions (some of the same persons) will be presented. You are asked to
mark - after a first (short) look - one of the grades of the scale according
to the measure in which the feeling or the emotion expressed in the photograph
is compatible with (i.e. near or like) what you are feeling now. The grades of
the scale are: 1) completely incompatible - the least near to you; 2)
incompatible; 3) incompatible a little more then compatible; 4) a little more
compatible than not compatible; 5) compatible; 6) very compatible - the
nearest. (When it is hard to decide which of two adjacent grades to mark - one
can mark the partition between them as an intermediate grade.) However, each
scale must be marked as skipping is not permitted."

After the examiner finished reading the instructions, he added: "I want to
emphasize that the use of grade 1 is only when (the photograph) is entirely
not compatible - i.e. entirely contradicting what you are feeling." This point
was added after subjects in pretests tended to give this grade to the majority
of the artificial basic emotions of intense negative content.

                                   -28-
The examiner then exposed the first photograph on the drum and at the same
time asked if the instructions were understood. To subjects who delayed more
than 30 seconds before marking the first item, the examiner repeated the
second sentence of the instructions with emphasize on the words "after a first
(short) look" This was repeated with the following items until the time for an
item was less then 30 seconds. After the first item, the examiner asked if the
content of the label of the marked grade was correct (i.e. if completely
incompatible or incompatible or any of the others - whatever he chose, depict
him correctly - to make sure that the subject used the grades correctly).
The drum was revolved to change the exposed item while the subject marked the
scale for the previous one.

The second task:
At the end of photograph 105 (after about 10 to 20 minutes), the drum and the
page of the 105 scales were taken away and replaced by a page containing the
148 words with their scales.
Then the examiner read the instruction for the second task which were nearly
the same as those of the first task. The only difference was that here he
referred to the 148 words.

The third task:
This task consisted of a Q-SORT procedure for the 105 photographs (materials -
1). In this task the subject was asked to order the items of each plate of
items to prearranged grades. The grades were arranged around the median of
each plate that was 3.5, the top score was 6, and the bottom was 1 (the same
as in the previous tasks). In plates of 8 and 9 items there were two places
for the grades 3 and 4, in the plate of 12 - two places for each grade. This
procedure was followed in order to overcome subject's tendency to scale the
majority of the items that are artificial expressions of negative emotions to
the same lowest grade - materials: 1b, 1c. It was also intended to reconstruct
the scaling procedure of Shalif, 1980 for 48 items of mixed and unmanipulated
expression of materials: 1a.

                                -29-
The ordering - the scoring of the items on the plates was done by means of
covering each item with white cards on each of which was printed a grade.
They were given to all the subjects in a fixed order - 6, 1, 5, 2, 4, 3, (and
3.5 in plates with an odd number of items). On the card of grade 6 was written
"very appropriate", on that of grade 1 was
printed "very inappropriate".

The fourth task:
At the end of task three came task four that was nearly identical to the
Shalif (1980) study. It consisted of ordering the 48 items of materials: 1a -
the Szonti-test items, according to subject's liking and not according to
appropriateness. (This use of the items is like that of the Szondi test and
was included for control purposes.)
After the fourth task, the subject was given the opportunity to ask about the
study and to ventilate her/his feelings. Then the examiner asked about any
unusual occurrences that were observed during the session.

The computation of subjects' dimensional scores
The interpretation of the content of dimensions which are the result of
multidimensional scaling is usually very subjective and open to experimental
bias. In factor analysis studies, the same problem is overcome - very seldom -
when subject's factor-scores are related to other variables that are not
included in the factor analysis.

In this study one of the central groups of items is the 48 photographs of
unmanipulated emotional expressions. As their basic emotional composition is
not known, the direct interpretation of the dimensions and the directions of
the mathematical solution by the aid of the 48 items is impossible.

The interpretation of the directions and the dimensions of the
multidimensional scaling of the 48 (materials: 1a) items and to a large extent
even that of the 96 emotional words (materials 2a) is based on correlations
between subject's dimensional scores and other variables (of verbal and non
verbal content).

                                      -30-
The computation of the dimensional scores for the 48 items of task one (and
afterwards those of the 96 words of task two) was done thus:

a) The output of the multidimensional analysis of the inter correlation matrix
of the items (S.S.A.-I) of the 48 items (and later that of the 96 words) - the
matrix of dimensional coordinates of the items - was linearly transformed so
that the mean of the dimension coordinates of the items for each dimension is
equal to "0".
(Different versions of multidimensional scaling techniques give the coordinate
of items on the dimensions in an unstandardized way with regard to where they
put the origin of the space and the range of the coordinates. The most
meaningful point of a multidimensional scaling model is the centroid of the
mathematical solution. Therefore, the said linear transformation was applied.)

b) The second step is the computation of each of the subjects' dimensional
scores for each of the dimensions (for each item group by itself). The
computation is like the multiplication of a line with a matrix . For each
dimension, each subject score for an item is multiplied by the item coordinate
for this dimension. The results of the multiplications are totalled and
divided by the number of items. This result is the subject's score for that
dimension.
As a result of this calculation, a subject who gave all the items the same
score, will have the dimension score of "0" for all the dimensions of this
item group. The higher a subject's item scores are for items which are clearly
in one direction of the multidimensional space of the mathematical solution,
the more his dimensional scores lie in that direction.
(The following two references are of similar applications of this approach: a)
Takane et al., 1977 - based on INDSCAL; b) Shalif et al.,1981 - based on
Guttman-Lingoes non metric program series, Lingoes, 1973.)

                                   -31-
c) Afterwards the dimensional scores of the subjects for the multidimensional
scaling of the 48 items of materials: 1a, and those of the 96 words of emotion
of materials: 2a (that were computed as well), were related to each other (by
computation of correlations) and to all other subjects' item scores and to any
other score based on them.


                                   -32-
                                 RESULTS
The subjects
The subjects - 101 male and 101 female - were single, resident students of
two near-by universities. About 90% of them were undergraduates, the others
were students of preparatory classes or graduate students. About 20% of the
subjects responded a poster-request for volunteers - the others were contacted
by the examiner and were roommates or neighbors of the above 20%. Eighty (80%)
of those approached by the examiner consented to take part in the study.
As the examiner promised anonymity to the subjects, as the tasks and the
data-collecting needed his full attention, and as the study is not about the
variance among people - there was no systematic data collection except that of
the item-scores. It is worth mentioning, however, that the subjects were from
diverse faculties and departments. They differed in their backgrounds,
involvement with the task and their moods, both before the session and during
it. Some of the subjects enjoyed their tasks. Others responded with tension to
different sections of the study. Some subjects had difficulty in choosing the
scores for the items, others were very hasty. The median length of time per
subject was about 45 minutes, the longest was one and a half hours and the
shortest about 35 minutes. The majority of the subjects were more interested
in the rationale of the study than in their fee.

The items' scores
As a result of missing answers, the number of scores per item varied between
199 and 202 (the number of subjects). During the free scaling procedure, the
subjects rarely used the intermediate scores. They also preferred the lower
scores for most of the items of artificial facial expressions of strong and
negative emotions. One can see in Table 1 on the next page, the distribution
of  scores of the groups of items from the free scaling procedure.

                                  -33-
Table No. 1: The distribution of scores of the groups of items from the free
scaling procedure and the percentage of each score from the groups' total.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Items    /Scores|  1 |1.5|  2 |2.5|  3 |3.5|  4 |4.5|  5 |5.5| 6  |Median
-------------|-----|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|------
1a - 48 Mixed|Freq.| 989| 35|2550|103|2440|140|2097| 73|1072| 18|  77| 3.02
expressions  |  %  |10.2|0.4|26.3|1.1|25.2|1.4|21.6|0.8|11.1|0.2| 1.8|  **
-------------|-----|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|------
1b - 33 Basic|Freq.|1841| 80|1947| 68|1112| 96| 834| 45| 491| 12| 139| 2.27
emotions     |  %  |27.6|1.2|29.2|1.0|16.7|1.4|12.5|0.7| 7.4|0.2| 2.1|  **
-------------|-----|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|-----------
1c - 24 Mixed|Freq.|1195| 81|1553| 71| 914| 67| 621| 31| 260|  5|  50| 2.28
basic emotio.|  %  |24.6|1.7|32.0|1.4|18.9|1.4|12.8|0.6| 5.4|0.1| 1.0|  **
-------------|-----|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|---|----|------
2 - 148 Words|Freq.|4102|210|7007|298|5082|505|6046|427|4555|140|1440| 3.12
( a + b + c )|  %  |13.8|0.7|23.5|1.0|17.0|1.7|20.3|1.4|15.3|0.5| 4.8|  **
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
**100% For that row
    As the distributions of the scores of too many items is skewed, the
non-parametric statistical procedures were preferred.

The validity of items and the reliability of their scores
As the procedure was very long, retesting of items was not done. As a
substitution and "first approximation", the scores of the same items of the
two procedures are the basis for the estimation of the lower boundary of the
items' reliability.

The 48 unmanipulated mixtures
The range of Spearman correlation coefficients between the scores of the
unmanipulated 48 emotional mixtures of materials: 1\a, from the two
procedures, is between 0.59 (p<.001) and 0.15 (p<0.017, one tail). The median
is 0.30 (p<0.001).
For each of these 48 items, the highest correlations between it and the 33
basic emotions - materials: 1b - are all significant. 46 of them are of 0.001
two tail or more, one is of 0.003 and one of 0.015 (r=-017).
One can deduce from the above findings that items of this group functioned in
this study as a relatively reliable measure of the emotional feelings of the
subjects.

                                   -34-
The scores of the sub-groups of basic emotions
The scores of the items of the 9 basic emotions were added to create subgroup
scores. This was done for each of the two procedures and then the matrix of
correlations for all the subgroup scores were computed and are demonstrated on
the following table 2.

Table No. 2: Matrix of correlations among the subgroups of basic emotions of
each procedure and between two procedures.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free scaling procedure       |         Q-Sort procedure
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     | H | S | I | F | A | D | S | C | S | H | S | I | F | A | D | S | C |S
     | A | U | N | E | N | I | A | O | H | A | U | N | E | N | I | A | O |H
     | P | R | T | A | G | S | D | N | A | P | R | T | A | G | S | D | N |A
     | P | P | E | R | E | G | N | T | M | P | P | E | R | E | G | N | T |M
     | I | R | R |   | R | U | E | E | E | I | R | R |   | R | U | E | E |E
     | N | I | E |   |   | S | S | M |   | R | I | E |   |   | S | S | M |
F|   | E | S | S |   |   | T | S | P |   | E | S | S |   |   | T | S | P |
R|   | SS| E | T |   |   |   |   | T |   | SS| E | T |   |   |   |   | T |
E|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---
E|HAP  **  57  40  05  00  05 -13  21 -02|*63  40| 03 -14 -20  02 -50 -21 -36
 |SUR  57  **  50  46  39  42  25  38  13| 30 *44|-03  06 -07  05 -31 -36 -32
G|INT  40  50  **  26  22  28  24  34  31| 13  17|*13 -07 -07  00 -14 -19 -13
S|FEA  05  46  26  **  83  73  66  54  28|-10  03|-07 *30  15 -03  07 -24 -10
C|ANG  00  39  22  83  **  73  70  57  31|-22 -01|-04  20 *21  01  08 -17  00
A|DIS  05  42  28  73  73  **  67  54  33|-17 -10|-02  15  01 *21  07 -10 -04
L|SAD -13  25  24  66  70  67  **  52  39|-38 -19|-12  25  09 -02 *37 -10  04
I|CON  21  38  34  54  57  54  52  **  50|-09 -03|-07 -03  04 -02 -02*(07) 04
N|SHA -02  13  31  28  31  33  39  50  **|-29 -15|-14 -05  03 -07  24  09 *37
G|==================================| HAP| **  37| 05 -19 -28 -12 -54 -26 -37
                                   Q| SUR| 37  **| 13  00 -15 -19 -52 -36 -36
** Correlation of 1.00 between a   \| INT| 05  13| ** -13 -04 -10 -15 -11 -15
   subgroup and itself             S| FEA|-19  00|-13  **  06 -16  08 -19 -25
                                   O| ANG|-28 -15|-04  06  ** -11 -04 -03  03
 * The correlation between the     R| DIS|-12 -19|-10 -16 -11  ** -07  04 -13
   subgroup's scores of the two    T| SAD|-54 -52|-15  08 -04 -07  ** -03  28
   procedures                       | CON|-26 -36|-11 -19 -03  04 -03  **  30
                                    | SHA|-37 -36|-15 -25  03 -13  28  30  **
                                    =========================================

The correlations between the subgroups' two procedures are not homogeneous.
One can see in Table two that the correlation of happiness (0.63) is the
highest. It can also be seen that those of interest and contempt are very low.
That of interest is barely significant (0.028 - one tail) and that of contempt
- r=0.07 - is not significant at all.
It seems that for many items and subgroups of artificial basic emotions the
two procedures led the subjects to focus their attention on different aspects
of the items.

                                    -35-
Content validity of the 9 sub-groups of basic emotions
The larger the inter-sub-group correlations and the smaller the correlations
of the items (and the subgroup score) with other items or (subgroups), the
more a subgroup score can be relied on when one interprets the content of
dimensions of the multidimensional scaling.
The majority of the correlations between subgroup scores of the free scaling
of the first task - as  one can see in Table 3 - are significant (30 out of 36
- p<0.003, two tail or more). The median correlation is +0.385, p<0.001.
This phenomenon is mainly the result of subjects' general response set of
tendency  to denial to the items of the negative emotions: fear, anger,
sadness, disgust; and their too willing acceptance of the three positive
emotions (happiness, surprise, interest). Those sets of response are not
symmetric as the inter-correlation of the three positive emotions is
relatively lower (there is more discrimination among them). Another set - that
of general trend of yes-saying or no-saying - is responsible for the positive
correlations between the items and the sub-groups of positive and negative
emotions.
The inter-sub-group correlations of the Q-Sort procedure are much more
differentiated. But even in this procedure where item scores are in
competition, there are still positive correlations and with three of the items
the level of significance is of p<0.001 . Only 15 of the 36 are negatives with
significance of 0.05 or more.

The three positive sub-groups
Table 3 of the free-grading procedure and Table 4 of the Q-Sort one, show the
matrices of correlations among the 10 items of the three positive basic
emotions of the study. From those correlations one can see that the border
between the contents of each subgroup is not sharply defined. Note the
difference between the cohesiveness of the groups.

                                 -36-
Table No. 3: The matrix of correlations among the 10 items of the  sub-
groups of happiness, surprise, interest from the free grading procedure
---------------------------------**-----------------------**-----------
|Subgroup|      Happiness        ||       Surprise        ||  Interest
|--------|-----------------------||-----------------------||-----------
|Item No.|  1  |  9  | 17  | 25  ||  2  | 10  | 18  | 26  ||  8  |  24
|--------|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| H |  1 | 1.0 | 0.64| 0.59| 0.56|| 0.51| 0.31| 0.36| 0.46|| 0.37| 0.17
| a |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| p |  9 | 0.64| 1.0 | 0.78| 0.78|| 0.42| 0.42| 0.40| 0.52|| 0.40| 0.19
| p |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| i | 17 | 0.59| 0.78| 1.0 | 0.80|| 0.35| 0.31| 0.41| 0.45|| 0.34| 0.18
| ne|----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| ss| 25 | 0.56| 0.78| 0.80| 1.0 || 0.38| 0.37| 0.43| 0.60|| 0.31| 0.22
|========|=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====
| S |  2 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 1.0 | 0.60| 0.68| 0.46|| 0.42| 0.15
| u |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| r | 10 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.60| 1.0 | 0.59| 0.49|| 0.34| 0.19
| p |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| r | 18 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.68| 0.59| 1.0 | 0.51|| 0.50| 0.30
| i |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| se| 26 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.46| 0.49| 0.51| 1.0 || 0.40| 0.25
|========|=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====
|Int|  8 | *** | *** | *** | *** || *** | *** | *** | *** || 1.0 | 0.23
|ere|----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
|st | 24 | *** | *** | *** | *** || *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.23| 1.0
=======================================================================

Table No. 4: The matrix of correlations among the 10 items of the sub-
groups of happiness, surprise, interest from the Q-SORT procedure
---------------------------------**-----------------------**-----------
|Subgroup|      Happiness        ||       Surprise        ||  Interest
|--------|-----------------------||-----------------------||-----------
|Item No.|  1  |  9  | 17  | 25  ||  2  | 10  | 18  | 26  ||  8  |  24
|--------|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----
| H |  1 | 1.0 | 0.47| 0.56| 0.49|| 0.35| 0.06| 0.16| 0.35|| 0.12|0.12
| a |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| p |  9 | 0.47| 1.0 | 0.64| 0.67|| 0.43| 0.13| 0.24| 0.31||-0.07|0.06
| p |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| i | 17 | 0.56| 0.64| 1.0 | 0.63|| 0.29| 0.01|-0.03| 0.33|| 0.07|0.09
| ne|----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| ss| 25 | 0.49| 0.67| 0.63| 1.0 || 0.42| 0.15| 0.21| 0.26|| 0.07|-.01
|========|=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|====
| S |  2 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 1.0 | 0.19| 0.40| 0.42|| 0.28|0.01
| u |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| r | 10 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.19| 1.0 | 0.36| 0.20||-0.04|-.06
| p |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| r | 18 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.40| 0.36| 1.0 | 0.26|| 0.06|-.02
| i |----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
| se| 26 | *** | *** | *** | *** || 0.42| 0.20| 0.26| 1.0 || 0.31|-.04
|========|=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|=====|=====|=====||=====|====
|Int|  8 | *** | *** | *** | *** || *** | *** | *** | *** || 1.0 |-.07
|ere|----|-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|-----|-----|-----||-----|----
|st | 24 | *** | *** | *** | *** || *** | *** | *** | *** ||-0.07| 1.0
=======================================================================

                                    -37-
As can be seen in tables 3 and 4, there is more differentiation between those
subgroups in the free scaling than in the Q-SORT - as in Tables no.8 and no.9
- which show the correlations between the subgroups and the dimensions of the
scaling analysis.

The validity of happiness
The highest correlations (of the free grading - task 1) of items 1, 9, 17, are
those that are between them; the next higher ones are with the four items of
surprise and item 8 of interest; those of item 25 is like the others except
its high correlation of 0.60 with item 26 of surprise. In the Q-SORT procedure
the three highest correlations of the happiness items are those that are among
themselves. It seems that this subgroup has a relatively high validity.

The validity of surprise
In task 1, the highest three correlations of items 10 and 18 are with items of
surprise; for item 2 those three include a correlation with item 1 of
happiness and only the fourth is with item 26 of surprise; in item 26 the two
highest correlations are with items of happiness and only afterwards  those of
surprise. In the Q-Sort task the findings are nearly the same.
These findings suggest that the validity of the surprise items is not very
high. It seems that item 26 is a mixture of happiness and surprise - more
happiness than surprise. It might be that all the items of this sub group are
mixtures of surprise with the content of the items of the sub group of
happiness.

The validity of interest
This subgroup consists of two items only - no. 8 and no. 24. In task 1 the
eight highest correlations of item 8 are with the items of happiness and
surprise (only then with item 24). For item 24 the highest six are with two
items of surprise, and with items of shame, sadness, distress, and anger - one
of each subgroup. Only the seventh is with item 8 of its sub group. In the
Q-Sort procedure the correlation between item 8 and 24 is not significant
(r=-0.07). It seems that the content validity of this subgroup is very small,
if it exists at all. The content of item no. 24 seems to be the most deviant.

                                   -38-
The validity of the Four negative basic emotions
The basic list of this study  consists of the above three positive emotions
and the four negative ones - namely: fear, anger, disgust, and sadness. A
strong tendency of the subjects to deny the negative emotions caused the
concentration of the scores of the items of those four sub groups at the lower
side of the grading-scale and relatively very high correlations among the 15
items of those subgroups. Therefore, the contribution of the data of the first
task to the examination of the content validity of those subgroups, is small.

Table 5 of the free grading (task 1) and Table 6 (of the Q-Sort) that follow,
contain the matrices of correlations of the 15 items of those sub groups and
the two items of distress (included for control). The majority of those items
were graded by about 75% of the subjects with the lowest grade they chose to
use (1 or 2).
              ***********Tables No. 5 and 6 about here********
The effect of "the-end-of-the-scale" of task 1 decreases to alarge extent
the value of the data of this task - for those subgroups of artificial facial
expressions of basic emotions.

The validity of fear
In the Q-Sort (table 6) the highest correlations of the items of fear are
between themselves, except one which is with item 4 of anger which is
apparently a mixture of fear and anger. Those findings indicate that this
subgroup has good content validity.

                                -39-
Table No. 5: Matrix of correlations  of the items of the subgroups fear,
anger, disgust, sadness and distress -  of the free gradings.
-----------------------------**-------------------**--------------------
|Subgroup|       Fear        ||       Anger       ||      Disgust      |
|--------|-------------------||-------------------||-------------------|
|Item No.| 3  | 14 | 19 | 31 || 4  | 12 | 20 | 28 || 5  | 15 | 21 | 32 |
|--------|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| F |  3 |1.0 |0.53|0.59|0.61||0.75|0.53|0.53|0.54||0.54|0.44|0.54|0.44|
| e |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| a | 14 |0.53|1.0 |0.63|0.61||0.55|0.51|0.57|0.56||0.40|0.54|0.57|0.61|
| r |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 19 |0.59|0.63|1.0 |0.60||0.62|0.55|0.76|0.66||0.55|0.44|0.64|0.44|
|   |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 31 |0.61|0.61|0.60|1.0 ||0.56|0.54|0.57|0.62||0.46|0.40|0.54|0.45|
|========|====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====|
| A |  4 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |0.63|0.57|0.59||0.62|0.41|0.54|0.42|
| n |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| g | 12 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.63|1.0 |0.63|0.65||0.59|0.43|0.62|0.33|
| e |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| r | 20 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.57|0.63|1.0 |0.65||0.55|0.49|0.70|0.36|
|   |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 28 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.59|0.65|0.65|1.0 ||0.48|0.41|0.59|0.41|
|========|====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====|
| D |  5 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |0.39|0.62|0.32|
| i |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| s | 15 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.39|1.0 |0.53|0.35|
| g |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| u | 21 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.62|0.53|1.0 |0.59|
| s |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| t | 32 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.32|0.35|0.59|1.0 |
|=======================================================================
| S |  6 |0.40|0.42|0.48|0.44||0.44|0.35|0.45|0.43||0.48|0.26|0.42|0.37|
| a |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| d | 22 |0.50|0.46|0.55|0.42||0.59|0.54|0.58|0.48||0.50|0.40|0.53|0.46|
| ne|----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| ss| 27 |0.33|0.38|0.46|0.38||0.42|0.33|0.42|0.46||0.36|0.30|0.38|0.37|
|=======================================================================
|dis| 11 |0.59|0.51|0.57|0.54||0.53|0.50|0.59|0.51||0.48|0.50|0.53|0.39|
|tre|----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|ss | 30 |0.55|0.55|0.58|0.68||0.58|0.47|0.54|0.55||0.43|0.41|0.52|0.48|
========================================================================
---------**--------------**---------*
|Subgroup|| Sadness      ||Distress |
|--------||--------------||----|----|              -------**-------------
|Item No.|| 6  | 22 | 27 || 11 | 30 |              |Subgroup|| Distress |
|--------||----|----|----||----|----|              |--------||----------|
| S |  6 ||1.0 |0.57|0.49||0.53|0.48|              |Item No.||  11 | 30 |
| a |----||----|----|----||----|----|              |--------||-----|----|
| d | 22 ||0.57|1.0 |0.41||0.52|0.56|              |Dis| 11 || 1.0 |0.44|
| ne| ---||----|----|----||----|----|              |tre|----||-----|----|
| ss| 27 ||0.49|0.41|1.0 ||0.35|0.51|              |ss | 30 || 0.44|1.0 |
=====================================              ======================

                                 -40-
Table No. 6: Matrix of correlations of the items of the  subgroups fear,
 anger, disgust, sadness and distress -  of the Q-Sort ratings.
-----------------------------**-------------------**-------------------*
|Subgroup|       Fear        ||       Anger       ||      Disgust      |
|--------|-------------------||-------------------||-------------------|
|Item No.| 3  | 14 | 19 | 31 || 4  | 12 | 20 | 28 || 5  | 15 | 21 | 32 |
|--------|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| F |  3 |1.0 |0.22|0.21|0.23||-.02|0.00|0.14|0.01||-.29|0.11|-.10|0.08|
| e |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| a | 14 |0.22|1.0 |0.17|0.22||0.31|-.01|0.16|-.01||-.14|-.11|-.06|0.00|
| r |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 19 |0.21|0.17|1.0 |0.24||0.13|0.10|-.21|0.10||-.09|-.05|-.19|0.09|
|   |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 31 |0.23|0.22|0.24|1.0 ||0.11|0.11|0.02|-.11||-.02|0.03|0.03|-.04|
|========|====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====|
| A |  4 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |0.10|0.24|0.19||-.31|-.10|-.05|-.02|
| n |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| g | 12 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.10|1.0 |0.14|0.28||0.28|-.09|0.24|-.03|
| e |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| r | 20 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.24|0.14|1.0 |0.18||-.02|-.15|-.20|-.06|
|   |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|   | 28 | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.19|0.28|0.18|1.0 ||0.21|-.10|0.17|-.19|
|========|====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====||====|====|====|====|
| D |  5 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |-.02|0.48|0.12|
| i |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| s | 15 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||-.02|1.0 |0.10|0.06|
| g |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| u | 21 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.48|0.10|1.0 |0.25|
| s |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| t | 32 | ** | ** | ** | ** || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.12|0.06|0.25|1.0 |
|=======================================================================
| S |  6 |-.12|0.13|0.13|0.12||-.08|-.01|-.07|-.10||-.10|-.05|-.04|0.01|
| a |----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| d | 22 |0.01|0.18|0.08|0.15||0.09|0.02|-.16|-.08||-.07|0.12|-.14|0.09|
| ne|----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
| ss| 27 |-.00|0.21|0.08|-.04||0.12|0.13|0.07|0.02||0.00|-.10|-.08|-.15|
|=======================================================================
|dis| 11 |0.07|-.12|0.20|0.13||0.08|-.05|0.06|0.16||0.01|-.03|0.00|0.05|
|tre|----|----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|----|----|
|ss | 30 |0.11|0.27|0.15|0.12||0.19|0.24|0.15|-.01||-.01|-.06|0.08|-.28|
=========================================================================
---------**--------------**---------*
|Subgroup|| Sadness      ||Distress |
|--------||--------------||----|----|              -------**-------------
|Item No.|| 6  | 22 | 27 || 11 | 30 |              |Subgroup|| Distress |
|--------||----|----|----||----|----|              |--------||----------|
| S |  6 ||1.0 |0.44|0.42||0.37|0.29|              |Item No.||  11 | 30 |
| a |----||----|----|----||----|----|              |--------||-----|----|
| d | 22 ||0.44|1.0 |0.38||0.24|0.28|              |Dis| 11 || 1.0 |0.16|
| ne| ---||----|----|----||----|----|              |tre|----||-----|----|
| ss| 27 ||0.42|0.41|1.0 ||0.22|0.07|              |ss | 30 || 0.16|1.0 |
=====================================              ======================

                                  -41-
The validity of anger
As seen in Table 6, item 28 is the most central to this subgroup; the
correlation of item 20 with one item of fear is higher then its correlation
with item 12 supposedly of this subgroup; the correlations of item 4 with
items of fear are higher than with item 12 of its own group; item 12 has
two high correlations with items of disgust that are higher than its
correlation with item 4 and 20.
It seems that item 20 and especially item 4 are mixtures of anger and fear. It
is also indicated that item 12 is a mixture of anger and disgust, when disgust
is the dominant part and item 20 is a mixture of anger (mainly) and disgust.

The validity of disgust
The correlations of the items of this subgroup show that item 21 is the most
loaded with this emotion; item 5 is a little less loaded with it; item 32 has
in it a mixture of fear and is somewhat marginal to this sub-group; item 15
functions as a mixture of various emotions to which the contribution of
disgust is small.
The correlations of this item with the artificial mixtures of emotions (1c of
materials) of Q-Sort, reveal that  only one  out of  seven  mixtures
containing disgust is significantly related to this item. Item 21 is in
significant correlation with all those seven (and not with the other 17), item
5 is in correlation with six of those seven; item 32 is in a significant
(positive) correlation with five  of those seven - the three that contain
surprise and the two that contain fear.

It can be concluded from the above findings that the content validity of this
subgroup is insufficient. The interpretation of the dimensions of the scaling
analysis will have to be related on the items 5 and 21 of this subgroup and on
item 12 (originally of the anger subgroup).

The validity of sadness
The three items of this subgroup are (mainly  according to the Q-Sort) of a
relatively homogeneous group. Those three are relatively highly  correlated
with item 14 (fear) and the two distress items.

                                    -42-
The validity of the two distress items
Izard (1971, 1977) presented items 11 and 27 as samples of the basic emotion
distress. But item 27 is taken by him from Ekman & Friesen (1975) where it is
presented as an item of the basic emotion sadness. According to them distress
is, in the main, a mixture of sadness and fear and item 30 is their example
for it. According to Table 5 and 6 it seems that the Ekman & Friesen version
is more accurate than that of Izard and sadness is found to be nearer the
concept of basic emotion than distress.

In conclusion of the test of the validity of the four negative basic emotions:
it seems that the validity of those subgroups is wanting (insufficient).
However, the findings about the relevant 17 items are clear enough, and that
is a sound enough base for the interpretation of dimensions content. It is not
clear yet whether methodological problems of this study or those of Izard and
Ekman & Friesen contributed the largest factor of deviations.

The validity of the sub-groups contempt and shame
Those two basic emotions (according to Izard, 1971, 1977) do not have enough
support in research (according to Ekman et. al., 1982). They were included in
the study for the purposes of control  and comparison.

The validity of contempt
This subgroup is not highly cohesive. In the first task the highest
correlation of item 7 is with item 14 - fear - r=0.31; for item 16 the highest  
is with fear no. 31 - r=0.38; for item 23 it is with anger no. 20 and with
distress no. 30 - both have r=0.55; that of item 33 is with shame no.29 -
r=0.37. Those correlations are higher than the inter-sub-group correlations
which are demonstrated in the following Table 7.

                                 -43-
Table No. 7: Matrix of correlation of the subgroups  contempt  and  shame
that were included for control and comparison purposes
*----------------------------------------**------------------------------*
|Procedure|     Free grading (task one)  ||    Q-Sort (task three)       |
-----------------------------------------||-------------------**---------|
|Subgroup |      Contempt     ||  Shame  ||      Contempt     ||  Shame  |
|---------|-------------------||---------||-------------------||---------|
|Item No. | 7  | 16 | 23 | 33 || 13 | 29 || 7  | 16 | 23 | 33 || 13 | 29 |
|---------|----|----|----|----||----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|
| C |  7  |1.0 |0.18|0.20|0.22||0.30|0.26||1.0 |0.17|0.10|0.03||0.20|0.15|
| o |-----|----|----|----|----||----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|
| n | 16  |0.18|1.0 |0.27|0.28||0.27|0.39||0.17|1.0 |0.12|0.01||0.11|0.28|
| t |-----|----|----|----|----||----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|
| e | 23  |0.20|0.27|1.0 |0.24||0.18|0.24||0.10|0.12|1.0 |0.20||0.15|0.05|
| m |-----|----|----|----|----||----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|
| pt| 33  |0.22|0.28|0.24|1.0 ||0.29|0.37||0.03|0.01|0.20|1.0 ||0.12|-.05|
|=========|====|====|====|====||====|====||====|====|====|====||====|====|
| S | 13  | ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |0.39|| ** | ** | ** | ** ||1.0 |0.37|
| ha|-----|----|----|----|----||----|----||----|----|----|----||----|----|
| me| 29  | ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.39|1.0 || ** | ** | ** | ** ||0.37|1.0 |
*========================================**==============================*

In the Q-Sort task: items 7 and 16 (which are photographs of males) are
significantly correlated as a cluster and both have their highest  correlation
with shame items; item 23 and item 33 are photographs of females and represent
a cluster of their own.
The significant correlations of item 7 with artificial mixtures (materials 1c)
are with one of the three containing contempt (the other emotion of this
mixture is anger) and with one item which is supposed to be neutral; item 16
is correlated with two of the three mixtures containing contempt, with three
of the seven containing disgust and with three that contain anger; item 23 is
correlated with one mixture of contempt, three out of seven of disgust; item
33 is correlated with the two "neutral" items, with one of happiness + sadness
and one of happiness + contempt.
It seems that the contempt subgroup has a weak common denominator, that the
loadings of the items with it is not high, and that each of them is a mixture
with out any obvious content.

The validity of shame
The two items of this subgroup act as a cohesive cluster in both procedures.
The validity of the 24 artificial mixtures

                                   -44-
The 24 items of materials: 1/c, suffered in the first task from the same set
of response of the basic emotions - denial. Therefore, the examinations  of
the content validity of those items is mainly based on the Q-Sort task.

The two neutral items 1 and 14 (included for control on Ekman & Friesen (1975)
procedure of item creations show that they are not neutral.
Item 1 is correlated to the four happiness items, with one surprise item, with
one contempt item, with mixture 9 that includes in it happiness + surprise,
with mixture 13 of surprise + questioning and with mixture 22 of happiness +
contempt.
Item 14 is positively correlated with both shame items (the higher r=0.43),
with one item of contempt, and with one item of interest.  It was also
positively correlated with mixtures no. 5 and no. 19 - ambiguous content of a
slight anger, determination seriousness; and no. 1 - neutral.
Those correlations indicate that Ekman & Friesen's (1975) technique for
creating artificial facial expression is not flawless. It seems that it cannot
prevent the contribution of the models' mood and chronic facial expressions to
the manipulated-artificial facial expression.

The six items that include happiness are also inconsistent. Four are
correlated to all four happiness items (the higher is r=0.60), but the other
two have too low correlations with the happiness items. Those two are
negatively correlated with many items of facial expression of emotion - the
higher is r=-0.21 p<0.002 (two tail).
The negative correlations of the above two indicate that the study includes
more emotional contents than the intended 9 basic emotions.

The four items that include surprise have 14 correlations with the four
surprise items - only one is not significantly positive.

                                -45-
The six items that include anger are not of the same quality. Only one item is
correlated with all four items of anger. Three are correlated with three items
of anger and two are significantly correlated to none of them.

The five items that include disgust are correlated to the two main items of
disgust (no. 5 and no. 21). Four of them are correlated with item no. 12 of
the anger subgroup which was found to be a mixture of disgust and anger. Only
one of the five mixtures is correlated to disgust item no. 23 which is
marginal to the disgust basic emotion.

The four items that include sadness are not of the same quality. Two of them
are correlated with the four sadness and the two distress items, one of the
mixtures is correlated with three sadness items and one of distress mixture
no. 24 has only one low correlation with them (r=0.13) which is with one of
the distress items.

The three items that include contempt have low correlations with the items of
the basic emotion contempt. Only one mixture is correlated to three items of
contempt.

In conclusion to the examinations of the validity of items 1a, 1b, 1c
The content validity of the artificial facial expressions of emotion was found
wanting and not of the same quality for all basic emotion or mixtures of
those. It seems that the reliance on these items is feasible but it must be
done cautiously. The interpretation of the meaning of the dimensions and the
directions of basic emotion in the multidimensional scaling space will have to
be based on the convergence of various findings.


The directions of the basic emotions in their multidimensional -scaling space
The main hypothesis of the study, dealing with facial expressions of emotion
claims that the content of the main dimensions of discrimination among
emotions matches the content of the seven basic emotions that comprise the
primary list of this study.

                                     -46-
In order to examine this, the 48 items that are unmanipulated facial
expressions - materials: 1a - were analyzed by multidimensional scaling. This
was done by a version of the S.S.A.P.-I of the Guttman-Lingoes series
(Lingoes, 1973) as adapted by Shalif, et. al. (1981). The basic procedure of
this adaptation is based on the available version of the S.S.A.-I of the same
source. When using it, one can include in the analysis up to 100 items, reach
up to the ten-dimensional level and compute subjects` dimensional scores of a
relatively unlimited number of subjects.

The coefficients of alienations of the S.S.A.I analyses
The result of the multidimensional analyses of the 48 items of material:1a
is as follows: for  two dimensions - the coefficient of alienation is
0.222; for three dimensions - 0.172; for four - 0.123; for five - 0.103; for
six - 0.082; for seven - 0.075; for eight - 0.061; for nine - 0.058; for ten
dimensions - 0.049.
The size of the second dimension is about 70% of the first dimension; the
tenth dimension is about 80% of the ninth and 40% of the first.

Analysis of artificial data
An analysis of artificial data was done in order to asses the relations
between relative sizes of the dimensions and coefficients of alienations, and
the relative weight of the basic variables of the domain.
The simulation was done as follows: first - each of 48 "items" was assigned  a
point in multidimensional space using the Random procedure of the Pascal
programing language; second  - the matrix of  distances was computed to the
above configuration of points; third - the derived matrix was analyzed by the
S.S.A.-I.

Four variables were changed systematically: a) the number of dimensions of the
initial configuration of the 48 "items"; b) the relative sizes of the
dimensions; c) the size of a random factor added to the distances of the
matrix of distances among the "items"; d) the number of dimensions of the
S.S.A.-I analysis.

                                    -47-
The simulation that was found the nearest to the real data of this study is
one of a ten dimensional configuration. In it the relative size of the  second
 dimension  is 70%  of the  first  one.  Each  of the following dimensions is
90% of the one before it. To each  distance of the matrix of the distances
among the "items" was added a random number whose size was between zero and a
25% of that distance. Table 8 contains the coefficients of alienations of the
multidimensional analyses of the real data, the above simulation and the
result of that simulation which does not contain in it the added random factor.

Table No. 8: The coefficients of alienations of the S.S.A.-I analyses of real
data and two simulations - I. with added random size to the matrix; II. -
without it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Number of the  |  coefficients of  alienations  of  the  three  versions  |
|dimensions of  |----------------------------------------------------------|
|the  analysis  |real data|I. with added random size|II. without added size|
|---------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|       2       |  0.222  |         0.227           |         0.21         |
|       3       |  0.172  |         0.16            |         0.11         |
|       4       |  0.123  |         0.12            |         0.082        |
|       5       |  0.103  |         0.09            |         0.041        |
|       6       |  0.082  |         0.078           |                      |
|       7       |  0.075  |         0.057           |                      |
|       8       |  0.061  |                         |                      |
|       9       |  0.058  |                         |                      |
|      10       |  0.049  |         0.047           |         0.01         |
===========================================================================|

It can be concluded that the relation between the change in coefficient of
alienation and the value of added dimensions is not linear. It is clear that
the coefficient of alienation is not a reliable measure in the determination
of the number of dimensions of the studied domain or their relative weight.

The subjects' dimensional scores for the ten dimensional analysis
The subjects' dimensional scores were computed according to the procedure that
appears in the chapter on methods, which can be summarized as follows: For
each subject, the row of his 48 scores of the unmanipulated 48 facial
expressions was multiplied by the matrix of the dimensional coordinates of the
ten dimensional S.S.A.-I analysis of those 48 items. (In that matrix there are
48 rows and 10 columns.) The result of this multiplication - for each subject
- is a row of 10 scores - one score for each dimension.

                                    -48-
The matrix of correlation of the ten dimensional scores
Among the 45 (non redundant) correlations of that matrix, none is significant.
(The highest, is of r=-0.1167, p<0.9, two-tail.) This result indicates that
the contents represented by the dimensions of the mathematical analysis - the
dimensions of discrimination between the emotions of daily life are relatively
independent.

The correlations between the 48 items and the ten dimensional scores
These correlations can determine the measure in which each dimension
represents a variable that is common to many items or a content that is unique
to one or two items. They may help to identify items that are not of the same
domain of that the majority of the items are.
Results show that the significance (two-tail) of 30 of the 48 correlations
with the first dimension is p<.002 (.002<p<.02 for additional four items); for
the second dimension there are 23 of p<.002 (and 5 of p<.02); for the third
there are 18 of p<.002 (and 5 of p<.02); for the fourth there are 11 (and 4);
for the fifth -  11 (and 5); for the sixth - 7 (and 8); for the seventh - 8
(and 9); for the eighth - 7 (and seven) for the ninth 10 (and 6); and for the
tenth 8 (and 4). The highest correlation for the first dimension is 0.67, for
the tenth - 0.37.
These results and the two dimensional projection maps of the items (for each
dimension against each of the others) reveal a relatively homogeneous
dispersion of the items in the ten dimensional S.S.A.-I analysis. The
combination of the two kinds of finding, indicates that the main content of
all the 48 items and all the ten dimensions are of the same emotional domain.

                                     -49-
The correlations between the dimensions and the items of basic emotion
The correlations between these items and the ten dimensions are the most
important means for the objective and non verbal interpretation of the content
of dimensions of discrimination among the emotions of daily life. These items
were scored twice - once on the first task, each on its own, and the second
time - on the third task, by Q-Sort in which they were divided into 4 groups.

For the first task - the "free grading": 8 items' scores have correlations
with the first dimensions of the S.S.A.-I analysis that reach the significance
of p<.002, two-tail (the higher r=0.60) additional 9 have the significance of
.002<p<.02; for the second dimension 3 are of higher significance and 4 of
lower; for the third - 10 high and 5 low; for the fourth - only 4 of the lower
significance; for the fifth - one high and two low; for the sixth, seventh and
tenth dimensions there is no correlation of p<.02; the eighth and ninth have
one of p<.02 each.
As a whole, 57 of the 330 correlations are of p<.02 (less than 7 are expected
by chance alone); 31 of these are of p<.002 (when by chance only 0.7 - less
then one such high correlation is expected);

For the Q-Sort procedure 11 items' scores have correlations with the first
dimensions that reach the significance of p<.002, two-tail (the higher r=0.53)
additional 7 have the significance of p>.02; for the second dimension only one
reaches the significance of p<.02; for the third - one is high and 4 are low;
for the fourth there are only 4 of the lower significance; for the fifth only
a low one; for the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth dimensions there is no
correlation of p<.02; the tenth dimension has three correlations with
significance of p<.02 each.
As a whole, 32 of the 330 correlations are of p<.02 (when by chance less then
7 are expected); 12 of these are of p<.002 (less than one is expected by
chance).

                                   -50-
From the above correlations it can be concluded that the Q-Sort procedure is
not a simple retest of the first task. It can also be concluded that the ten
dimensions include in them contents that are not covered by the 7 basic
emotions of the main list of this study or by the additional contempt, shame
and distress items.

The correlations between the dimensions and the 24 artificial mixtures of
basic emotion
The correlations between those items (materials: 1c) and the ten dimensions
are very similar to those of the 33 items of basic emotions. For the free
gradings 36 are of p<.02 and 21 of them are of the p<.002 level. For the
Q-Sort - 20 are of p<.02 and 8 of them are of the p<.002 level. These mixtures
were originally intended to be of a narrower spectrum of emotions than the 33
items of the basic emotions (materials: 1b). However the distribution of their
correlations with the ten dimensions are very similar to that of the 33 items
of 1/b.

The correlations between the 10 dimensions and the 148 words
126 of the words of materials: 2 (the second task) are correlated to the
subjects' scores for the ten dimensions of the unmanipulated facial
expressions of emotion (mixed expressions of daily life) - p<.02, two-tail
(only 3 are expected by chance). These correlations are divided unevenly)
among each of the ten dimensions. 89 words are significantly correlated to the
first dimension - p<.02, two-tail (65 of them are of p<.002). For the second
dimension 23 are of p<.02 and 27 are of p<.002). For the third there are 10 of
the p<.02; for the fourth 10 of p<.02 and one of p<.002; for the fifth 14 of
p<.02 and 4 of p<.002;  for the sixth - 4 of p<.02; for the seventh - 3 of
p<0.2 (as is expected by chance alone); for the eighth 4 are of p<0.02 and one
of p<.002; for the ninth, 6 are of p<.02 and one of p<.002; for the tenth
dimension there are only 4 correlations of p<.02 (two-tail).

                                    -51-
Those correlations seem to stress three main points: first, the words as used
in this study are very significantly related to the concrete emotional
contents of daily life; secondly, the concrete emotional contents of the words
are mainly related to the first five of the concrete emotional dimensions;
thirdly, the difference between the distribution of the correlations of the
words and the distribution of those of the artificial basic emotions and
mixtures of them, indicates that the two kinds of items (or at least the two
kinds of sampling of this study) sample the emotional domain in different ways.
The narrower dispersal of the words is more noteworthy as the words were
intended to be of an unrestricted wide spectrum while the above
artificial-facial-expressions' items were of a restricted list of contents.

The correlations between the dimension scores and those of the 9 subgroups of
basic emotions
The correlations between the subgroup scores and the dimension scores are the
basic means for interpreting the relations between the basic emotion brain
structures and the dimensions of discrimination among the emotions of daily
life. Though the content validity of the items and the subgroups was found to
be wanting, they are generally a sound enough base for the interpretation of
the contents of the dimensions and for the examination of the hypothesis of
this study.
In the following Tables 9 and 10, there appear the correlations between the
dimensions of the mathematical solution of the S.S.A.-I analysis of the 48
unmanipulated facial expressions of emotions  (materials: 1a of the first task
of free grading)  and the subgroup scores of the basic emotions (materials:
1b). Table 9 is for the free-grading (task 1) of the items of the 9 subgroups
and Table 10 is for the Q-Sort procedure of those items.


                                  -52-
Table No. 9: The correlations between the 9 subgroups of basic emotions  of
the free grading (task 1) and the dimensions of  the  S.S.A.-I  analysis of
the 48 unmanipulated facial expressions of mixed emotions (of task 1)
   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
   |Dimension|  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |
   |Emotion\ |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |      |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Happiness|0.63!|0.13 |-.05 |0.10 |0.07 |-.07 |0.16+|0.03 |0.12 |-.03  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Surprise |0.25!|0.09 |-.11 |0.06 |0.17*|-.03 |0.06 |-.16+|-.02 |0.02  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Interest |0.16*|0.24!|-.07 |0.01 |0.14+|-.02 |0.02 |0.07 |0.07 |0.04  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Fear     |-.22!|-.05 |-.30!|0.03 |0.11 |-.00 |0.10 |-.08 |-.16+|-.05  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Anger    |-.27!|-.01 |-.25!|0.13 |0.11 |-.03 |0.01 |-.11 |-.16*|-.04  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Disgust  |-.14+|-.00 |-.29!|0.04 |0.12 |0.06 |0.05 |-.07 |-.15+|-.02  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Sadness  |-.35!|-.02 |-.24!|-.01 |0.13 |0.11 |-.01 |-.06 |-.13 |-.07  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Contempt |-.16+|0.22!|-.12 |-.00 |0.07 |-.03 |-.00 |-.06 |-.06 |-.10  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Shame    |-.27!|0.25!|0.02 |-.12 |0.04 |0.03 |-.15+|0.04 |-.05 |0.01  |
   |======================================================================*
+ .02<p<.05; * .0021<p<.02; ! p<.002; all two-tail. (r=0.116 p=.05; one tail

Table No. 10: The correlations between the 9 subgroups of basic emotions of
the Q-Sort (task 3) and the  dimensions of  the  S.S.A.-I  analysis  of the
48 unmanipulated facial expressions of mixed emotions (of task 1)
   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
   |Dimension|  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |
   |Emotion\ |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |      |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Happiness|0.56!|-.05 |0.04 |0.10 |-.03 |-.07 |0.16+|0.02 |0.17*|0.01  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Surprise |0.31!|-.02 |0.05 |0.05 |0.01 |-.08 |0.07 |-.10 |0.11 |0.05  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Interest |0.07 |-.02 |0.08 |-.01 |-.05 |-.01 |0.01 |-.04 |0.04 |0.20* |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Fear     |-.15+|-.11 |-.19!|-.15+|-.04 |0.13 |0.04 |-.10 |-.07 |-.14+ |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Anger    |-.23!|0.03 |-.11 |0.22!|0.07 |-.09 |0.01 |-.00 |-.01 |0.02  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Disgust  |0.03 |-.11 |-.08 |0.04 |0.05 |-.02 |-.03 |0.03 |-.09 |0.10  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Sadness  |-.42!|-.04 |-.04 |-.06 |0.01 |0.06 |-.08 |0.07 |-.13 |0.02  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Contempt |-.06 |0.17*|0.11 |-.16*|-.13 |0.01 |-.03 |0.04 |0.05 |-.08  |
   |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|
   |Shame    |-.33!|0.11 |0.14 |-.04 |-.10 |0.08 |-.17*|0.11 |-.05 |-.02  |
   |=======================================================================
+ .02<p<.05; * .0021<p<.02; ! p<.002; all two-tail. r=0.116 p=.05 one tail.

                                     -53-
The comparison of Table 9 with Table 10 reveals, once again, effects that are
noted at the beginning of the chapter where subgroup validity was examined.
It can be seen that surprise and interest of the first task were highly
related to the dimensions of discrimination among emotion (three significant
correlations) and poorly so in the Q-Sort task. For the interest subgroup of
the Q-Sort procedure there is no dimension with which both items are
correlated.

For the four negative emotions of the basic list - fear, anger, disgust, and
sadness, there are only small differentiations in the first task. In Table 9
of that task, one can see that they have very similar correlations with the
first, third, fifth and ninth dimensions.
In Table 10 of the Q-Sort task, one can see that the differentiation among the
relatively more valid subgroups - fear, anger and sadness - is sharper. The
correlation of the disgust subgroup which is less valid, becomes insignificant.

The two subgroups of contempt and shame that were included for control
purposes are also more differentiated in the Q-Sort procedure. Shame has
nearly the same pattern with the exception of the second dimension which is
more clearly the "contempt dimension" on the Q-Sort.

Contempt itself, changes its pattern greatly on the first, third, fourth and
fifth dimensions. Only its correlation with the second dimension is stable.
These findings converge with the nonsignificant correlation between the scores
of the two procedures. They contribute to the conclusion that the common
denominator of the scores of the two procedures of this subgroup, - which keep
it correlated to the second dimension - is not contempt.
The difference between the patterns of the correlations of the subgroup
scores of the two procedures, and dimensional scores (of the 48 1a items)
highlights the fact that the subjects changed the parameters of their
discrimination-activity when the task changed.

                                      -54-
At this level of analysis it is too early to assess the relative contribution
of the various factors which cause this. It may be that two main factors were
involved: The first is the change in the relative contribution of various
parts of the face to the assessment. (As Ekman & Friesen, 1975, have shown -
 the willful control of the various parts of the face is not of the same level
of success.) The second is a Phenomena which Hirschberg (1980) pointed out.
She found in her study that subjects change the dimensions of discrimination
as the task changed.

Another uncontrolled variable which contributed to the difference between the
two procedures is subjects' attitudes: some subjects responded with strong
emotional distress or relief to the change from free grading to Q-Sort.
It is noticeable that there is only a small measure of exclusiveness with
regard to the relations of the subgroups and the dimensions of the S.S.A.-I
analysis of the 48 mixed expressions.
Ideally for the theory, each subgroup should be correlated to a dimension of
its own. But due to the characteristics of the mathematical solutions and
their restrictions this seldom happens. The most restricting obstacle is that
till now, it is theoretically possible to achieve but hard to attain,
systematic rotations of the axes (dimensions) of the mathematical
multidimensional model. More problems stem from the relatively low content
validity of some of the subgroups which also contributes its share to the
blurring of the results. However, the integration of the results of the two
procedures is enlightening and enables us to examine the hypothesis of this
study.

The directions of the emotions in the space of the S.S.A.-I solution
When one is tracing the directions in the mathematical multidimensional model
of the S.S.A.-I analysis, not in the usual way of visually scanning the
scatter of the items but in the new adaptation of the S.S.A.P.-I, one is
mainly relying on correlations. The correlations are those that are between
subjects' dimensional scores and subjects' scores for the relevant items and
variables included in the study but not in the S.S.A.-I analysis.

                                  -55-
For instance, if one is examining the directions of happiness and sadness
according to Table 10, it can be seen that scores of three dimensions are
significantly related to the happiness or the sadness subgroups of basic
emotions -  namely the first, the seventh and the ninth. As a result of this
examination it can be concluded that the direction of the two subgroups'
content, in the ten dimensional space-model, can be traced as a bipolar vector
which may be contained in the three dimensional (cube) sub-space of the first,
the seventh and the ninth.

Plate No. 1: The direction of happiness and sadness in the plane of first and
ninth dimensions.
                              first dimension
              happiness - r=+0.56 ^   *H
                                  |   *a
                                  |  *p
                                  | *p
                                  | *i
                                  |*n
                                 S*e              happiness - r=+0.16
                 ----------------a*s--------------> ninth dimension
sadness - r=-0.13                d*s
                                n*|
                               e* |
                               s* |
                              s*  |
                sadness - r=-0.42 |

    dimension.

A two dimensional projection of that cube - the projection of the first
dimension against the ninth dimension is shown in the above Plate. In it, the
equivalent bipolar vector is the sum of the two one-dimensional bi-polar
vectors which represent the subgroups' contradictory correlations with these
two dimensions.
The directions of the subgroups which are delineated below are according to
the pattern of the correlations of Tables 9 and 10 (with the help of the
correlations of the items themselves when needed).

                                  -56-
The directions of the happiness is mainly along the first dimension (which is
mainly the happiness-sadness dimension) and to a lesser extent with the
seventh and the ninth.

The directions of surprise is along the first, the fifth (which is mainly the
surprise dimension) and the eighth dimensions and it looses its uniqueness in
the Q-Sort task.

The directions of interest - which seems to be of very low content validity -
is along the second dimension (the only dimension with which both groups'
items are correlated - and only in task 1). The high significance correlation
of this subgroup-score of the Q-Sort, with the tenth dimension is due to item
24 which seems to be loaded with the content of disgust.

The directions of fear is most prominent on the third dimension (the fear
dimension) and with a lesser measure along the first dimension (opposite that
of happiness) and the fourth dimension (opposite that of anger - as is often
found in other studies).

The directions of anger is along the first dimension (opposite to happiness
and along the fourth dimension (which is the anger dimension).

The directions of disgust which has a low content validity is not based on the
subgroup score. It is based on the items which were found to be highly loaded
with the content of disgust. Its direction is mainly along the tenth dimension
(the disgust dimension).

The directions of sadness is mainly along the first dimension - in the
opposite direction of happiness. Though it has a very clear direction (second
only to happiness) it does not have an independent direction of its own.

The directions of contempt is along the second dimension - a direction of its
own (the pro-social dimension of interest and compassion) and along the fourth
dimension - in the opposite direction of anger, which is not logical if the
content of this subgroup is really contemptuous.

                                -57-
The direction of shame is along the first dimension - in the direction of
sadness and in the opposite direction of happiness and along the seventh
dimension (the shame dimension) - here too in the opposite direction of the
happiness subgroup.

Summing up, the above results give a substantial support for hypothesis one.
It was found that all seven basic emotions of the study (and the two
additional ones) are related to the dimensions used by the subjects when they
discriminated between the emotions of daily life. The main contradiction
between the results and the theory of this study is that sadness is not an
independent variable but an opposite one to the happiness.

The differences between the directions of the 9 subgroups in the model
The best measure of the relative independence between the subgroups would be
the computation of the angles between their directions in a model which is
beyond our resources. The second best is the testing of the significance of
the differences between the correlations of the subgroups and the dimensions
of the S.S.A.-I analysis.

The following table 10 contains the essentials of this examination. The upper
right- hand triangle is of the first task free gradings and the lower
left-hand triangle is of the Q-Sort procedure of the third task. In it, one
can see that all pairs of subgroups differ significantly. But, we cannot be
sure about the measure in which they are independent of each other when all
ten correlations are considered simultaneously, as there is still not
available a suitable test for this purpose.
    *********************Table 11 about here*********************

The significance of the differences demonstrated in Table No.11
In an array of coefficients of correlations as in other multivaraete tests,
the first step is the test for all the results simultaneously. In the matrix
of correlations between the 9 subgroups of basic emotions and the 10
dimensions of the 48 items of mixed and unmanipulated expressions of each
procedure there are 90 coefficients.

                                      -58-
Table No. 11: The difference between subgroups' correlations in task 1 and  3
with the dimensions (and pairs of them) of the 48 items of materials: 1/a  of
task 1*. The higher triangle is for task 1, the lower is for task 3.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Sub  *Happi  *Sur    *Inte   * Fear  * Anger *Disgust*Sadness*Con    * Shame
group*   ness*  prise*   rest*       *       *       *       *  tempt*
 Ha  *  D1;D7* D1=.38* D1=.47* D1=.85* D1=.91* D1=.78* D1=.98* D1=.79* D1=.91
 pp  *  *    * 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001
 in  * D1 *  *D5+8=17*D2+5=13*D3+9=44*D3+9=41*D3+9=43* D3=.19* D2=.10* D7=.31
 ess * D7;D9 * 0.0047* 0.0384* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0287* 0.0668*  0.001
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Su  * D1=.25*  D1;D5* D8=.24* D1=.47* D1=.53* D1=.40* D1=.60* D1=.41* D1=.53
 rp  * 0.0001*  *  D8* 0.0003* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001
 ri  *D5+8=13*    *  * D2=.14*D3+9=23*D3+9=23*D3+9=22*       * D2=.13*D7+8=32
 se  * 0.0516*D1     * 0.0192* 0.0005* 0.0047* 0.0013*       * 0.0446* 0.0002
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I   * D1=.50* D1=.25*  D1;D2* D3=.27* D4=.22*       * D1=.49* D2=.20* D1=.39
 n   * 0.0001* 0.0026* *   D5* 0.0048* 0.0132* see   * 0.0001* 0.0301* 0.0001
 t   *D10=.19*D10=.15*     * *D10=.34*D10=.18* discu *D10=.18*D2+3=22* D7=.17
 e   * 0.0212* 0.0526*see dis* 0.0005* 0.0392*  sion * 0.0392* 0.0179* 0.0495
 re  *       *       *cussion*       *       *       *       *D10=.28*D10=.22
 st  *       *       *    D10*       *       *       *       * 0.0030* 0.0188
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 F   * D1=.71* D3=.24* D1=.38*  D1;D3* D4=.10*  ***  * D1=.13* D2=.27*D2+7=41
 e   * 0.0001* 0.0080* 0.0001*  *  D9* 0.0069*       * 0.0087* 0.0001* 0.0001
 a   * D3=.23*       * D2=.28*    *  *       *       *       *D3+9=20*D3+9=29
 r   * 0.0179*       * 0.0003*       *       *  ***  *       * 0.0007* 0.0001
     *4+10=31*       *D3+9=31*D1;D3  *       *       *       *       *
     * 0.0021*       * 0.0001*D4;D10 *       *       *       *       *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 A   * D1=.79* D4=.17* D1=.44* D4=.36*  D1;D3* D1=.13*  ***  * D2=.24*D2+7=28
 n   * 0.0001* 0.0548* 0.0001* 0.0001*     D9* 0.0049*   *   * 0.0001* 0.0002
 g   *       *       * D2=.25*       *  *    *       *   *   * D3=.12*D3+9=26
 e   *       *       * 0.0019*       *    *  *       *   *   * 0.0418* 0.0006
 r   *       *       *D3+9=27*       *       *       *   *   *       *
     *       *       * 0.0006*       *D1;D4  *       *  ***  *       *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 D   * D1=.54* D1=.29* D1=.31*D10=.24* D4=.18*  D1;D3* D1=.21* D2=.23* D1=.13
 i   * 0.0001* 0.0026* 0.0001* 0.0129* 0.0446*  *  D9* 0.0001* 0.0002* 0.0485
 s   *       *(D9=.21* D2=.24*D10+D4=*       *    *  *       *D3+9=19* D2=.26
 g   *       *0.0294)* 0.0019*   0.31*       * see   *       * 0.0016* 0.0005
 u   *       *       *D3+9=30* 0.0018*       * discus*       *       *D3+9=28
 st  *       *       * 0.0001*       *       *   sion*       *       * 0.0001
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 S   * D1=.98* D1=.73* D1=.51* D1=.27* D1=.19* D1=.44*  D1;D3* D1=.19*D2+7=31
 a   * 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0009* 0.0179* 0.0001*       * 0.0014* 0.0001
 d   * D9=.30*       * D2=.25*D3+4=16* D4=.28*       * *     * D2=.24* D3=.26
 n   * 0.0069*       * 0.0013* 0.0401* 0.0024*       *    *  * 0.0002* 0.0003
 e   *       *       * D3=.17*       *       *       *       *D3+9=14*
 ss  *       *       * 0.0256*       *       *       *D1     * 0.0212*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 C   * D1=.62* D1=.37* D1=.32* D2=.28* D4=.38* D2=.28* D1=.36*  D1;D2* D1=.12
 o   * 0.0001* 0.0003* 0.0001* 0.0044* 0.0001* 0.0016* 0.0001*       * 0.0427
 n   * D2=.23* D2=.19*       * D3=.30* D2=.14* D4=.20* D2=.21*  *    * D7=.14
 t   * 0.0207* 0.0446*       * 0.0024* 0.0823* 0.0188* 0.0192*    *  * 0.0217
 em  *D2+4=35*D2+4=29*       *D2+3=43*D2+4=45*D2+4=36*D2+4=18*       *D1+7=15
 pt  * 0.0006* 0.0052*       * 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0322*D2;D4  * 0.0113
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 S   * D1=.89* D1=.64* D1=.44* D3=.33* D4=.25* D1=.35*(D2=.15* D1=.27* D1;D2
 h   * 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0001* 0.0014* 0.0045* 0.0002* p<.05)* 0.0004*     D7
 a   * D7=.33* D7=.24* D5=.11* D7=.21* D7=.18* D7=.14*(D3=.18* D7=.14* *
 m   * 0.0021* 0.0202* 0.1020* 0.0287* 0.0307* 0.0985* p<.05)* 0.0427*     *
 e   *D7+9=41*       * D7=.16*D3+7=41*       *D2+3=31*(nonsig* D4=.13*
     * 0.0002*       * 0.0244* 0.0001*       * 0.0013* corr.)* 0.0643*D1;D7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* According to the Hotelling test for the difference between coefficients of
  correlations that are correlated (from Guilford, 1965, p190-191) as
  the majority of the subgroups' scores are correlated (see Table 2).
**For each difference one line for the size and one for the significance.

                                     -59-
In the first task of free grading, 23 of them are of the two-tail significance
of .05 (or higher), 4.5 are expected by chance alone. The significance of this
finding is of p<0.00001. In the third task of  Q-Sort there are 16 significant
correlations and the significance of these findings is of p<0.00032.
The significance of the differences between the correlations of the subjects
was assessed by the Hotelling test for correlated coefficients of correlations
because the majority of the subgroups' scores are correlated (see Table 2).
Even when two correlations are significantly different mathematically, there
is still a possibility that the subgroups are in the same direction of the
multidimensional space of the mathematical solution of the S.S.A.-I. This can
happen when the two subgroups have the same multidimensional direction (and
emotional content) and differ only in the loading of the emotional content of
the items due to technical problems. Due of this and the lack of a suitable
test for the simultaneous testing of the ten dimensional differences between
the correlations of each pair of subgroups - the following findings are a
tentative first approximation.

The tests for the significance of the differences between subgroups were
conducted only when at least one of the subgroups was significantly correlated
with the subjects' score for that dimension.

In the free grading task there are 144 one-dimensional differences (out of
360) where at least one subgroup is significantly correlated to that
dimension, as well as 152 two-dimensional differences (out of 1620) in which
each of the dimensions of the pair is correlated to at least one of a pair of
subgroups. 47 of the above 144 one dimensional differences are significant
(combined probability of p<.0...(twenty zeros)015). Among the 152
two-dimensional differences, there were tested only those 98 in which none of
the one-dimensional differences (between the two subgroups) reached p<001 in
any of the relevant two dimensions (as in those cases the contribution of the
two dimensional difference can not be of high value to us). 19 of the above 98
differences are significant and their combined probability is p<.0000165.

                                        -60-
Table 11 - the upper right-hand triangle - shows the 47 significant one
dimensional differences and the 19 two-dimensional ones. Only two of the 36
pairs of subgroups do not have even one significant difference. There are no
significant differences (in this task) between the correlations (and the
directions of the vectors that represent the subgroups in the multidimensional
model) between fear and disgust and between those of anger and sadness.

In the third task of the Q-Sort there are 16 significant correlations between
subgroups and dimensions (out of the 90 of the matrix) with combined
significance of p<0.00032). 108 out of the 360 one-dimensional pairs of
subgroups' dimensional correlations include in them one of the above 16
significant correlation. 42 of those 108 are significantly different (the
combined probability of those differences is p<.0.....[twenty zeros]039).
In this procedure too, there were tested two-dimensional differences among
pairs of groups. Part of these as well as the 42 one-dimensional differences
are on the left-hand lower triangle of Table 11.

One can see from the convergence of the results of the two procedures  that
the nine subgroups differed significantly from each other. One can see that
all 36 pairs of subgroups have at least one significant difference. These
results partially support the hypothesis of this study dealing with the
differences between the directions of the basic emotions within the universe
of discrimination among emotions. However, these results also contradict our
claim that sadness is a basic emotion on its own and as such  relatively
independent of the others.  The findings about the bipolarity of
happiness-sadness highlight the bipolarity aspects of the basic emotions - an
aspect that was stressed by Darwin (1872), yet neglected by most of his
followers.

                                      -61-
The content of the 10 dimensions of the S.S.A.-I analysis, of the 48 facial
          expressions of unmanipulated emotional mixtures
According to our theory and hypothesis, the structure of the emotional domain,
with regard to dimensions of discrimination among daily facial expressions and
experience of emotion, is of nearly orthogonal dimensions. In this space the
content of the dimensions is supposed to converge with that of the
already-found basic emotions. In the mathematical solution of the S.S.A.-I,
the contents of the above dimensions are expected to converge with the
axis-dimensions of the analysis. It is also expected - as was indeed found -
that subjects' scores (which are computed with a simplified version of the
S.S.A.P.-I) for these axes-dimensions will be relatively independent of each
other.

In order to interpret the contents of the dimensions as objectively as
possible in this study, we examined the correlations between these dimensions'
scores, and all original item scores (non-verbal materials 1b and 1c of both
procedures and the 148 words of task 2) as well as  subgroup scores and the
dimensional scores of the subjects. All of them are Spearman nonparametric
correlations as the distributions of most of the scores are not "normal". All
levels of significance are two-tailed unless it is specifically stated that
they are one-tailed.

The first dimension - Happiness (pleasure) versus Sadness
The subjects' scores of this dimension correlate with those of the subgroup
happiness: +0.63, and that of sadness: -0.42 - both p<.001.
Its highest correlations are with the following words: happiness (+0.52);
satisfied (+0.52); depression (-0.45); distress (-0.45) - all p<.001.

                                    --62-
The second dimension - Interest in others + leniency versus drowsiness
In the free grading procedure (as seen in Table 9) the contempt, interest and
shame subgroups are correlated with this dimension - the only dimension with
which both items of interest are correlated. In the Q-Sort procedure only the
correlation of the contempt subgroup is still significant.

The highest correlations of this dimension with words - whose correlation with
this dimension is higher than with the other dimensions (and positive) are
with activism, attraction, concern, generosity, initiative, interest,
leniency, patience, potency, respect, right, sincere, tenderness, wakefulness.
The highest are attraction (+0.30); concern (+0.30); and wakefulness (+0.32).
The words that have significant and negative correlation with this dimension
are drowsiness, doze, fatigue.
It seems that the common denominator of the content of the items of the
subgroup of contempt (as regarded by the subjects of this study and which is
the cause of its correlation with the second dimension) contains leniency and
potency components but not scorn. (See the section about the validity of the
subgroups of basic emotions p37 and 42.)

The third dimension - the Fear dimension
In the free grading procedure all four negative emotions: fear, anger, disgust
and sadness; are correlated with the third dimension (p<.002) but only for the
fear subgroup all four items are significantly correlated with this dimension.
In the Q-Sort only the fear subgroup is correlated significantly with it
(-0.19, p<.002).
The words that have significant and negative correlation with this dimension
(in the same direction of fear) are: astonishment (-0.17); disgust (-0.20);
droopy (-0.21);  guilt (-0.16);   panic (-0.21);  remorse (-0.20); servility
(-0.19).

The fourth dimension - the Anger dimension or firmness versus embarrassment
In the free grading, the higher correlation with this dimension is of the
anger subgroup: r=0.13 0.05<p<0.072 (nonsignificant). In the Q-Sort procedure
the dimension is positively correlated with the anger subgroup - +0.22,
p<.002. It is negatively correlated with fear (-0.15) and contempt (-0.16)
both p<.02.

                                       -63-
Its higher correlations with words are: attraction (+0.21); courage (+0.18);
decisiveness (+0.19); embarrassment (-0.20); hope (+0.18); stubbornness
(+0.16); superiority (+0.19); weakness (-0.21) and yearning (+0.17) - all
between p<.0021 and p<.02. The highest correlation is with firmness (+0.22,
p<.002).

The fifth dimension - the Surprise dimension (stupefaction)
In the free grading the surprise subgroup is correlated with this dimension
(+0.17) as well as the interest one (+0.14); both are of p<.02. Those
correlations are mainly due to item surprise no. 18 (+0.21) and for item
interest no. 8 (+0.20) that was found in the examination of validity of items
to be loaded  with surprise rather than with interest. One item - disgust no.
5 is negatively correlated to this dimension (-0.22, p<.002).
In the Q-Sort procedure no subgroup and only two items are positively
correlated with this dimension - one is of dubious content: disgust no. 15 and
the other is of an artificial mixtures whose content is surprise + questioning
(+0.20, p<02). One item - contempt no.7 is negatively correlated to this
dimension.
The highest positive correlations with words are with anger, caution,
compassion, craving, curiosity, daring, disappointment, doze, excitement,
potency, superiority, suspicion, firmness - all of .002>p<.02 - and with
appetite, skepticism and stupefaction - of p<.002. Not even one of the words
is negatively correlated with this dimension. The most suitable words to
summarize the above content is vigilance or wariness.

The sixth dimension - troubled versus lightness
None of the subgroups nor the items of basic emotions of the free grading
procedures are correlated with this dimension. Only mixture no. 1 of "neutral"
content is correlated here. In the Q-Sort we find nearly the same situation.
Only fear no. 3 and mixture no. 23 of sadness + disgust reach the level of
p<.02.
                                   -64-
The words that are correlated with this dimension are: amused (-0.17);
appetite (-0.18); boredom (-0.15); frustration (+0.15); guilt (+0.16);
humorous (-0.18); preoccupied (+0.19); relief (-0.15); sadness (+0.14);
stupefaction (-0.14) - all of 0.009<p<.05.
The content of this dimension is: troubled
(preoccupied-guilt-worry-frustration) versus relief.

The seventh dimension - the Shame dimension
The seventh dimension is correlated to happiness - both procedures +0.16 - and
with shame - on the free grading: -0.15 and on the Q-Sort: -0.17. The words
that are significantly correlated with this dimension are: bitterness (-0.15);
depression (-0.15); envy (-0.17); happiness (+0.18); indifference (-0.18);
rigor (+0.16); satisfaction (+0.14) - the significance of all is of .01<p<.05.
The basic emotion shame that was included for control purposes has only two
items. However, it was found to be of a unique content of its own. It was
previously found to be as such only in a small number of studies - due to its
small part in the systematic variance. It seems that its clear appearance in
our study is due to the strength of the study procedure and the new
methodology on which it is based.

The eighth dimension - seems to have the content of contempt
This dimension is correlated in the free grading procedure with the surprise
subgroup (-0.16 p<.05); with anger no. 4 (-0.15, p<.05); anger no. 12 (which
is highly loaded with disgust - -0.14 p<.05); disgust no. 15 (not valid -
-0.16, p<.022); surprise no. 10 (-0.22, p<.002).
In the Q-Sort procedure, only surprise no.18 (-0.16, p<.022) and one of the
"neutral" mixtures (+0.14, p<.05) are correlated with this dimension.
Among the words, the significant correlations are with anger (-0.14, p<.05);
contempt (-0.24, p<.001); desire (-0.16, p<.021); disqualification  (-0.20,
p<.004); grateful (-0.20, p<.004); greediness (-0.14, p<.05); humiliation
(-0.15, p<.05); misery (-0.19, p<.007) mockery (-0.14, p< .05) superiority
(-0.19, p<.007).

                                  -65-
As only one "neutral" item is positively correlated with this dimension (the
highest correlation for words is restraint - +0.13 p<.08), we can rely only on
the items that are on the negative pole. Though their common denominator is
not entirely clear it seems to converge with the content of contempt.

The ninth dimension - love versus hate
In the free grading the subgroups of anger, fear and disgust are negatively
correlated  to this  dimension (p<.05 to p<.02). In the Q-Sort only the
happiness subgroup is correlated with it (+0.17, p<.02).
Among the words, the correlations are with concern (+0.16); decisiveness
(+0.14) disappointment (-0.16); hate (-0.15); humiliation (-0.15); interest
(+0.15); love (+0.15); satisfaction (+0.15) - all of p<.05, and amused
(+0.19);  depression (-0.17); longing (+0.19); rigor (+0.20); vigilance
(+0.18) - all of p<.02; and contempt(-0.22, p<.002).
The examination of the correlations of love and hate with the other dimensions
(their correlations with this dimension are higher than any of the other seven
advanced dimensions), and the correlations of this dimension expounded above,
lead to the conclusion that the content of the contradiction - love versus
hate - converges with the content of this dimension.

The tenth dimension - the Disgust dimension
In the free grading none of the subgroups and only one of the items of the
basic emotions - that of contempt no.33 (-0.17, p<.02) - are correlated with
this dimension.

                                 -66-
In the Q-Sort, only the non valid interest subgroup is positively correlated
to this dimension (+0.20, p<.004 - due to the correlation of item no. 24). The
other items of the basic emotions that positively correlate with this
dimension are: disgust no.5 (+0.17, p<.02); disgust no. 21 (+0.17, p<.02); and
basic emotion no. 12 (the item its content was intended to be of anger but was
found to be mainly of disgust - +0.20, p<.004). The only significant negative
correlation is of the subgroup fear (-0.14, p<.05).
Among the words, the significant correlations are with activity (-0.17,
p<.02); conciliated  (-0.14,  p<.05);  excitement  (-0.14,  p<.05);  rigor
(-0.18, p<.02); righteousness (-.21, p<.004); satisfaction (-0.21, p<.004).
From the above correlations it seems that the content of this dimension is of
disgust versus satisfaction.

In summation of the examination of the content of the dimensions of
         discrimination among facial expression
The analysis of the matrix of correlations between the subjects' scores for
the ten dimensions and all the other scores produces a relatively clear
picture. This is so although the content validity of some subgroups, items and
all the methodology of item building is deficient. This was made possible by
the new technique which can be used to extract meaningful variance by the
convergence of a plethora of scores.
The conclusion from the examination of the content of the dimensions is that
the main dimensions converge with the main basic emotions as was predicted by
the first hypothesis derived from the evolutionary theory of this study.
However, there are some reservations:

The first reservation relates to the bi-polarity of the basic emotions: a) it
was found that sadness is not an independent basic emotion; b) most of the 10
dimensions reveal a bi-polar content.

                                     -67-
The second reservation is about the basic emotions interest and contempt whose
content validity is questionable. The two items of interest are not heavily
loaded with the same content, so that interpretation of the emotional content
of interest had to be based on circumstantial evidence. The problems of the
contempt subgroup and emotion are more complicated. The subgroup items have a
common denominator, however, the subjects did not perceive the negative
derogatory aspect or connotation of the items of this emotion.

Following the proposition of reservations, we conclude that the results
essentially support the first concrete hypothesis of the study and at the same
time supply the most needed for support for the family of evolutionary
theories of emotion.

The dimensions of discrimination among the 96 words of emotion
In order to examine the feasibility of the second hypothesis of this study,
the 96 words of emotion of materials 2a were analyzed by S.S.A.-I of
Guttman-Lingoes series (Lingoes, 1973) - all the nine analysis of 2 to 10
dimensions were done. Then the subjects' dimensional scores were computed for
the ten-dimensional analyses, by the Shalif et. al. (1981) adaptation of the
S.S.A.P.-I of the same Guttman lingoes series. Next, the Spearman correlations
between those dimensional scores and all the original scores of the subjects
and their subgroup scores were computed.
The coefficient of alienation of the nine S.S.A.-I dimensional analysis is as
follows: for two-dimensions - 0.169; for three - 0.121; for four  0.095; for
five - 0.083; for six - 0.073; for seven - 0.063; for eight - 0.057; for nine
- 0.051; and for ten dimensions - 0.047.

The two-dimensional analysis
The best way to represent the content of the dimensions of this analysis is by
the words that are near the two margins of each dimension.

                                    -68-
Those of the  first dimension are: depression + restlessness which are near
the margin of one side versus calmness + happiness + confidence which are near
the margin of the other side.

Those of the second dimension are alertness + firmness on one side versus
habitualness + serenity on the other.

The above two dimensions are of a clear concrete content. The first is  of
restless- depression versus its opposition - calm-happiness. It is clear how
some theorists make of it abstraction and call it the "Evaluative dimension".
The content of the second is of a firm alert (caused many  times a day by the
many  challenges that occur in a competitive society), versus the habitual
relaxation (of the background time between challenges  of the less nervous
people). It is clear how it can be "abstracted" to fit the "Dynamism-
dimension" that was found frequently in two-dimensional analysis (according to
articles by Snider & Osgood, 1969).

The three-dimensional analyses
Those near the margins of the first dimension are depression + distress +
misery + frustration versus relaxed + at ease + satisfied + confidence. Those
of the second dimension are alertness + firmness + hope + yearning versus
habitualness + serenity + indifference + boredom. Those near the margins of
the third dimension are pride + haughtiness versus fatigue + longing + caution.

The content of the first dimension is mainly of the concrete content of
depression and distress versus its opposite - contentment. It can be seen how
it matches that of the activity of the inborn structure of "separation
distress" (or as it is called by Izard, 1971 - the basic emotion distress).
The content of this dimension can be "abstracted" to fit the first dimension
of the "thrifty" cognitive approach or that of the evaluative dimension of
Osgood's semantic differential technique.

                                      -69-
The content of the second dimension fits that of the developmental concept of
wariness or its other version vigilance. In a way, it fits the internal
activity of monitoring each ongoing intentional activity that meets the
ongoing challenges of life. It is clear why those of the thrifty cognitive
approach abstracted it to represent the Activity content. (It is also clear
how it became Osgood's second dimension.)

The content of the third dimension fits that of the inborn structure that
causes the bi-polar continuum of pride-shame which is better known by the name
of the basic emotion shame. It was suitable to abstraction as the Potency
dimension - the third dimension of the thrifty cognitive approach (and Osgood
as well).

The above results are a clear-cut refutation of the second hypotheses of this
study. They deal a severe blow to the theoretical efforts we made with the aim
of reconciling the contradiction between the evolutionary theories of emotions
and those of the thrifty cognitive approach.
In the following chapters of discussion and conclusion we offer a solution
with the aim of reconciling between our results and our theory.

       nThe ten dimensional analysis of the 96 words of emotion
In order to deepen the evaluation of the hypothesis of the study, the matrix
of correlations between the subjects' dimensional scores for these ten
dimensions and their 300 relevant scores was re-examined. (The 300 scores are
of the 10 dimensions themselves; the 148 words of materials: 2a, 2b, 2c; of
the 114 scores of the 57 artificial facial expressions of the two procedures -
materials: 1b and 1c and the 18 subgroup scores of the 9 basic emotions of the
two procedures; and the 10 dimensional scores of the analysis of the 48 mixed
and unmanipulated facial expressions.)
The 10 dimensions' inter correlations show that only one of the correlations
is significant - r=-0.20, p<0.004 (two-tail). This may be the result of uneven
sampling of the emotional domain due to our unintentional bias or due to the
bias of the language itself.

                                    -70-
The significant correlations between the 9 basic emotions and the ten
dimensions were spread unevenly. Most of the significant correlations are
with the first four dimensions. The eighth and ninth dimensions do not have
any significant correlation with any subgroup.
The following interpretation of the content of each of the ten dimensions of
the 96 emotional words is mainly based on the convergence of information drawn
from two sources: One is the content of the words that are on the two margins
of each dimension - the classical way - and the other is the above 10 by 300
correlation matrix.

The first dimension - contentment versus distress
The words that are near the margins of this dimension are misery + distress on
one side and calmness + atease + contentment on the other. Its highest
correlation with subgroups are with happiness (+0.57) and sadness (-0.40).
The words that have the highest correlations with it are: atease (+0.69);
calmness (+0.74) contentment (+0.69); depression (-0.67); distress (-0.69);
happiness (+0.67); sadness (-0.67); satisfied (+0.72) - p<.001 for all of them.
The highest correlation between this dimension and any dimension of the 48
unmanipulated facial expressions of mixtures of emotions is with that of the
happiness- sadness one - r=+0.60 p<.001. The content of this dimension is
mainly of calmness, satisfaction and  contentment versus depression,  distress
and sadness.

The second dimension - alertness versus serenity
The words that are on the edges of this dimension are alertness + tension +
curiosity on one side and serenity + disrespect + lightness on the other. Its
highest correlations with subgroups are with happiness (negative) and with
sadness and shame (positive).

                                       -71-
The words that have the highest correlation with it are: alertness (+0.47);
complexity (+0.46) disappointment (+0.42); disregard (-0.27); happiness
(-0.33); lightness (-0.26); satisfied (-0.30); serenity (-0.38); servility
(-0.20); stubbornness (+0.40) and tranquility (-0.29) - all are of p<.001.
The highest correlations between this dimension and a dimension of the facial
expressions are with the happiness-sadness dimension (r=-0.28 p<.001) and with
the surprise dimension (+0.23 p<.001). The content of this dimension is mainly
of alertness (vigilance) and stubbornness versus serenity.

The third dimension - pride versus shame (embarrassment)
The marginal-words are pride + firmness + haughtiness versus fatigue +
embarrassment. The highest correlations with words are:  activity  (+0.32);
anxiety (-0.27); boldness (+0.41) courage (+0.43); decisiveness (+0.31);
embarrassment (-0.31); fatigue (-0.34); firmness (+0.53); habitualness
(-0.25); pride (+0.46); shame (-0.25); sleepy (-0.27); slumber (-0.25);
superiority +0.42) and weakness (-0.27) - all are of p<.001.
Its highest correlations with subgroups are with sadness (-0.20, p<.02); with
shame (-0.14,  p<.05) and anger (+0.19, p<.02).
The significant correlations between it and dimensions of the facial
expressions are with the anger dimension (+0.29 p<.001) and with the shame
dimension (-0.19 p<.007).
The content of this dimension is mainly of boldness, firmness and pride versus
embarrassment, fatigue and shame.

The fourth dimension - surprise (and excitement) versus indifference
The marginal words are indifference + boredom + habitualness versus surprise +
adoration curiosity + shame + panic.
The highest correlations with words are: boredom (+0.24); habitualness
(+0.16); indifference (+0.42) and sleepy (+0.16) versus admiration (-0.39);
excitement (-0.46); fondness (-0.40); gratitude (-0.48); love (-0.43); panic
(-0.44); shame (-0.43) and surprise(-0.59).

                                   -72-
Its highest correlations with subgroups are with surprise and fear of the free
grading task (p<.002) and with surprise (-0.22 p<.002); contempt (-0.18
p<.02); sadness (-0.15 p<.05) and shame (-0.15, p<.05) in the Q-Sort task. The
content of this dimension is mainly of excitement versus blandness.

The fifth dimension - the dimension of Pity
The marginal words are pity + compassion + leniency versus sympathy +
curiosity + surprise + helpless.
The highest correlations (and mathematically negative - the same direction as
that of pity) with words are with: belonging (-0.33); boldness (-0.38);
cautious (-0.32); compassion (-0.53) conciliated (-0.32); firmness (-0.31);
generosity (-0.34); hope (-0.33); intensity  (-0.37);  leniency  (-0.56); pain
(-0.30); pity (-67); tenderness (-0.41); tolerance (-0.30) - all are of
p<.001. Only two words are positively correlated to it - confusion (+0.15
p<.038) and love (+0.17 p<.018). This result is also an indication of the
imperfection of our sampling of the emotional domain.
The only significant correlation with a subgroup is with interest ( 0.18,
p<.02). Besides its negative correlations with artificial facial expression
items, it is also positively correlated with mixtures of anger + disgust and
anger + contempt(both of r=+0.21, p<.004).
The fifth dimension is also significantly correlated with the second dimension
of the facial expressions whose content is of positiveness and superiority
(leniency) attitudes to the others (0.15 p<.036). The content of this
dimension is mainly of pity, leniency and  compassion.

The sixth dimension - longing versus skepticism (and astonishment)
The marginal words are longing + compassion + leniency versus astonishment +
suspiciousness + skepticism + curiosity + caution + serenity. The placement
here of serenity seems to be a result of the oddities of the S.S.A.-I
program).

                                  -73-
The highest correlations with words are with: compassion (-0.29); courage
(-0.28); fatigue (-0.27); longing (-0.48); yearning(-0.27); worry (-0.25)
versus astonishment (+0.35); skepticism (+0.24) and suspiciousness (+0.34).
This dimension scores are significantly correlated with the fifth and sixth
dimension of the facial expressions: the astonishment direction of this
dimension as that of surprise of the fifth; the longing direction of this
dimension is in the same direction as that of worry and guilt of the sixth.
The content of this dimension is mainly of longing versus skepticism. [As the
majority of the subjects were single and far from home this dimension and
feeling may represent a basic motion of attachment (belonging) versus
detachment (loneliness)].

The seventh dimension - responsibility and involvement
The marginal words are routine versus indifference + longing + skepticism. The
highest correlations are with the words: animosity (-0.27); attraction
(-0.30); delight (-0.30); indifference (-0.29); longing (-0.31);  routine
(+040); mirth (-0.24) and worry (+0.25).
It is significantly correlated with the subgroup of surprise (-0.15, p<.05).
There are positive correlations with basic emotion items of distress no. 11
(+0.15 p<.05) and the low validity disgust no. 32 (+0.19, p<.02).
There is a significant correlation between it and the surprise dimension (of
the facial expressions - (-0.14 p<.05) and a near significant one with the
disgust dimension (+0.14 p<.055). The content of this dimension is mainly of
the  dreariness of the daily obligations versus fun.

The eighth dimension - patience and loneliness versus longing and love
The marginal words are hope + longing + excitement + desire + delighted versus
loneliness + patience + involvement.

                                    -74-
The highest (negative) correlations - with the same direction as that of
longing (of p<.002) are with: happiness, craving, excitement, weakness,
desire, alarm, slumber, fatigue, longing, and hope. The correlations with the
other direction are of involvement, patience (0.31 p<.001) and leniency (0.33
p<.001).
The significant correlations with artificial facial expressions are:  surprise
no. 26 (-0.20 p<.004); one mixture of enjoyment + anger and one of disgust +
fear (both of r=-0.19, p<.02) - of the free grading and with anger no. 28
(-0.18 p<.02); disgust + hesitation (-0.17 p<.02); disgust + fear (-0.23
p<.002); sadness + anger (+0.16p<.02); sadness + enjoyment (+0.18 p<.02) - of
the Q-Sort procedure.
There is a negative correlation (of -0.19, p<.006) between this dimension and
the anger dimension of the facial expressions.
The content of this dimension is mainly of patience (of the abstainers) versus
the cluster of emotions of those preoccupied with love relationships.

The ninth dimension: guilt and depression versus contempt and disregard
The marginal words are caution + fatigue + disregard versus loneliness +
contempt + skepticism.
The highest correlations with words (p< .002) are for: contempt, loneliness
and skepticism versus caution, disregard, embitterment and fatigue. Following
(with .002>p<.02) are boredom and involvement versus anger, confidence, blur,
despair, guilt, haughtiness, imposer, pain, restlessness, servility, sleepy
and slumber.
A possible common denominator for the words that are in the direction of
caution and disregard is the depression syndrome - guilt, despair and pain,
and their results - restlessness and fatigue.
The most significant correlation with artificial facial expressions is that of
contempt no. 7 (+0.20 p<.004) of the free grades. There is a correlation of
0.18 (p<.012) between the guilt direction of the ninth dimension and the guilt
direction of the sixth dimension of the facial expressions.

                                     -75-
The content of the ninth dimension is mainly about the introjected contempt -
guilt and its "relatives"  versus its extrojection.
The tenth dimension - hostility versus conciliation
The marginal words are conciliated + serenity versus hate + pain + fatigue.
The words that are of the p<.002 correlation with this dimension are all of
the conciliated direction: alarm, alertness, adoration, conciliated,
contentment, desire, disappointment, longing, repulsion, right, serenity.
The words whose correlation is in the direction of the hostility are:
annoyance, boredom, fatigue, hate, pain, yearning - all of .002<p<.02. The
meaningful content of this dimension is conciliation versus  hostility.
On the relations between the ten dimensions of the words and those of the
facial expressions
The following Table 12 contains the matrix of correlations between the ten
dimensions of the words and the ten dimensions of the 48 unmanipulated facial
expressions. The mathematical directions of the results were adjusted in order
to clarify the presentation.
***Table 12 about here***
The matrix of 100 correlations between the two sets of 10 dimensions contains
10 with p<.01 and among them 6 are of p<.001. There is a clear convergence of
the first dimension of each set but not identity. It seems that in the
universe of emotion there is a slightly different direction for each of them.
This phenomenon is the root of the significant correlation of each of the two
with the second dimension of the other set.
As the two sets of items that are the basis of each multidimensional analysis
sample the emotional domain in a different way; and as the mathematical
procedure of the analysis is dealing with variance that is, partly, not
systematic  -  it  is  not  realistic  to  expect a perfect fit between the
two sets of due to the power of the new methodology, there is a significant
convergence between six of the dimensions of the facial expressions, and eight
of the dimensions of the 96 words of emotion.

                                    -76-
Table no. 12: The matrix of correlations between the ten dimensions of the
words and the ten dimensions of the facial expressions
_________________________________________________________________________
Dimension   |  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  | 10  |
 *Facial    |Happi|Inter|  F  |  A  |  Su |Troub|  S  |  Co |Love |Disgu|
   *express |ness-|  est|  e  |  n  |  rp |led -|  h  |  nt |  _  |st-Sa|
     *  ions|Sad  |in ot|  a  |  g  |  ri |Light|  a  |  em |     |tisfa|
 Words   *  | ness| hers|  r  |  er |  se | ness|  me |  pt | Hate|ction|
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1 Distress -| 0.60| 0.25|-0.12| 0.14|-0.04|-0.08|-0.10| 0.02| 0.13|-0.01|
 Contentment|0.001|0.001|0.094|0.044|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |0.065|  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
2 Alertness |-0.28| 0.10|-0.13| 0.08| 0.23| 0.17| 0.05| 0.00| 0.12| 0.05|
  - Serenity|0.001|  *  |0.060|  *  |0.001|0.018|  *  |  *  |0.097|  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
3 pride  -  | 0.01| 0.06| 0.01| 0.29| 0.05| 0.01|-0.19| 0.09|-0.03|-0.04|
Embarrassment| *  |  *  |  *  |0.001|  *  |  *  |0.007|  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
4 Excitement|-0.06|-0.07|-0.09| 0.00| 0.00|-0.07| 0.05|-0.10|-0.04| 0.07|
Indifference|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
5 Pity      | 0.04| 0.15|-0.01|-0.03| 0.05|-0.06| 0.03| 0.02| 0.10|-0.10|
            |  *  |0.036|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
6 Longing - | 0.12|-0.11| 0.06| 0.02|-0.16| 0.24| 0.08| 0.01| 0.04|-0.03|
  Scepticism|0.093|  *  |  *  |  *  |0.022|0.001|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
7 (Ir)respon|-0.07| 0.02|-0.02| 0.05| 0.14|-0.08|-0.03|-0.05| 0.04| 0.14|
sibility    |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |0.050|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |0.055|
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
8 Patience  |-0.05| 0.09| 0.01|-0.19| 0.00|-0.01| 0.05|-0.03|-0.04| 0.04|
     -  Love|  *  |  *  |  *  |0.006|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
9 Guilt  -  | 0.05|-0.05|-0.02|-0.05| 0.04| 0.18|-0.06| 0.04|-0.01|-0.08|
    Contempt|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |0.012|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
conciliation| 0.09| 0.11| 0.08| 0.08| 0.03|-0.09|-0.03|-0.02| 0.05|-0.10|
10 Hostility|  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |  *  |
=========================================================================
* Significance is of P>0.10

                                        -77-
There is a significant converging between the common content of the two sets
of dimensions, and the basic emotions of the evolutionary theories. Even most
of the content that seems to be pronounced clearly only in one set of
dimensions, converges with basic emotions of other studies.

Summary of the results of the examination of the second hypothesis
The results do not support the second hypothesis of this study and thus refute
our theoretical effort to reconcile the "parsimonious"-cognitive approach and
the evolutional approach.
Our results show clearly that the dimensions of discrimination among words of
emotion have a concrete content that fit results of previous studies about
basic inborn emotional variables. Our study undermines the firm belief in the
"parsimonious" models of two or three dimensions that were offered for the
emotional domain. It seems that methodological explanations - which are
presented in the following chapter - are in more accord with our results. This
explanation conforms to the criticism of Ekman, et al. (1982) about the
methodology of research in the field of facial expression of emotion. It is
also more parsimonious than the theory we offered as it does not call for two
sets of emotional variables.

                                      -78-
                                   DISCUSSION
In this study we developed a new version of the evolutional- developmental
theory of emotion. We tried to reconcile  the contradictions of theory and
empirical-results of studies, between the evolutional theories of emotion and
the parsimonious and abstract cognitive theories and their models for the
emotional domain.
From our theory we deducted two main hypotheses for empirical examination. The
essence of the first one is that the main dimensions of discrimination among
the emotions of daily life (moods, feelings, etc.) which are manifested
through facial expressions, converge with the main basic emotions of the
evolutional theories of emotion: happiness, surprise, interest, fear,anger,
disgust, sadness.
The essence of the second is that the main dimensions of discrimination among
the variety of words which express many different emotions, and are used to
describe the introspected emotions of daily life, converge with the three
abstract bi-polar dimensions of emotion (or the connotative meaning of Osgood,
1964) namely:  evaluation, potency, activity.)

The first hypothesis was supported in the main. The theoretical implications
of what was found to be in accord with this hypothesis and the implication of
that which was in contradiction or neutral to it are enormous. The results
enrich the empirical support of the evolutionary theories using data drawn
from daily life. This was very much needed by these theories for the
validation of claims about the role of basic emotions in man.

The second hypothesis was refuted. It was found that the dimensions of
discrimination among the words also converge with the basic emotions and
slightly so (if at all) with the abstract ones. Our effort to reconcile the
two contending approaches failed. However, the efforts were not in vain.

                                         -79-
This unexpected result gives greater support to the evolutional developmental
approach to the emotional domain, it undermines the basis of the
parsimonious-cognitive approach and its models. It suggests that the
methodological domain is the basis for explanations for the contradictions
between the empirical results of the two approaches. It seems that Ekman, et
al. (1982) criticism of previous research of the facial expression of emotion
is also relevant to that of the verbal research of emotion.

The inborn emotional structures that were detected
When theory or hypothesis predicts that the variables that are studied are
relatively independent of each other; and a dimension of the mathematical
multidimensional scaling (S.S.A.-I in our study) is correlated to a variable
with an expected content - we can conclude that there is a certain convergence
between them. If the variable is correlated at the same time with other
dimensions of the analysis - a problem may result.
Though we can be relatively sure that the variable examined is related to the
specific domain which is studied, it is not easy to trace the reason or the
causes for the multiple correlations.
One possible reason can be that the axis-dimensions of the mathematical
solution were rotated because of none systematic or irrelevant variance found
in the data. Another reason can be that the correlated dimensions converge
because of basic component(s) of the variables examined which are common to
both, as variables may be compounds (and not pure or primary ones). A third
reason can be that there is significant interaction between the variables
studied despite the assumption that they are independent of one another.

The following paragraphs reveal the main indications found in our study for
the convergence between the main dimensions of discriminations among the
emotions of daily life and inborn structures of emotion. (Not according to the
order of appearance in the empirical finding.)

                                      -80-
The contentment-distress or happiness-sadness dimension
In both the words and facial expressions the first dimension is bi polar, and
is the most prominent one. In both, the following dimensions have much smaller
weight than the first dimension. There is a correspondence between the content
of the first dimension of the two kinds of items.
The content of one pole of the first dimension converges with the content of
the well known inborn structure sadness or its higher intensity level -
distress. It was studied extensively as the Separation Distress (see Bowlby,
1969-81). The content of the second pole of the first dimension converges with
the content of the well studied content of happiness-contentment that was
thought to be another inborn structure. The facial expressions that fit the
two poles of this structure are the quiet and open smile for the positive side
(and not the face of laughter that is somewhat associated with it because of
the open mouth with uncovered teeth and positive content). The facial
expression for the other pole is the `crying face'. It seems that each
analyses of the central nervous system of date is monitored intensively by
this inborn structure. Therefore it is easy to "abstract" the concrete content
of this structure and to name it "the evaluation dimension".

The dimension of attention to the environment
The two kinds of items reveal two relatively independent aspects of attention.
The second dimension of words seems to converge with the alertness of the
widely studied vigilance (of signal detecting tasks) and the feelings of the
period of the continuous mood of wariness (of the studies of strangers'
anxiety of the first years of life). It seems that this basic emotion is part
of the mixture of elevated emotions that is commonly found when the "conflict
of fight or flight" is not settled yet.
This dimension has a significant correlation with the surprise dimension of
the facial expressions. It seems that the core of the second dimension of
words and at least part of that of the fifth dimension of the facial
expression is concentrated attention on the environment.

                                      -81-
The elevation in attention is common to many intentional behaviors and
therefore it might be "abstracted" to be called 'the dimension of activity'.

The dimension of pride versus shame
One of the most important aspects of the environment and the stream of life in
it - to be monitored, is the consequences of what happens to the status of the
individual in the hierarchy of the group. The emotion of pride is converging
with the direction of high status and shame with the lower status. The
bipolarity of this dimension is the cause of the significant and negative
correlation between the pride dimension of the words and the shame dimension
of the facial expressions.
In primate groups, one of the most common signs for submission is a ritual of
pseudu-sexual-receptivity - individuals of both sexes demonstrate this to any
threatening dominant figure in order to prevent an expected attack. This
relation between the two is the cause of blushing that is a pseudo-sign for
sexual arousal. This phenomenon is in essence the reason for the similarity
between shame, and shyness-coyness it simulate.

The dimension of fear
The content of the third dimension of the facial expressions is fear. This
content has no clear parallel among the dimensions of the words. As the
collection of words include in it this emotion and as the subjects used it in
their discrimination among the faces, the only logical explanation is that
subjects were reluctant to reveal in a consistent and frank manner their
feelings of fear. The difference between the words and the facial expressions
the words seems to be an equivalent to the differences between tests with an
obvious content and projective tests. The inborn structure of fear which is
one of the four whose brain structure is already clear (see Fonberg, 1986),
monitors the expected damaging factors of the environment.

                                     -82-
The dimension of anger versus patience
The content of this dimension was found clearly in the facial expressions and
less so in the words, seemingly, for the same reasons as those of fear. The
content of this dimension converges mainly with the activity of the structure
that monitors the frustrating aspects of the environment and the success of
the efforts for overcoming them. It seems that the consistency of this mood is
not independent of other emotions: The intensity of patience - the eighth
dimension of the words is negatively correlated to anger. On the other end,
the highest positive correlation of the anger (versus patience) dimension of
the words is with the pride (versus shame and embarrassment) dimension of the
words. The higher is one in the social hierarchy the more he can afford to
feel anger.

The surprise dimension
The content of this dimension is that of the structure that monitors the
unexpected. This structure monitors the input information for the amount of
unexpected changes or the discrepancy between the expected and the observed
(and the amount of attention needed for the examination of that discrepancy).
It seems that the items of surprised faces used in this study and those used
by others are not really "clean" from the outcome of the unexpected. There is
a difference whether the outcome is of positive or of neutral or is of
negative value. It is also different when the assimilation of the unexpected
is swift or slow. It seems that the expression of the elevation of alertness
in the items that are faces of surprise is the cause of the correlation
between the two dimensions.
The facial dimension of surprise is also correlated with the "longing
stupefaction": r=-0.16, p<.022. (Stupefaction is mainly with the same content
as surprise but of higher intensity.) It is also negatively correlated with
the seventh dimension of the words, that contain in it the regularity aspect.
It seems that the "startled face" is the most suitable for the expression of
the high intensity of this structure.

                                 -83-
The dimension of altruistic feelings (interest and patronage)
The core of this emotional dimension is the monitoring of the need to treat
the needy ones of the group - immature young and all those who suffer. In
lower animals it seems to work as IRM mechanisms (Inborn Releasing Mechanism)
that are mostly activated by the distress signals of young ones of the
species. In human, the equivalence is observed in the "Altruistic Emotions"
(see Frijda, 1986 p355; on the unselfish emotions). This content converges
with that of the fifth dimension of the words - the "pity dimension" and with
the altruistic aspects of the second dimension of the facial expression -
interest in others. stressing this point are the words leniency, patience,
concern, generosity, tenderness - that are significantly correlated with both.

The dimension of preoccupation: longing and guilt versus lightness
The content of this dimension seems to be the preoccupation with unfinished
business: frustrations, guilt, longing for family members (and the
embitterment of the ninth dimension of the words) etc. The "guilt" direction
of the facial expressions (which is highly correlated to the longing direction
of the words) is in the opposite direction to that of relief and humorous,
astonishment and even suspiciousness that distract the focus of attention from
unfinished business to the outside world. This content with the most known
representative - guilt was theorized about by a wide spectrum of researchers.
The significant correlation between the facial dimension and the verbal
alertness dimension is mainly due to the nature of unfinished business. There
is not ample clear evidence for the existence of a unique expression of it and
for the specific dynamics of this basic emotion. However, Darwin (1872) was
sure of its existence and brings evidence to support it. Tomkins (1982) claims
that guilt is emotionally identical to shame. Our findings are in accord with
Darwin's.

The disgust and revulsion dimension
The main content of this inborn monitoring structure is the inborn patterns of
defense against bad food. During socialization it adds the content of certain
body functions and odors and even behaviors that are against the mores of the
group.

                                        -84-
The contempt dimension
This basic emotion was supposed to be represented in this study as a control
subgroup of facial expressions. Those items were found to be with low
content-validity. However, the verbal items included in them the content of
this emotion - contempt, mockery, scorn and disqualification. The  highest
correlations of the word contempt is with the eighth and ninth dimensions of
the faces. It is also one of the edge words of the ninth dimension of words
that seem to be about the introjection and extrojection of contempt.

The bi-polar continoum of love and hate
Darwin (1872) was skeptical about the detectability of the emotion of tender
love in a unique facial expression. The pair of words - love and hate were
found to correlate with the ninth dimension of the faces (r=+0.15 and r=-0.15:
p<.05). Hate (but not love) is highly correlated with the tenth dimension of
the words (p<.02).

Excitement versus indifference or the play center
The fourth dimension of the words is mainly of the contradiction of excitement
versus boredom and indifference. Excitement behavior is - according to Frijda
(1986, p36-39) an equivalent to that of joy. This content converges with that
of the `play face' (ibid) and laughter and with a specific inborn brain
structure (see Panksepp, 1981, 1986).

In conclusion:
The above findings about twelve concrete and discrete emotional contents are a
firm support to the modern evolutional theories of emotion. They are a
significant blow to the "thrifty-parsimonious-cognitive" approach and to our
theoretical effort to reconcile between the two contradicting schools of
theories of emotion. It seems that the following methodological approach will
be more suitable for the solution of this
contradiction.

                                     -85-
On the methodology of the research of the primary variables of emotions
There are many aspects of the emotional life of the human being and it is
irrational to expect that one and the same methodology is suitable for all of
them. The core of the emotional domain is the brain structures of the basic
emotions and their ongoing activities. While the neurological and
neuro-psychological approaches have their own new methodologies and results,
the psychological approach is mainly using outdated methodologies. Those
methodologies do not make use of the fast developing computer resources.

The main obstacles that can be overcome with the methodology used in this
study are  as follows:  a)  This study enable now the recognition that the
discovering of new categories of emotion that have their own facial
expressions and the ability to discriminate among them is not fit for studying
the entire inventar of the primary variables of the emotional domain.
In spite of the fact that the primary variables of this domain act in
relatively independent of each other, only multivriate and especially
multidimensional paradigms are fit for the study of it. And this so, because
these variables are active in parallel all the time.
Izard's (1971) claim that the multidimensional methodologies do not fit to
deal with this domain is unfounded. It is the only methodology that can tackle
so easily with a domain which has so many primary variables which are
relatively independent of one another but active simultaneously.
However,even when one uses multidimensional approach one can be trapped by
ignorance about the problematic flaws of the specific techniques of this
approach. The first and the most important is the relation between the data
collecting stage of the study and the interpretation of the results.

                                      -86-
The best example for this problem is the puzzling contradiction of two
dimensional results when the items are the relatively pure facial expressions
of basic emotions. Usually in those studies the variance of each basic emotion
in the items is slight dew to the effort to build pure items. In these cases,
only "non parsimonious analysis" with a large number of dimensions (or
factors) equal (or larger than) the number of the basic variables can extract
the factors or dimensions of the first order. Otherwise, the extracted factor
or dimensions are of the smaller number of the second order - as can nearly
always be extracted from those of the first order.

The proponents of the "parsimonious-cognitive" approach get their two or
three- dimensional results, at least partly, due to the above problem.

The second main problem of previous studies is that of the task of the
subjects. As demonstrated by Hirschberg (1980) subjects can use different sets
of variables when doing their task - even during the same session and while
they work with the same items. When one studies the primary variables of a
domain which requires being analyzed by multidimensional (or factor) analyses,
one cannot rely on the old methodologies of pre multidimensional scaling.
The "new" approach of Guttman (1957, 1968) culminated in the methodology of
the "facet analyses" and the  mapping sentence, stress the need (in certain
cases) for a scale with a common direction for all the items intended for an
analysis. This common scale is also the best way to overcome the problem of
finding a collection of representative scales, the problem of research bias in
the collection or building of scales. It is the only logical way to solve the
logical contradiction of the need to know the main results in advance in order
to include in a study all the relevant items and scales. Guttman's solution
for that problem culminated in this study in the scale of "how much the
emotion expressed in ... [and here comes the specific item] is similar to your
present mood or feelings". The above scale allows the subjects to use all the
dimensions of discrimination that are relevant to them. (Those that are common
to a significant number of subjects, are reconstructed by the multidimensional
analysis.)

                                    -87-
The most problematic stage of multidimensional research is that of the
interpretation of the meaning of the mathematical solutions of the computer.
The elegant solution of this problem has already been available for at least
twenty years. Guttman and Lingoes series of multidimensional technics
(Lingoes, 1973 - S.S.A.P-I) contain it, and also Takane, at al. (1977 -
INDSCAL) and Shalif et al. (1981 - a simplified version of the S.S.A.P.-I).
The essence of those techniques is the computation of subjects' dimensional
scores (equivalent in a way to subjects' factor scores). Those subjects score
can be correlated or used in other statistical tests and analysis to yield a
meaningful and objective interpretation of the mathematical multidimensional
solutions.

The above technique enables one to use items that are natural mixtures of the
basic variables of the study as one does not need to know their meaning in
advance in order to interpret the meaning of the dimensions or the directions
of the domain.

Though, even while using this technique there is some subjective influence in
the interpretation of the results, it is usually restricted by the
availability of a lot of objective data that can be open to the critical
reader.
The rotation of the axis (dimensions) of the mathematical solutions in a
systematic way is not easy to obtain or control yet. Therefore, part of the
systematic variance is "lost" and it is difficult to test the measure of the
relative independence of directions in the mathematical solutions. However,
any primary variable of an examined domain, which is relatively independent of
the others, and is represented in the data by a systematic variance, will have
its special impact on the results. That impact can always be traced - at list
partially.

                                    -88-
One of the serious obstacles in the study of emotion is the response sets of
the subjects, and the usual use of facial expressions as the preferred means
to overcome it. This solution has its draw backs as well, as it is still
practically impossible to acquire spontaneous expressions with the needed
component(s) and to ensure that they are of the precisely needed content.
Ekman et al. (1982) conclude that all previous studies failed in their
treatment of this problem. As found in this study, even Ekman and Friesen's
(1975) technique did not solve the problem. It seems that the best solution of
this problem is the use of emotions induced by hypnosis in relatively young
models whose faces do not have significant chronic expressions of emotion.
Another error usually done in the study of the emotional domain as a whole is
the reliance on a too small number of items and variables. The number of the
main items of this study is 253 and even this seems to be too small. When one
studies a domain with so many basic variables and dimensions one cannot be
"parsimonious".
In this study, about 14 basic emotions were encountered and those are
(according to few theorists) are only the most prominent ones. In research of
phenomena of this kind, all the studies which used only a few dozen items
each, did not have a chance of finding the full collection of basic emotions.
In these studies, even the finding of all the main ones has only a small
chance.

                                     -89-

                                 CONCLUSIONS
This study used the new multidimensional methodology for the study of the
contradicting theories and findings in research of the primary variables of
emotion. We tested in it hypothesis derived from a cognitive evolutional
theory that was advanced to reconcile the contradiction between the simple
evolutional theories, and the parsimonious cognitive approaches (of two and
three abstract emotional dimensions). Our theoretical claims as to the essence
and the source of this contradiction was disconfirmed. It was found that even
the words of emotion are a legitimate and most relevant input for the basic
emotions of the adult.
The main contributions of this study is the identification of problems in the
methodological domain as the source of the above contradiction. By doing so we
also obtained a most significant support for the evolutional groups of
theories.
This study clarifies and enrich our knowledge of the dynamics of emotional
daily life and especially with regard to the moods and feelings of mild
intensities.
This study can be a prototype for the development of a new convenient
technique for the measurement of human emotions.

                                  -90-
APENDIX No. 1: The list of 148 words of materials: 2 and their subgroups

"C" Words that have the letter "C" to their left, are words of emotion that
    were included for control and are not part of the basic list of 96.
"*" Words that have the asterisk "*" to their left, are names of dimensions
    and variables that were found in previous studies and are not emotions.
"R" Words that have the letter "R" to their left, are included in the basic
    list of 96 and were taken from Russell (1980) - 25 out of his 28 words.

  activity          decisiveness        haughtiness       restrained
  adoration       R delighted           helplessness    * restraint
  alarm           * dependence          hope              right(ness)
  alertness       R depression          humiliation     * rigor
R anger             desire              indifference      routine
  animosity         despair             inferiority     R sadness
R annoyance       * dimness           * initiative      R satisfaction
R anxiety           disappointment    * intensity       R satisfied
* appetite          disgust             interest          scepticism
* approval        * disqualification  * intricacy         scorn
* artificiality     disregard           involvement     R serenity
  astonishment      disrespect          joy               servility
R at ease         R distress            leniency          shame
  attraction      C droopy              loneliness      * sharpness
* balanced          embarrassment       longing         C shyness
  belonging         embitterment      C love            * simplicity
C bitterness        enjoyment         * meditative      * sincerity
R bliss           C envy              C mirth           * sleepy
* blur            * exaggeration      R misery          * slumber
  boldness        R excitement        C mockery           sorrow
R boredom         R fatigue           * naturalness     * stability
R calmness        R fear                nervousness       stubbornness
  caution           firmness            pain              suffering
* clearness       * frankness           panic           C superiority
  compassion        fondness          * passiveness       surprise
* complexity      C friendly            patience          suspiciousness
C concern         R frustration         pity              sympathy
  conciliated     C gaiety            R pleasure          tenderness
  confidence      C generosity        * posing          R tension
* constraint      C gloom               pride             tolerance
* confusion         grateful            quiscence       R tranquillity
  contempt        C greediness          regret          C uneasiness
R contentment       grievance         R relaxed         * unstable
  courage           guilt               relief          * vigilance
C craving         R happiness           repulsion       * weakness
* criticism       * haste             C respect           wory
  curiosity         hate              C restlesness       yearning

                                     -91-
APPENDIXA No. 2:  The source of the 57 items of materials: 1/a, 1/b AND 1/c
The item numbers in the free grading task and their placement on plates for
the Q-sort
Materials 1a - The 48 items of Szondi test were arranged according to their
original numerical order in the free grading, and according to the standard of
the test in the Q-sort.
Materials 1b and 1c - The 57 artificial basic emotions and combinations were
arranged in the Q-sort, in two to three row on a plates according to the
number of items on a plate.
The plates: I - VI are of the Szondi Test; VII - X are of the 33 items of
basic emotions, XI and XII are of the 24 artificial mixtures of emotion taken
from Ekman & Friesen (1975).
                       The table of abbreviations
An Anger     Ha  Happiness Cn Control      D Down   No. Number
Co Contempt  In  Interest  Sc  Scepticism  U Up     p   Page
Dg Disgust   Sa  Sadness   Qu Questioning  L Left   71  Izard(1971)
Dt Distress  Sh  Shame     Ne Neutral      M Middle 77 Izard (1977)
Fe Fear      Su  Surprise  Mx Mixed        R  Right 75 Ekman & Friesen (1975)
      VII(11)            VIII                 IX                X
1.Ha 75 p112 L   | 8.In 77  p85 No.5 |17.Ha 75 p112 R   |22.In 71 p329 R
2.Su 75 p42  L   | 9.Ha 71 p236 No.2 |18.Su 75 p45  L   |23.Ha 71 p328 M
3.Fe 75 p181 R U |10.Su 71 p236 No.3 |19.Fe 75 p62  R   |26.Su 71 p328 L
4.An 75 p185 L D |11.Dt 71 p236 No.4 |20.An 75 p42  R   |27.Sa 75 p127 R(12)
5.Dg 75 p30  R   |12.An 71 p237 No.6 |21.Dg 75 p30  L   |28.An 77 p88  No.9
6.Sa 75 p193 L D |13.Sh 71 p237 No.7 |22.Sa 75 p127 L   |29.Sh 71 p329 L
7.Co 75 p183 L D |14.Fe 71 p330 L    |23.Co 75 p25  R U |30.Dt 75 p122 R
                 |15.Dg 71 p328 R    |                  |31.Fe 77 p91  No.1
                 |16.Ha 71 p237 No.9 |                  |32.Dg 71 p237 No.5
                                                        |33.Co 71 p330 M
              XI                                    XII
1.Ne    p38 L  | 7.An+Fe p96  R || 13.Su+Qu p177 R D | 19. Mx    p86  R D
2.Su+Fe p59 R D| 8.An+Cn p97  L || 14.Ne    p51  L   | 20.Ha+Su  p197 L U
3.Su+Dg p73 D  | 9.Ha+Su p108 L || 15.Co+An p185 R U | 21.Ha+Su  p197 R U
4.Sc+D  p74 L  |10.Ha+An p110 L || 16.Co+Dg p72  R D | 22. Ha+Co p109 D
5.Mx    p86 L U|11.Sa+Fe p122 L || 17.Sc+Dg p74  R   | 23.Sa+Dg  p125 L
6.An+Dg p93 D  |12.Sa+An p123 D || 18.Fe+Dg p75  D   | 24.Sa+Ha  p126 L
_____________________________
(11) The Roman numerals indicate the plates. The Arabic numerals indicate
the items in their respective group - a\II and a\III
(12) This item is of Distress according to Izard (1977). But he took it
from Ekman & Friesen (1975) who made it represent Sadness.

                                      -92-
Appendices No.3:  Table of Contents of the final draft of the disertation

Abstract - Hebrew                                                        a
Introduction                                                             1
Theoretical background                                                   4
   Types of variables discovered                                         5
   The two main approaches                                               7
   The main problems of previous research                               13
   What is emotion                                                      17
   What is the universe of emotional phenomena                          28
   What is the subjective experiance of emotion                         32
   The main discriminatios among the emotions                           34
   On the methology of the research in field of emotion                 64
The theory of this study                                                83
The hypothesis                                                          94
The method                                                              97
   The subjects                                                         97
   The tools                                                            98
   The procedure                                                       102
   The computation of the dimensional scores for the subjects          110
Results                                                                113
   The subjects                                                        113
   The items and their scores                                          114
   Directions of the space of discriminations among facial expression  136
   The content of the ten dimensions of the 48 mixed emotions' space   163
   The dimrensions of discrimination ammong the 96 words of emotion    172
   The relations between the words' dimensions and the facials'ones    183
Discussion                                                             188
Appendices                                                             231
References                                                             234
Abstract - English                                                       I

                                      -93-
                                   REFERENCES
Bowlby, J. (1969-1981) Attachment and Loss. London: Hogarth, V1-V3.

Clore, G.L. & Ortony, A. (1984) Some issues for a cognitive theory of emotion.
   Cahires de Psychologie Cognitive, Vol. 4, 53-57.

Darwin, C. (1872) The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals. (London: John
   Murray's edition of 1964).

Descartes, R. (1649) Treatise On the Passions Of the Soul. (In The Philosofical
   Works Of Descartes: E.S. Halden & G.R.T. Ross, Trans., Cambridge: Cambridge
   University Press, 1967).

Ekman, P., and Friesen, W.V. (1971) Constants accross cultures in face and
   emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 124-129.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V. (1975) Unmasking the face. Engelwood Cliffs N.J.:
   Prentice- Hall.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V., and Elsworth, P. (1982) Research foundations In P.
   Ekman (Ed.), Emotions in the Human Face. London: Cambridge University Press.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V., and Elsworth, P. (1983) Autonomic nervous system
   activity distinguishes among emotions. Science, 221, 1208-1211.

Ekman, P., Sorenson, E.R. and Friesen, W.V., (1969) Pan-cultural elements
   in facial displays of emotions. Science, 165 (3875), 86-88.

Fonberg,E. (1986) Amygdala, emotions, motivation, an depressive states. In R.
   Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.), Emotion _ Theory Research and Experience.
   New York: Academic Press, Vol 3.

                                      -94-
Frijda, N.H. (1986) The Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Guttman, L. A. (1957) Introduction to facet analysis. Proceedings  of  the
   Fifteenth International Congress of Psychology, Brussels 1957. Amsterdam:
   North Holland Publishing Co. .

Guttman,L.A. (1968) A generalized nonmetric technique for finding the smallest
   coordinate space for configuration of points. Psychometrica, 33,469.

Hirschberg, N. (1980) Individual differences in social judgment: a multivariate
   approach.In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in Social Psychology. Hilsdale, N.J.
   Lawrence and Erlbaum Associates.

Izard, C.E. (1971) The face of Emotion. New York: Meredith.

Izard, C. E. (1977) Human Emotions. New York: Plenum Press.

Izard C.E. (1984) Emotion-cognition relationships and human development. In
   C.E. Izard, J. Kagan & R.B. Zajonc (Eds.). Emotion, Cognition and Behavior.
   Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laird, J.D.(1974) Self-attribution of emotion: The effects of expressive
   behavior on the quality of emotional experience. Journal of Personality and
   Social Psychology, 29, 475-486.

Laird, J.D. (1984)  The  real  role of facial response in the experience of
   emotion: a reply to Tourangeau and Ellsworth, and others. Journal of
   Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 646-675.

Leventhal, H.A. (1979)  Perceptual-motor  procession  model of emotion. In P.
   Plinter, K.R. Blakstein and I.M. Spigel (Eds.), Perception of Emotion in
   self and others. New York: Plenum Press.

                                       -95-
Leventhal, H.A. (1982) A perceptual motor theory of emotion. Social Science
   Information, Vol. 21, 819-845.

Lingoes, J. C. (1973) The Guttman-Lingoes Non metric Program series. Michigan:
   Mathesis Press.

Osgood, C.E. (1952) The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological
   Buletin, 49, 197-237.

Osgood, C.E. (1959) The cross-cultural generality of visual-verbal sinesthetic
tendencies. Behavioral Science, 146-169.

Osgood, C.E. (1959b semantic space revisited. word, 15, 192-200.

Osgood, C.E. (1964) Semantic Differential technique in the comparative study
   of cultures. American Anthropologist, 66, 171-200.

Osgood, C.E. (1969) Introduction. In J.G. Snider & C.E. Osgood (Eds.), (1969)
   Semantic Differential Technique. Chicago: Aldine.

Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., and Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957) The Measurement of
   Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Panksepp, J. (1981) The ontogeny of play in ruts. Developmental Psychology, 14,
   327-332.

Panksepp, J. (1986) The anatomy of emotions. In R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman
   (Eds.), Emotion:  Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press,
   Vol 3.

Piajet, J. (1965) The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York:
   International Universities Press.

                                     -96-
Plutchik, R. (1962) The Emotions: Facts Theories and a New Model. New York:
   Random House.

Plutchik, R. (1980) Emotion a Psycho-Evolutionary Synthesis. New York: Harper.

Plutchik, R. (1980b) in R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.),(1980-1986) Emotion:
   Theory Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1-3.

Plutchik, R.. and Kelerman, H. (Eds.), (1980-1986) Emotion: Theory Research and
   Experience. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1-3.

Plutchik, R. (1982) A psycho evolutionary theory of emotions. Social Science
   Information, Vol. 21, 529-553.

Rosman, I.J. (1984) Cognitive determinants of emotion: A structural theory.
   Review of Personality & Social Psychology, No. 5, 11-36.

Russell, J.A. (1980) A Circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and
   Social Psychology, 39, 1161-1178.

Schachter,  S. (1964)  The  interaction  of  cognitive and  physiological
   determinants of emotional states. In L. Berkovitz (Ed.), Advances in
   Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press.

Scherer, K.R. (1986) Studying emotion empirically: issues and a paradigm or
   research. In K.R. Scherer, H.G. Wallbott & A.B. Summerfield (Eds.),
   Experiencing Emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Scherer, K.R. (1984) Les emotions: fonnctions et composantes. Cahires de
   Psychologie Cognitive, 4, 9-39.

Scott, J.P. (1980) The function of emotions in behavioral systems: a systems
   theory analysis. In R. Plutchik and H. Kelerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory
   Research and Experience. New York: Academic Press.

Shalif, I., Lerner, Y. and Dasberg, H. (1981) A symptom profile analysis of
   anti psychotic drug treatment: nonparametric multidimensional technique.
   Psychiatry Research, 4, 1-12.

                                     -97-
Shalif, I., (1980) One-trail-sessions with the Szondi test: construct validity,
discriminant validity and reliability - not published.

Snider, J. G. and Osgood, C. E.(Eds.), (1969) Semantic Differential Technique.
   Chicago: Aldine.

Spinoza, B. (1677) Ethics. (Amsterdam: Wereldbiblioteek; English trans. J.H.
   Frijda, 1979.)

Szondi, L. (1947) Experimental Diagnosis of Drives. Bern: Hans Huber.
   (Translated by G. Hull, New York: Grune and Stratton, 1953.)

Szondi, L., Moser, U. and Webb, M.W. (1959) The Szondi Test in Diagnosis and
   Treatment. Philadelphia: J.P. Lippincott.

Takane, Y., Young, F. W. & DeLeeuw, j. (1977) Nonmetric individual differences,
   multidimensional scaling. Psychometrica, 42, 7-67.

Tomkins, S.S. (1962/3) Affect, Imagery, Consciousness. Vol.1, Vol.2, New York:
   Springer.

Tomkins, S.S. (1982) Affect theory. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Emotions in the Human
   Face. London: Cambridge University Press.

Vargha, A. (1979) An experimental study of the factors of the Szondi Test.
   Magyar Pszichologiai Szamele, Vol. 36, 498-511.

Weinrich, J.D. (1980)  Toward  a sociological theory of the emotions. In R.
   Plutchik &, H. Kelerman, (Eds.). Emotion: Theory Research and Experience.
   New York: Academic Press, vol. 1.

                                     -98-
Wiggins,  J.S. (1982) Circumplex models of interpersonal behavior in clinical
   psychology. In P.C. Kendall & J.N. Butcher (Eds.) Handbook of Research
   Methods in Clinical Psychology. New York: Willey.

Winton, W. M. (1986) The  role  of  facial  response in  self-reports of
   emotions: A critique of Laird. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
   50, 808-812.

Woodworth, R.S. (1938) Experimental Psychology. New York: Holt.