Call for Papers: Methods in Emotion Research

Methods in Emotion Research is a special section of Emotion Review that assists emotion researchers in staying abreast of critical advances in research methods, tools, and techniques. We invite you to submit articles to this section or to contact the editors with suggestions for topics. Articles take a variety of formats. First, articles sometimes introduce and recommend a new method, tool, or technique for emotion research. Recent articles included a computational approach for studying affect (D’Mello et al., 2018), a more complete method of evaluating validity (Miners et al., 2018), and machine learning methods for classification and feature reduction (Miller et al., 2020). This type of article should inspire emotion researchers to try the new method. These articles should describe emotion topics or areas to which the methods are relevant, demonstrate how the methods can be used in emotion research, and explain what these methods add beyond older or simpler methods. These articles should not overburden readers with technical details or formulas. Instead, these articles should introduce readers to the methods, persuade them of their value, and refer readers to accessible resources so they can learn more. Second, articles can provide detailed tutorials regarding an existing method, tool, or technique, providing a crash course for emotion researchers. Like articles on new methods, these tutorial articles should explain when the methods would be useful to emotion researchers. However, articles on well-established methods can focus more on the concrete details of how to implement the methods. Regardless of whether the methods are old or new, articles should base all explanations and examples on emotion research and should refer the reader to additional sources to learn more. Third, articles for Methods in Emotion Research sometimes critique an existing method, tool, or technique for emotion research. For example, Matsumoto and Hwang (2017) examined methodological issues in cross-cultural studies of judgments of facial expressions. As a second example, Maul (2012a), though it predates the creation of this section, would have fit well within this section. This article critiqued the Mayer– Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test and was followed by comments (MacCann et al., 2012; Mayer et al., 2012) and a reply (Maul, 2012b). Critique articles should provide essential background about the methods, describe and integrate previous or new concerns about them, and recommend a way forward that addresses the concerns. Fourth, articles in this section sometimes review and compare alternative options. Such articles include reviews of databases of dynamic facial stimuli (Krumhuber et al., 2017), approaches to operationalizing neutral affective states (Gasper, 2018), experimental methods of inducing basic emotions (Siedlecka & Denson, 2019), and methods of coding extrafacial behavioral expressions (Witkower & Tracy, 2019). This type of article should provide a comprehensive overview of all alternatives, including the most commonly used options and the highest quality ones. These articles should provide key information about each option to help researchers select among the alternatives and should make recommendations regarding which options researchers should use in various circumstances. Finally, this type of article should provide information about how to obtain and use each of the options. All Methods in Emotion Research articles should represent the highest quality research methods and should simultaneously be written to be understandable to a broad audience of emotion researchers. Articles that are coauthored by emotion researchers and methodological specialists are welcomed, though not required. To pitch an idea for an article that you would like to write or to request an article on a topic you want to know more about, email the Methods in Emotion Research section editor (kim. barchard@unlv.edu).