Are valence and arousal separable in emotional experience?

TLDR

The bipolar valence‑arousal model of conscious emotion experience is a prominent framework in emotion research. The study tests whether arousal uniquely predicts physiological arousal and self‑reported feelings beyond valence in responses to visual stimuli. The authors used Bayesian model comparison to test the null hypothesis that arousal adds no predictive value beyond valence. Results show arousal does not improve prediction of electrodermal activity or global feelings beyond valence, with only a minor unique effect (1.5–4 % variance).

Abstract

The bipolar valence-arousal model of conscious experience of emotions is prominent in emotion research. In this work, we examine the validity of this model in the context of feelings elicited by visual stimuli. In particular, we examine whether arousal has a unique contribution over bivariate valence (separate measures for pleasure and displeasure) in explaining physiological arousal (electrodermal activity, EDA) and self-reported feelings at the level of item-specific responses across and within individuals. Our results suggest that self-reports of arousal have neither an advantage in predicting EDA nor make a unique contribution when valence is present in the model. Acceptance of the null hypothesis was confirmed with the use of the Bayesian information criterion. Arousal also showed no advantage over valence in predicting global feelings, but demonstrated a small unique component (1.5% to 4% of variance explained). These results have practical implications for both experimental design in the study of emotions and the underlying bases of their conscious experience.