Talk:Affect theory

Professional criticism

Is there any professional criticism available on affect theory? I've applied affect theory on myself and did not achieve optimal mental health. I actually felt more neurotic through the process of maximizing my positive affect and minimizing my negative affect.--Philosophistry 14:35, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Hello Philosophistry

On the basis of what you say here, and it is,of course, a brief remark, I would respond in the following way.

I focus on your "minimizing my negative affect". My question would be how did you go about doing this?

The theory says we "minimize negative affect" by expressing all affect.

1) We want to maximize interest and joy. 2) We want to minimize: anger, fear, distress, disgust, dismell and shame. 3) We achieve #'1 and 2 by expressing all affect. 4) We need a set of rules or "scripts" that we learn in order to optimally achieve #'s 1 and 2.

Minimizing negative affect does not mean NOT expressing it it means expressing it.

Maybe this is the way you read it but it "sounds" like you tried the tactic of repressing the negative?

drlynch'Drlynch—Preceding unsigned comment added by Drlynch (talk • contribs) 20:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Negative affect

Negative affect was redirecting here. I have changed the redirect to Affect (psychology). Seems more appropriate.Anthony (talk) 09:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Needs review for citations / original research

Hi all, this article needs a review for improved citations. Melody.waring (talk) 12:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Affect theory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090220012416/http://www.brianlynchmd.com:80/AT/resources.htm to http://brianlynchmd.com/AT/resources.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228230754/http://affectivetherapy.co.uk:80/Tomkins_affect.html to http://www.affectivetherapy.co.uk/Tomkins_affect.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090612084358/http://www.brianlynchmd.com:80/AT/atdiscussion.html to http://brianlynchmd.com/AT/atdiscussion.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

On "Adoption": the assertion that Tomkins' List of affects is incomplete

Affect theory as described by Tomkins leaves space for 'humor' as an emotion or script resulting from the affect 'enjoyment-joy' and explicitly discusses laughter as a more sudden and intense point of 'enjoyment-joy'.

Enjoyment-joy is characterized by a decrease of intensity. So 'humor' as noted by Rburtonresearch, the "response to a conflict between negative and positive affects," is a sharp reduction in this tension/conflict, which is experienced as affective intensity. Thus humor is an emotion linked to the affect enjoyment-joy.

Should I simply excise the section on humor or expand it with this definition?

My source: Shame in the Cybernetic Fold: Reading Silvan Tomkins Author(s): Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and Adam Frank Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Winter, 1995), pp. 496-522 Published by: The University of Chicago Press

Lolaglass (talk) 12:06, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

10th affect?

Affect theory will die out if none of its proponents ever get horny. Just saying :) Malick78 (talk) 07:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

The article on “affect”

Why is there no mention of the significance of affect in musical performance? 2600:1702:3840:5150:341E:21C1:3AC4:C982 (talk) 15:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)