| Literature DB >> 31399873 |
Abstract
Love has been thoroughly studied and a variety of definitions as well as types of love have been described in the literature. Given the data presenting natural language of love concept, the aim of the two present studies is to demonstrate a new technique which enables description of the structure of emotion concepts within love spectrum. This technique is based on emotional verbal fluency tasks. The procedure and the coding system used are reported in the article along with the data on reliability and standardization of the emotional verbal fluency technique. Construct validity is demonstrated by correlations of the emotional verbal fluency tasks with semantic and letter verbal fluency tasks, while discriminant validity is shown by correlations with other measures, such as the Triangular Love Scale, the Love Attitudes Scale, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. The article also presents how the emotional verbal fluency technique can be used in exploring the structure of emotion concepts within love spectrum. This is based on a hierarchical cluster analysis. An examination of connections between semantic clusters identified in the emotional verbal fluency tasks allows describing a structure of the concepts within love spectrum, such as liking, infatuation, love, and show of its differentiation. The presented technique taking into account natural language is of value in assessments of the structure of emotion concepts.Entities:
Keywords: Cognitive structure; Emotion concepts; Emotional verbal fluency; Love; Method; Psychometric properties
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31399873 PMCID: PMC6814648 DOI: 10.1007/s10936-019-09661-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Psycholinguist Res ISSN: 0090-6905
The inter-judge correlations (W-Kendall tests)
| Variables | Liking | Infatuation | Love |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correct responses | .99*** | .99*** | .99*** |
| Number of errors | .99*** | .99*** | .99*** |
| SC: Passion | .98*** | .98*** | .98*** |
| SC: Intimacy | .97*** | .97*** | .96*** |
| SC: Commitment | .96*** | .95*** | .96*** |
| SC: Short-temporal | .95*** | .94*** | .96*** |
| SC: Long-temporal | .94*** | .93*** | .94*** |
| SC: Esthetic | .87*** | .91*** | .87*** |
| SC: Existential | .93*** | .94*** | .93*** |
| SC: Eros | .98*** | .98*** | .98*** |
| SC: Pragma | .93*** | .92*** | .93*** |
| SC: Ludus | .92*** | .91*** | .90*** |
| SC: Storge | .94*** | .95*** | .94*** |
| SC: Mania | .91*** | .90*** | .89*** |
| SC: Agape | .91*** | .89*** | .90*** |
SC semantic cluster
***p < .001
Descriptive statistics
| Variables | Liking | Infatuation | Love |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correct responses | 9.10 (4.81) | 9.65 (4.44) | 11.01 (5.01) |
| Number of errors | .01 (.03) | .03 (.04) | .06 (.05) |
| SC: Passion | 1.94 (1.48) | 4.77 (2.74) | 3.04 (2.09) |
| SC: Intimacy | 3.53 (2.80) | 3.11 (2.66) | 5.26 (3.220 |
| SC: Commitment | 2.14 (2.34) | 2.38 (2.46) | 4.39 (2.52) |
| SC: Short-temporal | 1.10 (.37) | 1.08 (.38) | 1.02 (.21) |
| SC: Long-temporal | 1.04 (.26) | 1.11 (.44) | 1.29 (.65) |
| SC: Esthetic | .21 (.46) | .36 (.58) | .22 (.49) |
| SC: Existential | 1.01 (.19) | 1.08 (.27) | 1.32 (.61) |
| SC: Eros | 1.79 (1.57) | 4.30 (2.80) | 2.40 (1.85) |
| SC: Pragma | 1.04 (1.55) | 1.00 (.00) | 1.00 (.00) |
| SC: Ludus | 1.55 (1.12) | 1.19 (.95) | 1.05 (.33) |
| SC: Storge | 5.39 (3.10) | 3.46 (2.26) | 5.60 (3.09) |
| SC: Mania | 1.16 (.70) | 2.02 (2.04) | 1.46 (1.53) |
| SC: Agape | 1.23 (.97) | 1.70 (1.59) | 3.16 (2.57) |
SC semantic cluster, M mean, SD standard deviation
Correlations between the EVFT (number of correct responses) and other verbal fluency tasks (number of correct responses), and other measures (n = 340)
| Variable | EVFT | EVFT | EVFT |
|---|---|---|---|
| VF: Letter k | .41*** | .43*** | .42*** |
| VF: Animals | .42*** | .44*** | .44*** |
| VOC | .37*** | .36*** | .34*** |
| STAI-state | .11ns | .10ns | .11ns |
| STAI-trait | .18* | .09ns | .14* |
ns non-significant, EVFT Emotional Verbal Fluency Technique, VF verbal fluency technique, VOC Vocabulary, subscale from WAIS-R, STAI results from the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
*− p < .05; **− p < . 01; ***− p < .001
Correlations between the EVFT (semantic clusters i.e. number of words in a cluster) and the TLS (n = 340)
| EVFT | Semantic cluster | TLS Passion | TLS Intimacy | TLS Commitment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liking | Passion | .14* | − .05ns | .07ns |
| Intimacy | .04ns | .10ns | .10ns | |
| Commitment | .07ns | .18** | .27** | |
| Infatuation | Passion | .83** | .10ns | .01ns |
| Love | Intimacy | .30** | .22** | .04ns |
| Commitment | .28** | .26** | .05ns | |
| Passion | .31** | .11ns | − .04ns | |
| Intimacy | .13* | .71*** | .42** | |
| Commitment | .11ns | − .01ns | .64*** | |
| Liking | Short-temporal | − .09ns | .02ns | − .03ns |
| Infatuation | Short-temporal | − .11ns | .00ns | .57** |
| Love | Short-temporal | .09ns | − .14* | − .01 |
| Liking | Long-temporal | − .08ns | .09ns | .01ns |
| Infatuation | Long-temporal | − .01ns | .16* | .02ns |
| Love | Long-temporal | .15* | .15* | .39** |
*p < .05; **p < . 01; ***p < .001
ns non-significant, EVFT Emotional Verbal Fluency Technique, TLS scores from the Triangular Love Scale
Normative data of the EVFT of ‘love’ category (n = 340)
| Semantic clusters | Percentiles | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 10 | 25 | 50 | 75 | 90 | 95 | |
| Passion | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.25 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 6.00 | 8.00 |
| Intimacy | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 9.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 |
| Commitment | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 3.00 | 8.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 |
| Short-term | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1,00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Long-term | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 |
| Esthetic | .00 | .00 | .00 | .00 | .00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Existential | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 |
| Eros | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 5.00 | 6.95 |
| Ludus | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Storge | 1.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 6.00 | 8.75 | 10.00 | 10.00 |
| Mania | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 4.00 |
| Pragma | .00 | .00 | .00 | .00 | .00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Agape | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 4.75 | 7.00 | 9.95 |
Fig. 1Hierarchical clustering: relationships between semantic clusters in the concept love (dendrogram)
Fig. 2Hierarchical clustering: relationships between semantic clusters in the concept infatuation (dendrogram)
Fig. 3Hierarchical clustering: relationships between semantic clusters in the concept liking (dendrogram)
Correlations between the EVFT (semantic clusters i.e. number of words in a cluster) and the LAS (n = 190)
| EVFT | Semantic cluster | LAS | LAS | LAS | LAS | LAS | LAS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liking | Eros | .32*** | .11ns | .02ns | .18* | .03ns | .01ns |
| Storge | .03ns | .17* | .01ns | .00ns | .02ns | .06ns | |
| Ludus | .11ns | .12ns | .13ns | .10ns | .04ns | .05ns | |
| Mania | .09ns | .02ns | .06ns | − .07ns | .07ns | .09ns | |
| Pragma | .02ns | .01ns | .02ns | .02ns | .01ns | − .02ns | |
| Agape | .07ns | .01ns | .07ns | .07ns | .02ns | .03ns | |
| Infatuation | Eros | .82*** | .13ns | .09ns | .24** | − .03ns | − .00ns |
| Storge | .12ns | .21* | .01ns | .07ns | .00ns | .01ns | |
| Ludus | .11ns | .01ns | .03ns | .09ns | .01ns | .05ns | |
| Mania | .34** | .02ns | .06ns | .26** | .03ns | .04ns | |
| Pragma | .01ns | .00ns | .00ns | .03ns | .00ns | .02ns | |
| Agape | .00ns | .10ns | − .02ns | .02ns | .02ns | .02ns | |
| Love | Eros | .56*** | .11ns | .10ns | .17* | .07ns | .02ns |
| Storge | .04ns | .22* | .12ns | .02ns | .03ns | .05ns | |
| Ludus | .13ns | 12ns | .23* | .02ns | .01ns | .00ns | |
| Mania | .12ns | .01ns | .02ns | .25** | .04ns | − .06ns | |
| Pragma | .01ns | .01ns | .04ns | .00ns | .15* | .16* | |
| Agape | .02ns | .02ns | .03ns | .01ns | .10ns | .20* |
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
ns non-significant; EVFT Emotional Verbal Fluency Technique, LAS scores form the Love Attitude Scale