Keynote Speakers

Phoebe Ellsworth

Although many scholars bemoan the lack of consensus among emotion theorists, current theories agree on several important ideas, such as the adaptiveness of emotions and their principal components, and there is increasing convergence on divisive issues, such as discrete categories vs. continuous dimensions and the role of biology vs. culture. In the future our goal should be to distinguish real from apparent differences and to identify differences that can be resolved empirically.

Terry Maroney

A cultural script of judicial dispassion long has positioned reason and emotion as natural opposites, law as the sanctuary of reason, and judges as the emotionless guardians of that boundary. Our present “age of affectism” exposes that script as both inaccurate and counterproductive. But what lies beyond it? In this talk, Professor Maroney will present an overview of her multi-year, mixed-methods empirical study into the role of emotion and its regulation in the lives and work of judges in the United States, giving us an early view of portions of her forthcoming book, What Judges Feel: How Emotions Shape Justice.

Yuri Miyamoto

People generally want to increase positive emotions and decrease negative emotions. However, the extent to which individuals engage in such emotion regulation varies across cultures, partly due to differing beliefs about emotions. In this talk, I will present research highlighting cultural differences in dialectical versus predominantly adverse valuations of emotions. These variations in emotion valuations lead to cultural differences in emotion regulation and have health implications. I will also discuss sociocultural practices that support emotion beliefs and emotion regulation. By illuminating these processes, I will underscore the active role sociocultural contexts play in shaping emotions and their health implications.