![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In a digital society, we are frequently invited to communicate our present affective state via interfaces. These include smart-phone apps which allow users to track their mood in ‘real-time’, plus touchpads in organisations and public spaces which seek rapid feedback on whether an experience is positive or negative. In contrast to the use of surveys as tools of valuation, these technologies seek to capture experience in ‘real-time’, which can then be viewed and evaluated critically at a later time. Based on study of a number of mood-monitoring technologies, this paper highlights some of the ways in which they challenge conventional accounts of (e)valuation. In particular, rather than inviting individuals to represent their feelings towards the past numerically, they invite them to make uncritical expressions of positive or negative mood in the present. The central question of value is no longer how much is something valued, but whether or not it is valued. Quantitative and calculated analysis of positive and negative emotions occurs subsequently.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. Valuation here refers to an expression of worth; evaluation refers to the ‘meta’ process of reviewing and summing up existing values – see Lamont (Citation2012).
2. See www.mappiness.org.uk based at London School of Economics (LSE) and www.hedonometer.org based at University of Vermont.
3. PANAS is based upon a questionnaire, in which the subject is presented with 20 different affective states (e.g. ‘excited’, ‘hostile’ and ‘upset’) then asked to evaluate how much these describe their own state, between 1 (‘very slightly or not at all’) and 5 (‘extremely’). It can either be used to assess current feelings or feelings over the past week.