lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Persistence of Wishful Thinking
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Psychology. New Sch Psychotherapy & Counselling, UK.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1579-0730
New York University, USA;University College London, UK.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1891-0200
Saybrook University, USA;University of Florida, USA.
2014 (English)In: American Psychologist, ISSN 0003-066X, E-ISSN 1935-990X, Vol. 69, no 6, p. 629-632Article in journal, Editorial material (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Comments on the article by Fredrickson and Losada (see record 2005-11834-001). Recently the current authors (Brown, Sokal, & Friedman, 2013) debunked the widely cited claim made by Fredrickson and Losada (2005) that their use of a mathematical model drawn from nonlinear dynamics (namely, the Lorenz equations from fluid dynamics) provided theoretical support for the existence of a pair of critical positivity-ratio values (2.9013 and 11.6346) such that individuals whose ratios fall between these values will “flourish,” whereas people whose ratios lie outside this ideal range will “languish.” For lack of space in our previous article, we refrained from addressing, except in passing, the question of whether there might be empirical evidence for the existence of one or more critical positivity ratios (“tipping points”). In response to our critique, Fredrickson and Losada (2013) withdrew their nonlinear dynamics model, but Fredrickson (December December 2013) reaffirmed some claims concerning positivity ratios on the basis of empirical studies. We would therefore like to comment briefly on these claims and the alleged supporting evidence. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
American Psychological Association (APA), 2014. Vol. 69, no 6, p. 629-632
National Category
Psychology
Research subject
Social Sciences, Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-108213DOI: 10.1037/a0037050ISI: 000344009500015PubMedID: 25197848Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84925456915OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-108213DiVA, id: diva2:1614087
Available from: 2021-11-24 Created: 2021-11-24 Last updated: 2022-05-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Brown, Nicholas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Brown, NicholasSokal, Alan D.
By organisation
Department of Psychology
In the same journal
American Psychologist
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf