Livingstone Undergraduate Research Award in the Humanities
Livingstone Undergraduate Research Award in the Humanities
Stephen Francisco Walicki
Pleasantness of a Different Kind: Hierarchical Processing and Valence Content
View Stephen's project online
“Valence” is a term adopted from chemistry by psychologists to refer to psychological positivity and negativity. Contemporary philosophical accounts suggest that valence is homogenous across all mental states. I critically assess three arguments for homogeneity and argue that valence is non-homogenous.
What is your major and expected year of graduation?
My major is philosophy and I will graduate in May 2026.
What inspired you to pursue your project?
My project was recommended to me by my faculty mentor, Dr. David Wolfsdorf. Engaging with a new field (psychology and neuroscience) kept me interested throughout my research.
How did the Libraries support your research?
The libraries supported my research in three main ways. First, Temple librarians Rick Lezenby and Fred Rowland instructed me on how to use the BookBot, and introduced me to the Web of Science database. Second, I made use of the Temple library collection through the BookBot and stacks. Third, and finally, I used Temple library access to retrieve full-length digital texts, academic journal articles, and conference papers.
When Stephen approached me over a year ago to ask if I would be willing to advise his research, I suggested that he consider the topic of valence. The word “valence” was appropriated by psychologists in the 1930s from chemistry (cp. the valence or valency of atoms). Since then, psychologists have used “valence” in several ways; but the current dominant use pertains to the study of emotions or affect: emotions are said to be “valenced” or to possess “valence,” i.e., to be positive or negative. In recent years, philosophers have also taken an interest in valence. In my own work, I am interested in the relation between valence, the semantics of evaluative language, and the nature of value-laden mental states such as valuing. Following some initial research advice from me, Stephen proposed to consider philosophical accounts of the content and function of valence, and in particular the interrelation of valence’s content and function. In the course of researching this topic, including eliciting advice from professors in Temple’s Psychology department, Stephen landed on a more fundamental question. Philosophical discussions treat valence as if it were uniform across emotions or affective experiences. Influenced by accounts of valence in appraisal theories of emotion from psychology, in particular accounts that distinguish micro- and macro-valences, Stephen argues that philosophical conceptions of the uniformity of valence are dubious. In his paper, he critically assesses three arguments that philosophers have advanced for the uniformity of valence. He then develops an argument from complex emotions for the non-uniformity of valence. From his initial engagement with the topic of valence to the arguments in his current paper, Stephen’s research trajectory evinces impressive intellectual autonomy, understanding of challenging material from diverse theoretical domains (philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience), and a creative ability to integrate these disparate contributions to formulate original ideas.
-David Conan Wolfsdorf, Professor, Department of Philosophy, College of Liberal Arts
This category covers research methods in the humanities (in both traditional and digital forms). Disciplines represented include such fields as Art History, Classics, Literature, Film Studies, Linguistics and Languages, History, Philosophy, and Religious Studies. Much of the scholarly output in the humanities relies upon traditional library research methods using primary and secondary sources, though the specific source types consulted will vary from discipline to discipline.
This award is generously sponsored by John H. Livingstone, SBM ’49.