--- title: "Ekman-7 Emotion Ontology" description: "Explore seven reported emotion categories, World V1.2 base rates and example usages that separate threat, blame, loss, rejection and surprise through time." url: "https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion" --- [Home](https://nosible.com/) [Ontologies](https://nosible.com/ontologies) Ekman-7 Ontology field guide By NOSIBLE Research Updated 2026-07-18 # Ekman-7 Emotion Ontology Ekman-7 separates seven reported emotional frames that one sentiment score collapses and preserves them for direct comparison through time. Positive–negative sentiment hides information. Fear signals threat. Anger signals blame. Sadness signals loss. Disgust signals rejection. Ekman-7 assigns each event one dominant frame: anger, contempt, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness or surprise. The categories come from Ekman’s basic-emotion research. World applies them to reporting, not individual psychology or private emotional states. [[ 1 ]](https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068) [[ 2 ]](https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030377) World applies Ekman-7 to company, government, conflict, hazard, policy and science events. Researchers can test whether each emotion relates to volatility, capital flows, credit spreads or later events. This requires point-in-time data, a defined investment universe, event window and matched baseline. This guide provides definitions, base rates, historical shifts, evidence and downloadable data needed to evaluate the feature before modelling. Categories 7 categories Structure Flat, no hierarchy World events labelled 15.2% Stable codes Since v1 Release data CC0 On this page [01 Foundations](https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion#foundations) [02 Categories](https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion#vocabulary) [03 Example usages](https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion#trends) [04 Downloads and references](https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion#downloads) Foundations ## Ekman-7 distinguishes reported emotional frames without inferring the private emotions people feel Ekman treats emotions as distinct response systems, not points on a single positive–negative scale. Each category combines signals, appraisal, context and likely action. Anger indicates obstruction or offence. Fear indicates threat. Disgust indicates rejection. Sadness indicates loss. Happiness indicates desirable outcomes. Surprise indicates new information. Cross-cultural studies support shared category recognition, but expression and interpretation vary by culture. The ontology is a testable classification system, not a tool for inferring private psychological states. [[ 1 ]](https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068) [[ 2 ]](https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030377) [[ 3 ]](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00253.x) World classifies the dominant emotional frame expressed in event reporting. It does not estimate how an author, source or market participant feels. One event may contain several frames, and repeated coverage can increase counts without creating another economic shock. Researchers should test the seven categories against polarity and richer representations. Results should remain stable across sources, sectors, languages, regions and time. Any incremental performance should be linked to specific emotions and market regimes, not attributed to the ontology itself. [[ 4 ]](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01217) Categories ## Ekman-7 assigns seven independent emotion labels through a predictable, scalable event classification Ekman-7 is flat: every event receives one label. Anger and contempt are peers, like fear and sadness. Each label describes the dominant frame in reporting, not anyone’s internal state. The explorer shows each category’s definition, code, World V1.2 count and share of labelled events and the full corpus. Use the signals as hypotheses: fear can isolate threat, anger blame, surprise new information and disgust rejection. Search supports ontologies with thousands of categories. Search code, label, definition or path 7 shown · 7 total Labelled events **2,334,084** World coverage **15.2%** All World events **15,311,040** 2,334,084 of 15,311,040 World events carry labels from Ekman-7 Emotion Ontology. Select a category to see its count and both relevant shares. Categories ekman7_emotion anger Blame, confrontation and redress contempt Dismissal, scorn and asserted inferiority disgust Moral or physical rejection and reputational contamination fear Threat, uncertainty and risk-sensitive event cohorts happiness Approval, achievement and favourable outcomes sadness Loss, misfortune and subdued negative response surprise Novel information and abrupt expectation changes anger ### anger Copy link #### Definition Reporting framed by anger through blame, confrontation, demands for redress or responses to offence or blocked goals. Potential research use Blame, confrontation and redress Code anger Events with label 1,049,421 Share of labelled 45.0% Share of World 6.9% **Events with label** is the selected count. **Label share** divides it by 2,334,084 assigned events; **World share** divides it by all 15,311,040 events. #### Representative World V1.2 events One strong classified example per available year, with up to ten years shown. 10 examples 1. 2015-04-27Obama Debuts Anger Translator Keegan-Michael Key at Correspondents DinnerCoverage 46 2. 2016-11-12India Banks Struggle to Swap Banned Notes Amid Public AngerCoverage 73 3. 2017-01-06Key and Peele Return for Final Obama Anger Translator Sketch on Daily ShowCoverage 92 4. 2019-11-08Hong Kong Student Dies in Fall During Protests, Sparking AngerCoverage 254 5. 2020-08-06Beirut Blast Kills Over 100, Sparks Government AngerCoverage 998 6. 2021-03-15Newsom Fights Partisan Recall Amid Pandemic and Unemployment AngerCoverage 60 7. 2022-04-19Xi Jinping Maintains Strict Zero-Covid Policy Amid Public AngerCoverage 117 8. 2024-11-04Spain Deploys 7,500 Troops to Flood Zone Amid Rising Public AngerCoverage 401 9. 2025-06-16Justin Bieber Admits Anger Issues After Blocking Friend Over TextsCoverage 261 10. 2026-03-18Rand Paul Confronts Trump's DHS Pick Mullin Over Anger IssuesCoverage 6,756 Browse categories to compare definitions, World V1.2 statistics and representative classified events. Example usage 1 of 3 ### Example Usage: FTX coverage shifts from fear during collapse to anger during prosecution World V1.2 contains 690 Ekman-labelled events tagged with FTX or Sam Bankman-Fried. During the November–December 2022 collapse, fear accounts for 55.3% of 217 events and anger 31.3%. Across the trial window, anger rises to 71.2% while fear falls to 21.6%. Around sentencing, anger reaches 88.9% and fear 7.4%. [[ 5 ]](https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/19464725450260-Derivative-Positions) [[ 6 ]](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-statement-guilty-verdict-jury-trial-sam-bankman-fried) [[ 7 ]](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-prison) Collapse reporting emphasizes threat, insolvency and contagion. Trial and sentencing emphasize blame, wrongdoing and punishment. A 14-day decay preserves the transition without treating each observation as a new regime. This exposes financial-risk mechanisms that a single negative sentiment score cannot distinguish across reported phases in World. [[ 6 ]](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-statement-guilty-verdict-jury-trial-sam-bankman-fried) [[ 7 ]](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-prison) Collapse Trial Sentencing Full sequence 690 tagged events · 2019-11-06 to 2026-06-17 Collapse · 217 events Fear 55.3% · Anger 31.3% Trial · 111 events Anger 71.2% · Fear 21.6% Sentencing · 27 events Anger 88.9% · Fear 7.4% **Coverage intensity retains a 14-day memory** events per million World events **Coverage moves from threat to blame** fear share minus anger share The decayed series use a 14-day half-life and a seven-event prior estimated only from observations before October 2022. Later observations cannot change the baseline. The longer memory suppresses isolated daily reversals while preserving the collapse, trial and sentencing transitions. This describes media coverage. It does not test returns, causality, attribution or economic impact on exposed assets. Example usage 2 of 3 ### Example Usage: Election day creates a brief happiness spike before anger quickly returns The 2024 United States presidential election produces a sharp but temporary change in classified emotion. Happiness reaches 23.9% in the seven days beginning after election day, up from 6.3% during the prior week. Anger falls from 52.4% to 40.6%, while surprise rises as the outcome becomes known. [[ 9 ]](https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024presgeresults.pdf) The transition reverses within two weeks. Happiness falls below 11% and anger returns above 50%, so the improvement has a short half-life. Emotion categories separate outcome confirmation from renewed political conflict. Researchers can then test policy attention, sector exposure, volatility and event-signal decay against each phase. [[ 10 ]](https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12819) Happiness +17.6pp Anger -11.8pp Surprise +5.3pp Seven-day pooled share of Ekman-assigned election events · % Happiness Anger Surprise The fixed English cohort covers 15 October through 25 November 2024 and requires election language plus a presidential candidate or voting term. Each line pools Ekman counts across the current and prior six days, then divides by all Ekman-assigned cohort events in that window. Example usage 3 of 3 ### Example Usage: COVID emotion states reveal distinct crisis phases hidden inside negative sentiment COVID coverage doubles after the World Health Organization declares a pandemic on 11 March 2020. Normalized Ekman-labelled attention rises from 50,374 to 102,045 events per million across matched fourteen-day windows. Disgust remains the largest state, but its share falls from 49.3% to 34.9% as the reporting agenda broadens beyond contamination. [[ 8 ]](https://www.who.int/news-room/speeches/item/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020) Anger rises from 6.4% to 16.6%, while sadness triples from 4.5% to 13.5%. Fear falls despite the wider crisis. Those states map to different mechanisms: contamination, policy conflict and realized loss. Researchers can condition volatility, sector exposure and policy-response tests on crisis phase instead of treating every negative COVID event as equivalent. [[ 1 ]](https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068) Normalized coverage +51,671 per million Disgust -14.4pp Anger +10.2pp Sadness +9.0pp Fourteen-day pooled share of Ekman-assigned COVID events · % Disgust Anger Sadness Fear The fixed English COVID cohort compares 26 February to 10 March 2020 with 11 to 24 March. Each line pools emotion counts across the current and prior thirteen days, then divides by all Ekman-assigned cohort events in that window. The marker is the World Health Organization's pandemic declaration. Data and sources ## Download Ekman-7 and References ### Downloads Download categories and counts as CSV, or the complete machine-readable release as JSON. [**CSV** Definitions and counts Download ↓](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/nodes.csv) [**JSON** Full machine-readable release Download ↓](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/statistics.json) Release details and citation files [Manifest](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/manifest.json) [Release README](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/README.md) [CC0 license and scope](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/LICENSE.md) [Citation file](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/CITATION.cff) [Changelog](https://nosible.com/data/world-v1.2/ontologies/ekman-emotion/v1/CHANGELOG.md) Need the complete World event schema? [Open the World data dictionary.](https://nosible.com/data-dictionaries#world) ### References 1. [ 1 ][Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 6(3-4), 169-200.](https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068) 2. [ 2 ][Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1971). Constants across cultures in the face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17(2), 124–129.](https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030377) 3. [ 3 ][Ekman, P. (1992). Facial expressions of emotion: New findings, new questions. Psychological Science, 3(1), 34–38.](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00253.x) 4. [ 4 ][Hutto, D. D., Robertson, I., & Kirchhoff, M. D. (2018). A new, better BET: Rescuing and revising Basic Emotion Theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1217.](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01217) 5. [ 5 ][FTX Trading Ltd. (2022, November 11). Voluntary Chapter 11 petitions filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.](https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/19464725450260-Derivative-Positions) 6. [ 6 ][U.S. Department of Justice. (2023, November 2). Statement on the guilty verdict in the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried.](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-statement-guilty-verdict-jury-trial-sam-bankman-fried) 7. [ 7 ][U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York. (2024, March 28). Samuel Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years in prison.](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-prison) 8. [ 9 ][Federal Election Commission. Official 2024 presidential general election results.](https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024presgeresults.pdf) 9. [ 10 ][Funck, A. S. (2024). A meta-analytic assessment of the effects of emotions on political information search and decision-making. American Journal of Political Science.](https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12819) 10. [ 8 ][World Health Organization. (2020). Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, 11 March 2020.](https://www.who.int/news-room/speeches/item/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020) Continue exploring ## Complementary ontologies [5 categories Media Frames Test whether emotion and narrative emphasis carry separate information about the same event. Explore ontology →](https://nosible.com/ontologies/media-frames) [88 categories PLOVER Political Events Connect reported emotion to concrete political actions such as threats, sanctions and concessions. Explore ontology →](https://nosible.com/ontologies/plover) > Explore seven reported emotion categories, World V1.2 base rates and example usages that separate threat, blame, loss, rejection and surprise through time. **URL:** https://nosible.com/ontologies/ekman-emotion