English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In response to our work (1), Sauter and Eisner (2) argue, “… [our] strong claims … are not supported by [our] data.” Herein, we show that their arguments are unsubstantiated, primarily reflecting misunderstandings. Sauter and Eisner argue “…[EA] understanding of English emotion terms ... may have been more variable … because of varying lexical correspondence … as well as … English proficiency.” East Asian (EA) observers possessed a minimum International English Language Testing System score of 6.0 (1, p. 2), including use of fairly complex language. As high frequency words, all emotion labels were also well within capability. Furthermore, before testing, we established comprehension by obtaining descriptions and synonyms of each emotion label. Sauter and Eisner argue “Because the Chinese ‘cultural group’ includes many cultural and linguistic subgroups, variability even for in-group signals should be expected.” We show variance …

Reply to Sauter and Eisner: Differences outweigh commonalities in the communication of emotions across human cultures