This article examines the concept of emodiversity, put forward by Quoidbach et al. (2014) as a novel source of information about "the health of the human emotional ecosystem" (p. 2057). Quoidbach et al. drew an analogy between emodiversity as a desirable property of a person's emotional make-up and biological diversity as a desirable property of an ecosystem. They claimed that emodiversity was an independent predictor of better mental and physical health outcomes in two large-scale studies. Here, we show that Quoidbach et al.'s construct of emodiversity suffers from several theoretical and practical deficiencies, which make these authors' use of Shannon's (1948) entropy formula to measure emodiversity highly questionable. Our reanalysis of Quoidbach et al.'s two studies shows that the apparently substantial effects that these authors reported are likely due to a failure to conduct appropriate hierarchical regression in one case and to suppression effects in the other. It appears that Quoidbach et al.'s claims about emodiversity may reduce to little more than a set of computational and statistical artifacts. (PsycINFO Database Record

中文翻译：

---

普遍性：结果或统计伪像的可靠预测器？

本文考察了Quoidbach等人提出的关于多样性的概念。（2014年）作为有关“人类情感生态系统健康”的新颖信息来源（第2057页）。Quoidbach等。有人将情绪多样性作为一个人的情绪构成的理想特性与将生物多样性作为一个生态系统的理想特性进行了类比。他们声称，在两项大规模研究中，情绪多样性是心理和身体健康状况改善的独立预测因素。在这里，我们表明Quoidbach等人的情绪多样性构造存在几个理论和实践上的缺陷，这使得这些作者使用Shannon（1948）的熵公式来度量情绪多样性是非常可疑的。我们对Quoidbach等人的重新分析。两项研究表明，这些作者报告的明显实质性影响可能是由于在一种情况下未能进行适当的层次回归，而在另一种情况下是由于抑制作用。看来，Quoidbach等人关于情绪多样性的主张可能会减少到只不过是一组计算和统计伪像而已。（PsycINFO数据库记录