Situation Context in Context-Aware Emotion Recognition
A Structured Literature Review of Conceptualisation and Modelling Approaches
A. Kaypmaz (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)
B.J.W. Dudzik – Mentor (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)
S. Mukherjee – Mentor (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)
S. Tan – Graduation committee member (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Emotion recognition systems often infer affective states from observable signals such as facial expressions, speech, body posture, language, or multimodal behaviour. Yet emotional meaning is rarely determined by these signals alone: the same expression may communicate different emotions depending on the surrounding situation context. In this review, situation context refers to the external, environmental, temporal, social, conversational, or event-related information that shapes how an emotional signal is interpreted. This paper presents a structured literature review (SLR) synthesizing 19 papers across five search strata to examine how situation context is conceptualised and modelled in context-aware emotion recognition research. The synthesis shows that situation context is not one shared computational object. It is operationalised as visual surroundings, conversational history, social interaction, causal event structure, commonsense knowledge, or semantic situation understanding, depending on the task and modelling tradition. Modelling approaches range from implicit use of temporal or multimodal features to explicit representations through context branches, graph structures, cause labels, commonsense knowledge, or prompting. A central limitation of the field is therefore structural fragmentation: situation context is considered important, but it is defined, represented, and evaluated inconsistently across tasks and datasets.