Thanks but I don’t see the connection between what I wrote and what they wrote …
Update: Maybe you meant that they understand the term “valence” in the same way I do. That seems plausible. Their explanation of valence is wildly different than mine, but we are both talking about the same thing, I think.
There’s this from QRI that I think also points to a similar interpretation of valence and arousal as the one you use here.
Thanks but I don’t see the connection between what I wrote and what they wrote …
Update: Maybe you meant that they understand the term “valence” in the same way I do. That seems plausible. Their explanation of valence is wildly different than mine, but we are both talking about the same thing, I think.