Abu-Lughod’s perspective on emotions is different from the other authors.
   She also used a more personal study approach, as she basically became one
   of the people she was studying. Her ideas are more valid because she is
   not implying on how we should behave, but is more focused on presenting
   the conclusions of her actual study. The other authors off course were
   also studying cultures in person, but I didn’t get the feeling, that they
   were as engaged as she was with the people. For instance Seligmans study
   is made as a class, focused on people of his own culture and can therefore
   be inaccurate for other cultures. The anger texts were also focused on
   different cultures, but the scholars were not as engaged with people as
   Lughod was. The best proof for that is her own finding that her host was
   trying to make her stay with emotionally exaggerated story about a
   cassette. She did not know that he was lying to her before he dropped her
   on the airport, but she found out about it later, when she came back and
   his wife told her, that the girl who was supposed to be dead was actually
   still married to the guy. That is why I think that her study of emotions
   is better than those of other authors. Firstly because she did not examine
   her own culture and secondly because she actually became a solid member of
   the examined culture.