Too little checked to say Reviews and the store listing were checked, but not the Android app’s code, so we can’t say yet.
From our automated analysis, 25 Oct 2026.
This analysis describes version 1.17.16 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 1.17.16, updated 2026-10-21.
This analysis describes version 0.0.440 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-25 .
The store currently lists version 0.0.440, updated 2026-10-20.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
How We Feel is a free app created by scientists, designers, engineers, and therapists to help people better understand their emotions and find strategies to help them navigate their emotions in the moment. Conceived in conjunction with Yale University's Center for Emotional Intelligence and based on the work of Dr Marc Brackett, How We Feel helps people find the right word to describe how they feel while tracking their sleep, exercise, and health trends using HealthKit in order to spot patterns over time.
Founded as a science-based nonprofit, How We Feel is made possible by donations from people who are passionate about bringing mental wellbeing to the widest possible audience. Our data privacy terms are clear and easy-to-understand: all of your data is kept on your device unless you opt-in to send an anonymized version of your check-ins to be used in research to help more people.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Reviewers report clear pricing: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 83 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own text offers a one-time or lifetime purchase, or reviewers report that the price is stated clearly.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
900 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Cool concept and I appreciate there are no hidden fees or subscriptions. Looses a star because I need to be able to add more than 2 emotions per check-in
The Best App! — I never write reviews but this app I had to. This app is actually fully free - no hidden fees, no hidden things you can’t unlock until you pay - it’s FREE. The app itself has tools that have genuinely helped my anxiety and…
Awesome and free! — I struggle with mental health alot and this helps me so much, no ads, no in app purchases, it’s great.
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
No package has been scanned for this app, so nothing is published about what it ships. That is an absence of evidence, not a finding.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.17.16 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 1.17.16, updated 2026-10-21.
This analysis describes version 0.0.440 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-25 .
The store currently lists version 0.0.440, updated 2026-10-20.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Some bug fixes, a social campaign.
No release notes were provided for this version.
Appworthy
how-we-feelAssessed 2026-10-25 from 900 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
No itemized purchase list is available for this listing.
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.