Charles Finney, in his Revivals of Religion, wrote that huge outpourings of emotion were the evidence that revival has happened. He also wrote that such displays would be automatic if one followed his blueprint for revival.
In other words, Finney believed that peoples emotions could be manipulated into the desired response, through the application of his methods. And this is how revivals are done.
In my mind, anyway, the word "revival" means "mass conviction/mass conversions". Emotional displays are optional. I often wonder if a revival could occur w/o the emotionalism one usually associates with tent-style revivals?
Yet the Puritans also reference experience. Divines in the Dutch Nadere Reformatie like Comrie and Voetius held experience as well, sometimes bordering on mysticism and seen today in the most insular sects like the Netherlands Reformed Congregations.
By contrast, in the CRC and its derivatives (also Dutch), bearing the indelible stamp of Kuyperian covanentalism, experience counts for little to nothing.
While we would probably dismiss Finney out of hand, I have high regard for both Kuyper and the Puritans/Dutch Second Refomration divines. All claim to start from Scripture, as did Mullins in the article above. You can see the difficulty.
Sort of an earlier day Benny Hinn?