Emotion and Biological Psychology

epistemic emotions

curiosity, confusion, surprise, interest, wonder

closely tied to knowledge, learning, and cognitive processes

arise in response to situations involving uncertainty, curiosity, insight, or the pursuit of understanding

crucial in motivation for learning, problem-solving, and critical thinking – signal that something needs to be understood or resolved, prompting further cognitive effort

doubt-certainty cycle (KOLLA UPP?)

curiosity

the desire to acquire new knowledge

epistemic emotion

confusion

a reaction to conflicting or unclear information

epistemic emotion

surprise

a response to unexpected information

epistemic emotion

interest

engagement with novel or complex stimuli

epistemic emotion

wonder

a deep sense of awe or fascination, often about something vast or mysterious

epistemic emotion

definition of emotional episode

an event-focused, two-step, fast process consisting of

a) elicitation mechanisms that

b) shape multiple responses (e.g. behavioral, physiological, and subjective feeling)

provides us with information about the environment and prepare us to handle it and reach our goals

components of an emotional response

action tendency as emotional response component

approach – avoid

subjective experience as emotional response component

conscious experience of feeling

physiology and somatic respons as emotional respons component

autonomic nervous system

endocrine systems

expression as emotional response component

facial expression

posture

movement

cognitive as emotional response component

attention

cognitions

decision-making

volitional control as emotional respons component

the conscious capacity to regulate actions, emotions, and impulses to align with personal goals or values

KOLLA UPP

functions/adaptive purposes of emotions

inform us about the environment and prepare us to handle it and reach our goals, e.g. increasing survival (although is gets out of hand sometimes…) and well-being

guide behavior

facilitate decision-making

prioritize attention and memory

regulate physiological states

support social communication

emotions as functional states

Adolphs & Anderson’s idea that defines emotions by what they do, rather than how they are implemented

illustration: a clock is defined as something that shows the time, rather than by the multiple implementations it can have

brain state

an instance of an emotion

not all instances of the same emotion have an identical such state

properties of emotion states

scalability: emotion intensity (roughly like arousal)

valence: evaluation, good/bad

persistence: lasts longer than stimuli

generalization: over stimuli and behavior

global coordination: engages the whole organism

automaticity: greater priority over behavior than volitional actions

social communication: signals to other organisms

can be used to separate instances of emotion states!

necessity of emotion causation theories

should explain:

1. elicitation: why a given event evokes an emotion

2. differentiation: why the evoked emotion is of a specific kind

and the psychological mechanism, i.e. the process through which this is achieved

evolutionary origin of emotions

originally served to guide action

all living organisms share some fundamental characteristics:

1. the are autonomous systems

2. they can produce self-initiated movements

3. their movements show direction: they move towards some things and away from other

→ to determine the direction, some type of evaluative process is needed → the forerunner of our emotions

emerging consensus among emotion researches

emotions…

• are complex phenomena

• have evolutionary origins, but are shaped by cultural factors

• serve as an “interface” between the organism and its environment

• are elicited by some type of “information processing”

• have a number of important functions (usually of social nature)

• include several components (e.g. expression, physiology, action tendencies)

• involve changes in mental and bodily components that are centrally represented as feelings (which can be labeled)

dominant approaches in emotion theory

categorical

• basic emotion theories

• cognitive appraisal theories

• associative theories

dimensional

• unidimensional models

• multidimensional models

hybrid

• constructionist theories

  • multilevel theories

categorical approaches

theories that assume that people experience emotions as categories, which are distinct from each other

agrees on that learning is involved to some extent

basic emotion theories (BET)

categorical approach, assumes that there are a limited number of innate and universal emotion categories

there’s a set of survival problems that most living organisms have in common → these problems require adaptive responses → these responses are seen as the “prototypes” of human emotion

some say that basic emotions may combine with other emotions or cognitive contents to create more complex emotions

have their roots in Darwin’s work on emotional expression

examples of adaptive responses in basic emotion theories (BET)

fear, to avoid danger

interest, to search for food

joy, to cooperate with others

anger, to compete for resources

desire, to procreate

disgust, to avoid toxic substances

tender love, to care for offspring

possible support for basic emotion theories (BET)

early development

phylogenetic continuity

cross-cultural consistency in the antecedent conditions

cross-cultural accuracy in facial and vocal expression

categorical perception of emotional expressions

distinct patterns of psychophysiological changes

distinct brain networks

Panksepp’s seven emotional systems

well-known model in basic emotion theories (BET), that defines emotions as fixed biological building blocks, not psychological constructions

argues that we are born with seven fixed, subcortical circuits:

• SEEKING: generalized motivational arousal

• RAGE: affective attech

• FEAR

• LUST: sexuality

• CARE: nurturance/maternal

• PANIC: separation distress, social bonding

• PLAY: social joy and affection

learning only conditions what triggers them and how we regulate the behavioral output

criticism against basic emotion theories (BET)

little agreement about how many emotions are basic, which emotions are basic, and why they are basic – if there really are basic emotions, how can there be so much disagreement?

can’t explain the variety of emotions people experience in life

not that much distinct patterns in expressions, physiology, or neural activity

cognitive appraisal theories (CAT)

categorical theories, focus on how specific profiles of appraisal outcomes determine the emotion

says that emotions are elicited and differentiated on the basis of a person’s subjective evaluation, of the personal significance (usually related to goals, motives, and plans) of a situation, object, or event on a number of dimensions or criteria

assume “emotion specificity” in the response

comparison of basic emotion theories (BET) and cognitive appraisal theories (CAT)

similarities:

• assume “emotion specificity” in the response

• categorical approaches

differences:

• (most) CAT assume that emotions will reflect the outcomes of individual criteria in even more specific ways

• CAT often postulate a much larger number (even infinite) of emotions

criticism against cognitive appraisal theories (CAT)

disagreement among researchers about the exact number and identity of the criteria required to account for emotions

also disagreement about the appraisal profile for each emotion: even if they agree on the criteria, they may not predict the same pattern for the emotion

appraisals have mainly been studied with verbal self-reports (recalled emotional episodes) – critics argue that this is studying what people think causes their emotions rather than the actual causes

inconsistent in the view of subconsciousness: responds with “appraisals may occur subconsciously” when accused of being too cognitive, but at the same time assuming that subjects can report upon their appraisal processes (which is not possible if it’s outside consciousness)

appraisal may not be the only mechanism! when trying to predict specific emotions based on ratings of criteria, only 40-50% of episodes are classified correctly

associative theories (AT)

categorical approaches, range from simple condition theories to complex semantic networks

emotions are recorded in memory → activation of these memories is the most frequent cause of emotions in daily life

claim that most stimuli evoke emotions as a result of learning and emotional conditioning

not all of them are focusing on how emotions are caused. some just investigate the link to memory

neo-behavioristic

emotional conditioning

learning processes in LeDoux’s Higher-Order Theory of Emotional Consciousness (associative theory, AT)

a new neutral stimulus acquires “emotional power” via repeated pairings with another stimulus that is already stored in memory as part of an “emotion schema” → previously neutral stimulus will eventually evoke that emotion on its own

very similar to classical conditioning

Rolls’ emotion classification scheme

associative theory (AT), similar to operant conditioning/instrumental learning

we are born with primary reinforcers (e.g. pain), and learn secondary reinforcers (e.g. money) by associations throughout life

emotions = states elicited by rewards and punishments (reinforcers), and by the omission or termination of such reinforcers

categorizes emotion in terms of:

a. whether the reinforcer is positive (reward) or negative (punishment)

b. by the contingency relationship between the response and the reinforcer

criticism against associative theories (AT)

not very informative about what stimuli will tend to evoke what emotions

underestimates innately prepared responses: any stimulus should be capable of eliciting any emotion, but this is not really true – we learn some associations easier than others, e.g. easier to develop a phobia of snakes than lightbulbs

circular reasoning: the emotion (e.g. joy) could be the reward and the elicited emotion

sneaks in some cognitive interpretation elements: acknowledgement that associations alone can’t explain the full range of emotions experienced by people

neglect evidence of multiple emotion systems within the brain

little effort to analyze cultural differences in emotions (probably because mostly animal studies)

primary reinforcers kinda similar to affect programs in BET

dimensional approaches

conceptualize emotions based on their placement along broad and continuous dimensions

not usually regarded as theories of emotion causation – the goal is rather to describe the structure of emotional experience (feelings) – but often part of hybrid theories

come in many different forms: one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional

circumplex model of emotions/core affect

two-dimensional model that illustrates that emotions vary in their similarity to each other

says that we are always experiencing some core affect – at a given moment, the conscious experience is a single integral blend of two dimensions

economic way of representing affective responses

criticism against the circumplex model/core affect

blurs important psychological distinctions: emotions placed roughly at the same position can be quite different (e.g. angry and afraid are both high in arousal and unpleasantness, but very different in terms of their implications for the individual, such as different action tendencies)

people actually don’t seem to experience a feeling all of the time, in fact maybe only 25% of the time

confuse emotions (intense, short-lived responses to events) with moods (weaker, more floating, without a specific object)

methodological problems: the model might just be random from the factor analyses

we can experience opposite emotions at the same time, this model doesn’t acknowledge that

there might be two arousal dimensions reflecting different physiological systems

dimensions may not be superior to categories

emotions might manifest earlier than valence and arousal

hybrid approached

combine categorical and dimensional aspects

come in different forms: constructionist and multilevel

theory of constructed emotion (TCE) (Feldman Barrett)

hybrid approach constructionism theory, says that emotions aren’t in principle distinct from cognitions and perceptions – no brain systems dedicated/unique to emotions at all

emotions are “created on the fly” every time. the brain uses concepts (required: without a concept for fear, you can’t experience fear) to give meaning to both internal and external sensations – if the concept happens to be about emotion, the brain is constructing an emotion

social construction: empasizes the importance of culture and language-based concepts

psychological construction: argues that emotions are constructed from various mental elements that are not specific to emotions

hybrid model: interpretative layer for emotion categories/concepts, affect layer with biological dimensions/core affect

criticism against theory of constructed emotion (TCE)

doesn’t escape the problems with core affect – if all mental states are conceptualizations, core affect should be too, but it’s seen as a biological primitive

emotions feel very different from other mental states, which contradicts the idea of the same domain-general core systems for all mental states

the focus on language forces an awkward position: it there’s no swedish word for an english term of emotion X, do swedes not experience emotion X?

difficult to test: no clear hypotheses on how the brain relates to emotions, unclear distinction between emotions being triggered vs created, “predicts variability” but there’s always variability (i.e. impossible to falsify)

if concepts are absolutely necessary, how can we create the concept of fear without experiencing fear? no infant or animal could never have emotions – fails to explain how emotions evolved

not realising that we can experience multiple emotions (e.g. anger and happiness) at the same time

doesn’t differentiate feelings from emotions – emotions are labeled feelings

multilevel theories (MLT)

many different causes of human behavior and emotions, i.e. emotions are multiply determined – a single emotion mechanism is unable to account for all emotions

these theories can resolve some of the problems associated with other theories

reflect both universal and culture-specific aspects

accounts for variability and individual differences

can explain that more than one emotion can occur at the same time (occurance of mixed emotions)

cover emotions not addressed by traditional theories

more consistent with neuropsychological findings

incorporates both dimensional and categorical aspects

different events may activate different mechanism, and different mechanisms have different emotions related to them (?)

the BRECVEMAC theory

different types of emotions are aroused by different types of mechanisms at different levels of the brain. the lowest levels may involve mainly the arousal dimension and proto-emotions (e.g. surprise), whereas the highest levels may involve more complex and even aestethic emotions

features nine mechanisms, which involve more or less distinct brain networks, thought to have evolved sequentially/gradually through evolution

Brain stem reflex

Rhythmic entrainment

Evaluative conditioning

Contagion

Visual imagery

Episodic memory

Musical expectancy

Aesthetic judgment

Cognitive appraisal

main problems for emotion theories

emotions are a less perfectly homogenous class of phenomena

• instead of agreeing on criteria distinguishing different emotions from each other, it might be easier to converge on a set of criteria that distinguish emotions from non-emotional phenomena

disconnection between psychological emotion theories and empirical studies in neuroscience

• no shortage of either one, but they aren’t exactly working toghether

  • few neuropsycholocigal studies try to test theories of emotion, although there are a lot of neuroscience data on emotions

emotional perception vs emotional induction

observing and understanding vs internally experiencing

cognitive and sensory ability to detect and decode emotional signals in others or environment (e.g., looking at a sad face or listening to sad music and logically realizing it represents sadness)

vs

actual activation of your own subcortical circuits and autonomic nervous system, causing you to genuinely experience the emotion yourself (e.g., crying and feeling sad while listening to that music)

components of the central nervous system (CNS)

brain

spinal cord

afferent signals

goes to the brain (or intended brain region)

efferent signals

goes from the brain (or intended brain region)

gross division of the nervous system

central nervous system (CNS)

peripheral nervous system

components of the peripheral nervous system

networks of nerves and ganglia outside the brain and the spinal cord

divides into somatic and autonomic nervous system

neuron

nerve cells that handle/process/transfer information in the nervous system

consists of a cell body with a nucleus, dendrites, and an axon (surrounded by myelin sheath) ending in an axon terminal

glial cells

non-neuronal helper sells in the nervous system

don’t carry nerve impulses (action potential), but help with e.g. cleaning waste, digest parts of dead neurons, provide insulation (i.e. myelin) to the neurons’ axons, and regulate synaptic transmission

several different types, for example: astrocytes, schwann cells, and oligodendrocyte

autonomic nervous system

part of the peripheral nervous system that controls and regulates internal organs without us consciously recognising it

both reflexes and central regulation

divides into two major divisions that act complementary: the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system, sometimes also enteric and intrinsic cardiac nervous system

visceral nervous system

sometimes used as a synonym to the autonomic nervous system

sometimes seen as a system specifically for the afferents (input) from the viscera (internal organs), i.e. for interoception. the autonomic nervous system is then seen as the motor (efferent) component

insula

brain structure very important for the autonomic nervous system

primary interoceptive cortex that integrates bodily signals, tracking the state of the body

sympathetic nervous system

quick and mobilizing part of the autonomic nervous system that controls our “fight or flight” response

regulates vital organ functions

activates in “times of need”, especially under stress or danger

increases heart rate/blood flow, releases glucose to give us a quick burst of energy, and slows down enteric activity to save energy for immediate physical action, among other things

parasympathetic nervous system

slower and dampening part of the autonomic nervous system that controls “rest and digest”

helps to control body responses during times of rest

increases digestion rate, lowers heart rate, and calls for insulin release, among other things

ways of dividing the brain

gross anatomy

hemispheres

lobes

structures/regions

cytoarchitecture

cerebrum

cerebellum

brain stem

1

frontal lobe

2

temporal lobe

3

brain stem

4

cerebellum

5

occipital lobe

6

parietal lobe

1

corpus callosum

2

orbitofrontal cortex

3

hypothalamus

4

amygdala

5

ventral-medial prefrontal cortex (important for emotion regulation)

6

hippocampus

7

thalamus

8

cingulate gyrus

frontal lobe tasks

planning/reasoning

problem-solving

recognising and regulating emotion

social skills

temporal lobe tasks

understanding language

processing auditory information

organising information

memory

learning

brain stem tasks

regulate breathing, body temperature, heart activity etcc

cerebellum tasks

control balance and muscle co-ordination

occipital lobe tasks

integrating and processing visual information (colour, shape, distance)

parietal lobe tasks

recognising sensations and body position

recognising objects

spatial judgments

understanding time

amygdala tasks

integrate information from different parts of the brain

salience detection

essential for the processing of emotional responses

1

cerebral cortex

2

basal ganglia

3

hippocampus

4

amygdala

brief history of (thought) localisation of psychological functions

the brain was not originally seen as responsible, instead the heart, liver, blood, pineal gland, and humidity (among other things)

phrenology

idea that the mind is based in the brain, that is not seen as a unity but as distinct organs with distinct functions

the brain was said to be composed of different muscles – the bigger ones are those we use the most.

belied that personality traits can be predicted by measuring contours of the brain

discredited pseudoscience

division of the brain in functional areas

holistic view of the brain (Flourens, Lashley)

early form of distributed processing saying that the whole cerebrum contributes to higher functions

no specific place has a specific function → the location of brain damage doesn’t matter, only the size of the injury

equipotentiality: intact parts of the brain can take over functions from damaged areas

ideas of early connectionism/interactionism

Forms of distributed processing

Wernicke: basic functions localized to specific brain regions – complex cognitive functions involve connections between regions

Luria: block model where localized functions work in functional systems across three blocks

• block 1: basal parts of the brain. wakefulness, basal attention, and affect

• block 2: posterior cortex. receive, analyze, store information from the outside

• block 3: frontal lobe. motor function, planning, executive functions

modern distributed processing in networks

networks are the basic building blocks for brain functions. they operate within the connectome (the brain's functional network)

it processes information by combining local specialization, where specialized functions are handled within network modules (functional segregation), and global coordination, where network hubs integrate that information across the brain (functional integration)

this topology is dynamic and meta-stable, meaning the networks can reorganize fast depending on the functional requirements

which parts are communicating at a timepoint changes → the network also changes over time

default mode network (DMN)

resting network of the triple network model

deals with self-reflection, memories, planning, inner focus

medial prefrontal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, lateral and medial paretial lobe

salience network (SN)

network in the triple network model that deals with bahavioral relevance

detects what is important in the flow of information and deals with switches between default mode network and central executive network

anterior insula and cingulate cortex

central executive network (CEN)

network in the triple network model that deals with goal oriented behavior, working memory, problem-solving, outer focus

dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, posterior paretial cortex

triple network model

model illustrating how distributed processing operates through three different networks

contents of networks

circuits, which consist of cells (neuron and glia) that communicate mostly through chemical processes at synapses, but sometimes also electrochemical

electrochemical neural communication

how a signal travels from one end of a neuron to the other (i.e. communication within cells)

resting potential → reaching threshold due to stimulation from another neuron → depolarization → action potential → repolarization → hyperpolarization → signal to next neuron

action potential

at rest, the inside of the neuron is more negatively charged (i.e. the resting potential is negative) because of an imbalance in the concentrations of ions – mostly in natrium (Na+) and potassium (K+) – and proteins

when a neuron receives signals from another neuron, the membrane potential is no longer in rest and gets less negative. when the charge reach the threshold (often -55 mV), action potential begins. the neuron is depolarised by Na+ entering through ion channels opened due to the action potential, making the charge inside the neuron positive. the Na+ channels are then closed and K+ channels opened, causing K+ to exit the neuron. these channels are a bit slow, so “too much” K+ exits. this makes the neuron hyperpolarized with an extremely negative charge, which makes it impossible for the potential to travel in any other direction than “forward”. when it reaches the axon terminal (the end of the neuron) the voltage change opens calcium channels

effects of the action potential on the presynaptic site

potential reaches voltage-sensitive terminal → opens calcium channels → calcium ions enter and bind to the protein calmodulin, forming a complex → the complex binds to vesicles → releases some of the vesicles and induces vesicles to bind to the presynaptic membrane and to empty their contents exocytosis