What are the theoretical frameworks of emotion and cognition? - Chapter 11

What are the key aspects of emotion science?

Six key aspects have emerged from the previous chapters of this book

1. Affect is a pervasive part of our lives
2. Emotions, emotion schemes, mood states, feelings and temperament are different aspects of affect
3. Affect can be studied at different levels of analysis
4. Affect is seen in a wide range of both cortical and subcortical areas of the brain
5. Individual differences are important
6. Studying normal emotion and disturbed emotion can inform each other

Why is affect a pervasive part of our live?

The affective life of people is rich and varied and affects every part of our lives. It affects attention, memory and our decisions. Most of our most important experiences and memories are characterized by the valence of situations. It is therefore not surprising that a disrupted perception of affect (such as with emotional disorders) can have devastating consequences, or that being able to properly regulate emotions is crucial for well-being and happiness.

Emotions, emotion schemes, mood states, feelings and temperament are different aspects of affect

The different components of affect are often confused in the investigation of emotion. This causes a lot of confusion and misunderstanding. Affect is an overarching concept that covers both emotions and moods. Emotion is described as a quick and short-term response to an event, including physical response, feelings, and cognitive appraisal. Basic emotions are determined by evolution and can be distinguished from non-basic emotions, also known as emotion schemes. These emotion schemes are mental representations of combined affective and cognitive components.

Moods last longer and can be seen as a kind of objectless core effect, an emotion that is stretched over a longer period of time. This allows us to interpret in a more general way how we do it in life. Feelings can again be seen as the conscious representation of emotions and moods. It is interesting that although people can clearly distinguish between feelings of anger, sadness and fear, when describing this they do not go much further than a description of valence (positive-negative) and arousal (intensity). This can be because emotions have evolved far before language, so language does not have a good description for it.

Temperament, finally, refers to more persistent (perhaps even lifelong) tendencies to act in a certain way. There are a number of important dimensions related to temperament: Neuroticism-Negative Affectivity (N-NA) and Extraversion-Positive Affectivity (E-PA). A third system ( disinhibition versus constraint ) determines how N-NA and E-PA are experienced and expressed. The affective tone of a person's life is a result of interactions between temperament, life experiences, experiences of emotions, emotion schemes and moods.

Affect can be studied at different levels of analysis

Affect can be studied at neuronal level, response level or subjective level. These levels are related to each other in all sorts of complex ways. These relationships need to be investigated much further in the future.

Affect is seen in a wide range of both cortical and subcortical areas of the brain

Emotions, moods and feelings can be traced back to large and interconnected brain regions. In particular, neural circuits between cortical and subcortical areas are important for expressing and experiencing emotions and moods.

Individual differences are important

There are strong individual differences in both emotional reactivity and emotion perception. People consistently differ in how they respond to affective situations, how they pay attention to them, how they interpret and remember. These differences are unfortunately often ignored by cognitive psychologists and neuroscientists.

Studying normal emotion and disturbed emotion can inform each other

There was always a clear separation between research into normal emotions and research into emotion disorders. This is now changing. Research into emotions on the one hand can strengthen knowledge and understanding on the other.

What are the seven sins in studying emotion?

Davidson identified seven sins in studying emotion and stated that research developments could correct many of them.

1. Affect and cognition are subserved by separate and independent neural circuits
2. Affect is subcortical
3. Emotions are in the head
4. Emotions can be studies from a purely psychological perspective
5. Emotions are similar in structure across both age and species
6. Specific emotions are instantiated in discrete locations in the brain
7. Emotions are conscious feeling states

The first sin is the assumption that affect and cognition are subserved by separate and independent neural circuits within the brain. However, it appears that each of these domains is made up of many sub-components and that the two are deeply integrated at the neural level. The affective and cognitive processes can be found in many overlapping areas of the brain.

The second sin is the assumption that affect is primarily subcortical. There is no doubt that subcortical structures (especially the amygdala) are critical for a range of affective states. Nevertheless, there is much evidence that both cortical and subcortical areas are involved in affect. More specifically, subcortical-cortical circuits are crucial for expressing and regulating emotions. It is true that the ability of cortical areas to inhibit subcortical activity occurs much more in higher primates (especially humans) than in rats and other animals. These connections seem to have changed the experience and expression of emotions, moods and feelings.

The third sin is the assumption that emotions are completely in the head. Psychophysiological research shows that a series of peripheral processes is critical for the realization of emotions, moods and feelings. Affective and behavioral processes are characterized by both brain processes and physiological processes. Emotions are therefore embodied. Physiological markers are important indications for feelings.

The fourth sin is the idea that neurobiology can be completely ignored. Fortunately, fewer and fewer cognitive psychologists think that way. ERP and fMRI studies have shown that neural processes are strongly associated with behavioral responses and with exposure to emotional stimuli. Differences in brain activity have shown a difference between liking and wanting, two components of positive affect that cannot be separated without neuro-research.

The fifth sin is the assumption that emotions are the same between different age groups and different types. Although the age aspect in this book has not really come to the fore, there is a lot of evidence that emotion (especially emotion regulation) changes with age. Studying a process in one species can tell us something about similar processes in other species (think of animal studies in rats). However, the question is whether this only applies to basic processes or also to the more complex ones.

Especially when it comes to the regulation of emotions by the more extensive PFC that is present in people, this is a difficult problem.

The sixth sin is the assumption that different emotional systems are located at specific locations in the brain. Although relatively differentiated neural systems can underlie certain emotions, a large number of interconnected brain regions are active in almost all affective states. Brain areas are therefore each involved in multiple circuits.

The seventh sin is the assumption that emotions are conscious states of feeling. It is now clear that emotions and moods can be distinguished from states of feeling. Feelings are the conscious representations of emotions and moods, but emotions can operate on different levels and need not be aware.

What are the different levels of analysis?

Affect can be studied at the level of molecules or cells (and genes) or at the level of behavior; at the level of neuronal systems or at the cultural level. All these levels are important in themselves, but also influence each other. That is why the current research into affect is made up of biological, psychological and social contextual research into normal and abnormal affect.

Single-level analysis is very useful for developing general theoretical models that explain certain phenomena. However, these models cannot explain the phenomena caused by the other levels. Thus discrete and dimensional approaches to emotion are often seen as opposite to each other, while both may be needed to find a complete explanation of affective experience and expression.

A unifying framework

There is a comprehensive, integrative framework that leaves a framework of how dimensional and discrete approaches can be combined. This includes Panksepp's primary emotional systems. These are the same as basic emotions. The activation of these primary emotional systems leads to a disturbance in the general affective background, or core effect or background mood. These disturbances are consciously perceived and this leads to a subjective experience, which is interpreted in terms of valence and arousal. This also explains why people describe this valence and arousal, but often not the discreet emotion that goes with it. This is located under the surface. This model therefore uses both the discrete emotion approach and the dimensional approach.

Teasdale and Barnards interacting cognitive subsystems approach

A multi-level approach to the interactions between affect and cognition assumes that many different components or subsystems are involved in emotion. An emotional response occurs when these different components are temporarily synchronized, for example through the evaluation of a certain situation.

The multi-entry memory (MEM) approach states that many emotions arise from both low-level sensory processes (for example, processing the properties of a snake) and high-level reflective processes (for example, imagine you are locked in a room with a snake). Some emotions (the basic emotions) occur at every level of processing, while others only occur at the more reflective levels (the secondary emotions such as jealousy, guilt, etc.). This model provides an explanation for mixed feelings.

The interacting cognitive subsystems (ICS) framework proposes nine different cognitive subsystems, which interact with each other in a complex way. Certain types of information, corresponding to certain types of experiences, are processed by specialized subsystems. Three of these are the acoustic, visual and body state subsystems. The systems look at objects, location, form, meaning, etc. Propositional meaning can be conveyed in a sentence, while implicational meaning refers to a more intuitive or holistic schematic model of life experiences. There are also subsystems for verbal and physical output. The other subsystems are: morphonolexical, propositional, implicational, articulatory, object and limbs.

The ICS also states that specific processes that occur in each subsystem have the same internal structures, but operate completely independently of each other and can therefore occur in parallel. These processes can transform information from one code (for example, acoustic) to another (for example, visually).

Propositional and implication levels of meaning

One of the most important aspects of the ICS framework is the distinction that is made between propositional and implication levels of meaning. Propositional meaning can be expressed in language and leads to intellectual beliefs that have a truth value (they can be true or false). This type of information is usually not affected by information that comes from intonation or physical state of arousal.

Implication significance, on the other hand, leads to emotional beliefs ('gut feelings') that are derived from current emotional experiences. These beliefs are influenced by information from many sources and have no truth value. They often cannot be expressed in words, but are intuitive. Information from all subsystems is therefore merged into the implication subsystem. According to this theory, feeling is caused by schematic models that encode recurring themes from the emotional patterns of similar, previous experiences. When certain affect-loaded schematic models are activated by the implication subsystem, the associated emotion arises. The ICS also emphasizes the physical effects.

The ICS model, in contrast to other models, states that it is possible that a purely intellectual conviction has no influence on 'gut feelings'. This can occur when all other subsystems are not activated, but only the propositional subsystem. There is no emotion.

Cognitive bias can be explained by this model as a transformation of an implication code into a propositional code, taking all sorts of other factors from the sensory subsystems and mood into account. These factors ensure that the transformation is 'colored' as it were, different schematic models are merged, so that evaluative judgments come under the influence of bias.

Processing depression-related schematic implication models is seen as a cause of depressive mood. Negative automatic thoughts that are typical of emotional disorders do not play a direct role in generating a negative mood such as depression. There is, however, a connection between cognitive and sensory processes, whereby an intervention in negative thoughts can nevertheless lead to a reduction in depressive feelings.

Power and Dalgleish's SPAARS approach

Another model, similar to ICS, is the Schematic, Propositional, Analogical and Associative Representation Systems (SPAARS) approach. The model has many similarities with ICS, but also a number of important differences. For example, SPAARS places a lot of emphasis on goal-based cognitive appraisals, which would be crucial for generating emotion. Emotions are made up of a number of different components (physiological changes, awareness, actions, evaluation), but can only be distinguished from each other on the basis of the appraisal component.

In this model, the analogic level represents the processes that occur at a sensory motor level. The propositional level is about representations (thoughts and beliefs) that can be expressed in language. The schematic level is about the more abstract representations about the state of the world and the self, which cannot be expressed in language. The important goals and appraisals are also included in this level. Emotions are therefore generated directly from the schematic level and indirectly from the propositional level. The associative level provides an automatic connection between certain stimuli and responses, creating an alternative route for generating emotion where the schematic level is no longer needed.

In this model, a function of the basic emotions is to adjust the cognitive system in such a way that a goal (that was previously blocked) can still be achieved. Emotional disorders stem from a malfunction of one of the five basic emotions. An emotion adjusts the system by making the relevant goals of that emotion salient (for example, escape behavior in the event of fear).

Overview of multi-level models

The strongest point of the multi-level approaches is that they are able to provide a theoretical explanation of both normal and disturbed emotions within a single framework. That information can be processed at different levels therefore explains that there is sometimes a separation between our emotions and our rational analysis of a situation. Because these models recognize so many different levels, they give a more realistic picture of the complex interactions between these different levels of processing.

How can neurobiological and cognitive models of affect be integrated?

It is very difficult to integrate these different models, because the different research areas often have different language use and different approaches. In addition, there is often confusion about whether cognition and affect should be seen as separate systems, or as parts of a composite whole.

A dynamic system approach

Cognitive psychology often starts from a straightforward approach to cause and effect. Psychological wholes, such as attention, memory and emotion, are mainly looked at, without looking at the cooperating parts from which these wholes arise. Neuroscience, on the other hand, looks at how the different neural systems influence each other, without an assumption of linearity or causality.

The dynamic systems approach shows how complex systems such as the brain work and involve multiple causal processes. The systems show how units are created from interacting parts. This is due to self-organization (the spontaneous formation of order from non-linear interactions) and circular causality (causality in two directions between the different levels of a system). Cause-effect relationships therefore run in two directions. In addition, effects do not have to be linear, but exponential or threshold effects can also occur, making it difficult to predict a future state of the system from the current state.

Instead of assuming that information from the senses is processed and translated into an output (linear theory), a dynamic system assumes that information processing systems reconfigure themselves on the basis of a constant flow of sensory information. Such a system can thus show how interactions between subcomponents are related to the development of coherent wholes, so they can provide a description of both psychological and neurobiological studies of emotion.

Are cognitive-affect relationships bi-directional?

There are three major approaches to emotion-cognitive relationships. The first is appraisal theory, where meaning is extracted from the situation in order to help us to make sense of the world. Appraisal is often seen as something that precedes emotion, although emotion also seems to influence appraisals. So it seems that this can be a bi-directional relationship.

The second approach focuses on functions of emotions. The most important function of emotion seems to be focusing attention on the most relevant environmental aspects, so that the right actions can be prepared. From this perspective, the connection runs exclusively from emotion to cognition.

The third approach suggests that personality traits and clinical disorders affect cognitive biases. This is therefore a connection that runs from temperament to cognition. However, it is also found that cognitive biases can play an important role in the development of personality traits. In that case, the causality would go in the other direction. These opposite findings are likely to indicate that the relationship is more likely to be in two directions. Ignoring these bi-directional influences probably leads to incomplete models of emotion and makes it difficult to come to an integrated theory of the different approaches.

What characterized the dynamic systems?

The non-linear approach to cognition focuses on how ordered structures arise from complex dynamic systems. From this perspective, cognition is a form of self-organization that occurs in the context of a complex dynamic system. The bi-directional causal relationships can lead to an emotional interpretation. This starts with a 'trigger event', followed by a phase of self-amplification (an emotional interpretation is formed here). Attention and arousal and many other components therefore interact in a fast and dynamic way. This phase is followed by a phase of self-stabilization, in which higher levels of complexity are involved. In this phase, plans are made to deal with the situation and these plans depend on the emotion formed in the previous phase.

Trigger phase

A trigger event causes a change in phase, whereby the order of the system is suddenly disrupted. Such an event can occur at any stage of an emotional interpretation and can consist of external or internal input (memories etc.). In such an event the amygdala becomes active to focus attention on the right places. This activation leads to an emotional interpretation with the help of the OFC, ACC etc., which in turn enhances the processing and allocation of attention to relevant parts of the world, and this provides further feedback to the amygdala by means of reciprocal connections. This is an example of a positive feedback loop, which creates a continuous strengthening of changes in the brain as a result of the trigger event.

Self-stabilization phase

Negative feedback begins to dominate during this phase. This ensures that the current state within the system is maintained. There is therefore inhibition of the brain circuits (through regulation by the OFC and vmPFC). This reduces the activation in the amygdala. An emotional interpretation develops, stability can occur as attentional orientation and action tendencies lead to a narrowing of the focus of attention and behavior towards relevant material.

Learning phase

A stronger connection can arise between sub-components that are often activated, which can lead to persistent cognitive bias and beliefs. Stable emotional states are essential for learning, as they leave a lasting trail on the components.

This model therefore describes a system of stable equilibrium; it remains alert to changes, but there is also an important degree of stability. It is important that a trigger event at any level in the model can lead to a dynamic change in the stable state of the entire system. Dynamic systems make it easier to design a realistic framework in which neurobiology is related to cognitive psychology.

How can the scientific basis of emotion be translated into clinical practice?

Although a lot of research has been done into emotional disorders, there is still a big separation between research and practice. One reason for this is that the goals of scientists and practitioners are far apart. Research is often very specific and researchers often do not step back to look at the big picture. For a psychic practitioner, it is important to have an overview of the larger picture. In addition, theoretical research is often very far from the everyday reality that practitioners have to deal with.

Translation research could be a solution for these problems. The findings are translated in emotion studies into the development of better treatment approaches. A good understanding of a basic affective phenomenon also provides a better understanding of an extreme form of this, as seen in a disorder.

How is basic science applied?

The usefulness of scientific research for the development of clinical interventions becomes most evident in behavioral psychology, especially with conditioning. This is often used for behavioral therapy.

From fear extinction to exposure therapy

Exposure therapy is based on extinction. Time and time again, this therapy shows an object that the patient fears. Because there are no negative effects as a result of seeing this stimulus, the fear becomes less and less. Research also shows that administering d-cycloserine helps with the extinction process. This can therefore possibly be used in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The drug is not a direct treatment for specific phobias, but can be used in combination with psychological treatment to enhance the effects of the therapy.

From cognitive bias to clinical intervention

More cognitively focused therapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy are more based on attempts to address the biases that are typical of certain disorders such as depression and anxiety. However, these therapies were never so deeply rooted in experimental research. However, research into temperament and properties has recently provided a stronger link between research and practice. For example, neuroticism appears to be associated with fundamental biases in how people process affective information. More attention is given to threatening information and ambiguous information is processed in a more threatening way. The question is whether this bias is a cause or a consequence of an emotional disorder.