LO: To what extent practice cerebral and biological factors interact in emotion?

The following teaching notes are for the learning objective:To what extent do cognitive and biological factors collaborate in emotion? The question is asking to discuss the interrelationship between biological and cognitive factors in the creation of emotion.

Emotion is divers as having three components: a physiological modify – likewise known as physiological arousal, a subjective interpretation of an experience and a behavioural response.

Emotions motivate behaviours – but they are also the social glue that binds the states together with others. They are a means of communicating with others. Darwin argued that emotions had a strong evolutionary advantage for u.s.a. every bit a species.

Based on Darwin's theory that emotions are the result of evolution, Paul Ekman argues that at that place are seven basic emotions. He bases this on a large book of cross-cultural research that shows that there are seven universally recognized facial expressions: happiness, anger, surprise, disgust, fear, sadness and contempt. Even though these emotions may be universal, how they are evoked is not. Hochschild (1979) refers to this as Emotion work – that is, some cultures learn to show happiness, even in situations that other cultures would non meet as positive. Or past learning to eat sure foods – for example, fried crickets or ants as seen in places like Cambodia – the cloy reaction is not there. To first off this discussion of how biological and cognitive factors interact with emotion, I starting time off with a very simple activity.

What do our facial expressions mean?

Can you actually read emotions? Let'due south see here …

Teens and power to read facial expressions

Hither is a good overview on the topic of emotion

Although the video higher up gives a history of the theories of emotion, for the IB examination it is not required that students know all of those theories. The goal is only to know how physiology and emotion interact. Equally the video explains, psychologists today argue that emotions are often a combination of bottom-upwards and top-down processing. Bottom-up processing is the body's reflex response to a stimulus. A car crashes and I jump. Not merely do I jump, but I experience arousal of the sympathetic nervous arrangement. In other cases, an emotion is the issue of tiptop-down processing – that is, I interpret the situation with a combination of the frontal lobe (thinking near the situation and predicting what may happen) and the hippocampus (retentivity of past similar situations or recognition – for case, I recognize that it is actually a canis familiaris that I know and that there is no reason to exist afraid.)

This is the footing of LeDoux's theory of the emotional brain.

LeDoux's model gives biological back up to Singer & Schachter's Ii Factor Theory. According to the theory, when an emotion is felt, a physiological arousal occurs and the person uses the immediate environment to search for emotional cues to label the physiological arousal. Lazarus later called this process of evaluating the state of affairs and one's resources to cope with the situation cognitive appraisal (1975).

Schachter and Vocalizer (1962) carried out a study to support their Two Cistron Theory.

In this experiment at that place were three hypotheses:

  • If a person experiences a state of physiological arousal for which they accept no firsthand explanation, they will label this state in terms of their "cognitive explanations" of its causes based on their current situation.
  • If a person experiences a state of physiological arousal for which they have an appropriate explanation, there will be no demand to use external situational cues to label the arousal as an emotion.
  • Given no state of physiological arousal, despite situational cues, an individual will experience no emotion.

For this written report, the researchers had a sample of 185 male undergraduate students who volunteered in order to earn "bonus points" on an test. They were told that they were going to be injected with a new vitamin, Suproxin; all the same, in actuality they were injected with adrenaline. For this written report there were iii independent variables:

  • Physiological arousal – they were either injected with adrenaline or with a placebo (saline solution)
  • Explanation of arousal – they were either informed (told the correct symptoms) or misinformed (told the wrong symptoms) or ignorant (not told annihilation most symptoms).
  • Emotional cues – they were either exposed to a confederate who was "euphoric" – that is, very happy – or an aroused confederate.

Altogether in that location were four conditions which were exposed to either the euphoric or the angry amalgamated: adrenaline informed, adrenaline misinformed, adrenaline ignorant, placebo ignorant. To mensurate emotions, the researchers observed the participants' behaviour through a one-way mirror. In add-on, they besides used self-reported data at the end of the report to make up one's mind the participants' level of happiness. They did not use self-reported data on anger because they feared that the students would not be honest as they might fear not getting their "bonus points."

The results are rather complex. In the euphoric situation, adrenaline ignorant and misinformed participants reported higher levels of happiness than those that were informed. However, there was no difference between those two groups and the placebo. So, in the euphoria status, the third hypothesis was non supported. In the aroused status, adrenaline ignorant participants behaved significantly more angrily than either the informed or the placebo participants. This appears to support all iii hypotheses.

Evaluation

This report is very famous in psychology, but information technology is fraught with bug. On the one hand, information technology appears to provide evidence for the Two Cistron Theory. The use of a placebo helped to determined whether information technology was in fact the adrenaline or simply the situation. As you tin see from the euphoric situation, this cannot be adequately determined.

But there are several limitations of this report:

  • Inconsistent method of collecting information. No self-reports from the aroused condition. An assumption is fabricated that the "euphoric" reports were more than accurate.
  • The act of injecting someone with a needle may lead to a natural increase in adrenaline which is non accounted for.
  • The study is highly artificial and lacks ecological validity. Situations where we are experiencing unexplained physiological arousal are rare.
  • The theory may explain some emotions (anger, fear) amend than others (happiness, sadness).
  • Sampling bias – merely male university students were used as participants.
  • Ethical considerations – the use of charade.
  • Zimbardo & Marshall (1979) attempted to replicate the euphoric condition and were not successful. This may betoken that the results are not reliable.

Other research

There are several studies that back up the theory of cognitive appraisal. Here are two examples.

Speisman et al (1964) had participants watch a moving-picture show of an aboriginal circumcision ceremony which involved the cutting of the young boys' genitals. While showing this motion picture, one of three sound-tracks was played. In the "trauma condition" the participants could hear the noises of the surgery and they were also told but how painful this surgery is; in the "intellectualization condition" they heard a vox-over by an anthropologist explaining the history of the tradition; in the "denial status" the overall tone of the presentation was about the celebration of these young boys condign men. While participants watched the film, the researchers measured their center rate and galvanic pare responses. The results showed that the trauma status showed much higher physiological measures of stress than the participants in the other 2 conditions. Although a cause and effect human relationship may accept been established which supports the theory of cognitive appraisal, the state of affairs was artificial.

Dutton & Aron (1974) arranged for attractive women to conduct a questionnaire with men later on either having crossed a high suspension bridge (high arousal) or a low bridge (depression arousal), and to give out their telephone numbers (mensurate of attraction). The high arousal condition led to a higher number of men calling the woman presumably because, in the presence of an attractive female interviewer, the men had labeled or misattributed the arousal they felt as sexual allure rather than fear.

Overall, we tin see that at that place is testify of the interaction of biological and cognitive factors in emotion, simply it is difficult to measure this interaction. Mod brain imaging techniques are now being used to investigate what happens – for example, Susan Fiske's inquiry on emotional responses to the homeless (Course Companion p 129), simply how noesis and biological factors really interact is all the same unclear to researchers.

THINKING CRITICALLY nigh Enquiry

What does this report say about emotions? What do you recollect near the fact that Facebook carried out this inquiry without the knowledge of their users?

In the video at that place are ii important concepts that are discussed:

Emotional contagion: the thought that nosotros arrange the emotions of others. This appears to exist an evolutionary advantageous trait. When ane infant cries, others begin to cry. Simply what does this accept to practise with the two-factor theory? Could it be that non all emotions are based on arousal?

Upward social comparison: Comparing yourself to someone who is doing ameliorate than y'all are. Enquiry shows that this leads to negative emotional responses. The opposite is down social comparing, when we compare ourselves to people who are in a worse situation than we are. This usually increases our feeling of well beingness and improves mood.

Notes

schachter-and-singer-revision

The Learning Outcome #thirty – 29.03.2012.

The Learning Outcome #xxx – Detailed Planning

Exemplar Answer

glt-eleven-interaction-of-emotion-and-noesis-ii-factor

Presentation Slides 1 – Two factor theory

Presentation Slides ii – Appraisal theory