6 basic emotions
excitement, interest
disgust
anger, annoyance
fear, nervousness
happiness
sadness
6 basic emotions
excitement, interest
disgust
anger, annoyance
fear, nervousness
happiness
sadness
Last edited by Petter; 05-30-2023 at 08:04 AM.
Interest, surprise and confusion (attention) are completely neutral, but they are indirectly related to emotion. Goal-directed behavior is the reason why we keep an interest in a particular subject, and there are two different goals: maximize reward/pleasure and minimize punishment/pain.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...t-our-feelings
But our expressions are less a mirror of what’s going on inside than a signal we’re sending about what we want to happen next. Your best ‘disgusted’ face, for example, might show that you’re not happy with the way the conversation is going – and that you want it to take a different tack.
“It’s the only reason that makes sense for facial expression to have evolved,” says Bridget Waller, an evolutionary psychology professor at the University of Portsmouth. Faces, she says, are always “giving some sort of important and useful information both to the sender… and to the receiver.”
We use the contempt and disgust facial expressions to show disapproval of someone or something.
A nodding 'mmm' is a facial expression that shows approval of someone or something.
Both pain and disgust can motivate us to stay away from objects and people. The difference is that pain is caused by a threat which leads to an emotional reaction (fear) whilst disgust is caused by a former reward, e.g. spoiled food. This means that we cannot avoid the disgusting object. So disgust is not a basic emotion.
Last edited by Petter; 05-31-2023 at 05:10 AM.
Yes, it could mean that too.Originally Posted by chriscorey
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl...at-excites-you
"Humans are motivated to seek novel and pleasurable experiences."
------
novelty ---> interest
------
Excitement affects the mind and the body (so post #236 is partially incorrect).
a basic emotion: mind and body are affected so the decision-making process is changed (including the risk/reward ratio)
boredom: low levels of dopamine ... very low excitement
satisfaction: normal levels of dopamine ... low-medium excitement
appetitive impulsivity <--> excitement ... high levels of dopamine: quick decisions
reckless impulsivity <--> anger (high) and fear (low) ... OFC and PFC
... and high levels of serotoninsatisfaction: normal levels of dopamine ... low-medium excitement
appetitive impulsivity <--> hunting
anticipation or hopefulness = excitement + interest
vigilance = tension + interest
A disgusting place or situation motivates him/her to avoid it in the future, but it does not change the decision-making process (besides a new memory). So disgust is not a basic emotion.
A basic emotion temporarily changes the personality.
Why? 1) Because it is stationary and 2) it usually does not concern life or death situations.A disgusting place or situation motivates him/her to avoid it in the future, but it does not change the decision-making process
3) The disgust response/reflex solves the problem automatically.
https://psychology.unl.edu/can-lab/Neta%26Kim_PPS.pdf (Surprise as an Emotion: A Response to Ortony)
We write in response to an article published in this journal by Andrew Ortony titled “Are All ‘Basic Emotions’ Emotions? A Problem for the (Basic) Emotions Construct.” The author claimed that “for all its elevated status as a basic emotion, surprise fails to satisfy the minimal requirements that [he] proposed for something to be an emotion, and if it is not an emotion, it cannot possibly be a basic emotion.” Although we acknowledge the concerns brought forth by Ortony, we respectfully disagree with his conclusion about surprise. To make a case against the assertion that surprise is valence-free, we summarize an extensive body of work showing that surprise is indeed valenced—in a specific manner (i.e., ambiguously valenced)—and that it meets all of Ortony’s criteria for an emotion. In other words, rather than being described as neither positive nor negative, this emotion is either positive or negative. We consider the data with respect to surprise as a basic emotion, and we dispute the definitions of basic emotions as “widely divergent.” Future work is needed to continue defining an emotion, and a basic emotion, but we believe this is a worthy effort toward shaping a still evolving field.
https://www.paulekman.com/universal-...at-is-disgust/
"We can feel disgusted by something we perceive with our physical senses (sight, smell, touch, sound, taste)" ... yes
"by the actions" ... no
"and appearances of people" ... yes
"and even by ideas." ... no
https://www.cell.com/trends/neurosci...236(00)01730-6
"Functional neuroimaging has shown that facial expressions of disgust consistently engage different brain areas (i.e. insula and putamen) compared with other facial expressions."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...49763422000422 (Common and distinct neurofunctional representations of core and social disgust in the brain...)
Disgust represents a basic emotion and has been conceptualized as a multifaceted and evolutionary adaptive defensive-avoidance response. The disgust response may have initially evolved in the context of rejection of potentially poisonous food (Darwin, 1965, Rozin and Fallon, 1987, Rozin et al., 2009). The same underlying mechanism may have subsequently been adapted to facilitate the avoidance of contaminations by pathogens and may even serve the avoidance of harmful social interactions (Curtis et al., 2011, Davey, 2011, Haidt et al., 1994, Kupfer and Fessler, 2018, Rozin and Fallon, 1987, Rozin et al., 2016, Vicario et al., 2017). In line with its evolutionary function, disgust is primarily elicited by exposure to potentially poisonous or infectious stimuli, such as rotten food, cockroaches or individuals with poor personal hygiene as well as injury- and mutilation-related stimuli (Haidt et al., 1994, Olatunji and Sawchuk, 2005, Rozin and Fallon, 1987, Vicario et al., 2017). Exposure to these stimuli induces a distinct disgust reaction on different levels encompassing subjective experience of revulsion, as well as physiological and behavioral responses. The behavioral response includes rapid withdrawal from the eliciting stimulus as well as a distinct facial expression characterized by a wrinkled nose (Rozin et al., 1994) and raised upper lip (Rozin et al., 1994), reflecting the primary purpose of the disgust reaction in terms of avoiding or rejecting pathogens (Chapman et al., 2009, Oaten et al., 2009, Olatunji and Sawchuk, 2005, Rozin and Fallon, 1987, Rozin et al., 2009, Rozin et al., 1994, Schienle and Wabnegger, 2021) (in line with Vicario et al., (2017) henceforward referred to as core disgust processing). The highly distinct facial expression for disgust additionally serves social-communicative purposes (Chapman and Anderson, 2012, Chapman et al., 2009, Vicario et al., 2017, von dem Hagen et al., 2009), such that a disgusted facial expression signals to conspecifics the danger of being exposed to potential pathogens (Burklund et al., 2007, Darwin, 1965, Rozin et al., 1994, Surguladze et al., 2003, von dem Hagen et al., 2009) or an attitude of social rejection (Burklund et al., 2007, Surguladze et al., 2010, von dem Hagen et al., 2009). Accurate decoding of these signals is essential for survival and successful social interaction (Darwin, 1965, Ekman, 1993, Fusar-Poli et al., 2009b, Malhi et al., 2007, Phillips et al., 1999). In line with Vicario et al. (2017) who referred to the perception or appraisal of a disgusted facial expression in others as a social-communicative signal, we henceforward refer to perception/appraisal of disgusted faces as social disgust processing.
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-even-a-thing/
Some psychologists argue that physical and moral disgust are two sides of the same coin. Others insist that, although the word “disgust” is used in both situations, when moral norms are broken, what people are actually experiencing is anger.
caudate nucleus <--> visual beauty
putamen <--> disgust
Social disgust has a social function (obviously) but it is still not a basic emotion. If it is possible to activate putamen and the insular cortex by looking at a healthy and beautiful face then it is a disgust response/reflex, which is not an emotion.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...49763416308168 (Core, social and moral disgust...)
immoral behavior:
1) someone causes pain
2) someone causes disgust, ∼1-5% of all cases
------
Pain is processed by PAG etc, and disgust is processed by putamen and the insular cortex.
So moral disgust exists, but only in those cases that cause actual disgust.
"Immoral behavior leads to a myriad of social and legal punishments designed to make the cost of unethical behavior higher than the benefits."
------
Immoral behavior leads to approach behavior (anger). But disgust is about avoidance behavior.
"In contrast, in a similar paradigm, some evidence indicates that the appraisal of a surprised face shifts to be in line with the clear expressions, suggesting a contextual influence (see also H. Kim et al., 2004); surprise is viewed more positively when presented with positively valenced (i.e., happy) expressions and more negatively when presented with negatively valenced (i.e., angry) expressions. Taken together, whereas neutral faces are valence-free, surprised faces carry emotional value that is shaped by contextual influence."https://psychology.unl.edu/can-lab/Neta%26Kim_PPS.pdf (Surprise as an Emotion: A Response to Ortony)
------
I think this makes sense. We can go from valenced to surprised but never from neutral to surprised. Why? Because as soon as we interact with people or objects, we either maximize reward/pleasure or minimize punishment/pain. This means that surprise is always colored by previous information.
On the other hand, one could argue that interest is the same thing as attention and completely neutral, and surprise is a reaction on interest rather than excitement.
anticipation <--> an expected event ... the default mode
surprise/amazement/disbelief <--> an unexpected event (magic etc)
curiosity <--> new information (orientation)
curiosity <--> interest
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4635443/ (The psychology and neuroscience of curiosity)
Tinbergen’s third question is about the proximate mechanism of a behavior. The mechanism of any behavior is in device that produces it—the brain.
As noted above, Kang and colleagues used a curiosity induction task to test Loewenstein’s hypothesis that curiosity reflects an information gap (Loewenstein, 1994). Human subjects read trivia questions and rated their feelings of curiosity while undergoing fMRI (Kang et al., 2009). Brain activity in the caudate nucleus and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) was associated with self-reported curiosity. These structures are activated by anticipation of many types of rewards, so these results suggest that curiosity elicits an anticipation of a reward state—consistent with Loewenstein’s theory (Delgado et al., 2000, 2003, 2008; De Quervain et al., 2004; Fehr & Camerer, 2007; King-Casas et al., 2005; Rilling et al., 2002). Puzzlingly, the nucleus accumbens, which is one of the most reliably activated structures for reward anticipation, was not activated (Knutson et al., 2001). When the answer was revealed, activations generally were found in structures associated with learning and memory, such as parahippocampal gyrus and hippocampus. Again this is a bit puzzling, because classic structures that respond to receipt of reward were not particularly activated. In any case, the learning effect was particularly strong on trials on which subjects’ guesses were incorrect—the trials on which learning was greatest.
------
excitement ≠ interest
https://www.wired.com/2010/08/the-itch-of-curiosity/
The results of the fMRI experiment are an intriguing, if limited, glance at the neural processes underlying creativity. The first thing the scientists found is that curiosity obeys an inverted U-shaped curve, so that we're most curious when we know a little about a subject (our curiosity has been piqued) but not too much (we're still uncertain about the answer). This supports the information gap theory of curiosity, which was first developed by George Loewenstein of Carnegie-Mellon in the early 90s. According to Loewenstein, curiosity is rather simple: It comes when we feel a gap "between what we know and what we want to know". This gap has emotional consequences: it feels like a mental itch, a mosquito bite on the brain. We seek out new knowledge because we that's how we scratch the itch.
The fMRI data nicely extended this information gap model of curiosity. It turns out that, in the moments after the question was first asked, subjects showed a substantial increase in brain activity in three separate areas: the left caudate, the prefrontal cortex and the parahippocampal gyri. The most interesting finding is the activation of the caudate, which seems to sit at the intersection of new knowledge and positive emotions. (For instance, the caudate has been shown to be activated by various kinds of learning that involve feedback, while it's also been closely linked to various parts of the dopamine reward pathway.) The lesson is that our desire for abstract information - this is the cause of curiosity - begins as a dopaminergic craving, rooted in the same primal pathway that also responds to sex, drugs and rock and roll.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34028612/ (Neural dynamics of pride and shame in social context: an approach with event-related brain electrical potentials)
The neural underpinnings of social emotions such as pride and shame are largely unknown. The present study aims to add evidence by exploiting the advantage of event-related brain electrical potentials (ERP) to examine the neural processes as they unfold over time. For this purpose, a dot-estimation task was adapted to explore these emotions as elicited in a simulated social context. Pride prompted an early negativity seemingly originated in medial parietal regions (precuneus) and possibly reflecting social comparison processes in successful trials. This was followed by a late positivity originated in medial frontal regions, probably reflecting the verification of singularly successful trials. Shame, in turn, elicited an early negativity apparently originated in the cuneus, probably related to mental imagery of the social situation. It was followed by a late positivity mainly originated in the same regions as the early negativity for pride, then conceivably reflecting social comparison processes, in this occasion in unsuccessful trials. None of these fluctuations correlated with self-reported feelings of either emotion, suggesting that they instead relate to social cognitive computations necessary to achieve them. The present results provide a dynamic depiction of neural mechanisms underlying these social emotions, probing the necessity to study them using an integrated approach with different techniques.
Keywords: Cuneus; ERP; Medial frontal areas; Precuneus; Pride; Shame; Social emotions.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...in_Vertebrates
Circuits Regulating Pleasure and Happiness: The Evolution of the Amygdalar-Hippocampal-Habenular Connectivity in Vertebrates
Appetitive-searching (reward-seeking) and distress-avoiding (misery-fleeing) behavior are essential for all free moving animals to stay alive and to have offspring. Therefore, even the oldest ocean-dwelling animal creatures, living about 560 million years ago and human ancestors, must have been capable of generating these behaviors. The current article describes the evolution of the forebrain with special reference to the development of the misery-fleeing system. Although, the earliest vertebrate ancestor already possessed a dorsal pallium, which corresponds to the human neocortex, the structure and function of the neocortex was acquired quite recently within the mammalian evolutionary line. Up to, and including, amphibians, the dorsal pallium can be considered to be an extension of the medial pallium, which later develops into the hippocampus. The ventral and lateral pallium largely go up into the corticoid part of the amygdala. The striatopallidum of these early vertebrates becomes extended amygdala, consisting of centromedial amygdala (striatum) connected with the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (pallidum). This amygdaloid system gives output to hypothalamus and brainstem, but also a connection with the cerebral cortex exists, which in part was created after the development of the more recent cerebral neocortex. Apart from bidirectional connectivity with the hippocampal complex, this route can also be considered to be an output channel as the fornix connects the hippocampus with the medial septum, which is the most important input structure of the medial habenula. The medial habenula regulates the activity of midbrain structures adjusting the intensity of the misery-fleeing response. Within the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis the human homolog of the ancient lateral habenula-projecting globus pallidus may exist; this structure is important for the evaluation of efficacy of the reward-seeking response. The described organization offers a framework for the regulation of the stress response, including the medial habenula and the subgenual cingulate cortex, in which dysfunction may explain the major symptoms of mood and anxiety disorders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity#Theories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_(emotion)
Interest is a feeling or emotion that causes attention to focus on an object, event, or process. In contemporary psychology of interest, the term is used as a general concept that may encompass other more specific psychological terms, such as curiosity and to a much lesser degree surprise.
The emotion of interest does have its own facial expression, of which the most prominent component is having dilated pupils.
http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/students/explore.htm
What makes people curious? Why do individuals explore the unknown? The research in these areas is inconclusive and often contradictory. Are curiosity and exploration motivations or drives? Can curiosity and exploration be operationally defined independent of one another? Motivation is defined as the arousal, direction and persistence of behavior (Franken, 1994); an internal state or condition that activates behavior and gives it direction; desire or want, that energizes and directs goal-oriented behavior; the influence of needs and desires on the intensity and direction of behavior. Drive is defined as a basic or instinctive need; a vigorous effort toward a goal; to cause and guide the movement.
excitement: 'wanting' <--> a goal/reward
interest: 'wanting' <--> an indirect goal ... e.g. checking the weather (---> not getting sick)
interest <--> anticipation of a rewardanticipation or hopefulness = excitement + interest
vigilance = tension + interest
vigilance <--> anticipation of a threat
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote