Lecture 7 - Emotion, Physiological Flashcards
Overview of this lecture
Overview
What is an emotion?
The ‘James-Lange’ theory of emotion
Cannon’s critique
Schachter’s two-factor theory of emotion
The Schachter and Singer (1962) experiment
Facial feedback
What is an emotion?
What is the James-Lange theory of emotion?
Proposed independently by psychologist William James and physiologist Carl Lange, the James-Lange theory of emotion suggested that emotions occur as a result of physiological reactions to events.
Two important points
The bodily changes he refers to are both internal (visceral: heart rate, breathing patterns, etc.) and external (muscle
contractions in face and body)
This point got lost when James’ theory was amalgamated into
Lange’s (1885) theory (to form the so-called James-Lange theory)
James argued that perceptions lead directly to bodily changes on the grounds that our minds are pre- programmed to respond to certain stimuli (‘lock and key’ analogy)
What is Canon’s critique on this theory
Cannon’s (1927) critique
Focused on the ‘visceral’ aspect of the
‘James-Lange’ theory. Argued that
- Total separation of the viscera from the CNS
does not alter emotional behaviour - The same visceral changes occur in very
different emotional states and in non-emotional
states - The viscera are relatively insensitive structures
- Visceral changes are too slow to be a source of
emotional feeling - Artificial induction of visceral changes typical
of strong emotion does not produce emotion - Hohmann, G. W. (1966). Some effects of spinal cord lesions on experienced emotional
feelings. Psychophysiology, 3, 143–156.
What did Maranon (1924) study show about the physiological base and emotion
Maranon (1924)
Injected participants with adrenaline
Found that fewer than of them reported any⅓ emotional reaction. This would not be the case if we thought that it was due to innovation of the visceral part because he only addressed the visceral (internal).
Even these people typically only reported ‘pseudo- emotions’(e.g., “I feel as if I were afraid”)
Schachter’s two-factor theory
Often the interpretation of arousal is unproblematic
“When we are faced with an armed hold-up man, there is no ambiguity about either the situation or our feelings”
“But what of disturbing situations which are more ambiguous and unfamiliar?” (1959, p.127)
These considerations led Schachter to develop his
two-factor theory of emotion
Physiological arousal is necessary (see James) but not sufficient (see Cannon)
Also needed is some cognitive input to interpret that arousal.
More on the theory (3 popositions)
3 propositions
- If an individual is aroused but has no immediate
explanation for the arousal, he/she will want to explain it
and will therefore label it and describe his/her feelings in
terms of whatever explanations available - If an individual is aroused but has a completely
appropriate explanation for the arousal, he/she will not feel the need to explain it and is unlikely to label his/her feelings in terms of the alternative explanations - In any given situation, the individual will react emotionally or describe his/her feelings as emotions only to the extent that he/she experiences a state of physiological arousal
What is the The Schachter and Singer (1962) experiment?
Designed to test these 3 propositions
Involved 3 manipulations
1. State of physiological arousal
2. Degree to which participants had an explanation
for this arousal state
3. Availability of alternative explanations for the arousal
Manipulation of arousal
- Cover story: effects of vitamin (“Suproxin”) on vision
- Epinephrine or placebo
Manipulation of appropriateness of explanation for arousal
- Side-effects warning
- Correct (informed)
- Incorrect (misinformed)
- None (uninformed)
Manipulation of alternative explanatory cognitions
- Euphoria condition (messy room, childlike behaviour of
confederate)
- Anger condition (insulting questionnaire, angry behaviour of confederate)
More on The Schachter and Singer (1962) experiment?
Dependent measures
- Self-report
- How irritated, angry or annoyed would you say you feel at
present?
- How good or happy would you say you feel at present?
- Composite index: good/happy ratings minus irritated, etc.
ratings
Observation
- Euphoria condition
- Joins in or initiates new ‘euphoric’ activity
- Anger condition
- Extent of agreement with ‘angry’ remarks made by confederate
The Schachter and Singer (1962) experiment results
Self-report data for
anger and euphoria
conditions
Within conditions the
data are – broadly –
consistent with
predictions
Across conditions there
are problems
Observational data in
euphoria condition
Epi inf significantly
lower than Epi mis
Other differences not
significant
(Look at graph on word to make more sense)
What did they conclude?
Schachter and Singer (1962):
Conclusions
Manipulation of explanation for arousal state generally worked as predicted
Spawned a whole line of research on
‘misattribution of arousal’
Some problems with arousal manipulation:
results from placebo condition often did not
differ from those in the arousal conditions
Most crucially, manipulation of ‘alternative cognitions’ did not result in the same state of arousal being labelled ‘euphoria’ or ‘anger’
What is the current status of Schachter and Singer’s 2 factor theory?
There have been remarkably few attempts
to replicate the Schachter and Singer study
Of the few replications that have been
published, only one (Erdmann & Janke,
1978) provides support for central prediction
However, notion that perceived cause of
arousal can be important is generally accepted
What is the current research on the physiological part of emotion?
First, there is more evidence than there
used to be that different emotions are
characterised by different patterns of physiological activity
Second, there has been a revival of interest
in the ‘non-visceral’ aspect of James’ theory
Facial feedback
Postural feedback
What is facial feedback
Idea is that how we feel is partly shaped
by feedback from the facial musculature
Clever test of this notion was conducted
by Strack, Martin, and Stepper (1988)
Participants evaluated cartoons while holding
a pen either with their lips or with their teeth
Cartoons judged funnier in ‘teeth’ condition
than in ‘lips’ condition
What is the general conclusion on the subject
In modern emotion theory there is general
acknowledgement that physiological activity
is important in (some) emotions
But few if any would argue that emotion is
simply the perception of bodily activity
Most theorists would argue that cognition
plays an important role in the generation of
emotion (see next lecture on appraisal theory)
