Affective neuroscience

Mapping Emotions On The Body: Love Makes Us Warm All Over December 30, 20134:04 PM ET MICHAELEEN DOUCLEF Affect is the experience of feeling or emotion.[1] Affect is a key part of the process of an organism‘s interaction with stimuli. The word also refers sometimes to affect display, which is “a facial, vocal, or gestural […]

People drew maps of body locations where they feel basic emotions (top row) and more complex ones (bottom row). Hot colors show regions that people say are stimulated during the emotion. Cool colors indicate deactivated areas. Image courtesy of Lauri Nummenmaa, Enrico Glerean, Riitta Hari, and Jari Hietanen.

People drew maps of body locations where they feel basic emotions (top row) and more complex ones (bottom row). Hot colors show regions that people say are stimulated during the emotion. Cool colors indicate deactivated areas.
Image courtesy of Lauri Nummenmaa, Enrico Glerean, Riitta Hari, and Jari Hietanen.

Mapping Emotions On The Body: Love Makes Us Warm All Over

December 30, 20134:04 PM ET
MICHAELEEN DOUCLEF

Affect is the experience of feeling or emotion.[1] Affect is a key part of the process of an organism‘s interaction with stimuli. The word also refers sometimes to affect display, which is “a facial, vocal, or gestural behavior that serves as an indicator of affect” (APA 2006).

The affective domain represents one of the three divisions described in modern psychology: the cognitive, the conative, and the affective. Classically, these divisions have also been referred to as the “ABC of psychology”, in that case using the terms “affect”, “behavior“, and “cognition”. In certain views, the cognitive may be considered as a part of the affective, or the affective as a part of the cognitive.[2]

Affective states are psycho-physiological constructs. According to most current views, they vary along three principal dimensions: valence, arousal, and motivational intensity.[3]Valence is the subjective positive-to-negative evaluation of an experienced state. Emotional valence refers to the emotion’s consequences, emotion-eliciting circumstances, or subjective feelings or attitudes.[4] Arousal is objectively measurable as activation of the sympathetic nervous system, but can also be assessed subjectively via self-report. Arousal is a construct that is closely related to motivational intensity but they differ in that motivation necessarily implies action while arousal does not.[5] Motivational intensity refers to the impulsion to act.[6] It is the strength of an urge to move toward or away from a stimulus. Simply moving is not considered approach motivation without a motivational urge present.[7]

All three of these categories can be related to cognition when considering the construct of cognitive scope. Initially, it was thought that positive affects broadened cognitive scope whereas negative affects narrowed cognitive scope.[3] However, evidence now suggests that affects high in motivational intensity narrow cognitive scope whereas affects low in motivational intensity broaden cognitive scope. The cognitive scope has indeed proven to be a valuable construct in cognitive psychology.[3]

Affective neuroscience is the study of the neural mechanisms of emotion. This interdisciplinary field combines neuroscience with the psychological study of personality, emotion, and mood.

Emotions are thought to be related to activity in brain areas that direct our attention, motivate our behavior, and determine the significance of what is going on around us. Pioneering work by Paul Broca (1878),[2] James Papez (1937),[3] and Paul D. MacLean (1952)[4] suggested that emotion is related to a group of structures in the center of the brain called the limbic system, which includes the hypothalamus, cingulate cortex, hippocampi, and other structures. Research has shown that limbic structures are directly related to emotion, but non-limbic structures have been found to be of greater emotional relevance. The following brain structures are currently thought to be involved in emotion:[5]

In its broadest sense, cognition refers to all mental processes. However, the study of cognition has historically excluded emotion and focused on non-emotional processes (e.g., memory, attention, perception, action, problem solving and mental imagery).[40] As a result, the study of the neural basis of non-emotional and emotional processes emerged as two separate fields: cognitive neuroscience and affective neuroscience. The distinction between non-emotional and emotional processes is now thought to be largely artificial, as the two types of processes often involve overlapping neural and mental mechanisms.[41] Thus, when cognition is taken at its broadest definition, affective neuroscience could also be called the cognitive neuroscience of emotion.

Main structures of the limbic system

  • Amygdala — The amygdalae are two small, round structures located anterior to the hippocampi near the temporal poles. The amygdalae are involved in detecting and learning what parts of our surroundings are important and have emotional significance. They are critical for the production of emotion, and may be particularly so for negative emotions, especially fear.[6] Multiple studies have shown amygdala activation when perceiving a potential threat; various circuits allow the amygdala to use related past memories to better judge the possible threat.[7]
  • Thalamus– The thalamus is involved in relaying sensory and motor signals to the cerebral cortex,[8] especially visual stimuli. The thalamus also plays an important role in regulating states of sleep and wakefulness.[9]
  • Hypothalamus– The hypothalamus is located below the thalamus. It plays a role in emotional responses by synthesizing and releasing neurotransmitters which can affect mood, reward and arousal.[10]
  • Hippocampus – The hippocampus is a structure of the medial temporal lobes that is mainly involved in memory. It works to form new memories and also connecting different senses such as visual input, smell or sound to memories. The hippocampus allows memories to be stored long term and also retrieves them when necessary. It is this retrieval that is used within the amygdala to help evaluate current affective stimulus.[11]
  • Fornix The fornix is the main output pathway from the hippocampus to the mammillary bodies. It has been identified as a main region in controlling spatial memory functions, episodic memory and executive functions.[12]
  • Mammillary body – Mammillary bodies are important for recollective memory.[13]
  • Olfactory bulb– The olfactory bulbs are the first cranial nerves, located on the ventral side of the frontal lobe. They are involved in olfaction, the perception of odors.[14]
  • Cingulate gyrus– The cingulate gyrus is located above the corpus callosum and is usually considered to be part of the limbic system. The different parts of the cingulate gyrus have different functions, and are involved with affect, visceromotor control, response selection, skeletomotor control, visuospatial processing, and in memory access.[15] A part of the cingulate gyrus is the anterior cingulate cortex, that is thought to play a central role in attention[16] and behaviorally demanding cognitive tasks.[17] It may be particularly important with regard to conscious, subjective emotional awareness. This region of the brain may also play an important role in the initiation of motivated behavior.[17]

Other brain structures related to emotion

  • Basal ganglia – Basal ganglia are groups of neuclei found on either side of the thalamus. Basal ganglia play an important role in motivation.[18]
  • Orbitofrontal cortex – Is a major structure involved in decision making and the influence by emotion on that decision.[19]
  • Prefrontal cortex — The term prefrontal cortex refers to the very front of the brain, behind the forehead and above the eyes. It appears to play a critical role in the regulation of emotion and behavior by anticipating the consequences of our actions. The prefrontal cortex may play an important role in delayed gratification by maintaining emotions over time and organizing behavior toward specific goals.[20]
  • Ventral striatum — The ventral striatum is a group of subcortical structures thought to play an important role in emotion and behavior. One part of the ventral striatum called the nucleus accumbens is thought to be involved in the experience of goal-directed positive emotion. Individuals with addictions experience increased activity in this area when they encounter the object of their addiction.
  • Insula — The insular cortex is thought to play a critical role in the bodily experience of emotion, as it is connected to other brain structures that regulate the body’s autonomic functions (heart rate, breathing, digestion, etc.). This region also processes taste information and is thought to play an important role in experiencing the emotion of disgust.
  • Cerebellum – Recently, there has been a considerable amount of work that describes the role of the cerebellum in emotion as well as cognition, and a “Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome” has been described.[21] Both neuroimaging studies as well as studies following pathological lesions in the cerebellum (such as a stroke) demonstrate that the cerebellum has a significant role in emotional regulation. Lesion studies[22] have shown that cerebellar dysfunction can attenuate the experience of positive emotions. While these same studies do not show an attenuated response to frightening stimuli, the stimuli did not recruit structures that normally would be activated (such as the amygdala). Rather, alternative limbic structures were activated, such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, the anterior cingulate gyrus, and the insula. This may indicate that evolutionary pressure resulted in the development of the cerebellum as a redundant fear-mediating circuit to enhance survival. It may also indicate a regulatory role for the cerebellum in the neural response to rewarding stimuli, such as money,[23] drugs of abuse,[24] and orgasm.[25]

 


alone on a plane

28 December 2012 Last updated at 14:54 GMT Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed into law a ban on Americans adopting Russian orphans. The law is a reaction to the US Magnitsky Act, which blacklists Russian officials accused of rights abuses. The … Continue reading

28 December 2012 Last updated at 14:54 GMT

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed into law a ban on Americans adopting Russian orphans.

The law is a reaction to the US Magnitsky Act, which blacklists Russian officials accused of rights abuses.

The death of anti-corruption lawyer Sergei Magnitsky in 2009 became a symbol of the fight against corruption in Russia, and soured relations between Russia and the US.

The US state department says it “deeply regrets” the passing of the law.

Earlier this month the US Congress adopted the Magnitsky Act, prompting Russia’s retaliation. The EU has also criticised Russia over its handling of the case.

Mr Putin signed the Russian law after it had been approved by the Russian parliament.

He told officials he saw no reason not to sign it, and said he would sign a presidential decree to “modify the support mechanisms for orphaned children”.

“There are lots of places in the world where living standards are higher than they are here,” Mr Putin said.

“Are we going to send all our children there? Perhaps we should move there ourselves?”

Some 3,400 Russian children were adopted by foreign families in 2011, almost one-third of the children going to American homes.

Over the same period, the number of children adopted by Russian citizens was 7,416.

In the past two decades Americans have adopted more than 60,000 Russian children.

“The Russian government’s politically motivated decision will reduce adoption possibilities for children who are now under institutional care,” US state department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said.

“We are further concerned about statements that adoptions already underway may be stopped and hope that the Russian government would allow those children who have already met and bonded with their future parents to finish the necessary legal procedures so that they can join their families,” he added.


Torry Hansen had turned to a second adoption agency to bring home a child from the Soviet Republic of Georgia, a source with the sheriff’s department told ABC News.

She switched adoption agencies after the agency that arranged the adoption of her first child, World Association for Children and Parents, urged her to wait before adopting again, the source said. The association advised Hansen it would be best to settle in with the boy before adding to her family, the source said.

A few months later, Hansen, of Shelbyville, Tenn., and her mother, Nancy Hansen put 7-year-old Artyem Savilev on a plane back to Moscow in hopes of having the boy’s adoption annulled.

In a letter pinned inside Artyem’s pocket, Hansen told Russian officials that he was violent, had psychiatric issues and that she no longer wanted to be his mother.

The Tennessee sheriff investigating the case said both Torry and Nancy Hansen have notified him through their lawyer that they refuse to be interviewed unless they are charged with a crime. He said he is looking into possible charges against the women.

Angry Russian officials are calling for a halt to all U.S. adoptions until the two countries can hammer out a new agreement that spells out the conditions and obligations for such adoptions.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called the boy’s abrupt return “a monstrous deed.” The Russian president told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview that he had a “special concern” about the recent treatment of Russian children adopted by Americans.

Torry Hansen of Shelbyville, Tenn., put 7-year-old Artyem Saviliev — renamed Justin Artyem Hansen in the U.S. — on a plane to Moscow’s Domodedovo airport with a note in his pocket saying she was returning him, that the boy had severe psychological problems and that the orphanage had lied about his condition.

“I no longer wish to parent this child,” the note read, calling the boy a liability.

Torry Hansen, who returned her seven-year-old adopted son Artyom to Russia, alone on a plane, is now suing the Russian children’s ombudsman:

Russian children’s rights ombudsman Pavel Astakhov said on Thursday a lawsuit had been filed against him by an American woman who sent her adopted son back to Russia.

Torry Hansen filed a lawsuit in Moscow’s Savelovsky Court, seeking retraction of a November 24, 2011 article in the Rossiiskaya Gazeta government daily. She also demands punitive damages.

“The essence of the lawsuit is that I call Hansen an adoptive mother, while she wants me to call her Artyom Savelyev’s former adoptive mother,” Astakhov said.

“I’m glad a lawsuit was filed by Torry Hansen against me and the Rossiiskaya Gazeta. I’ll gladly meet her and request that she visits Russia and the court,” he added.

Hansen was living in Tennessee in April 2010 when she put Artyom Savelyev, then 7, on a flight back to his native Russia unaccompanied, with a note saying she did not want him because he was “psychotic.”

Astakhov said that the Russian side would seek child support payments from the U.S. woman, according to the March 8 U.S. court ruling.

“We will try to make her pay the cost of Artyom’s support, nothing more,” he said.

According to the child ombudsman’s estimates, the boy’s stay in a group home costs 42,000 rubles per month (over $1,400), not including psychological treatment costing 27,000 rubles (over $900) per month.

This AP story adds there’s a hearing next month: “Pavel Astakhov said Thursday he would like Hansen, who has sued him in a Moscow court, to testify at a hearing scheduled for next month.”

If the lawsuit is really about being called Artyom’s adoptive mother, rather than his former adoptive mother, I’m sorry to tell her that, at least under American law of libel, truth is a defense. She is still Artyom’s adoptive mother, at least in the U.S., since her parental rights have not been terminated here. One cannot terminate parental rights by simply sending a child away. The fact that a Tennessee court has ordered her to pay child support is evidence that she is still his parent, since child support is only a parental responsibility.

Continuar leyendo "alone on a plane"

Irrationality

Dan Ariely Uncovers the Truth About Dishonesty from The RSA on FORA.tv Uploaded on Jan 13, 2009 Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at Duke University, presents examples of cognitive illusions that help illustrate why humans make predictably irrational decisions. EG is the celebration of the American entertainment industry. Since 1984, Richard Saul Wurman […]

Dan Ariely Uncovers the Truth About Dishonesty from The RSA on FORA.tv

Uploaded on Jan 13, 2009
Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at Duke University, presents examples of cognitive illusions that help illustrate why humans make predictably irrational decisions.

EG is the celebration of the American entertainment industry. Since 1984, Richard Saul Wurman has created extraordinary gatherings about learning and understanding. EG is a rich extension of these ideas – a conference that explores the attitude of understanding in music, film, television, radio, technology, advertising, gaming, interactivity and the web – The Entertainment Gathering

Dan Ariely is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Behavioral Economics at MIT Sloan School of Management. He also holds an appointment at the MIT Media Lab where he is the head of the eRationality research group. He is considered to be one of the leading behavioral economists. Currently, Ariely is serving as a Visiting Professor at the Duke University, Fuqua School of Business where he is teaching a course based upon his findings in Predictably Irrational.

Ariely was an undergraduate at Tel Aviv University and received a Ph.D. and M.A. in cognitive psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a Ph.D. in business from Duke University. His research focuses on discovering and measuring how people make decisions. He models the human decision making process and in particular the irrational decisions that we all make every day.

Ariely is the author of the book, Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions, which was published on February 21, 2008 by HarperCollins.


[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDAzsZLvfPw&w=560&h=315]

Published on Jul 26, 2012
Instinct is the driving force behind human decision making. Irrationality must be recognized if we’re going to get beyond the risks of not being built as thinking machines, says David Ropeik.

Ropeik an Instructor at Harvard, a consultant in risk perception and risk communication, author of How Risky Is it, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Always Match the Facts, and principal co-author of RISK, A Practical Guide for Deciding What’s Really Safe and What’s Really Dangerous in the World Around You.

http://bigthink.com


[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFdCzN7RYbw?list=UU8IMseLCZx2BZe3thxHXnog&hl=en_US&w=560&h=315]

Published on Nov 26, 2012
Animation describing the Universal Principles of Persuasion based on the research of Dr. Robert Cialdini, Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Marketing, Arizona State University.

Dr. Robert Cialdini & Steve Martin are co-authors (together with Dr. Noah Goldstein) of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Business Week International Bestseller Yes! 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to be Persuasive.

US Amazon http://tinyurl.com/afbam9g
UK Amazon http://tinyurl.com/adxrp6c

IAW USA: www.influenceatwork.com
IAW UK: www.influenceatwork.co.uk/


[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph7LcupAENw&w=560&h=315]

Nobel Prize winning neuropsychiatrist Eric Kandel describes new research which hints at the possibility of a biological basis to the unconscious mind.

Directed / Produced by
Elizabeth Rodd and Jonathan Fowler


[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUXtGQkJcQ0&w=560&h=315]

Learn every gesture and body language cue in one video. Eye, hand, leg, arm, and mouth gestures are completely covered. Gestures and Body Language Series Be an expert in body language. Applies to his and her body language. Article is here http://bit.ly/apSipQ

Share

The Power Of Persuasion and helping behavior

CROSS-CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN HELPING STRANGERS, ROBERT V. LEVINE, ARA NORENZAYAN, KAREN PHILBRICK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helping_behavior Helping is influenced by economic environment within the culture. In general, frequency of helping behavior is inversely related to the country economic status. The major explanation for people failing … Continue reading

CROSS-CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN HELPING STRANGERS,
ROBERT V. LEVINE,
ARA NORENZAYAN,
KAREN PHILBRICK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helping_behavior

Helping is influenced by economic environment within the culture. In general, frequency of helping behavior is inversely related to the country economic status.

The major explanation for people failing to stop and help a victim is how obsessed with haste they are. People who were in a hurry did not even notice the victim, although, once they arrived at their destination and had time to think about the consequences, they felt some guilt and anxiousness.

Read more: http://www.experiment-resources.com/helping-behavior.html#ixzz1bWhUDhWT

http://ayn-rand.info/cth–25-Why_Did_Kitty_Genovese_Die.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese

http://peopletriggers.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/the-six-weapons-of-influence-part-3-social-proof/

http://www.experiment-resources.com/helping-behavior.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cialdini

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/102780/7621597.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15382273

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15398332