Introduction

Your emotions play a major part in your daily life, coloring your interactions with others, your decisions, and your general mood state. Emotions influence various cognitive processes, such as learning, memory, problem-solving, perception, and attention. Emotions modulate every facet of cognition. In fact, emotions are one of the more difficult human experiences to define. Theories of emotions have existed since antiquity, yet even today, emotions are still highly debated within academic circles. You may be intimately familiar with how emotions feel, but do you understand the underlying psychology behind your own emotions? What is it about the human experience of emotions that is so hard to pin down? How do your emotions start, and where do they come from? And how are your emotions differentiated from each other; from both an internal and external perspective?

What is an emotion?

The pursuit of an emotion theory that unites all aspects of human experience, psychology, and physiology, is elusive. Psychologists refer to the overall experience of emotion and mood as your affective state. The best encompassing definition of emotions is as follows:

Short-term, relatively intense, and subjective affective states that occur in response to an experience

Short-term and Relatively Intense

An emotional reaction can be broken into two stages, the rapid initial response, where the emotion grows and intensifies over time, and the second stage, when the emotion fades in intensity until the emotional episode passes. How intense and prolonged an emotional episode will depend on the emotion, with sadness triggering the most intense and prolonged episodes.

‍

But it also depends on a person’s emotional regulation capabilities. People can regulate their emotions to reduce the intensity and duration, or they can be heightened and extended by our appraisals. In psychology, appraisal describes someone’s internal cognition about events or topics that will color their emotional reactions to those events. For example, before a big test, how does someone’s thoughts about the test affect their emotional responses during the test itself. Research shows that positive appraisals mean you experience milder emotional reactions to negative experiences. This is where the idea that controlling your thoughts helps you control your emotions comes from. Emotional regulation is key to general well-being because humans can experience incredibly intense emotions; without regulation, the rollercoaster of feelings can be detrimental to overall mental health.

Subjective Response to an Experience

Emotions are subjective in that two people may have different emotional responses to the same experience. Think about experiences in your life where someone had an emotional response that surprised you; maybe they cried during a happy moment or seemed unfazed during a sad moment. Though emotional regulation is critical, many factors are working behind the scenes to control individuals' reactions to experiences, such as cultural and gender differences.  

Feelings and Moods

Because emotions are so short-lived and intense, you spend more time in a feeling or mood than an emotional state. Feelings are not the same as an emotion. Feelings are experienced after an emotion, in response to the chemicals released. For example, you can experience fear in response to a scary situation and then continue to be afraid, with heightened heart rate and extra stress hormones after the initial fear emotion subsides. Feelings can be broken into five major categories that correspond to specific physical responses:

1. Positive Emotion

2. Negative Emotion

3. Illness Sensations

4. Homeostasis

5. Cognition

Note that not all feeling states start as an emotion. When you feel hungry, it’s not because of an emotion you experienced. The emotions we are concerned with in this article mostly fall within the negative and positive emotion categories.

Moods are like the gentler cousin of feelings and emotions, with a much lower experiential intensity. Moods form from an amalgamation of multiple feelings and are heavily affected by recent emotions and how your brain manages recent emotions. For example, anxiety or uneasiness may originate from recurring fear experiences. A melancholy or depressed mood might originate from the emotions resulting from a loss.

Emotional Theory in Antiquity

Emotions appear even in the earliest antiquity records. The first surviving mention of emotions occurs in the Book of Rights, a Chinese encyclopedia from the first century. Buddhism influenced the understanding of emotions in India around 500BC, that desire and lust are negative emotions that drive all suffering. Around 450BC, Greek pre-socratic philosopher Empedocles imagined an emotional principle with two basic forms, love (philia) and hate (neikos).  Yet he didn’t extend this emotional principle to human beings.

Enter Socratic philosophers like Aristotle and Plato. Plato thought the soul was divided into three parts, the rational part, the spirited part, and the appetitive part. Plato viewed emotions negatively as base irrational responses originating from the spirited and appetitive parts of the soul. The Stoics imagined emotions as passions, originating from a mental force that prevents reasoning. Stoics argued that in the ‘first movements’ of a passion, the mind can rationally squash emotion before it evolves into a mature passion like lust.

Efforts to understand emotions in the Middle Ages were influenced, if not controlled, by Christian theology. It was recognized that conceptualization faculties in humans were important for emotions like shame and wonder. Christian theologians like Augustine discussed emotions as sins. Augustine (354-430AD) argued that spontaneous emotions could not be sins because sin requires free consent. Emotion became sin the first moment a person recognized and could stop it but failed to do so.

Other theologians, such as Peter Lombard and Anselm of Laon, regarded Augustine as wrong, maintaining that emotions triggering first movements towards evil things were in fact venial sins. This forms the root for later implications, as negative emotions are viewed as the person’s fault for not being sufficiently precautious against them.

Emotion Genesis

Emotion genesis is the model, process, or sequence of events that describe how emotions start or originate in humans. Two theories dominate in modern psychology, surrounding emotion genesis. Before covering the Component Process Model (CPM) and the Conceptual Act Model (CAM), let’s explore early emotion genesis theories.

Emotion Genesis Theories in Early Modern Psychology

The first emotion genesis theory in modern psychology is attributed to psychologist William James and physiologist Carl Lange, at the end of the 19th century. James and Lange theorized that emotions originate as autonomic nervous system responses to external stimuli. The physiological reaction precedes the emotional reaction. This theory leans heavily into physiology as the primary control behind emotions. Their theory was challenged after Philip Bard and Walter Cannon conducted experiments on the body and emotion connection in animals. The experiments showed that physiological and emotional responses occur simultaneously and often independently. This new theory was more closely backed by neurobiology.

While wrong, both theories, contributed to the discussion around emotions and the series of events that trigger emotions.

Component Process Model

The Component Process Model (CPM) is based on the appraisal concepts, known as action theory and cognitivism, mentioned earlier in the article. People interpret events and situations differently, affecting the resulting emotion, intensity, and duration. This model originated from the work of psychologist Klaus Scherer, a lifelong researcher of emotions and founding editor of the APA journal Emotion. Essentially, the stimuli that trigger human emotions are assessed given context.

Humans appraise and reappraise their environment often, looking for changes. Suppose you appraise your environment and find it non-threatening, calming, and relaxing. In that case, a scary stimulus might trigger a milder emotional response, milder fight-or-flight response, and slower reaction time. But suppose you appraise your environment and find it unsettling and unfamiliar. Now a scary stimulus is more likely to trigger a higher intensity emotional response, a more abrupt fight-or-flight response, and a quicker reaction time. Scherer’s research showed that all ancestral appraisals have a significant evolutionary purpose and are consistent across human populations. You can imagine how appraisals would benefit humans in a survival situation during early human development and evolution.

Appraisals can be divided into four stages, occurring in a sequence:

1. Relevance Check

2. Implications Check

3. Coping Potential Check

4. Normative Significance Evaluation

During the Relevance Check, you are assessing for novelty and pleasantness. Is this situation new in some way that may pose an unknown danger or benefit? Is this situation pleasant? If not, it’s highly relevant to avoid.

The Implications Check is when you are assessing the consequences of an event. What are the possible outcomes? Are these outcomes good or bad? And will the implications of this effect affect me in the short-term and long-term?

The Coping Potential Check examines how well you can cope with the possible implications of the second check. Can you control the consequences? Do you have the resources to cope with all possible outcomes?

The Normative Significance Evaluation is the last check when you ask about the significance of this event to your social norms, values, and sense of self. Is this event far outside the norms? Is this event significantly counter to your values?

This partly unconscious series of checks help us appraise every situation we encounter in our daily lives. The CPM model explains that emotions result from cognitive-evaluative stimulus checks; in other words, your brain assesses your experiences and decides the best emotional response.

Conceptual Act Model

The Conceptual Act Model was introduced by Lisa Feldman Barrett in 2006. Barrett was trying to reconcile the ‘emotion’ paradox. Humans have repeatedly reported experiencing discrete emotions like sadness and anger, but psychological and neurobiological research has not found emotions so discrete. Neurobiological research suggests that what is occurring at the brain and body level is affect, not discrete emotion.

This can be a little confusing, so let’s break it down to understand how your brain and body ‘assign’ emotions:

What is affect?

Affect describes your neurophysiological state along two axes with four endpoints. According to research, you can distill your emotional experiences down into two states.

Imagine an axis with pleasure at one endpoint and displeasure at another. Your experiences can exist anywhere on this continuous line. Now image an axis with high arousal at one endpoint and low arousal at another. Your experiences can also exist anywhere on this continuous line.

‍

The image above conceptualizes thst Conceptual Act Model, showcasing how the pleasant and arousal continuums combine to form emotional states.

How do you interpret these two states?

Barrett theorized that humans experience an emotion after categorizing their current affective state. This means that emotions aren’t innately recognized, and instead, the brain uses a knowledge framework to assign different emotions to different points along the pleasure and arousal continuums.  In essence, the concept of a specific emotion is what triggers the emotion.

Let’s consider you have just received a call with positive news about a new job opportunity. The Conceptual Act model states that you would categorize your affective state as ‘happiness’ and then induce a happy emotion. This differs from the traditional emotion understanding, where a stimulus triggers a discrete already programmed emotion within the brain.

Lacking the Framework

This model has some pretty interesting implications. If your knowledge about emotions is limited, is it harder to feel the nuances of emotion? Do children only experience core emotions because they lack the proper framework to categorize emotions? Barrett maintains that research into the further workings of the Conceptual Act Model must be studied holistically.

Emotion Differentiation

Research from Michelle Yik and colleagues indicates that emotions are conceived along two continuums. Their findings build upon the Conceptual Act Model, adding to its general acceptance as the leading model of emotion genesis. Yik et. al integrated the dimensional models of other researchers into a single model of mood and emotion.

Psychologist Wilhem Wundt (1896) settled on a three dimension theory where there existed six extremes and a continuum between them:

• Pleasantness – Unpleasantness

• Strain – Relaxation

• Excitement – Calm

In 2000, Schimmack and Grob investigated three-dimensional models, like Wundt’s, and compared them to two-dimensional models, like Yik’s. They could not reconcile sufficient emotion differentiation using only a two-dimensional model. Schimmack and Grob concluded that three dimensions are needed to describe the core affect, but that three dimensions still lack the fine-tuning necessary to cover the breadth of human emotion.  They still believe there is a missing component in understanding the core affect.

Categorical Models

The American Psychological Association (APA) recognizes two sets of primary and secondary emotions. . The primary emotions are a small set of discrete emotions that are recognized across all cultures. While secondary emotions contain a cultural component, requiring social experiences to develop.

This differentiation originates from research started in the 1970s, by psychologist Paul Ekman. Ekman pioneered the study of emotions when psychology was focused on other areas of interest. He wanted to know if emotions were universal across all cultures and used facial expressions to find answers. Ekman believed facial expressions are the best physical representations of emotions and can be used to categorize emotions.

Ekman found that even remote cultures like New Guinea, free from the influence of the west, could universally identify seven facial expressions. His study showed that even isolated cultures identified human emotions by facial expressions with a high degree of accuracy. Fear and surprise were the two emotions that scored the poorest among the New Guinea group. Ekman maintains that core human emotions are associated with very similar facial behavior for everyone. This was supported by research into blind children that showed congenitally blind children display the same facial behavior as sighted children.

The seven universal facial expressions are:

• Anger

• Disgust

• Fear

• Suprise

• Happiness

• Sadness

• Contempt

If all humans recognize these seven facial expressions, then theories about ancestral emotions emerging early in human development are supported. Ekman believes that the facial expressions of emotions evolved in direct response to social pressures.

Ekman’s work to develop the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) showed that emotions could be distilled down to changes in expressions through muscle movement and contractions. Facial expressions were cataloged, and action units were defined. The FACS was first published in 1978 and has been used by thousands of researchers, multiple government agencies, and by animation studios looking to depict realistic human expressions.

This emotion chart displays how different components of a facial expression are assigned different action units, and that multiple action units can combine to produce a fine-tuned categorization of the underlying emotion.

Prototype Approach

Work by Russell and Fehr in 1984, came to a different conclusion regarding emotion differentiation. They imagined emotions originating as prototypes or best instances of each category of emotion. They felt this was the best explanation behind how easily humans categorize the same emotions across cultures and time. For example, sadness is closely linked to the same facial expressions, causes, and consequences for everyone.

These emotional prototypes are easy for people to understand. Emotions feel inherent in our reactions and understanding of the world, but scientists have never empirically been able to identify a unique emotional fingerprint for any emotion within our brains. There’s no switch for anger, no brain circuit for happiness, but human experience seems to say otherwise.  ‍

Russell imagined the ideal of combinations of valence (goodness or badness) and arousal (high to low) as the primary backbone for discrete prototype emotions.

Wrapping up the Theory of Emotions

Everyone knows an emotion when they feel it, but asking someone to define what an emotion is can be a stumper. This part of the human experience is responsible for the highs and lows that make living enjoyable but harken back to the days of early human survival. Emotions developed for evolutionary means within the context of social interactions. Our core emotions matured early in human evolution and are nearly universally recognized among humans. Ekman believes the universal emotions, anger, disgust, fear, surprise, happiness, sadness, and contempt, were most vital to early survival.

Research indicates that your continuous appraisals of your surroundings can influence emotions. In other words, assessing your environment for dangers, novelty, possible outcomes, and other features will result in a matching emotion. Different people will appraise situations differently, resulting in two people in the same situation experiencing different emotions. Your mental inputs can result in a worse emotional outcome, so learning how to assess experiences maturely is essential.

The leading theory being emotion genesis, the Conceptual Act Model, is supported by ongoing research into emotion differentiation. Lisa Barrett considers emotions to derive from categorizing them in two dimensions. She maintains that you’re only capable of experiencing an emotion you can conceptualize based on your knowledge of emotions. If you’ve never heard of jealousy or seen it modeled, you may not be pre-disposed to experiencing jealousy. Instead, when your neighbor has a brand new sports car, you may feel angry because this is the extent of your emotional intelligence. Maybe you’re prone to anger or sadness? Learning more about emotions through reading or interacting with others can improve your emotional intelligence and thus your ability to experience these nuanced milder emotions more often.