Emotion and the autonomic nervous system: A prospectus for research on autonomic specificity.

The question of whether there are different patterns of autonomic nervous system responses for different emotions is examined. Relevant conceptual issues concerning both the nature of emotion and the structure of the autonomic nervous system are discussed in the context of the development of research methods appropriate for studying this question. Are different emotional states associated with distinct patterns of autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity? This is an old question that is currently enjoying a modest revival in psychology. In the 1950s autonomic specificity was a key item on the agenda of the newly emerging discipline of psychophysiology, which saw as its mission the scientific exploration of the mind-body relationship using the tools of electrophysiological measurement. But the field of psychophysiology had the misfortune of coming of age during a period in which psychology drifted away from its physiological roots, a period in which psychology was dominated by learning, behaviourism, personality theory and later by cognition. Psychophysiology in the period between 1960 and 1980 reflected these broader trends in psychology by focusing on such issues as autonomic markers of perceptual states (e.g. orienting, stimulus processing), the interplay between personality factors and ANS responsivity, operant conditioning of autonomic functions, and finally, electrophysiological markers of cognitive states. Research on autonomic specificity in emotion became increasingly rare. Perhaps as a result of these historical trends in psychology, or perhaps because research on emotion and physiology is so difficult to do well, there 18 SOCIAL PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY AND EMOTION exists only a small body of studies on ANS specificity. Although almost all of these studies report some evidence for the existence of specificity, the prevailing zeitgeist has been that specificity has not been empirically established. At this point in time a review of the existing literature would not be very informative, for it would inevitably dissolve into a critique of methods. Instead, what I hope to accomplish in this chapter is to provide a new framework for thinking about ANS specificity, and to propose guidelines for carrying out research on this issue that will be cognizant of the recent methodological and theoretical advances that have been made both in psychophysiology and in research on emotion. Emotion as organization From the outset, the definition of emotion that underlies this chapter should be made explicit. For me the essential function of emotion is organization. The selection of emotion for preservation across time and species is based on the need for an efficient mechanism than can mobilize and organize disparate response systems to deal with environmental events that pose a threat to survival. In this view the prototypical context for human emotions is those situations in which a multi-system response must be organized quickly, where time is not available for the lengthy processes of deliberation, reformulation, planning and rehearsal; where a fine degree of co-ordination is required among systems as disparate as the muscles of the face and the organs of the viscera; and where adaptive behaviours that normally reside near the bottom of behavioural hierarchies must be instantaneously shifted to the top. Specificity versus undifferentiated arousal In this model of emotion as organization it is assumed that each component system is capable of a number of different responses, and that the emotion will guide the selection of responses from each system. Component systems differ in terms of the number of response possibilities. Thus, in the facial expressive system a selection must be made among a limited set of prototypic emotional expressions (which are but a subset of the enormous number of expressions the face is capable of assuming). A motor behaviour must also be selected from a similarly reduced set of responses consisting of fighting, fleeing, freezing, hiding, etc. All major theories of emotion would accept the proposition that activation of the ANS is one of the changes that occur during emotion. But theories differ as to how many different ANS patterns constitute the set of selection possibilities. At one extreme are those who would argue that there are only two ANS patterns: 'off' and 'on'. The 'on' ANS pattern, according to this view, consists EMOTION AND THE AUTONOMIC NERVOUS SYSTEM 19 of a high-level, global, diffuse ANS activation, mediated primarily by the sympathetic branch of the ANS. The manifestations of this pattern rapid and forcefulcontractions of the heart, rapid and deep breathing, increased systolic blood pressure, sweating, dry mouth, redirection of blood flow to large skeletal muscles, peripheral vasoconstriction, release of large amounts of epinephrine and norepinephrine from the adrenal medulla, and the resultant release of glucose from the liver are well known. Cannon (1927) described this pattern in some detail, arguing that this kind of high-intensity, undifferentiated arousal accompanied all emotions . Among contemporary theories the notion of undifferentiated arousal is most clearly found in Mandler's theory (Mandler, 1975). However, undifferentiated arousal also played a major role in the extraordinarily influential cognitive/physiological theory of Schachter and Singer (1962). According to this theory, undifferentiated arousal is a necessary precondition for emotionan extremely plastic medium to be moulded by cognitive processes working in concert with the available cues from the social environment. At the other extreme are those who argue that there are a large number of patterns of ANS activation, each associated with a different emotion (or subset of emotions). This is the traditional specificity position. Its classic statement is often attributed to James (1884), although Alexander (1950) provided an even more radical version. The specificity position fuelled a number of experimental studies in the 1950s and 1960s, all attempting to identify some of these autonomic patterns (e.g. Averill, 1969; Ax, 1953; Funkenstein, King and Drolette, 1954; Schachter, 1957; Sternbach, 1962). Despite these studies, all of which reported support for ANS specificity, the undifferentiated arousal theory, especially as formulated by Schachter and Singer (1962) and their followers, has been dominant for a great many years. Is the ANS capable of specific action No matter how appealing the notion of ANS specificity might be in the abstract, there would be little reason to pursue it in the laboratory if the ANS were only capable of producing one pattern of arousal. There is no question that the pattern of high-level sympathetic arousal described earlier is one pattern that the ANS can produce. Cannon's arguments notwithstanding, I believe there now is quite ample evidence that the ANS is capable of a number of different patterns of activation. Whether these patterns are reliably associated with different emotions remains an empirical question, but the potential is surely there. A case in support of this potential for specificity can be based on: (a) the neural structure of the ANS; (b) the stimulation neurochemistry of the ANS; and (c) empirical findings. 20 SOCIAL PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY AND EMOTION