Primary Process Affects and Brain Oxytocin

ascinating findings about intranasal oxytocin effects inhumans continue to emerge. Periodically, we should takestock of the overall meaning of these findings and seeknew connections to therapeutic issues. Indeed, thoughtful inte-gration with the full spectrum of animal research findings mayhelp bring greater order to the diverse findings being harvestedin humans.The research by Ditzen et al. (1) on oxytocinergic modulationof positive and negative behaviors during conflictual discussionsbetween cohabiting couples provides such an opportunity. Fol-lowing intranasal oxytocin (40 IU), the ratio of positive interac-tions (eye contact, interest, emotional self-disclosure, validation,caring, nonverbal positive behavior) compared with negativeones (criticism, contempt, defense, domineering, belligerence,stonewalling, nonverbal negative behavior, interruption) wentup, with male subjects exhibiting marginally larger changes thanfemale subjects (to facilitate thinking, ideally each measureshould have been summarized separately in the supplementarymaterials). Further, plasma cortisol declined significantly moreduring oxytocin-soothed interactions in female subjects thanmale subjects. Had this been a within-subject study with repeatedmeasures, the effects would presumably have been much stron-ger. This would be highly desirable in future work, with perhapsone prior experience with oxytocin providing participants areference point for the psychological effects of oxytocin, therebydiminishing their pre-experimental anxiety. Perhaps the effectobserved by Ditzen et al. (1) was due, in part, to oxytocindiminished anxiety evoked by participating in such an experi-ment.These findings synergize with past work highlighting howoxytocin facilitates retrieval of positive social memories, trustbehaviors, while decreasing anxiety and stress (as summarized in[1]). Might these diverse findings be explained by a few p rim ary-p ro cess affective ch an ges?W illo xyto cin -p ro m o ted p air-b o n d in gs invo les su ffice to gu id e o u r th in kin g optimally? Might those learnedeffects (secondary processes) and tertiary-process changes ob-served in humans (e.g., increased trust) reflect more primaryaffective changes not well recognized in human studies?Please note that primary and secondary processes are notused here in the way psychoanalysis deployed these conceptssince Freud introduced them in Interpretation of Dreams (2).Psychoanalysis uses such terms for primitive affect-governedmodes of thinking as contrasted with more controlled, logicalthoughts. In my usage, 1) primary-process emotions arise fromevolutionarily provided subcortical operating systems; 2) sec-ondary-process emotions reflect basic emotional learning andmemory processes as reflected, for example, in classical andoperant conditioning; and 3) tertiary processes are the higheremotional functions that include thought and deliberation oftenbased on episodic/autobiographical memories and capacities forsymbolic thought and communication (3). Basic emotional feel-ings are probably reflected within all levels of mind-brainorganization, but the semantics of these levels are bound to differin yet to be agreed upon ways. For biological psychiatry, a keygoal is to get the foundational, primary processes describedaccurately (3), especially since tertiary processesNsocially con-structed, thought-penetrated emotionsNarise from higher neo-cortical brain regions where idiographic, individualized learningcan create many confusions for psychological research.