(9)") (t-,r^r) 1,,R .9-L^*. 1\ L'x)J-"1 t UnconsciousEmotio7n9 7 AJed--qJ"-lq-t'L tf L*'nh"-' |3 C-7,e"'< Emotions are meansd esignedt o regulateb ehaviori n relation to agendass et 0U''<-u'> f r-aa ^fr> Yt-lL " Demotions( seeT ooby & Cosmides,1 990).I n a biological perspectivet,h erefore,e motionsc an be understooda s clever meanss hapedb y evo- NeuropsychologicMale chanisms lution to make us want to do what our ancestorhsa d to do successfulltyo pass geneso n to comingg eneration(se .g.,O hman,1 993a,1 996).

ConceptuaIlm plications A R N E O H M A N , A N D E R SF L Y K T , A N D D A N I E L I - U N D Q V I S T The evolutionary-functionapl erspectiveo n the psychologyo f emotion shifts the emphasisf rom the unique phenomenologyo f human feeling to action tendencies and responsep attemst hat we sharew ith fellow inhabitantso f the animalk ingdom, Rathert han conceptualizinge motiona s a centralf eelings tatem ore or lessi mper- fectly minored in verbalr eports,p hysiologicarl esponsesa,n d expressiveb ehavior, (hee volutionaryp erspectivev iews emotiona s complexr esponsetsh at includes ev- eral partly independenct omponents( seeO hman & Birbaumer, 1993,f or a more An EvolutionaryP erspectiveo n Emotion thoroughd iscussiono f somek ey conceptuails suesin the studyo f emotion)., ,Emo- tional phenomena"( Frijda, 1986) occur in situationst hat are significantt o the J CJI The Function of Emotion person for phylogenetico r ontogeneticr easons.T hey are related to verbal re- 1984)p repar- f)Emotions can be understooda s actions ets( e.g.,F rijda, 1986;L ang, sponsesim plying affectivea ppraisaal nd evaluationo f the situation.A t the behav- ing the organismt o act in somew aysr athert hani n othersF. rom this Perspective, ioral level, emotional phenomenaa re manifested,f or example, as approacho r therei s no clearb oundaryb etweene motiona ndm otivationT. raditionallym, otiva- avoidancet endencies(e .g.,L ang et al., 1990),e xpressivefa cial gestures(e .g.,F rid- "overflow") tion has been more related to action tendenciesin ducedf rom internals tatess uch lund, 1994), or noninstrumental( e,g,, characteristicso f behavior as hunger,w herease motion mosto ften has beenr elatedt o statese licited by exter- (Frijda, 1986).F inally, becausee motionsi nvolveo ften vigorousa ctiont endencies, nal stimuli.A fundamentadl imensionin both emotiona nd motivationi s that of they recruit metabolics upportf rom bodily mechanismrse latedt o behaviorael ner- approach-avoidancer,a ngingf rom a readinessto stay in a situationa nd engagei n geticsa nd arousalp rocessesw, hich becomea ccessibleto scientifics tudy through its potentialitiest o abandoningi t becauseo f the threatsa nd dangersi t implies psychophysiologicaml easures( e.g.,e lectrodermaal ctivity and heart rate).I n rhis (Lang.eta l., 1990).T he functionaal dvantagoef thesep rocesseis thatt hey allow perspective,t he verbal, behavioral,a nd physiologicalc omponentso f emotions for flexibility in the interactionb etweeno rganisma nd environmentI.n effect,a should not be understooda s alternativea venuest o unitary internals tatesp resum- primary function of emotion has beend escribeda s the decouplingo f stimuli and ably isomorphic with phenomenologicael xperienceb, ut as loosely coupled and response(sS cherer,1 994).R athert hant be rigid stimulus-responrseel ationshipo f dissociablec omponentso f a complexe motionalr esponse(L ang, 1993). signals timuli and fixed actionp attemsd escribedb y ethologist(se .g.,T inbergen, 1951),e motionsi n many contextsa llow flexibleu seo f environmentaslu pporti o A Perspectivoen UnconsciouEsm otion achieved esiredo utcomes( e.g.,A rcher,1 979;D amasio,1 994)F. or examplew, hen distressedc, hildren seek the supporta nd comfort of their parentsw hetherb y their Conceptualizinegm otiona sc omposedo f dissociablceo mponentism pliest hat.,un- own locomotion( crawling,w alking,o r running)o r by vocalb ehaviorp romptjng conscioues rnotion"s implyi s a specificc aseo f a dissociation----evideonf cpeh ysio- parentala pproach,H owever,t he decouplingo f stimulusa nd responseis by no logical or behaviorael motionala ctivationi n the absenceo f verbalr eportso f emo- meansa bsoluteb, ecauseti me for deliberatioins not alwaysa n advantageA. preda- tion or emotionallyr elevanrs timulation( Lang, 1993).F rom the evolutionary tor, for example, strikes fast and hard, and the quicker defensivem aneuversa re perspectiveit follows that activationo f basic emotionals ystemsi s more or less initiated by the potentialp rey, the betteri ts chancest o survivet he encounter.P ar- independenotf consciousa warenesosf whati s goingo n (seeL eDoux,1 996;O h- ticularly in defensivec ircumstancest,h erefore,t ime is a critical issue,a nd then man, I 999). This is a consequencoef the assumptionth at the evolutiono f emotion emotionala ctivationa nd reflexivee scapea ctionm ay be virtuallyi nstantaneous' by far precededt he emergenceo f linguisticallyc ompetenot rganismsF. or humans,

796 298 CognitiveN eurosciencoef Emotion however,o nceb asic emotionasl ystemsa rea ctivatedb, oth and aspecrs thee ricitingc onditions UnconsciorrsEmotion2 99 of rhe emotionarr esionse. ;;;;;;;;'t;;;r;;;;;;o!rl",i"'", ."0 ';.:'ji.::: consciouse laborationt hen is likely ;#lu l,:"ij to rhe to shapet ne? urrherf ate of the emotional i: :"*.".:r'ignincance orsanism'su rvivaar nd as well as its consequences srate, to lzard( 1991),t his t"nti,irution for aciion. ousrys eeni n ,h" rii.ij"""t, ,nor," ort- unconscious ,r"ng but emotion_becomae ss erious and-reser it is alsoc oupledto probremo nryi f onec raimst hatf eer- funcrion" 1""j'.":.-"l^"tl trest, a powerfudl isrupt- ,n:i*.ssary condiriono f l:q^,r .,notion,U .iurr* ,fr.n it impliesa conrradicrion rn terms( Clore,1 994)'T he notion jili!:tt:liff of emoiiono s"xp"ri.n.e is typicalryp arr ;,#;:;t*;J:3::: :;ffff f fl ffi}i;:ij ,lit ;q:!::",?:";f;Ti;'i;:T:lltilXT.#oyf th;e:y::;tffi ^._. 141"i l .:{.;l.Hf?1:,T*:i#i:J:ii :,,,,'ffli mentalistic s-"k"i; ;;;;,",," perspectivec,l aimso f un.onr.iour'r.otion ;;:"n : ffi :Tf 11] e8l' ": ;; ;;; rhrougrhhea utomaric comrnon breakw ith psychorogical fi i:ili?ll ares ignificant caprreuo r sensea nd require special is srrifreO ro rheo r expranationsa s in the pr.roiun iil"o'"r hom,.;; ;nr, unconscious'T he broader-evorutionary ,n" p"rrp..i;*, rn to address contrasr,r eadsr esearchers issuess ucha s, which .onoi,ionr .-..#lxL#i:T, i.i.*,n. ,nu, becomes an episodeo f emorron il::.ffif i?:eHn ass:ociia;tetdwi it"h fo*cu.se d ffi ,,:";,il,,,iIj consciousrya ccessiblew?t rat man, 1979, attentionr J errectsio ., ,ti, havef or furthere motionar l9g7). *""r'.r*r#, ror,- processing?a nd Does the neural circuitry differ between The signal scious unconsciousa nd con_ functi implies emorion?( see ohman, lggg, rhe environmen, that we atend ro for; ;; rhorought heoreticaar nalysis *n.noLo0,|r"l?fleorteionnt differenta spectso f unconscioues motionalp rocesses). of emotionasl tates..when may concenrra,u. ,,.n'.'n l";;;;;n15o0, *" In this chapter* " udd.'".,u nconscious emotioni n thes enseth ate motion be activatedw ithout conscious can j:tifr recognitiono f itre pen e"trcitinsgr imurusT. his may hap- r:ilffi when an emotionally #.;irjTiri!"i,,lH::#n::T*:*i:i**#,H relevantJ timulus*, ti.i,,, presented avoid*er,d.". '"i""l ii'ii,,J''i*," attentiona, uromaricalrv outsidec onscrous i" -"#lni;f::: o, iedirectsa ttention; ;;;;;" soundst hat ll.'5;:s: :a't:te.n.:riro nm ay that its focus,o r whena srimulus indicare,t.,.,u-;;-r;:"'-j:':_.:nuo be focusedo n is preventedf rom reachingc onscious crr u**"n"r, throughb ackwardm askrng *d'"h.;;,;;F;,",Ajfdrf*ftiX l t{ nonethelesesr icitso svchophysiorogical..rponr", rnr ne 5 F iuggesrrnge motionaar ctivation. surroundiwnogr ld _,.T#:,.il_:lf,f[i: :l*:l In both instanc"r *" Lnui tirat tv.,rr"*r,isgoi.onrni,"n, nr"f. \-I an-importa"ii ."L."o.,."rining whether tional stimurusb ecomes-consciousry rhe emo_ perceivedis tirne.I n the rapid responding interesto f promotrng The Arrenrional to biologicatty siinincunr il;il perceprual Spotlighr cesses and energericp ro- may respond to emotional stimuli Focused rheseli nes before th, spatiala ttentiot or."ioin."lrssesr haer motio.n.;s; : :::,;:,:'o',xllJ."rt,il,',,l'"'; il^l; ;;" ;il.':,';t'j'Jfirrfi .ytin gth roguhrh e d ark mucha si nZ ajonc('1s9 80) ,p..f.**.r15"'""'i,ir., J:o:,n.nI1s:t' o,:n i# 1u_r a'Iln ltem sloga,tnr , & Dark, I9g6t.H n.*o.,-,-w, e;.v-,e:,_r:':'-;'l'";s'r rl in memory f ;H::**tt, ours idteh e )' ;; ;#;i:"":"il.ffiTi,l .ffiT"il,f;t; spoisrhr, . nocc omposeodf homoger sf,orfoU . en;ffJ ": Emorion jJ#r:[i:# and Attention ililili:"#*l,lT,y.", s,1ril:t1:*rliii;'"1"'"1;ffre they are located, on the and *..an easily The SignalF uncriono f Emotion objectsw e need focus the flashlight Even thought he functional focuso f thise volutionarpy erspecttve the organization on emotioni s on jli of action, emotions mli.*:*":*'''."# havep ervasive I efrectso n iii.'',"ff alr types '. logical of psycho- #* **t* processes, '.b''r, from perce-ptionto colnition, liJn,:'|,lJfti,,Iii'1"'::'ll ;;,';;;'"0i.,'nroo*.,es learning, and so on (Tooby & o.el oca(ed asr ow hicohth er cosmides'r 990).T o beco-",fuuorably rormulared. in rhep resumeiue aroom .";i;;;; bl narurasr erecrionth, es uccess- Furrhermore, *Ju,u. lli,,, ful behaviorars rrategiesr egulated on thed ominating by emotionsn .,ur'.,. .*,, efficient rng rhel ighr ,*it.h, cunenrc oncern(e .g.,f ind- presupposese xtraction action,w hich ,r..lTl",1din9 "in.' of informationf rom the environment. wou r " emotion guides _criticar To this end, ds ea "hrr c,r i; ; ;* J iii,nii , n , a*ention. rndeed, n-,."y ,h";;i;;ugr". In $;i,, iiij l;"" ,"l ."xifrf" ff "signal tt,ut emorionsh ave impor- an analogouwsa v emotion ,:,',,1 tant functions" that.prompt regulateast tenti' the organismi o ro.u, attention particurar aspectosf ,rr. .""rir*,i.ir' aspectso f the surroundings on d ild jHff:'fl (e.g.,F orkmanJ t ar., 1979;H ";;;;;;;i., pars or ou r an c ;i;#:''J::"ffi';:ilt" 1979' 199r)' For i;;;l;0, erso rs,o. : ::Yll 1c : exampre,a s sraredb y lzard p.163), ,,a g_encies.rhus,r,yp",r,.,",ft sensitizes lielst, parriculaer morion the organism to particulari eaarres tf i,r'.nu,ron,nenr. . . [andJe nsures *ay hidei n rhey fe t_rrio.-:b.e,_"ex.p,t_or;eTd :lir?:HTli::j;:*;iili*l*; e::]ml:Tour,ir:on nar envir sraraen dh ertpo s hap,he" ;',';;;";'Il:.ffiiil1,::l*:L?,*: 300 CognitivNe eurosciencoef Emotion Technically speakings, timurus-driveant tentionc apturea rways UnconscioEusm otionJ 0| goal-driven inreractsw ith the controro f attentiona ctivatedb y an emotionar The evorutionary.perspective state( yantis, I99g). impriest hat srimuri Particularryif therei s lvith threat tha(h ave beena ssociated time pressurien vorveds, ucha sw hens uspectindga nger throughoumt ammarian" uotrtion,toutd (e'g" a.lurkingp redaror)d, irecting and anxiety be easiryc onnectetdo fear thes potlighmt ay be assistebdy rrtoruri. rou- and that tinesw hich may usep reexisting knowredgeir locatep otentiatrh reats the anywherein perceptuafri eld. this way, ttref laltrright riejairi-lrelr:e:vdasntri:m ;urri; ';i;it,i::i:i"#'dff:Il'1,,1:i,,l:il:'i^,;"f# l;i,X'i,"#fi .In can bc quickrym ovedt o criticar aret ikeryt o be foundu rlig tr,r.ut"ning areaso f the surroundingsto promoter apidry'dearing Specificallyw, e concenrrate:l_yh.?r beasrasn dh umans. with the threat.T hesea uto_ *uy U" i"r."O rhe matic,p reattentivreo utinesa re snakeasn ds piders protorypoef animafle ars, likely to makeu seo f superficiasrt imulusi nforma_ (Ohmanl,9 g6;O rrrri .,,il,'r9g5), tion to arertt he attentionar ando na ne quallpyr ororyp- "false spotlightT. hus, they are likery to be biased positives" toward (reactingto a stimurusth att urns ].nlJi6ffi g-",'l':^:lt"a.toang",;noa'i,r"""*rrji.l".r'ri8n,',,, "farse out innocuouos n crosere xamrna_ :Tt.Tifl tion) rathert han negatives("f ailing to reacrt o whatt umso ut to be a critical stimuli) becauseo f the potentiar iil:Jii","l',T;""hrUUf deadlylost of the rattera rternativeT.h is is jusr :;:l*:l#'::T'1""i;#?'ffi # one exampleo f what Mineka (1992)h as termed,,adaprivceo nservarism,,ro describet he cautiousnesosf animars when it comest o dearingw ith fear stimuri. From this functionar scenarioo, new ouldp osturatteh att herea rem echanisms auro_ AutomaticA ttenriont o Facial stimurii n rhes urroundings Threat :::',t-1tt_]"r"ting.significanr by meanso r furuir"rp ro- cessrngp erceptuasl ystemst hat focus on criticari nformaiioni n the environrnent The Face_in_the-Crowd on theb asiso f superficiafle ature Effect anarysesT.h us,t hec onventionaalt tentionaslp ot- light wouldo nly come.intop ray Hansena nd jggg)..exposed aftert iis firstp reriminarya ndp reattentivaen arysis Hansen( subjects of the to complexm atriceso f visuar stimulusa rray.E ven thought he typeo i diuirion wirh the rasko f pressing.different stimuri or tuuo,b etweenp reatten- brd;;;;;;ing on *l"Tatic. attentionm echanisms ma(rixw ere similar whethera t stimurii n a c.n i].1"1 and the spotrighot f consciousa trenrionrh ar or whetherf , f" .frJ.il"o.", wc ,ave qesc'Dedh erem ay evotutionariry l-J characterizme anyi ndividuale motionsi,t was dever_ oe,iveryj p,otrrerhseis,y;, ; ;il;;I'j;lr#jr,i;rT;:tj:[ to the specific a devianr AI: CO:T:.].1*lation emotiono f fear, which is the topic ro which we angryf acei n a-background'.;;;;;irppy ry now turn. "anger ru.., thanv icev ersa. superioritey ffect,"r u.rr.,-..ror",-*;-;il* This of rhe ro be unaffectebdy rhes ize backgrouncdr owd,-w^hi*c"rrr irr.." matic" pop-out" ^rl**n for attributinigt to an auto- Fear, Anxiety, effecto f preattentivoe.r gin. and Attention argument' in ii'n'.w ith thep reviousrdye veroped Hansena ndH ansen1 rgsslp riposea'ilu, Feari s a negativeo r aversive, paralrepr rocessing ung.yf acesw erer ocatedb y highrya ctivatede motionasl tatet hatp romptsa void- mechanisiilr tSt "ui""iu,i".rry' anceo f pickedo ut rher arget, and escapef rom situationst hat threatenth e thel ocariono fhappyf aces whereas survivalo r weil-feing of orgun- requiread postattenti;;serisaera rch. isms' ohman er ar' (19g5) analyzedi. u, *iir,in-t*o thee volurionar,y.. nurr::.,,1,r In agreemenwti th importante vorutionarilyd e- ;;rr"r,ro thare volutionarily rived behaviorasl ystemsa: predatoryd efense cantt hreast timuliw ere i",.,il;;; signifi_ systema nd a sociars ubmissiveness automaticalt.olyc uteOin "i . system.T hus, in this perspective, Howevert,t .,... fearo peratesto b'ng organismsa way frorn pred_ *. severapl roblemws irh this, llprlI."].t"l.oltpt"y' atorsa nd-top romotey ielding an in the faie of dorninangr roupm embersT. heset wo e,' oor re xp emri etan, typeso f fear have important ;il;"';#Tlff differences( ohman, l9g6), bui they arsoh aue and one happ:y" fa,c:e, fw. iafsf i l"fi ff Hff :till mon a com- :l:1"gty used,a nd the angry face had core centeredo n avoidances. uccessfuar voidance snadow,w hich appears a characreristic of threateningsi tuations f.o. tfrc pof_oui effect (purceil requiresp erceptuals ystemst hat can f urlhermores, ubjects i: l.^::":, er al., 1996). locates timuli relatedt o threatw h'ereverth ey were fasrer( o decide, r,riu jl.tl_^"^r_l occur in the perceptuar a a.","r, ,;;;,:,:,: fierd. Crearry,t herei s a premrumo n speed:f ast identifica- marroixfh appthy ainn ,a.rnatrix tion ofa ngrry,. .r.iJl1li,l1lT:ilH:ifi:ii::;: of threata .lrowse arly activationo f defenses, Kirouac& Dor6,1 984), which may bring the potentiar rhisf indinf ;;s;;r;;;,;e ansry victim out of reach of the striking procestsh ant he facesw ereh ardert o predatoro r the moody authorityf igure before happyo nesp.,: rhapibec"a'uhsoeo pr'iu"., any damagec an happen' rn lhe arem uchm orep revalent Definedi n this way, fear rs an emotiona ssociated environmenorf the rypicals ubjecr active with p;il;ft; for thist ype coping with threats.H owever,i f efforts to colleges rudent(sB onda of experimenr, cope with the threatf air, one rs siiote, rqdoi.i "il'."p*s rhat Ieft in a situationo f uncertainc ontroilabirity, angryr argerws erea ffecred responslea rencierso and feari s transformeidn to anxrery by rocationo r trr. t,,e.irn rhe (Epstein,1 972). Thus, fear 1989)s uggest marrix( Hamptone t al., and anxietyh ave u .or*on evorutionaryd escenr, thats equenria,;.;l- ;i;.;r1"".r.'rr.o which gives them a common rargersr'o o' consequenrrv' in rhes earchfo r angry core,b ut theya rsod iffer profoundiy* ;,i'r".f.., ro thes hortelru t"i.y f;;;gry behavioraol utretsF' eari s related couldb e rargetisn happvc rowds to activec oping( sometimeisn thef orm of immo- artriburetdo mt freezing),w hereas (i.e.,topor,u,,.n,ii.'-,#;:,#",fi anxietyt akeso u.. *I"n the threari s resilienrt o r;:*:"T%i::; !;i;|lJ. coping 1994)' :.t',:.'.TlTrr::*rlf Thus,t heo riginaHl ansenri l-rir"r.""fint,il supporfto r automa(ic oro cannobr e invokeda s selectioonf threatenln,,gir nrfi, 302 CognitivNe eurosciencoef Emotion

The Face-in-rhe_CrowEdf fect with UnconsciousEmotion 303 SchemaricF acialS timuli /- -\ Z: A 4: Becauseth e fincringsre ported \-.-/ \ - . t / {-"-/ by Hansena nd Hansen( l9gg) are criticalf or our \t"-/ { t ^ - / \t"t/ hypothesisw, e have \=/ \y \7 performeda serieso f studiesa iminga t a furthere rucidation \y E/ of the face-in-the-crowd effectw hirea voidingt heh azardsth atp raguedin rerprera- a\ tion oftheir findings. a\ a\ A strategicafilr stc hoicei n our researcwh asl o uses chemaric { - . - / {'"-l rather than real faces. \-./ \t"-/ \'"-/ \-"t/ The use of real facesi s complicatedb ecauseit is difficult \7 \-/ 6) directlyt o controlt heirp hysical v/ E/ featuresF, or examprea, ngryf acesa rem ores rmr- v/ Iar thanh appyf acest o neutrarc onrrorf aces,w hicrrmayJ *itain *hy happyf aces (a]- a\ 6\ /- _\ are often - l more quickly found amongn eufralo nest han F"'1 \ - . t / I o o , l are angry faces( e.g.,B yme {'"-/ \t"-/ & Eysenck1, 995;O hman \J/ et al.,u npublishedda ta).W irh schematifca ceso, n the v/ \=/ \y otherh and,t hreateninga nd v/ nonthreateninfga cesc an be constructesdo that their physicald ifferencefr om a neutrarfa cei s fuenticarB. y usings chematicfa ccs,f ur- thermorew, e shourdb e able to determinem ore exactlyw hich facialf earuresa re criticalf or a potentiala ngrys uperioritye ffect. to delineate --Attempting thec riticarf eatureo f threateninsgy mboricfa ces,A ro- noff et al. (1988)c oilected threateninmg asksf rom a wide assortmenotf curtures 6) and defined featurest hat were .orron to 6) most of them. such featuresi ncruded \y a\c/ \y 6aF-36? static aspecto f faces €/ such as pointede arsa nd dynamicf eature.su ch as frowning E/ b/ eyebrowso r smiling mouths.M any of the featuresis orateda s dynamicc haracteris- ctl tic of facial threar by Aronoff .i. (tssg) conformed 6) to findings reporredf rom 6D6) studieso f schematic \Y/ 63 facesb y McKelvie( 1973). 63 N) specificailyM, cielvie,s datai ndi- v/ v/ \y 9/ F-3 N) (s catedt hat frowning eyebrows E)/ were critical for negahvee varuationo f face.sa nd for perceptiono f anger in a face,B asedo n thesef indings,w e constructedfa cial stimuli in which 6s6) severalf eaturess uch as eyebrows,m ouths,e yes, (a and cheekbonesc ould 6 6:a 6:a be independentrmy anipulated. v/ v/ v/ €)/ \y In a serieso frating studies(L undqviser r;r., 1999) e/ we found that thesef eaturesa ppearedto be hierarchicallys tructuredin an affective Figure1 3.1E. xampleosf 3 x3 spaced efined matriceosf schematfiacc esu sedin visual by the semanticd ifferentiadr imensionso f evaluarion, searchs tudiesT. he activrty,a nd tasko f thes ubjec*tu , to O.i"r.in" whether Potency'F irst, frowning eyebrows with a a face made facesc lusterw ithin an area of affective devianet xpressiowna sp resenitn the( separately spacet hat courd presented3) x . 3" be characterizeads negativereyv aluatedp,o tent,a nd marricesT.h er wo upperm arricessh ow highiy acti- angryl leftt unj noppyi" Jf,if vated'w hereasf acesw ith the opposiree yebriw (i.e., facesa gainsnr eu(rabl ackground raisedi n rhe midile; were faces.," ;;;';" Iower.shoawn gry glultered in a positively againsht appyb ackqloun:,(l:-fr) evaruateJo reao ithe affectives pace.T hesec lustersw ere andh appyu grnr, ungryb ackgrounds dividedi nto subclusters (righr).I n rhee xperimenhta tf by them outh( happyo r sad),a ndt heses ubclusterrsn, rum, them atjcesa ia no,i n"lua"a devjant were^further face. split dependingo n the stap. oi the eye, and so on. On the basiso f thesef indings,w e selectedth reateningn,o nthreatening. and Exposure neutral faces for use in the type of visual times were l or.2.sec'T he subjects searchp aradigmd everopedb y Hansen pressedo ne buttoni f at facesw ere and Hansen( 1988). the samea nd anothero ne Thesef acesa re illustratedin the sampleo f actual it there* u, u i.uiunt-riimutu,i n the matrices The matrix. showni n figure1 3.1. results( figure r 3-2)s howed, .t"u. ou.rrii'etfect of threati n the derection ln the first experiment time for deviants timuri.R egardress ^ we exposeds ubjectst o 3 x 3 matriceso f schematic or uactgro;nJ condition,d etection (see for threarening was fasrer faces figure r3.l), of whichh arfshowed6 identical (angrv) than fo, non,tr..ui.nin;A;;r, faciale xpression(sn eurrar, stimuri.H owever,f inding threatening or a,neutralf ace among angry [angry], nonthreatenin[gh appyl).I n ther emainingh alf of rhet rials, or happyf aces* ir'r,ii'rur,", because physicard ifference of the distincr one of the nine facess howeda deviantg .riui' betweent argetsa nd distractors angrya gainsta neutrarb ackground, in this condition.T he back_ happy againstn eutral ground condition interacredw ittr background,a ngry againsta happy backgroundh, appy exposuret i*". *ltr, neutrarb ackground, against an angry tion of the threatening detec- background, and neuiral againstu ny ti',t," "*ir.rriu. - face was fasterb oth with r- ana Uu"t opp_o-site-expression 2-sece xposurew. ith trre groundsT. he deviants timuluso ccunede qually background( nonthreatenrng oftena iail positionii n the matrix. *itt u threateningd eviant;t hreat_ enlng with a nonthreateningd eviant), howeveithe foste,d "te.tion of threalenins ***l

304 Cognitive Neuroscience of Emotion

UnconsciousEmot3io0n5 VisualS earch detec(ed againsta backgroundc rowd l 500 of faces (hana re nonthreatening plays' None of the conioun,ring faciard is- ru.torr'ririo..,ouo interpretation I 400 Hansena nd Hansenf indings ofihe original *;;;;;;; ,il, ,,uor. Enor ratesw eret ow, there l factor favorin! ri," tnr"ui.onoition, 300 ;iJ:.:T::Tding and subjectsw erea s fasr ! c not presenti n u rutri* I 200 as rn marriceso f no.u.1t-^tllt:lus-w as oiiir"r""irg rr*, Thus,t hese^resutts e hyporhesi,sn u,l u'nu1lYtening.faces' prouioes ffirt ro, tt, r 1 0 0 tt pa(icularlv effective E ing srimuti ir,,, h.ir';T"l"sd:li:1' in discoveririgth rearen- trE | 000 o potentiation 900 of Attention to FacialT hreatb y Anxiety @ 800 is criticatlo thee ffecrrse porred 700 ffJr?,;"1,,r;:lwrrerher.emorion witho urs che_ hadd iagonat facesw -erpeh ysicalslvim ilara, sb oth ,,"., ,"1"1tt1o,'-o1*st- 1aLntd-l cnudrv,uedn gtv 600 simpiy linel.for mouths,a nd 'I invertedr rorn, the "y", *.r, sec 2 sec 1 sec z sec j:,[Tli.;Jy:#ifi,1".,,1ffi"*n,."f ExposurDeu ratlon 111,..3.1.j,'..il{;i;i"l'';T ru".int t'" f ff:[J:,i:i'L1J:;r"lt" "'o';';;;" thougwhe k .nonwo thinagb our Figure l3.2 Detection emotionally ratencies( reactiont imes)f rom a visual search to the.expressions. subjects experimentw here thisf indingw ouldb e ':tL:y-"tj one *uf ,o".ruriry determinedw hether a deviantt arget siimuius( happyo r angry) was presenri n ma. tnces composedo f neutrSlb ackgro-und tr ''tt " 'u tin' "j' nff i faJeso r happylangryb ackgroundf aces. ,::,; lJl TJiil;Ti'Jy"ii, time of Exposure subjectisn findine tyHiiT:f S{ rhe mafix was eirherI or 2 sec. a devia:n!,ir t irr-.r ,.ri"g i;;:;:a f [f N) }J bed onei n an experimensr irtr emainsro our raboratoryb,u rr here# r;;;;;iil.uuuituur" O tr'uut n*i.iy fromo theri nvesriga- ;::il fl:]f, .X"il|!;j:::: i, uiLiut"a* ith ag eneraribzieaJsto faces wase vidento nly at the longeri nterval. nirst, y ;,:i1r,",, similart o thef astd etectiono f neutral Brn eil ;;::,,:?ffi ;,,1f#1i'i!t. devianrsa gainst backgroundso flngry lfl?i#:l:ll;i o, r,rppy faces,t his implies that the diffi- ou'tg'ouoni; ;; culty the perceptuald iscrimination ;::-:ffIJriff',:fffi;'u raceasn dh apprya ceasg ainsr _of was iliportant. when discriminatronw as easy (i e', when the background -# had horizontalf eaturesa nd the targetsd iagonar subj e-c t s r" * i; ;;;,;; ones)' l-sec exposure..was whereasrh e ?dlft":j #l-:H;::;::* j1,",,.,,",jj," sufficient to get the angers uperioritye ffect. rwo groupi:sd fliid " ", ;;,ff;;;;""d rr" when the However, ro find happy perceptuald iscrimination, ", iiiri*r, neutrabl ackgroundw hen facesa gainsar (i.e., borh backgrounda nd targers *r" urctground;i ri"" or had diagonal lines)' 2-sec were jectsw eres lowerr o sngryf acesa, nxiouss ub- neededf or the angers uperioritye ffect to emerge. find happy,"d;;;fi;: r'urrurrxrotrs This implies that the s-earchfo r angry powerfudl istracting subJectssu, ggestinag faces,a lthoughm ore efficient than rhat for effecti .'# "".^;';^^;:l: happy faces, was not fuJry automaii.. ir,,,r,igr,"*i.iy:ff Ruth.r, tn. data appeart o indicatet hat the :::f:"ffll1,:1T'r:"il1#r:jfhl4fjil'L",, angry faces were thann onthreatening erI nd lscriminating quickry found againsta neutralb ackground stimuti. threatening difficult but that the more task of finding an angry iu.. uguinri, Bradleya ndM ogg (,y_n!l backgroundo f happy faces was normacl ontrolsa nd more effort-demandinga nd required :*O persondsi agnosewd ith morl ti.". However,e ven though angry and o' aep""iono ,; i;;., happy faces were equalryd iscriminable f .,l'JlHl tr n ana trenriro enxap emrie rn r.o,n "u.r.'o ther and from the neutrarf ace, J,fitf, ]: 'f:, the detection times for angry enr e deviants* " ut*.y, fas(er than those for happy mio arn| . ^ * ,,,",; '.':jo'J'il;.JJT'J deviants.T his searcha symmetry arger (threat),s adness, :" ?::T: :ili,#,xi:,il;i1 in favor oi angry facess uggeststh at angry, but and hapiiness,; ; ;.."li';." ".ffi not happy,f acesh ad a criticar whetnh e ieaturet hatc ourdb e preattentiverryo cated( Treis- racdeiss appe"a pr,."our," ii r;,J#fi.l, man & Sourher,l 9g5). rh; p'";";;;;;;fi''. Hlil:Ifl ""i:lffi: [ There was no differencei n latency :#';ij::,JT::J".:.n:? orreanr reeri therar cea,n d to decidet hat a deviants tirnulusw as nor ditr*entr esponse presenti n matriceso f threatening of rhef ace,n ., -il'n k.y, u.p.nain"g, , ,i"'oo" and nonthreateninfga ces,w hich both took signif_ i'rr"j-1"^l^tllt- icantly longer than matrices of neutral eeym ov e r; stimuri.E nor ratesw ere row and tendedt o menr ,* .,.,.u ,ou:','f?fii ! jfi: be lower for threateningt han lects lookeda nd wirh f l;f ,?ll'i1ll,,;f : for nonthr.ateninfd eviants. what,ratencytn. . .rrri. lUn : These results anxietyd isorder r',ri*ed a biaso f the generarized show clearly that a threatenfngfa cial display patienrst o.I ook airngry is nrore raDidlv tor ir...,"*t,i r",,abrys horrer other expressiorrsA. gain, larenciest han rhreateni;; ffii li*i,, orou"o effecrivea trenrion 305 CognitiveN euroscjencoef Emotion catchers' particularrv.fo:.p".,ronwri.t h UnconsciousEmotion anxietyd isorderF. orowing yantis (lggg), J07 it can be arguedt hat design'o ne stimurus-driveant tenrionc apturew as potentiatcd cannotb ut wonderw hat anxietys ensitizecl because stimurusf eatuiesw ere used the settingo f goal-drivena ttention by the visual tion, for threateninsgt imuri.E mo_ r:ff therefore,a ppearst o drive attention. il:',"ft:" ;, ;.J,fi j enri n th e o ispiay secon d, 1[::, .T,I il:,,,r{:"_:s.presnot presenr fear_relevantrh an the r",, ,_"1".-jj":::1'_"-:* were shorrerf or the recognirionii"i,-,,n'I..*Y'.f.ffi .;fi::T#j:.|"f j;1j, rencyo f deviant 1.#u,1";:r,H,f Auromatlc Attention fear_reteva,n,itr rii to ThreatenlngA nimal Stimuli i;i.;;;;ron er at., 1989).

The Snake_in_the_Grass Snakes Effect in rhe Grass:F earful Subjects The resuitsr eviewed A in thep reviouss ecrion simirar que'srionto _thatr aised showc learlyt hatf aciars timurii mpry- with regardt o the faciar ing threara re more "*::lli ti,i. in rhe conrexro f biologically stimuri courd be raised ,"I1,;;r"n'i'n"g stimuli in capturingr he fru"r.f""riiu.niirat of both normal and auenrion stimuti: would subiectsf earful anxiouss ubjectsT. his providesg ood ; ary hypothesis supportf or the evolutron_ ;;; ;;ffi ".il' o'".r han suggestingt hat fear stimuri ;j,i:il!',iin'l;*fi nonreasrruubrj eicnts ihat haver orowed humanst hrought heir ,; t"- evolution shourdb e efficjent specific-fear attention" "pirr.tr. rr"r irrrr questionnairews ere dersw hether ,.rrr..r";:"";? *""- administeredto a largeg roup simirarr esultsw ourdb e medicine,p hysicalt herapy, of students( of ourJ.".J *i,t otherc rasseosr "uoruiionuriry or optics),u nOt t,oses co.ing fear-relevansrt imulis uch in snake fear abovet he gOthp ercentile asp ictureso rr"lto ""i spiderss. uch and berow rhe son p.r."r,irrii performedin studiesh aveb een invited ,pia". fear, or vice our laboraroryiO t,non,,,l.. ldsJj. to particioatei n an experimenr. veisa. were a n.ioanr;rr."u rrurc ontrorg roup, subjectsw ere exposedr o marrices rhe 50th percentilei n scoringb erow ;i;;,;;;; or either snakes,. spiders, uo*, ryp"s oi;;;; ers' or mushroorns'I n 'ow- procedure, recruited.w ith this setection half of the casesa lr stimuri in rhe each subjectc ourd-be. *por.i category' matrix were of the same uo]i io r.*.0 and nonfeared whereast he other harf had a stimurus vanrs timutei, .s.,s nakes-a1! fear_rere_ from a deviantc ategory.I n suppon yd:rs,;!-sie-.",tr"i, hypothesis,.,ru;."i, subjectA ' subjects ,o, u specificasllny ake_fearful ::,iT ::]",t"jary *.r. iri.r". to find a devianr were.exposetod tt. p."uio'urry s{ crf spl.er among flowers snake or second describepdr ocedure and mushroomst han vice versa. experimenTt' hey hai 2xz for the r\) detection This increasei n speedo f .nJ s';J';trices, half x was not accompaniecbry t:X'.T;.il':T^"-"lr of whichh ad onry i--r more ...o.r-ro the contrary,t here were '**i'' "' 'o'ol.;.r* errors in detectingf ear-rerevant rewer remainhinagrhr ad thrn f"u.-irr"t"uo-n,o .uiun, srimu.ri. i;:il::";t i'e" snakes one tenciesw ere shortesr Responser a- rooms, or spidersa mongf lo-wers for deviant.rnut., uron-g iackground or flowers" . ,n,:1'-11"1' or mush- spiders among flowers r"i[*.0 uy mushrooms.T he longestl aten.]r, rher esur r , *.r. found for deviant musn_ ., ;;rl;.;;$[':J; i"l":f.fJ"i, t r5ffi?,i"J:;,,,;.; rooms amongb ackgrounds nakes ;.,;"';,,.. anJ flo*ers amnngs pidersT. his distribution detectionl atenciest pPeTs of !ilT#[l,illJi,lliu.'i::,':l*"''l"; d;;; ". mushrothoamvnisc e to make ecologicals ensew. hen flowers marrix versa. serveda s deviant or mushrooms stimuli, sizeh a_dc-ale ar" n .t onr ."r_iilt"uun, stimuri,d etection,;*o"*... innuenced *nrr.i* Ir*.lxpenments, matrix' with by their rocationin the r,"tr snakea nd spiderd eviantsr,r o*"".r,'rocation ror.* ,-i."u.* ;,;ffi jTj"I' effect in the matrix had no ?;,n1,r,," lil:*l j on detebtionra tencyw, hich suggests specificatiyn identifyingrh.i,'f.ur.r;;;p;;fi" JilJn* . l*l; ,t,u,, t,.y werea utomaticalrdye tecreo. their Funhermoreo' vera' it srrmulu(ss eef igure nonfearefeda r_rerevant took rong[i," a.,r.i'" irrger in a large( 3 r3.3)( e.g.s, nake-rearrur'sui1..,' a small (2 x 2) x 3) rhanr n wirhs piders *"." fastewr ith matrix,b ut, as indicatedb y the interactron andv ice" ..::l Tlr.r,h.;G';;;;fi"nal snakesth an and betweenf ear rerevance -..,"., response size of marrix' rhis effect was fear-relevasntirm ulus connecretod rhe more ";";;;; ;;, fear-inerevanrh an facilitateidt, d.t..ii"". vant targets'I n fact' fear-rere- To sum seDaratete stss howeda reliabres ize-of-matrix.ri.-.ionry . . up,i n theses ectionw e fear-irrelevant ro, vjde havea escribed targets'i hus, attentiona ppeared converging evidence to be automatrcaryd rawn ro devi- and_spiders,w hereas f]^:l"l*. u rno.. ,.qu.n,irf searchs rraregyw as ;"";; li.: located eviantf lowers used ro a::,jnottc o:l m T,;ip rexity ;il." r*:l** *"j.; l and mushroomr.r nrr. ,.rurts indicate of thed isplays eeme,do -r-ua,J, *J:j,,#*:'l f; f ill stimuli were rhat fear-rerevanr irrelevanr reslf or fear-rerevant picked up independe.ntly,,"trt t,r. stimulj,f indingf iar_ref.*"i thanf or fear_ p"iii.n rn rhep ercepruafrie rd in r,irnrii'ir", processr eminiscento f a ..pop_out,, a effect of preattentiveo rigin. -:11s As with rrrd.aotne o st; ;,n!"ffi','i the visuals earchs rudiesu ring l,i#, ;#:,'ijn:ff ":ll..?l:Jf "T X.; r.t;r;tic facesa s srimuli,r heseo ara cannotb e accountedfo r in terms amongf j;JlilJii#?i::';_.,T.+iif of thec on-foundinfagc torsp laguingi nterpretation ear_irr",;;;;;;Jl j of the originalH ansena nd wasf urtheer nhanced rru;*:i;illl H1ns1n( J9Egtil;.;u1r"" Hun..n & t, "r,Ji;".i, *. ur.:g Hansen,1 994). 1:f:]:,,::: f,t.,, . responedm olionaily caregorieso f stimuli ,uri,., tr,* s'ingte wjrh to r3e::r:e::v ance exemptarsf or each fear_ generaii,..Jn lti.,yd isorder condition,i t is unrikelyt hat :1,".:Ti;j,:,:TJ*3::,r,:oi*ts showead biast o some. o*ron confoundingfa ctor for anrmals timu[ courda ccount arl sp ec for findingr r,orr.rlu,"n.i"st o them. in ca r ry ,.."i, " i ," ,r J j Indeed,w ith our cificf eared : Jl..Jf:f,i ff: l stimulusT'h esere isluJrrnism :p;r ytn aruii'oiu,; T::i :lj;:f,r:**: ,tur" a sensitivitoy identiry 308 CognitiveN euroscienceo f Emotron

1400 UnconsciousEmoti3o0n9 3 x 3 Matrices cause rapid emotionala ctivationw ourd wirh mobirizer-e sourceism mediatelyto deal 13 00 the rhreat'w hich would improve ;il';;;; or survivingt he encounter. ! Non-fear-ful are neurarm echanismsro There boosta ii, urgur"n,r"*oou* (e.g., a neurarn etwork rgg6)hasd erineated U) 12 00 in rodentst hat may ro"r,r iar.-*r.,ed f Feartul synaptically stimulusi nformationm ono_ E via rhet halamusto the'amygdu,n',iu, aptic bypassintgh es lowerm ulrisyn_ o parhwayv ia rhe cortex ro prompt'erarry 11 00 F = feared ,esponorngto thfeats.I n this way the bea .iiuar"bde f;';i FR = fear-relevanl ;ffi:Tl|,::]r,"rXr.:.wourd srimuluisc ompreteprryo cessed - 10 00 FIB fear-inelevant o distr.= distraclors C) afl 900 Auronomic q) Responsetso phobicS rimuli tr The hypothesisth at fear aclivrli^n .l^-- _^. _-, 800 ':i:i:,,1:'L::',Ji,x:'';:::::,", ffJ;f*:i:: tl ljl".ft T,"3ffinf li,l; 700 showe,evareJ-,;ili,,i;i:;,:it1:i$'_:H"X*Ti;l,;':JE'fi FRr arseFt lRGsetFtB fearedo bject ;:i,,#.:fi :,3r9:l tarset (e.g.,F redrikso",isar,H irr'i'olutngr, FtFrdislFr,t Rd istre. oisrr."e- n'i[ii. for a review). 1975;s eeS artory1, 9g3, For exampleG, lobisch;i ;i fearfusl ubjects, A;;) reporredrh ars nakeo_r spider- Figurer 3'3' Detectionra tencie(sre acrion in contrast.tnoo rmacl ontrori, , times)fo r fear-releva(nstn akess,p iders) responses' ,i"** enhancesdk inc onducrance or fear-irrelevan(ftl ower.sm, ushrooms) a heartr atea ccereratioans rtiruii i" fearfual ndn onfearfu,lu bi..tr. opposeido u a...t"rution,a nda broodp res_ Fearfurs ubjectsw eres erectetdo surei ncreasreo picrures^osfn akes feare ithers nakeosr spidersb ut not both.T he or dft;;;.;rpared to neurrar nonfearfusl ubiectsw erea rbitrarily evaluatepdi ctures or positivery allocateads c ontrolsfo r feareda ndn onfeared u* il ;;;;",.srarue probe N) cn fear-rerevatnatr petsin _rhefe arful aftero nseot f thef earedi: ::-" -t:4t. stirnurip resented (Jl subjectsN. oi. ,nu,a ris ubjectws eref asterto de- picturesh owed,u urtuntior lo tectf ear-rerevatnhi anf ear-inerevu", reflex (figure potentiatioonf thes tartleb link J,rruri "na thatf earfurs ubje's weree ven I3'5)' indicaringo "rp" "ri";;;;*." f.,J fasrerto detectr hes pecific 1990) incrination(sL ange t ar., stimulit treyf eared. eveni f stimulusd uratio'nrsrr. . u.f i"n rtro msec)T. hus,t hesere sults thatf earfuts ubjecrs,t"*. prJr"ri."o l,,?.jl:", "*o,ionut responsteo feared featureso f potential danger and that this generart endencyb ecomes for persons more obvious who respondw ith acutef rar ti tf.t.s trmuli. Backward Maskinga sa Methodto Assure rrea(tentivpero cessing AutomaticA ctivationo f phobic Fearr o Stimuli percepriopnr,e arrenrrve d1ier.el :rjlm.i'n andc onsciouinsf Theoretical e wh a ri .se v enr ua ryp .r..ui .o.' Considerations and therefore ii.1l- ;;:ilil:"l"td:.,ff i"[ff ::::: speciarm ethod, ar" ne.ded a *.r.-,i.* aparti f one wants An importantq uestionr aised onslratet hat emotionalr esponding to dem_ by thed emonstratioonf enhanceda ttention can b" ericit"d uft., ening stimuli to threat- marrca narysis onry a preattentive,a uto- concernsi ts consequenc.rro , .rotronar of rhes timurusin rhea bsence is activationo. ne possibirity 1999) oili, .onr.ious recognition(o hman, that we ail sharea preattentive one methodt o teasea part bias to attendt o threata nd that, as a resurt, nonconsciouasu tomaticm echanisms consciousa rtentionis focused of stimurus on the threatt.r ,i, bir, *outo ue *o.. appraiosrat nr .' ti*ur**iJuu.r*,.0 in fearful subjec(s ilnoun..o ,",n"L. wr,ii,r, so that their atrentionJ o"rJ u" more ;:J:::T,::T:'.:H.ous ever, rapidly redirectedH. ow_ "ff"r '*';: oncea ttentioni s redirectedto are ry ro Irow in g ; the threatf,u rtherr espondingw ould be depen_ ;;; ff flili :,.flT1",,fr or:t g: consciousa ppraisaor f rhe ceivcd is primarily depJndent *:[i i ili m;*- situationr,o ii,r, an emorionael pisodejs on ti,. int.ruli';;;" rhe only if rhe resulr evoked the maskings timuli, onsetso f rhe rargera nd of the impries, iu, r"u, is j'stified. the stimulus-o"r",, .yn.tro", ,appraisar In orher words, I99i). frOO, (Esteves& Ohman, emotionala ctivaribn be.a postartentiv" when rhis inrervati s short( rrt:l#;;;;trnr..), .would iro."r, The arrernativep ossibirity rhem asking is that not only attention, tendsr o comprereryb lock srimulus but arsoe motion,is cJntrolledfr om the uuto,niti., recognitiono r ,n. ,'.g., ,iirr,ur. yet, tentivel ever, pr.ut- stratedt hat the it can be demon- so that the attentionaslh ifta ndt hee rnotionar targets timulus,e vent hough activationw ouldo ccur it remainsb lockedf rom awareness, in parallel Evolutionaryc ons.iderations influencest he person'sb ehavior speaki n favoro f the Iattera lternative tr.. s"*i;i"';;ilrr., be- example'M arcer( igg3) 1g92,f o*eviews). For demonsrraterdh arr eacrion trmest o identifyr he coror of Skin Conductance Temporat Course of Startle potentlation 6 t f Snatcy'Spidsl5 I f Ncural i ? i 3 o.: D Plcuut = a 4 1 L ? 2 I U 4 , s 1 -I-- * . E z 1 Animal Fearful -o- Contr ols o.r E I L { & . . : u - + - ! e I l J I

' : l n I

_ 4 JI

1203 00 800 r300 Probe Times (ms)

d

Q ^",_., "-^_.., /-l Snakes/Spidcrs \ I Ncuaal Temporal { , Course of Starile potentiation Sna.kcs/Spiders 6 r Controls '-\- O O Neutral g - J S u r : F I o) lO = = 4--'l. (,{-) 3 : l

F L - l '; i 0-f Blood Pressure E E I € E .z--l i < v 1 | I J _ 4 J

1203 00 800 1300 probe 38oo Times (nrs)

Figure I 3.5. Difference in sranle blink amplitude to srartlep robesb etween flexese licited againsra background re_ ,nut..ZrpiJ., uinJr .",rr, pictures functiono f intervalb etween as a lo*.9, :,r., "'i"., i.' or" ,,,:'ilf:f: :ftr tJr'flhf"fi "" lrorn[ 5o-mseecx posureNso. re, ;lT; 'jl:# rire" r*,,i*rr'p"i#ufiln ,o stimulai lread3y0 0m seca frer ,r,,r u".ra Figure 13,4.S kin rh.eirons.e* r,, ri" ,r,.,?'""ry conductan< utus clicired a rcspon.se shonfe ar-stim- that ran its.cours"f ",Uli", snake-r-r oe "a"r"rru"J "i,",y,r:l:j;i,"J{,:,::ffilj:,',:T,:l:::,'l;l:Tl;' panel).( Dara p,"*re offset (to*", from Globishe t al., 1999.) shown for skir conductance), or neutrars timuri.N ote the sponses largers kin conductancer e- and the pronouncedh eartr ate accereration and the crearb roocrp ressurei n- creaset o rhe feareds timulus.( Dara from Globish et,1., iSSS I

l l l 3l2 CognitiveN euroscjencoef Emotion patchesp resented to subjectsw ere affectedb y preceding UnconscioEusm otion i lj the color_wordse ven wnen words were impossiblet o recognize themselvesa s more dislikjng, ' br.urr" or backwardm asking. more activateda, nd Esrevesa nd ohman them asked lessi n controlw hene xposed (rgg3) and ohman and soares( rgg3, snakesp icturestl an to to backward lgg4) acrapterdh e anyo ,n.rlil,ur.r. Simirarr esurts maskingt echniqufeo r usew ith emotionar wereo btained phobic stimuriA. s masksf or common ,,ffis, objects,s uch as pi"trr., ofsnakes fi:T5','rr:::lliil'l-.9:tioe'-r."#ur where,ra,"ns oni.uJul-contrors and spiderso, t,,,'"" r"o !"lres categories. 1994) used pictureso f slmilar i1993, rnes rimulus f:::tl -tle..stiTulus rr,"r, "r"ti""liuro."o ,t ouj."t, ttut *"re cut in piecesa nd then conrent reassembreda nd rephotographed randomry '1.;:iffi so that no centraro bject sciousrecogni;;;,:':i,To'iJ,:'r"f teves courd be discemed.E s_ ,,:",;"i:_,*,"r;'ffi and ohman (r993) examineott e eiiectrveness describebdv LeDoux pv"n l#*ltrI of faciarp icturesw irh a neu- tlss6). (-norgt"#'r.r, hemisphere tral emotionale xpressionag so muraasokrss standr hem eaning courdn ot under_ frourl fIacilaailp lcturesp ortrayinga ffects of singre* orar pt"r"n?.ii" or happiness. of anger qurtea ccurarely ,t. righth emispheriet ,c ourd thee motiona,or ". "i,t.-*"rjr. rate A forced-choicep rocedurew asu sed Thesere sultssh ow to determrnem askinge ffectsa s a function . conclusive,lty u ,. onr.io of rhe soA' The subjects rusis "J:rf.T.Jr::Jr:i,,T::?:ffji,ili; weree xposedto iong serieso f stimuius nont ecessroaa rcyt iva(e the first pairs,i n which r.rr;"p i"ii.r. stimuruss erveda s targeta nd the srimuruasp peareads e ffecrive seconda s mask.T hey were requiredt o "r ";";;rr;; guesst he natureo f the target o*;";;,t;;;',"0".,""r'1"",1."..0 stimurusa nd then to stalet heir confidence p*;';"'n guess'T he resurts in the jr;TJ::_T':, * ;'*Ji,'* ora p hocbs it i showedt hat the subjectsre quireda n :,:fii :",::ffiI mutuis ss u rn- for SoA of about r00 rnsec confident correct.recognitiono f the artenrion,arrer,;;;rt:l;:,i"".t*",t;,T:?T:.;,Hf,:';llm*:*,,';i:*l targets timulus,a nd there were no differ- encesb etweent he stimulus ery can be categoriesW, hen the SOA was activatedf rom. stimuri i" subjects 30 mseco r less,( he it," .""i.""ment that are both performeda nd fert ihut th.y performed peripherarin the perceptuar too weak or too randomry.T heser esurtsw ere fierd to.na"r,r,.'io."", of stablei rrespectiveo f whe(her appearsth at emotional consciousa ttentionT. hus, it the subjecis'werer andomlys erectedn onfearfur ir ri,nuttun"our-*i,t or uni_ the^fear .activation ,t " shift of attentiont oward classifieda s highly rru.rui o, nonfearfur elicirings rimulusW. hent he ;;;l]r:,:Hrs on the basiso f ques_ ,,i;;i;;;;, eventuaily in consciousnerrr,t i, oJ"ur*';;;:':""'i:'J:t^:t:Tu,igl is regisrered grve 3"",ilffij #T:j:.1j"1'* ,J'l N) phobic :::r.hier: e"su-lt;in^fge *ara; n:a :uit:om'faftifc,f i:lii:f :Ti':l' \ Ul Responsesto MaskedS timuli unconrroil;Uqiueu lity. f\) Using the backward maskingt echnique,o hman and tr+ Soares( r994) resredr he hy- Preartentivep rocessesin pavlovian pothesist hat phobic fear can-.bep t"*.n,iu.ry FearC onditioning uctivateda nd, thus, that rnore than shiftsi n attentionc an be achieved uy uutoritic stimulusa naryses. Masked subjectsw ho They serected Elicitationo f Condjtioned were either highry rearruro i Responses snar<.so , of spiders( but not of both) as well as nonfearfulc ontrols An importanqt uestion using rtrep .ruiourif describedm ethod. ra These subjectsw ere exposedt o two stimuluss eriesc onsisting presentations of repeated s:h:olw:n. T'theongin;,;::xl],f':f5irTri.lr,"'J,lrlrll,,if,lf;fri, :?:.JJjffJi of pictureso f snakess, pidersf,l owers, by fearful subjectsF. or and mushroomsI.n the arst exampre,b ".ause twrn studies series,t hesel arget pictures* ere a genericco mponent suggest hat therei s maskedu y immetiatety fo'owing nonrecogniz_ behinda nimai.rr ;. (,e;,;;,;:,.,fi#19::,^,:"ti:: . able pictures( cut and randomryr "urr.,nut"a; tilfr,; ui an so,q producinge ffecrivem ask- nd p rerr e nr ing (30 msec).I n the second :5: iv evr . 'H'i"]? ??i'.]. .'ffii seriest,h e targetsw erep resentewd ithout J[ ' r'.'ff:* ll;;1 I" l: -a skin conductance masks. likely is thati t ttn""o pri*1."-i.r,'^*, response(ss cRs) were recorded in rermso f ,ou,o,,,,llo"tYpossibility logical as an i'*n.d."e x of the physio- responsec omponenro f fear. In addition,. the *il;;; "^0"*o a ., e-\tras erieso f pictures in which :lTr,H:T::['::':H,il,Hmn:; they were askedt o rate their subjective lu;'lr#;l..,:fiT:r,]in:i'"lif ln termso f valence( likeidislike) response activationa ndc ontrol. "i,:a: froenr, v,;#ii1l'f'#f*1 $ According to skin conductanced ata, :::f :Y:'l r-u::: i ru:.* the subjectsw ho were afraid of snakes ac ombinatoi"r"n ' "it'".t wo. il.l showede- le-vatedre spondingt o snakes ;il;'i;i:fl':?:::ilvis Accordirnogs erigman .";;";; to spidersa n4 neurrals timuli, spider-fearfurs ubjects. the showeds pecificaty'erevaledre sponses exa m in ei uy or,'" u" nonfearful to spiders,a nd the o"o' i[";:"fi subjectsd id not differintiut" u.i*..n tioning'A s a resurot f evoill!:1[Tfi,:]"lutionary ,: tJ:i fi ;. ;.JJ*i* :: ite caregoriesr,e gardresos f mask_ .""iirffi"r, ,ti,nuti. .tut.o ing condition.T hus' the resultsf rom vrvalr hrearisn mammalian to fecurrenstu r_ the maskeds eriesw ere simirar to those evorudtn*" r";r;;;;;; series, from ations enresr erectiveinlyr o whicb suggesrs,i ,ri,n"r, "f the response wirha versiveev enrsc'o nseqr"",ry,;;;;;;'inobi" associ- :::#:fr*a was prearrenrivety oble"ts woulde asiryb e rurnedin rof ear sucha ss nakes r,i*uri fl.*r.'il;r", havea genetic Inrerestingryt,h e psychophysiologicar to forms ucha ssociarioanns'd readiness findingsw erep ara'eredi n the rarings it *urd r;;;;;r#ft. ro of the subjectiver esponset o the picirres. rngt o resurirn responses expecsru chc onditio'- tirus, tire snake-fearfusr ubiects that,s imilart o piroui.. "rp*ses, rated consciouasn alysis wourdn otr equirea fu' of rhes rimulurs" . iij, .ii.li"ri". 3.'4 CognitiveN eurosciencoef Emotion

This hypothesisw ast esredb y ohman ands oares( 1993)T. heyu seda differen- Unconscious tial condirioningp aradigm Emotion j l5 to.oniition oin"renrg roupso f subjecti Condirioningto ically fear-relevant ro eirherb iorog_ MaskedS rrmuli (snakeso r spiders)o r fear-irrelevan(ftl owers stimuli' subjects o, n,ushroo..) in the fear-rereurn, shown In^rhe"condirioning snakes irorp.-*ere two picturesp onrayrng studiesb y Ohman and spiders,r espectivelys. ubjelts and co_ in the fear-inelevangt roupsw ere shorvn pictureso f flowers and mushiooms."Afre; a'or''*,"'"n!ilJi'l'";::l',"T"::t;,lt?ii;o1; a few habituationtr ials,t herew as an fril,ft":T:r:o:n;so,.f , f1ear:-,re?le:v,ansr ""'"' acquisitionp hasew hereo ne of the rcsted or fear-irrelevant stimuliw as foilowedb y an electrics hock in exrincrion ;;;;.;.;#lir", *.r. with a 05-sec interstimulus-interval. US, This pi.,rr" *u, designatedth e otherp icture( e-g., cs+. The ;:#ffi j",T:ffi[l' a spideri f theC S+ *asu'snak.), which tr$il:T, the w-asn everf ollowedb y J,,".',;fi::Llii:fr i:ll, I eaming ffii..'Jl[ US, was designatedth e cs-. w_itrtrn is spon.ses new responses? tJtr; paraaigmr hed ifferencein skinc onduc- u. .onaitioJll In:.1-to:". can autonomirce - tancer esponseto thec s.+.11!t he thata rep reventeidr" t CS-r eflectsp urec onditioninge ffecrsu ncontami- meanso f backward ."rJ;*;r;;ness natedb y sensitization' ;t"ri|n;ltt" by initiar responding,,u i so on (see exrincrion ohman, Igg3), In the . ^^_ Cgl,.rporaryle arninitheorists nhaset ha1.l:nlinatedi he 1985; directedb "*f.n*.n,, rhe cs+ and rhe cs- were pre- Ohman1, 919. ;;il',*: any USs. Half rhe subjectsc ondirioned romin rg ,,iff| ['#i,:#.?:*"::Tl; r::r:e::le^:v]a,hn.tg "t ro fear_relevanarn d fear_ assaotcioi nLs:: il4 stimuli' respectivelyw, ere extinguished with maskeds rimuli and the ,r',"v fi other half wirhour any irs't*: "i] i,ni,"0. masks.T hus, subjec"tisn the maskedg roups ;;;l;:;iL'",:*f ;;lli (e.g.p, osne&r cS+ and had both the lie: p:r:ejpaar:e#dn,e,'tsi,,.so' S.y.i1rlilrrl. tousness Boies, the cs- maskedu y a ,anoomty. ri assocrarions toward uno reassembrepdic turew ith a 30- between thee aseo f forming msec SOA, exactly as rvptso i ;;;il' litl"tta in rhe experimento n fearful subjects, ..pon.J theoryt o .*0.", ,or. fttii" and Soares( 1994). Uy 6f.,,nrn r,,,.ijii,.,fif Both the groups :#x';lJl"*#**L*ff :l*f . testedw ithoutm asksd uringt hee xtinction the more degraded Hrn tetrm:soj fi infpfuti r'.ffi able phases howedr eri_ rhei nnut ,f";;;::-:,"-'_"1*'*1y degradation: differential skin conductancere sponding io_rhec s+ and rhe cS-, suggesting continuing conditioning effectsi n-botir jlli,:t1.'T;lly#:xrry:j*,:l,ud"_*i:::;: grorir. Fo, the groupst estedw ith masked ;;::L*X asa n fo r ,t CSs during extinction, however, extremwea vt od egrade- v-r f"- ,Jt"uul." madea clear difference. H.n..,i i'uf'rr;;;:tt i"pr,. i"ri. ilrit"*"".r. maskingc omprerelv whereas shoulda llow fear learning irn*.""rr *rp"nding in a prepareds timulus. rn spiteo f masking, fear-inetevani :b"li:I..d the groupc onditionedto it sho;rd be |! stimuli,.reljablea, tUeirt educet v' differentiarle spondingto the CS+ and the CS- remainedi n rhe group;"dt;;;;; normnaor nrearrur !o snakeso r spiders.T he resurrf or o",.li"'';!'fll,llJ,".1::Xl"flT'"of'r, subjecwtes rex - this group thereforep araileredt hose obtainedw ith fearful subjectsi n the experi_ ment reportedb y Ohman and Soares( 1994). ::xl**n,"w,er:e .#:iil,!iri,:,:L*:"H:3;J:::J;*J:,:::1*ll This basic maskebdy neutral effecrw as croseryr epiicateii n two rtirrri trrr'rurr.;;; onesa,.n df or tho (1993a'b)' studiesb y soaresa nd ohman ,5 developed small-animal againu sing snakesa nd used. by ohman.anSdo ares rpio"r, u, i.* relevanst timuri,a nd by Esteves Thee lecrris. hocklr q^ue (1993,1 994w) as et al. (1994a)a nd parra et al. (1997i uringa n-ung.yf acea s rheC S+, r"u.ot .nneJl;':,;ffi individuaa"ir,r,r/ ".01i,J",',, This serieso f studiess howed ;:#:TJT::'J:i"?l,an thats kin .ondr.,un.. responsecso nditioned fear-relevanst timuri (snakes/spiders to invorved oiungf ir..r) reriabrys urvivedb ackward ,'",:To:;1::',::;ji';T:l.""oi,il"'i*url ane rrecrivmerays kecds dar-inerevant " ,oo', ..1,;il,:'fi::; o{a m asking ililTi,i;"],i,""'iil;'Jlt::"1f11response.to srimuwria su ioi;rr,u.oy ff:1ffJi,:1';;"* ' ,,i,,i""i r:o (Sig emar n rs, zr) ,n "T ill,"Lxl:r'[ :"iff3r'J, I *r, r' . ii- ii' ;#,l,:1 :?'rffi '; such as J.il':i:TJil,:l iil jil::T il:ni T.,'f;"JT: ll thes hock. llf H:.'lil; snakes,s piders,o r angryf aces.T hese ro various Thisc ritica.r" "di;;;;*;';iJr..o datas uggesth ata perceptuamr echa- conrrolc ondjrl'l_*St1oomt e nism of a preattentiveo rigin contribu,r, conrrol of thee xperimenls.included ,o in.lr.paredness effecrs eeni n human condjrionw, heretrons. " .""0_i,l5",r, conditioningI.t appears as if thec ontrolo f..espJnsecso nditioned tear-relevant to evolutiorrarily ;lif,*j *h 'r;h"; .; ;;';,, stimuri is rransferreo j tb preattentivme echanismosf **i :,l,i3 :',": f:f, 1': elicitation' such -easir/ response n'1 r1T ai: n' nir leirirlein ,g a transfero i controri , not ,J.n ro, responses con rr orc on ; ;f fi;' l';iil".ti,: tral conditionedt o neu- di ri on *u, in .r ,1 l _i Tt"j#.-+*: stimuli, and this differencei s herpfur re.ng thatit wasn ott h" rn u..ount;ng for the differencesin srimurujns rh. l"-:1t':" o."ur-i.;l*; ;" i," tri*- tioning seen berween condi- c.Jo,:: rheser wo stimulus. ;r;;;. Ir is as sponses if different rypeso f re- ", .,r ,unut ,;,; ; ;:;;l.j #;;". were condirioned to rwo t,iTon'sjw lte re .ffff j;J# ,c.o:n:o:t,tilo_1nt,in. g0 1,", .the types of srirnuli; o". ,;; uno designedro rrt. or, n"";""^^:::,:l other controlc ondi- immune to cogn.itionis conditioned ;r;;;iiu" ,o pr,oul .ti,nuri,a ndo nem orea dvanced recrins, r,.p ,"i,,.,i rorp ossi.borneo irionin!'.r- cognitivetvg ovemed and i"""'ffii:f#il1;$,lT:: is conditionedto n.urruls limuri et al., lseeo h,";;:l;;i;,'"dnrun J,,,,,,e., 1978,i n press). ff: i il *:lf fil,l,rT or ,,i,;," il #;:,::ffii,t:l:iT: IiJ ; The primary test of maskecl conditioninge ffectso ccuned at a serieso f un_ 3l6 CognitivNe eurosciencoef Emotion Unconscious maskede xtinctiont ri-alsin which Emotion3 l7 the previousrym askeds rimuli were presented wirhoutm asks,t hus vanrs timuli rn addition'a. s atowing furr recojnitiono i,r," csr. If the pavrovian in thes rudyb y Esrevees t ar.( rgg4b), tioning_conringency condi- tronerdo m asked subjectcso ndi- had,beene ffectiveiu .ing a"quisition fear-rerevsatnimr ursit roweroe riabre trainingi n sp-itelrm ask- CS+ airr.r*t#iffinr"io ,n, ing, differentiare spondingto the previousii and rhe cs- when they '.r. pr"r.n,.Jlonmasted ,Jrt"a cS+ and CS-w ourd be ex- duringe xtinctions. uch pectedd uring this unmasked respondingw as nor extinctions eries.S ome of rh. experi..-nr, f.it*r:"tit observedi n subjectsc onditionedt o fear-irrelevanr includedm asked utro stimuli rhus, again, test-rriardsu ringa cquisiti"rl," *t.', the data crearryd emonstratetn at electrodermar the maskei CS+ wasp re- be aversively responsecsa n sentedw ithoutt he US. conditionedto effectiveryru rr.J-r,i*uri, target but onryp rovidedth att he Es(evese r al. (1994b)e xpos.ed stimulusi s fearr elevant subjecrsto pictureso fangry and happyf aces u1 a neurrat of sarvagingth e traditionar faceL ith",u fr", an effecriv(e3 0 mseco) r an .,^-,9",*rt humanc onditioningw isdomt hatc ondi- tl'l lrirslr:r:s,tu:'lvi"e(: Jf JU rnsec)m asking troninga rwaysr equiresc onsciousa wareness intervar.c onditionings ubjectsh ad an of the cs-US contingencyw ourdb e shockU S.folrowing erectric (o arguet hat perceptual the maskeda ngryf acea t a 500-msec thresholdc ould haveb eenl owered cS-US intervarw, hereas exposure as a reiult of r"p"ated controls ubjcctsh ad the shock to them askeds timurid uring foilowingt he neutrarm asksw ithouta ny precedrng conditionintgr ainingp. erhaps ubjectcso urd targets timurus' improvet heir recognition In the nonmaskede xtinctions essions, kin of the -*["0 ,,in-.urai stconoitioning conductancree sponses and for trainingp roceeded, were larger to angry than to,h.appy somer easont his processw as more facesf or subjectsc ondirionedt o maskej angry obviousf or fear-rerevantth anf or fear- facesb oth with effective inelevanst timuliA. s a < andi neiiectiver urti.g in,.."als,w hereas response no differential skinconductance;;;#:::::",rr*,_:1T,,::::J:i:[:nl:fHf :HJf was observedt o angry and happyf aces in subjectsc ondilionedt o the fear-relevant Hil:l neutralm asksw ithout any preceding picturesa s a correrateto tariet stimurusT. hus,t heser esurrsp rovided expectancieosf shock basedo n the improved the first supportf or the pivrovian recognitiono f the targets timuli. hypothesitsh -at condirionincga n to masked be demonsrrated Another possibirity fear_relevanst imuli. wo.uldb e that the subjectsw ere not abre to discriminateb ut In a seconde xperimentE, steves necessarilyr ecognizet he masked et ar.( 1994b)a gaine xaminedc onditioning CS+ and the maskedC S- when they were effectivelya nd to fearr elevanr.I n rhis case, ineffectivelym askedt aciat'stimuiri n two groups ft?,**11 U. "Uf. to pr.Oict,a nd thus pared that were com- even though expect,t he shock, to a sensitizatiocno ntrorc ondition they would not be abre to speciiy wheres hocksa nd maskedf aciars timuri which maskedc s presentation f\) were presentedin random involved rhe snakea nd which invorved .o order to assess ensitizatione ffects.H arf the ,rt. rfii.r. Rather,t hey coutd baset heir ing subjects concrition- expectancieosn vague ctl had the shock foilowing ,tt" ..ri."J'angry hunchese itherf rom somei nformation. ,leaking faces,a nd harf had the mask through,,the t\) shocksf.o llowing the masked or, perhapsm ore theoreticartyin teresting, happyf ices. sotfi ttreg roupso f subjectsc onditioned rrom uooity feedbacko riginatedi n o to maskeda ngry facess howed the conditionedre sponse r"'nuiningd ifferentiar-responstoe ,;r;rk;l;;r."- tations of angry To choose among and happy faces durin'ge xtincti*. ri,i, these altematives,O hman and Soares( 199g) groups effect was as iarge in groups ran three exposedt o an effectivet arget-mask of subjectst hrough an identical -runr,..*oi.n.,t-e rvara s ln groupse xposedt o a rong, differenriarc onditionin! p".iaigr, rh" ineffective target-mask intervar. CS+ was eithera maskeds nakeo , u -rrt.Jrpio..]*itf, the effect was observed with a _urt "O spidera nd snakes, maskeda ngryb ut not with respectively's erving as rhe cs-' a maskedh appyc s+, lnd no differences As usuar,'them asking intervar was msec. and happy betweena ngry Rathert han the (500 30 facesw ere observedi n groups'exposeJ short msec) int"rttirrlur inieruat to shocksa nd maskedp ictures the us.a in previous studies, in randomo rder.T hus' thesed ata.t.urty interval betweent he onseto f the ,ujpo.t ,hu,, kin conductancree sponses cs and the shockw as extendedt o 4 sec to can be' conditioned allow subjecrsi n one to nonconsciousryp iesenieac ss, provided of,the ttlr." g.up, io;;p;;r, rheir that rhey are fear rotating -100 shock expecrancyb y relevant( i,e.,e volutionarilyp repared a knobf rom ("sureo fio shock") to b.aor. associatewd ith aversivenesasn d to'oi'.r,o"L asl ikely as no shock,,) fear). to +100 ("sure of shock") in the cs-US int.ruur. inus, this group wourd alrow ohman and conclusionsa bout a rerationship soares( r99g) reporteds imirarr esurtsu sing betweena onr"rourr ho.k "*p""tuncy f.e ar-relevant snakesa nd spidersa s dermal responding. and erectro- and flowers and mushrooms A second.g.oup* ". ,lrpgr.fir.A as fear-irrerevansrt imuli. one group of to guessa fter each trial subjectsw as conditioned wherhert he maskeds (imulush ad to maskeds nakeso r spidersa s CSs+w ith been" rnri.'o, a'spider.T his group provided and snakes, maskeds pider test of rhe hypothesis a respectivelys, ervinga s CSs_A. nother that recognitio" irp.ou" group of subjectsw as con.i_ reinforced :.o{d as a function of repeated ttonedt o maskedf lowerso ,,nurhroo*, exposureto them askeds timuli. in u.imita, differentiacl onditioningp ara_ rh" tiiJgroup hadn oadditionalr ask, digm' In all instances, but was onry exposedt o the maskingi ntervalw as 30 r."" the conditioning. onti,rg"ncy.r nus, provided was and the cs-us interval tion of the it a reprica- 500 msec' In this exoerimentt,h e previouslyu sedp rocedurea nJ allo*ei effecto ithe con

Neuropsychological MechanismSs:o meS peculations

UnconsciouEs licitariono f PsychophysiologicRael sponses A neuralc ircuit for fear acrivationa nd fear rearningi s being Figurel 3'6' porary delineatedin contem_ SUn conductancree sponsetso maskedp resenratlons neuroscience(e .g.,D amasio,1- 994; ot a spider'r Davis, 1992;F anselow,I 994; LeDoux, snakef_o llowed by an electric shoCku nconditionrO 1990' 1992, 1996).A ccording ,iiruiu, (CS+) and a snakeo r to this norin,'i"ror,nation about a spidern ot followedb y (CS-) enters a fear stimurus shock duringa cquisition(u pperl eft panel)a nd ex- the brain via the crassicasr ensory tinction (upper putt*uy, and is bifurcated pararer right panel). The lower prnj, ,ho* processingc orticar into ,ho.k exp..run"y raringsi n a and subcorticacl ircuiisa t tfe separateg roups of subjectse xposed (LeDoux, midbraina nd tharamicr evers to the samec onditioningc onttngency.N ote 1967, 1990, lgg2, 1996). that the subjectss howed f" ,t"-r"U."iical circuit, sensory differentiale xpectanciees ven though the maskingp roce_ is mediatedp rimariry inforrnarion dure effectively through th. port..io. inuuiu'nu. preventedc onscious, .cognition of the and genicuraten uclei of o u l stimuli. (Data from Oh_ the thalamusr o rhe rareranl ucleus man & Soares,1 99g.) lr rrrr "r"yglli" and from therei t is passed l-\) to the basorareraarn d then on to the centrarn u.r",r'r-oi*," amygdara LeDoux, (Fanserowr, gg4; { 1992).Thec orticar-circui*ti gi"""rl" ine ctussicast ensoryn ucreio f the which conveys,informarion6 ;;;;;';;"sory tllnl'e1 c1o::n ex and associationa reaso f in severalp arallelp rocessingp utt,*uyr 1e.g.C, ricft, 1994;L ivineston& vant stimuli' The groupsr equired Hubel1, 988).-Feoxra mptaec, cording to guessw hethera snakeo r a spiderw as pre- roo u,nurio'.iut.lir*j,i rJ,".;iffi;;;,"r" sented performed randomly (50.5% andd istributed correct) ituring the masked acquisition,b ut f",tu." ,.p,.."ntarionisn perfonned well (approximarely il::::::r;:,*ffi:T earty, .n,o,y 90vo correct) during the nonmaskede xtinction. .;l,tJ Thus, there was no evidence ve rs en ce zo nes re ".; that the subjectsw ere able to recognizet he masked su rr in g .:.",:fi'i ::[;1:;,:'J stimuli during acquisition. and inferior)' The rinkiigI i i'!T ;'j;* i:,;ll; This excrudest he hypothesist hat s,iblects of.faciar "on-,pon"noio a unique improved.their *uy huu" face is assumedt o recognitiona s a functiono f conaitioningtr ainin!. cortex," nO uurio* rr," ,uu;".,, rl:a::c,e:: ^,1".r'thtoccipiro-parietal other characreristicosf the rated sho-cka s equally untikery after the are extractedi n a serieso f steps maskedc s+ and the masied cs-during in the temporarn eocorticesi,n the firstf ew habituation final represenration which rhe trialsw heren o shocksw ereg iven.s omewhat of the face ir f;";.'il;'i'rlformation surprisingry, the is projecredb ack ro however,d uring acquisitiont hey gradually subcorticarc ircuir ro pararimbicr na rateds hocka s somewhar ikely after rin,ui"'n"ids, incrudingt he hippocampus thec s+ anda ss omewhat and the amygdaraI.n formation unrikelyo rt". tt" cs-. Duringe xtinctionw, hent hes hock ir.utro "o'u"y"o'iJ'inrur", and prefrontar and the mask where particurarry cortices, were omittcd,t hey rateds hocka s moreu nrikery the ventromedia,re gion oi the frontal aftert he cs- than as lobesi s given a key role after the cs+ (see lower panels rhe interfaceb erweenc ogniriona nd of figure i:.01. rne differencei n ratings to the ihe bo;y'i;rri"rio, rgg4).T hesep rocessing cs+ and the cs- was stationsa re interconnected staristicallrye riabreb oth duringa cquisitiona nd extinction. by continuou,r "; r"*rro and feed tronsa t backwardp rojec_ Thus, theser esultsi ndeeds how rhats ubjects many levels( Damasioe t al., rgg0), hadd ifferentiaer xpectanciedsu ring ano ttrec riticars tructurefso r verbal the cS+ and the cS- even though identifrrcationf visuali nputi s assumed . they were not able consciousryto recognizet he ," ,"riO.l" ", stimuli.T hey suggest parietraelg ions rharr hes ubjectiw erea blet o discriminatbeu t nor.-..ogni.. irrane!tl ar, Ie e5r)r. p'.o"n,i"r""i,ioiy",, ".:iil[fT lr:*il1n"::'?',,:- the maskedc S+ and the masked lectedb ackt o the amvsdarafr om cS-. However, shock expectancyr atings were severar and frorn( heh ippocampus unrelatedt o skin conductance (LeDoux' lggT' rgg6j s<.r responsesw, hich suggestsin crependecnot ntror rhat rhe preriminaryu nulr,, or input theset wo of amygdalav ia that reachesth e responsem odalities. the subcorticatrh aramicro rte is;;;"'". ny processing lessc ontinuousluyp dated productsf rom the corticarc ircuits.g ir"r.na to the amygaala,a fear 320 CognitiveN euroscrenocef E motion UnconsciouEsm otion3 2| responser s recruitedv ia laterarh ypothalamus(a utonomic responsesL; eDoux, subjects 1990)'t he centralg ray to one of two angry faces (the of the brainslem(a ctives keletadl efense'responsvejsa its aversnivoeis e CS+ ar dorsalp art,a nd behaviorafrr eezingv ia its ventralp art (Fanserow, wirhtr ,.* u,..tp r"..iJ. " #+,ff:;] rgg4),a nd the pre.senreedi rherr nasked- ,iLi il:f ;il',#: pons( potentiatesdt artlev ia then ucleusr eticuraris; by, o, ,uiking, a neutralf.a ce Davis,1 992). blood . ";;i;";r";nu.iJ"r"o.ur our findings flow correlareso f nonconsciou;;;;;:;'"rs from the maskings tudiesa reb roadryc onsistenwt ith actrvar.ioonf rhec onditioned thrst ypeo f fear responsec. ontrasts a fear networki n the senset_h at masking betweent he maskedc ii uno may havei nterferedp rirnariryw ith the tion cs- revealeds pecifica ctiva_ corticalc ircuit, of right amygdala,w hereas.o n,r"ro thusp reventingc onsciourse cognitiono f thes timuri,w hereas .the b-.*,*..n the nonmaskedc s+ infor_ showed specific activation andc s_ mations till courdr eacht he amygdarav ia of the left .,nvgari". Thus, the subcorticarro uteo r via colraterars the the resurtsc onfirmedt hat from early cortical emotionarr esponsec onditioned processingt o activates cRs via hypotharamice fference. to tn"ts+ *us specificary mediated More amygdalaa nd suggesred by the specificallyt,h ed issociatiobne tweena utonomic differentiarr oresf or the nght respondinagn dc onsciousre cogni_ nonconscious and the refr amygdarain tionof fearstimulri eviewedabove(Estevesetal., and con i994ab; hman&Sourer, fSSl, 1994)i s conceptuallys imilar to the Morer.ri,s ri sn;n.ijl ft: dissociationb erweenr ecognitionfa ilurea nd right il::"il[1Jilkl'#il;JJf:fni XXl# enhancedS CR responding amygdarai n fact courd o..ur in"o".p.nd!ntrj ;ff;; to familiar faces by prosopagnosiJs,, ,.port.o of the visuarc orrices.T heir Uy surrss howedt hat the response re- Bauer( 1984)a nd by Tranela ndD amasio( 19g5, ofthe amy"grditaf,r u.Jrr"tut"ow irh lggg; Tranere t ar., r995).H ow- rior coliiculus activity in the supe- ever' an lmportantd ifference and the pulvinar,U rt noi .o, betweent he two setso f datai s that the dissociation interpre,toe, d"g g"r,',h", rn prosopagnosicsc oncemedi dentity and not thee ffec"rf *.rk; ri;i;i_:,j"i"lH: the emotional" r,pr.ssion of faces tical visual f;:l;::U::: (Tranele t al., r988). circuirry rhara lso mediates Nevertherestsh,e i nterpretatioonf thep rosopagnosaicn dv en- UfinOsighiri "" Weiskrantz,1 997). tro-medialf rontarc ortex dataa dvancedb y Tranere t al. (1995)'miy appiy ro our findings as well. They ar.guedt hat Unconscious in their prosopagnosrcsp,r ocessingo f facial Conditioninga ndt he Dissociation information was between disruptedb y lesionsi n the occipito-temporaclo rtex,t hus prevenr- Expectancya nd Recognition , ing consciousa ccess to the identityo f the face.H owever,i nformationf rom visuar association so far, the interpretation-inte rms cortex courd cascadeto the frontal lobest hroughp arietal of a brain networkh as beenu sed and temporal the dara on elicitation to understand routes to dorsolaterafl rontal structures of,auronomic and eventuallyt o the ventromediar egion, fear d;;;.;i;;dirioned or phobic) ro masked q.;1 which. is assumed srimuli Bur whar about the orrr by Damasio (1994) to be a critical relay station in activating ?-r-Li"experiments on conditioning maskeds timuri? The fact to L; somatic responsest hrough the amygdara. thar conditioneoi cn, coutd In agreementw ith this interpreratron, fear-relevanr be estabrishedro masked patientsw ith lesionsi n the ventrom.aiat stimurii s consisrenwr ith theo ..iri". CO purt of the frontal cortex showed unim- gives .r. rhatL eDoux( rgg2, 1996) pairedv erbal to the amygdaraf or fear conditioning. recognitiono f famiriarf acei but no evidenceo f enhanced ii" ..nour rore of the amygdala scRs to humane morionacr onditioning for familiar as comparedt o unknownf aces( Tranel *us confin,,i"oif a."n*u et al., 1995), et ar' (r995)' et ar. (r995) andL aBar The applicationo f Becharae r ar. (iggs) trpon.J. _ this interpretationto our data is rerarivelys traightforward. oo'uuled issociarionto rhe effecrr har There patienrsw ith damaget o rhe amygdaia is evidencet hat_t]r9a lredara is not only sensitiveto faileJ; ;;* SCR condirioning emotionarf aliar expres- of normaru ss) (in spite sions( Adolphse t al., 1995;y oung but did acquirea cogniriveu nderstanding era l.,l Sgi) bur,a ccordingto single-unisrr udies (which ofconditionings ituation in monkeys( ono & Nishijo, CS is associaredw irh rhe US-,e rc.). 1992)a, lsot o otrrerr ypeso f biologicalyf ear-rerevanr trfi;; with hippocampadl amageo, n stimuli.usedin our studies. showendo rmsacl R. onaliion sucha ss pidersT. hus,i t couldb e sugg"siedth atm ask- ingo uts ho*endo . "i1."* "r-i"e"r- ing disruptedp rocessing lni'X[[T:' of the visuals timuria t the occipito-p;ietarle vel, afrer processing As previousryd iscussed, of featurei nformationi s convergettlo maskingd id not interferew ith facer ecoidsi n visual association tron to the deriveryo f informa- cortrces.I n this way, amygdaraa, nd.thereforoeu r generar subjectsw ere preventedf rom correctryr aberingt he nnoingo r conditioningto masked masked fear-relevansrt imuric ourd stimulus.H owever,a ccordingt o pEi data,t he visual be understoodr,l ."ru u. argued associatiocno rtexw as acti_ the effect thatt he specificityo f vatedi n phobicse xposed to fear-relevants timuli was due to phobics timulation(F redriksoent al,, 1993,1 995),a nd ,o Jir*, accesst o the amygdalav ia perhaps circuitss ervingw harD amllio (1994) processinga t this level is sufficient o activate called;tJr; emotions.,,However, the amygdalaa nd thence, maskedc onditioning in our via autonomicn uclei in the hypotharamus, data therew as not onry a dissociation the SCRs.A s "*piulnedb y Damasio scRs betweenc onditioned (1994'p p. l3l-132): "in andt hef airuret o recognizeth e ordert o causea body responseo,n ed oesn ot CSs,u rt uiro " oirrociationb e(ween 'recognize' evenn eed tron and explicire xpecrancies recosni_ to the bear,o r snake,o r of rhe US (ohman eagrea s iuch.-.. . Ail thati s requiredi s that appeared A S"rr.r,-isb;;.;;;,ffi ,, early sensory from our data that the subjects cortices.detecat nd "rt"goiir" the key featureo r features w.r" uut" to discriminateb etween of a grven maskedC S+ and the the entity( e.g,,a nimal,o bject),a ndt hats tructures maskedc s- wiihout u.ing-uir" sucha st hea mygdalare ceives rgnals this ro recognizet hem and that concerning discriminarionw as .1f1.1..", ro.goad their co nju nctiye presence.', ,h"-.if..rrn.y ratings. Conceptually similar findings were The centralr ole of (he amygdara reportedb y wcing r, "r. for the typeo f phenomendae artw ith in this cortical iiiqol, who used slow shifrs in chapterw asc onfirmed potentialsto indexc ov"rr ",..^,"-^^., ;^_'^:- . in a recents tudyb y Mooir.t ut.( 199g).T hev conditioned rurur . , ti m ii,.i r ,.r,*i.", ffii ,Tffi:1,'J.i::i,,,f'Jfi.:"il;riul:h ffi::: 322 CognitivNe euroscrencoef E molion UnconsciousEmotion tio'preceded the point in time where 323 an electrics hockU S had beenp resenred Man (pp.5G_95). during( nonmaskedt)r aining, Wokin-gsht"aum"n,B *ne.r kshire, event hought hem astingc onditions England:V an NosrrandR einold duringe xtincrion Aronoff' J ' Barcray,o ' * Company. trialse ffectivelyr uledo ut conscious y f. A. (ffi;. fte recognirion reJognitionT. hus,a corticalm easureth arh as stimuti.J ourna! personaliry of rhreateningfa ciar beenr eliablyr elated of and Social'irija*r, to expecrancuyn Ou iti"ipotion( see,e .g.,n "frrUrrgf, Bauer'R M (lgg4)' 54,647_655. Iard, 1983) & Gail_ Autonomic recognition" r "r' r", wase licitedf rom nonctnsciousr imulation psychologicar and facesi n prosopagnosiaa: .euro- muchr iket hem askeds rim- appricariono f theb uitry rcr"*i.ig" *r experimentc ourde ricit Test.N europsychorogia,2 2, 457_ votuntarirfc onrro,ed,o vert inriceso f cxpcc- ,r oTr :t uJJ r . Bechara, A., Tranel, D , Damasio,H ,, Adolphs, R., Rockland,C . & weiskantz (rgg7) suggested Doubred issociarion qqn6;1;eni"t Damasio,A . R. (1995). one routef or understandintgh e dissociatron sf .;; il;;;;;;e tween conscious be- kn_owredgre rariver o rhea mygdara recognition and expectancyr eported hippocaminp-uhsu maSnrsn.i u, (1998):" stimuli by ohman and soares _ :nd zac,'tiii_,r,s. of especiailm portance t""o;.t for detectrndga nger.. . may havea n inde_ u..ounorr s ociar pendenta nd order system "*:,,::::j,X.":,i;"I: ll::;f };.-o',"'o'#0n.,, phobisao: me that can have access-perhapse ven privireged cess-to a ac- Ail \ i e v, D is o rd er s , * c,,u-i,i )) ,ii iu ,n " commentarys tage independentlyo f the uisuai ;: # i:i ff ,[,i "T;l ff,ii,"jij, cortices,ii weiskantz, BomsrcinR, . F. & pitma ; ::, : 1997,p .230)' Thus,s ubjectsw ho m, T. S. (Eds).( 1992).p erceplion we.ea brer o preoictr harn onrecognizesdti muli Guilford press. wiiltout AwarertessN.e w york: were likely ro be folrowed "the by shock( ohman& soares,r 99g) may"have Bradlcy'B ' P' usedr he & Mogg, K. (1996)' Eyem ovements commentarys tage",( i.e.,c onsciousn"ss; to emotionafla ciale xpressions to accessin formationh iddenf rom cal anxiety Iabs(ractl.I ntenrarional in clini- consclousnesbsy torrrot oJ iryrnobgy, 31,541.g. maskeds timulii ndependentloyf the visualc ortices. BymcA, . & Eysencrku,. * tL99ii.'ir^i-i '"1' "ivi,r^/' io!"rr,"r^mrxoioodua,s n dr hreat Cogniriorta nd Entorion,d , Sqg_ieZ.-" detecrion. Clore' c L' (lgg4). why Conclusions emotionsa re never unconscious. p. r;rofrEnotri*o'i,"'^ ""ii-91)"r,'*In Ekman & R. J. Davidson i"T'u,uTfff rpoz.s 5-rri,il.,.y-- oi.o,* - have argued thar .r.i;i;,n,?lll . rhe , ::":l:t_^.n*l"l ,*: humansh ave an evorurionarilyd erermined AstonishiHnsy pothesirsh:e Scientifc readrnestso let theira ttention $earcfho r theS oulN. ewy ork: be captureda utomaticailbyy emotionaily,i gnin.unt stimuli lurking in the psychorogicar o,'""J::',t.n,. N) darknesso utsidet rres potrighto f conscrous Error.E motionR, easona,n dt he attention.A s a resurt, i';:ii?H::".g, HunanBrarirN. ew , ,' attentioni s shiftedt o the potentiailyt hreatening event,a nd Damasio' A R" Traner' autonomicr esponserse lared D' & Damasio,H . (lgg0). Face Xi 1,":T :iT:.:ir", ro emotionata crivationa re recruited. of agnosiaa nd the neurars ubstrates rrus' rn rnrs way, memory.A nnual Reviewo 1 Nrurorriuir, emotionalr espondingm ay be initiatedu nconsciousry, ir, An_ron. t* outside Davis, M. (1992). The rote of the focuso f attentionT. his is truep arti."i*iy amygdalui n .onii,ion"j fear. p. r", stimurir elatedto survivart hrea!s In J, Aggleron (Ed), fne rn the.e vorutionarye cology 'fE';;;;;:,:,:;;^ory, of mammars.'whena ssociatedw ith aversiveness ::i:i;:i'{::'";::l:;;,i:ii,:;" anMd enraib,"r,,,i,",i througha Pavrovian ^ rpp. condiiioningp rocedures,u cht hreatening Dawson' M E' power stimuria cquiret he & Schell' A. M. 1t985;. tnro.rution to controlf ear respondingfr om an processinga nd humana utonomic automaticre velo f si.urus unutyrir.N o, condirioning.A dvancesi , cras_ only can fear responses ^. .ri.uf erycnopnyrioi[r,"], eg_rcs. be preattentiveteyt icireo,b ut the data Dimberg' u & ohman' (1996)' glh"rd fear also indicatet hat A' ,h.-*;1i,'esyctrop'ysiorogical responsesc an be learned to non.onr.iorriy facial stimuli. responsest o pr.r"n,.d stimuli that are pre- Motivation and Emotiott,Z O, sented.followed Ekman, p. tqtg_';52. by an aversiveu nconditionesdt imurus pavrovian & Friesen,W . (1976)' Pictures in a contingency. of Faciat Affe,' Palo However, accordingt o the psychologistsp ress. Alto, cA: consulting data so far availables, uch unconscioucso nditioning ro occur only EpsreinS' (rg12) The narure to fear-rerevanstt imurid erivingt heir fear-eliciring of anxietyw irh emphasius pon t:rl^opmr *erv olutionary power its relarionshitpo expecrancy. sourcesE. vent houghs ubjectse xposedto pavrovian tingency sucha con- l;1,?,;r^i:l""ii_9,lliJffi',,c,,l,,r,",ioii_oi,, i0,:',i .i{i.,i,ff"ii'to, remainu nawareo f the. ont.it of rusked stimuri,t heya rea bret o deverop E_s teveFs ' Dimberg, syslematica nd veridicale xpectancies ' u & ohmano, .-ilsso.l.A u(omaricaty aboutw hich fear-relevanstt imuii will be ericitefde arc: onditioned followed by the unconditioned responsreos m askefda ciael xpression srimulur.r n-"g"r.ont.i.ounru,t hr csed atac an be undersrood ;!liil:r.,"."e s. Cognitioann dE noilott8, , in terms of the neural network model for activation t"':;:;:,::lTilf"l',?irl Damasio as proposedb y and co-workers and for fear in parricular the.racree:c osnitionr e morional as proposedb y LeDoux. re paYra-maestkeirns g raciael xpres- of backwardm asking's candinaviarr Psl't'hologv.3 4, l-.lg. it""rii t1 Esteves,F ., parra, C.. Dimberg, U. & Ohman, A. (1994b). References ing: pavrovian Nonconsciousa ssociative condirioning" irlcn.onJu"iu;;;;;;"r* learn- .'-' '-"t" ro masked AdolphsR, .,T ranel, srimuli. ps;,c/rophvsiotogyjr,, fear-relevanfra - D.. DamasioH,. & DamasioA,. R.( 1995). - :iul :rr_r85. Feara ndt heh umana myg_ ransetow. M. S. (1994). dala.J ounnl of Neuroscienc1e.,5 5, g79_5g91. Neural organizationo lthe . . for fear.p sychononric defensiveb ehaviors ystemr esponsible Archer'J (1979)B. ehaviouraars pects _ auilerii & ^"rr"r,--r,-iri_oii".' ot r.ar.i n w. Srrrcki(nE d),F eari n Animotasn d Fotknran, S.,S chaeffeCr., & Lazaru*s.,, .'tinrii. i"o!",,,""p rocessaessm ediaroorsf 324 CognitiveN euroscienceo f Emotion UnconsciousEmotion 325 stressa nd coping. In V. Hamilton & D. M. Warburton( Eds),H arnan Srressa nd Cogut_ (Eds), psychophysiorogicar, ?'ie strucrure oJ Enoriort: cognitive and clinica! Aspects tion: An Infornnriott ProcessitrgA pproach( pp.265-295). ChichesrerU, K: Wiley. (pp. I8-30). Seattle,W A: Hogrefe& Huber. FredriksonM, . (1981).O rientinga ndd efensivere sponsetso phobica ndc onditioned.srinruli Lang' P' J, Bradley, M. M. & cuthbert, B. N. (1990). Emotion,a uention,a nd the in phobics staflre and normals. Psychophysiologl,1 8,456465. reltex. Psl,chologicalR eview, 92, 377-395. FredriksonM, ., Wik, G., Annas,P ., Ericson,K . & Stone-ElandeSr,. (1995).F uncrional LeDoux, (1987). prurn J. E. Emotion. ln F. (Ed), Handbooko f physiotogy.r : The Neruous neuroanatomyo f visually eliciteds implep hobicf ear:a dditionadl ata and theoretical J,rsrernv' ol Y, Higher Functiortso f the Brain (pp. 419-460).B ethesdaM. D: American analysis.P sychoplrysiology3, 2, 4348. PhysiologicaSl ociety. FredriksonM, ., Wik, G., Greitz,T ., ErikssonL, ., Stone-ElandeSr,. , Ericson,K . & Seclvall, LcDoux, (1990). J. E. Information flow from sensationt o emotion:p rasticityi n the neurar G. (1993). Regionalc erebralb lood florv during experimentapl hobic fear. pqcltopltt.si- compurarion of stimurusv arue.I n M. cabriel & J. Moore (EAs),I zaming and conrpu- ology, 30, 127-131. tational Neuroscience. Foundationso f Adaptive Networks( pp. 3_50).C ambridge,M A: Fridlund, A. J. (1994). Hunrun Facial ExpressiotrA; n E,olutionary view. New york: Aca- B radford Books/l\4lTp ress. demic Press. LeDoux, l. (1992). E. Brain mechanismso f emotiona ncre motionarl earning.C urrent Frijda, N. (1986). prcss, opin- H. The Entotiorts.C ambridge:C ambridgeU niversiry iort in Neurobiology,2, 19l-197. Globisch,J ., Hamm, A. O., EstevesF, . & 6hman, A. (1999).F eara ppearsfa sr:r emporal LeDoux, J (1996). E. The Enotiona! Bruin: The MysteriousI lnderpinningso f Entotionar course psychophl'siologt', of startle reflex potentiationi n animal fearful subjects. 36, Lr/e. New York: Simon & Schuster. 66-7 5. Livingstone, M. & Hubel, D. (1988). Segregationo f form, color, movement,a nd deprh: Hamburg,D . A., Hamburg,B . A. & BarchasJ,. D. (1975). Angera ndd epressioinn perspec- ana(omy,p hysiology,a nd perceptionS. cience,2 40, 74V749. tive of behavioralb iology. In L. Levi (Ed), Enrotions:T heir poramerersa nd Measttre- Lundqvist, D., Esteves,F . & 6hman, A. (1999). The facc of wrath: critical featuresf or nrcril (pp.235-278). New York: Ravenp ress. conveyingf acial threat.C ognitiona nd Enoliort,,fJ, in press. Hampton,C ., Pirrcell,D . G., Bersine,L ,, HansenC, . H. & Han.senR, . D. (19g9),p robing Maclcod, c. (1991) "pop-out": Clinicala nxietya nd rhes electivee ncodingo fthreateningin formation. another ps..,cltottotnic look at the face-in-the-crowde ffect. Bulletin of the Irttentational Reviervo f psychiarry, 3, 279_292. Sociery,2 7, 563-566. Marcel,A (1983). consciousa n

worry? The cognitive function of anxiety.B ehaviour Researcrr In P. M. Niedertahl & S. Kitayama (Eds), i"/reH eart's E1.eE: nrorionalI nfluencesi n ond Therapy, 28, 455469. ctl Perceptiotta nd Auentiort (pp. Zl7-? l. San Diego, CA: Academic press. McKelvie, s. J. (1973). The meaningfulnesasn d meaningo f schematicf acesp. erceplion & (, Hare,R . D. & Blevings, (19?5). ps;- G. Defensivere sponserso phobics timuli.B iological Ps 1'chophS ,sic s, I 4, 343-348. chology,- 1,l -13. Monis J S.' ohman,A . & Doran,R . J. (r99g).c onsciousa ndu nconsciouesm otionarl earn- Isen,A , M. (1993).P osirive affecta nd decisionm aking.I n M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland ing in the humana mygdalaN. ature,3 93,4 6.:.470. (Eds), Handbook of Enrotiotts( pp.261-277). New york: Guilford press. Monis, J. S.,O hman. A. & Dolan,R . J. (1999).A subcorticapla thwayt o ther ighta mygdala Izard,C . E. (1979).E motionsa s morivationsa: n evolutionary-developmenprearls pective. mediating" unseen" proceedings fear. of the Nationa!A cadeny of sciencis,c a,'rcgu In H. E. Howe, Jr. & R. A. Dienstbier( Eds),N ebraskaS ynrposiurorrn Motivarion l97g I 685. (pp. 163-200). Lincoln: Universiryo f Nebraskap ress. Mineka,s . (1992), Evolutionarym emoriese, motionapr rocessinga,n dt he emotionsrd isor- Izard, C. E. (1991). The Psychologyo f EnrotionsN. ew york: plenum press. ders. psychology In D. Medin (Ed), The of Learning and Motivation, vol. (pp. James,W . (1890t19501). psychotogy, 2g The Principleso f vol. l. New york: Dover. l6l-205). New York: Academicp ress. JohnstonW, . A. & Dark, V. J. (1986).S electivea ttention.A nnualR eviewo f pslchology, Ohman, (1979). A. The orientingr esponsea, ttention,a nd rearning:a n informationp rocess- 3 7 , 4 3 _ 7 5 . ing perspecrive. In H. D. Kimmel, E. H. van Olst & J. F. Orlebeke( Eds),I fte Orientirtg Kendler,K . S., Neale,M . C., KesslerR, . C., HearhA, . C. & EavesL, . J. (lgg2)..Ihe genetic Reflex itt .. Hunnns (pp.4a3472). Hiilsdale,N J; LawrenceE rrbaumA ssociates. epidemiologyo f phobiasi n wornen:t hei nterrelationshoipf agoraphobias,o cialp hobia, ohman,A (1983). pavlovian The orientingr esponsdcu ring conditioningIn. D. A. T. Siddre situationapl hobiaa nd simplep hobia.A rchiveso f Ceneralp sy,chiatr4y,9 ,273-Zgl. (Ed), Orienting and Habituatiott: perspectivesi n Hunnn Research( pp.315_369,r. Kirouac,G ' & Dor6, F. Y. (1983).A ccuracya nd latencyo fjudgmento f faciale xpressions ChichesrerU, K: Wiley. of emotions.P erceptual and Motor.!lil/s, ,J9, 147-150. ohrnan,A . (1986) Facet he beasta nd feart hc face:a nimala nd socialf earsa s protolypes LaBar, K. S,, LeDoux, J. E., SpencerD, . & phelps,E . (1995).I mpairedf ear condirioning for evolutionary psychoplrysiology, .. analyseso f emotion. 23, 123_145. folfowing unilateral temporal lobectomy in humans.J owtal of Neuroscience, 15, Ohman, A. (1987). The psychophysiologyo f emotion: an-evolutionary_cognitivpee rspec_ 6846-{855. tivc. .. Adyancesi n Ps;'chophysiolog2y,7 9_127. Lang,P . J. (1984).C ognitioni n emorionc: oncepat nda crion.I n C. E. Izard, (1993a). J. Kagan& R. ohrnan, A. Fear and anxietya s emotionarp henomenac:r inicarp henomenorogy, B. Zajonc (Eds), Enrotion, Cogniriott,a nd Behavior( pp. I9Z-ZZ8). New york: Cam- evolutionaryp erspectives, and informationp rocessingm echanismsI.n M_ Lewis & J. bridge University Press. M. Haviland (Eds), Handbooko f Emotions( pp. 5r l-536). New york: Guilford press, Lang, P. J. (1993). The three-systema pproacht o emorion.I n N. Birbaumer & A. Ohman ohman' A. (1993b). stimurus prepotencya nd fear: daraa nd theory.I n N. Birbaumer& A. vtt, rrFsi+= E-gs ir sirre -igi!!F*r*luufui,,E =f-=r :Ee+fr:g F , ff$$iffi'lS*fff$fg5i'ii'ggignitisiii$igg fggisg#6 i '$sFii5s:$sii$EfFs;sii; $iFigiififFgigiig$igf5g$$ g slsri':;igii$5FiljisF=i$F$ gF$iis+s+;iirs5-ifg$faif$i$ € i,isFi f, {Fiiii i 3E$i3iffiiffii$ siFiiiF$ifi ii$iiis$i's$i igiii iiF'igiit5g*i g5i;ffiii iEF;iFg E: i 3ii[i if siF tai qEFr iEF;ii5;*; i: i i ; ;si :g- .if $ii ;; aca;u; ; ii;;fii FF

^$ f f e{f, d,€e i r j r rlrs gi;iiiFlie " i$it;s f**iuii,gg :ii;:i;Frl:i:e;s *; i i gc$i;sE $ I t' 3; =sY €5; 5 q l:i : Jui : i : : si:ig : sFgsFlsiIii$iiiiFI giii3i Fs::gF iFiia,;t;s E;eii igfF.;iiei$$iE;;Eiiev s sa;i*;iif;Fif, siggifii$sgisssi ;i$;i.;iis$i$ ig*d3iif fS;:ils$g$i;$gis FCses6$ er€sis$iFa $F t E 3r ; s i F a ; ; i €r ;Fiugif5if5g;'. €: [ ; l : s ; a$-4a3't . . : s s F ig;asn'ilsFss;iF gi 5*$g i' iil i eiig$ielgig5*ggf$g-*g € ii$Fifra $s$gF $$s; € €€**rliF'$Fea ri sEHbii i i ; $e sr-$li[ :EEiE i uAf l *t € Efi ,