The Cognitive Control of Emotion

Review TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.5 May 2005 The cognitive control of emotion Kevin N. Ochsner1 and James J. Gross2 1Department of Psychology, Columbia University, Schermerhorn Hall, 1190 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027, USA 2Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Building 420, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, USA The capacity to control emotion is important for human cognitive neuroscience models of the ‘cold’ control of adaptation. Questions about the neural bases of attention and memory (e.g. [8,9]). The aim of this review emotion regulation have recently taken on new import- is to evaluate recent imaging studies that, in the context of ance, as functional imaging studies in humans have evidence from allied human and animal work, help to permitted direct investigation of control strategies that elucidate the functional architecture underlying the draw upon higher cognitive processes difficult to study cognitive control of emotion. in nonhumans. Such studies have examined (1) control- ling attention to, and (2) cognitively changing the Emotion and emotion regulation meaning of, emotionally evocative stimuli. These two An essential part of understanding emotion regulatory forms of emotion regulation depend upon interactions mechanisms is characterizing the processes that generate between prefrontal and cingulate control systems and emotions. Current models posit that emotions are cortical and subcortical emotion-generative systems. valenced responses to external stimuli and/or internal Taken together, the results suggest a functional archi- mental representations that (i) involve changes across tecture for the cognitive control of emotion that dove- multiple response systems (e.g. experiential, behavioral, tails with findings from other human and nonhuman peripheral physiological [10]), (ii) are distinct from moods, research on emotion. in that they often have identifiable objects or triggers, (iii) can be either unlearned responses to stimuli with If you are distressed by anything external, the pain intrinsic affective properties (e.g. an unconditioned is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of response to an aversive shock) or learned responses to it; and this you have the power to revoke at any stimuli with acquired emotional value (e.g. a conditioned moment. response or stimulus–reward association), (iv) and can Marcus Aurelius (Meditations) involve multiple types of appraisal processes that assess the significance of stimuli to current goals [11], that (v) depend upon different neural systems [3,12,13]. Introduction Emotion regulation involves the initiation of new, or the Conflicts, failures, and losses at times seem to conspire to alteration of ongoing, emotional responses through the ruin us. Yet, as Marcus Aurelius observed nearly two millennia ago, we humans have an extraordinary capacity Box 1. A brief history of psychological research on emotion to regulate the emotions occasioned by such travails. regulation Importantly, these regulatory efforts largely determine the impact such difficulties will have on our mental and Study of the cognitive control of emotion has three major historical antecedents within psychology [1]. The first antecedent is the physical well-being [1–3]. Given its importance to adap- psychodynamic study of defense, which was initiated by Freud a tive functioning, it is not surprising that research on century ago. This line of work has examined the regulation of anxiety emotion regulation has a long history (Box 1). Past work and other negative emotions using clinical descriptions and has investigated the cellular responses to stress, the individual difference studies of so-called perceptual defenses against processing negatively arousing stimuli, and specific behavioral consequences of adopting specific regulatory defenses such as repressive coping [68,69].Thesecondantecedent strategies, and the neural systems involved in simple is the stress and coping tradition that grew out of the psycho- forms of affective learning and social behavior in rodents dynamic approach in the 1960s. This line of work has focused on the and nonhuman primates [1,4–7]. In recent years, research management of situations that ‘tax or exceed the resources of the on emotion regulation has entered a new phase as person’ ([70], p. 141), and generated an early classic study of reappraisal showing that subjective and physiological responses functional imaging studies of regulatory phenomena in decreased when a film of a potentially upsetting surgical procedure humans have developed rapidly. This growth has facili- was viewed in analytical and detached terms [71]. The third tated investigation of human analogs to affective beha- antecedent is the developmental study of self-regulation, which viors studied in animals, but, perhaps more importantly, had its roots in the study of socioemotional development. This work has allowed study of the emotion regulatory power of showed that children could obtain a preferred but delayed reward by thinking about available treats in abstract ways (e.g. putting a mental higher cognitive control processes that are difficult to ‘picture-frame’ around a cookie) that decreased their immediate study in animal models. In so doing, current work on the impulse to eat them [72]. Contemporary research builds on this ‘hot’ control of emotion draws on rapidly developing foundation using both behavioral and neuroscience methods to describe when, how, and with what consequences individuals Corresponding author: Ochsner, K.N. ([email protected]). regulate their emotions. Available online 5 April 2005 www.sciencedirect.com 1364-6613/$ - see front matter Q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.010 Review TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.5 May 2005 243 Box 2. From basic mechanisms to individual differences Characterizing the nature and operating characteristics of basic through reappraisal, which itself depends upon cognitively reexamin- emotion regulatory mechanisms in healthy participants might help ing the meaning of emotional events. to establish a normative model for explaining the successful Many forms of psychopathology revolve around failures to regulation of emotion. It might also lead to a greater under- adaptively regulate emotional responses, with consequences ranging standing of individual differences, clinical conditions and lifespan from personal distress to socially maladaptive and self-destructive development, by describing them in terms of variation and change behaviors [2,3,5]. Resting and symptom provocation studies have in the function of a basic functional architecture for the cognitive begun to identify abnormal patterns of neural response in psychiatric control of emotion. illness [3,6,13] and substance abuse (e.g. [77]) that might be related to Among healthy adults, there is considerable variability in the nature emotion regulation failures. However, very few studies have examined and strength of emotional responses, and also in the capacity to directly the neural mechanisms mediating successful or unsuccessful regulate them. Behavioral studies have begun to explore the regulation in clinical populations using methods like those described experiential and behavioral consequences of these differences [73], in this review (see, however, [78]). Building knowledge of dysregula- and characteristic patterns of resting and/or emotional stimulus- tory mechanisms from a basic model of effective regulation could related neural activity in prefrontal and emotional appraisal systems elucidate the nature of these disorders and suggest avenues for are now being associated with gender, personality, negative affectivity cognitive and pharmacological treatment. [3,74] and regulatory ability. For example, Jackson et al. found that Basic models of emotion regulation might also help to explain the greater left PFC electrical activity at rest predicted dampened development of regulatory capacities across the lifespan. It is possible, physiological reactivity to aversive stimuli, which might reflect for example, that structural and functional changes in control and automatic regulatory processes [75], and Ray et al. [76] found that appraisal systems underlie normal and abnormal emotional the tendency to cognitively ruminate about emotional events pre- responses in children [79],andthepositivityofemotionalexperience dicted enhanced ability to increase or decrease amygdala responses in older adults [80]. action of regulatory processes. Current work examines the impacting different types of emotional appraisal processes processes that individuals use to influence which emotions and associated neural systems [17,18]; (2) their effects – they generate, when they do so, and how these emotions serving to initiate (amplify) or block (diminish) perception are experienced or expressed [1]. Several schemes have of our responses to stimuli; (3) their relative reliance on been proposed for organizing regulatory strategies the overlapping neural systems supporting attentional (e.g. [14]). One distinction suggested by Gross and control and cognitive change, as indicated by their colleagues contrasts behavioral (e.g. suppressing expres- placement along the continuum; and (4) whether emotion sive behavior) and cognitive (e.g. attending to or inter- change is their explicit goal (‘I want to feel better!’), or preting emotion-eliciting situations in ways that limit occurs as a by-product of pursuing some other learning or emotional responding) regulation.

Load more