Affective science最新文献

Our target article (Park et al., this issue) described the process of developing a provisional conceptualization of emotional well-being (EWB). In that article, we considered strengths and gaps in current perspectives on a variety of related concepts and ways that the proposed conceptualization of EWB informs our evaluation of measures and methods of assessment and identification of its causes and consequences. We concluded with recommendations for moving the framework and the field forward. Eight rich, thoughtful, and highly engaged commentaries addressed the target article. Collectively, these commentaries illustrate both points of consensus and areas of substantial disagreement, providing a potential roadmap for continued work. In this response, we summarize key issues raised and highlight those points raised by multiple commentators or that we considered seminal to advancing future discussion and research.

The relation between empathy and morality is a widely discussed topic. However, previous discussions mainly focused on whether and how empathy influences moral cognition and moral behaviors, with limited attention to the reverse influence of morality on empathy. This review summarized how morality influences empathy by drawing together a number of hitherto scattered studies illustrating the influence of targets’ moral characteristics on empathy. To explain why empathy is morally selective, we discuss its ultimate cause, to increase survival rates, and five proximate causes based on similarity, affective bonds, the appraisal of deservingness, dehumanization, and potential group membership. To explain how empathy becomes morally selective, we consider three different pathways (automatic, regulative, and mixed) based on previous findings. Finally, we discuss future directions, including the reverse influence of selective empathy on moral cognition, the moral selectivity of positive empathy, and the role of selective empathy in selective helping and third-party punishment.

How should we characterize the affective lives of non-human animals? There is a large body of work studying affective processes in non-human animals, yet this work is frequently overlooked. Ideas about the affective lives of animals have varied across culture and time and are reflected in literature, theology, and philosophy. Our contemporary ideas about animal affect are philosophically important within the discipline of affective science, and these ideas have consequences in several domains, including animal husbandry, conservation, and human and veterinary medicine. The articles contained within this special volume cover several levels of analysis and broad representation of species, from the non-mammalian, to rodents, to primates; but together, these articles are collectively concerned with the topic of affective processes in non-human animals.

The “voice areas” in the superior temporal cortex have been identified in both humans and non-human primates as selective to conspecific vocalizations only (i.e., expressed by members of our own species), suggesting its old evolutionary roots across the primate lineage. With respect to non-human primate species, it remains unclear whether the listening of vocal emotions from conspecifics leads to similar or different cerebral activations when compared to heterospecific calls (i.e., expressed by another primate species) triggered by the same emotion. Using a neuroimaging technique rarely employed in monkeys so far, functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy, the present study investigated in three lightly anesthetized female baboons (Papio anubis), temporal cortex activities during exposure to agonistic vocalizations from conspecifics and from other primates (chimpanzees—Pan troglodytes), and energy matched white noises in order to control for this low-level acoustic feature. Permutation test analyses on the extracted OxyHemoglobin signal revealed great inter-individual differences on how conspecific and heterospecific vocal stimuli were processed in baboon brains with a cortical response recorded either in the right or the left temporal cortex. No difference was found between emotional vocalizations and their energy-matched white noises. Despite the phylogenetic gap between Homo sapiens and African monkeys, modern humans and baboons both showed a highly heterogeneous brain process for the perception of vocal and emotional stimuli. The results of this study do not exclude that old evolutionary mechanisms for vocal emotional processing may be shared and inherited from our common ancestor.