Modeling emotion processes remains a conceptual and methodological challenge in affective sciences. In responding to the other target articles in this special section on “Emotion and the Brain” and the comments on our article, we address the issue of potentially separate brain networks subserving the functions of the different emotion components. In particular, we discuss the suggested role of component synchronization in producing information integration for the dynamic emergence of a coherent emotion process, as well as the links between incentive (...) salience and concern-relevance in the elicitation of emotion. (shrink)

In this response, I suggest that the focus of “emotion” researchers should be more on striving to develop a science of brain and behavior than on deciding what is the proper status of emotion. Because structure and function are closely intertwined in biological systems, advancing our understanding of complex behaviors will necessitate researching their brain substrates.

In this special section, three target articles present three different perspectives on emotion and how it is implemented in the human brain. Fundamental issues are discussed such as the nature and organization of emotion’s representation in the brain and the best approaches for elucidating emotion’s neural basis. Comments and author replies further discuss these issues and explore their interconnections. A common theme of the target articles and commentaries is that multiple approaches and perspectives must be integrated across all levels of (...) analysis to understand the neural basis of emotion. (shrink)

Some thoughts on the nature of networks, the prevalence of emotional experiences, and the importance of new questions.

Our approach to emotion emphasized three key ingredients. We do not yet have a mature science of emotion, or even a consensus view—in this respect we are more hesitant than Sander, Grandjean, and Scherer or Luiz Pessoa. Relatedly, a science of emotion needs to be highly interdisciplinary, including ecology, psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy. We recommend a functionalist view that brackets conscious experiences and that essentially treats emotions as latent variables inferred from a number of measures. But our version of functionalism (...) is not definitional or ontological. It is resolutely methodological, in good part because it is too early to attempt definitions. (shrink)