Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
emotional stimuli ( Mason, 1971 ) or to the expectation of a positive situation
such as the sexual partner ( Colborn et al., 1991 ). Likewise, common behav-
ioral reactions such as startle, offensive or defensive postures, freezing, or
approach, only provide information about the intensity of the underlying
emotion (for a review, see Jones and Boissy, 2010 ). Therefore, the study of
emotions in animals is mostly addressed by means of defining the response
of a subject to an emotionally arousing situation. In this way, the emotional
reaction is measured by behavioral and physiological parameters without
requiring any preconceived theory about what emotions really are. Conceptual
frameworks are thus needed to allow a convenient and reliable assessment of
emotion in animals.
Among possible conceptual frameworks, appraisal theories originally
developed in cognitive psychology to investigate human emotions can be
helpful to better access the emotional experience in animals ( Boissy et al.,
2007a; D ´ sir ´ et al., 2002 ). Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that
causal links between emotions and cognition occur in both directions, with
not only cognitive processes determining felt emotions but also with emo-
tional manipulations more or less persistently influencing cognitive processes
( Mendl et al., 2009 : Paul et al., 2005 ). Below we provide a brief review of
the interactions between emotions and cognition in farm animals. Firstly we
examine the cognitive processes involved in the development of emotions.
Then we explore how emotions may in turn alter these cognitive processes
and how short-lived processes such as emotions can lead to prolonged
affective states.
Influence of Cognitive Processes on Emotions
Since the pioneering work of Magda Arnold, appraisal theories have been
developed in psychology to access emotions in humans: emotions result
from how an individual evaluates a triggering situation per se followed by
his responses to that situation (for a review, see Kappas, 2006; Lazarus
et al., 1991; Scherer, 1999 ). According to the pragmatic framework devel-
oped by Scherer (2001) , this evaluation is based upon a limited number
of elementary characteristics, from the most simple to the more complex,
including (i) the characteristics of the event (its suddenness, familiarity,
predictability, and pleasantness), (ii) the consistency of the event with the
individual's expectations, (iii) the coping potential, mainly the ability of
the individual to react and to control the event, and (iv) the normative signif-
icance of his response, including his internal standards (i.e. his self-esteem)
and his social standards (i.e. the expectation of the social group). The
outcomes of these elementary characteristics determine the emotional experi-
ence. For instance, fear is elicited by exposure to an unpleasant event that is
sudden, unfamiliar, unpredictable and inconsistent with the expectations of
the individual, whereas rage is experienced in similar situations, except that
Search WWH ::




Custom Search