A call for an evolved understanding of emotion

By Matt Collette
A call for an evolved understanding of emotion
In a new scholarly review, psychology professor Lisa Feldman Barrett points out that the beliefs about emotion guiding many security practices today may be flawed. Credit: Mary Knox Merrill.

(Medical Xpress) -- Many scientists believe that all people experience and express the same biologically “basic” emotions — an idea they have attributed to evolutionist Charles Darwin and one that has shaped modern security training and law enforcement techniques.

But that belief is not rooted in sound scientific study, says Northeastern’s Lisa Feldman Barrett, Distinguished Professor of Psychology in the College of Science, who wrote a review of recent research for the Association for Psychological Science’s journal, Current Directions in Psychological Science, titled “Was Darwin Wrong About Emotional Expressions?

“It has been assumed for many years that when you feel some emotion, you automatically show that emotion on your face. This belief guides security training at airports, FBI training and so on,” Barrett said. “But there’s a lot of research out there to show that emotions are not written on the face, that there’s a lot of context that a perceiver like you or me brings to the judgment of facial expressions.”

Backers of a “basic” emotions approach cite Darwin, who wrote “Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals” after his famous “Origin of the Species.” That book argued that emotions were states of minds that were automatically expressed across animal species.

“But Darwin’s views were that these expressions were vestigial, more like your tailbone — something that evolution carried forward but which may no longer be of any use,” Barrett said. “So Darwin was arguing that these expressions are no longer functional, thereby showing that they must exist as an inherited characteristic.”

Commonly held beliefs in psychology include that humans automatically express a handful of emotions, like sadness through a frown or anger through a scowl. But recent research — by Barrett’s own lab at Northeastern and others — has challenged that longstanding hypothesis. Instead, the new research shows that small changes in an experiment can lead to dramatically different results. And recent articles published in the journals Nature and Science call into question the use of security-training techniques based on the “basic emotion” approach.

“The fact is, it’s not really clear from the existing evidence that people actually make these expressions on an everyday basis,” Barrett said. “When do people actually pout in sadness? You certainly couldn’t win an Academy Award for pouting in sadness.”

Barrett said that further study of emotion beyond the most popular hypothesis is important, especially since the potentially flawed research has become the basis for law enforcement and homeland security protocols and procedures.

“The idea that facial expressions are a beacon for you to read is just not right,” she said. “It’s a really popular view and you can find data that supports it, but you can also find a tremendous amount of data that does not. That research doesn’t seem to be getting much play, and it needs to.”

Related Stories

Was Darwin wrong about emotions?

Dec 13, 2011

Contrary to what many psychological scientists think, people do not all have the same set of biologically "basic" emotions, and those emotions are not automatically expressed on the faces of those around us, according to ...

How the brain works with feelings

Nov 23, 2011

(Medical Xpress) -- People who claim to recognize a burned imprint of Jesus on a piece of toast are channeling what Northeastern University Distinguished Professor of Psychology Lisa Feldman Barrett calls ...

A meeting of the minds

Dec 07, 2011

People are happiest in warm weather, but grow considerably unhappier as humidity levels rise, according to an analysis of the language of some 1.3 billion tweets by Northeastern University computer science ...

What are emotion expressions for?

Dec 23, 2011

(Medical Xpress) -- That cartoon scary face – wide eyes, ready to run – may have helped our primate ancestors survive in a dangerous wild, according to the authors of an article published in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science. The au ...

Recommended for you

Intervention program helps prevent high-school dropouts

Oct 24, 2014

New research findings from a team of prevention scientists at Arizona State University demonstrates that a family-focused intervention program for middle-school Mexican American children leads to fewer drop-out rates and ...

Bilingualism over the lifespan

Oct 24, 2014

It's a scene that plays out every day in Montreal. On the bus, in schools, in the office and at home, conversations weave seamlessly back and forth between French and English, or one of the many other languages represented ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Isaacsname
not rated yet Jan 04, 2012
...we all have the same basic emotions but react to them differently, internally. To think you could gauge somebody's dasein by facial movements alone is narrow at best.

Corban
not rated yet Jan 04, 2012
Without an emotional baseline, how do you prove something like this? It's like judging the contents of a black hole within the event horizon
slayerwulfe
not rated yet Jan 04, 2012
My understanding of prof. Barrett's point is that the former is not proof and the later proves it. I consider myself Darwinian in belief and understanding that evolution does not occur or advance as a constant for every member of a species. I have observed people that can lie with absolute confidence and others like myself that should never attempt it. That some are able to commit cruel and murderous acts with no emotional response appears related to autism that emotions for some may not be defective but rather not available.

slayerwulfe
not rated yet Jan 04, 2012
To Corban: You form an hypothesis based on the structure of your perception and understanding. It then becomes a matter of searching for what you have predetermined as what you are hoping to find. The process is guided by you to reach only that moment.

That we are are least 10,000 yrs behind where we should be, while not proven is at least supported by the existence of the Rhind papyrus that most of our knowledge is acquired through trial and error. The resistance to change is also resistance many times to a loss in monetary compensation by those in control of the current structure that is considered knowledge.