Happily entangled: prediction, emotion, and the embodied mind

Abstract

Abstract:Recent work in cognitive and computational neuroscience depicts the human cortex as a multi-level prediction engine. This 'predictive processing' framework shows great promise as a means of both understanding and integrating the core information processing strategies underlying perception, reasoning, and action. But how, if at all, do emotions and sub-cortical contributions fit into this emerging picture? The fit, we shall argue, is both profound and potentially transformative. Far from being additional mechanisms operating alongside the multi-level predictive core, emotion and subcortical processing appear to be inextricably interwoven with the construction of the multi-level predictions that determine our percepts and select our actions. The upshot is a picture of the mind as fundamentally in the business of preparing the organism for action. Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation AbstractRecent work in cognitive and computational neuroscience depicts the human cortex as a multi-level prediction engine. This 'predictive processing' framework shows great promise as a means of both understanding and integrating the core information processing strategies underlying perception, reasoning, and action. But how, if at all, do emotions and sub-cortical contributions fit into this emerging picture? The fit, we shall argue, is both profound and potentially transformative. In the picture we develop, online cognitive function cannot be assigned to either the cortical or the sub-cortical component, but instead emerges from their tight co-ordination. This tight co-ordination involves processes of continuous reciprocal causation that weave together bodily information and 'top-down' predictions, generating a unified sense of what's out there and why it matters. The upshot is a more truly 'embodied' vision of the predictive brain in action.

Real-world expectations and their affective value modulate object processing

“…Our results are compatible, however, with the general idea that affect interacts with 454 predictive processing (Barrett and Simmons, 2015;Miller and Clark, 2018). One possibility 455 recently put forward by some authors is that, rather than contributing to the content of the 456 predictions, a subject's internal affective state modulates the weight given to prediction errors 457 during perceptual inference (Miller and Clark, 2018). Specifically, this weight would increase when the subject is experiencing affect.…”

“…In addition, the context's affective value interacted with the validity of the prediction 494 it had initiated: classical prediction error effects were only observed with neutral contexts, and 495 a complete reversal of these effects was observed when contexts were emotional. This result is 496 not compatible with the idea that the affective value of a stimulus, and the ensuing internal 497 bodily state of the subject, are contributing to the creation of predictions (Barrett and Bar, 498 2009); but it is compatible with a modulatory role of affective value over the weight of sensory 499 evidence in perception (Miller and Clark, 2018). In conclusion, our results deepen our 500 understanding of predictive coding in an ecological setting by showing that the mere presence 501 of explicit expectations, and their affective content, modulate object recognition.…”

“…However, because negative contexts were especially 463 negative, the median valence for affective contexts was still close to neutral (5.8, 0 being the 464 most negative and 10 the most positive). Moreover, Miller & Clark (2018) do not differentiate 465 between positive and negative stimuli in their proposal and, generally, the same brain network 466 seems to be implicated in the processing of all affective stimuli, irrespective of valence 467 (Lindquist et al, 2016). 468…”

“…Alternatively, the prediction's affective value might interact with its validity. Based on 129 a recent proposal according to which sub-cortical nuclei have a modulating power over 130 prediction errors (Kanai et al, 2015), and on the fact that many subcortical circuits are 131 coordinated with bodily processes, Miller & Clark (2018) proposed that affect (relating to 132 internal bodily states) exerts a continuous influence on perception by increasing the weight 133 attributed to prediction errors during perceptual inference. When prediction errors are up-weighted, observers will rely more on the sensory input instead of their predictions to recognize 135 a target object.…”

Hand morphometrics, electrodermal activity, and stone tools haptic perception

“…Nonetheless, according to theories in cognitive extension, grasping has also a cognitive counterpart, that is not directly associated with biomechanics, but instead depends on sensing capacity (Miller et al, ). Such capacity is part of a comprehensive cognitive toolkit that also include emotional processes (Miller & Clark, ). The analysis of these electrophysiological reactions when handling stone tools can supply information on possible changes in the level of engagement associated with hand‐tool interaction in human evolution.…”