The dynamic opponent relativity model: an integration and extension of capacity theory and existing theoretical perspectives on the neuropsychology of arousal and emotion

Abstract

Arousal theory as discussed within the present paper refers to those mechanisms and neural systems involved in central nervous system activation and more specifically the systems involved in cortical activation. Historical progress in the evolution of arousal theory has led to a better understanding of the functional neural systems involved in arousal or activation processes and ultimately contributed much to our current theories of emotion. Despite evidence for the dynamic interplay between the left and right cerebral hemispheres, the concepts of cerebral balance and dynamic activation have been emphasized in the neuropsychological literature. A conceptual model is proposed herein that incorporates the unique contributions from multiple neuropsychological theories of arousal and emotion. It is argued that the cerebral hemispheres may play oppositional roles in emotion partially due to the differences in their functional specializations and in their persistence upon activation. In the presence of a threat or provocation, the right hemisphere may activate survival relevant responses partially derived from hemispheric specializations in arousal and emotional processing, including the mobilization of sympathetic drive to promote heightened blood pressure, heart rate, glucose mobilization and respiratory support necessary for the challenge. Oppositional processes and mechanisms are discussed, which may be relevant to the regulatory control over the survival response; however, the capacity of these systems is necessarily limited. A limited capacity mechanism is proposed, which is familiar within other physiological systems, including that providing for the prevention of muscular damage under exceptional demand. This capacity theory is proposed, wherein a link may be expected between exceptional stress within a neural system and damage to the neural system. These mechanisms are proposed to be relevant to emotion and emotional disorders. Discussion is provided on the possible role of currently applied therapeutic interventions for emotional disorders.

Personality and opponent processes: Shyness, sociability, and visual afterimages to emotion.

“…With repeated use of a primary process, the opponent process becomes stronger. Conversely, with relative disuse of the primary process, the opponent process weakens (Comer et al, 2015;Solomon & Corbit, 1974). In interpreting the This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

“…According to OPT, the function of the opponent process is to bring the individual’s affective system to equilibrium after the experience of an emotional event. With repeated exposure to, or experience of, a specific primary process, researchers have argued that the opponent process becomes stronger across time (Comer, Harrison, & Harrison, 2015; Solomon & Corbit, 1974).…”

“…Given that repeated experience of a specific primary process results in the opponent process becoming strengthened, and disuse weakens the opponent process (Comer et al, 2015; Solomon & Corbit, 1974), we tested several predictions based on theorized differences in the perception and experience of positive and threat-related emotions for shyness and sociability. First, we were particularly interested in testing our primary hypothesis that, given shy and sociable (i.e., conflicted) individuals are presumably primed to experience both positive (related to sociability) and threat-related (related to shyness) emotional biases during social situations, these individuals would be more likely to experience both of these primary processes more strongly, resulting in stronger expected OP after adapting to both happy faces (i.e., negative afterimage) and angry faces (i.e., positive afterimage) than other individuals.…”

Brain Mechanisms in Blood Glucose Mobilization and Absorption: The Role of the Left and the Right Frontal Regions in the Regulatory Control of Blood Glucose Levels

“…Similarly, the anterior and posterior regions of each hemisphere communicate with the parallel region across the corpus callosum. 19 Given this general wiring of the various regions, each quadrant appears to compete for cerebral resources, specifically glucose, for a given function. Due to the overall regulatory role of the frontal lobe, if the right frontal region were to exhaust the general supply of glucose available, posteriorly there would be an "unbridling" or cortical release of processes typically under frontal control.…”

Laterality in Parkinson’s disease: A neuropsychological review

“…While many models of how emotion and arousal are represented in the brain have been produced, such as the Right Hemisphere Model (Heilman & Van Den Abell, 1980) and later the Valence Model (Sackeim et al, 1982;Silberman & Weingartner, 1986), there lacks one model that cogently encapsulates temporally and dynamically the interplay between these functional neural systems that produce the cognitive and behavioral outputs. Therefore, the Dynamic Opponent Relativity Model (Comer et al, 2015), was proposed to incorporate the oppositional roles of the two hemispheres as they work to control the delicate balance of cognition. This model proposes that the oppositional hemisphere may still be maximally activated but inhibited by processes in the contralateral hemisphere.…”