The emotion paradox in the aging body and brain

Abstract

With age, parasympathetic activity decreases, while sympathetic activity increases. Thus, the typical older adult has low heart rate variability (HRV) and high noradrenaline levels. Younger adults with this physiological profile tend to be unhappy and stressed. Yet, with age, emotional experience tends to improve. Why does older adults’ emotional well‐being not suffer as their HRV decreases? To address this apparent paradox, I present the autonomic compensation model. In this model, failing organs, the initial phases of Alzheimer's pathology, and other age‐related diseases trigger noradrenergic hyperactivity. To compensate, older brains increase autonomic regulatory activity in the pregenual prefrontal cortex (PFC). Age‐related declines in nerve conduction reduce the ability of the pregenual PFC to reduce hyperactive noradrenergic activity and increase peripheral HRV. But these pregenual PFC autonomic compensation efforts have a significant impact in the brain, where they bias processing in favor of stimuli that tend to increase parasympathetic activity (e.g., stimuli that increase feelings of safety) and against stimuli that tend to increase sympathetic activity (e.g., threatening stimuli). In summary, the autonomic compensation model posits that age‐related chronic sympathetic/noradrenergic hyperactivity stimulates regulatory attempts that have the side effect of enhancing emotional well‐being.

Negative images, regardless of task relevance, distract younger more than older adults.

“…These results do not rule out the dynamic integration theory necessarily but do indicate that older adults can at least prioritize negative images enough to respond to them when shown at rapid speeds and remain less affected by them than younger adults. Altogether, our results support recent calls to reexamine mechanisms as they relate to the positivity effect (e.g., Barber & Kim, 2021; Mather, 2024). While our results do not pinpoint a particular mechanism, they do indicate that the positivity effect can occur early in cognitive processing and goes beyond age-related stimulus perception differences.…”

“…Several existing theories can accommodate these findings, including less traditional accounts. For example, some recent accounts suggest the positivity effect to be driven by multiple pathways (Barber & Kim, 2021; Gronchi et al, 2018), while another proposes it to be a byproduct of age-related changes in autonomic and noradrenergic systems (Mather, 2024).…”

“…While the original theory did not specify how older adults would implement these emotional priorities, subsequent theorizing proposed that older adults have chronic goals to optimize emotional well-being that require cognitive control; this proposed regulation mechanism helps older adults prioritize positive experiences and diminish the impact of negative experiences (Knight et al, 2007; Kryla-Lighthall & Mather, 2009; Mather & Carstensen, 2005; Mather & Knight, 2005; Reed & Carstensen, 2012; Reed et al, 2014). While this cognitive control model can account for a variety of positivity effect patterns (see Reed & Carstensen, 2012), the goal-directed mechanism is difficult to reconcile with findings that the positivity effect can occur quickly and that individual differences in the positivity effect are not reliably associated with executive function (Barber & Kim, 2021; Mather, 2024; see also Buecker et al, 2023). Alternative accounts of the positivity effect often consider more automatic, rather than strategic, processing (Barber & Kim, 2021; Gronchi et al, 2018; Labouvie-Vief et al, 2010; Mather, 2024).…”

“…While this cognitive control model can account for a variety of positivity effect patterns (see Reed & Carstensen, 2012), the goal-directed mechanism is difficult to reconcile with findings that the positivity effect can occur quickly and that individual differences in the positivity effect are not reliably associated with executive function (Barber & Kim, 2021; Mather, 2024; see also Buecker et al, 2023). Alternative accounts of the positivity effect often consider more automatic, rather than strategic, processing (Barber & Kim, 2021; Gronchi et al, 2018; Labouvie-Vief et al, 2010; Mather, 2024). For example, the dynamic integration theory considers older adults to process negative information less than younger adults because the emotional content is more complex and difficult to process, so older adults automatically deprioritize negative information that would otherwise disrupt their limited cognitive capacity (Labouvie-Vief et al, 2010).…”