The role of language in the experience and perception of emotion: a neuroimaging meta-analysis

Abstract

Recent behavioral and neuroimaging studies demonstrate that labeling one’s emotional experiences and perceptions alters those states. Here, we used a comprehensive meta-analysis of the neuroimaging literature to systematically explore whether the presence of emotion words in experimental tasks has an impact on the neural representation of emotional experiences and perceptions across studies. Using a database of 386 studies, we assessed brain activity when emotion words (e.g. ‘anger’, ‘disgust’) and more general affect words (e.g. ‘pleasant’, ‘unpleasant’) were present in experimental tasks vs not present. As predicted, when emotion words were present, we observed more frequent activations in regions related to semantic processing. When emotion words were not present, we observed more frequent activations in the amygdala and parahippocampal gyrus, bilaterally. The presence of affect words did not have the same effect on the neural representation of emotional experiences and perceptions, suggesting that our observed effects are specific to emotion words. These findings are consistent with the psychological constructionist prediction that in the absence of accessible emotion concepts, the meaning of affective experiences and perceptions are ambiguous. Findings are also consistent with the regulatory role of ‘affect labeling’. Implications of the role of language in emotion construction and regulation are discussed.

Emotion differentiation predicts likelihood of initial lapse following substance use treatment

“…For instance, neuroimaging studies show that labeling one’s affect states in a discrete and specific way is associated with down-regulation of the amygdala, a brain region associated with representing negative affect (Brooks et al, 2017; Hariri et al, 2000; Lieberman et al, 2007). Another study found lower activation of the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and anterior insula, two regions involved in representing negative affect, among individuals with greater emotion differentiation (Kashdan et al, 2014).…”

The Contribution of Childhood Negative Emotionality and Cognitive Control to Anxiety-Linked Neural Dysregulation of Emotion in Adolescence

“…The comparison of interest in this task was the difference in brain connectivity when adolescents labeled facial expressions of negative emotions compared to passively viewing them. This task measures implicit emotion regulation thought to be engaged as a result of labeling emotions (Brooks et al, 2016;Gyurak, Gross, & Etkin, 2011;Lieberman et al, 2007). We hypothesized that (a) NE would predict a less mature pattern of amygdala-PFC connectivity; (b) CC would predict a more mature pattern of amygdala-PFC connectivity; and (c) the association between NE and less mature patterns of amygdala-PFC connectivity would be strongest at low levels of CC (i.e., NE x CC interaction), highlighting the independent and interactive effects of childhood traits on emotion regulation in adolescence.…”

“…Despite the novel contributions of this study, it has noteworthy limitations. First, although previous research suggests emotion labeling is an effective implicit emotion regulation strategy (Brooks et al, 2016;Gyurak et al, 2011;Lieberman et al, 2007), we did not explicitly instruct participants to regulate their emotions during the task. As we cannot be certain that labeling emotions engaged emotion regulation strategies to a similar extent in all of our participants, future studies examining patterns of functional connectivity during explicit emotion regulation tasks are warranted.…”

Self-report captures 27 distinct categories of emotion bridged by continuous gradients

“…To account for the occurrence of specific emotions, a related line of inquiry has documented how other, more context-directed affective dimensions such as dominance, certainty, agency, effort, and attention differentiate reports of emo-tional experiences of similar valence and arousal, such as anger and fear, or hope and pride (1,14,19,(22)(23)(24). Varying combinations of such dimensions have been the focus of hundreds of studies linking reported emotional experience to behavior, physiology, and brain activity (25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36).A second approach to emotional experience details how specific emotion categories, such as awe, fear, and envy, describe discrete clusters of states within a presupposed semantic space. More precisely, basic emotion theories posit that a limited number of clusters, ranging in theoretical accounts from 6 to 15, describe the distribution of all emotional states (16,37,38).…”