Valuing what happens: a biogenic approach to valence and (potentially) affect

Abstract

Valence is half of the pair of properties that constitute core affect, the foundation of emotion. But what is valence, and where is it found in the natural world? Currently, this question cannot be answered. The idea that emotion is the body's way of driving the organism to secure its survival, thriving and reproduction runs like a leitmotif from the pathfinding work of Antonio Damasio through four book-length neuroscientific accounts of emotion recently published by the field's leading practitioners. Yet while Damasio concluded 20 years ago that the homeostasis–affect linkage is rooted in unicellular life, no agreement exists about whether even non-human animals with brains experience emotions. Simple neural animals—those less brainy than bees, fruit flies and other charismatic invertebrates—are not even on the radar of contemporary affective research, to say nothing of aneural organisms. This near-sightedness has effectively denied the most productive method available for getting a grip on highly complex biological processes to a scientific domain whose importance for understanding biological decision-making cannot be underestimated. Valence arguably is the fulcrum around which the dance of life revolves. Without the ability to discriminate advantage from harm, life very quickly comes to an end. In this paper, we review the concept of valence, where it came from, the work it does in current leading theories of emotion, and some of the odd features revealed via experiment. We present a biologically grounded framework for investigating valence in any organism and sketch a preliminary pathway to a computational model. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Basal cognition: conceptual tools and the view from the single cell’.

Technological Approach to Mind Everywhere: An Experimentally-Grounded Framework for Understanding Diverse Bodies and Minds

“…For example, one view is that only biological, evolved forms have intrinsic motivation, while software AI agents are only faking it via functional performance [but don’t actually care ( Oudeyer and Kaplan, 2007 , 2013 ; Lyon and Kuchling, 2021 )]. But which biological systems really care—fish?…”

Reframing cognition: getting down to biological basics

“…All organisms must be capable of determining what behaviour works and what doesn't, what promotes survival, growth and/or reproduction and what threatens it. The second contribution in this section, by Pamela Lyon and Franz Kuchling, concerns how organisms value what they encounter as a necessary adjunct to marshalling behaviour [57]. In emotion research, reinforcement and aversion are aspects of valence, an organism's response to perceived advantage and harm.…”

“…Examples range from allosteric control of glucose metabolism in mammals to protein synthesis, chemotactic motility, quorum sensing and circadian rhythmicity in prokaryotes. [57]. In emotion research, reinforcement and aversion are aspects of valence, an organism's response to perceived advantage and harm.…”

Behaviorist approaches to investigating memory and learning: A primer for synthetic biology and bioengineering

“…Related to the question “How do you explore learning when you do not know in advance what the animal can perceive?” is the key question of how to motivate a new type of organism. A rich literature addresses the conceptual issues around preferences and valence in minimal living [ 74 ] and even non-living (e.g., AI) [ 75 , 76 ] systems; here, given the focus on novel biological constructs, we use a functional definition of motivation with respect to substances, states, or signals that are necessary or contrary to the system’s longevity and well-being. An organism’s motivational state is manipulated by depriving it of some commodity, using a preferred commodity, or by varying the intensity of an aversive event.…”