Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Alternative Theoretical Perspectives on Emotion Representation & Modeling


Published on

Keynote at EmoSpace2011 Workshop
March 2011, Santa Barbara, CA, US

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Alternative Theoretical Perspectives on Emotion Representation & Modeling

  1. 1. Alternative Theoretical Perspectives on EmotionRepresentation & Modeling Eva Hudlicka Psychometrix Associates Blacksburg, VA EmoSPACE2011 Workshop 9th FG 2011 March 21, 2011 Santa Barbara, CA Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 1
  2. 2. Outline• Definition• Three Theoretical Perspectives• Similarities & Differences• Implications for Affective Modeling• Summary & Conclusions Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 2
  3. 3. Emotions• Evaluative judgments of the: – World – Others – Self• … in light of agent’s goals & beliefs• …motivating & coordinating adaptive behavior Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 3
  4. 4. Emotions Are Multimodal• Manifested across multiple, interacting modalities: – Physiological / Somatic (neuroendocrine - e.g., heart rate, GSR) – Cognitive / Interpretive (“Nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so…”; appraisal, biasing effects) – Motor / Behavioral (expressive, action oriented) – Experiential / Subjective (conscious experience) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 4
  5. 5. Dominant Theoretical Perspectives• Discrete / Categorical (Tomkins, Izard, Ekman, Panskepp…)• Dimensional (Wundt, Osgood, Lang, Russell, Thayer, Watson, Tellegen, Mehrabian…)• Componential (focus on cognitive appraisal) (Scherer, Roseman, Reisenzein, Smith, Ellsworth, Frijda, Ortony…) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 5
  6. 6. Discrete / Categorical• A small number of ‘hardwired’ basic emotions – Joy, fear, anger, sadness, disgust, surprise..• Characterized by distinct patterns of: – Triggering stimuli – Cognitive processing – Behavioral tendencies – Expression Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 (Cohn, 2006) 6
  7. 7. Dimensional• Emotions defined in terms of 2 or 3 dimensions – 2D: Pleasure & Arousal – 3D: Pleasure & Arousal & Dominance• 4th dimension recently proposed: – Unpredictability (Fontaine, Scherer et al., 2007) (Breazeal, 2003 adapted Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 from Russell, 1997) 7
  8. 8. Dimensionalfrom de Groot & Broekens, 2003 – adapted from Mehrabian, 1995 Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 8
  9. 9. 2 or 3 Dimensions?• 2D - cannot distinguish between emotions sharing same P & A values – Negative valence, positive arousal – Anger? Fear?• Need 3rd dim. to distinguish --> dominance – Anger: - val., + arousal, + dominance – Fear: - val., + arousal, - dominance Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 9
  10. 10. Componential• Emotions characterized by synchronized activity across multiple modalities – Cognitive, Physiological, Expressive, Behavioral, Subjective• Cognitive modality & appraisal characterized by appraisal variables (dimensions) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 10
  11. 11. Stimuli Relevance Implications Coping Norms Appraisal VariablesNovelty Valence Goal relevance Certainty Urgency Goal Emotion congruence Agency Coping potential Hudlicka Norms EmoSPACE2011 11
  12. 12. STIMULI FEARNovelty high Valence low Goal high relevance Agency other Outcome high probability Goal low congruence Urgency v. high Coping potential low Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 12
  13. 13. OCC Theory• Ortony, Clore, Collins (OCC): Cognitive Structure of Emotions (1988)• Emotions characterized by abstract evaluative criteria applied to: – Events (desirable / not…) – Acts by other agents (praiseworthy / not…) – Objects (attractive / not…)• ~22 emotions defined (including complex/social) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 13
  14. 14. Valenced Reactions Event-based emotions Attribution Attraction Desirability = low emotions emotions Praiseworthiness = lowFortunes-of-others Fortunes-of-self emotions emotionshappy for, pity, degree of autonomy = high gloating.. expectation deviation = high Prospect-based Well-being emotions emotions distress reproach fear love,hate Hudlicka anger EmoSPACE2011 14
  15. 15. Outline• Definition• Three Theoretical Perspectives• Similarities & Differences• Implications for Affective Modeling• Summary & Conclusions Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 15
  16. 16. Semantic Primitives:Atomic Structure of Emotions Discrete / Dimensional ComponentialCategorical PA or PAD ~6 Basic dims. Appraisal emotions variables (13) OCC evaluation criteria (11) Etc. Becker-Asano, 2005 Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 16
  17. 17. (Size of) Affective Spacessmall # of affective states accommodated large Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 17
  18. 18. Which Emotions Can be Defined by the Semantic Primitives?• Discrete / Categorical – Basic emotions (joy, sadness, fear, anger, disgust, surprise) – Complex & social emotions? - Theoretical basis lacking• Dimensional – Larger set than basic - but not all emotions uniquely defined – Lacks cognitive differentiation• Componential (cognitive appraisal variables) – Very large space, accommodates many types of affective states & varying intensities Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 18
  19. 19. What Do the Different Semantic Primitives Characterize? Basic emotionsCategorical / Discrete World & Relationship of Subjective Felt Self w/ World Experience Componential Dimensional Appraisal variables PA or PAD / OCC criteria dims. 19 Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011
  20. 20. Emotion Modalities Emphasized• Discrete / Categorical – Multimodal patterns (cognitive, motivational, behavioral,subjective) characterizing distinct basic emotions• Dimensional – Subjective felt experience - physiology & subjective experience >> cognition – Characterize ‘core affect’ (Russell)• Componential (appraisal) – Interpretation of stimuli & the stimuli-agent relationship - cognitive & interpretive structure >> physiology – Characterize emotions proper Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 20
  21. 21. Outline• Definition• Three Theoretical Perspectives• Similarities & Differences• Implications for Affective Modeling• Summary & Conclusions Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 21
  22. 22. (Some) Implications for Affective Modeling• Modeling core affective processes – Modeling emotion generation – Modeling emotion effects Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 22
  23. 23. Domain EMOTION GENERATION MODELSStimuli Emotions Discrete / Categorical Dimensional + -D P=x P A=y D=z = + + A Componential (appraisal) Appraisal Variables Novelty =x Valence =y = Goal Congr.=z Agency =w Etc. OCC (appraisal) Evaluative criteria Desirability Praiseworthiness Attractiveness … etc. Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 23
  24. 24. Modeling Emotion Generation• Emphasis on cognitive modality - cognitive appraisal (other modalities ignored / minimized)• Appraisal theories (componential perspective) provide best theoretical support• Emotions defined in terms of abstract (domain- independent) features: – Vectors of appraisal variables – Vectors of OCC evaluation criteria• Identifying values of these features may be non trivial Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 24
  25. 25. EMOTION EFFECTS MODELS MultimodalEmotions Manifestations of Emotions Discrete / Categorical Dimensional physiology expressions P=x & gestures A=y D=z speech cognition Componential Appraisal Variables Novelty =x Valence =y Goal Congr.=z Agency =w Etc. Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 action 25
  26. 26. Modeling Emotion Effects• More challenging > emotion generation: – Cannot easily ignore multiple modalities – Effects on behavior, expression, (less) cognition• Theoretical support << emotion generation• PAD representation facilitates modeling of expressive manifestations• Supporting data for mapping PAD & appraisal variables onto effects not always available – More data available at discrete / categorical level Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 26
  27. 27. Benefits of Dimensional Representations• Model large # of emotions• Facilitate integration of multiple emotions … but theory still lacking• Continuous representations facilitate smooth transitions among emotions & different intensities – …more realistic affective expression• Enable parsimonious representation of shared qualities of different emotions – …high arousal --> rapid movement, high speech pitch Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 27
  28. 28. Which Perspective & Space Should You Choose?• ….it depends• Which emotions will you need?• Which affective processes will you model? – Appraisal variables good for emotion generation modeling (via cognitive appraisal) – PAD dimensions good for dynamics of emotion expression –…• Are the data available? – For each dimension / variable? – For each modality of interest? Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 28
  29. 29. Outline• Definition• Three Theoretical Perspectives• Similarities & Differences• Implications for Affective Modeling• Summary & Conclusions Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 29
  30. 30. Summary of Continuous Characterizations of Emotions• Different spaces defined by different underlying dimensions (semantic primitives) – PAD vs. appraisal variables (& OCC evaluative criteria)• Emphasizing different aspects & modalities of emotions – Felt experience vs. stimulus <--> agent relationship – Physiology vs. cognition• Different pros/cons for particular affective computing tasks• “the search for the optimal low-dimensional representation of the emotion domain remains open” (Fontaine, Scherer, Roesch, Ellsworth, 2007) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 30
  31. 31. Conclusions• Different perspectives / spaces should be viewed as complementary – Decision re: perspective choice guided by specific research & applied objectives – Multiple perspectives may be used in a single architecture …supporting different tasks• It’s too early for a “unified theory” of emotions – Unified theory of emotions may not exist – “Emotion is too broad a class of events to be a single scientific category, and no one structure suffices.” (Russell & Feldman Barrett, 1999) Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 31
  32. 32. Thank you Questions? Hudlicka EmoSPACE2011 32