What are the theories of emotion?

Emotions are determined through cognitive processes

Question: What are the theories of emotion?
Position‹3 of 5›: Schachter-Singer Two-Factor Theory
Argument1 of 2›: Emotions are determined through cognitive processes

After a physiological response occurs, cognition interprets and labels the correct emotion.

The argument

In the Schachter-Singer Two-Factor theory of emotion, the second factor in causing an emotion is cognitive interpretation. The Schachter-Singer theory points to cognitive processes to resolve one of the major disagreements between two earlier theories of emotion: the James-Lange theory, which argued that emotions are the direct result of physiological responses, and the Cannon-Bard theory, which rebutted James-Lange in part by observing that many physiological symptoms, such as those experienced during exercise, do not correlate neatly with emotions. Whereas Cannon and Bard entirely rejected James-Lange's claim that physiology causes emotions, Schachter and Singer bridged the gap between James-Lange and Cannon-Bard by theorizing an additional cognitive step after physiological arousal to explain why specific physiological responses only sometimes cause specific emotions. According to the Schachter-Singer theory, cognitive interpretation is the second step in forming emotions following physiological arousal. When a physiological response occurs, this triggers a person's cognitive processes, which search for a source of the physiological symptom in their external environment. If a person begins sweating, for example, cognitive interpretation might check for signs of heat, ongoing exercise, or danger in the person's environment, and initiate and label the relevant emotional response based on this information. Thus, two factors are involved in emotional responses, the physiological factor and the cognitive factor.

Premises

[P1]The Schachter-Singer theory holds that an emotion requires two factors: physiological arousal followed by cognitive interpretation. [P2] This bridges James-Lange, which said physiology alone causes emotion, and Cannon-Bard, which noted arousal like exercise does not map neatly onto emotions. [P3] When a physiological response occurs, the mind searches the environment for its source — checking, say, whether sweating means heat or danger — and labels the emotion accordingly. [C] Therefore, because emotions are determined through cognitive processes after arousal, the Schachter-Singer Two-Factor Theory explains emotion.

Counter-arguments

As an exposition of the two-factor theory this is accurate, but as an argument that it 'explains emotion' it faces the standard objections. Empirically, Schachter and Singer's original 1962 adrenaline study has proved difficult to replicate, and later work found the predicted misattribution of arousal only inconsistently, so the evidence base for the theory is weaker than its neat logic suggests. Theoretically, its core claim that a cognitive interpretation is required for emotion is contested from two directions: Zajonc's research on affective primacy argued that emotional responses can occur before and without cognitive appraisal, while Lazarus's cognitive-mediational theory holds that appraisal itself, not undifferentiated arousal plus labelling, does the real work. The two-factor account is a historically important attempt to reconcile James–Lange and Cannon–Bard, but that it bridges them elegantly does not show it is correct; the sibling theories persist precisely because each captures cases the others handle poorly, and none has settled the field.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The claim that emotion requires arousal plus cognitive interpretation is contested by evidence (Zajonc) that affective responses can occur without prior cognitive appraisal. [Rejecting P2] Elegantly bridging James–Lange and Cannon–Bard does not make the theory correct; its founding experiment replicates poorly and rival appraisal theories dispute its mechanism.