Structuring lines of the cognitive-emotional world of Ψ
A situation
A small group of people, adults and children, enters the subway.
They are different: their skin, their face, their physique are Other.
Their language is Other
Their smell is Other
Their behavior is Other.
Reactions — This group can be percieved as
— a gang of well organized thieves ; people who will provoke incidents; assaulting other travelers => urgent fear
— refugees, probably needing help => solidarity
— potential terrorists – reminiscent of the terrorists seen on TV => reinforcement of an anxious mood
=> feeling threated
— nothing special => indifference
The Emotion syndrome
According to Scherer, any emotion can be analyzed in five « components » (or « systems ») (Scherer 1984a, p. 99):
a component of cognitive evaluation of the stimuli or situations;
a physiological component of activation;
a component of motor expression;
a component of draft of action and preparation of the behavior;
and a subjective component, or “feeling”.
These last four components are traditional.
“Situation”, “Stimuli”
External source of emotion
Situation = the world-around-the-experiencer
Stimuli = the situation (world-around-the-experiencer) as perceived-analyzed-understood by the experiencer
=> as the world « experienced” by the experiencer.
=> as the world described and told by the experiencer
=> as the world the speaker wants to share with the other participants
External sources as a montage elaborated from the surrounding world.
Montage: the technique of selecting, editing, and piecing together separate sections of film to form a continuous whole.
Internal source of emotion
Internal sources can be any kind of mental montage
An anecdote told by Léonore Quéffélec daughter of Brigitte Engerer
Brigitte Engerer was giving a masterclass
A student wanted to play the second concerto of Rakhmaninov.
BE threw the partition in her face.
As a student, BE was deeply impressed by one of her teachers, who died while playing the second concerto of Rakhmaninov.
BE never played this concerto.
The cognitive component of the emotion syndrome
The detailed introduction of a cognitive evaluation component opens up very interesting perspectives.
— This component concerns practically all emotions:
There are hardly any emotional states that do not presuppose a significant number of cognitive processes
(Scherer 1993/1984, p. 107).
— It « guarantees a permanent control of internal and external stimuli »,
and assesses « whether they are harmful or useful for the organism«
by relating them to the individual’s « needs, plans or preferences«
(id., p. 103; p. 110; p. 101).
— This component is of central importance to the processing of emotion because
the nature of the emotion seems to be determined primarily by the cognitive processes of evaluation (id., p. 114).
The Facets of the Cognitive Component
Scherer gives two variants of his cognitive appraisal system (id., p. 115; p. 129; we have introduced the facet numbering).
Scherer, K. R. (1984a): «Les émotions: Fonctions et composantes». Cahiers de psychologie cognitive. 4. 9-39. Repris dans B. Rimé, K. Scherer (éds), 1993 Les émotions. Neuchâtel, Delachaux et Niestlé. (1e éd. 1989). 97-133.
Scherer, K. R. (1984b): « On the Nature and function of emotion: A component process approach ». In Scherer, K. R., Ekman P., (eds) 1984, Approaches to emotion. Hillsdale, N. J., Lawrenbce Erlbaum. 293-317.
The following table merges the two tables.
Table 1: Facets of the cognitive component
| F1 | Event intervention | Timing, expectation, probability, predictability |
| F2 | Evaluation of the action / outcome of the event | Intrinsic agreeableness, importance of the goal, significance for goal achievement, legitimacy |
| F3 | Inference about the cause of the event | Identity of the agent, motive/origin, legitimacy |
| F4 | Assessment of potential of control | Potential to influence the event or its consequences – potential for power to dominate its effects |
| F5 | Comparison with external or internal standards | Conformity to cultural expectations or norms Consistency with real and/or ideal self image. |
| F6 | Consequences for self | gain/loss of life, health, material goods, relationships, status, self-esteem, time experiences |
| F7 | Expectations | plans coming true/not true, role/norm demands satisfied/not satisfied |
| F8 | Durations of effects | short/long term, permanent, periodic |
| F9 | Type of activity achievement-task | transport, socio-emotional, leisure, service, basic drives, observation |
| F10 | Location of event | nature, street, institutions, home |
| F11 | Agent of effect | natural forces, society, groups, individual, self, object |
| F12 | Relationship to agent | intimacy, attitude, status |
| F13 | Action of agent | chance, type of intention, role/norm demands. |
Discussion:
— These facets are actually interdependant.
— What is an “event”? Something salient – Diverging from the scenario of the current action in which the experiencer is actually / feels involved.
Table 2: Facets of the cognitive component
The following table is a re-writing of the preceding one, integrating the following contributions:
—Rhetorical rules of dramatization of speech: (Lausberg, 1971; 1973)
— Rules for the construction of media discourse: « Emotion and emotional language in English and German news stories » (Ungerer 1995; 1997)
— Pragmatics of emotionive communication: « Towards a pragmatics of emotive communication » (Caffi & Janney, 1994; Caffi, 2000)
Facets of emotional structuration of the world of the experiencer
I — Evaluating what happens
Global evaluation of the event
Interjections: evaluating without Naming-Framing
II — Name and Frame what happens: What?
Framing principle : Relationship to Ψ “/(/Ψ)”
Framing tool: Analogy: Like what?
Specific Framing Lines of the event (/Ψ)
Framing the participants: Who?
Frame the timeline: When?
Framing the space :Where?
Framing the causal machinery : Cause-Effect-Control
Causality, Agency
Effect and consequences
Control
The emotional potential of a description of a situation can be evaluated at two levels, the first corresponding to a general orientation towards an affect, the second to a more specific orientation towards a particular emotion or a particular mood.
- Synthetic evaluation of the event
Positioning of the event on the pleasure / displeasure axis
— «Evaluation of the action or of the outcome of the event in terms of intrinsinc agreeableness» (Scherer)
— «Evaluation» (Caffi et Janney)
| Psychological categories | Linguistic categories | Main contrast |
| evaluation | evaluation | positive / negative |
— «Principle of emotional evaluation» (Ungerer):
| Provide evaluations based on the norms of your culture | Commenting adverbs, lexical items with positive/negative connotations |
Evaluation
An evaluation is a set of reactions or operations leading to the attribution of a value (aesthetic, moral (a good action), pragmatic (a good knife) to an object, a person, a situation, an action
The evaluation can be expressed
— By a reaction of the whole body to an event (reaction of rejection / openness), accompanied by semi-linguistic vocal production: yes / no
— By a physical reaction:
approaching / retreating movement
taking / throwing
— By an interjection
ew, ew, ugh / hmm!
berk,beuûrk, pouah / hmm!
Through this primary reaction, the event is « placed » on the evaluative axis by a reflexive movement, accompanied by minimal linguistic productions.
The evaluation can be made explicit verbally by an evaluative predicate
pleasure / pain
pleasant / unpleasant
true / false
good / bad
good / bad
beautiful / ugly
it’s great / it’s unacceptable
It can be accompanied by an explicit emotional declaration:
it’s unpleasant / it’s pleasant,
I’m disgusted / I’m on cloud nine
The evaluation can be deferred in other cases, where it is no longer a reflex, no longer obvious. Then the evaluastion is constructed through a long linguistic and cognitive work composing of data coming from all the axes of categorization of the emotion, and leading to an evaluative conclusion like
Finally, in fact, on reflection, all this is extremely positive and even pleasant + blooming face and opening mimic
The evaluation can be made by any actor involved in the event, including the narrator.
producing conflicting evaluations
In an extended interaction, the emotional evaluation is repeated, carried out at several levels. It is the point of convergence of a series of co-oriented phenomena.
(ii) Framing principle: Relationship to Ψ
Overhanging parameter : “/(/Ψ)” — A parameter which combines with every others
| Expectations Goals | plans coming true/not true, role/norm demands satisfied/not satisfiedsignificance for goal achievement, legitimacy |
|
| Relationship to Ψ
|
Consequences for self? | gain/loss of life, health, material goods, relationships, status, self-esteem, time experiences |
| Experiencer’s standards?
internal / estersnal |
Conformity to cultural expectations or norms Consistency with real and/or ideal self image. |
| F2 | Evaluation of the action / outcome of the event | Intrinsic agreeableness, importance of the goal, significance for goal achievement, legitimacy |
| F5 | Comparison with external or internal standards | Conformity to cultural expectations or norms Consistency with real and/or ideal self image. |
| F6 | Consequences for self | gain/loss of life, health, material goods, relationships, status, self-esteem, time experiences |
| F7 | Expectations | plans coming true/not true, role/norm demands satisfied/not satisfied |
| F12 | Relationship to agent | intimacy, attitude, status |
Norms
Emotions are fundamentally shaped by values and interests.
The emotion attached to an event affecting an experiencer varies in quantity and quality depending on how that event affects its value system.
With the exception of innate reflex emotions, such as the fear induced in the duckling by the shadow of the raptor; or the cold sweat of the motorist who has just escaped from the accident).
Given an unknown experiencer receiving a news or facing an event, nothing can be said about the intensity and nature of the emotion felt by this subject, if any.
At most, we can expect it to be consistent with the emotion socially attached to that kind of news or events.
Let’s suppose that an individual finds himself in front of another dead person, or that he is told « So-and-so is dead ». His feeling depends totally on the relation he had with the dead person. If it an enemy, he may feel pity (“war is a terrible thing” or joy, (« one less bastard« ) consecutive to the end of his fear, or a warlike exaltation (« now I am the strongest! »).
In such a situation, the principle of complementarity of the emotions applies: « the happiness of some makes the misfortune of others« .
If it is a stranger, perhaps fright, or pity, or simply indifference, if the scene takes place in time of war. If it is a loved one, fright, despair, sadness, depression or other feelings associated with grief.
If it is your child, the reaction may be the same, but also something like pride: « my son is a hero, a martyr, a saint » – or so it is sometimes said. T
In any case, the emotion felt may differ from the stereotypical emotion given in the official definition of the situation.
(iii) Framing Tool : Naming-and-categorizing — Analogy
Identity = same key feature
Categorical analogy = same kind of beings, same name, same emotion
Structural analogy = same kind of events, —, —
Metaphor
Framing the event
Categorization processes
— of the event itself
— of the participants
(iv) Global Framing
Emotion is produced according to the name and category given to the event as a whole, as well as the name and category attributed to each of its components.
The designation of certain events refers to euphoric / dysphoric preconstructs
life drive/death drive
wedding / funeral,
attack / party
Such designations immediately position the event on the negative or positive zone of the pleasure/displeasure axis.
This positioning is done by default, that is, it can be modified by circumstantial considerations. For some participants, a wedding can be sad and a funeral an exciting event.
In addition to the emotions integrated into linguistic pre-constructs, the inventory of emotional data includes all the antecedent reports which, in ordinary social relations, triggers emotion (Cosnier 1994, Chapter 3; Scherer, Walbott, Summerfield, 1986).
The nature of this data is obviously culture-bound.
At the limit, the mimesic emotion is produced by making the reader hallucinate the scene.
In the article ‘evidence’ in his Dictionary of Rhetoric, Molinié mentions
that famous and ridiculous suppression of the screen of discourse, with the idea that the listener is transformed into a spectator’ (1992, p. 145);
there is obviously a difference between taking part in the battle and reading a war novel, but it remains to account, for example, for the hallucinatory effect of the narrative.
— Specific framing lines
(v) Participants: Who?
This category takes up Ungerer’s « Principle of rank ». For an « equal » event, the emotion varies with the identity of the people (or sentient beings) affected, some people being emotionally more « sensitive » than others to the same event. With the same degree of proximity (kinship), the death of a child affects « more » than that of an old man, that of a civilian « more » than that of a soldier. « Winning the jackpot » does not evoke the same feelings depending on whether it affects « a bigwig » or « a family whose father is unemployed ». « A tramp/gangster is found murdered » induces very different feelings, indignation in one case, perplexity or delight in the other (see Study 3).
People can be categorized as
acquaintances, relatives, loved ones, neighbors / foreigners
(vi) Time line: When?
| Time? | When? — Timing of the event | Past / present/ future Before / Now / after |
| Probability,
Predictability, expectation, |
Probable / Unlikely ?
Expected / unexpected ? |
According to their temporal – aspectual construction, events are excluded or included in the subjective temporal sphere of the person:
at the very moment I am talking to you… VS now it is all over.
The temporal dimension is essential in the construction of urgency as well as surprise, a component of any emotion.
This category corresponds to Scherer’s F1 facet, and also refers to the rhetorical techniques of chronography.
(vii) Space: Where?
| Where? | — Location of event?
— Distance to the experiencer? |
— nature, street, institutions, home
— near / far |
Place?
The place where the emotional event occurs can be emotionally marked
murder in an empty lot vs. murder in the cathedral
It can be marked in relation to a given person (he was found lying in your office).
This category corresponds to Scherer’s F10 facet, and also refers to the rhetorical techniques of topography. Its subjectivization refers to Ungerer’s « Principle of proximity ».
Overall, the categories of place and time reconstruct the event according to the spatio-temporal coordinates of the target person.
Distance
Emotions varies in kind and intensity with the distance of the event from the experiencer. The term is to be taken in the material sense, near / far:
These tragic events take place in Srebrenica / somewhere in the Balkans / two hours by plane from Paris.
but also in the sense of intimacy (intimacy, involvment, solidarity)
it is a question of financial mathematics / this concerns us all
Thi corresponds to the F12 facet of Scherer, but also to elements entering the « control » dimension of Caffi and Janney. T
Les modalités introduites par rapport au thème du dire ou à la relation interviennent également dans sa définition (Caffi 2000).
— Framing the causal machinery
(v) Agency
Identification of the Cause or Agent
Agency =Agent-Causality
Agent-Causality is the idea that agents can start new causal chains that are not pre-determined by the events of the immediate or distant past and the physical laws of nature
Inference about the cause of the event Identity of the agent, motive/origin, legitimacy
Who / What : identification of the agent
| What? Natural phenomenon |
cause | |||
| Agency? | ||||
| self | ||||
| — Intentional action: motive /origin, legitimacy | ||||
| other | type of intention, role/norm demands. | |||
| Who? Human agent | ||||
| — Non-intentional | ||||
This essential category refers to Scherer’s F3 and F11 facets.
The determination of a cause or agent influences emotional attitudes towards an event. In particular, it is at the origin of the variations in emotions linked to the attribution of responsibility.
The street accident is due to fatality (« a landslide« ) or to a deliberate act (« a drunk driver without a license ran into them« ); there is adness and sorrow in the first case, anger in the second.
Depending on whether one attributes to the desertification of the countryside an abstract cause (« the climate crisis, the European Common Agricultural Policy« ) or agents (« the European Commissioners« ), one builds resignation or political indignation (see Study 2).
« Peter terrorizes Paul » induces something like indignation towards Peter, whereas « Peter terrifies Paul » may earn him pity, if Peter is a Quasimodo (see Chapter 8).
Effect and consequences
| Effects? | Durations of effects | short/long term, permanent, periodic |
| Consequences for self? | gain/loss of life, health, material goods, relationships, status, self-esteem, time experiences |
This category corresponds to Scherer’s F6, F7 and F8 facets.
For example, in order to orient a person’s emotional attitude towards fear (constructing fear), we can show him, by means of a schema similar to that of an argument by consequences, that the negative consequences of such and such an event being frightening, so is the source.
Control?
For an individual, the emotion associated with an event varies with his or her ability to control that event. If the development of a fear-provoking state of affairs is out of control, the fear becomes panic.
Caffi and Janney
| Linguistic categories | Main contrast | |
| proximity | near / far | |
| control | specificity | clear / vague |
| evidentiality | confident / doubtful | |
| volitionality | assertive / non assertive |
The « control » category of corresponds to the F4 facet of Scherer. For an individual, the emotion associated with an event varies with his or her ability to control that event. If the development of a fear-provoking state of affairs is out of control, the fear becomes panic.