This article offers a critical perspective on efforts to build computational models of human emotional processes. I argue that current computational scientists are missing an opportunity to bring simplicity and clarity to emotion research by adopting an overly literal interpretation of psychological theory. Rather, hearkening back to arguments from the early days of cognitive science, I suggest an approach of reinterpreting psychological phenomena through the lens of computation. I illustrate this approach through models of emotional dynamics and cultural differences.
AylettR.PaivaA. (2012). Computational modelling of culture and affect. Emotion Review, 4, 253–263.
2.
KimH.MarkusH. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 785–800.
3.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
4.
MarsellaS.GratchJ. (2009). EMA: A process model of appraisal dynamics. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research, 10, 70–90.
5.
MarsellaS.GratchJ.PettaP. (2010). Computational models of emotion. In SchererK. R.BänzigerT.RoeschE. (Eds.), A blueprint for affective computing: A sourcebook and manual (pp. 21–46). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6.
PicardR. W. (1997). Affective computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
SchererK. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In SchererK. R.SchorrA.JohnstoneT. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 92–120). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
8.
SchererK. R.BänzigerT.RoeschE. (Eds.). (2010). A blueprint for affective computing: A sourcebook and manual. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
9.
SimonH. A. (1967). Motivational and emotional controls of cognition. Psychological Review, 74, 29–39.
10.
SimonH. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
YamagishiT.HashimotoH.SchugJ. (2008). Preferences versus strategies as explanations for culture-specific behavior. Psychological Science, 19, 579–584.
