This paper discusses (i) the usefulness and (ii) the clarity of the concept of arousal. In discussing its usefulness, I argue that we can explain some key “arousal effects” without relying on the concept of arousal. To do so, I consider the role of the appraisal of affective relevance as a process mainly subserved by the amygdala and explaining emotional effects on attention, memory, and learning. Then, with respect to the clarity of the concept of arousal, I use the componential approach to emotion to suggest that further research may investigate whether the umbrella term “arousal” covers five different concepts (energy, sympathetic nervous system activity, intensity, strength, and salience), each corresponding to a specific component of emotion.
ColombettiG.HarrisonN. (2019). From physiology to experience: Enriching existing conceptions of “arousal” in affective science. In TsakirisM.De PreesterH. (Eds.), The interoceptive mind: From homeostasis to awareness (pp. 245–258). Oxford University Press.
3.
ColombettiG.KuppensP. (2024). How should we understand valence, arousal, and their relation? In ScarantinoA. (Ed.), The emotion theory: The Routledge comprehensive guide: Volume 1 (pp. 599–620). Routledge.
4.
CostaV. D.LangP. J.SabatinelliD.VersaceF.BradleyM. M. (2010). Emotional imagery: Assessing pleasure and arousal in the brain's reward circuitry. Human Brain Mapping, 31(9), 1446–1457. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20948
5.
DuffyE. (1941). An explanation of “emotional” phenomena without the use of the concept “emotion”. Journal of General Psychology, 25, 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1941.10544400
6.
DukesD.AbramsK.AdolphsR.AhmedM. E.BeattyA.BerridgeK. C.BroomhallS.BroschT.CamposJ. J.ClayZ.ClémentF.CunninghamW. A.DamasioA.DamasioH.D'ArmsJ.DavidsonJ. W.de GelderB.DeonnaJ.de SousaR., …, SanderD. (2021). The rise of affectivism. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(7), 816–820. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01130-8
7.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge University Press.
HamannS. (2012). Mapping discrete and dimensional emotions onto the brain: Controversies and consensus. Trends in Cognitive Neurosciences, 16(9), 458–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.07.006
10.
HamannS. (2024). An overview of contemporary theories of emotions in neuroscience. In ScarantinoA. (Ed.), Emotion theory: The Routledge comprehensive guide: Volume II (pp. 260–286). Routledge.
11.
JohnstonE.VitelloM. (2021). Reconstructing the history of emotions: Revisiting Elizabeth Duffy’s rejection of the term “emotion”. History of Psychology, 24(4), 301–322. https://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000203
12.
KragelP. A.SanderD.LaBarK. S. (2024). How can brain data be used to arbitrate among emotion theories? In ScarantinoA. (Ed.), Emotion theory: The Routledge comprehensive guide: Volume II (pp. 511–542). Routledge.
13.
MontagrinA.BroschT.SanderD. (2013). Goal-conduciveness as a key determinant of memory facilitation. Emotion, 13, 622–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033066
14.
MontagrinA.SanderD. (2016). Emotional memory: From affective relevance to arousal. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e216. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15001879
15.
MurrayR. J.KutlikovaH. H.BroschT.SanderD. (2023). The amygdala and appraised concern-relevance: Initial evidence that intrinsic motivation modulates amygdala response to otherwise neutral stimuli. Motivation Science, 9(2), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000293
16.
NeissR. (1988). Reconceptualizing arousal: Psychobiological states in motor performance. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.345
17.
PoolE.BroschT.DelplanqueS.SanderD. (2016). Attentional bias for positive emotional stimuli: A meta-analytic investigation. Psychological Bulletin, 142(1), 79–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000026
18.
PoolE. R.SanderD. (2021). Emotional learning: Measuring how affective values are acquired and updated. In MeiselmanH. L. (Ed.), Emotion measurement (2nd ed., pp. 133–165). Woodhead Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821124-3.00005-3
SanderD. (2013). Models of emotion: The affective neuroscience approach. In ArmonyJ.VuilleumierP. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of human affective neuroscience (pp. 5–53). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511843716.003
21.
SanderD.GrafmanJ.ZallaT. (2003). The human amygdala: An evolved system for relevance detection. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 14(4), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1515/revneuro.2003.14.4.303
SanderD. (in press). Theories of emotion for human affective neuroscience. In ArmonyJ.VuilleumierP. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of human affective neuroscience (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
24.
SanderD.KoenigO. (2002). No inferiority complex in the study of emotion complexity: A cognitive neuroscience computational architecture of emotion. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2(3–4), 249–272.
StussiY.PourtoisG.SanderD. (2018). Enhanced Pavlovian aversive conditioning to positive emotional stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(6), 905–923. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000424
27.
StussiY.SanderD. (2024). Computational analysis, appraised concern-relevance, and the amygdala: The algorithmic value of appraisal processes in emotion. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 161, 105676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105676
28.
ZsidóA. N. (2024). The effect of emotional arousal on visual attentional performance: A systematic review. Psychological Research, 88(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01852-6
