An associative account of emotions

Keyword(s):  
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaas N. Oosterhof ◽  
Alison J. Wiggett ◽  
Emily S. Cross

AbstractCook et al. overstate the evidence supporting their associative account of mirror neurons in humans: most studies do not address a key property, action-specificity that generalizes across the visual and motor domains. Multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) of neuroimaging data can address this concern, and we illustrate how MVPA can be used to test key predictions of their account.


2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 903-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Horton ◽  
Ryan Gabriel Windeknecht

2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 413-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Beesley ◽  
Fergal W. Jones ◽  
David R. Shanks

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bennett I. Bertenthal

AbstractThree challenges to the sufficiency of the associative account for explaining the development of mirror mechanisms are discussed: Genetic predispositions interact with associative learning, infants show predispositions to imitate human as opposed to nonhuman actions, and early and later learning involve different mechanisms. Legitimate objections to an extreme nativist account are raised, but the proposed solution is equally problematic.


2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Cook ◽  
Geoffrey Bird ◽  
Caroline Catmur ◽  
Clare Press ◽  
Cecilia Heyes

AbstractThis article argues that mirror neurons originate in sensorimotor associative learning and therefore a new approach is needed to investigate their functions. Mirror neurons were discovered about 20 years ago in the monkey brain, and there is now evidence that they are also present in the human brain. The intriguing feature of many mirror neurons is that they fire not only when the animal is performing an action, such as grasping an object using a power grip, but also when the animal passively observes a similar action performed by another agent. It is widely believed that mirror neurons are a genetic adaptation for action understanding; that they were designed by evolution to fulfill a specific socio-cognitive function. In contrast, we argue that mirror neurons are forged by domain-general processes of associative learning in the course of individual development, and, although they may have psychological functions, they do not necessarily have a specific evolutionary purpose or adaptive function. The evidence supporting this view shows that (1) mirror neurons do not consistently encode action “goals”; (2) the contingency- and context-sensitive nature of associative learning explains the full range of mirror neuron properties; (3) human infants receive enough sensorimotor experience to support associative learning of mirror neurons (“wealth of the stimulus”); and (4) mirror neurons can be changed in radical ways by sensorimotor training. The associative account implies that reliable information about the function of mirror neurons can be obtained only by research based on developmental history, system-level theory, and careful experimentation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 631-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Yuan ◽  
Sarah Carr ◽  
Guosheng Ding ◽  
Shimin Fu ◽  
John Xuexin Zhang

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-219
Author(s):  
Ayse P. Saygin ◽  
Frederic Dick

AbstractLike Cook et al., we suggest that mirror neurons are a fascinating product of cross-modal learning. As predicted by an associative account, responses in motor regions are observed for novel and/or abstract visual stimuli such as point-light and android movements. Domain-specific mirror responses also emerge as a function of audiomotor expertise that is slowly acquired over years of intensive training.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document