4.4 Article

Reward and emotion: an affective neuroscience

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Volume 39, Issue -, Pages 161-167

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.016

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Academy of Finland [294897, 332225]
  2. Sigrid Juselius stiftelse
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [100019_188966]
  4. Signe och Ane Gyllenberg's stiftelse
  5. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [100019_188966] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)
  6. Academy of Finland (AKA) [332225] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pleasure and reward are essential for motivation, learning, feeling, and allostasis, but the relationship between reward and emotion lacks consensus. Future research should focus on mapping the similarities and differences in stimuli and mechanisms involved in reward processing and emotional processing, advocating for an integrative affective sciences approach.
Pleasure and reward are central for motivation, learning, feeling and allostasis. Although reward is without any doubt an affective phenomenon, there is no consensus concerning its relationship with emotion. In this mini-review we discuss this conceptual issue both from the perspective of theories of reward and emotion as well as human systems neuroimaging. We first describe how the reward process can be understood and dissected as intertwined with the emotion process, in particular in light of the appraisal theories, and then discuss how different facets of the reward process can be studied using neuroimaging and neurostimulation techniques. We conclude that future work needs to focus on mapping the similarities and differences across stimuli and mechanisms that are involved in reward processing and in emotional processing, and propose that an integrative affective sciences approach would provide means for studying the emotional nature of reward.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available