Abstract

Panksepp, the father of Affective Neuroscience, dedicated his life to demonstrate that foundations of mental life and consciousness lay in the archaic layers of the brain. He had an evolutionary perspective emphasizing that the subcortical affective systems come prior to cortical cognitive systems. Based on his life-long work, the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales (ANPS) was constructed, and a new neurodevelopmental approach to personality was started. The new approach suggested that personality was formed based on the strengths and/or weaknesses found in the subcortical basic affective systems, which are initially regulated by the mother-infant attachment styles and later by early life experiences. ANPS measured six basic affects: CARE, PLAY, SEEK, SADNESS, FEAR, and ANGER; along with a Spirituality subscale. Up to date, it has been translated to several languages, and these studies confirmed that ANPS is a reliable and valid tool. Based on the observation that these ANPS studies have both universal and culturally specific findings, cross-cultural affective neuroscience (CAN) was initiated in 2012, with the approval of Panksepp. As a new research field, CAN aims to investigate the influence of culture on the regulation of basic affective systems. CAN claims that this influence can be studied by observing the cultural variations in (1) the level of emotional interdependency, (2) the types of reinforced or suppressed affects, and (3) the types of affects that accompany interdependent or independent self-construals. Cross-cultural comparisons of Turkish and American ANPS findings and the results of our first Euro-Asian CAN project among Japan, Turkey, and Germany support these claims. These cultures regulate the basic affective systems in unique ways, while maintaining certain similarities with each other. In a way, each culture has a unique affective personality profile and a specific function in the global affective network. The conclusion of this review shares guidelines, suggestions and ethical codes for future CAN researches.

Highlights

  • Specialty section: This article was submitted to Psychoanalysis and Neuropsychoanalysis, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

  • The new approach suggested that personality was formed based on the strengths and/or weaknesses found in the subcortical basic affective systems, which are initially regulated by the mother-infant attachment styles and later by early life experiences

  • He built the foundations of his affective theory, in a period where Zeitgeist was more on the side of the behaviorists and the cognitive neuroscientists, Cross-Cultural Affective Neuroscience (CAN)

Read more

Summary

EMOTIONS FOR PANKSEPP

Being the father of Affective Neuroscience, Panksepp dedicated all his scientific work to demonstrate that the role of subcortical affective systems comes prior to the role of cortical cognitive systems (Panksepp, 1998). His affective prophecy was confirmed by the increasing awareness in the twenty-first century that “affective consciousness” has the most important role in mental life (Watt, 2017; Davis and Montag, 2018) This clear foresight of his Affective Neuroscience theory (Panksepp, 1998) took its strength from its evolutionary perspective, claiming that the ancient subcortical layers of our brain keep the primal instincts and emotions, that are shared by all mammals and that functioned as tools for survival. Panksepp built up a neurodevelopmental approach to personality and stated that personality is formed upon the strengths and weaknesses found in the “basic affective systems,” which are initially regulated by the mother-infant interactions and early environmental experiences (Davis et al, 2003; Panksepp and Watt, 2011) Based on this bottom-up approach, the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales (ANPS) was constructed in 2003 (Davis et al, 2003). Transient hypofrontality during altered states of consciousness is another topic open to discussion (Dietrich, 2003)

ANPS STANDARDIZATION STUDIES IN DIFFERENT CULTURES
GUIDELINES AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE CAN RESEARCHES
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CAN RESEARCHES
Findings
ETHICAL VISION OF CAN
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call