Abstract Many of the core questions in affective science (e.g., Are there basic emotions? What are the antecedents and functions of emotion? How do individuals differ in emotional reactivity?) have developed without explicit connection to the realm of human health. Alternatively, when emotion has entered the health realm (e.g., Does anger increase cardiovascular risk? Is optimism protective?), it has frequently been with little connection to mainstream research in affective science. This separation is not a state of affairs to lament, but rather represents opportunities for the future in which the fields of emotion and health can enrich and extend each other. Our objective in this chapter is to bring the nexus between these realms into focus via discussion of five guiding premises for relating emotion to health. These serve as conceptual guideposts for examining past, current, and future empirical studies, and do so with an emphasis on testable hypotheses. The five premises are: (1) emotions consequential for health are about something; (2) health requires a focus on co-occurring discrete emotions; (3) health is biopsychosocial in nature and necessitates integration of phenomenology and neurophysiology; (4) cumulative, chronic emotions are consequential for health; and (5) emotion can be protective and promote positive health. Each premise is illustrated via separate substantive studies, although a unifying theme across them is the need for integrative endeavors that put toge

This paper aims to analyze technical and internal aspects of one particular type of human moral enhancement, i.e. enhancement of moral motivation via direct emotion modulation. More precisely, it challenges the assumption that modifying certain emotions will have the results desired by the advocates of this theory. It is argued that neuropsychological understanding of the role and function of emotions, as well as of underlying cognitive mechanisms, might be relevant for the discussion about biomedical enhancement of moral capacities. Moreover, typical claims about direct emotion modulation seem to be contradicted, or at least seriously challenged, by available neuroscientific data. Particular attention is paid to the theory that emotions are evolved and functionally specialized programs whose task is to coordinate other adaptive mechanisms of human psychology in order to promote one’s fitness. If this view of emotions is plausible, it can be argued that several difficulties for moral bioenhancement theory ensue. Neuroscientific and evolutionary-psychological perspective seem to indicate that emotions don’t fulfill necessary requirements to serve as the vehicles of moral enhancement and it should, therefore, take into account role and function of entire cognitive modules associated with moral decision-making.

Introduction Most human interactions are imbued with emotional exchange. In fact, it is hard to imagine a meaningful interaction in which emotion communication plays no role and even banal everyday transactions such as paying at a supermarket often involve an exchange of smiles or sometimes the expression of displeasure by one or both interaction partners. Importantly, these expressions serve as social signals that provide information about the expresser as well as about the situation (Hess, Kappas and Banse 1995) and that help to coordinate and facilitate interpersonal interaction and communication (Niedenthal and Brauer 2012; Parkinson, Fischer and Manstead 2005). This chapter explores the influence of context on the social signal value of such emotion expressions. What do they in fact tell us about the person or the situation and what influence has the context they occur in on the meaning of the exchange? When considering the impact of context, on the one hand, and the social signals inherent in emotion expressions, on the other, the first question to ask would be what emotions actually signal. The scientific study of emotion expressions is usually traced to Darwin's seminal work On the Expressions of the Emotions in Man and Animal ([1872] 1965). Darwin understood emotion expressions as the visible part of an underlying emotional state, which are evolved and (at least at some point in the past) adaptive. The notion that the expressions communicate the organisms’ state and

The scientific investigation into the architecture of human affect has historically been defined by a fundamental theoretical schism, often characterized as a "100-year war" between discrete emotion models and dimensional frameworks. Discrete models, such as those proposed by Izard and Ekman, argue for biologically hardwired, universal emotional categories like fear, anger, and joy, presumed to have evolved as distinct adaptive responses to environmental challenges. Conversely, dimensional models prioritize a continuous spectrum of valence and arousal, suggesting that what individuals categorize as emotions are essentially cognitive constructions layered atop simpler physiological states. The Core Emotion Framework (CEF) emerges as a sophisticated structural-constructivist resolution to this dichotomy, proposing a modular system that accounts for the complexity of human experience while maintaining a rigorous, repeatable structural foundation rooted in ten universal emotional operators or powers. Within the CEF, emotions are not viewed as static states or feelings but as functional operators within a complex human operating system. This paradigm shift suggests that emotional states are predictable computational events rather than subjective mysteries. The CEF operationalizes these processes by decomposing all affective phenomena into a small, non-overlapping set of ten operators, which serve as the emotional equivalent of CPU instructions. These operators determine what infor

effects). Sometimes, emotions can be categorized as background emotions, basic emotions (e.g., Ekman’s emotion … salience more broadly. Emotions are believed to serve evolutionarily adaptive functions and are thought to … . a 4 ? ; = EMOTIONS AND AFFECT IN HUMAN FACTORSA ND HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION EMOTIONS AND AFFECT IN