Neha Khetrapal
Centre for Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences
University of Allahabad, Allahabad, India
Abstract
SPAARS (Schematic, Propositional, Analogical and Associative Representational Systems) is the integrated cognitive model of emotion proposed by Power & Dalgleish (1997). In SPAARS, emotions are described as appraisal based against an individual’s goals and this makes the theory functional in nature. The theory proposes two routes for the generation of emotions, namely a direct one in which the appraisals have become automatized and the other where these are still not automatized. It provides a useful approach within which both basic and complex emotions can readily be understood. The theory can also be applied for explaining the disorders of emotion and it can be used to generate novel therapeutic interventions for them. In the current review, the SPAARS approach in conjunction with the theory proposed by Nigg and Casey (2005) has been applied for understanding ADHD. According to Nigg & Casey, affective deficits in ADHD could be due to problems with either approach or avoidance emotions. These problems have been explained with the help of appraisals and reinforcement learning within the SPAARS framework. Interventions that follow logically from the SPAARS framework have also been suggested.
Keywords: ADHD; Affective deficits; Emotions; SPAARS; Therapeutic interventions
Introduction
SPAARS (Schematic, Propositional, Analogical and Associative Representational Systems) is the integrated cognitive model of emotion proposed by Power & Dalgleish (1997). It is multi-level in nature. The initial processing of stimuli occurs through sensory-specific systems like vision and so on. These grouped together are called the analogical representation system. The output from this system then feeds on to three semantic representation systems that operate in parallel. At the lowest level is the associative system, which takes the form of a number of modularized connectionist networks. The intermediate level has the propositional system that has language like representation though it is not language specific.
According to the model, there is no direct route from propositions to emotions but they feed either through appraisals at the schematic level or directly through the associative system. The highest level is called the Schematic Model level. It has the advantages of storing information in a flexible manner along with the traditional schema approach. At this level the generation of emotion occurs through the process of appraisal.
There are different types of appraisals for eliciting basic emotions like sadness, happiness, anger, fear and disgust. These basic emotions can be classified as approach or avoidance emotions; for instance, appraisal for fear involves the interpretation of threat to one’s physical or emotional safety and hence is useful for avoiding a potentially threatening stimulus. The basic emotions are thus generated via the direct route. An additional way in which emotions might come to be generated through the direct route is from repeated pairings of certain event emotion sequences that eventually leads to the automatisation of the sequence. This repetition bypasses the need for any appraisal that the event has important implications for one’s goals and thus becomes directly associated with emotion. Example of the involvement of the direct route in an emotional disorder is an instance of phobia where the automatic processing of the objects is anxiety provoking even though the appraisal route is processing it as non-threatening. The appraisals also provide the staring point for complex emotions. For instance, empathy can be aroused in a person the appraisal process that takes into account the loss of goals of others. In this scheme the disorders of emotions also derive from the same set of basic emotions. Thus, the SPAARS model serves as a useful approach for understanding the affective deficits in various disorders. The purpose of this review is to apply the SPAARS model in conjunction with the cognitive and affective neurosciences theory proposed by Nigg and Casey (2005) for understanding the nature of affective deficits in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). ADHD is characterized by hyperactivity/impulsivity and/or inattention that interfere with normal functioning in various settings (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Although there are three proposed subtypes, the focus over here would be only on the combined subtype of the disorder.
According to Nigg and Casey (2005) one route to ADHD might be due to a breakdown in the prediction mechanism performed by the prefrontal cortex (PFC) that in turn would lead to problems in cognitive control. This leads to ineffective and disorganized behavior. The other two routes might be affective in nature. The first out of these would be due to extreme approach behavior (due to the over reactivity of the nucleus accumbens of the amygdala), which combined with poor socialization of self-control leads to impulsive and overactive behavior. The second would be due to over-functioning of the avoidance systems (due to the under-reactive amygdala-frontal circuit) which when combined with poor socialization of empathy and social rules leads to impulsive conduct problems and antisocial behavior.
ADHD as explained by SPAARS
According to the theory proposed by Nigg and Casey (2005) ADHDs would have a problem in generating the basic approach and avoidance emotions. ADHDs would also have a problem in learning to generate appropriate emotions even after witnessing repeated pairing of certain event-emotion sequences that eventually leads to the automatisation of behavior. Evidence for problems in reinforcement learning in ADHD has also been found (Sagvolden et al., 2005; 1998).
Thus the two routes for the generation of emotion are not functioning properly in the disorder. ADHD would be further characterized by problems in showing complex emotions like empathy that would eventually lead to impulsive behavior.
In the SPAARS approach there are inhibitory and facilitatory processes that operate to maintain an optimal balance between the avoidance and approach behavior, this intricate balance could be possibly disturbed in the disorder due to extreme of approach or avoidance behavior.
Therapeutic Interventions
Within the SPAARS approach, techniques that address the Schematic Model of an individual will be successful in helping him or her to the extent that faulty appraisals of situations are involved. Providing a new schematic model for appraisal of events would be an option in this case. This is an instance of fast change processes occurring in therapy. But ADHDs may continue to experience the maladaptive emotions through the activation of the direct route that is slow to change and the ADHDs in this case may benefit from behavioral exposure techniques.
Directions for Future Research
It would be fruitful in the future to conduct experiments that would serve as evidence in support of the SPAARS approach and would ultimately be helpful for understanding the disorder better. Topics like the appraisals for generating the basic and complex emotions could be addressed in future research endeavors. The SPAARS model could be explored within a cognitive neuroscience framework, for instance, the focus of approach and avoidance behavior that is the nucleus accumbens and the amygdala-frontal circuit respectively as proposed by Nigg & Casey. Conducting work in the domain of therapy with a focus on the principles of SPAARS approach could help improve the affective problems of ADHDs.
Conclusion
The SPAARS approach in conjunction with the theory proposed by Nigg and Casey can offer a good understanding of the affective deficits in ADHD. It is not only a parsimonious theory but it also generates empirical predictions that can be readily explored to gain empirical knowledge about affective functioning in ADHDs. The framework also offers innovative ways of treating the affective deficits found in the disorder. Future efforts should be made for applying the theory to other emotional disorders with the aim of understanding these better.
References
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Nigg, J. T. & Casey, B. J. (2005). An integrative theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder based on the cognitive and affective neurosciences. Development & Psychopathology, 17, 785-806.
Power, M. & Dalegleish, T. (1997). Cognition and Emotion: From Order to Disorder. England: The Psychology Press.
Sagvolden, T., Johansen, E. B., Aase, H. & Russell, V. A. (2005). A dynamic developmental theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) predominantly hyperactive/impulsive and combined subtypes. Behavioral Brain Science, 28, 397-419.
Sagvolden, T., Aase, H., Zeiner, P. & Berger, D. F. (1998). Altered reinforcement mechanisms in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Behavioral Brain Research, 94, 61-71.
Biographical Note
Neha Khetrapal
Centre for Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences
University of Allahabad
Allahabad 211002
India
Phone: (91-532) 2460739
Fax: (91-532) 2460739
Email: nehakhetrapal@gmail.com
At present, the author is a graduate student at the Centre for Behavioural & Cognitive Sciences, University of Allahabad, India. She has joined D.Phil (cognitive science) 1 year ago and also took her Master’s at the same Centre. Her first degree of B.A. (Honors) in psychology has introduced her to the mysteries of brain and behavior and since than she became interested in psychopathology. She always wanted to come up with appropriate theories potentially capable of explaining the underlying deficits in disorders but found the right direction of doing so in her research program where she has started reading extensively about various theories that could explain normal behavior. As a result the author has tried to apply the theories and developed them further so that they could explain the nature of deficits. Up to date she has published several papers in various journals and attended international conferences where she has presented such theories on ADHD and psychopathy. She strongly feels that research carried under the framework of these theories will not only help to develop them better but also explain disorders better.