Topics in Cognitive Science 11 (1):50-74 (2019)
Authors | |
Abstract |
Research on surprise relevant to the cognitive-evolutionary model of surprise proposed by Meyer, Reisenzein, and Schützwohl is reviewed. The majority of the assumptions of the model are found empirically supported. Surprise is evoked by unexpected events and its intensity is determined by the degree if schema-discrepancy, whereas the novelty and the valence of the eliciting events probably do not have an independent effect. Unexpected events cause an automatic interruption of ongoing mental processes that is followed by an attentional shift and attentional binding to the events, which is often followed by causal and other event analysis processes and by schema revision. The facial expression of surprise postulated by evolutionary emotion psychologists has been found to occur rarely in surprise, for as yet unknown reasons. A physiological orienting response marked by skin conductance increase, heart rate deceleration, and pupil dilation has been observed to occur regularly in the standard version of the repetition-change paradigm of surprise induction, but the specificity of these reactions as indicators of surprise is controversial. There is indirect evidence for the assumption that the feeling of surprise consists of the direct awareness of the schema-discrepancy signal, but this feeling, or at least the self-report of surprise, is also influenced by experienced interference. In contrast, facial feedback probably does contribute substantially to the feeling of surprise and the evidence for the hypothesis that surprise is affected by the difficulty of explaining an unexpected event is, in our view, inconclusive. Regardless of how the surprise feeling is constituted, there is evidence that it has both motivational and informational effects. Finally, the prediction failure implied by unexpected events sometimes causes a negative feeling, but there is no convincing evidence that this is always the case, and we argue that even if it were so, this would not be a sufficient reason for regarding this feeling as a component, rather than as an effect of surprise.
|
Keywords | Cognitive‐evolutionary model Emotion Predictive coding Review Schema‐updating Surprise Unexpectedness |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1111/tops.12292 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Whatever Next? Predictive Brains, Situated Agents, and the Future of Cognitive Science.Andy Clark - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):181-204.
A Treatise of Human Nature.David Hume & A. D. Lindsay - 1958 - Philosophical Quarterly 8 (33):379-380.
Towards a Cognitive Theory of Emotions.Keith Oatley & P. N. Johnson-Laird - 1987 - Cognition and Emotion 1 (1):29-50.
View all 30 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Cognition and Emotion: A Plea for Theory.Rainer Reisenzein - 2019 - Cognition and Emotion 33 (1):109-118.
A Contrast‐Based Computational Model of Surprise and Its Applications.Luis Macedo & Amílcar Cardoso - 2019 - Topics in Cognitive Science 11 (1):88-102.
Storytelling as Adaptive Collective Sensemaking.Lucas M. Bietti, Ottilie Tilston & Adrian Bangerter - 2019 - Topics in Cognitive Science 11 (4):710-732.
Editors’ Introduction and Review: An Appraisal of Surprise: Tracing the Threads That Stitch It Together.Edward L. Munnich, Meadhbh I. Foster & Mark T. Keane - 2019 - Topics in Cognitive Science 11 (1):37-49.
Novelty Manipulations, Memory Performance, and Predictive Coding: The Role of Unexpectedness.Richárd Reichardt, Bertalan Polner & Péter Simor - 2020 - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 14.
View all 12 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
The Cognitive Structure of Surprise: Looking for Basic Principles.Emiliano Lorini & Cristiano Castelfranchi - 2007 - Topoi 26 (1):133-149.
Temporal Characteristics of the Surprise Reaction Induced by Schema-Discrepant Visual and Auditory Events.Michael Niepel, Udo Rudolph, Achim Schützwohl & Wulf-Uwe Meyer - 1994 - Cognition and Emotion 8 (5):433-452.
A Value-Based Solution to the Surprise Exam Paradox.Terence Rajivan Edward - 2018 - Philosophical Pathways (221):1-2.
The Solution to the Surprise Exam Paradox.Ken Levy - 2009 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2):131-158.
Significance Testing with No Alternative Hypothesis: A Measure of Surprise.J. V. Howard - 2009 - Erkenntnis 70 (2):253-270.
Surprise, Surprise Gianna Petrone: La battuta a sorpresa negli oratori latini. Pp. 129. Palermo: Palumbo, 1971. Paper, L. 1,800. [REVIEW]Michael Winterbottom - 1974 - The Classical Review 24 (02):218-219.
How Can You Be Surprised? The Case for Volatile Expectations.Roberto Casati & Elena Pasquinelli - 2007 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):171-183.
Coherence Between Emotion and Facial Expression: Evidence From Laboratory Experiments.Rainer Reisenzein, Markus Studtmann & Gernot Horstmann - 2013 - Emotion Review 5 (1):16-23.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2017-09-23
Total views
39 ( #288,449 of 2,497,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,370 of 2,497,786 )
2017-09-23
Total views
39 ( #288,449 of 2,497,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,370 of 2,497,786 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads