The Neuroscience of Happiness - Revision history

imported>Psych202 at 09:50, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T09:50:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:50, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|'''Reward circuit''': Three key areas implicated in the dopaminergic reward circuit in the brain: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|'''Reward circuit''': Three key areas implicated in the dopaminergic reward circuit in the brain: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' inform us about the nature ~~or path to~~ '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' inform us about the nature of '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

imported>Psych202 at 09:49, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T09:49:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:49, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|'''Reward circuit''': Three key areas implicated in the dopaminergic reward circuit in the brain: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|'''Reward circuit''': Three key areas implicated in the dopaminergic reward circuit in the brain: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' ~~tell~~ us ~~anything~~ about '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' inform us about the nature or path to '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

imported>Psych202: moved Can Neuroscience Teach Us About Happiness? to The Neuroscience of Happiness

2013-06-09T09:48:21Z

moved Can Neuroscience Teach Us About Happiness? to The Neuroscience of Happiness

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:48, 9 June 2013
(No difference)

imported>Psych202 at 09:42, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T09:42:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:42, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|~~250px~~\|~~Key~~ areas implicated in the ~~brain~~ reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|'''Reward circuit''': Three key areas implicated in the dopaminergic reward circuit in the brain: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

Line 40:		Line 40:
	[[File:Ofc2.jpg\|thumb\|c\|left\|250px\| '''Orbitofrontal cortex''' integrated with the nucleus accumbens and VTA of the '''basal ganglia''', situated in the brain.]]		[[File:Ofc2.jpg\|thumb\|c\|left\|250px\| '''Orbitofrontal cortex''' integrated with the nucleus accumbens and VTA of the '''basal ganglia''', situated in the brain.]]
	===Orbitofrontal Cortex===		===Orbitofrontal Cortex===
	Neuroanatomically connected to the nucleus accumbens is the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), another brain region highly involved in the processing of pleasure and thus a strong candidate for any hedonic brain network. The OFC may further be split into a mid-anterior and ~~more~~ anterior region. The mid-anterior region is purported to be highly involved in the coding of the subjective experience of ~~pleasure~~ - neuroimaging studies have shown strong correlations to pleasantness ratings for food, sexual orgasms, drugs, chocolate, and music.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[2]]]</sup> The more anterior region is supposedly involved in more complex positive reinforcers such as monetary gain.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[2]]]</sup> A meta-analysis by Kringelbach and Rolls (2004) of 87 publications from 1994 to 2003 confirmed the involvement of different sub-regions of the OFC in both reward punishment. Whereas the lateral OFC is related to the evaluation of punishment, the medial OFC was found to be consistently involved in the processing of reward. <sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[26]]]</sup>		Neuroanatomically connected to the nucleus accumbens is the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), another brain region highly involved in the processing of pleasure and thus a strong candidate for any hedonic brain network. The OFC may further be split into a mid-anterior and anterior region. The mid-anterior region is purported to be highly involved in the coding of the subjective experience of pleasures of the senses - neuroimaging studies have shown strong correlations to pleasantness ratings for food, sexual orgasms, drugs, chocolate, and music.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[2]]]</sup> The more anterior region is supposedly involved in more complex positive reinforcers such as monetary gain.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[2]]]</sup> A meta-analysis by Kringelbach and Rolls (2004) of 87 publications from 1994 to 2003 confirmed the involvement of different sub-regions of the OFC in both reward and punishment. Whereas the lateral OFC is related to the evaluation of punishment, the medial OFC was found to be consistently involved in the processing of reward. <sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[26]]]</sup>

	[[File:anterior_cingulate.png\|thumb\|c\|right\|250px\|'''Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)''': Sagittal MRI slice with highlighting location of the ACC]]		[[File:anterior_cingulate.png\|thumb\|c\|right\|250px\|'''Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)''': Sagittal MRI slice with highlighting location of the ACC]]
	===Anterior Cingulate Cortex===		===Anterior Cingulate Cortex===
	The ventral part of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), or Brodmann area 24, is also connected to the nucleus accumbens (and many other regions implicated in emotion) and appears highly important for any neural network associated with happiness. Indeed, studies on therapeutic interventions involving either cognitive behavioral therapy or deep brain stimulation ~~both~~ found that reduced depressive symptoms were associated with increased activity in ventral ACC, along with increased hippocampus volume and a number of other metabolic changes.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[27]]]</sup> Meta-analyses also implicate parts of the ACC in happiness. Murphy et al. (2003) for instance found that the rostral supracallosal ACC (as well as dorsomedial PFC) was the most consistently activated region found in happiness. But the same study found that the rostral part of the ACC was also activated by sadness.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[8]]]</sup> In contrast, a more recent meta-analysis by Vytal and Hamann (2010) that included new data from additional 30 studies since Murphy et al. and used a more spatially sensitive activation likelihood estimation (ALE) method found that activation of both left ventral and rostral ACC were highly associated with happiness but not sadness, nor any other negative emotions.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[5]]]</sup>		The ventral part of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), or Brodmann area 24, is also connected to the nucleus accumbens (and many other regions implicated in emotion) and appears highly important for any neural network associated with happiness. Indeed, studies on therapeutic interventions involving either cognitive behavioral therapy or deep brain stimulation found that reduced depressive symptoms were associated with increased activity in ventral ACC, along with increased hippocampus volume and a number of other metabolic changes.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[27]]]</sup> Meta-analyses also implicate parts of the ACC in happiness. Murphy et al. (2003) for instance found that the rostral supracallosal ACC (as well as dorsomedial PFC) was the most consistently activated region found in happiness. But the same study found that the rostral part of the ACC was also activated by sadness.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[8]]]</sup> In contrast, a more recent meta-analysis by Vytal and Hamann (2010) that included new data from an additional 30 studies since Murphy et al. and used a more spatially sensitive activation likelihood estimation (ALE) method found that activation of both left ventral and rostral ACC were highly associated with happiness but not sadness, nor any other negative emotions.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[5]]]</sup>

	===Other candidates===		===Other candidates===
	In Vytal and Hamann's 2010 meta-analysis, the largest activation foci associated with happiness was located primarily in the right superior temporal gyrus (STG), or Brodmann's area 22.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[5]]]</sup> STG is normally implicated in auditory or language processing, but it has also been found to be important for social cognition<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[29]]]</sup>, particularly in perceiving emotions in facial stimuli. While many of the studies in Vytal and Hamann's meta-analysis involved viewing facial expressions, there did not appear to be a significantly higher number of happiness studies involving facial recognition~~. Something unique to STG may be associated with happiness~~. Perhaps given the importance of social connection to well-being, certain sub-components of STG may be particularly sensitive to positive facial expressions. This is an area worth further exploration.		In Vytal and Hamann's 2010 meta-analysis, the largest activation foci associated with happiness was located primarily in the right superior temporal gyrus (STG), or Brodmann's area 22.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[5]]]</sup> STG is normally implicated in auditory or language processing, but it has also been found to be important for social cognition,<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[29]]]</sup> particularly in perceiving emotions in facial stimuli. While many of the studies in Vytal and Hamann's meta-analysis involved viewing facial expressions, there did not appear to be a significantly higher number of happiness studies involving facial recognition. Perhaps given the importance of social connection to well-being, certain sub-components of STG may be particularly sensitive to positive facial expressions. This is an area worth further exploration.

	=Conclusion=		=Conclusion=
	Based on recent meta-analyses in affective neuroscience, it appears that pleasure may be objectively measured through a combination of "hedonic" interconnected cortical and sub-cortical regions, including, but not limited to, dopaminergic components of the basal ganglia (NAcc, VTA, ventral palladum), the midanterior subregion of the orbitofrontal cortex, the right rostral and ventral anterior cingulate cortex, and, possibly, the right superior temporal gyrus. However, a unified neuroanatomy of happiness remains elusive. Given the wide variance among the meta-analytic studies and lack of clear consistency and specificity, we cannot ~~be terribly confident yet~~ in our ability to both predict subjective well-being nor discriminate levels of happiness between subjects based on their neuroimaging feedback.		Based on recent meta-analyses in affective neuroscience, it appears that pleasure may be objectively measured through a combination of "hedonic" interconnected cortical and sub-cortical regions, including, but not limited to, dopaminergic components of the basal ganglia (NAcc, VTA, ventral palladum), the midanterior subregion of the orbitofrontal cortex, the right rostral and ventral anterior cingulate cortex, and, possibly, the right superior temporal gyrus. However, a unified neuroanatomy of happiness remains elusive. Given the wide variance among the meta-analytic studies and lack of clear consistency and specificity, we cannot place too much confidence in our ability to both predict subjective well-being nor discriminate levels of happiness between subjects based on their neuroimaging feedback.

	The above meta-anlayses relate largely to hedonic pleasure elicited in laboratory settings through film, facial expression, music, food or image mood inductions. While some studies looked at changes in ACC activation outside the lab following behavioral therapy,<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[27]]]</sup> ~~these~~ studies for the most part investigated only the hedonic component of happiness, or the momentary experience of pleasure. The eudaimonic component - i.e., a broader sense of meaning, contentment, engagement, or well-being, has been explored to a lesser degree. Given emotion and cognition are functionally integrated systems,<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[30]]]</sup> neural correlates of eudaimonic happiness likely implicate a broader ~~sense~~ of cortical structures as ~~well~~. ~~Further~~, individual differences in age, sex, and personality likely make the waters murkier. Past meta-analyses have found substantial differences in certain regions for positive and negative emotions.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[31]]]</sup> It is also possible that most studies done in the lab do not reach ~~as intense a~~ level of ~~happiness~~ (in terms of valence) as that ~~experienced~~ outside. While it is reasonable to assume ~~most~~ brain regions are implicated across multiple levels of intensity, we cannot rule out the possibility that some key brain regions for measuring happiness are only activated above certain thresholds, which have not yet been empirically explored in the lab given natural constraints stimulus intensity.		The above meta-anlayses relate largely to hedonic pleasure elicited in laboratory settings through film, facial expression, music, food or image mood inductions. While some studies looked at changes in ACC activation outside the lab following behavioral therapy,<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[27]]]</sup> the studies herein for the most part investigated only the hedonic component of happiness, or the momentary experience of pleasure. The eudaimonic component - i.e., a broader sense of meaning, contentment, engagement, or well-being, has been explored to a lesser degree. Given emotion and cognition are functionally integrated systems,<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[30]]]</sup> neural correlates of eudaimonic happiness likely implicate a broader scope of cortical structures, but may be just as important to measure as hedonic pleasure to ascertain an objective state of happiness. However, individual differences in age, sex, and personality likely make the waters murkier. Past meta-analyses have found substantial differences in certain brain regions for positive and negative emotions.<sup>[[Can_Neuroscience_Teach_Us_About_Happiness?#References\|[31]]]</sup> It is also possible that most studies done in the lab do not reach the level of emotion intensity (in terms of valence) that people experience outside. While it may be reasonable to assume that the same brain regions are implicated across multiple levels of intensity for the same emotion, we cannot rule out the possibility that some key brain regions for measuring happiness are only activated above certain thresholds, which have not yet been empirically explored in the lab given natural constraints on stimulus intensity.

	=Future Directions=		=Future Directions=
	The bulk of the neuroimaging studies discussed herein examined the correlation between emotions and brain regions, but did not assess whether these brain regions are essential for happiness. To arrive at a more comprehensive emotional model of happiness, other methods such as studies with nonhuman animals (for reward circuitry) and human neuropsychological studies with focal brain lesions and deep brain stimulation are likely needed. Using more ecologically valid emotional experiences in the laboratory will also help fill out a more full range of neural correlates of happiness. For instance, meaningful news such as end of semester grades, test ~~scores~~, or sports game scores can voluntarily be withheld till experimentation to try to ~~measures~~ the neuroanatomy of happiness involved in achievement, satisfaction, or excitement from real-world events.		The bulk of the neuroimaging studies discussed herein examined the correlation between emotions and brain regions, but did not assess whether these brain regions are essential for happiness. To arrive at a more comprehensive emotional model of happiness, other methods such as studies with nonhuman animals (for reward circuitry) and human neuropsychological studies with focal brain lesions and deep brain stimulation are likely needed. Using more ecologically valid emotional experiences in the laboratory will also help fill out a more full range of neural correlates of happiness. For instance, meaningful news items such as end-of-semester or quarter grades, test results, or sports game scores (for serious fans) can voluntarily be withheld till experimentation to try to measure the neuroanatomy of happiness involved in achievement, satisfaction, or excitement from real-world events.

	=References=		=References=

imported>Psych202 at 09:24, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T09:24:52Z

Show changes

imported>Psych202 at 08:58, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T08:58:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:58, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|~~400px~~\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|250px\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people ~~seemingly~~ interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure ~~the~~ emotion objectively ~~through~~ neuroscientific methods~~. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology~~. While considerable progress has been made measuring ~~these constructs of~~ happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging ~~and meta-analyses have begun to~~ suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. ~~Yet, these~~ recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto ~~the brain to~~ a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure this emotion objectively with neuroscientific methods. While considerable progress has been made measuring happiness through subjective self-report, it historically been difficult to connect to a comprehensive underlying neurobiology. Yet, recent meta-analyses and developments in neuroimaging suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. These recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto a specific region of the brain or only examined as part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

	=Categorical vs. Dimensional View=		=Categorical vs. Dimensional View=

imported>Psych202 at 08:50, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T08:50:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:50, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|~~300px~~\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|400px\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

imported>Psych202 at 08:50, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T08:50:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:50, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|~~250px~~\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]		[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|300px\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

imported>Psych202 at 08:49, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T08:49:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:49, 9 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[File:reward.jpg\|thumb\|250px\|Key areas implicated in the brain reward circuit: NAcc, ACC, OFC]]
	Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.		Can '''neuroscience''' tell us anything about '''happiness'''? With so many people seemingly interested in how to be happy, great utility would exist in being able to measure the emotion objectively through neuroscientific methods. However, happiness can mean many different things and has thus historically been difficult to connect to an objective underlying neurobiology. While considerable progress has been made measuring these constructs of happiness through self-report, recent developments in neuroimaging and meta-analyses have begun to suggest progress in our ability to objectively measure the emotional experience of happiness. Yet, these recent findings are not without controversy. Much debate still exists around whether happiness can be examined as a discrete emotion or a part of a dimensional continuum. Researchers also contest whether happiness can be mapped onto the brain to a specific region or only examined as a part of a dynamic neural network. Below is an overview of the recent findings and debate. The article concludes by integrating these findings, discussing future directions, and taking the view that, unfortunately, we still have a ways to go before neuroscience can consistently identify states of happiness and meaningfully inform better paths toward its obtainment.

imported>Psych202 at 08:23, 9 June 2013

2013-06-09T08:23:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:23, 9 June 2013
Line 98:		Line 98:
	* [http://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/newsletter.aspx?id=1545 Overview of Positive Neuroscience at University of Pennsylvania]		* [http://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/newsletter.aspx?id=1545 Overview of Positive Neuroscience at University of Pennsylvania]
	* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f-T7lgdLPI Video of Kent Berridge, Richie Davidson, and Daniel Gilbert on the Neuroscience of Happiness at the Aspen Ideas Festival]		* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f-T7lgdLPI Video of Kent Berridge, Richie Davidson, and Daniel Gilbert on the Neuroscience of Happiness at the Aspen Ideas Festival]
			* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF0_lyttXRg Interview with Prof Morten Kringelbach from BBC documentary on measuring pleasure in the brain]