A historical approach to models of emotional laterality.

In this paper I discuss the main models that have tried to explain brain asymmetries for emotions. The first models, based on clinical observations, proposed either a general right hemisphere dominance for emotions (the'right hemisphere') model or a different specialization of the right hemisphere for negative and of the left hemisphere for positive emotions (the'valence' model). In more recent times new models, based on partly modified versions of the previous ones have been proposed. The revised version of the 'valence' model, labeled the 'approach-avoidance' model maintained that hemispheric asymmetries are not related to the valence of the emotional stimulus but to the motivational (approach vs avoidance) system that is engaged by that stimulus. On the contrary, revised versions of the 'right hemisphere' hypothesis proposed graded versions of this model, maintaining that only some kinds or some levels of emotions are clearly right lateralized. One version of these models (the'emotion type hypothesis') assumed that only elementary basic emotions should be subsumed by the right hemisphere, wheres more complex social emotions should be subtended by the left hemisphere. The other version (the 'schematic level of emotion hypothesis') assumed that the right hemisphere should subsume only the basic 'schematic' level of emotions, characterized by an automatic and unconscious processing, whereas the more propositional and conscious 'conceptual' level could be less lateralized or subsumed by the left hemisphere. This last model is supported by the obsevation that the right hemisphere reveals a modus operandi (i.e. a prevalence of the 'automatic' over the 'intentional' and of the 'unconscious' over the 'conscious' functional processing) that is typical of the 'schematic level of emotions.