Emotions

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:02 > 0:00:05Why do we do the things we do?

0:00:05 > 0:00:09What really makes us tick?

0:00:09 > 0:00:12How do our minds work?

0:00:13 > 0:00:16For centuries, these questions were largely left

0:00:16 > 0:00:19to philosophers and theologians.

0:00:21 > 0:00:24Around 100 years ago, a new science

0:00:24 > 0:00:28began to shine a bright light on the inner workings of the mind.

0:00:28 > 0:00:32It was called experimental psychology.

0:00:34 > 0:00:36But doing scientific experiments

0:00:36 > 0:00:41posed some terrible ethical and moral dilemmas.

0:00:41 > 0:00:44Do you think the research was justified? Would you have stopped him if you could?

0:00:44 > 0:00:48In this series, I will explore how psychologists have probed inside

0:00:48 > 0:00:55our minds, by way of experiments, which sometimes were frankly barbaric.

0:00:55 > 0:00:59- The experiment requires that we continue... - But he might be dead in there.

0:00:59 > 0:01:03Ever since I was a medical student, I have been fascinated by psychology,

0:01:03 > 0:01:08by its brutal history and by how far some researchers have been prepared

0:01:08 > 0:01:11to go in the search for answers.

0:01:13 > 0:01:16This time, I'm exploring how scientists have struggled

0:01:16 > 0:01:19to understand that seemingly irrational

0:01:19 > 0:01:25and yet deeply complex part of our minds, our emotions.

0:01:25 > 0:01:26Oh, dear.

0:01:27 > 0:01:30I'm playing my own small part in this quest.

0:01:30 > 0:01:33You're going to be experiencing some...

0:01:33 > 0:01:35moderate pain.

0:01:35 > 0:01:37How are you going to create the pain?

0:01:37 > 0:01:42Emotions are a huge part of our lives,

0:01:42 > 0:01:43but where do they come from?

0:01:43 > 0:01:48Can they be controlled?

0:01:48 > 0:01:52What are they there for?

0:01:52 > 0:01:55The answers they came up with were rich, complex

0:01:55 > 0:01:58and also profoundly uncomfortable.

0:01:58 > 0:02:04They have made me re-evaluate the role of emotions in my own life.

0:02:17 > 0:02:21It's a load-bearing belt, it's got to be done up securely, because your life may depend on it.

0:02:21 > 0:02:24Safety helmet.

0:02:24 > 0:02:30'A problem faced by anyone who wants to study emotions is how to reproduce them.

0:02:30 > 0:02:34'Some emotions are harder to generate that others.

0:02:34 > 0:02:38'The one we're hoping to generate today is fear.'

0:02:38 > 0:02:43A pair of gloves - if you do get stuck, it'll stop you ripping your fingernails off.

0:02:43 > 0:02:47Do you ever get people who freak out when they're down there?

0:02:47 > 0:02:49- Frequently.- Right.

0:02:49 > 0:02:54'I have never done this, because I have always been aware that

0:02:54 > 0:02:58'when I go into small, dark spaces and I even think about doing so,

0:02:58 > 0:03:01'I become really, really uncomfortable.

0:03:01 > 0:03:03'I think I probably have a mild degree of claustrophobia,'

0:03:03 > 0:03:07but I've never challenged it, and that's kind of why I want to do it now,

0:03:07 > 0:03:09I want to see what it's going to actually be like.

0:03:09 > 0:03:11There's your cave.

0:03:11 > 0:03:13God, wow! That's small, isn't it?

0:03:13 > 0:03:16I was imagining something large.

0:03:17 > 0:03:20Ha...! OK.

0:03:20 > 0:03:22- First of all, there's just... - Ooh, that's nasty.

0:03:22 > 0:03:25'Now, one of the questions that scientists have grappled with

0:03:25 > 0:03:30'down the years is the relationship between reason and emotion.

0:03:30 > 0:03:33'I see myself as a rational creature

0:03:33 > 0:03:36'and yet I can be overwhelmed by my feelings,

0:03:36 > 0:03:39'as I think I'm about to find out.'

0:03:42 > 0:03:46There's a part of which is absolutely convinced I'm a rational creature -

0:03:46 > 0:03:49whatever emotion is engendered by the cave,

0:03:49 > 0:03:50I can control it.

0:03:50 > 0:03:53But I don't know until I do it.

0:03:55 > 0:03:58- Ooh, cor blimey, it's a long way down.- Going down.

0:04:00 > 0:04:02Aha! Yep, I'm fine.

0:04:02 > 0:04:04- Lay right down.- Yep.

0:04:04 > 0:04:07And get your legs in first, insert your legs.

0:04:07 > 0:04:08Oh, jeez.

0:04:08 > 0:04:12- Twist your hips. - Oh, God, this is horrible.

0:04:12 > 0:04:15- Yeah, just relax.- I realise...

0:04:15 > 0:04:17that actually it's not

0:04:17 > 0:04:20the dark and the small - it's the fear of getting stuck.

0:04:20 > 0:04:24HE SIGHS

0:04:24 > 0:04:28Right... Do people panic at this point?

0:04:28 > 0:04:33Well, the secret is, your mind and your body both have to be relaxed.

0:04:33 > 0:04:35Ah, Jesus.

0:04:35 > 0:04:38Ah, I can feel panic.

0:04:38 > 0:04:40Calm down, objectify it -

0:04:40 > 0:04:43out of a score of ten, how bad is it?

0:04:43 > 0:04:45Probably about nine at the moment.

0:04:45 > 0:04:48And could I...? No. It's really, really horrible.

0:04:48 > 0:04:52Ssh, ssh, ssh. Just stop, relax.

0:04:54 > 0:04:57- You come to what they call the grip self moment.- Right.

0:04:57 > 0:05:00When you've got to grip self, but you absolutely have to take control.

0:05:00 > 0:05:03All right?

0:05:04 > 0:05:11Just don't think about it, just keep breathing. Jesus Christ!

0:05:13 > 0:05:15My arm has got stuck,

0:05:15 > 0:05:20- I have my left arm underneath me. - Just adjust yourself a little bit - don't panic.

0:05:20 > 0:05:23Do I put my hands in front of me or what?

0:05:23 > 0:05:29- Yeah, whatever's most comfortable. Take your time.- But I'm not going to get stuck?- No.

0:05:29 > 0:05:32Oh, jeez, that was horrible. Oh, God.

0:05:36 > 0:05:39Ah, it's unbelievable, man.

0:05:39 > 0:05:42My arm was trapped underneath me. I really thought...

0:05:42 > 0:05:45..I was going to be stuck.

0:05:45 > 0:05:48Now, that was just...

0:05:48 > 0:05:51absolutely bloody awful. Oh, God!

0:05:55 > 0:05:58'It is clearly possible to produce a powerful emotion,

0:05:58 > 0:06:03'but to really understand them is a very different challenge.'

0:06:04 > 0:06:06HE SIGHS DEEPLY

0:06:12 > 0:06:15In the early days, psychology largely relied

0:06:15 > 0:06:18on speculative, unproven theories.

0:06:18 > 0:06:23Then, at the start of the 20th century, psychologists

0:06:23 > 0:06:29finally began to apply the scientific method to their discipline.

0:06:29 > 0:06:34One of the first to do so was young, ambitious JB Watson.

0:06:34 > 0:06:38The place, John Hopkins University, Baltimore.

0:06:40 > 0:06:44The question he was asking was deceptively simple -

0:06:44 > 0:06:48where do emotions come from?

0:06:48 > 0:06:51Are we born with them? Do we learn them?

0:06:51 > 0:06:56He already had a pet theory.

0:06:56 > 0:06:59Now, Watson believed that we're all born with three basic emotions -

0:06:59 > 0:07:03love, fear and rage - and that by mixing those together,

0:07:03 > 0:07:07you get all the emotional range that we enjoy as adults.

0:07:07 > 0:07:09But where he broke with other people was,

0:07:09 > 0:07:13he believed that every experience you had, all the emotions

0:07:13 > 0:07:18you felt later in life, were the product of some childhood experience,

0:07:18 > 0:07:22that what you experienced as a child would determine who you fell in love with,

0:07:22 > 0:07:25what you hated and what you got angry with.

0:07:27 > 0:07:30Watson's own childhood was not happy.

0:07:30 > 0:07:34His father was drunk and often absent.

0:07:34 > 0:07:36Perhaps because of this, Watson was immensely driven

0:07:36 > 0:07:41and, in 1920, began planning something that would make him famous.

0:07:43 > 0:07:46Now, Watson was about to do what will turn out to be

0:07:46 > 0:07:50one of the most controversial and also important experiments

0:07:50 > 0:07:52of the early 20th century.

0:07:52 > 0:07:54He must have been...

0:07:54 > 0:07:59nervous, and so must the people taking part in this experiment.

0:08:02 > 0:08:05Watson wanted to study fear,

0:08:05 > 0:08:08and to do that, he was going to have

0:08:08 > 0:08:11to find someone and utterly terrify them.

0:08:11 > 0:08:13These are his props -

0:08:13 > 0:08:15a clown mask...

0:08:16 > 0:08:19..some newspaper and matches,

0:08:19 > 0:08:21a steel bar and a hammer.

0:08:23 > 0:08:27So, who was he going to terrify?

0:08:27 > 0:08:31Watson chose, as his subject, a nine-month-old infant

0:08:31 > 0:08:33he called Albert.

0:08:33 > 0:08:37Albert's mother was a wet nurse at the local hospital, who probably

0:08:37 > 0:08:43needed the dollar a day usually paid to experimental subjects.

0:08:43 > 0:08:47A corridor conveniently linked Albert's hospital home

0:08:47 > 0:08:48to Watson's lab.

0:08:50 > 0:08:54Now, Watson must have hoped this was going to be something memorable,

0:08:54 > 0:08:57because he filmed it, which was something extremely unusual for the time.

0:08:57 > 0:09:01Watson wanted to prove that though babies are born

0:09:01 > 0:09:04with an instinctive capacity for fear,

0:09:04 > 0:09:07initially, there is not much they're actually frightened of.

0:09:07 > 0:09:10They learn what to fear.

0:09:10 > 0:09:11Watson started by testing

0:09:11 > 0:09:16Albert's reaction to a series of potentially dangerous things.

0:09:16 > 0:09:18This is a burning pile of paper.

0:09:18 > 0:09:20Will Little Albert be frightened of it?

0:09:20 > 0:09:22And the answer is no -

0:09:22 > 0:09:27Little Albert was trying to reach out and grab the flames.

0:09:27 > 0:09:30He's obviously not frightened. He doesn't know that fire burns,

0:09:30 > 0:09:32he hasn't had that experience.

0:09:32 > 0:09:36Then animals were pushed in front of him.

0:09:36 > 0:09:40Albert was curious, but showed no signs of actually being frightened.

0:09:40 > 0:09:41But Watson knew

0:09:41 > 0:09:46he COULD terrify Albert with loud, unexpected noises.

0:09:46 > 0:09:50So far what he'd done was pretty innocuous. The next bit wasn't.

0:09:50 > 0:09:54Imagine this doll is Little Albert,

0:09:54 > 0:09:57and this bit of cotton wool is a mouse. Well, the mouse comes

0:09:57 > 0:10:01to play with Little Albert, and they have some fun together.

0:10:01 > 0:10:05And then, on one occasion, the experimenter comes up behind Little Albert

0:10:05 > 0:10:07and, completely unexpectedly,

0:10:07 > 0:10:11terrifies the kid by banging a loud noise.

0:10:11 > 0:10:14They do this again and again.

0:10:14 > 0:10:20What they wanted to see was, had they induced fear in Little Albert,

0:10:20 > 0:10:22towards the rat that he had previously really liked?

0:10:28 > 0:10:33Watson was deliberately trying to condition Albert to associate

0:10:33 > 0:10:36all these objects with fear.

0:10:36 > 0:10:42The test would be...would Albert be scared of them without needing to startle him with the bang?

0:10:45 > 0:10:50So Watson and his colleagues pushed the objects in front of Albert once more.

0:11:02 > 0:11:04Ooh.

0:11:07 > 0:11:09Albert is obviously very uncomfortable.

0:11:09 > 0:11:12He's trying to run away, and they're almost torturing him.

0:11:12 > 0:11:14You can see it, he's crying.

0:11:14 > 0:11:15He's screaming...

0:11:15 > 0:11:19he doesn't want anything to do with it. He's trying to run away,

0:11:19 > 0:11:23and they're just bringing it back to him - it really is quite disturbing.

0:11:23 > 0:11:27Watson noted that when the rat alone was presented,

0:11:27 > 0:11:33Little Albert puckered his face and withdrew his body sharply to the left.

0:11:35 > 0:11:39Oh, and this is nasty - they've got the mask out now.

0:11:39 > 0:11:42Oh, this is horrid. The experimenter's got the mask on

0:11:42 > 0:11:46and he's deliberately setting out to try and terrify the child.

0:11:47 > 0:11:51Watson had proved that you can learn fear of almost anything.

0:11:51 > 0:11:54Extreme fear.

0:11:54 > 0:11:56You can make a person phobic.

0:11:58 > 0:12:00So I've read about the case of Little Albert before,

0:12:00 > 0:12:04but I've never seen the footage, and it's really quite upsetting,

0:12:04 > 0:12:08particularly when you think of him as an innocent young child of eight months,

0:12:08 > 0:12:11having these horrible things done to you by adults.

0:12:13 > 0:12:16There's a sort of coldness about this experiment,

0:12:16 > 0:12:19which is really, really uncomfortable.

0:12:23 > 0:12:26Watson's work was a landmark.

0:12:26 > 0:12:30By frightening Little Albert, he had shown that, whilst our capacity

0:12:30 > 0:12:37for emotions is innate, how they develop depends on what we experience.

0:12:39 > 0:12:41The experiment ended after five months,

0:12:41 > 0:12:45when his mother got a new job and moved away.

0:12:45 > 0:12:50She took with her a child filled with fears.

0:12:50 > 0:12:56For nearly a century, one of psychology's most iconic figures vanished.

0:13:00 > 0:13:02Recently, however, a relentless researcher

0:13:02 > 0:13:04did manage to track him down.

0:13:07 > 0:13:11But there was to be no happy ending.

0:13:15 > 0:13:17Little Albert died from an infectious disease

0:13:17 > 0:13:20when he was a child.

0:13:20 > 0:13:24'Even the name Watson gave him isn't really his.

0:13:24 > 0:13:26'His mother called him Douglas.'

0:13:30 > 0:13:32He is this sort of big event in the history of psychology

0:13:32 > 0:13:35and yet he's also utterly anonymous...

0:13:36 > 0:13:39..which is quite sort of sad in its own way.

0:13:39 > 0:13:42And also because his mother...

0:13:42 > 0:13:46took his secrets with her to the grave, we have no idea what happened

0:13:46 > 0:13:48to Little Albert after he left.

0:13:48 > 0:13:53We have no idea whether the fear that was conditioned into him

0:13:53 > 0:13:56by Watson persisted.

0:13:56 > 0:13:57All we know

0:13:57 > 0:14:03is he lies here, he died aged six, probably of encephalitis,

0:14:03 > 0:14:05and that...

0:14:05 > 0:14:06his mother loved him.

0:14:16 > 0:14:21Fast-forward to the 21st century, and it's clear that the influence

0:14:21 > 0:14:25of the Little Albert experiment has been profound.

0:14:25 > 0:14:29Watson had shown that we learn fear by association.

0:14:29 > 0:14:33It wasn't long before others began using the same technique

0:14:33 > 0:14:35to reverse the effect,

0:14:35 > 0:14:39to use the power of association to unlearn fear.

0:14:44 > 0:14:46His legacy is behavioural therapy,

0:14:46 > 0:14:50one of the most effective treatments today for helping people with phobias.

0:14:53 > 0:14:57Ten years ago, I made a TV series about phobias.

0:14:57 > 0:14:58I particularly remember Daniel.

0:14:58 > 0:15:03He was so frightened of dogs, he could barely walk down the road.

0:15:03 > 0:15:05Oh, my God! Mum! Mum!

0:15:05 > 0:15:06It's all right, it's OK.

0:15:06 > 0:15:09It's OK, it's OK.

0:15:09 > 0:15:12But, look, he's coming up that way - please can we cross over?

0:15:12 > 0:15:14It's all right, it's all right.

0:15:14 > 0:15:18OK? Just keep walking - it's all right.

0:15:18 > 0:15:19- No, I don't...- OK?

0:15:22 > 0:15:25'Daniel had a few sessions with a behavioural psychologist,

0:15:25 > 0:15:27'which seemed to help.

0:15:27 > 0:15:28'But has it lasted?'

0:15:31 > 0:15:36'Daniel is now 20, and I've come to meet him with my own dog, Guy.'

0:15:36 > 0:15:39- Hello, there!- Hiya.

0:15:39 > 0:15:41Hi, there. Michael.

0:15:41 > 0:15:44- Hiya. Daniel. - Hello, very nice to see you. - Hi, nice to meet you.

0:15:44 > 0:15:48You've changed a lot since I last saw you! Are you OK with Guy?

0:15:48 > 0:15:50Ah, yeah, fine. Yeah, it's no problem.

0:15:50 > 0:15:52Very good, very good, I'm impressed.

0:15:52 > 0:15:54Do you mind, I'm just going to bring Guy next to you?

0:15:54 > 0:15:56I just want to see, are you happy patting Guy?

0:15:56 > 0:15:58I don't mind.

0:16:00 > 0:16:02- There you go.- See that's not... that's fine NOW.- Yep.

0:16:02 > 0:16:04- But years ago, that would never have happened.- Yep.

0:16:04 > 0:16:07It's a lot, it's a lot easier to rationalise and weigh up now.

0:16:07 > 0:16:09Before it would have just been anything to get away from the situation.

0:16:09 > 0:16:15'Behavioural therapy does not claim to cure but to make fear manageable.

0:16:15 > 0:16:18'I wanted to see if Daniel would be able to handle

0:16:18 > 0:16:20'a bigger challenge than Guy.'

0:16:20 > 0:16:25- So what do you think about the one over there? - It's fine when it's over there.

0:16:25 > 0:16:27Would you be happy going over there and having a chat,

0:16:27 > 0:16:29or me bringing her back over here?

0:16:29 > 0:16:33I'd rather you didn't, to be honest, but I could probably walk past.

0:16:33 > 0:16:36Shall we go and see how close we can get before you feel uncomfortable?

0:16:36 > 0:16:39- Yeah, I think I can walk past, yeah. - Let's go and see. Come on, Guy!

0:16:41 > 0:16:45'Behavioural therapy involves gradually increasing the exposure

0:16:45 > 0:16:48'to whatever it is you fear.'

0:16:50 > 0:16:53So, out of ten at the moment?

0:16:53 > 0:16:54I'm anxious.

0:16:56 > 0:16:57Six or seven.

0:16:57 > 0:16:59- So it's going up?- It is, yeah.

0:16:59 > 0:17:02OK, tell me kind of when you want to stop, then.

0:17:03 > 0:17:08'If Daniel runs away now, his fear of dogs will be reinforced.'

0:17:10 > 0:17:14- See, this is OK. I mean, I wouldn't want to get much closer, to be honest.- OK.

0:17:15 > 0:17:20'But staying while his brain shrieks, "Run!" is hard to do.'

0:17:23 > 0:17:25You all right?

0:17:25 > 0:17:27I am, but...

0:17:27 > 0:17:32- Is your pulse running...? - Yeah, probably a bit faster.

0:17:32 > 0:17:34Mind if I just have a go at your pulse?

0:17:39 > 0:17:42- About 125, 130.- Which is...?

0:17:42 > 0:17:45- Which is about, I'd imagine, twice what it normally is.- Really?

0:17:45 > 0:17:49Yes. So I think you're feeling a trifle anxious.

0:17:52 > 0:17:57'If Daniel can tough it out, his anxiety will fade,

0:17:57 > 0:18:01'and he will start to break the association between dogs and fear.'

0:18:11 > 0:18:14You're now running at about 90.

0:18:14 > 0:18:17- Which is a little bit above.- It's a little bit, but it's come down...

0:18:17 > 0:18:22- In the last minute or so, it's come down from about 120 to 90.- Yep.

0:18:24 > 0:18:28'I don't think Daniel will ever love dogs, but nor will he allow

0:18:28 > 0:18:31'a fear of them to rule his life.'

0:18:31 > 0:18:34Well done. Really, really impressive.

0:18:45 > 0:18:50By the 1950s, psychologists felt they had a grasp of how fears develop

0:18:50 > 0:18:51and how they can be controlled.

0:18:53 > 0:18:56But what about a more positive emotion?

0:18:56 > 0:18:58What about love?

0:19:12 > 0:19:15I don't actually bring out these photographs very often,

0:19:15 > 0:19:18and they are incredibly evocative.

0:19:18 > 0:19:22This is me and Claire on our honeymoon,

0:19:22 > 0:19:24sort of looking at each other.

0:19:24 > 0:19:26And it brings a very sort of warm glow.

0:19:26 > 0:19:28And then these are pictures of...

0:19:28 > 0:19:30me and the kids growing up.

0:19:30 > 0:19:33That must be Jack, probably about two years old,

0:19:33 > 0:19:36very sweet.

0:19:37 > 0:19:41So what is love and what is it for?

0:19:42 > 0:19:46In the 1950s, the answers were unclear.

0:19:46 > 0:19:51There were just a series of assumptions going back half a century.

0:19:51 > 0:19:56They knew babies are born with basic instincts,

0:19:56 > 0:19:58and the most basic is to eat.

0:20:00 > 0:20:03The dominant idea was that affection and love develop

0:20:03 > 0:20:05towards whoever is feeding us.

0:20:05 > 0:20:11Love is just there to reinforce this bond with the feeder.

0:20:11 > 0:20:16But no-one had put this idea to the test.

0:20:19 > 0:20:24People didn't understand how you could study it, let alone...

0:20:24 > 0:20:26be willing to study it.

0:20:26 > 0:20:32It was something which was seen as almost unstudyable,

0:20:32 > 0:20:34certainly in the laboratory,

0:20:34 > 0:20:37and that anyone who attempted to do so was probably a fool.

0:20:38 > 0:20:41One man who thought that, as far as love was concerned,

0:20:41 > 0:20:45psychology had been a complete failure, was Harry Harlow.

0:20:48 > 0:20:54In 1958, Harlow set about challenging this by doing a strange

0:20:54 > 0:20:56and compelling experiment.

0:20:59 > 0:21:02What Harlow wanted to do was explore love.

0:21:02 > 0:21:05Now, how do you actually do something like that?

0:21:05 > 0:21:07Well, he had an idea -

0:21:07 > 0:21:09it's rather extraordinary and certainly bizarre.

0:21:14 > 0:21:17What Harlow needed for his experiments were baby monkeys

0:21:17 > 0:21:20and very basic building materials.

0:21:22 > 0:21:28What Harlow wanted to investigate was the nature

0:21:28 > 0:21:30of love between a mother and a child.

0:21:30 > 0:21:34What is it a child really wants?

0:21:37 > 0:21:40This was going to help him answer that.

0:21:41 > 0:21:45'There were lots of theories about love and the relationship

0:21:45 > 0:21:50'between a mother and child but virtually no experimental data.'

0:21:52 > 0:21:53Ah!

0:21:53 > 0:21:56HE LAUGHS Right.

0:21:56 > 0:21:59So what Harlow was attempting to do

0:21:59 > 0:22:01was build...

0:22:01 > 0:22:05something which was a sort of surrogate mummy monkey.

0:22:05 > 0:22:10'The baby monkeys were to be separated from their mothers

0:22:10 > 0:22:16'and then offered DIY alternatives, built out of bits of scrap.'

0:22:16 > 0:22:20Now, the interesting thing is that Harlow was doing this fascia,

0:22:20 > 0:22:23not really for the benefit

0:22:23 > 0:22:25of the baby monkeys,

0:22:25 > 0:22:31but because he wanted parents to identify with this...

0:22:31 > 0:22:33funny little creature he was creating.

0:22:35 > 0:22:39Harlow wanted this to be about people, not just monkeys.

0:22:39 > 0:22:41And finally what I need is...

0:22:41 > 0:22:46yes, one of these - basically, a source of food.

0:22:47 > 0:22:48A mother,

0:22:48 > 0:22:52pared down to her absolutely bare essentials - basically one...

0:22:52 > 0:22:57breast, if you like, one nipple to feed, one face to smile

0:22:57 > 0:22:59and a frame to sort of cuddle onto.

0:22:59 > 0:23:03Right, so that was monkey number one.

0:23:03 > 0:23:06Now he needed to build monkey number two.

0:23:10 > 0:23:13'The purpose of the experiment was to offer baby monkeys

0:23:13 > 0:23:19'two types of surrogate mother and see which they preferred.

0:23:19 > 0:23:24'One would offer food, the other something less obvious.'

0:23:26 > 0:23:30At this point, these two monkeys look really quite similar,

0:23:30 > 0:23:34but I'm just going to add Harlow's final touch.

0:23:35 > 0:23:40'To the second surrogate mother, Harlow added just one thing -

0:23:40 > 0:23:41'a soft cover.'

0:23:43 > 0:23:46And the question was, if he took a baby monkey and he introduced

0:23:46 > 0:23:51the baby monkey to these two parents, who would it prefer to go to?

0:23:51 > 0:23:55Conventional theory said that you get love, or love is generated,

0:23:55 > 0:23:59by fulfilling something of your basic wants.

0:23:59 > 0:24:02So, in theory, and that's certainly what everyone believed at the time,

0:24:02 > 0:24:06the baby monkeys would become attached and bonded to this monkey,

0:24:06 > 0:24:09because this monkey is providing milk, it is satisfying a need,

0:24:09 > 0:24:11satisfying hunger.

0:24:11 > 0:24:13So what happened?

0:24:18 > 0:24:20Harry Harlow is no longer alive,

0:24:20 > 0:24:24but I'm going to meet someone who worked very closely with him.

0:24:32 > 0:24:34- Hello?- Hi, come on in, come on in!

0:24:34 > 0:24:36Hello, thank you.

0:24:36 > 0:24:39Wooh! Well, hello.

0:24:39 > 0:24:41- What happened?- Hi.

0:24:41 > 0:24:43Ah, as I heard somebody once say,

0:24:43 > 0:24:46I put my foot down, and it broke itself.

0:24:46 > 0:24:49'Len Rosenbaum is an eminent psychologist.'

0:24:49 > 0:24:52We're going, I think, into this front room.

0:24:52 > 0:24:53Fabulous.

0:24:53 > 0:24:58Did people really think it was enough just to feed and to clothe?

0:24:58 > 0:25:02I think, at that time, people thought those primary drives,

0:25:02 > 0:25:05the survival needs,

0:25:05 > 0:25:10were enough to carry infants - monkeys or others -

0:25:10 > 0:25:12from immaturity to maturity.

0:25:12 > 0:25:18No-one, at that point, thought that something like what Harlow

0:25:18 > 0:25:24called the affectional drives, these bonding tendencies, were in a sense

0:25:24 > 0:25:28as primary as the need for food, the need for water and so on.

0:25:28 > 0:25:31Thus the experiment.

0:25:31 > 0:25:32OK.

0:25:36 > 0:25:40'The baby monkeys were offered their choice.

0:25:40 > 0:25:42'Harlow recorded exactly what happened.'

0:25:46 > 0:25:49Watch!

0:25:50 > 0:25:52He's going to the wire mother.

0:25:52 > 0:25:59The baby readily fed from the wire object, but rather rapidly left the wire mother

0:25:59 > 0:26:04and then spent its time clinging, 15, 16, 18 hours a day...

0:26:04 > 0:26:08Each of these had a clock attached, so you could time

0:26:08 > 0:26:13how much time was the baby spending clinging to one or the other.

0:26:14 > 0:26:19The attachment was developed towards the cloth surrogate,

0:26:19 > 0:26:22regardless of the source of the food.

0:26:22 > 0:26:26So it was not food in the end - it was touch which was important to the baby monkey?

0:26:26 > 0:26:28That was what these experiments purported to show, yes.

0:26:29 > 0:26:33'Having shown that the babies preferred the cloth mother,

0:26:33 > 0:26:36'they wanted to investigate what this really meant.

0:26:36 > 0:26:40'What was the baby feeling for the cloth mother?'

0:26:40 > 0:26:43The whole idea was to ask the question...

0:26:43 > 0:26:49well, fine, the kid prefers the cloth, even though the wire feeds.

0:26:49 > 0:26:52But what... how far does that preference go?

0:26:52 > 0:26:53What's its ultimate meaning?

0:26:55 > 0:27:00'They used fear to test the strength of the baby's bond.

0:27:00 > 0:27:04'Faced with a scary object, which mother would they run to?'

0:27:04 > 0:27:10And now Dr Harlow is, ah, moving to the front

0:27:10 > 0:27:14of the cage one of these very scary objects.

0:27:14 > 0:27:19- He raises the door, scares it... - The monkey goes, "Ah!" - ..and the baby rushes away.

0:27:19 > 0:27:21- Immediate, isn't it? - Where does it rush?

0:27:21 > 0:27:26Not to the feeder but to the cloth surrogate.

0:27:26 > 0:27:30So Mummy really is providing everything they need - protection...?

0:27:30 > 0:27:33- Exactly. The thing is to be in her presence.- So this is love?

0:27:33 > 0:27:37- This is what Harlow would call love in a way?- This is what Harlow would call love.

0:27:37 > 0:27:39And I'm inclined to agree.

0:27:39 > 0:27:42'Next, Len and Harlow tested

0:27:42 > 0:27:46'the strength of a baby's love for its mother.

0:27:46 > 0:27:50'Just how unpleasant would the cloth mother have to be

0:27:50 > 0:27:54'before the baby monkey ceased to want it?'

0:27:54 > 0:27:58What I did was to try and provide a mother, a cloth mother,

0:27:58 > 0:28:02that the infant would become attached to

0:28:02 > 0:28:06but which would provide a kind of rejection,

0:28:06 > 0:28:10which meant that what I did was used compressed air

0:28:10 > 0:28:15to blow a blast of air at the kid, at some periodic interval.

0:28:15 > 0:28:19The baby then steps off, gets away, and then what happens?

0:28:19 > 0:28:23That's the question. Does the kid say, "Well, I don't want any more of this.

0:28:23 > 0:28:25"I don't... This is not for me"?

0:28:25 > 0:28:29No, just the opposite. The theory is this...what if,

0:28:29 > 0:28:34every time you're emotionally upset, you do the thing that you always do

0:28:34 > 0:28:37when you're emotionally upset, you rush to your mother?

0:28:37 > 0:28:42But now when you're on your mother, I make you even more emotionally upset, what do you do?

0:28:42 > 0:28:45Well, you want to be on your mother even more!

0:28:45 > 0:28:49There's a linkage between the infant's emotional state

0:28:49 > 0:28:55and its desire to be on the mother, even if the mother is the source

0:28:55 > 0:28:57of that emotional distress.

0:28:57 > 0:28:58I mean, it kind of makes sense,

0:28:58 > 0:29:01but when I was working with delinquent children, it always...

0:29:01 > 0:29:04I was young, I was sort of 20, but I was surprised

0:29:04 > 0:29:08by the extent to which these children, who frankly

0:29:08 > 0:29:12had abusive mothers... It didn't matter HOW badly their mothers had

0:29:12 > 0:29:16behaved to them - they would get really, really angry if you ever,

0:29:16 > 0:29:18EVER accused their mothers of being in any way inadequate.

0:29:18 > 0:29:20Absolutely the case.

0:29:20 > 0:29:25And it was exactly those kinds of observations, at the human level,

0:29:25 > 0:29:29that was a natural bridge for us to study.

0:29:31 > 0:29:35These experiments threw a powerful light on a baby's need

0:29:35 > 0:29:37for its parents' touch.

0:29:37 > 0:29:40But Harlow was about to go further.

0:29:40 > 0:29:46He now asked...what would happen if we had no love, no contact -

0:29:46 > 0:29:48nobody at all?

0:29:48 > 0:29:52Would this lead to depression and despair?

0:29:52 > 0:29:54And if so, would this help our understanding

0:29:54 > 0:29:56of this terrible affliction?

0:29:56 > 0:30:00Harlow himself had suffered from depression.

0:30:00 > 0:30:05He put baby monkeys in total isolation, for up to a year.

0:30:05 > 0:30:10Some were not only isolated, but confined in a restricted space

0:30:10 > 0:30:12known as the Well of Despair.

0:30:12 > 0:30:15All the monkeys came out

0:30:15 > 0:30:20severely disturbed - those placed in the well were particularly damaged.

0:30:23 > 0:30:28'Len did not work with Harlow on these experiments.'

0:30:28 > 0:30:30Do you think the research was justified?

0:30:30 > 0:30:32Would you have stopped him if you'd had the choice then?

0:30:32 > 0:30:36The isolation experiments, I probably would not have.

0:30:36 > 0:30:39The Well of Despair studies, I probably would have.

0:30:39 > 0:30:42But, what was the goal?

0:30:42 > 0:30:46If we could create a meaningful, valid

0:30:46 > 0:30:48monkey model of depression,

0:30:48 > 0:30:52would that be worthwhile?

0:30:52 > 0:30:54Without question in my mind,

0:30:54 > 0:30:57I would say it would be ABSOLUTELY worthwhile.

0:30:57 > 0:31:02- Whatever you had to do to the monkeys to achieve that? - Well...that's your phrase,

0:31:02 > 0:31:06I don't know... I can't answer the "whatever I had to do".

0:31:06 > 0:31:12But, would I have said, if I were on a grant committee, reviewing

0:31:12 > 0:31:17research that said, "Our goal is to create a monkey model of depression

0:31:17 > 0:31:22"that would allow us to understand ultimately brain mechanisms" -

0:31:22 > 0:31:26I would say - having worked in a psychiatry department for 47 years -

0:31:26 > 0:31:29you're damn right I would have been supportive of it.

0:31:29 > 0:31:32To be able to solve that problem - to be able to knock

0:31:32 > 0:31:37a piece of that problem out of the way - is OVERWHELMINGLY worth it.

0:31:50 > 0:31:54'Harlow's work is deeply controversial.

0:31:54 > 0:31:55'But what he gave the world

0:31:55 > 0:31:59'is something that I think is of profound importance.

0:32:01 > 0:32:05'He proved just how much we all need affection

0:32:05 > 0:32:07'and close physical contact.'

0:32:08 > 0:32:10OK...

0:32:10 > 0:32:12"When we were walking home from school,

0:32:12 > 0:32:14"Betty told me she had this idea..."

0:32:14 > 0:32:17- "Tells." - "Tells", yeah. Thank you...

0:32:17 > 0:32:20'After Harlow, hospital-born babies were no longer

0:32:20 > 0:32:24'separated from their mothers, but placed physically close to them.

0:32:24 > 0:32:28'What had seemed natural to so many mothers

0:32:28 > 0:32:30'was now confirmed by science.

0:32:31 > 0:32:35'This particular experiment utterly altered the way that people dealt

0:32:35 > 0:32:39'with the subject of love, and the way they brought up children.

0:32:39 > 0:32:41'From then on you begin to see that'

0:32:41 > 0:32:45the important thing is that children should feel touched, cuddled, held.

0:32:45 > 0:32:50And for that, I am profoundly, profoundly grateful to Harlow.

0:32:57 > 0:33:00Watson had shown that emotions are learnt,

0:33:00 > 0:33:04and Harlow, that we are intensely social creatures.

0:33:04 > 0:33:09So it was natural to put these two ideas together, and ask,

0:33:09 > 0:33:13how much of what we do and feel is learnt from other people?

0:33:13 > 0:33:19In 1961, American psychologist Albert Bandura set out to see

0:33:19 > 0:33:24how far just watching other people influences our behaviour.

0:33:27 > 0:33:30Bandura chose to study aggression.

0:33:32 > 0:33:34At the time, the widespread view

0:33:34 > 0:33:40was that watching violence reduces aggression - it purges us.

0:33:40 > 0:33:41But was this true?

0:33:48 > 0:33:52To find out, Bandura experimented on small children

0:33:52 > 0:33:54aged three to five.

0:33:58 > 0:34:02So what Bandura did, is he put an adult in a room with a child

0:34:02 > 0:34:03and a bunch of toys, including

0:34:03 > 0:34:08something he called the "Bobo doll", which is a giant inflatable doll.

0:34:08 > 0:34:12Then, what happened after about a minute is the adult unexpectedly

0:34:12 > 0:34:15started beating up the doll in really quite a vicious manner -

0:34:15 > 0:34:18shouting, screaming, kicking,

0:34:18 > 0:34:22hitting with a hammer - and went on like this for about ten minutes.

0:34:24 > 0:34:27What would the child do, if after watching the adult

0:34:27 > 0:34:31they were left in a room on their own, with the same toys?

0:34:38 > 0:34:40Ooh! She really is going for it.

0:34:42 > 0:34:47She's doing exactly the same as she saw the adult do, she's lifted

0:34:47 > 0:34:50the doll up and now she's really hammering it.

0:34:50 > 0:34:53She's got a little hammer out, and she's having a go at its toes now.

0:34:53 > 0:34:55Which shows innovation if nothing else...

0:34:56 > 0:34:59'Every child who'd watched the adult being violent

0:34:59 > 0:35:01'copied much of what they'd seen.

0:35:01 > 0:35:04'The closest imitation

0:35:04 > 0:35:07'was when a child observed an adult of the same sex.'

0:35:07 > 0:35:09Now he's got the gun out, and he's using

0:35:09 > 0:35:13a combination of the gun and the hammer to just whack the doll.

0:35:14 > 0:35:17He's got a very aggressive expression on his face.

0:35:19 > 0:35:23'Importantly, another group who had watched an adult play gently

0:35:23 > 0:35:27'played calmly, showing no signs of aggression.

0:35:28 > 0:35:31'Basically, what the children saw, the children did.

0:35:31 > 0:35:35'This was an utterly unexpected finding.'

0:35:38 > 0:35:42Before Bandura did this experiment, psychologists thought that

0:35:42 > 0:35:43seeing somebody else acting out

0:35:43 > 0:35:47a violent scene would be cathartic, it would sort of purge you.

0:35:47 > 0:35:49But what this clearly demonstrated,

0:35:49 > 0:35:51and really shocked people at the time,

0:35:51 > 0:35:53is that actually what happens when

0:35:53 > 0:35:58you see something doing violent actions - you tend to imitate them.

0:36:02 > 0:36:05Bandura's findings were given added impact by his timing.

0:36:05 > 0:36:10His experiment took place just as television was moving into the home.

0:36:12 > 0:36:14Two years later,

0:36:14 > 0:36:19Bandura re-ran his experiment with one important difference.

0:36:20 > 0:36:24This time, he wanted to compare how children react

0:36:24 > 0:36:30to watching an aggressive adult not in real life - but on film.

0:36:32 > 0:36:33Children watched two versions.

0:36:33 > 0:36:36One was a straightforward recording

0:36:36 > 0:36:39of the adult beating up the Bobo doll.

0:36:39 > 0:36:42The second, a fantasy version,

0:36:42 > 0:36:46with the attacking adult dressed as a cat.

0:36:46 > 0:36:49In almost every case, Bandura got the same results -

0:36:49 > 0:36:52children imitated what they'd seen.

0:36:52 > 0:36:55The results were dynamite.

0:36:57 > 0:37:00This was one of the first experiments

0:37:00 > 0:37:03to look at the impact of television violence.

0:37:03 > 0:37:05The complicated relationship between

0:37:05 > 0:37:09TV and behaviour is still being debated.

0:37:09 > 0:37:12But it was Bandura who opened the floodgates,

0:37:12 > 0:37:16and launched an entirely new area of research.

0:37:24 > 0:37:27Right. OK - oven on...

0:37:27 > 0:37:30'Bandura had shown that we CAN be strongly influenced

0:37:30 > 0:37:32'by other people's behaviour.

0:37:32 > 0:37:36'This is the basis of so-called social learning theory.'

0:37:36 > 0:37:38We don't have a bowl.

0:37:38 > 0:37:42- OK, so we measure out about... - How much?- Four ounces, I think.

0:37:42 > 0:37:44Which one's ounces? The quarter one?

0:37:44 > 0:37:50'But it's also clear that how we learn changes as we mature.

0:37:50 > 0:37:55'As we grow up, something else happens to temper our behaviour.

0:37:55 > 0:37:59'We develop a capacity to reflect on what we see.

0:38:00 > 0:38:03'We identify with other people.

0:38:03 > 0:38:05'We develop empathy.'

0:38:05 > 0:38:08- Mmm... Tastes good. - It's good, isn't it?

0:38:09 > 0:38:12'So how exactly do we DO this?'

0:38:12 > 0:38:17Well, for decades nobody really knew, and then researchers developed

0:38:17 > 0:38:21new ways of looking inside the brain for answers.

0:38:29 > 0:38:32I'm on my way to Holland, to experience experimentation

0:38:32 > 0:38:3521st-century style.

0:38:35 > 0:38:39We've left the world of abuse and exploitation behind -

0:38:39 > 0:38:43though what I'm about to do WILL involve pain.

0:38:49 > 0:38:52Christian Keysers is researching empathy,

0:38:52 > 0:38:55by trying to watch it at work in our brains.

0:38:58 > 0:39:02So we think the big question is a bit, how we understand other people.

0:39:02 > 0:39:05And I think you've all experienced that sometimes you'd

0:39:05 > 0:39:09see your partner, for instance, accidentally hurting herself.

0:39:09 > 0:39:12And when you see that, the funny thing is you don't just realise

0:39:12 > 0:39:14that the other person IS in pain,

0:39:14 > 0:39:18but you almost have to hold your own finger, because you kind of embody

0:39:18 > 0:39:21to a certain extent the pain of the other.

0:39:21 > 0:39:23And so what our lab is all about

0:39:23 > 0:39:26is trying to understand, at the level of the brain,

0:39:26 > 0:39:30what happens while we get these very strong insights

0:39:30 > 0:39:32into what somebody else is feeling.

0:39:34 > 0:39:39Christian is investigating the extent to which our own feelings of pain

0:39:39 > 0:39:43are important in understanding the pain of others.

0:39:44 > 0:39:48So basically there's going to be two phases to the experiment...

0:39:48 > 0:39:52There's a first phase in which you're going to be watching movies,

0:39:52 > 0:39:54and then there's going to be a part

0:39:54 > 0:39:59where you're going to be actually experiencing some moderate pain...

0:39:59 > 0:40:01How are you going to create the pain?

0:40:01 > 0:40:04Well, I think you're going to find out a little bit later on

0:40:04 > 0:40:06in the experiment.

0:40:10 > 0:40:13'Christian is going to collect two sets of data.

0:40:13 > 0:40:16'First, he records what happens in MY brain

0:40:16 > 0:40:19'when I see someone else in pain.'

0:40:19 > 0:40:20OK, ready to go?

0:40:20 > 0:40:22- Yep.- OK, here we go...

0:40:35 > 0:40:38- OK, Michael? How was that?- Fine...

0:40:38 > 0:40:41'Then, he measures what happens in my brain, when I am repeatedly

0:40:41 > 0:40:45'and enthusiastically whacked by one of his colleagues.'

0:40:45 > 0:40:47Three, two, one... Go.

0:40:49 > 0:40:52Three, two, one... Stop.

0:40:52 > 0:40:55'The two brain scans can then be compared.

0:40:57 > 0:41:01'What they're finding suggests that empathy is actually measurable.

0:41:01 > 0:41:07'Many of the same brain areas light up, whether we are experiencing pain

0:41:07 > 0:41:10'or watching someone else in pain.'

0:41:13 > 0:41:16What's really special about this area we're in,

0:41:16 > 0:41:21is that by seeing that the same brain area is active in two cases

0:41:21 > 0:41:24you don't just see WHERE in the brain it's being done,

0:41:24 > 0:41:28but you see that it's done by this recall of your own experience.

0:41:34 > 0:41:38When tested this way, people show very different responses.

0:41:38 > 0:41:40I'm a bit nervous.

0:41:41 > 0:41:45Will the machine reveal that I am warm and empathic -

0:41:45 > 0:41:48or perhaps a secret psychopath?

0:41:49 > 0:41:52"I often have tender, concerned feelings

0:41:52 > 0:41:54"for people less fortunate than me"...

0:41:54 > 0:41:56Yeah, I... Mmm, yeah.

0:41:56 > 0:42:02'This questionnaire will help them compare how empathetic I think I am

0:42:02 > 0:42:05'with how empathetic the MACHINE thinks I am.'

0:42:06 > 0:42:10"When I see someone get hurt, I tend to remain calm"...

0:42:10 > 0:42:12No, that probably doesn't describe me very well.

0:42:14 > 0:42:18'First, Christian shows me what happened when I was slapped.'

0:42:19 > 0:42:22This created very reasonable results. So you...

0:42:22 > 0:42:24you did activate your S1,

0:42:24 > 0:42:29- your S2, your insula and your ACC, just like your average Joe.- OK...

0:42:29 > 0:42:33'So far, I was normal. I'd activated areas involved in

0:42:33 > 0:42:36'sensation and emotion, like most people do.'

0:42:37 > 0:42:42Now, this is the part where you probably want to distract your wife.

0:42:42 > 0:42:47While we were showing you the movies the first thing we saw was this.

0:42:47 > 0:42:51None of the red areas get reactivated while you observed it.

0:42:52 > 0:42:55And now you can call her again, because what we then did was

0:42:55 > 0:42:59we lowered the threshold a bit, kind of looking for weaker activity,

0:42:59 > 0:43:03and when we did that, we actually saw that you do have activity

0:43:03 > 0:43:07that is typical - but there was lower than what we find on average.

0:43:08 > 0:43:10So I'm not a psychopath,

0:43:10 > 0:43:13but I'm not, erm...wholly in touch with the feelings of others?

0:43:13 > 0:43:19- Exactly. You're not the most soft-hearted person, maybe.- OK.

0:43:19 > 0:43:20Where you reacted yesterday...

0:43:20 > 0:43:23'What made it more embarrassing, was the brain images

0:43:23 > 0:43:27'did not match the answers I had given on the questionnaire.'

0:43:27 > 0:43:29OK - maybe I lack insight, then.

0:43:30 > 0:43:34That could actually be, because one of the funny things is

0:43:34 > 0:43:36when we scanned a psychopath,

0:43:36 > 0:43:41the brain images really suggested that they weren't all that empathic,

0:43:41 > 0:43:45but the questionnaires made it look like they were model citizens!

0:43:45 > 0:43:48Oh, God, so I AM a psychopath?! There you go.

0:43:48 > 0:43:51Well, maybe that's pushing it a little bit, but...

0:43:51 > 0:43:53I think what tends to happen is we tend to, erm,

0:43:53 > 0:43:56exaggerate our best characters, don't we? We have vain brains.

0:43:56 > 0:43:58- Yes.- Yes, quite.

0:43:58 > 0:44:01So what the brain scans are doing, in a funny way,

0:44:01 > 0:44:04is they are answering one of the more fundamental questions -

0:44:04 > 0:44:07which is who are we, as opposed to who we THINK we are.

0:44:07 > 0:44:09Yes!

0:44:15 > 0:44:18Our understanding of empathy is developing,

0:44:18 > 0:44:22because today's technology allows us to see inside the brain.

0:44:23 > 0:44:27It's revealing that empathy seems to be deeply embedded

0:44:27 > 0:44:29in the networks of our minds.

0:44:30 > 0:44:34While I'm witnessing you go through some experiences,

0:44:34 > 0:44:36my brain does exactly that -

0:44:36 > 0:44:39it doesn't just make me SEE what is going on in you,

0:44:39 > 0:44:42it makes me share all the different senses.

0:44:42 > 0:44:44I will feel the pain you go through,

0:44:44 > 0:44:48I will empathise with the actions you do to get away from it.

0:44:51 > 0:44:53It really reminds us of the fact

0:44:53 > 0:44:57that we are kind of incredibly social by nature -

0:44:57 > 0:44:59that kind of everybody around us

0:44:59 > 0:45:02is not just around us, but kind of IN us.

0:45:11 > 0:45:16Cutting-edge technology, and sometimes brutal experiments,

0:45:16 > 0:45:19have each opened a window onto human emotions.

0:45:19 > 0:45:23But there is another way we have come to learn about

0:45:23 > 0:45:27the role of emotions in our lives, and that's an accidental by-product

0:45:27 > 0:45:31of terrible personal misfortune.

0:45:35 > 0:45:41In the 1990s, a neuroscientist called Antonio Damasio started researching

0:45:41 > 0:45:46patients who had damaged a part of the brain key for normal emotions.

0:45:49 > 0:45:54He was struck by the differences in the way they were making decisions.

0:45:54 > 0:45:57His research would reveal the

0:45:57 > 0:46:02surprisingly pervasive role emotions have in every corner of our lives.

0:46:05 > 0:46:10Dave is a patient, like those in Damasio's original study.

0:46:11 > 0:46:14Until eight years ago, life was good.

0:46:19 > 0:46:21We, um, had a really good relationship I think.

0:46:21 > 0:46:24Very affectionate, yeah. Very loving.

0:46:25 > 0:46:29He could put himself in my shoes and think about,

0:46:29 > 0:46:31what could he do to make me feel

0:46:31 > 0:46:36more at ease? And so he would do those kinds of nice things.

0:46:37 > 0:46:39In 2002, Dave was diagnosed

0:46:39 > 0:46:43with a brain tumour, and had surgery to remove it.

0:46:44 > 0:46:47What neither he nor his wife realised,

0:46:47 > 0:46:49was that the operation would involve

0:46:49 > 0:46:54removing a part of his brain crucial for processing emotion.

0:46:54 > 0:46:59When he woke up, he just was...

0:46:59 > 0:47:01really um...cold.

0:47:01 > 0:47:06He told me he didn't want me to touch him, or talk to him...

0:47:07 > 0:47:10The doctor came, the surgeon, and I said, you know,

0:47:10 > 0:47:13"That's not Dave. What happened?"

0:47:14 > 0:47:19Dave's IQ was unaffected, and he has returned to his job

0:47:19 > 0:47:21as an animal psychologist.

0:47:22 > 0:47:24But he is very conscious of being changed.

0:47:25 > 0:47:30'A lot has gone, from that aspect. Emotionally flat.'

0:47:32 > 0:47:35It's... that's the toughest thing, is uh...

0:47:35 > 0:47:37you don't realise how important emotions are

0:47:37 > 0:47:42until you don't feel 'em, and you can only remember 'em.

0:47:44 > 0:47:46- Hi...- Hi.

0:47:47 > 0:47:50Dave had not fallen out of love with Lisa...

0:47:50 > 0:47:53but he was no longer capable of feeling it.

0:47:53 > 0:47:56They divorced - but she remains devoted to him,

0:47:56 > 0:47:59and takes him to all his medical appointments.

0:48:01 > 0:48:04Do you want any more coffee before we go?

0:48:04 > 0:48:06No, I've just filled up.

0:48:07 > 0:48:08Well, shall we...?

0:48:08 > 0:48:10All right.

0:48:13 > 0:48:16Dave's case is so rare,

0:48:16 > 0:48:21he is being studied by a doctor who trained under Antonio Damasio.

0:48:22 > 0:48:25At Wisconsin University, Dr Koenig is continuing

0:48:25 > 0:48:29the investigations started by his teacher, into the impact of emotions

0:48:29 > 0:48:32on our capacity to reason.

0:48:36 > 0:48:38So is it fair to say that

0:48:38 > 0:48:41you're maybe not operating with the same intuition in terms of emotion,

0:48:41 > 0:48:45but you're relying more on the sort of cognitive or rule-based

0:48:45 > 0:48:48strategy to try to...you know, put together what this person might be

0:48:48 > 0:48:53thinking, and, you know, "What is MY responsibility in this situation?"

0:48:53 > 0:48:54Right. It's...

0:48:54 > 0:48:57I have to... think about what it would feel like

0:48:57 > 0:48:59rather than feel it.

0:48:59 > 0:49:01Mm-hm...

0:49:01 > 0:49:04I was...thinking the other day...

0:49:05 > 0:49:09And I don't want this to sound strange, but I imagined,

0:49:09 > 0:49:14"Well, maybe serial killers don't have emotions"...

0:49:14 > 0:49:18Not that I would ever be a serial killer, but I think

0:49:18 > 0:49:20I have that sense of...

0:49:21 > 0:49:24- ..it doesn't bother me. - Mm-hm.- You know what I mean?

0:49:24 > 0:49:28But the thing that prevents me from BEING a serial killer

0:49:28 > 0:49:31is that I... can remember that I'm not.

0:49:38 > 0:49:39Hello...

0:49:39 > 0:49:43'What Dave is experiencing is intensely personal,

0:49:43 > 0:49:46'but it is also scientifically revealing.

0:49:46 > 0:49:50'I wanted to meet Dave's doctor, to find out what had happened

0:49:50 > 0:49:54'to his brain to produce these profound changes.'

0:49:56 > 0:49:58So what are we looking at?

0:49:58 > 0:50:00So here we're looking at Dave's brain

0:50:00 > 0:50:03in a number of different views.

0:50:03 > 0:50:05As we move forward in his brain

0:50:05 > 0:50:07you can see, here are his eyes...

0:50:07 > 0:50:08Ooh, dear...

0:50:08 > 0:50:12Yeah, so...so right above his eyes you can see...

0:50:12 > 0:50:15- That's tragic.- ..very obviously a loss of tissue there on the right.

0:50:16 > 0:50:20Can he still... READ emotions - say, in Lisa...

0:50:20 > 0:50:22If he saw someone crying, I mean, he would know that,

0:50:22 > 0:50:24you know, tears mean this person is sad.

0:50:24 > 0:50:28Now, if that would MEAN anything to him, if that would impact him

0:50:28 > 0:50:30emotionally, is a different question.

0:50:30 > 0:50:35So he can probably recognise these social and emotional cues

0:50:35 > 0:50:39that are emitted by other people, but...

0:50:39 > 0:50:41you know, can he use those to influence

0:50:41 > 0:50:44HIS decision-making, is a different process.

0:50:45 > 0:50:49Patients like Dave are making it increasingly clear

0:50:49 > 0:50:54that our power to reason is NOT independent of our emotions.

0:50:54 > 0:50:59They are supporting the evidence first gathered by Antonio Damasio.

0:51:00 > 0:51:03Through most of the 20th century there was this

0:51:03 > 0:51:09really predominant view that our decision-making is dominated by some

0:51:09 > 0:51:12cold, logical processing, some reasoning.

0:51:12 > 0:51:15So I think Antonio Damasio's work

0:51:15 > 0:51:19was seminal from the standpoint of highlighting the importance of

0:51:19 > 0:51:24emotion for decision-making. And patients like Dave were really

0:51:24 > 0:51:28the key piece of evidence like that.

0:51:29 > 0:51:34Damasio undermined the widely held belief that most of our decisions are

0:51:34 > 0:51:38logical ones, by devising an ingenious test.

0:51:38 > 0:51:41He took his inspiration from gambling.

0:51:44 > 0:51:50He devised a gambling test, that would try to mimic the uncertain mix

0:51:50 > 0:51:54of risk and benefits that we juggle with in everyday life.

0:51:55 > 0:51:58Damasio was convinced that, even when we THINK we are making a decision

0:51:58 > 0:52:03based on reasoning, we are actually following an emotional hunch.

0:52:05 > 0:52:10'Damasio tested this by a carefully designed gambling task.'

0:52:11 > 0:52:13OK, so I've got 2,000...

0:52:13 > 0:52:16and I will pick this one here.

0:52:16 > 0:52:18Reward, penalty... Good, I'm 2,100.

0:52:18 > 0:52:20Let's keep going on that one.

0:52:20 > 0:52:23'I'm playing a computer version of the game.

0:52:23 > 0:52:25'The player is offered four rows of cards.

0:52:25 > 0:52:29'They sample each one, and find out that two of them

0:52:29 > 0:52:32'will give them small but consistent rewards.'

0:52:32 > 0:52:33I like this one...

0:52:33 > 0:52:37'The other two give them big rewards, but also big losses.'

0:52:37 > 0:52:39Aaagh...!

0:52:39 > 0:52:41Damn!

0:52:41 > 0:52:44'Normal people respond before they are even aware of this.

0:52:44 > 0:52:48'They just instinctively feel wary of the risky cards.'

0:52:48 > 0:52:51Oh... That's a bad one. That is a bad one.

0:52:52 > 0:52:55'They are not necessarily conscious of this.

0:52:55 > 0:52:58'They have an emotional cue -

0:52:58 > 0:53:01'what we often call a gut instinct.'

0:53:05 > 0:53:08"You earned a total of 2,900." Whoa!

0:53:08 > 0:53:11"You may now leave. Please alert the experimenter that you are done.

0:53:11 > 0:53:14"Press the X to exit."

0:53:14 > 0:53:18So, yes... OK, that was fun!

0:53:18 > 0:53:24'What struck me, was I had no idea I was getting an emotional cue.'

0:53:24 > 0:53:26That feels like a sort of simple, logical decision,

0:53:26 > 0:53:28it doesn't feel like an emotional decision.

0:53:28 > 0:53:32Right - well, in the end, after enough experience,

0:53:32 > 0:53:35you do sort of process it at this sort of

0:53:35 > 0:53:38explicit level, where you say "This is just a logical choice."

0:53:38 > 0:53:41But as you're going through the test, what we've found is that

0:53:41 > 0:53:43neurologically healthy individuals

0:53:43 > 0:53:47will start to move towards the safer decks before they can explicitly

0:53:47 > 0:53:51articulate that these decks are safer than the other ones.

0:53:51 > 0:53:53So they seem to be operating more on an emotional hunch.

0:53:53 > 0:53:58So actually, what I think of as a logical decision is actually

0:53:58 > 0:54:02a rationalisation after the event - my gut has already decided which is

0:54:02 > 0:54:05the safe bet, and then my... intelligence catches up with it!

0:54:05 > 0:54:07Yeah, that's one way to put it, that your emotional system

0:54:07 > 0:54:10is really the instrument of learning here, which precedes

0:54:10 > 0:54:12your sort of conscious awareness.

0:54:14 > 0:54:16- DAVE:- 50 bucks...

0:54:18 > 0:54:21Dave has never done the gambling test before.

0:54:22 > 0:54:25With his damaged emotions, how will he do?

0:54:32 > 0:54:34Right, I lose money there.

0:54:35 > 0:54:37Penalties...

0:54:45 > 0:54:48- You owe us some money, Dave!- I do. - You owe us some money.

0:54:48 > 0:54:52- 1,500... 1,450. - Get your chequebook out.

0:54:52 > 0:54:54- I'd rather owe it to you. - DR KOENIG LAUGHS

0:54:54 > 0:54:57Yeah, I didn't learn anything on that, did I?

0:54:57 > 0:55:01- You win some, you lose some. That's what gambling's all about.- Yep.

0:55:01 > 0:55:03So as you were doing it, did you have any feeling that

0:55:03 > 0:55:08"This is sort of a risky decision", or "This is a safe play", or...?

0:55:08 > 0:55:10Um...no.

0:55:21 > 0:55:25We go through life thinking decisions we make - big or small -

0:55:25 > 0:55:30are the result of our uniquely human ability to think rationally.

0:55:30 > 0:55:32But as Dave and other

0:55:32 > 0:55:37unfortunate individuals show us, reason without emotion is nothing.

0:55:43 > 0:55:45On a more personal level,

0:55:45 > 0:55:50Dave also shows us how vital emotion is to feeling alive,

0:55:50 > 0:55:55and how crucial empathy is to even knowing who you are.

0:55:56 > 0:56:03I'm going through life missing some of these important pieces that

0:56:03 > 0:56:06we don't have to think about, that just happen.

0:56:09 > 0:56:14The longer I go basing what I should feel on memory,

0:56:14 > 0:56:18I'm kind of nervous that eventually the memory will fade,

0:56:18 > 0:56:23and then trying to remember what the actual emotion felt like will be...

0:56:24 > 0:56:25..more mysterious.

0:56:27 > 0:56:29At least now I have the memory -

0:56:29 > 0:56:34so I can at least go through life with that understanding.

0:56:34 > 0:56:37If I didn't have that memory...

0:56:38 > 0:56:43..I guess it would be a lonely, lonely existence.

0:56:45 > 0:56:47BAT CHIRRUPS

0:56:55 > 0:56:56CHILD SHRIEKS AND GIGGLES

0:57:01 > 0:57:02Whoa...!

0:57:04 > 0:57:06You want to try that, Clare?

0:57:07 > 0:57:11'Nearly a century since Watson set out to terrify Little Albert,

0:57:11 > 0:57:13'and in the process triggered an extraordinary

0:57:13 > 0:57:18'and sometimes disturbing quest to try and understand human emotions...

0:57:20 > 0:57:24'..we now realise that, far from being something you have to curb,

0:57:24 > 0:57:27'suppress, restrain,'

0:57:27 > 0:57:31emotions are actually central to becoming a rational, complex,

0:57:31 > 0:57:34fully functioning human being.

0:57:35 > 0:57:38Snap!

0:57:39 > 0:57:42'But the price of applying the scientific method

0:57:42 > 0:57:46'to the study of the mind has been high -

0:57:46 > 0:57:48'terribly high in some cases.

0:57:48 > 0:57:52'And this leaves me with conflicting feelings.'

0:57:55 > 0:57:59Some of the experiments, particularly the later work with monkeys carried

0:57:59 > 0:58:03out by Harlow, and the experiments done on Little Albert, you just

0:58:03 > 0:58:06couldn't justify, you couldn't get away with, in the modern age.

0:58:06 > 0:58:08I certainly would obviously

0:58:08 > 0:58:12never allow any of MY children to be terrified as part of an experiment.

0:58:12 > 0:58:15But do I think it was worthwhile in the end?

0:58:15 > 0:58:18Yes, I do. I'm glad it was done.

0:58:18 > 0:58:21I do believe that the knowledge that was gained

0:58:21 > 0:58:24was worth the price that was paid.

0:58:49 > 0:58:52Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd

0:58:52 > 0:58:54E-mail subtitling@bbc.co.uk