See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351571933

HOW EMOTIONS ARE MADE: IMPLICATIONS FOR BOWEN

THEORY

Article · May 2021

CITATIONS READS
0 791

1 author:

Dave Galloway
Living Systems Counselling and Training, Vancouver, BC
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Decision Making and Bowen Family Systems Theory View project

Emotions and Bowen Family Systems Theory View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dave Galloway on 14 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 HOW EMOTIONS ARE MADE:
IMPLICATIONS FOR BOWEN THEORY

Dave Galloway

Lisa Barrett’s book, “How Emotions are Made,” describes her

decades long work in the field of emotion research and presents
her theory of constructed emotion. Bowen theory places
particular importance on the role emotions and feelings play
in human functioning. The theory of constructed emotion
posits that if one changes their concepts about a subject that
this would lead to constructing different emotions/feelings
regarding that subject. Bowen theory provides an individual
with a rich set of new concepts for how one can think about
their relationships and their own functioning. Barrett’s
theory offers an explanation of how these new concepts can
create new emotional (feeling) responses. The implication is
that the value of “thinking systems” is that it will create new
emotional responses that will support improved functioning.

Key words: emotions, constructed emotions, Bowen theory,

family systems, differentiation of self, feelings

INTRODUCTION
The concept of the emotional system is one of the
most important in family systems theory. (Kerr and
Bowen 1988, 26)

Those interested in Bowen theory may find Lisa Barrett’s

theory of constructed emotion (ToCE) a useful way to think
about emotions and feelings. Dr. Barrett’s book, How Emotions
are Made, (2017) references decades of research to support
a detailed explanation of how emotions are created. She
describes how our biology and learning allow us to construct

Mr. Galloway has been a serious student of Bowen theory for over fourteen years.
He works with Living Systems Training and Counselling in British Columbia. He
can be reached at dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

© Georgetown Family Center, 2020

129
130 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

our emotions, which, if accurate, should complement and

expand a systems way of thinking about human behavior.
The ToCE posits that our brain, using simulations and predic-
tion loops, learned concepts and categories, and goals creates
the appropriate emotion to fit with the stimuli we are process-
ing at any moment. According to the ToCE, the experience of
an emotion depends on context, goals, and previous experi-
ences and not on the firing of some specific circuit. This paper
presents an overview of how Bowen theory and the ToCE are
different but complementary.

OVERVIEW OF THE THEORY OF

CONSTRUCTED EMOTION
Barrett uses the terms feeling and emotion synonymously
while Bowen theory does not. This is addressed further in
a later section. The phrase emotion/feeling will be used to
distinguish Barrett’s terminology from Bowen’s separate
concepts of emotion and feeling.

Stimuli, Simulations, and Prediction Loops

The ToCE builds on the idea that the brain uses simula-
tions and prediction loops to construct a mental representation
of the world. The brain creates a simulation using informa-
tion the senses provide; for example, photons hitting the eyes.
Humans, like other species, evolved to predict what action
should be performed as quickly as possible, so the simulation
with the lowest prediction error that supports one’s goals is
used until further stimuli warrant a different simulation. The
brain is using as little information as it can, getting a good
enough match so that it can react to the incoming stimuli as
quickly as possible. If the goal is to eat, the brain creates differ-
ent simulations and predictions than if the goal is to mate,
fight, or flee. Reflexively trying to catch something versus
trying to avoid something is an example of this process: the
brain predicts where the hand needs to be (via simulations)
based on the trajectory (sensory inputs and more simulations)
of the object in order to catch the object (the goal). Another
aspect of ToCE is that, to make the process more efficient,
humans developed the use of concepts to more quickly catego-
 How Emotions Are Made | 131

rize stimuli and more accurately predict actions to be taken.

Concepts and categories support the process of recognizing
something with very little information in order to act quickly.
To continue the example, very little sensory information is
required for the concept of “cup” to be used by the brain,
which is then used in the process, unless the prediction error
gets too high. The ToCE posits that concepts are a key part of
how we simulate and predict. In milliseconds, working with
incomplete information, we use concepts to decide what we
are experiencing and begin to execute an action plan that
aligns with our goal. We then create the emotion/feeling that
fits with the situation. The ToCE core idea is that emotions/
feelings are created to fit the simulation that was predicted
to be the best choice based on the goal. One person catching
a falling cup could experience pride while another experi-
ences relief, while another embarrassment. It all depends on
the sensory input, their concepts, goals, and “body budget.1”
In short, the ToCE process begins with the biology of
sensory input and processing, followed immediately by the
use of psychological constructs of learned concepts and goals
to “construct” a particular instance of an emotion, consciously
experienced as a feeling.

INTEROCEPTION AND THE BODY BUDGETS:

WHAT I FEEL, I BELIEVE
A significant source of sensory input is from our “intero-
ceptive” system. Interoception is the process that senses the
energy state of the body and its readiness to perform actions.
If the body can’t sense itself in space and time, how can it
reflexively catch, avoid, or pursue something? If it can’t sense
its energy level, how can it correctly activate the body to react?
Sensing place and energy is the function of the interoceptive
network which includes areas of the brain associated with
emotions. It generates valence, which is “felt” as affect and
arousal. This system evolved to ensure that our energy budget
is monitored and kept in balance, such that predicted energy
1 The body budget concept includes parts of the internal interoceptive network that
senses and maintains our energy expenditures and needs. In order to react to our
environment the body has to predict its energy needs in seconds.
132 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

needs are supplied as required. This system is also involved

in, and influences, simulations and predictive loops being
used with the other senses. If you have been cold, hungry,
tired, scared, or flu-stricken, you have experienced your
interoceptive system influencing your “feelings.” According
to the ToCE, the interoceptive systems contributes to creating
emotions/feelings and sometimes these created emotions/
feelings are inappropriate. For example, according to the
ToCE, I may get angry at someone because I’m just hungry or
tired, not because they are being mean to me. My simulation
includes my sensing discomfort and linking it to you. I then
simulate and categorize this unpleasant feeling of discomfort
as “you are being unpleasant,” thus inappropriately creating
an instance of a feeling I call “angry.”
While the interoceptive network includes brain areas asso-
ciated with emotion, it evolved not for us to “feel” but for
our body budget to stay balanced, based on predictions being
made about what our body will need in order to respond to
the situation. Nature doesn’t care what we feel, but it does try
to keep us alive (Barrett 2017, Kindle location 1403).

Construction of Emotions
The ToCE posits that emotions are constructed using
multiple inputs. It is a process, working as a system, where
everything is influencing everything else. The inputs are
from one’s external senses, the interoceptive system, and a
collection of concepts and goals. The affective state influences
how the inputs of external stimuli are processed. For exam-
ple, it influences how the sensory systems prioritize stimuli
(Akrami et al. 2018). Because the brain is a signal processor
(audio, visual, tactile, etc.), it works to predict what these raw
signals are and what they mean by creating simulations and
running predictions using previously established concepts.
For example, “dog” is a concept. It is one’s past experiences
and knowledge that allows the creation of a “dog” category,
which is used to predict if a new stimuli represents a “dog”
or an alternative such as a “coyote.” Until the brain’s systems
categorize the incoming signals to a known concept, it won’t
know what it is experiencing. During this moment, the brain
is also predicting, via simulation, what actions one should
 How Emotions Are Made | 133

perform, which is why the interoceptive system and goals

are important to this process. The ToCE posits that, like other
sensory processes, one instantaneously creates an emotion/
feeling, based on predictions and simulations using emotional
concepts against what sensory, interoceptive, and goal infor-
mation is being presented. Barrett is clear that it is unproven
that emotional processing works like sensory processing, but
she believes that it does and incorporates this into her theory.
The following is an event I experienced that will illus-
trate the above explanation. While driving, I automatically
started braking for a pedestrian my brain “thought” was going
to be crossing the road. I wasn’t aware of this until after I
was braking. This action was the most “correct” prediction,
given my goal of not hitting pedestrians. It was only useful
because it was the best simulation–prediction for the situa-
tion. It turned out to be completely wrong: the person wasn’t
crossing the road, but the viewing angle made it seem like
they were. The driver behind me could have hit me because
of my incorrect and, unexpected for them, sudden braking. I
experienced the emotion/feeling of relief (automatically) that
nothing bad happened followed by a feeling of “wow” this
prediction stuff is very cool (automatically). The important
aspect of this example is that my observations—the stimuli—
were not “incorrect”: photons are just photons. My simulation
and prediction were incorrect. I reacted to a simulated predic-
tion, not to what was happening. This reaction included creating an
emotion/feeling which I felt as “relief” once I realized nothing was
wrong. I could have experienced any number of emotions/feelings.
Frustration, confusion, embarrassment, and anxiety are possibilities
that come to mind.
This example illustrates an important aspect of the “predic-
tion loop” process. The simulation has to include the goal to
be achieved for the situation. The brain must know what the
goal is whenever it is making simulations and predictions. My
brain “knew” that my goal was not to hit a pedestrian. When
we are categorizing our current situation against previous
experiences, to predict a matching emotion/feeling, the brain
uses our goals for that context. This is important because the
same situation can have different goals, depending on what
I want. This means that the same sensory inputs can create
134 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

different emotions/feelings, depending on the different inputs

of concepts, goals, and body budget. This works against the
idea that we have specific circuits for specific emotions that
are triggered by our senses.

No Distinct Fingerprints
Barrett devotes several chapters to refuting the notion that
emotions are created by a fingerprint or specific neurologi-
cal circuit. This came out of her failure early in her career to
replicate findings of how individuals distinguish between the
feelings of being anxious or depressed. She failed eight times
over three years. She pursued this research, testing hundreds
of individuals, and concluded that individuals use the same
words to describe different emotions/feelings. Her further work
included the use of EMG recordings of facial muscles, show-
ing that these muscle movements could not accurately predict
an emotion/feeling. In other work, the experimental design
put an image of a face in the context of different stories. This
resulted in the participants choosing different emotion/feeling
labels for the same facial expression. The premise that humans
have a very specific emotion labeled happiness, supported
by a specific neurological circuit that triggers specific facial
movements to create a smile, was not supported by her own
research, nor by a review of others’ research. The critique of
the existing research is useful for anyone thinking of research-
ing systems concepts: the artificial settings and prompted
responses used in the past to research emotions inflated the
rate of correct answers. Much early research was based on the
participant reviewing pictures of actors acting an emotion,
for example being surprised, and then selecting a matching
emotion word from a limited list of word choices. Subsequent
research showed that if you take away the list of choices, the
correct answer rate drops, while the variation in responses
goes up. For example, Widen et al. (2011) report only fifty-
eight percent and forty-two percent correct choices, across
two studies, for forced-choice (specific choices provided) but
only eighteen percent and sixteen percent correct choices for
free (no choices provided) labeling. According to Barrett,
the implications of these findings are that we do not have a
specific circuit that fires for an emotion/feeling, and we are not
victims of our biological wiring because someone pushed an
emotional button. One may still have a predictable reaction to
 How Emotions Are Made | 135

others in specific situations, but this is far more complex than

a specific circuit fingerprint model. The theory of constructed
emotion proposes how one creates a reaction—an emotion/
feeling—as opposed to a specific circuit being fired. The ToCE
represents a very dramatic difference to more commonly held
views about emotions in the research community. Ekman
(2016) surveyed 248 emotion researchers to determine what
they thought about a number of questions. The table below
is adapted from his findings, which he believes shows strong
support for Darwin’s idea of the universality of facial expres-
sions. Lisa Barrett’s ToCE is not widely accepted.

Question % endorsing
Evidence for universals in any aspect of emotion 88%
Evidence supporting universal signals (facial, vocal) 80%
Universals in events that trigger emotions 66%

Table 1. Summary of emotion researchers’ beliefs adapted from

Ekman survey.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
This author believes that the ToCE offers important
considerations for clinical work, starting with one’s ability to
read a client’s emotions.

Reading Emotions
Barrett is clear that given our poor ability to interpret
facial expressions one needs to be careful when reading facial
expressions and body language to assess the emotions of
others. There is a very good chance that the outcome will be
wrong. In addition, one’s affective state and recent events can
bias the evaluation. A client’s ability to read the therapist’s
emotional state will be affected by the level of stress or anxiety
they have during a session as will their concepts about coun-
seling and counselors.
Asking process-oriented questions to gather functional
facts can help the therapist avoid an incorrect reading of a
client’s emotional state. Barrett’s work makes it clear that
understanding what and how a client is thinking about a situ-
ation is more useful than attempting to interpret the client’s
emotional state through visual impressions.
136 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

The expression a client believes they see on the therapist’s

face may also not be what the therapist means to convey. This
supports the idea that working to be neutral with clients is
important since they are likely to misinterpret the therapist’s
facial expressions and emotional state.

Emotional Granularity
Barrett recommends that individuals learn to be more
specific when labeling an emotion/feeling and calls this
“emotional granularity” (Pond et al. 2012). By being more
specific, one builds up a larger, more accurate set of emotional/
feeling concepts which is useful for creating the emotion/feel-
ing in the future (Kashdan, Barrett, and McKnight 2015). For
the clinician, inviting a client to think about a feeling and to
create a specific label for that feeling could help the client to
become more specific about the emotional process that led
to that feeling. This should help them recognize and manage
their emotional process in the future. This labeling, also called
“affective labeling,” has been shown to be more effective for
emotional regulation than cognitive reappraisal or distraction
(Kircanski, Lieberman, and Craske 2012). Bowen describes the
example of a husband becoming enraged just from the “look”
his wife gave him. Once the husband understood the details
of this particular emotional experience, he was better able to
control his response (Bowen 1978). This understanding led to
changing his goal, which meant his simulations and prediction
loops changed to calculate the appropriate response using the
new goal. Being very clear about this new goal reinforces this
process; his simulations and predictions are more likely to use
this new goal versus the old “defend myself” goal. More clar-
ity about the feeling and emotional process should help the
client think about an appropriate response (goal). The value of
Barrett’s theory is that it predicts that this specifically named
emotion/feeling when linked with a specific revised goal will
allow the client to create this “emotion” again, and recognize
it, but create a different outcome since the emotion/feeling
now has a new goal. The process of thinking about the feeling,
the process that created it, and a new way to respond (goal),
aligns well with a Bowen theory approach to therapy.
 How Emotions Are Made | 137

Subjective Thinking and Experiential Blindness

For most of us, the world is so familiar that it is hard to
imagine what Barrett describes as “experiential blindness”: the
inability, due to lack of experience, to recognize something.
Because the brain simulates our reality, the entire process of
experiencing the world is subjective. In fact, the brain can
simulate things that are not actually there. If one’s stimuli are
a close enough match to what has been and currently could be
experienced, the simulation will use that until the prediction
loop indicates that the match is not correct. Experiential blind-
ness is a special instance of simulation. It occurs when the
brain has nothing available to predict with. Due to a lack of
experience with the set of inputs, it can’t create a suitable simu-
lation. There is nothing that matches well enough. A clinician
may not realize how experientially blind they are to situa-
tions presented by their clients. They can, literally, only try to
simulate, relying on concepts they have created from second
hand accounts. A research approach using how, what, when,
where, and who, but not why, type questions is helpful in
reducing this subjectivity. Based on the theory of constructed
emotion, it would be unlikely that a clinician could create the
same emotion(s) as the client. But a clinician can help the client
think more factually about the situation and decide what they
want to do going forward.
Another source of subjective thinking is a process called
“affective realism” (Barrett 2017, Kindle location 1403), where,
nonconsciously, the affective state influences the thinking
about a topic. The impact of this is that no decision is free
from the influence of the interoceptive network. The impli-
cation for clinicians is that our affective state—think “body
budget”— will influence our thinking while we interact with
clients. The combination of our poor ability to interpret facial
expressions and some level of experiential blindness reinforces
the benefits of using a research approach with clients. The
other implication is that the feelings that a client is sharing
may be due more to their “body budget” than to their actual
situation. Pain, colds, lack of sleep, blood sugar levels, and
other similar factors, can all affect the emotions that a client
experiences. The ToCE offers a detailed explanation of how
subjective our experience with clients is, thus supporting the
approach of gathering functional facts.
138 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

IMPORTANCE OF GOALS
According to the theory of constructed emotion, goals
are required for the creation of emotions. The brain gener-
ates simulations and predictions specific to the goal for the
current context. Changing the goal changes simulations and
predictions, thus changing the outcome. For example, the goal
of feeling the emotion/feeling of “family peace” can lead to
many experiences being used in a simulation to create this
emotion. The simulation that best matched the goal of feel-
ing family peace, for the current situation, would be chosen.
However, if the goal was to have the experience of defining
self, the simulations could create different emotions such as
fear, anxiety, conviction, or satisfaction. The goal of “feeling
less anxious” usually leads to different outcomes in contrast
to the goal of “defining a self.”
Based on this idea, a clinician’s goals in a session will
influence the type of emotions they create and influence the
questions they ask because the brain is running simulations
and predictions about what to do next using their goals.
Because of the emotionality that comes up in client sessions,
the ToCE would suggest that having very specific goals for a
session would support the clinician in being less influenced
by the emotionality of the session.
A client’s goals will influence, if not direct, their interac-
tions with others. Bowen (1978) used the term “goal directed”
fourteen times in the context of self-focused goals versus
other-focused goals. ToCE would predict that a goal that is
self-oriented versus relationship-oriented would generate
different emotions and behaviors. I believe ToCE provides a
strong theoretical basis for the value of having well defined
self-oriented goals—which is consistent with Bowen theory.
Another benefit of being more goal directed is that the
activity of pursuing a goal, versus just trying to manage
anxiety, appears to be a better mechanism for dealing with
anxiety-creating threats. Pursuing a goal uses different parts
of the brain and appears to be more effective than trying to
manage the anxiety using exposure or extinction approaches
(Boeke et al. 2017).

Impact of Recent Events

To be as efficient as possible, the process of creating simu-
lations and predictions is biased in favor of more frequent and
 How Emotions Are Made | 139

more recent events. This can lead to an incorrect assessment of

a situation because of biased simulations (Akrami et al. 2018).
An innocent question or look from a partner could be incor-
rectly labeled as “checking up on me” or “not trusting me”
instead of “engaging me.” It can be helpful to understand that
recent events can make one more reactive. “It’s the predictions
talking” would be a more neutral way to think about any of
our reactions.
Based on this idea, a client’s current reactivity could be
a measure of what has happened to them more recently or
most often and less about what is happening to them in the
exact moment. If they create their emotions, then the therapist
should consider what is leading them to create this one at this
time since both the goals for a situation and recent/frequent
history are involved. This gives the client something to reflect
on to become clearer about their role in relationships and how
they function in triangles in particular. For example, if one is
regularly predicting “the other is being critical,” the following
could be involved: (a) past events have created a bias for this
prediction, (b) they don’t have alternative concepts to draw on
(for example, “other is just curious”), or (c) their goal of “keep
other happy” is influencing their simulations and predictions.
Barrett’s ideas around recency, concepts, and goals provide a
mechanism of how a triangle can become more functionally
fixed. As described above, the ToCE also offers an explanation
for how a triangle can become less rigid.

Family of Origin Work

Working with one’s family of origin falls into two areas.
The first involves gathering factual information about one’s
family in order to think more objectively about the family.
Every family has their “trials and tribulations” as Bowen put
it, and getting factual information as well as family members’
perspectives of events is part of family of origin work. Doing
this will expand the range of concepts one has about the
family of origin, which, according to the theory of constructed
emotion, will affect the emotions created when interacting
with one’s family.
The second area focuses on increasing the amount of
meaningful contact with one’s family of origin. This usually
involves managing one’s reactivity while interacting with
family members. The ToCE supports having well defined,
140 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

self-directed goals when interacting with family members.

These goals will impact the simulations and predictions and
thus the emotions that are created during the interactions.
Goals such as being curious, not trying to change the other’s
opinions, and not trying to fix other people’s problems can
have a significant positive impact on the emotion/feeling one
creates for oneself and others. The ToCE provides a frame-
work for how the family’s functioning, concepts, goals, and
emotions are connected, and understanding this may help a
client think more objectively about their family of origin.

I Can Choose My Emotions

Barrett’s theory supports the idea that it is important to
carefully choose how to think about any situation. For exam-
ple, the goal of “not blaming my parents for my experiences”
leads to a different set of simulations and predictions—and
thus emotions/feelings—in one’s relationships. For a clini-
cian, the goal of “think of behaviors as symptoms” and the
goal of “clarify the underlying process that led to the behav-
iors,” lead to different simulations and predictions and more
neutral responses in a session. The ToCE posits that individu-
als change the emotions/feelings they create through their
choice of goals and concepts and by managing their body
budget. Rather than trying to suppress emotions/feelings as
they arise, one can use them as information and work back-
ward to the concepts and goals that created emotions/feelings
in the first place. From this perspective, just “trying to be less
reactive” is futile unless one changes what created the reac-
tivity in the first place. The author believes that the process of
examining one’s concepts and goals and choosing those for
oneself is the start of the process of defining a self in relation-
ships. Barrett writes,

But as an adult, you absolutely do have choices about

what you expose yourself to and therefore what you
learn, which creates the concepts that ultimately drive
your actions, whether they feel willful or not. So
“responsibility” means making deliberate choices to
change your concepts. (2017, 154)
 How Emotions Are Made | 141

Manage the Body, Manage Emotions

Barrett offers advice on how to manage emotion/feeling
by managing a key component in the creation of emotions:
one’s body budget. The ToCE provides the theoretical basis
for the following ideas:
The body’s budget is sensitive to sleep, exercise, and
diet. Getting the appropriate amount of quality sleep, physi-
cal activity, and food is important to one’s affect and thus the
emotions/feelings one creates. Are you and your clients physi-
cally comfortable in your office? Being physically comfortable
requires less energy and is easier on your body budget—so
get comfortable.
The body isn’t fooled by chemically induced “comfort.”
Coffee might make one more alert, but the body budget knows
better. “Self-medication” (through stimulants and addictive
substances or behaviors) doesn’t fool your body budget. Self-
medicating is usually detrimental, and allows a person to
avoid the root issue.
In the moment of emotional/feeling discomfort, move-
ment of almost any kind can be helpful. Movement with a
purpose engages other parts of the brain and shifts attention
into a seeking mode which can lower anxiety (Panksepp and
Watt 2011). Since the current state of emotion/feeling is linked
to the current interoceptive network state, changing that state
by moving influences the current state of emotions/feelings.
Focusing on goal-oriented activity further changes the process
that creates emotions/feelings. For example, the ToCE supports
the idea of going for a walk to think about self-directed goals,
especially if one is getting reactive to a situation.
Another aspect of understanding the impact of the body
budget is learning to recognize when one is feeling discomfort
solely because one’s body budget is depleted. Is my frustration
with another individual really because I am actually just tired,
uncomfortable, or hungry? The concept of the body budget
being used in the creation of emotions provides a mechanism
to influence what emotions/feelings one creates. While the
ToCE doesn’t address a person’s emotional functioning in their
relationships, it can provide ideas that help with managing reac-
tivity, which should improve one’s functioning in relationships.
142 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

IMPLICATIONS FOR BOWEN THEORY

Systems versus Individual Model
The author believes that the theory of constructed emotion
supports a systems model approach like Bowen theory
because it describes how the individual as a system creates
their emotions/feelings, thus avoiding the use of a cause-
and-effect model. Barrett describes why she believes the idea
of a “fingerprint” for emotions is invalid, which would be a
cause and effect individual model. Bowen theory describes
how individuals function in relationship systems, specifically
family systems. A systems approach seeks to understand the
processes of how any one part influences the functioning of
any other parts in the system. The functioning of the system
emerges from the interactions of its parts. Bowen theory, using
a systems model, situates the creation of an emotion/feeling
within the context of the emotional process between individu-
als where both individuals co-create their emotions/feelings.
The ToCE does not try to address this. Barrett does believe
that the influence of the family of origin is significant because
this is where an individual first learns many of their concepts
and emotions. The ToCE can help explain the influence of the
system and the individual’s part in creating their emotions.
The author believes that the ToCE offers an enriched way to
think about the emotional process in relationship systems.

Barrett Emotion and Bowen Feeling

Barrett uses the terms emotion and feeling synonymously
but defines an emotional experience as “feeling an instance
of emotion.” Barrett defines an individual experience of
a feeling as one instance in a population of feelings where
the population represents a category labeled as an emotion.
Barrett borrows the biological concept of “populations” where
there is variation in the instances (individuals) that make up
the population of individuals in a category. For Barrett, an
instance of an emotion is the conscious experience of a brain and
body state, labeled with a category (emotion), where a cate-
gory represents a population of different instances (individual
experiences) where each instance is a feeling. Thus, the use of
the word emotion in ToCE can be thought of as a feeling. The
conscious experience, the instance, is also what Bowen theory
would call a feeling (Bowen 1978, 197 and 356), but the simi-
larity ends there as Bowen theory has a different concept of
 How Emotions Are Made | 143

emotion that distinguishes it from feeling. Barrett discusses

the sensory systems, the interoceptive system, and the various
brain systems that are involved with generating an experi-
ence of emotion/feeling but has no term for this collective
nonconscious activity. Bowen would describe all such noncon-
scious activity as being part of the individual’s “emotional
functioning,” and believes that humans have this in common
with other species.
Barrett uses the term affect in reference to the intero-
ceptive system generating “simple feelings” that are not
emotions (2017, endnote 36). Interoception is experienced
along two continua: valence, going from unpleasant to pleas-
ant; and arousal, going from calm to noncalm (aroused, jittery,
agitated). An affective state is always present, but it may
be outside of one’s awareness. In Bowen theory, interocep-
tion and nonconscious affect would be considered a part of
emotional functioning, and conscious affect would be consid-
ered “feeling.” In Bowen terms, the ToCE describes how an
individual’s physiology creates the conscious experience of
having a feeling. It is this author’s opinion that this physi-
ology does not equate to the concept of emotion in Bowen
theory, but is a subset of it.
Bowen chose the term emotion to align the theory with
biology and the idea that humans are governed by forces they
share in common with other species. The usefulness of the
term is that it includes the idea that one can have a noncon-
scious “emotional” reaction that impacts one’s functioning.
For example, “broken heart syndrome” is a dramatic auto-
matic emotional response to an “emotionally stressful event”
(American Heart Association 2019). Bowen theory’s distinction
between emotion and feeling is useful in discussing reactions
to a relationship event. Bowen’s ideas of an emotional system
and emotional fusion—wherein emotionally fused individu-
als react to each other automatically and nonconsciously as a
system or unit—can be a useful way to think about events like
broken heart syndrome. In Bowen theory, emotion is discussed
in the context of relationship systems and the concepts of
emotional, feeling, and intellectual systems.

Emotional, Feeling, and Intellectual Systems

Bowen’s term “emotional system” includes all aspects
of physiology. A physiological change in response to another
144 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

would be considered an emotional response. Many of these

emotional responses influence our thinking, but we are not
conscious of this influence. In Bowen theory, becoming aware
of an emotion is what creates a feeling, and this process uses
what Bowen conceptualized as the “feeling system.” For
example, the complex physiology that allows the body to
sense that it’s time to eat (an emotional response), leads to the
conscious experience of being hungry, a feeling. Bowen theory
uses a third concept, the “intellectual system,” to describe the
function of rational, objective thinking to form opinions, in
contrast to subjectively based thinking associated with feelings
generated by the feeling system from emotions. The following
quotes from Bowen (1978) define these concepts.

For the purposes of this theory, the emotional system is

considered to include all the above functions [mating,
flight, fight, search for food], plus all the automatic
functions that govern the autonomic nervous system,
and to be synonymous with instinct that governs the
life process in all living things. … The intellectual system
is a function of the cerebral cortex, ... [and] involves the
ability to think, reason, and reflect, and enables man
to govern his life, in certain areas, according to logic,
intellect, and reason. (356)

The feeling system is postulated as a link between the

emotional and intellectual systems through which
certain emotional states are represented in conscious
awareness. (356)

In clinical practice, I have made a clear distinction

between feelings, which have to do with subjective
awareness, and opinions, which have to do with logic
and reasoning of the intellectual system (159).

To continue the food example, the intellectual system

functions to allow the individual to thoughtfully choose what
to eat based on their opinions or convictions of what is best
to eat versus what might be more tasty, convenient, or sooth-
ing. This author believes that the physiological aspects of
 How Emotions Are Made | 145

ToCE can be seen as a subset of Bowen’s idea of the emotional

system. In Bowen theory, the fear response that triggers the
release of stress hormones would be considered an emotional
response. The fact that this is shared with other species going
back approximately 450 million years (Denver 2009) is signifi-
cant in that it confirms how much humans have in common
with other species. Both the ToCE and Bowen theories have
their basis in physiology, but Bowen believed that emotions
operated at a cellular level (Bowen 1978) and that we are
governed more by our emotions than we like to believe. Is
the fetal response of DNA methylation to a mother’s level
of cortisol an “emotional” response? I believe Bowen would
think it was. Bowen’s use of the term emotion includes a much
broader and evolutionarily older context. There are several
important distinctions between the two theories.

• In Bowen theory, the concept of emotion is rooted

in biology and what we have in common with other
species. In the theory of constructed emotion, the
concept of emotion is only a population of feeling
instances created from the collection of individuals’
subjective experiences (a cultural phenomenon).
• Bowen’s “emotional system” is automatic and noncon-
scious, and allows for families to function as an
emotional system unit. The ToCE does not address this.
• The feeling system, which brings subjective informa-
tion into awareness, affects our decision making by
influencing our intellectual system and this affects
one’s functioning in a family or social system. The
ToCE supports the subjective nature of the feeling
creation process, but it is not a theory about how indi-
viduals function in their families.
• The ToCE does not discuss anything like Bowen’s intel-
lectual system.

Since the theory of constructed emotion describes the

complex process by which one becomes consciously aware
of emotion/feeling, it could expand upon the feeling system
concept in Bowen theory, but it does not have the breadth
to explain how humans function, as Bowen theory does.
146 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

Bowen theory describes how the emotional system (versus

the intellectual system, objective thinking, and reasoning
functions) can be the dominating factor in decision making,
thus influencing the functioning of individuals in a system.
The intellectual system’s functioning can be subjugated to
one’s emotions in the service of feeling “better” (usually less
anxious) instead of doing what is more logical, reality oriented,
and rational. This is all in the context of the emotional system
in which one is operating. One becomes aware of the influ-
ence of the emotional system via the feeling system, which
brings emotions into each individual’s awareness. Bowen used
the term differentiation, in one context, to mean the ability
to distinguish between one’s subjective thinking (feelings)
generated by the emotional system and one’s opinions based
on logic and reasoning. All of this was part of trying to under-
stand the functioning of individuals in a family system: how
do individuals become dysfunctional, even though they intel-
lectually understand that what they are doing is not in their
best interest? The concepts in Bowen theory of intellectual
system, feeling system, and emotional system are useful in
discussing emotional processes and individual functioning
in the context of relationship systems.
The concept of emotion/feeling in the theory of
constructed emotion does not capture the scope nor the
complexity of the idea of emotion as proposed by Bowen. The
processes that cause DNA methylation in a fetus or a broken
heart syndrome event in an adult, in response to being in a
relationship with another, are far removed from the concept
of a feeling. Facts about both physiological events and the
function they serve can be studied using normal scientific
methods. But one induces no feelings while the other’s feel-
ings are diverse and completely subjective. The ToCE proposes
that emotions/feelings are independent from Bowen theory
emotions in that the same emotional state can create different
feelings for different individuals. It is the biologically objec-
tive nature of the Bowen theory concept of emotional systems
that allows it to be a science that can describe human behavior.

Emotional Process
Bowen wrote the following on emotional process:

I have used the terms emotional demand and emotional

process to describe the emotional responsiveness by
 How Emotions Are Made | 147

which one family member responds automatically to

the emotional state of another, without either being
consciously aware of the process. Perhaps this can be
understood as nonverbal communication, but I have
chosen to use these terms descriptively. The process
is unconscious in the sense that neither person is
consciously aware of it…(1978, 66)

The ToCE adds to the understanding of “the emotional

responsiveness by which one family member automatically
responds” by offering a more detailed description of an aspect
emotional process within individuals. The following ideas
from the ToCE could be useful when thinking about emotional
responsiveness between individuals and the part each plays in
the exchange due to their subjectivity in the emotion/feeling
creation process:

• Each will be doing their best to interpret their percep-

tion of the other’s emotional/feeling state during the
interaction, but both individuals can easily be wrong.
• Each will create emotions/feelings based on the goals
each has for the relationship with the other while
trying to satisfy their own goals.
• Each is more likely to create an emotion/feeling that
is biased by their recent or habitual experiences with
the other rather than on what is happening in the
current exchange.
• Each may create emotions/feelings based on concepts
that they learned from their family of origin.
• The body budget of each will influence the emotions/
feelings each creates.

The ToCE reinforces the following aspects of Bowen’s

concept of emotional process:

• This process is mostly nonconscious.

• Each individual plays a part in the process that occurs
in relationships.
• The family system influences process since it
can be the source of concepts, goals, perceptual
learning, recent biases, and even body budgets.
148 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

Emotional process in Bowen theory is almost always in

the context of interlocking triangles between various family
members. The above processes would then be using concepts
and goals involving other individuals that are not directly
involved in the interaction. It is this author’s opinion that there
will be one or more concepts or goals that are the source of an
individual’s reactivity.

Multigenerational Process and Emotional Programming

Multigenerational emotional process is anchored in

the emotional system and includes emotions, feelings,
and subjectively determined attitudes, values, and
beliefs that are transmitted from one generation to the
next. This transmission is assumed to occur primarily
through relationships. (Kerr and Bowen 1986, 224)

Bowen only used “emotional(ly) program(med)” twice

in his collected papers and wrote that the multigenerational
transmission process was the “least detailed” and “needs the
most attention” (Bowen 1978, 411). He wrote:

Each person is programmed from birth to serve a

certain set of functions and each “senses” what is
required or expected, more from the way the system
functions around him than from verbal messages
that he is free to function as he pleases. (421)

The concept of the multigenerational transmission process

describes how different children in the family are more or
less emotionally involved in the family emotional processes,
resulting in the children having different levels of differen-
tiation of self.
Barrett’s work provides some insight into how “emotional
programming” can impact the development of emotions/
feelings. This author believes that the sensing of how one
should function becomes one’s goals that are used by the ToCE
processes. At some point in their development, infants create
their first simulations and predictions using these learned
“how to function” goals. As they learn words and concepts,
they categorize their experiences and create emotions/feelings
 How Emotions Are Made | 149

which are then used in subsequent simulations and predic-

tions, always using goals based on how one should function
in the family. They learn what to label anxiousness and
what to label calmness and how to function to manage those
emotions/feelings. Most of this learning is nonconscious.
Depending on the family’s level of maturity, stressors, and
resources, children learn a specific meaning about concepts
used by society and the family. For example, the concept of
“be good” would have been defined very differently across a
group of families of different backgrounds. All these concepts
feed a child’s simulations and predictions that create their
emotions/feelings. All the while, the child learns how to func-
tion in the family system.
Barrett wrote that the family plays an important role in
how infants acquire concepts and emotions. The child, by
learning what words, concepts, and emotions mean, in their
family, learns (or is programmed) to think and feel what the
family believes is appropriate for any given situation. Barrett
makes no specific reference to how one functions in a family,
while the concept of how one functions, versus how one is, is
important in Bowen theory. Infants participate in reciprocal
communication as early as one month. An older, preverbal
infant learns how to function in the family. That function-
ing will get named using concepts, albeit not necessarily
consciously, as the child becomes more verbal. What Barrett’s
theory makes clear is that an individual learns concepts and
uses them to create emotions/feelings, driven by the outcome
of simulations and predictions, which requires goals. What
Bowen theory posits is that the individual learns how to func-
tion in the family via emotional processes and programming.
This author believes that “how to function” is used as one’s
goals, and the concepts come from how the family talks (or
doesn’t) about themselves and how family members should
behave. Bowen believed that the functioning comes first and
codevelops with language. This supports the ToCE’s premise
that goals are needed to create emotions. Goals (“how I want
to function”) are required before concepts can be used, other-
wise one wouldn’t know what concepts are appropriate for
the situation. This author believes that the ToCE offers some
interesting ideas with respect to the concept of multigenera-
tional transmission process and emotional programming, even
150 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

though it misses the important idea of how, what, and when

does one learn about how they should function in their family.

Anxiety
Bowen refers to anxiety and its role in families in a 1957
paper (Bowen 1978, 3) years before the development of the
theory. Later, Bowen wrote that it is “one of two main vari-
ables” of the theory (1978, 361). He uses the term “emotional
tension” synonymously with anxiety. From a Bowen theory
perspective, the impact of anxiety on human behavior is that
it generates feeling-based subjective thinking where one is
more focused on relieving the present emotional tension
versus working, over time, to resolve the issue that created the
tension. What Barrett’s theory can contribute is that anxiety,
as an emotion/feeling, is ‘’created” based on an individu-
al’s concepts and goals and that the individual plays their
part in creating their emotion/feeling experience of anxiety.
The concepts one uses and the goals one has will impact the
simulations and predictions their brain generates and thus the
emotion/feeling they experience. Bowen theory posits that
the individual senses (consciously or not) a disturbance in
the relationship and this creates an emotional (physiologi-
cal) reaction in an individual. The ToCE posits that one uses
this response as an input to create an emotion/feeling. For
example, having a goal of “be more curious” versus “keep the
peace” will use different concepts and goals to create different
simulations and predictions leading to different emotions/
feelings for the same interaction. (Note: This would be on a
continuum from being totally curious with no worry about
keeping the peace to totally worrying about keeping the peace
with no curiosity.) The impact of Barrett’s theory is that one
needs to work on changing their concepts and goals in order
to have a different emotion/feeling outcome. According to
Bowen theory, this process would change how one functions
in the relationship, which could moderate the level of anxiety
in the individual and thus in the entire system. Bowen theory
would suggest that a more differentiated person would recog-
nize their responsibility for choosing what concepts and goals
they want to work with and what feelings they want to create.
Barrett encourages her readers to be more thoughtful about
the concepts they believe and operate with.
 How Emotions Are Made | 151

Differentiation of Self
Bowen’s concept of differentiation of self (DoS) describes
one’s level of emotional maturity in terms of one’s ability to be
a self-reliant, goal-directed individual who does not impinge
on others. The concept is relevant to a systems perspective
versus an individual model. A more differentiated person
does not expect others to fulfill their expectations nor do
they believe they are responsible for fulfilling the expecta-
tions of others. Being part of a system, the individual would
understand their interdependence with others and the part
they play in the functioning of the system. Barrett’s theory
makes no reference to the concept of differentiation of self.
She uses the term emotional granularity to mean the ability
to distinguish one emotion/feeling from another. Bowen uses
differentiation (in one context) to mean the ability to distin-
guish subjective feeling type thoughts from objective rational
type thinking, which is not what Barrett means by emotional
(feeling) granularity.
The process of thinking about what concepts and goals one
wants to live by does align with what Bowen theory describes
as a part of becoming more differentiated. What the theory of
constructed emotion misses is the reaction from the system
to the person who decides to start thinking, and presumably
acting, differently based on carefully thought out opinions
(concepts) and goals. Bowen wrote about this reaction from
the system and the pressure it can put on an individual to
“change back” which would mean, at least, going along with
the concepts and goals of the system. It this author’s opin-
ion that for a person to change their concepts and goals, as
described by Barrett, it would be very helpful to also under-
stand Bowen theory.

Responsibility for Self

The concept of differentiation of self includes
being more responsible for one’s life course. The theory of
constructed emotion supports this idea in that if one constructs
their emotions, they are responsible for what they construct.
Likewise, if one is using certain concepts and goals, they
should examine the objective validity of them. The ToCE
describes a different way to think about responsibly manag-
ing one’s emotions/feelings: from examining the concepts
152 | Family Systems 14:2 2020

used, to working on emotional granularity, to managing

one’s body budget. Any individual can choose work on these
items but no one else can do it for them. Understanding and
choosing to be responsible for one’s emotions/feelings is a
significant aspect of the process of defining a self. The value
and importance of systems thinking and Bowen theory is that
it provides the individual with a new set of concepts to use to
manage one’s emotions. The ToCE posits that if one adopts
new concepts about relationship events, such as those encom-
passed by Bowen theory, then different emotions/feelings will
be produced in response to relationship events.. Bowen theory
would predict that the process of defining a self, in the form of
new concepts and goals, is key to constructing more appro-
priate emotion/feeling responses to relationship events. This
author believes that the ToCE can help a person understand
the value of learning and adopting Bowen theory ideas to
make progress in their family system.

Goals
Both the theory of constructed emotion and Bowen theory
discuss the importance of goals, but from different perspec-
tives. Barrett describes how simulations and predictions are
used to meet a current goal and how the goal influences the
predictions that are generated. Bowen discusses how more
differentiated individuals are more goal directed (what do
I want for me) versus relationship oriented (what should I
do for other) or feeling oriented (how can I feel better). The
ToCE predicts that having well defined goals will influence the
simulations and predictions one creates because concepts are
selected and predictions are validated based on the specific
goal. It’s harder to predict which simulation is best if the
goal is not clear.
Bowen theory describes the impact of goal orientation
from a relationship systems viewpoint, making it clear that
goal-directed activity for self is a key aspect of a more differ-
entiated individual. What the ToCE adds is the understanding
that by having clearly defined self-directed goals, the brain
will generate different emotional/feeling responses than if one
has feeling or relationship-oriented goals. In this regard the
ToCE supports Bowen theory by describing how self-directed,
 How Emotions Are Made | 153

goal-oriented thinking could change one’s emotions/feelings

and thus why it is important to put in the effort to do this.

Emotional Differentiation and Emotional Granularity

Barrett uses the term emotional granularity to describe
one’s ability to use specific names for specific types of
emotions/feelings. This requires what Barrett calls emotional
differentiation—the ability to differentiate different kinds
of emotions/feelings. Barrett believes that the benefit of
emotional granularity is that it develops a larger, more accu-
rate set of concepts. Emotional granularity should help one
recognize the specific emotions/feelings—and the specific
concepts and goals used to create them—that arise from inter-
actions with others. Then the underlying concepts and goals
that created the emotion/feeling can be objectively examined
by the individual for their origin and validity.
Bowen uses the term “emotional differentiation” once in
his book (1978, 85) with very different meaning. He describes
differentiation as differentiating one’s self from others and
also as differentiating one’s subjective thinking from objective
thinking. This author believes the thinking effort to become
more emotionally granular could aid in one’s ability to distin-
guish between subjective or feeling thinking and objective
or rational thinking. Research supports the hypothesis that
greater emotional granularity improves emotional regulation
(Barrett et al. 2001 and Pond et al. 2012). However, this process
can’t stop with labeling, but should also look at the relation-
ship interactions—the emotional process—that resulted in the
feelings being labeled. The ToCE focuses on the emotion/feel-
ing being created. Bowen theory focuses on emotional process
in the relationship that resulted in the that emotion/feeling,
because this is what an individual has to work on for real
change to occur.

CONCLUSION
Dr. Barrett offers a new theory on how to understand an
essential part of human behavior: the experience of emotions/
feelings. The theory of constructed emotion has a focus on the
individual and describes the mechanisms for how emotions/
154 Family Systems 2020 | 14.2

feelings are constructed within the individual. Bowen theory

has a focus on the family system, and its concepts are based on
observing how families function. It describes the impact that
emotions have on the family system through the functioning
of its members. Both theories offer useful ideas for becoming
a more responsible self. ❖

REFERENCES
Akrami, Athena, Charles D. Kopec, Mathew E. Diamond, and Carlos D. Brody.
2018. “Posterior Parietal Cortex Represents Sensory History and Mediates its
Effects on Behaviour.” Nature 554(7692): 368–72.
American Heart Association, “Is Broken Heart Syndrome Real?” https://www.heart.
org/en/health-topics/cardiomyopathy/what-is-cardiomyopathy-in-adults/is-broken-
heart-syndrome-real. Accessed Dec 14, 2019.
Barrett, Lisa F. 2017. How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Barrett, Lisa Feldman, James Gross, Tamlin Conner Christensen, and Michael
Benvenuto. 2001. “Knowing What You’re Feeling and Knowing What to Do
about It: Mapping the Relation between Emotion Differentiation and Emotion
Regulation.” Cognition & Emotion 15(6): 713–24.
Boeke, Emily A., Justin M. Moscarello, Joseph E. LeDoux, Elizabeth A. Phelps,
and Catherine A. Hartley. 2017. “Active Avoidance: Neural Mechanisms and
Attenuation of Pavlovian Conditioned Responding.” The Journal of Neurosci-
ence 37(18): 4808-4818.
Bowen, Murray. 1978. Family Therapy in Clinical Practice. New York: Jason Aronson.
Denver, Robert John. 2009. “Structural and Functional Evolution of Vertebrate
Neuroendocrine Stress Systems.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
1163(1): 1–16.
Ekman, Paul. 2016. “What Scientists Who Study Emotion Agree About.” Perspec-
tives on Psychological Science 11(1): 31–34.
American Heart Association. Accessed October, 2019. Is Broken Heart
Syndrom Real? www.heart.org/en/health-topics/cardiomyopathy/
what-is-cardiomyopathy-in-adults/is-broken-heart-syndrome-real
Kashdan, Todd B., Lisa Feldman Barrett, and Patrick E. McKnight. 2015. “Unpacking
Emotion Differentiation.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 24(1): 10–16.
Kircanski, Katharina, Matthew D. Lieberman, and Michelle G. Craske. 2012. “Feel-
ings into Words.” Psychological Science 23(10): 1086–91.
Panksepp, Jaak and Douglas Watt. 2011. “Why Does Depression Hurt? Ancestral
Primary-Process Separation-Distress (PANIC/GRIEF) and Diminished Brain
 How Emotions Are Made | 155

Reward (SEEKING) Processes in the Genesis of Depressive Affect.” Psychiatry:

Interpersonal and Biological Processes 74(1): 5–13.
Pond, Richard S., Todd B. Kashdan, C. Nathan DeWall, Antonina Savostyanova,
Nathaniel M. Lambert, and Frank D. Fincham. 2012. “Emotion Differentiation
Moderates Aggressive Tendencies in Angry People: A Daily Diary Analysis.”
Emotion 12(2): 326–37.
Widen, Sherri C., Anita M. Christy, Kristen Hewett, and James A. Russell. 2011.
“Do Proposed Facial Expressions of Contempt, Shame, Embarrassment, and
Compassion Communicate the Predicted Emotion?” Cognition & Emotion
25(5): 898–906.

View publication stats