Anything we see or that happens to us can elicit in us an automatic triple response: cognitive, emotional and motivational (i.e., motivational).
The cognitive response (which corresponds to what Alfred Korzybski called the semantic response) depends on our knowledge, the motivational response depends on our needs, and the emotional response depends on the perception or expectation of their satisfaction or frustration. The three responses are interdependent in the sense that each influences the other two in a reinforcing or inhibiting sense.
The above responses, of course, are not random, but follow certain associations and logic characteristic of the individual, which must be recorded somewhere in the mind. Well, by the name cognitive-emotional-motive map (CEMM) I refer to the subsystem of the mind in which are recorded (i.e. programmed), the automatic cognitive, emotional and motivational responses characteristic of the individual.
How is CEMM formed and how can it be modified?
I assume that at birth an individual’s CEMM already exists, and that it contains only the elementary associations and logic written into the DNA, i.e., those we have in common with other mammals.
After birth, the infant begins to interact with his environment and in particular with his mother (or an equivalent figure) and, because of his specifically human capabilities, he unconsciously begins to record in his CEMM associations between his feelings and the objects, events, and symbolic and linguistic expressions that provoke or accompany them. At the same time, the infant learns to recognize such objects, events and expressions, and particularly those associated with the people on whose care he depends.
The CEMM is a fundamental component of the mind, without which it could not function. In this regard, George Herbert Mead taught us that the human mind (i.e., the specifically human part of our mind, to distinguish it from the parts we share with other animals) is formed and constructed through social interactions in order to manage social interactions themselves in an adaptive sense, that is, to meet the needs of the individual.
Well, the formation of the human mind described by Mead corresponds to the progressive programming of CEMM, which continues throughout the individual’s life, although its early stages are the most important and pregnant as they constitute a kind of what in ethology is called imprinting. In fact, each learning is the basis on which subsequent learnings, which are normally additive, rest. That is, what has already been learned influences and limits or favors what is possible to learn later. In other words, the more limited and restricted what is learned at a young age, the more difficult it is to learn something new in adulthood. This is also due to the fact that brain plasticity decreases with age.
On the other hand, we can see that it is easier to learn something completely new than to unlearn something, that is, to modify what has already been learned.
Thus, the CEMM can be modified, but to a more or less limited extent depending on how it was constructed in childhood and youth. In this regard, I believe that the purpose of psychotherapy should be to modify or neutralize maladaptive cognitive-emotional-motive responses , to the perception of certain ideas, images, linguistic expressions or other stimuli. I also believe that in order to change responses to certain stimuli, it is necessary to re-present (live or by means of simulations) such stimuli in association with others, capable of generating responses of the opposite affective sign than those elicited by the former.
Examples of maladaptive responses that it pays to neutralize through psychotherapy or self-therapy are unjustified, that is, unfounded contempt and fear. In fact, both contempt and fear (which often go hand in hand with each other) not only result in a state of stress that is potentially detrimental to psychophysical well-being, but also prevent one from establishing a useful, satisfying or even pleasant relationship with the object of such feelings.
Social reward
CEMM is essentially used to answer (in a systemic sense) questions such as the following: is the entity (object, person, behavior, idea, etc.) that is presented to me or is it good or bad? Pleasant or unpleasant? Useful or useless? Comprehensible (acceptable) or incomprehensible (unacceptable)? Consistent or inconsistent with my personality and social reputation? Does it require any particular behavior on my part? What should I expect in relation to this entity?
An individual’s behavior in the various circumstances in which he or she may find himself or herself depends on the answers to questions such as those above. Such answers constitute the programming of CEMM, which is primarily concerned with social relations, and all that is cultural (in the sense that it is produced, exchanged or shared by human beings).
Since an individual’s well-being depends on the quality of his or her social interactions, and since the CEMM essentially serves to direct the individual’s choices in a direction favorable to his or her well-being, it follows that the most interesting part of the CEMM is that in which the social consequences related to various perspectives of behavior are stored. In other words, the CEMM tells us whether, given a certain behavior, we should expect reward or punishment from particular people or, in general, from the community to which we belong.
In this regard, as children, we almost all underwent what we can call “social reward imprinting,” that is, we learned what behaviors of ours earn us approval or disapproval, reward or punishment from others (starting with parents and educators).
For example, those who have undergone a strict upbringing in a disciplinary sense tend to regard obedience as a cause for social reward. Similarly, those who have had very intellectually demanding educators tend to regard intelligence and its manifestations as indispensable means of being accepted and loved. The same phenomenon occurs with other educational styles that give importance, for example, to morality, respect for traditions, religion, sports, beauty, money, competition in general, savings, etc., so that associations (conscious or unconscious) can be created in the CEMM between these values and the expectation of social reward.
Of course, as adults it is possible that the expected rewards may not be realized, or the results of one’s efforts may be counterproductive. This can result in a state of chronic stress and frustration with related psychological and psychosomatic discomfort and disorders.
In such a case, psychotherapy aimed at neutralizing maladaptive or unrealistic imprints may be helpful. During such therapy, the patient should learn, through interaction with the therapist, alternative ways of obtaining social rewards, and be able to unlearn (this is the most difficult part) the “wrong” associations.
Regarding the role of the CEMM during social interactions, it should be considered that when two people A and B interact, each is present (as an idea or demon) in the other’s CEMM, so A’s behavior toward B, and B’s behavior toward A depend on the particular associations stored in the CEMM related to the interlocutors.
These associations concern both the reactions that A expects from B in the face of a certain behavior, and the reactions of third parties or the community they belong to to that same behavior.
Regarding the second case, see the chapter Trilateral Relationships and Affective Consistency.
Next chapter: Interdependence, cooperation, competition, violence, authority.