The 2001 visit of actor Robin Williams of Koko, the Gorilla renewed the question on whether animals can communicate and express emotions as humans do. The caretakers of the ape have claimed that he can understand human actions and can respond using the American sign language. In his encounter with Koko, Williams experienced being tickled and requested to tickle in return. It was observed that Koko can express happiness and even mourning over someone’s death. When shown with a DVD of one of the films of Williams, the ape positively identified that the person in the cover is the same as the one interacting with him. After 13 years, the belief that animals can really express emotions was further advanced when Koko express sad facial expressions when informed of Williams death in 2014. Animal rights advocates questioned the incident as irresponsible, stating that the information only caused emotional distress on the ape and that there was no need for doing that. What can be elicited in this instance is that the response of Koko on the death of a friend only confirms (although superficially) that he can indeed also express negative emotions.
To address the question of whether animals such as Koko can really express and communicate emotions, it is necessary to define first what is emotion. Through this, we can clarify whether the observations on Koko, among other animals, are indeed emotions or simply other bodily response. Meyers (4 as cited in Hosseini 24) defines emotion as a state of activation of physiological mechanisms, conscious experience and expressive behavior. In addition to this definition, the different theories of emotion are also helpful in addressing the question of animals being able to express and communicate emotion. There are various theories, namely: the James-Lange Theory, the Cannon-Bard Theory, the Schachter-Singer Theory, Cognitive Appraisal Theory and Facial-Feedback Theory (Meyers 8-12). Of these theories, the article will only apply the James-Lange Theory and the Cognitive Appraisal Theory since these are the most widely known.
Under the James-Lange Theory, it is suggested that humans or animals express emotion as a result of some physiological processes. It also states that the type of emotion will depend on how the triggering event is interpreted (Meyers 21). For instance, when someone sees a snake in the woods, the perception that a snake is a dangerous animal (interpretation of the triggering event) will cause trembling (physiological reaction), which then triggers the emotional response of being frightened. Under this theory, being frightened did not cause the person to tremble but rather, it is the trembling that caused the person to be frightened.
Closely related to the James-Lange Theory is the Cognitive Appraisal Theory. It states that thinking about the triggering event determines the emotional response and the consequent physical reaction (Meyers 25 & So, Kuang & Cho 122). For instance, when someone sees a wolf, his perception that he is currently in great danger (cognition) elicited a frightening emotional response which will then determine the physical reaction (fight or flight).
What makes the above theories relevant to the present discussion is the fact that perception on the triggering event is a necessary condition for the resulting emotional response. When related to the question of animals being able to communicate and express emotion, it must be ascertained whether animals are able to have perceptual processes in response to a triggering event. For example, in the case of Koko, the ape must have some perceptions on the presence of Williams which then determined his psychological response. To shed further light on the question, it is necessary to establish that the triggering event is either a sign or symbol. Langer (1) claimed that it is with symbol there is an involved perceptual process. The ability of humans to respond to both symbol and sign is what gives them a higher echelon in the intellectual ladder than animals, which can merely respond to signs.
A sign is defined as any stimulus that marks the presence or imminence of something to come. Both humans and animals are capable of recognizing signs, although the former have more elaborate recognitions (Langer 1). When a dog sees a stranger (sign), it barks. When a wolf growls in the woods (sign), the other animals might interpret this as a manner of announcing the occupation or protection of a territory. For humans, when we see the traffic light turns red, we stop and then proceeds when it turns green. Therefore, sign elicits direct response without any cognition about what it represents. Since animals can only recognize signs, it follows that their response to a triggering event (such as the presence of Williams in front of Koko) does not involve a prior process of interpreting the event. This claim makes it appear that the emotional responses of Koko as claimed by a significant number of people are not really emotions because of the absence of prior perceptual process in accordance with the James-Lange Theory and the Cognitive Appraisal Theory.
The ability of humans to recognize symbols enables them to express and communicate emotions. Symbols, unlike signs, cause humans to think about the thing being symbolized. Animals can already respond to signs, which directly represent what are being signified. By thinking about the thing being symbolized, perception and interpretation occurs which makes emotional response possible. In order to communicate their perception of the symbol and the emotional response, humans have been able to develop languages. The ability to have knowledge is also another explanation why animals cannot express and communicate emotions. Language is a structure representing symbols. Symbols require perceptual process, which are then necessary for emotion. Unlike humans, animals do not have language (Langer 2-3). The humming of birds and the barking of dogs could not be considered as language since these are just responses to sign, not symbols. This ability of humans to have language has evolved from elementary stages to its present complex structures (Pinker 1). Furthermore, the ability to have multiple languages such as polyglot is found to have link with greater analytical skills. This analytical skill enables humans to interpret events more comprehensively, which then determines emotion (Kluger 2-3).
Works Cited
Hosseini, Seyyed Abed. “Classification of brain activity in emotional states using HOS analysis.” International Journal of Image, Graphics and Signal Processing 4.1 (2012): 21. DOI: 10.5815/ijigsp.2012.01.03
Kluger, Jeffrey. “Understanding How the Brain Speaks Two Languages.” Time, Time, 23 Apr. 2013, healthland.time.com/2013/04/23/bilingualism/. Retrieved January 12, 2018 from http://healthland.time.com/2013/04/23/bilingualism/
Langer, Susanne K. “Language and Thought.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. Eds. Paul Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 96-101. Retrieved January 12, 2018 from https://myweb.dmacc.edu/personal/sdmiller/instructor/Shared%20Documents/eng%20106/Langer,%20Susanne%20K.%20-%20Language%20and%20Thought.pdf
Pinker, S. “Horton Heared a Who!.” Time (1999). Retrieved January 12, 2018 from http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,33142,00.html
- So, Jiyeon, Kai Kuang, and Hyunyi Cho. “Reexamining fear appeal models from cognitive appraisal theory and functional emotion theory perspectives.” Communication Monographs83.1 (2016): 120-144. Retrieved January 12, 2018 from https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2015.1044257
