The opponent-process theory of emotion / Getting Stronger

Practical applications. Besides explaining common sensory and emotional reactions, I believe the
opponent-process provides some very practical guidance for how we can use pleasant and unpleasant
experiences to our advantage. This guidance can be boiled down to seven basic insights:

1. Be aware of hidden processes! The most important insight is to be aware that any primary
sensory or emotional stimulus, whether pleasurable or unpleasant, will give rise to opponent
processes of an contrasting nature. Even though you most likely cannot directly perceive them,
these opponent processes are happening–and even growing in strength–at the very same time as
the primary emotions and sensations that you do perceive. When the primary emotions and
sensations stop or pause, these contrasting processes emerge into consciousness! For example if
you put your hand in cold water, a “warm” opponent processes is being stimulated, but you feel that
warmth only once you withdraw your hand from the water. And the pleasure of overindulging in
sweet desserts is likely to be followed by an unpleasant reaction that arises some time after you
stop eating.
2. Avoid overexposure to pleasurable stimuli. This does not mean that you should minimize or
avoid direct pleasure! Just be aware that too much of a good thing too often can backfire — and be
aware WHY that is so. By remaining vigilant, you need only to moderate the intensity and
frequency of pleasant stimuli to ensure that the opponent processes do not build up. For
example, eating small portions of delicious foods, and spacing out meals — or even individual bites
— will tend to reduce the level the opponent processes (cravings) that would otherwise reinforce
appetite and cravings. When you go for that second cup of coffee, you may marginally increase your
alertness in the short term, but realize that you are at the same time continuing to stimulate a
reactive opponent process, counteracting the caffeine high, that may lead to increased tiredness
later on. There is a biological argument for moderation!
3. Use unpleasant and stressful stimuli to indirectly build pleasure. This is one of the most
powerful insights of the opponent-process theory. By judiciously exposing ourselves to intermittent
stresses, of sufficient intensity and frequency, we activate in our bodies and psyches some powerful
opponent processes, which in turn result in heightened pleasure and satisfaction. Depending on the
type of stimulus, these indirect pleasures can be short-lived or more sustained. Stressful or
unpleasant stimuli can therefore be thought of as a form of “psychological hormesis”: The nervous
systems is activating certain pleasurable inhibitory processes in order to defend against and build
tolerance to stress. These pleasure-generating defense mechanisms are real, biological processes
which operate in our nervous systems. One well known example is the production of endorphins,
our natural opiates, which can be produced by engaging in strenuous exercise. Endorphins literally
help us to endure the pain of exercise by providing a counteracting pleasure. So by increasing the
intensity and frequency of stress exposures, we are not just building tolerance–we are actively
building up a sustained background “tone” of pleasurable emotions. This is very much in line with
what the Stoics called “tranquility”. As explained on the Stoicism page, Stoic tranquility is not
apathy or a lack of feeling! On the contrary, it is a positive sense of equanimity, contentment, and
happiness that endures and supports us. It is the opposite of depression; you might even call it
“elevation”.
4. Indirect pleasure is superior to direct pleasure. So we have learned that we can paradoxically
use pain or discomfort to indirectly cause pleasure. But is there any reason to think that the
pleasure resulting from running, hard work, cold showers, or skydiving is superior to the pleasure
from sweet desserts or scratching an itch? Aren’t they equivalent? Doesn’t any pleasure, whether
direct or indirect, nevertheless have the potential to lead to addiction? This is an interesting
question, but I think the opponent-process theory makes the case that indirect pleasures — those
that results as reactions to stress — are superior. There are two main reasons for this: First,
according to Solomon, opponent-processes are “sluggish”; they take time to build, and decay more
slowly. They continue even when the stimulus stops. And unlike direct pleasures, which may be
more intense, there is no sudden withdrawal reaction when they stop, hence no “craving”. They tend
to fade slowly. Second, the initial unpleasant stimulus — exercise, work, cold sensations — must be
sufficiently unpleasant to be effective. This initial unpleasantness will always be a “barrier” that
requires conscious effort to face and overcome. If it starts to become “addictive”, it is easier to let
this unpleasant barrier stand in the way. It is easy to decide not to go running or take a cold shower
if one becomes concerned it is becoming too habit-forming or detrimental to one’s health.
5. Use unpleasant stimuli to counteract addictive pleasures. This is one of the most interesting,
and I think unexplored, applications of the opponent-process theory. Addictions are characterized by
increased cravings. These arise when opponent process build up in reaction to pleasurable primary
stimuli that are too intense and frequent. The craving can become a sustained background “tone”
that is always there when the pleasurable stimulus is absent. And the “savings” effect makes the

http://gettingstronger.org/2010/05/opponent-process-theory/[5/31/2012 5:18:48 AM]

opponent cravings come back more easily. But we can overpower these cravings by deliberately
introducing unpleasant stimuli at the same time as the addictive cravings, in order to
generate new pleasurable opponent processes. The key is to time the unpleasant stimuli to
coincide with cravings or withdrawal, and make them sufficiently intense and frequent, that one
builds up sufficient background pleasure tone to counteract the unpleasant anxiety that typically
accompanies addictions. So fight cravings by adding a new stressful activity like high intensity
exercise, cold showers, or intermittent fasting! It may also help explain why cue exposure
therapy — exposing oneself to the forbidden fruit without partaking — can often be more effective in
extinguishing addictions than merely abstaining or avoiding the addictive stimulus. It is possible that
active cue exposure might generate a type of acute “stress” that “burns out “the original craving with
an opposing pleasure. This is like fighting fire with fire!
6. Don’t abuse pain and stress. Despite the potential benefits of controlled stress and unpleasant
stimuli to indirectly induce sustained pleasure or “elevation”, this approach is easy to misinterpret or
apply incorrectly. Some might take this to be a justification for masochism or self-harm, but it is not.
The key here is to carefully think through the consequences of one’s actions. Does the application
of the stress or unpleasantness result in an objective strengthening of your body and mind — or
does it lead to physical or psychological harm? Depressed teens sometimes engage in a practice
called “cutting” to relieve their depression and apathy, because it can actually reactivate pleasure or
a rush that fills a gap and can become addictive. Most likely, this pleasure can be explained in
terms of opponent processes that release some of the same endorphins or other neurotransmitters
as exercise does. But one needs to distinguish between objectively harmful activities like cutting and
beneficial habits like exercise or cold showers. Far from injuring oneself, these beneficial uses of
stress and “pain” act to act to build strength, resilience, and long-term happiness.
7. Optimize your stimulation schedule. Be aware of critical decay durations and savings effects of
opponent processes, for both pleasant and unpleasant stimuli. Addictions and cravings can be
minimized by reducing the frequency of exposure to pleasure-triggers to allow enough time for any
cravings to decay. The next time you are mindlessly wolfing down bite after bite of an addictive
snack like popcorn or candy, try spacing out bites to allow the craving sensations to die off between
bites and see whether you end up satisfied with fewer bites. On the flip side, if you are finding it
hard to get started on a healthy habit like strenuous exercise, cold showers, or fasting, it may be
that you need to increase the frequency and intensity of the new habit until it takes. According to
Solomon, it will become increasingly pleasant if you do this.

Since becoming aware of the opponent-process theory, I applied it to myself in two instances recently:

On the pleasure side, I reduced my craving for alcohol by drinking less frequently, and limiting the
amount that I drink. The pleasure remains, but the daily cravings have disappeared. I’ve
documented this on the Discussion Forum of this blog.
On the pain side, I have increased my enjoyment of cold showers by never missing a day, by
lengthening the showers, and by making sure to expose my most sensitive body parts to the
coldness. This has significantly increased the pleasure I feel, and it comes on more quickly while in
the shower (within 10-15 seconds, versus previously more than a minute) and the warm,
exhilarating post-shower feeling lasts all morning. I’m happy all the time, and I definitely feel less
stress.

Think about how this might apply to your own situation. Are there pleasures in your life that tend to
result in cravings when they are absent? Can you think of ways to introduce healthful but somewhat
unpleasant stress into your life in a way that builds your resilience and at the same time a deeper level of
satisfaction and sustained pleasure? Can you use this indirect pleasure to displace cravings or
dissatisfaction? And in both cases, how aware are you of the relationship between the intensity and
frequency of the stimuli, and the tendency to foster opposing processes that turn pleasures into pains,
and pains into pleasures?

The potential applications are infinite!

http://gettingstronger.org/2010/05/opponent-process-theory/[5/31/2012 5:18:48 AM]