Amygdala Templates
We immediately process all (or most) incoming stimuli through “templates” in our Amygdala (mid-brain). We process these same stimuli through our cerebral cortex at a later point (1 or 2 seconds later) and more slowly. In most cases, we eventually temper the immediate reactions of our Amygdala by means of this more “rational” cortical analysis. The Amygdala “templates” are applied to each incoming stimulus to determine whether or not this stimulus represents a threat to us (or perhaps an opportunity for personal pleasure). I have proposed that Charles Osgood’s Semantic Differential (Osgood, 1957) provides the major criteria for determining threat: good/bad, active/passive, and strong/weak. Many of these Amygdala templates are probably established early in our life or may actually be “hard-wired.” We might even find the appearance of Carl Jung’s archetypes (Jung, 1978).
I would suggest that the amygdala plays an important role not only in the assessment of possible threat but also in the anticipation of pleasure. We look forward to a pleasant interaction with a specific person based on past experiences with this person and input from our psychosocial template. A shot of dopamine might accompany this anticipation—just as it does when the addicted gambler enters the casino or when our lover removes their clothes (or our clothes). There might be no more powerful engagement of the polystatic process than in the anticipation of threat or pleasure. If Carl Jung is correct, this power might often relate not only to the squirt of a feel-good neurochemical but also to the triggering of a deeply held and fundamental archetype related to an evil figure or force, or to a benevolent, seductive and pleasure-evoking siren.
What occurs when a coach is working with her client on difficult issues that may evoke fear-based templates? How does a coach either bypass or counter the emotional impact of these templates? First, I would advise the coach to be thoughtful, caring and patient. Once a threat template is activated, it can be engaged indiscriminately to include the coach himself. Second, the coach should “appreciate” the fear manifest by his client. “I can certainly appreciate why you might feel anxious at this point, for there are several good reasons to worry about what might occur.” The coach can then articulate some of the “good reasons.”
The coach, at this point, not only is being empathetic; she also is being a bit rational and objective regarding their client’s fears. At this point, the client can themselves become a bit more rational and objective. As a coach, I often increase the “objectivity” by listing the “good reasons” on a flip chart or at least on a piece of paper. It is then possible to identify some of the “good reasons” not to be quite so fearful and some “good ideas” regarding how best to address these fears. What actions can be taken that reduces the sense of helplessness and hopelessness that often accompanies the activation of the amygdala’s fear-based template.
Download Article
