Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Expecting pain

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is a large amount of evidence of placebo and nocebo effects showing that one’s expectation of a forthcoming pain can influence the subsequent experience of pain. Here I shall not discuss the implications of these findings for the nature of pain, but focus instead on the nature of pain anticipation itself. This notion indeed remains poorly analysed and it is unclear what type of anticipatory state it involves. I shall argue that there is more to pain anticipation than a mere combination of anticipatory beliefs and fears. When the impending damage is imminent, pain anticipation involves a distinctive sui generis mental state, which I call nociceptive prediction. One then anticipates the forthcoming event under the pain mode. After analysing its points of similarities and differences with pain, I shall argue that nociceptive prediction is best understood in imperative defensive terms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There is a wide variety of pains and one may wonder whether it is the same to expect the pain of a vaccine injection, the pain of a heavy handbook falling on your foot, and the monthly pain of your menstruation cramps. Here I leave aside the anticipation of certain types of pain, such as visceral pains, and focus only on the pain caused by external threats and in principle avoidable from the subject’s viewpoint.

  2. For instance, Friston, who is at the origin of the predictive coding framework, sometimes appears to take prediction to be synonymous to beliefs, as shown here: “This surprise depends upon (prior) expectations, but where do these prior beliefs come from?” (2013, 213). The objective of this paper, however, is not to offer a detailed analysis of the predictive coding approach.

  3. One can explain the analgesic effect in the latter case by the fact that attention is then focused on the environment, and thus, away from one’s body. By contrast, one can predict fear of bodily damage (which is not tested here) to induce hyperalgesia.

  4. More generally, Klein (2018) argues against the predictive coding theories that the mind cannot be only a predictive machine if predictions are belief-like because there need also to be desires, preferences, and motivational states in general for the organism to act: “Try to get by with only prediction, and you’ll end up just sitting there” (Klein, 2018, p. 2542). See also Arpaly and Schroeder (2013). Advocates of predictive coding, however, want to collapse the distinction between beliefs and desires with the help of the notion of active inference (e.g. Clark, 2020; Hohwy, 2018). To summarize, Klein claims that predicting that you will be hungry will not suffice to make you eat, but Clark replies that it will in association with the prediction that you will no longer be hungry if you eat. It is not clear, however, that one can fully explain away conative states. For the sake of this paper, I shall not go further into the debate, since the notion of pain anticipation exists independently of the predictive coding framework.

  5. One may reply that such a case of emotional recalcitrance does not suffice to prove that there is no anticipatory pain belief insofar as one can entertain contradictory beliefs (Pendoley, 2023).

  6. These effects cannot be explained exclusively in attentional terms. The processing of peripersonal space keeps its unique signature even when attention is shifted away from the hand that receives the somatosensory stimulus and when participants focus on the contralateral side (Zanini et al., 2021). Still, these effects can hardly qualify as cognitive penetration. The impact of nociceptive prediction on pain appears to be closer to multisensory interaction.

  7. Grahek (2001) describes what he calls threat hypersymbolia: as soon as something or someone approaches his arm, a patient made brisk withdrawal movements and reports experiencing a burning pain (Hoogenraad et al., 1994). Similar behaviours can be found in patients with chronic pain (Moseley & Vlaeyen, 2015).

  8. Finally, one can also mention Klein’s (2015a) two-layer account, which distinguishes between pain itself, and painfulness, or what he calls suffering. On his view, painfulness, is not constitutive of pain; it is a distinct attitude taken towards pain. Within this framework, he then defends a body-directed imperative account for pain (e.g. “Don’t put weight on your ankle!”), and a higher-order imperative account for suffering (“Less of this pain!”).

  9. One may wonder whether the imperative content should be more detailed and contextually anchored, specifying exactly the kind of movements to perform given the exact threat. However, the imperative view does not assume that nociceptive prediction takes over motor planning and motor control. It simply claims that it directly provides to the motor system the end to achieve. The specific means to achieve this end are computed by the motor system, which anchors the bodily command to the situation and which organizes the information into action schemas hierarchically organized (Jeannerod, 1997).

  10. However, we cannot fully rule out that the imperative content could explain both effects.

References

  • Anscombe, G. E. A. (1957). Intentions. Harvard University Press.

  • Armstrong, D. M. (1962). Bodily sensations. Routledge and Paul.

  • Arpaly, N., & Schroeder, T. (2013). In praise of Desire. Oxford University Press.

  • Atlas, L. Y., & Wager, T. D. (2012). How expectations shape pain. Neuroscience Letters, 520(2), 140–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avenanti, A., Annela, L., & Serino, A. (2012). Suppression of premotor cortex disrupts motor coding of peripersonal space. Neuroimage, 63(1), 281–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydede, M. (2009). Is feeling Pain the Perception of something? Journal of Philosophy, 106(10), 531–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, D. (2011). The imperative view of pain. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 18(9–10), 164–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, D. (2013). What makes pains unpleasant? Philosophical Studies, 166, S69–S89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, D. (2019). Why take painkillers? Noûs, 53(2), 462–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlassina, L., & Hayward, M. K. (2019). More of me! Less of me! Reflexive imperativism about affective phenomenal character. Mind, 128(512), 1013–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayne, T. (2010). Agentive experiences as pushmi-pullyu representations. In J. Aguilar, A. Buckareff, & K. Frankish (Eds.), New waves in the philosophy of action (pp. 219–236). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Benedetti, F., Frisaldi, E., Barbiani, D., Camerone, E., & Shaibani, A. (2020). Nocebo and the contribution of psychosocial factors to the generation of pain. Journal of Neural Transmission, 127, 687–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berridge, K. C., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2008). Affective neuroscience of pleasure: Reward in humans and animals. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 199, 457–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blini, E., Farnè, A., Brozzoli, C., & Hadj-Bouziane, F. (2021). Close is better: Visual perception in peripersonal space. In de F. Vignemont, F. H. Y. Wong, A. Serino, & A. Farnè (Eds.), The world at our fingertips: A multidisciplinary investigation of Peripersonal space. Oxford University Press.

  • Bordini, D., & Torrengo, G. (2022). Frightening times. European Journal of Philosophy, 30(1), 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. A., Seymour, B., Boyle, Y., El-Deredy, W., & Jones, A. K. P. (2008). Modulation of pain perception by expectation and uncertainty: Behavioral characteristics and anticipatory neural correlates. Pain, 135, 240–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Büchel, C., Geuter, S., Sprenger, C., & Eippert, F. (2014). Placebo analgesia: A predictive coding perspective. Neuron, 81(6), 1223–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bufacchi, R. J., & Iannetti, G. D. (2018). An Action Field Theory of Peripersonal Space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22 (212).

  • Carruthers, P. (2018). Valence and value. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 97(3), 658–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casser, L., & Clarke, S. (2022). Is pain modular? Mind and Language, 38(3), 828–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2020). Beyond desire? Agency, choice, and the predictive mind. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 98(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clery, J., & Ben Hamed, S. (2021). Functional networks for peripersonal space coding and prediction of impact to the body. In de F. Vignemont, F. H. Y. Wong, A. Serino, & A. Farnè (Eds.), The world at our fingertips: A multidisciplinary investigation of Peripersonal space. Oxford University Press.

  • Colloca, L., & Benedetti, F. (2007). Nocebo hyperalgesia: How anxiety is turned into pain. Current Opinion in Anesthesiology, 20(5), 435–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colloca, L., Sigaudo, M., & Benedetti, F. (2008). The role of learning in nocebo and placebo effects. Pain, 136(1–2), 211–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, D. F., & Graziano, M. S. (2004). Sensorimotor integration in the precentral gyrus: Polysensory neurons and defensive movements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 91(4), 1648–1660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, B., & Tye, M. (2014). Pains and reasons: Why it is rational to kill the messenger. The Philosophical Quarterly, 64(256), 423–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, N. (2010). Vivre Sans La Douleur? Odile Jacob.

  • Davis, W. A. (1987). The varieties of fear. Philosophical Studies, 51(3), 287–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Paepe, A. L., Crombez, G., & Legrain, V. (2016). What’s coming near? The influence of dynamical visual stimuli on nociceptive processing. PLoS One, 11(5), e0155864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Paepe, A. L., Crombez, G., & Legrain, V. (2017). Remapping nociceptive stimuli into a peripersonal reference frame is spatially locked to the stimulated limb. Neuropsychologia, 101, 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vignemont, F. (2015). Pain and bodily care: Whose body matters? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93(3), 542–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vignemont, F., Wong, H. Y., Serino, A., & Farnè, A. (Eds.). (2021). The world at our fingertips: A multidisciplinary investigation of Peripersonal space. Oxford University Press.

  • Deonna, J., & Teroni, F. (2012). The emotions. A philosophical introduction. Routledge.

  • Derbyshire, Stuart, W. G., et al. (2004). Cerebral activation during hypnotically induced and imagined pain. Neuroimage, 23(1), 392–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong, W. K., Chudler, E. H., Sugiyama, K., Roberts, V. J., & Hayashi, T. (1994). Somatosensory, multisensory, and task related neurons in cortical area 7b (PF) of unanesthetized monkeys. Journal of Neurophysiology, 72, 542–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dostoyevsky, F. (1872). The devils. Penguins.

  • Dworkin, S. F., Chen, A. C., LeResche, L., & Clark, D. W. (1983). Cognitive reversal of expected nitrous oxide analgesia for acute pain. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 62(12), 1073–1077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filbrich, L., Blandiaux, S., Manfron, L., Farnè, A., De Keyser, R., & Legrain, V. (2019). Unimodal and crossmodal extinction of nociceptive stimuli in healthy volunteers. Behavioural Brain Research, 362, 114–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friston, K. (2013). Active inference and free energy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 212–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geuter, S., Boll, S., Eippert, F., & Büchel, C. (2017). Functional dissociation of stimulus intensity encoding and predictive coding of pain in the insula. Elife, 6, e24770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gligorov, N. (2017). Don’t worry, this will only hurt a bit: The role of expectation and attention in pain intensity. The Monist, 100(4), 501–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grahek, N. (2001). Feeling pain and being in pain. MIT Press.

  • Graziano, M. S. (2018). The spaces between us. A story of Neuroscience, Evolution, and human nature. Oxford University Press.

  • Hemphill, R. E., & Stengel, E. (1940). A study on pure word-deafness. Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry, 3, 251–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hohwy, J. (2018). The predictive processing hypothesis. (in print). In A. Newen, L. Bruin, & S. Gallagher (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press.

  • Hoogenraad, T. U., Ramos, L. M., & Van Gijn, J. (1994). Visually induced central pain and arm withdrawal after right parietal lobe infarction. Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 57(7), 850–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoskin, R., Berzuini, C., Acosta-Kane, D., El-Deredy, W., Guo, H., & Talmi, D. (2019). Sensitivity to pain expectations: A bayesian model of individual differences. Cognition, 182, 127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, H. (2013). Killing the Messenger: Representationalism and the painfulness of Pain. Philosophical Quarterly, 63(252), 509–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, H. (2017). Pain and cognitive penetrability. The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Pain (pp. 266–275). Routledge.

  • Jeannerod, M. (1997). The cognitive neuroscience of action. Wiley.

  • Klein, C. (2015a). When the body commands. MIT Press.

  • Klein, C. (2015b). What pain asymbolia really shows. Mind, 124(494), 493–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, C. (2018). What do predictive coders want? Synthese, 195(6), 2541–2557.

  • Klein, C., & Martinez, M. (2018). Imperativism and Pain Intensity. In D. Bain, M. Brady, & J. Corns (Eds.), The Nature of Pain (pp. 13–26). Routledge.

  • Koyama, T., McHaffie, J. G., Laurienti, P. J., & Coghill, R. C. (2005). The subjective experience of pain: where expectations become reality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(36), 12950–12955.

  • Ledoux, J. (2015). Anxiety. Penguin books.

  • Legrain, V., Iannetti, G. D., Plaghki, L., & Mouraux, A. (2011). The pain matrix reloaded: A salience detection system for the body. Progress in Neurobiology, 93(1), 111–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, M. (2011). Imperative content and the painfulness of pain. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 10(1), 67–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, M. (2015). Pains as reasons. Philosophical Studies, 172(9), 2261–2274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, M. (2022). Imperative Transparency Mind, 131(522), 585–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melzack, R., & Casey, K. L. (1968). Sensory, motivational, and central control determinants of pain: A new conceptual model. The skin Senses, 1, 423–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millikan, R. G. (1995). Pushmi-Pullyu representations. Philosophical Perspectives, 9, 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moseley, G. L., & Vlaeyen, J. W. (2015). Beyond nociception: The imprecision hypothesis of chronic pain. Pain, 156(1), 35–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munton, J. (2022). How to see invisible objects. Noûs, 56(2), 343–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nanay, B. (2017). Pain and mental imagery. The Monist, 100, 485–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pendoley, K. (2023). Stubborn emotions, stubborn beliefs. Synthese, 201(5), 165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ploghaus, A., Tracey, I., Gati, J. S., Clare, S., Menon, R. S., Matthews, P. M., & Rawlins, J. N. P (1999). Dissociating pain from its anticipation in the human brain. Science, 284(5422), 1979–1981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainville, P., Carrier, B., Hofbauer, R. K., Bushnell, M. C., & Duncan, G. H. (1999). Dissociation of sensory and affective dimensions of pain using hypnotic modulation. Pain, 82(2), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (1997). The space around us. Science, 277(5323), 190–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosander, K., & von Hofsten, C. (2004). Infants’ emerging ability to represent occluded object motion. Cognition, 91(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti, A., Romano, D., Bolognini, N., & Maravita, A. (2015). Dynamic expansion of alert responses to incoming painful stimuli following tool use. Neuropsychologia, 70, 486–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomons, T. V., Iannetti, G. D., Liang, M., & Wood, J. N. (2016). The pain matrix in pain-free individuals. JAMA Neurology, 73(6), 755–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharvit, G., Corradi-Dell’Acqua, C., & Vuilleumier, P. (2018). Modality-specific effects of aversive expectancy in the anterior insula and medial prefrontal cortex. Pain, 159(8), 1529–1542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shevlin, H., & Friesen, P. (2021). Pain, placebo, and cognitive penetration. Mind & Language, 36(5), 771–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shih, Y. W., Tsai, H. Y., Lin, F. S., Lin, Y. H., Chiang, C. Y., Lu, Z. L., & Tseng, M. T. (2019). Effects of positive and negative expectations on human pain perception engage separate but interrelated and dependently regulated cerebral mechanisms. Journal of Neuroscience, 39(7), 1261–1274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straka, Z., Noel, J. P., & Hoffmann, M. (2022). A normative model of peripersonal space encoding as performing impact prediction. PLOS Computational Biology, 18(9), e1010464.

  • Tamietto, M., & de Gelder, B. (2010). Neural bases of the non-conscious perception of emotional signals. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 697–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tresilian, J. R. (1999). Visually timed action: Time-out for ‘tau’? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(8), 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urien, L., Xiao, Z., Dale, J., Bauer, E. P., Chen, Z., & Wang, J. (2018). Rate and temporal coding mechanisms in the anterior cingulate cortex for pain anticipation. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlaeyen, J. W., & Linton, S. J. (2000). Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: A state of the art. Pain, 85, 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wager, T. D., Rilling, J. K., Smith, E. E., Sokolik, A., Casey, K. L., Davidson, R. J., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Placebo-induced changes in FMRI in the anticipation and experience of pain. Science, 303(5661), 1162–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolpert, D. M., & Flanagan, J. R. (2001). Motor prediction. Current Biology, 11(18), R729–R732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanini, A., Patané, I., Blini, E., Salemme, R., Koun, E., Farnè, A., & Brozzoli, C. (2021). Peripersonal and reaching space differ: Evidence from their spatial extent and multisensory facilitation pattern. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(6), 1894–1905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Hilla Jacobson and Luca Barlassina for their extremely useful comments on previous versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut Jean Nicod, CNRS—EHESS—ENS—PSL University, 29 rue d’Ulm, Paris, 75005, France

    Frederique de Vignemont

Authors
  1. Frederique de Vignemont
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederique de Vignemont.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Vignemont, F. Expecting pain. Synthese 202, 156 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04394-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04394-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation