A fundamental piece of the social motivational architecture is social valuation, a class of computational states whose function is to adaptively regulate cost-benefit transactions with others. Various adaptive problems of social valuation (e.g. kin selection, discriminative association) shaped multiple neuro-computational adaptations that attend to, compute, store, and deploy information in the service of calibrating social valuation. Social valuation is realized by internal regulatory variables that summarize various inputs (e.g. Kinship Index, Association Value). One such variable, the welfare tradeoff ratio (WTR), indexes the weight one places on another’s welfare relative to one’s own welfare (chapter 1). Experimental data indicate that WTRs are target-specific and decrease with stakes, and that the magnitude of this decrease is itself target-specific (chapter 2). Those who value one’s welfare highly are more worthy of social investment. That is, others’ WTRs for one are expected to be an input of one’s WTRs for others. The estimation of others’ WTRs for one is thus expected to be accurate. In effect, people accurately estimate others’ WTRs for them, over and above their generalized generosity (chapter 3). Imperfect information and noise may render a current WTR outdated with respect to its optimum value, and the mind possesses mechanisms for the recalibration of WTRs—recalibrational emotions. Guilt up-regulates one’s WTR for another when it has been set too low. Gratitude up-regulates the WTR when another reveals more social value than one had reckoned. Anger down-regulates the WTR in response to receiving a low WTR from another. These recalibrations are targeted and operate on rates of benefit delivery and cost imposition (chapter 4). A decrease in the social value of one for others leads to social devaluation of one by others. Shame is hypothesized to be an adaptation for buffering this social devaluation (chapter 5). Some situations, such as stealing money from colleagues, co-mobilize shame and guilt. The modulation of these emotions follows functionally distinct logics, though. For example, the cost imposed on others aggravates both shame and guilt. On the other hand, the publicity of the situation exacerbates shame but not guilt (chapter 6).