Approach, avoidance, and inhibition: Personality traits predict cognitive control abilities

The extent to which approach and avoidance personality trait sensitivities are associated with specific cognitive control abilities as well as with verbal and nonverbal domains remains unclear. In the current study, we investigated whether approach and avoidance trait sensitivities predict performance on verbal and nonverbal versions of the Stroop task, which taps the specific cognitive control ability of inhibiting task-irrelevant information. The findings from the current study indicate that whereas approach (specifically, Extraversion) sensitivity was predictive of verbal Stroop performance, avoidance (specifically, Behavioral Inhibition System) sensitivity was predictive of nonverbal Stroop performance. These results provide novel evidence suggestive of the integration of motivational personality traits and the ability to inhibit task-irrelevant information in a domain-specific fashion.     

Miller (1944) revisited: Movement times in relation to approach and avoidance conflicts

Three experiments (total N = 291) sought to provide support for the idea that avoidance conflicts, relative to approach conflicts, are more difficult to motorically resolve. Conflicts were instantiated by asking individuals to approach desirable stimuli and avoid undesirable stimuli under conditions in which there was no objectively-correct direction of movement. To control for baseline movement speeds, non-conflict trials presented desirable (e.g., reward) and undesirable (e.g., threat) stimuli in the absence of any spatial conflict. In addition, movement times were isolated through the use of a joystick movement paradigm in which movement speeds were quantified subsequent to some initial tendency to move in one direction or the other. Consistent with hypotheses, all experiments found that movement times were slowed in the context of avoidance conflicts relative to approach conflicts. Results are discussed in terms of theories of motivation, affective processing, conflict, and anxiety.     

Approach, avoidance, and self-regulatory conflict: An individual differences perspective

Four studies involving 230 undergraduates examined the interactive effects of dispositional approach and avoidance, as manifest in the traits of extraversion and neuroticism. Participants who were high in both traits or low in both traits exhibited less assertive knocking behavior (Study 1), had difficulties refraining from blinking (Study 2), and displayed more anxious behavior during a mental health interview (Study 3). Study 4 tested the idea that such extraversion by neuroticism interactions might be associated with difficulties in recognizing and responding to goal-relevant stimuli. Results involving a go/no go task confirmed this hypothesis. In total, the results highlight the manner in which the co-activation of dispositional motives related to approach and avoidance can compromise effective self-regulation.     

Approach and avoidance as action effects

Numerous studies use arm movements (arm flexion and extension) to investigate the interaction between emotional stimuli and approach/avoidance behaviour. In many experiments, however, these arm movements are ambiguous. Arm flexion can be interpreted either as pulling (approach) or as withdrawing (avoidance). On the contrary, arm extension can be interpreted as reaching (approach) or as pushing (avoidance). This ambiguity can be resolved by regarding approach and avoidance as flexible action plans that are represented in terms of their effects. Approach actions reduce the distance between a stimulus and the self, whereas avoidance actions increase that distance. In this view, action effects are an integral part of the representation of an action. As a result, a neutral action can become an approach or avoidance reaction if it repeatedly results in decreasing or increasing the distance to a valenced stimulus. This hypothesis was tested in the current study. Participants responded to positive and negative words using key-presses. These “neutral” responses (not involving arm flexion or extension) were consistently followed by a stimulus movement toward or away from the participant. Responses to emotional words were faster when the response's effect was congruent with stimulus valence, suggesting that approach/avoidance actions are indeed defined in terms of their outcomes.     

Approach and avoidance motivation as predictors of pro-relationship behaviors

Pro-relationship behaviors, such as willingness to sacrifice, are assumed to be driven by both approach and avoidance motivation. However, this assumption has not been directly tested. In two studies, we examined how individual differences in approach and avoidance motivation predicted pro-relationship behavior. In Study 1, avoidance (but not approach) motivation uniquely predicted sacrificial behavior. In Study 2, sacrificing was uniquely predicted by avoidance motivation, whereas accommodation was uniquely predicted by approach motivation. These data suggest that although both sacrificing and accommodation are pro-relationship behaviors, they are driven by different motivational systems, which in turn may result in different long-term relational outcomes.     

Moving forward is not only a metaphor: Approach and avoidance lead to self-evaluative assimilation and contrast

Could it be that walking toward (vs. away) someone else changes your self-evaluation in the direction of what this person is? We answer positively and argue that approach movements lead to self-evaluative assimilation (a higher self-evaluation with a high vs. a low standard), while avoidance movements lead to self-evaluative contrast (a lower self-evaluation with a high vs. a low standard). Hence, we predict that approach/avoidance moderates the impact of comparison information on self-evaluation. To test this idea, participants were either primed with approach or avoidance before processing comparison information (Study 1) or physically had to walk toward or away from this information (Studies 2 and 3). Results on self-evaluated adjustment (Studies 1 and 2) and self-evaluated attractiveness measures (Study 3) confirmed our predictions. These studies suggest ways to behave to self-evaluate positively when hearing about others.     

When self-protection overreaches: Relationship-specific threat activates domain-general avoidance motivation

Murray, Holmes, and Collins’ [Murray, Holmes, and Collins (2006) Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 641-666] interpersonal risk regulation model posits that people cope with threats to their romantic relationships by prioritizing self-protection goals over connectedness goals. The current paper tests whether these relationship-specific responses to threat are reflective of broader shifts in motivation. In Study 1, participants were quicker to identify avoidance-related words than approach-related words following a relationship-specific threat. In Study 2, threatened participants performed better than control participants on an anagram task under an avoidance frame, but not under an approach frame. These results suggest that relationship threat nonconsciously heightens global avoidance motivation and that the interpersonal risk regulation model may originate from a more fundamental approach-avoidance system.     

Self-Report Measures of Individual Differences in Regulatory Focus: A Cautionary Note

Regulatory focus theory distinguishes between two independent structures of strategic inclination, promotion versus prevention. However, the theory implies two potentially independent definitions of these inclinations, the self-guide versus the reference-point definitions. Two scales (the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire, Higgins al., 2001, and the General Regulatory Focus Measure, Lockwood, Jordan, & Kunda, 2002) have been widely used to measure dispositional regulatory focus. We suggest that these two scales align respectively with the two definitions, and find that the two scales are largely uncorrelated. Both conceptual and methodological implications are discussed.     

Approach and Avoidance Relationship Commitment

The current paper proposes that relationship commitment is a goal; and as such, is regulated by the approach and avoidance dimensions. We suggest that two types of commitment exist: approach commitment, the desire to maintain and continue the relationship, and avoidance commitment, the desire to avoid relationship dissolution. Specifically, approach commitment is associated with a desire for future relationship incentives and rewards; and avoidance commitment is a desire to avoid the negative consequences or costs of relationship dissolution. In this paper, we evaluate previous research on relationship commitment from an approach and avoidance goal theory perspective, and then present an approach and avoidance commitment model and hypotheses testable in future research.     

Thou shalt not discriminate: How emphasizing moral ideals rather than obligations increases Whites' support for social equality

An important step toward reducing group-based disparities in society is creating support for equality among advantaged group members (e.g., Whites and men). The current research examined how presenting social equality between ethnic groups in terms of moral ideals (i.e., equal treatment) vs. moral obligations (i.e., non-discrimination) affected the attitudes of Whites (students in Study 1, N = 45 and 2, N = 44 and employees in Study 3a, N = 67 and Study 3b, N = 62) toward various social equality issues. It was found that participants in the moral ideals condition reported more activation rather than inhibition tendencies regarding equality (Study 1), were more supportive of affirmative action (Study 2), indicated lower levels of social identity threat, and were more favorable toward cultural diversity which resulted in greater prioritization of equality (Study 3a) than those in the moral obligation condition. These effects did not arise when the ideals/obligations distinction was applied to a nonmoral domain (i.e., competence, Study 3b), underlining the central argument that these processes are specific to morality. The broader theoretical implications for morality and intergroup research are discussed.     

Conflict: Run! Reduced Stroop interference with avoidance responses

Conflict has been hypothesized to be aversive, triggering avoidance behaviour (Botvinick, 2007). To test this hypothesis, a standard Stroop task was modified such that avoiding was part of the response set. More precisely, participants were asked to move a manikin towards or away from Stroop stimuli, depending on the colour of the words. Results showed that the type of response (approach versus avoidance) modulated the Stroop congruency effect. Specifically, the reaction time analysis revealed that the stimulus congruency effect disappeared with avoidance responses, contrary to approach responses where a stimulus congruency effect was present. Moreover, the error data showed a reduction of the general congruency effect when avoiding. These results suggest that in the face of conflict, avoidance is the predominant response.     

Helping and proactive extra-role behaviors: The influence of motives, goal orientation, and social context

We explore how two motivational orientations (communion and status striving) influence three extra-role organizational behaviors: proactive engagement, providing help, and seeking help. We propose and confirm intervening mechanisms, in the form of (a) goal orientations and (b) attitudes toward coworkers. Proactive behaviors are predicted by status striving, through the intervening mechanisms of both learning and performance proving goal orientations. Providing help is, in turn, motivated by communion striving, and the relationship is mediated by goal orientations (learning and performance avoiding) and by satisfaction with and commitment to coworkers. Finally, seeking help is a function of communion striving, which influences the outcome through learning goal orientation and satisfaction with and confidence in coworkers.     

An emotional signature of political ideology: Evidence from two linguistic content-coding studies

Approach–avoidance frameworks for political ideology have been proposed with increasing frequency. Following such frameworks and a wider motivation–emotion literature, it was hypothesized that political ideology would be predictive of the extent to which anxiety (avoidance-related) versus anger (approach-related) words would be evident in written texts. Study 1 sampled user-generated text within conservative versus liberal Internet chat rooms. After correcting for the greater normative frequency of anger words, a crossover ideology by emotion type interaction was found. Study 2 found a parallel interaction among college students writing about a non-political topic. Political ideology thus has a discrete emotional signature, one favoring anxiety among conservatives and anger among liberals.     

Approach/avoidance motives, test emotions, and emotional regulation related to testing

This research stems from our program of work that focuses on understanding how students regulated their emotions related to testing. The primary goal for this study was to incorporate the approach/ avoidance motives into a model of emotional regulation related to testing. In addition, a secondary goal was to report on efforts at construct validation of the scores obtained during the refinement of the Emotional Regulation Related to Testing (ERT) Scale. Our results suggest that underlying beliefs, such as approach/avoid motives and the cognitive-appraisal process, of the ERT had both direct and indirect effects to both pleasant and unpleasant emotions related to testing. In addition, the ERT accounted for 56% of the variance in Pleasant and 87% of Unpleasant Test Emotions.     

Approach/avoidance motivation, message framing, and health behavior: understanding the congruency effect

Health messages framed to be congruent with individuals’ approach/avoidance motivations have been found to be more effective in promoting health behaviors than health messages incongruent with approach/avoidance motivations. This study examines the processes underlying this congruency effect. Participants (undergraduate students, N=67) completed a measure of approach/avoidance orientation (the BIS/BAS scales) and read either a gain- or loss-framed message promoting dental flossing. Results demonstrated a congruency effect: Participants who read a congruently framed message had greater flossing efficacy, intended to floss more, and used more dental flosses than did the participants who read an incongruent message. Moreover, intention to perform the behavior predicted the congruency effect and self-efficacy mediated participants’ intentions to perform the health behavior. Discussion centers on the role of personality factors and situational factors in models of behavior change.

Dare to compare: Fact-based versus simulation-based comparison in daily life

We examined the relative frequency of social, counterfactual, past-temporal, and future-temporal comparison in daily life using an experience-sampling method, in which participants were randomly prompted to record thought samples using palmtop computers carried for two weeks. Comparative thought accounted for 12% of all thoughts, and all four comparison types occurred with equivalent frequency. Comparisons may be either fact-based (i.e., based on actuality, as in social and past-temporal comparison) or simulation-based (i.e., based on imagination, as in counterfactual and future-temporal comparison). Because the latter are more “unbounded,” and because greater perceived opportunity invites greater self-improvement, we predicted and found that counterfactual and future-temporal comparison were more likely to be upward (vs. downward) than social and past-temporal comparison. All comparison types focused on approach more than avoidance motives, except for counterfactuals, which showed equivalent focus on both. These findings reveal the prominence of comparative thought in daily life, and underscore the value of an integrative theory that describes social, counterfactual, or temporal comparison using a common theoretical platform.     

The relationship between rumination, avoidance and depression in a non-clinical sample

Recent commentaries have proposed conceptualizations of rumination in terms of both cognitive and behavioral avoidance. This study examined the relationship between rumination, avoidance and depression using a newly developed self-report measure of avoidance in depression, the Cognitive-Behavioral Avoidance Scale (CBAS) [Ottenbreit, N.D., & Dobson, K.S. (2004). Avoidance and depression: The construction of the cognitive-behavioral avoidance scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 293-313]. A non-clinical sample (N=104) of undergraduate students completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, rumination and avoidance. Rumination, avoidance and depression were all significantly correlated. Rumination and behavioral avoidance remained intercorrelated when anxiety was controlled, confirming an association that is independent of anxiety. By contrast, the relationship between cognitive avoidance and rumination disappeared when anxiety was partialled out. Notably, avoidance predicted unique variance in depression scores, over and above anxiety and rumination. Consistent with the proposal of Ottenbreit and Dobson [Avoidance and depression: The construction of the cognitive-behavioral avoidance scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 293-313], our findings support the value of clinicians and psychopathologists giving consideration to avoidance in their conceptualization of depression.     

Goals and responses to failure: Knowing when to hold them and when to fold them

The ability to disengage from hopeless situations is critical to goal attainment and effective self-regulation. Two experiments investigated the effects of striving to attain success (approach goals) versus striving to avoid failure (avoidance goals) on persistence. Participants completed anagrams designed so that less persistence during an initial set of unsolvable anagrams was beneficial. In Study 1, participants reported how motivated they were by approach and avoidance goals. In Study 2, participants were primed to set approach or avoidance goals. Participants with avoidance goals persisted longer during failure, with more intense and enduring emotional distress, than those with approach goals. Greater anger predicted spending more time on subsequent unsolvable anagrams and accounted for differences in persistence. The results suggest that people with approach goals are better able to identify when they should disengage during failure, and disengage more completely, than people with avoidance goals. An earlier version of this article was presented at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology conference, Palm Springs, CA, January, 2006.     

Power, stability of power, and creativity

Power hierarchies are an essential aspect of social organization, create stability and social order, and provide individuals with incentives to climb the hierarchical ladder. Extending previous work on power and creativity, we put forward that this relationship critically depends on both the stability of the power hierarchy and the relevance of creative efforts to power. Across three experiments, we show that when power positions are unstable, low power individuals are more flexible thinkers, are less avoidant and process information more globally. Consequently, they achieve more creative insights, especially when being creative is relevant to power. As such, when the power hierarchy is unstable, those lacking power hold the power to creativity.