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.     

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.     

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 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.     

End of the line: Line bisection,an unreliable measure of approach and avoidance motivation

Approach motivation leads to greater left hemisphere activation, whereas an avoidant motivational state activates the right hemisphere. Recent research, which served as the basis for the current experiment, suggests line bisection provides a simple measure of approach/avoidance lateralisation. Findings from Experiment 1 indicated that the landmark task was sensitive enough to identify lateral asymmetries evoked by happy and angry faces; however, follow-up experiments failed to replicate this finding. When task instructions were slightly modified or when a mixed design was used, motivation did not influence landmark task performance. The use of images in lieu of faces also failed to produce a significant effect. Importantly, a straight replication of Experiment 1 produced a null result. Line bisection does not appear to be a suitable measure of lateralised approach/avoidance biases, possibly due to the high individual variability inherent in visuospatial biases. Implications for null hypothesis significance testing are also discussed.     

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.     

Unique associations between anxiety,depression and motives for approach and avoidance goal pursuit

This study investigated the shared and distinct associations between depressive and anxious symptoms and motives for pursuing personal goals. One hundred and thirty-six undergraduates generated approach and avoidance goals and rated each on intrinsic, identified, introjected and external motives. Anxious and depressive symptoms showed significant unique associations with distinct motives. Specifically, depressive symptoms predicted significant unique variance in intrinsic motivation for approach goals (but not avoidance goals), whereas anxious symptoms predicted significant unique variance in introjected regulation for approach and avoidance goals. Some of these findings were moderated by gender. The findings broadly support the notion that depression is uniquely characterised by reduced enjoyment of approach goal pursuit whereas anxiety is uniquely characterised by pursuit of goals in order to avoid negative outcomes. We suggest that these findings are compatible with regulatory focus theory and suggest that motives for goal pursuit are important in understanding the relation between goals and specific mood disorder symptoms.     

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.     

Underlying motivation in the approach and avoidance goals of depressed and non-depressed individuals

Neurobiological theories predict decreased approach motivation and increased avoidance motivation in depression, but the results of previous studies have been equivocal. This study addressed a key limitation of previous research by assessing participants' underlying motivation for adopting their goals. Depressed (N=26) and non-depressed (N=33) participants listed approach and avoidance goals and wrote down their underlying reasons for adopting those goals. The groups did not differ on either the number of goals or underlying reasons but when underlying reasons were coded for approach or avoidance motivation depressed participants, compared to controls, showed less approach motivation and more avoidance motivation in relation to their approach goals. There were no effects related to avoidance goals. The results suggest that while the goals of depressed persons appear to be similar to those who are not depressed there are important differences at the level of underlying motivation.     

Effects of approach and withdrawal motivation on interactive economic decisions

Although recent economic models of human decision making have recognised the role of emotion as an important biasing factor, the impact of incidental emotion on decisions has remained poorly explored. To address this question, we jointly explored the role of emotional valence (i.e., positive vs. negative) and motivational direction (i.e., approach vs. avoidance) on performance in a well-known economic task, the Ultimatum Game. Participants had to either accept or reject monetary offers from other players, offers that vary in their degree of unfairness. A main effect of motivational direction, but not valence, was observed, with withdrawal-based emotion (disgust and serenity) prompting more rejections relative to approach-based emotion (anger and amusement) and a neutral state. These results further confirm that subtle incidental moods can bias decision making, and suggest that motivational state may be a useful framework to study such decisions. Implications with regard to emotion, cognitive neuroscience, and clinical psychology are discussed.     

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.