Overcoming Automatic Behavioral Tendencies in Approach‐Avoidance Conflict Decisions.
Saved in:
| Title: | Overcoming Automatic Behavioral Tendencies in Approach‐Avoidance Conflict Decisions. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Chen, Menghuan (AUTHOR), Reutter, Mario (AUTHOR), Pauli, Paul (AUTHOR), Gamer, Matthias (AUTHOR), Pittig, Andre (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Psychophysiology. Jul2025, Vol. 62 Issue 7, p1-16. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Aversive stimuli, Individual differences, Incentive (Psychology), Psychotherapy, Reward (Psychology), Reflexes, Conflict (Psychology), Response inhibition |
| Abstract: | Adequate control over automatic responses to affective stimuli is crucial for adaptive goal‐oriented behavior. However, it remains unclear how individuals overcome automatic approach‐avoidance tendencies to appetitive and aversive stimuli. Here we examined free versus forced approach‐avoidance decisions to four conditioned stimuli (CSs), which were previously paired with either a single aversive (avCS+) or appetitive outcome (appCS+), both (i.e., conflicting) outcomes (confCS+), or no outcome (neuCS−). These CSs were presented in an anticipation phase before participants could use a joystick to either approach and obtain CS‐specific outcomes or avoid without getting anything. Response times, subjective ratings, heart rate, and eye‐tracking data were recorded in N = 75 participants. Results revealed that for single outcomes, concordant responses (e.g., avoidance to the avCS+) were faster than forced discordant responses (e.g., approach to the avCS+). During anticipation, gaze fixations shifted towards the spatial location associated with the concordant response for single‐outcome stimuli (e.g., upward for avoidance of avCS+). Conflicting stimuli elicited intermediate behavioral and gaze patterns at the group level, while exploratory analyses revealed substantial individual differences: High avoiders (i.e., participants showing an overall high proportion of avoidance) exhibited slower approach responses and greater threat‐focused visual attention compared to low avoiders. Decreased heart rate in response to all CSs suggests a general preparation of behavioral responses, while increased pupil dilation during the anticipation of aversive stimuli indicates threat‐related processing. These findings suggest that competing outcomes can amplify individual differences in motivational salience and therefore might inspire clinical interventions focused on inhibiting disorder‐specific behavioral tendencies. Impact Statement: This study advances our understanding of how individuals control automatic approach and avoidance tendencies to appetitive and aversive stimuli. Merging behavioral, physiological, and oculomotor responses, it reveals that competing outcomes facilitate behavioral inhibition, which may inspire the development of clinical interventions targeting at enhancing inhibitory control and promoting adaptive behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Psychophysiology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 1 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: pbh DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection An: 186954193 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Overcoming Automatic Behavioral Tendencies in Approach‐Avoidance Conflict Decisions. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chen%2C+Menghuan%22">Chen, Menghuan</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Reutter%2C+Mario%22">Reutter, Mario</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pauli%2C+Paul%22">Pauli, Paul</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gamer%2C+Matthias%22">Gamer, Matthias</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pittig%2C+Andre%22">Pittig, Andre</searchLink> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Psychophysiology%22">Psychophysiology</searchLink>. Jul2025, Vol. 62 Issue 7, p1-16. 16p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Aversive+stimuli%22">Aversive stimuli</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individual+differences%22">Individual differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Incentive+%28Psychology%29%22">Incentive (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychotherapy%22">Psychotherapy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reward+%28Psychology%29%22">Reward (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reflexes%22">Reflexes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Conflict+%28Psychology%29%22">Conflict (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Response+inhibition%22">Response inhibition</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Adequate control over automatic responses to affective stimuli is crucial for adaptive goal‐oriented behavior. However, it remains unclear how individuals overcome automatic approach‐avoidance tendencies to appetitive and aversive stimuli. Here we examined free versus forced approach‐avoidance decisions to four conditioned stimuli (CSs), which were previously paired with either a single aversive (avCS+) or appetitive outcome (appCS+), both (i.e., conflicting) outcomes (confCS+), or no outcome (neuCS−). These CSs were presented in an anticipation phase before participants could use a joystick to either approach and obtain CS‐specific outcomes or avoid without getting anything. Response times, subjective ratings, heart rate, and eye‐tracking data were recorded in N = 75 participants. Results revealed that for single outcomes, concordant responses (e.g., avoidance to the avCS+) were faster than forced discordant responses (e.g., approach to the avCS+). During anticipation, gaze fixations shifted towards the spatial location associated with the concordant response for single‐outcome stimuli (e.g., upward for avoidance of avCS+). Conflicting stimuli elicited intermediate behavioral and gaze patterns at the group level, while exploratory analyses revealed substantial individual differences: High avoiders (i.e., participants showing an overall high proportion of avoidance) exhibited slower approach responses and greater threat‐focused visual attention compared to low avoiders. Decreased heart rate in response to all CSs suggests a general preparation of behavioral responses, while increased pupil dilation during the anticipation of aversive stimuli indicates threat‐related processing. These findings suggest that competing outcomes can amplify individual differences in motivational salience and therefore might inspire clinical interventions focused on inhibiting disorder‐specific behavioral tendencies. Impact Statement: This study advances our understanding of how individuals control automatic approach and avoidance tendencies to appetitive and aversive stimuli. Merging behavioral, physiological, and oculomotor responses, it reveals that competing outcomes facilitate behavioral inhibition, which may inspire the development of clinical interventions targeting at enhancing inhibitory control and promoting adaptive behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Psychophysiology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=186954193 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1111/psyp.70101 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 16 StartPage: 1 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Aversive stimuli Type: general – SubjectFull: Individual differences Type: general – SubjectFull: Incentive (Psychology) Type: general – SubjectFull: Psychotherapy Type: general – SubjectFull: Reward (Psychology) Type: general – SubjectFull: Reflexes Type: general – SubjectFull: Conflict (Psychology) Type: general – SubjectFull: Response inhibition Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Overcoming Automatic Behavioral Tendencies in Approach‐Avoidance Conflict Decisions. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Chen, Menghuan – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Reutter, Mario – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Pauli, Paul – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Gamer, Matthias – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Pittig, Andre IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 07 Text: Jul2025 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 00485772 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 62 – Type: issue Value: 7 Titles: – TitleFull: Psychophysiology Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
