Approach versus avoidance and the polarity principle-On an unrecognized ambiguity of the approach/avoidance paradigm.

Abstract

The present study examined the role of polarity correspondence (Proctor & Cho, 2006) in the approach/avoidance task. It was hypothesized that the typically found approach/avoidance effect could (at least in part) be explained by matching polarities of the stimuli and the response alternatives. To test this hypothesis, polarity of the stimuli was manipulated in three experiments. Experiment 1 showed that two neutral categories elicited an approach/avoidance asymmetry similar to that typically found for positive and negative stimuli when the categorization of stimuli was framed as "yes (Category A)" versus "no (not Category A)." This pattern is explained by assuming a polarity match between the "yes" category and the approach response. Experiment 2 used positive (flowers) versus negative (insects) categories. In a control condition, a typical compatibility effect was found (i.e., positive [negative] items relatively facilitated approach [avoidance]). However, when the task consisted of categorizing insects as the + polarity ("yes, insect" vs. "no, no insect"), the compatibility effect reversed; it was significantly increased when flowers were the "yes" category. In Experiment 3, polarity of positive/negative stimuli (flowers/insects) was manipulated prior to completion of a standard approach/avoidance task with flowers and insects as stimuli. Approximately the same pattern of results (albeit less pronounced) was found as in Experiment 2. The results suggest that results with the approach/avoidance task interpreted in terms of valence or motivational relevance may be (partly) due to polarity differences. This should be taken into account if these effects are routinely interpreted in terms of valence or motivational relevance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).