Approach Does Not Equal Approach

Abstract

There is inconsistent evidence as to whether angry faces evoke approach or avoidance tendencies. The present research sought to resolve this debate. We suggest that approach–avoidance movements can serve various goals (e.g., affiliation, aggression). Furthermore, we assume that these goals determine the effect of angry faces on approach–avoidance tendencies. In particular, angry faces communicate aggressive intentions and may therefore evoke aggressive tendencies in the perceiver. Thus, angry faces should trigger approach only when it serves aggression but not when it serves affiliation. Three studies showed that angry faces facilitated approach, when the behavior was represented as aggressive approach, but not when it was represented as peaceful approach. Furthermore, when approach was represented as peaceful approach and, hence, aggression was not an available option, angry faces facilitated avoidance. In sum, angry faces can evoke approach or avoidance, depending on the goals associated with these behaviors.