Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35236183›Full record

ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2023

The action dynamics of approach-avoidance conflict during decision-making.

Santiago Garcia-Guerrero, Denis O'Hora, Arkady Zgonnikov, Stefan Scherbaum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Santiago Garcia-GuerreroSchool of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-5819-1805
Denis O'HoraSchool of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-3776-6782
Arkady ZgonnikovSchool of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Stefan ScherbaumDepartment of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approach-avoidance conflict is observed in the competing motivations towards the benefits and away from the costs of a decision. The current study investigates the action dynamics of response motion during such conflicts in an attempt to characterise their dynamic resolution. An approach-avoidance conflict was generated by varying the appetitive consequences of a decision (i.e., point rewards and shorter participation time) in the presence of simultaneous aversive consequences (i.e., shock probability). Across two experiments, approach-avoidance conflict differentially affected response trajectories. Approach trajectories were less complex than avoidance trajectories and, as approach and avoidance motivations neared equipotentiality, response trajectories were more deflected from the shortest route to the eventual choice. Consistency in the location of approach and avoidance response options reduced variability in performance enabling more sensitive estimates of dynamic conflict. The time course of competing influences on response trajectories including trial-to-trial effects and conflict between approach and avoidance were estimated using regression analyses. We discuss these findings in terms of a dynamic theory of approach-avoidance that we hope will lead to insights of practical relevance in the field of maladaptive avoidance.

Indexed as

Avoidance LearningDecision MakingConflict, PsychologicalHumansMotivationRewardApproachapproach-avoidance conflictavoidancemouse-trackingshock

Identifiers

PMID35236183
PMCPMC9773158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.