Highlighting the difference between approach and avoidance motivation enhances the predictive validity of performance-avoidance goal reports

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily J. Hangen ◽  
Andrew J. Elliot ◽  
Jeremy P. Jamieson
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Approach And Avoidance ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach And Avoidance Motivation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Avoidance Goal

Approach and Avoidance Motivation: Issues and Advances

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas B. Eder ◽  
Andrew J. Elliot ◽  
Eddie Harmon-Jones
Keyword(s):  
Approach And Avoidance ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach And Avoidance Motivation

scholarly journals Big Five traits, approach-avoidance motivation, concerns and adherence with COVID-19 prevention guidelines during peak of pandemics in Croatia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Zuro ◽  
Dino Krupic
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Hierarchical Regression ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Approach And Avoidance ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach And Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Prevention Guidelines

Without the vaccine, only way to prevent the spread of coronavirus is following COVID-19 preventive guidelines such as keeping social distance, wearing masks and gloves, reducing mobility, etc. Success depends on how many individuals strictly follow the suggestions from epidemiologists. In this study we examine who and why is adhering with the guidelines. A community sample of 500 participants fulfilled short Big Five Inventory, Questionnaire of Approach and Avoidance Motivation (QAAM) and two scales constructed according to the COVID-19 epidemiological guidelines in Croatia. The results of hierarchical regression analysis indicate that agreeable and conscientious individuals are complying more with preventive measures. In addition, approach, not avoidance, motivation appears to be more important in following the guidelines. Results are discussed in terms of framing messages to explain goals that might be reached by compliant behaviour rather than emphasizing negative consequences of pandemic as such messages seem to produce negative emotional states with no beneficial changes on the behavioural level.

scholarly journals Love to Win or Hate to Lose? Asymmetry of Dopamine D2 Receptor Binding Predicts Sensitivity to Reward versus Punishment

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 1039-1048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Tomer ◽  
Heleen A. Slagter ◽  
Bradley T. Christian ◽  
Andrew S. Fox ◽  
Carlye R. King ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Receptor Binding ◽  
Dopamine D2 Receptor ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Approach And Avoidance ◽  
Sensitivity To Reward ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach And Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Dopamine Signaling ◽  
Dopamine Receptor Binding ◽  
Motivational Bias

Humans show consistent differences in the extent to which their behavior reflects a bias toward appetitive approach-related behavior or avoidance of aversive stimuli [Elliot, A. J. Approach and avoidance motivation. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation (pp. 3–14). New York: Psychology Press, 2008]. We examined the hypothesis that in healthy participants this motivational bias (assessed by self-report and by a probabilistic learning task that allows direct comparison of the relative sensitivity to reward and punishment) reflects lateralization of dopamine signaling. Using [F-18]fallypride to measure D2/D3 binding, we found that self-reported motivational bias was predicted by the asymmetry of frontal D2 binding. Similarly, striatal and frontal asymmetries in D2 dopamine receptor binding, rather than absolute binding levels, predicted individual differences in learning from reward versus punishment. These results suggest that normal variation in asymmetry of dopamine signaling may, in part, underlie human personality and cognition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document