Conflict in a word-based approach-avoidance task is stronger with positive words.
approach
avoidance
event-related potential
manikin task
motivation
Journal
Brain and behavior
ISSN: 2162-3279
Titre abrégé: Brain Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101570837
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2023
06 2023
Historique:
revised:
21
03
2023
received:
27
09
2021
accepted:
27
03
2023
medline:
19
6
2023
pubmed:
11
5
2023
entrez:
11
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Valence and motivational direction are linked. We approach good things and avoid bad things, and experience overriding these links as conflicting. Positive valence is more consistently linked with approach than negative valence is linked with avoidance. Therefore, avoiding positive stimuli should produce greater behavioral and neural signs of conflict than approaching negative stimuli. In the present event-related potential study, we tested this assumption by contrasting positive and negative conflict. We used the manikin task, in which we read positive and negative words that they needed to approach and avoid. Consistent with our prediction, positive conflict prolonged reaction times more than negative conflict did. A late (500-1000 ms following word onset) event-related potential that we identified as the Conflict slow potential, was only sensitive to positive conflict. The results of this study support the notion that avoiding positive stimuli is more conflicting than approaching negative stimuli. The fact that the conflict slow potential is typically sensitive to response conflict rather than stimulus conflict suggests that the manikin task primarily requires people to override prepotent responses rather than to identify conflicting stimuli. Thus, the present findings also shed light on the psychological processes subserving conflict resolution in the manikin task.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Valence and motivational direction are linked. We approach good things and avoid bad things, and experience overriding these links as conflicting. Positive valence is more consistently linked with approach than negative valence is linked with avoidance. Therefore, avoiding positive stimuli should produce greater behavioral and neural signs of conflict than approaching negative stimuli.
METHODS
In the present event-related potential study, we tested this assumption by contrasting positive and negative conflict. We used the manikin task, in which we read positive and negative words that they needed to approach and avoid.
RESULTS
Consistent with our prediction, positive conflict prolonged reaction times more than negative conflict did. A late (500-1000 ms following word onset) event-related potential that we identified as the Conflict slow potential, was only sensitive to positive conflict.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study support the notion that avoiding positive stimuli is more conflicting than approaching negative stimuli. The fact that the conflict slow potential is typically sensitive to response conflict rather than stimulus conflict suggests that the manikin task primarily requires people to override prepotent responses rather than to identify conflicting stimuli. Thus, the present findings also shed light on the psychological processes subserving conflict resolution in the manikin task.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37165754
doi: 10.1002/brb3.3008
pmc: PMC10275559
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e3008Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Neuropsychol Rev. 2014 Dec;24(4):461-90
pubmed: 25407470
J Exp Psychol. 1960 Apr;59:239-45
pubmed: 13832584
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013 Feb;251(2):441-51
pubmed: 22569858
Brain Cogn. 2020 Dec;146:105637
pubmed: 33217721
J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Feb;20(2):215-25
pubmed: 18275330
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2012 Jun;12(2):287-307
pubmed: 22351495
Brain Behav. 2023 Jun;13(6):e3008
pubmed: 37165754
Psychol Bull. 2009 Mar;135(2):183-204
pubmed: 19254075
Science. 2004 Feb 13;303(5660):1023-6
pubmed: 14963333
Addiction. 2003 Jun;98(6):825-36
pubmed: 12780371
Int J Psychophysiol. 2014 Sep;93(3):283-97
pubmed: 24950132
Biol Psychol. 2015 Feb;105:115-23
pubmed: 25619616
Biol Psychol. 2010 Jul;84(3):451-62
pubmed: 19733618
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2005;9(4):312-33
pubmed: 16223354
Neurosci Res. 2013 Mar;75(3):239-49
pubmed: 23298530
Biomed Hub. 2017 Aug 05;2(2):1-5
pubmed: 31988910
Appetite. 2021 Aug 1;163:105190
pubmed: 33711352
Biol Psychol. 2007 Oct;76(3):135-46
pubmed: 17728047
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2006 May;32(5):589-602
pubmed: 16702153
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2010 Apr;20(2):257-61
pubmed: 20185294
BMC Neurosci. 2012 Mar 27;13:35
pubmed: 22452924
Psychophysiology. 2018 Jun;55(6):e13049
pubmed: 29266241
Science. 2000 Jun 9;288(5472):1835-8
pubmed: 10846167
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2007 Jun;38(2):105-20
pubmed: 17126289
Neuropsychologia. 2000;38(5):701-11
pubmed: 10689046
Neuropsychologia. 2003;41(8):1122-35
pubmed: 12667546
J Exp Psychol. 1970 Feb;83(2):299-303
pubmed: 5480902
Front Psychol. 2014 May 08;5:378
pubmed: 24847292
Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(2):260-74
pubmed: 15979655
Exp Brain Res. 2011 Aug;212(4):603-11
pubmed: 21698468
Biol Psychol. 2004 Oct;67(1-2):51-76
pubmed: 15130525
Neuropsychologia. 2019 Aug;131:333-341
pubmed: 31153965
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2023 Mar;78:101806
pubmed: 36435548
J Pers. 2014 Aug;82(4):265-77
pubmed: 23750741
Psychol Rev. 2004 Oct;111(4):931-959
pubmed: 15482068
Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Dec;8(12):539-46
pubmed: 15556023
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Mar;133(1):101-135
pubmed: 14979754
J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 May 15;14(4):593-602
pubmed: 12126500
Psychon Bull Rev. 1994 Dec;1(4):429-38
pubmed: 24203551
Annu Rev Neurosci. 2001;24:167-202
pubmed: 11283309
Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):379-84
pubmed: 16405133
Clin Neurophysiol. 2001 Mar;112(3):536-44
pubmed: 11222977
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009 Mar;4(2):162-76
pubmed: 26158943
Psychophysiology. 2018 Mar;55(3):
pubmed: 29044552
Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52
pubmed: 11488380
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008 Jul;95(1):36-49
pubmed: 18605850