The Self’s Symbolic Role in Implicit Approach/Avoidance: Movement Time Evidence

ABSTRACT

Theories of self-regulation emphasize the special role that the symbolic self may play in approach and avoidance movements, but experimental evidence is lacking. In two experiments (total N = 157), participants moved either a self-relevant (e.g., “me”) or non-self (e.g., “not me”) agent to one of two locations, one occupied by a positive word and the other occupied by a negative word. In both experiments, the movement agent interacted with the destination valence such that it was only the symbolic self that moved more quickly to positive rather than negative locations. These results established a role for the symbolic self in approach/avoidance that had been questioned, thereby supporting both classic and contemporary self-related theories of approach and avoidance.

Keywords:

• affect
• approach
• avoidance
• motivation
• movement
• self

Notes

1. 1. For theoretical reasons and because movement onset times could reflect numerous factors such as momentary alertness or preparedness, the hypotheses pertained to movement times rather than onset times. Indeed, when examining movement onset times, potential interactions between agent and destination valence were not significant in either Experiment 1, p = .119, or Experiment 2, p = .818. The results are therefore consistent with our emphasis on movement times as reflective of motivational processes in the task.

2. 2. For parsimony’s sake, we omit a more or less direct replication of the interactive findings of Experiment 1 in a different sample of 83 participants. In that sample, too, a significant agent by destination valence interaction was observed for movement times, p = .001, and only the self-agent (“me”) was moved faster to positive (M = 553 ms; SD = 52) than negative (M = 589 ms; SD = 50) locations, p = .000.

3. 3. When including trials involving inaccurate recognition memory responses, the results were parallel to those reported. For example, the agent by destination valence interaction was significant, p = .031, there was a destination valence main effect for the self-object (“me”), p = .003, and no destination valence main effect for the control object (“chair”), p = .964. Condition means were substantially the same as those reported in the text.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael Robinson

Michael Robinson is affiliated with the Department of Psychology, North Dakota State University.

Darya Zabelina

Darya Zabelina is affiliated with the Department of Psychology, Northwestern University.

Ryan Boyd

Ryan Boyd is affiliated with the Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin.

Konrad Bresin

Konrad Bresin is affiliated with the Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

Scott Ode

Scott Ode is affiliated with Medica.