Movement direction or change in distance? Self- and object-related approach–avoidance motions ☆

205 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Ten Frequently Asked Questions About Implicit Measures and Their Frequently Supposed, But Not Entirely Correct Answers (2009, background): “However, these effects were reversed when the same motor responses were described as upward (i.e., positive meaning attributed to extensor contraction) and downward (i.e., negative meaning attributed to flexor contraction) (for related findings, see Markman & Brendl, 2005; Seibt, Neumann, Nussinson”
On the Nature of Automatically Triggered Approach–Avoidance Behavior (2013, background): “One group of participants should imagine pulling the stimulus toward them and pushing it away, whereas the other group should imagine moving their hand away from the stimulus and toward the stimulus (Seibt et al., 2008).”
Comparing measures of approach–avoidance behaviour: The manikin task vs. two versions of the joystick task (2010, background): “As several studies have shown, the meaning of the behaviour rather than the concrete motor pattern is relevant for compatibility effects in MAAB (Markman & Brendl, 2005; Seibt et al., 2008).”