Research on healthy eating motivation has shown that people who are autonomously motivated tend to engage in healthier eating behaviours than people with controlled forms of motivation (Ng et al., 2012; Verstuyf et al., 2012). However, healthy eating requires both trying to eat healthy foods (i.e., approach goals) and trying to avoid unhealthy foods (i.e., avoidance goals), and previous research on the association between motivation and approach-avoidance eating goals is mixed (Harrison et al., 2011; Otis & Pelletier, 2008). In the current study, we explored the relationship between motivation and approach-avoidance goals using a 21-day daily diary design. Our findings indicated that approach goals were more difficult than avoidance goals and that higher relative autonomous motivation was associated with greater approach goal success, but not avoidance goal success. We also investigated the relationship between goal specificity, the temporal scope of approach-avoidance goals, and goal success/failure. Our findings are consistent with previous research on motivation and goal difficulty (Aitken et al., 2016; Green-Demers et al., 1997), but our approach-avoidance goal difficulty findings warrant further investigation. / Graduate / 2018-06-11

United States post-secondary education continues to see an increase in Hispanic enrollment, particularly those of Mexican heritage. The present study was designed to examine this population’s experience of stress, anxiety and academic approach-avoidance conflict. Data were collected at North Texas postsecondary institutions. Participants (N = 197) completed an online survey including a Picture Story Exercise (PSE), open-ended responses to hypothetical scenarios, and self-report measures. The current study utilized a mixed-method approach integrating content analysis measures and self-reports. Results indicated that anxiety symptoms expressed to academic, familial, and minority social situations differed, partial η2=.39; with the academic scenario including the highest and minority social scenario the lowest anxiety. Results suggested that Mexican-American college students may express cognitive and affective symptoms of anxiety more frequently than physical symptoms on scenarios but not on self-report scales (Personality Assessment Inventory Anxiety; PAI Anxiety). PSE responses suggested that Conflict and Drive for Goal Orientation were frequent among this sample. Academic Total Anxiety and Academic Physical Anxiety related positively to PSE Conflict, while Academic Cognitive Anxiety related negatively to PSE Positive Outcomes. Exploratory models predicting PSE variables from Academic Anxiety and PAI Anxiety were inconclusive but suggested that gender accounted for significant variance in PSE scores.

The current research explored how one’s motivational focus and political orientation may interact to produce cognitive rigidity. Past literature provides evidence for associations between approach-based orientation and cognitive flexibility and between avoidance-based motives and cognitive rigidity (e.g., Cacioppo, Priester, & Berntson, 1993; Friedman & Förster, 2005; Förster, Friedman, Özelsel & Denzler, 2006, Isen & Daubman, 1984; Mikulincer, Kedem & Paz, 1990). Further, research on political orientation suggests a strong association between conservatism and cognitive rigidity (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). Can approach/avoidance motivation help explain this link between political orientation and rigidity? To answer this question, we manipulated approach/avoidance orientation using primes that focused individuals on what they should do versus what they should not do; there was also a no-prime control group. The cognitive rigidity task involved categorizing prototypic and non-prototypic items. For each item, participants provided goodness of fit ratings and discrete category judgment of whether the item was a member of the category (i.e., “yes” or “no”). Cognitive rigidity was operationalized as greater exclusion of non-prototypic items from a category. We found approach/avoidance motivation and political orientation significantly interacted to predict cognitive rigidity. An avoidance prime produced lower goodness of fit ratings and more “no” category membership decisions for political conservatives, but not political liberals. There were no differences across groups for the approach prime. These findings suggest that conservatives’ cognitive rigidity may be attributable to their greater avoidance motivation; conservatives appear to be sensitive to negative outcomes, and when these are cued, cognitive rigidity increases.

In this dissertation, two exemplar-based models of categorization, the General Context Model (GCM) and the Exemplar Based Random Walk model (EBRW), were used to describe between-group categorization differences in artificial and natural language categories. Prior research has shown that political Conservatives in avoidance mode are more exclusive categorizers of natural language category members than Conservatives in approach mode, but this effect was absent for Liberals (Rock & Janoff-Bulman, 2010). In Experiment 1, experimenter-generated stimuli were used to show that the EBRW could account for between-group differences in categorization decisions. In Experiment 2, the data collected by Rock and Janoff-Bulman were used to develop techniques allowing the GCM to account for between-group differences in natural language categorization decisions. Experiment 3 extends these methods to allow the EBRW to account for between-group differences in natural language categorization decisions. Across these experiments, the models identify between-group differences in determining similarity, bias to give an "in-the-category" decision, and the amount of information required to make a categorization decision. Techniques for modeling natural language categorization decisions are discussed.

No description available.

肢體動作是情緒表達的方式之一，本研究旨在探討表達情緒時，表達者「動作特性」及「身體方向」對肢體動作情緒表達的影響，及其二者的關係。參考過去研究，本研究使用生氣、害怕、開心及悲傷四種情緒的肢體動作，並操弄平滑度、僵硬度、速度、力道及擴張度五種動作特性；0°、45°、90°三種身體方向，並且以正確率、反應時間及情緒強度作為指標，進行區辨作業及評分作業。本研究共分兩個實驗，每個實驗皆由兩個子實驗構成，兩個子實驗分別使用「一般動作」及「特殊動作」作為呈現刺激。實驗一目的在於探討「動作特性」對情緒表達的影響；實驗二目的在於探討「動作特性」和「身體方向」共同對情緒表達的影響。實驗一A使用一般動作並操弄五種動作特性，藉此得到各情緒的動作特性組合；實驗一B使用特殊動作並操弄動作特性相容性，結果顯示動作特性相容性確實有其效果，相容情況的情緒強度高於不相容情況。實驗二A、二B分別使用一般動作及特殊動作，並操弄五種動作特性及三種身體方向，結果顯示當身體方向符合情緒的趨避動機時，其正確率、反應時間及情緒強度的表現皆較好。综合而言，「動作特性」及「身體方向」在肢體動作表達情緒時確實有其效果，當動作特性相容時，可增進情緒表達力；當身體方向符合該情緒的趨避動機時，也可增進情緒表達力，但動作特性及身體方向二者間的關係為何，本研究仍無法下一定論。 關鍵字：情緒表達、趨避動機、肢體動作、動作特性、身體方向 / Abstract Body movement is one of the ways to express emotion. The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of movement quality and body direction on the emotion expressiveness of body movement. Referring to some previous studies, four kinds of emotion (anger, fear, happiness and sadness) were included in the present study. Five movement qualities (smoothness, stiffness, speed, strength and expansion) and three body directions (0°, 45° and 90°) were manipulated as the independent variables. Response accuracy and reaction times of an identification task and rating scores of the emotion rating task were measured as the dependent variables. There are two experiments in this study which includes two sub-experiments each. One of the sub-experiments adopted non-propositional body movements as stimuli (Experiment 1A & 2A), and the other adopted propositional body movements as stimuli (Experiment 1B & 2B). Experiment 1 aimed to explore the effect of movement qualities. In Experiment 1A, movement quality combinations which can express each of the four emotions were found. Based on this result, in Experiment 1B, movement quality compatibility was manipulated. The results of Experiment 1B confirmed the effect of movement quality compatibility on emotion strength in non-propositional body movement. Experiment 2 manipulated five movement qualities and three body directions. The results showed that when body direction was compatible with the approach-avoidance motivation of the expressed emotion, participant’s performances on response accuracy, reaction times and rating scores were better than that of incompatible ones. In conclusion, both movement quality and body direction can influence the emotion expressiveness of body movement. When movement qualities and body directions are compatible with the expressed emotion, the strength of emotion can be increased. But the relative contributions and the interaction effect of movement qualities and body directions are still unclear. Keywords: emotion expression, approach-avoidance motivation, body movement, movement quality, body direction