No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Behavioural inhibition and valuation of gain/loss are neurally distinct from approach/withdrawal
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 August 2019
Abstract
Gain or omission/termination of loss produces approach; while loss or omission/termination of gain produces withdrawal. Control of approach/withdrawal motivation is distinct from valuation of gain/loss and does not entail learning – making “reward” and “punishment” ambiguous. Approach-withdrawal goal conflict engages a neurally distinct Behavioural Inhibition System, which controls “anxiety” (conflict/passive avoidance) but not “fear” (withdrawal/active avoidance).
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019
References
Adelman, H. M. & Maatsch, J. L. (1956) Learning and extinction based upon frustration, food reward, and exploratory tendency. Journal of Experimental Psychology 52:311–15.Google Scholar
Brown, J. S. (1948) Gradients of approach and avoidance responses and their relation to level of motivation. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 41:450–65.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., Johnson, S. L. & Joormann, J. (2008) Serotonergic function, two-mode models of self-regulation, and vulnerability to depression: What depression has in common with impulsive aggression. Psychological Bulletin 134(6):912–43. doi:10.1037/a0013740.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J. (ed.) (2008) The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J. (2016) Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaires: Structural survey with recommendations. Personality and Individual Differences 89:60–64. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.045.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J., DeYoung, C. G. & McNaughton, N. (2013) Motivation and personality: A neuropsychological perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7:158–75.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J. & McNaughton, N. (2012) Neuroscience and approach/avoidance personality traits: A two stage (valuation-motivation) approach. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 36:2339–54. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.09.013.Google Scholar
Frost, R. & McNaughton, N. (2017) The neural basis of delay discounting: A review and preliminary model. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 79:48–65. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.04.022.Google Scholar
Gallup, G. G. (1965) Aggression in rats as a function of frustrative nonreward in a straight alley. Psychonomic Science 3:99–100.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. (1977) Drug effects on fear and frustration: Possible limbic site of action of minor tranquilizers. In: Handbook of psychopharmacology: Vol. 8: Drugs, neurotransmitters and behaviour, ed. Iversen, L. L., Iversen, S. D. & Snyder, S. H., pp. 433–529. Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. & McNaughton, N. (2000) The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system, 2nd edition. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, P. J., Chong, W., McNaughton, N. & Corr, P. J. (2011) An economic perspective on the reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality. Personality and Individual Differences 51:242–47.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–91.Google Scholar
Kelly, J. F. & Hake, D. F. (1970) An extinction-induced increase in an aggressive response with humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 14:153–64.Google Scholar
McNaughton, N. (2018) What do you mean “anxiety”? Developing the first anxiety syndrome biomarker. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 48:177–90. doi: 10.1080/03036758.2017.1358184.Google Scholar
McNaughton, N. & Corr, P. J. (2004) A two-dimensional neuropsychology of defense: Fear/anxiety and defensive distance. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 28:285–305. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.03.005.Google Scholar
McNaughton, N. & Corr, P. J. (2018) Survival circuits and risk assessment. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 24:14–20. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.01.018.Google Scholar
McNaughton, N., DeYoung, C. G. & Corr, P. J. (2016) Approach/avoidance. In: Neuroimaging personality, social cognition and character, ed. Absher, J. R. & Cloutier, J., pp. 25–49. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Mobbs, D. & LeDoux, J. E. (2018) Editorial overview: Survival behaviors and circuits. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 24:168–71. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.10.004.Google Scholar
Motta, S. C., Carobrez, A. P. & Canteras, N. S. (2017) The periaqueductal gray and primal emotional processing critical to influence complex defensive responses, fear learning and reward seeking. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 76:39–47. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.10.012.Google Scholar
Novemsky, N. & Kahneman, D. (2005) The boundaries of loss aversion. Journal of Marketing Research 42:119–28.Google Scholar
Paulus, M. P. & Stein, M. B. (2006) An insular view of anxiety. Biological Psychiatry, 60(4):383–87. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.03.042.Google Scholar
Renfrew, J. W. & Hutchinson, R. R. (1983) The motivation of aggression. In Satinoff, E. & Teitelbaum, P. (Eds.), Motivation (Vol. 6): Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Shadli, S. M., McIntosh, J., Glue, P. & McNaughton, N. (2015) An improved human anxiety process biomarker: Characterisation of frequency band, personality, and pharmacology. Translational Psychiatry 5:e699. doi:10.1038/tp.2015.188.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1991) Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 106:1039–61.Google Scholar
Target article
Revisiting the form and function of conflict: Neurobiological, psychological, and cultural mechanisms for attack and defense within and between groups
Related commentaries (28)
A note on the endogeneity of attacker and defender roles in asymmetric conflicts
Advantaged- and disadvantaged-group members have motivations similar to those of defenders and attackers, but their psychological characteristics are fundamentally different
Attack versus defense: A strategic rationale for role differentiation in conflict
Behavioural inhibition and valuation of gain/loss are neurally distinct from approach/withdrawal
Between-group attack and defence in an ecological setting: Insights from nonhuman animals
But how does it develop? Adopting a sociocultural lens to the development of intergroup bias among children
Collective action problems in offensive and defensive warfare
Do people always invest less in attack than defense? Possible qualifying factors
Emotions in attacker-defender conflicts
Functional sex differences and signal forms have coevolved with conflict
Identity leadership: Managing perceptions of conflict for collective action
Levels of analysis and problems of evidential support in the study of asymmetric conflict
Matching pennies games as asymmetric models of conflict
Moral rigidity as a proximate facilitator of group cohesion and combativeness
Reasons to strike first
Resolving attacker-defender conflicts through intergroup negotiation
Symmetric conflicts also allow for the investigation of attack and defense
The attack and defense games
The attack and defense mechanisms: Perspectives from behavioral economics and game theory
The evolutionarily mismatched nature of modern group makeup and the proposed application of such knowledge on promoting unity among members during times of intergroup conflict
The importance of raiding ecology and sex differences in offensive and defensive warfare
The multiple facets of psychopathy in attack and defense conflicts
The political complexity of attack and defense
Toward the need to discriminate types of attackers and defenders in intergroup conflicts
Towards the elucidation of evolution of out-group aggression
Unraveling the role of oxytocin in the motivational structure of conflict
Using political sanctions to discourage intergroup attacks: Social identity and authority legitimacy
Using the research on intergroup conflict in nonhuman animals to help inform patterns of human intergroup conflict
Author response
Asymmetric conflict: Structures, strategies, and settlement