Research on approach/avoidance training (AAT) effects shows that approach (i.e., reducing the distance between the self and a stimulus) leads to more positive evaluations of stimuli than avoidance (i.e., increasing the distance between the self and a stimulus). The present experiments relied on a grounded cognition approach to extend this finding by investigating the framing-dependency of AAT effects on facial representations of target stimuli. In a Preliminary Experiment, using antagonistic types of approach (affiliative vs. aggressive) and a reverse correlation paradigm, we found that approach led to more positive facial representations than avoidance when approach was portrayed as affiliative, but this effect decreased and tended to reverse (i.e., yielding more negative facial representations) when approach was portrayed as aggressive. Two registered experiments extended these results while also addressing important limitations of the Preliminary Experiment. First, to prevent any contrast emerging from the joint use of approach and avoidance, Experiment 1 isolated the unique effects of affiliative approach, aggressive approach, and avoidance compared to a control action. We also explored whether aggressive approach and avoidance (two negatively valenced yet distinct actions) produced negative effects characterized by divergent outcomes on facial features (e.g., weak vs. dominant). Second, Experiment 2 tested the importance of the experiential component of approach/avoidance actions by comparing the AAT with a mere instructions condition. Results of Experiments 1 and 2 proved consistent with a framing-dependency of AAT effects. Unveiling the framing-dependency of AAT effects challenges some of the current theoretical views on AAT effects.

中文翻译：

---

这不仅是我是否接近，而且是我为什么接近：关于行动框架在接近/回避训练效果中的作用的注册报告


对接近/回避训练 （AAT） 效应的研究表明，与回避（即增加自我与刺激之间的距离）相比，接近（即减少自我与刺激之间的距离）会导致对刺激的积极评价。目前的实验依赖于扎根认知方法，通过研究 AAT 效应对目标刺激面部表征的框架依赖性来扩展这一发现。在初步实验中，使用拮抗类型的方法（从属关系与攻击性）和逆相关范式，我们发现当方法被描绘成从属关系时，方法比回避导致更积极的面部表征，但当方法被描绘成攻击性时，这种效果会减弱并趋于逆转（即产生更多消极的面部表征）。两个注册的实验扩展了这些结果，同时也解决了初步实验的重要局限性。首先，为了防止方法和回避的共同使用出现任何对比，实验 1 分离了与对照动作相比，从属关系方法、攻击性方法和回避的独特效果。我们还探讨了攻击性方法和回避（两种消极但不同的行为）是否会产生负面影响，其特征是对面部特征的不同结果（例如，弱与主导）。其次，实验 2 通过将 AAT 与单纯的指令条件进行比较，测试了接近/回避行为的经验成分的重要性。实验 1 和 2 的结果证明与 AAT 效应的框架依赖性一致。揭示 AAT 效应的框架依赖性对当前关于 AAT 效应的一些理论观点提出了挑战。