No abstract

Several emotion theorists suggest that valenced stimuli automatically trigger motivational orientations and thereby facilitate corresponding behavior. Positive stimuli were thought to activate approach motivational circuits which in turn primed approach-related behavioral tendencies whereas negative stimuli were supposed to activate avoidance motivational circuits so that avoidance-related behavioral tendencies were primed (motivational orientation account). However, recent research suggests that typically observed affective stimulus–response compatibility phenomena might be entirely explained in terms of theories accounting for mechanisms of general action control instead of assuming motivational orientations to mediate the effects (evaluative coding account). In what follows, we explore to what extent this notion is applicable. We present literature suggesting that evaluative coding mechanisms indeed influence a wide variety of affective stimulus–response compatibility phenomena. However, the evaluative coding account does not seem to be sufficient to explain affective S–R compatibility effects. Instead, several studies provide clear evidence in favor of the motivational orientation account that seems to operate independently of evaluative coding mechanisms. Implications for theoretical developments and future research designs are discussed.

Given that semantic processes mediate early processes in the elicitation of emotions, we expect that already activated emotion-specific information can influence the elicitation of an emotion. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to masked International Affective Picture System (IAPS) pictures that elicited either disgust or fear. Following the presentation of the primes, other IAPS pictures were presented as targets that elicited either disgust or fear. The participants' task was to classify the target picture as either disgust or fear evoking. In Experiment 2, we substituted the IAPS primes with facial expressions of either disgust or fear. In Experiment 3, we substituted the IAPS primes with the words disgust or fear. In all three experiments, we found that prime-target combinations of the same emotion were responded to faster than prime-target combinations of different emotions. Our findings suggest that the influence of primes on the elicitation of emotion is mediated by activated schemata or appraisal processes.

Facial expressions such as smiling or frowning are normally followed by, and often aim at, the observation of corresponding facial expressions in social counterparts. Given this contingency between one's own and other persons' facial expressions, the production of such facial actions might be the subject of so-called action-effect compatibility effects. In the present Experiment 1, we confirmed this assumption. Participants were required to smile or frown. The generation of these expressions was harder when participants produced predictable feedback from a virtual counterpart that was incompatible with their own facial expression; for example, smiling produced the presentation of a frowning face. The results of Experiment 2 revealed that this effect vanishes with inverted faces as action feedback, which shows that the phenomenon is bound to the instantaneous emotional interpretation of the feedback. These results comply with the assumption that the generation of facial expressions is controlled by an anticipation of these expressions' effects in the social environment.

How does affect impact approach and avoidance responses? Whereas approaches in a Darwinian tradition have emphasized a direct affect-behavior link, recent approaches in cognitive psychology have argued that the relation of affect to approach and avoidance responses depends on the coding of the behavioral response. We suggest that the relation of affect to approach and avoidance responses depends on the kind of behavior itself. Specifically, we tested the assumption that facial approach and avoidance responses are permanently linked to affect, whereas such links are more flexible and dependent on the coding of actions with manual responses. In one experiment, the response labels sun and rain were assigned to manual approach and avoidance responses and facial contractions of the zygomaticus and the corrugator muscles. Manual responses were facilitated when stimulus valence matched the valence of the response labels, whereas facial responses were facilitated when stimulus valence matched the affect expressed by these responses. The results suggest that the links between affect and manual responses depend on how these responses are cognitively coded, whereas the links between affect and facial responses are much less affected by such coding.