Abstract

AbstractApproach motivation (striving for desired end-states, eagerly focusing on where one wants to be) is often held up as the best type of motivation: It feels good and is associated with many positive outcomes. Indeed, a common perception is that regulation in terms of approach motivation is almost always better than regulation in terms of avoidance motivation. However, as we discuss, this conclusion is worthy of a deeper look. We consider how approach and avoidance motivation manifest at different levels in a self-regulatory hierarchy and how this can help us understand the upsides and downsides of both approach and avoidance motivation. In other words, approach motivation is not always beneficial and avoidance motivation is not always problematic. Understanding these trade-offs involves a consideration of which level in the hierarchy approach or avoidance is manifested, what types of outcomes are being examined (the experience of regulation vs. performance), and how the approach or avoidance regulation fits or does not fit with an individual’s broad concerns or specific situational demands. Furthermore, a hierarchical approach helps make sense of behaviors that reflect simultaneous approach and avoidance tendencies, such as tactical approach to remove (avoid) a threat, providing a dynamic and nuanced view of motivation.