Abstract
We provide an overview of instruments related to the three most representative theories of approach-avoidance (Monni et al., in Personality and Individual Differences 166:110163, 2020): The Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, in American Psychologist 52:1280–1300, 1997; Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 30:1–46, 1998), the Reinforcement sensitivity theory (Gray, in Behaviour Research and Therapy 8:249–266, 1970; The psychology of fear and stress, CUP Archive, 1987; as reported by Gray & McNaughton (The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of Septo-hippocampal system, Oxford University Press, 2000), and the Approach-Avoidance temperament theory (Elliot & Thrash, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82:804–812, 2002; Journal of Personality 78:865–906, 2010). We examined published peer-reviewed empirical studies guided by three aims: (1) providing a brief description and comparison of the basic constructs of the three theories; (2) offering an overview of the approach-avoidance assessments that have been used in the literature; (3) discussing the strengths and weaknesses of these methodologies and suggesting which might be the most effective technique according to the constructs’ operationalization and the psychometric-procedural quality to help researchers choose the reference theory and method best suited to their research focus.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Notes
We selected these three theories since they have led to a more significant contribution in our understanding of motivated behavior. For an in-depth discussion of approach-avoidance theories we recommend “Elliot (2013) Handbook of Approach and Avoidance Motivation New York: Taylor & Francis Group”.
Abbreviations
- BAS:
-
Behavioral approach system
- BIS:
-
Behavioral inhibition system
- FFS:
-
Fight/Flight system
- FFFS:
-
Fight/Flight/Freeze system
- o-/r-RST:
-
Original/revised reinforcement sensitivity theory
- RFT:
-
Regulatory focus theory
- RFQ:
-
Regulatory focus questionnaire
- GRFM:
-
General regulatory focus measure
- RFS:
-
Regulatory focus scale
- BIS–BAS scale:
-
Behavioral activation and behavioral inhibition scale
- SPSRQ:
-
Sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire
- SPSRQ-RC:
-
Sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire revised and clarified
- J5:
-
Jackson-5
- RSQ:
-
Reinforcement sensitivity questionnaire
- rRSTQ:
-
revised reinforcement sensitivity theory questionnaire
- RST-PQ:
-
Reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality questionnaire
- ATQ:
-
Approach-avoidance temperament questionnaire
References
Aluja, A., & Blanch, A. (2011). Neuropsychological behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and behavioral approach system (BAS) assessment: A shortened sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire version (SPSRQ–20). Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(6), 628–636. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.608760
Amiri, S., Behnezhad, S., & Azad-Marzabadi, E. (2017). Psychometric properties revised reinforcement sensitivity theory (r-RST) scale in chronic pain patients. Journal of Pain Research, 10, 1879–1885. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S132133
Baas, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2011). When prevention promotes creativity: The role of mood, regulatory focus, and regulatory closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 749–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022981
Baas, M., Nijstad, B. A., Koen, J., Boot, N. C., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2020). Vulnerability to psychopathology and creativity: The role of approach-avoidance motivation and novelty seeking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(3), 334–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000223
Balconi, M., Falbo, L., & Conte, V. A. (2012). BIS and BAS correlates with psychophysiological and cortical response systems during aversive and appetitive emotional stimuli processing. Motivation and Emotion, 36, 218–231.
Bijttebier, P., Beck, I., Claes, L., & Vandereycken, W. (2009). Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity theory as a framework for research on personality–psychopathology associations. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(5), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.04.002
Bipp, T., Kleingeld, A., & Van Dam, K. (2015). Approach and avoidance temperament. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33, 196–206. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000285
Caci, H., Deschaux, O., & Baylé, F. J. (2007). Psychometric properties of the French versions of the BIS/BAS scales and the SPSRQ. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(6), 987–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.008
Calcott, R. D., & Berkman, E. T. (2014). Attentional flexibility during approach and avoidance motivational states: The role of context in shifts of attentional breadth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1393–1408. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035060
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
Cogswell, A., Alloy, L. B., van Dulmen, M. H., & Fresco, D. M. (2006). A psychometric evaluation of behavioral inhibition and approach self-report measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8), 1649–1658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.008
Čolović, P., Smederevac, S., Oljača, M., Nikolašević, Ž, & Mitrović, D. (2018). A short measure of the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory–RSQ17. The Journal of Psychology, 152(3), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2017.1419158
Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(5), 754–761.
Conner, B. T., Rahm-Knigge, R. L., & Jenkins, A. L. (2018). Revision and clarification of the sensitivity to punishment sensitivity to reward questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 121, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.09.016
Cooper, A., & Gomez, R. (2008). The development of a short form of the sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire. Journal of Individual Differences, 29(2), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.29.2.90
Cooper, A., Gomez, R., & Aucote, H. (2007). The behavioural inhibition system and behavioural approach system (BIS/BAS) scales: Measurement and structural invariance across adults and adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(2), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.023
Corr, P. J., & Cooper, A. J. (2016). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality questionnaire (RST-PQ): Development and validation. Psychological Assessment, 28(11), 1427–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000273
Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2675
Elliot, A. J. (2013). Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation. Psychology Press.
Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002). Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: Approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 804–812. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.804
Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2010). Approach and avoidance temperament as basic dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality, 78(3), 865–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00636.x
Fellner, B., Holler, M., Kirchler, E., & Schabmann, A. (2007). Regulatory focus scale (RFS): Development of a scale to record dispositional regulatory focus. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 66(2), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185.66.2.109
Förster, J. (2003). The influence of approach and avoidance motor actions on food intake. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(3), 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.150
Förster, J. (2004). How body feedback influences consumers’ evaluation of products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(4), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_10
Förster, J., Grant, H., Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Success/failure feedback, expectancies, and approach/avoidance motivation: How regulatory focus moderates classic relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(3), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1455
Förster, J., Higgins, E. T., & Bianco, A. T. (2003). Speed/accuracy decisions in task performance: Built-in trade-off or separate strategic concerns? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90(1), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00509-5
Förster, J., Higgins, E. T., & Idson, L. C. (1998). Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment: Regulatory focus and the" goal looms larger" effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(5), 1115–1131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1115
Förster, J., & Stepper, S. (2000). Compatibility between approach/avoidance stimulation and valenced information determines residual attention during the process of encoding. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(6), 853–871. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200011/12)30:6%3c853::AID-EJSP20%3e3.0.CO;2-1
Förster, J., Friedman, R. S., Özelsel, A., & Denzler, M. (2006). Enactment of approach and avoidance behavior influences the scope of perceptual and conceptual attention. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 133–146.
Freitas, A. L., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed action: The role of regulatory fit. Psychological Science, 13(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00401
Freitas, A. L., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Regulatory fit and resisting temptation during goal pursuit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(3), 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1504
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2001). The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1001–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1001
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2002). The influence of approach and avoidance motor actions on creative cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1488
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2005a). The influence of approach and avoidance cues on attentional flexibility. Motivation and Emotion, 29(2), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-005-7954-4
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2005b). Effects of motivational cues on perceptual asymmetry: Implications for creativity and analytical problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(2), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.263
Gray, J. A. (1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 8(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(70)90069-0
Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress (Vol. 5). CUP Archive.
Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of Septo-hippocampal system (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Hao, N., Yuan, H., Hu, Y., & Grabner, R. H. (2014). Interaction effect of body position and arm posture on creative thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 261–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.025
Harmon-Jones, Eddie, Gable, Philip A., & Peterson, Carly K. (2010). The role of asymmetric frontal cortical activity in emotion-related phenomena: A review and update. Biological psychology, 84(3), 451–462.
Haws, K. L., Dholakia, U. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2010). An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(5), 967–982. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.5.967
Hengstler, M., Holland, R. W., van Steenbergen, H., & van Knippenberg, A. (2014). The influence of approach–avoidance motivational orientation on conflict adaptation. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(2), 548–560. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0295-6
Heubeck, B. G., Wilkinson, R. B., & Cologon, J. (1998). A second look at Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(4), 785–800. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00124-X
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60381-0
Higgins, E. T., & Cornwell, J. F. (2016). Securing foundations and advancing frontiers: Prevention and promotion effects on judgment & decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.04.005
Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R. S., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, O. N., & Taylor, A. (2001). Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.27
Higgins, E. T., Roney, C. J., Crowe, E., & Hymes, C. (1994). Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance distinct self-regulatory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(2), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.2.276
Higgins, E. T., Shah, J., & Friedman, R. (1997). Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 515–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.515
Idson, L. C., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). Distinguishing gains from nonlosses and losses from nongains: A regulatory focus perspective on hedonic intensity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(3), 252–274. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1402
Idson, L. C., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Imagining how you’d feel: The role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(7), 926–937. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264334
Jackson, C. J. (2009). Jackson-5 scales of revised reinforcement sensitivity theory (r-RST) and their application to dysfunctional real world outcomes. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(4), 556–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.02.007
Jin, X., Wang, L., & Dong, H. (2016). The relationship between self-construal and creativity—regulatory focus as moderator. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 282–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.044
Jorm, A. F., Christensen, H., Henderson, A. S., Jacomb, P. A., Korten, A. E., & Rodgers, B. (2000). Predicting anxiety and depression from personality: Is there a synergistic effect of neuroticism and extraversion? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109(1), 145–172. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.109.1.145
Koch, S., Holland, R. W., & van Knippenberg, A. (2008). Regulating cognitive control through approach-avoidance motor actions. Cognition, 109(1), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.014
Krupić, D., Corr, P. J., Ručević, S., Križanić, V., & Gračanin, A. (2016). Five reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) of personality questionnaires: Comparison, validity and generalization. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.012
Kuschel, S., Förster, J., & Denzler, M. (2010). Going beyond information given: How approach versus avoidance cues influence access to higher order information. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550609345023
Lanaj, K., Chang, C. H., & Johnson, R. E. (2012). Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 998–1034. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027723
Lardi, C., Billieux, J., d’Acremont, M., & Van der Linden, M. (2008). A French adaptation of a short version of the sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire (SPSRQ). Personality and Individual Differences, 45(8), 722–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.019
Lench, H. C., & Levine, L. J. (2010). Motivational biases in memory for emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 24(3), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930802650788
Leone, L., Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. (2005). Emotions and decision making: Regulatory focus moderates the influence of anticipated emotions on action evaluations. Cognition & Emotion, 19(8), 1175–1198.
Leone, L., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2002). Validità della versione Italiana delle Scale BIS/BAS di Carver e White (1994): Generalizzabilità della struttura e relazioni con costrutti affini. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 29(2), 413–436. https://doi.org/10.1421/1245
Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., Camacho, C. J., & Higgins, E. T. (1999). Promotion and prevention choices between stability and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1135–1145. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1135
Liberman, N., Molden, D. C., Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Promotion and prevention focus on alternative hypotheses: Implications for attributional functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.5
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H., & Kunda, Z. (2002). Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 854–864. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.854
Loijen, A., Vrijsen, J. N., Egger, J. I., Becker, E. S., & Rinck, M. (2020). Biased approach-avoidance tendencies in psychopathology: A systematic review of their assessment and modification. Clinical Psychology Review, 77, 101825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101825
Maddox, W. T., Filoteo, J. V., Glass, B. D., & Markman, A. B. (2010). Regulatory match effects on a modified Wisconsin card sort task. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16(02), 352–359. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617709991408
McDonald, R. P. (1970). The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 23(1), 1–21.
Memmert, D., & Cañal-Bruland, R. (2009). The influence of approach and avoidance behavior on visual selective attention. The Journal of General Psychology: Experimental, Psychological, and Comparative Psychology, 136(4), 374–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300903266648
Mihić, L., Čolović, P., Ignjatović, I., Smederevac, S., & Novović, Z. (2015). Anxiety between personality and cognition: The gray zone. Personality and Individual Differences, 78, 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.01.013
Mitrović, D., Smederevac, S., Čolović, P., Kodžopeljić, J., & Dinić, B. (2014). Personality prototypes based on dimensions of the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory among prisoners and non-prisoners. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.004
Monni, A. (2019). Approach and avoidance and health status: The role of cognitive flexibility and the ability to adapt to rewards and punishments. La Sapienza University of Rome.
Monni, A., Olivier, E., Morin, A. J. S., Belardinelli, M. O., Mulvihill, K., & Scalas, L. F. (2020). Approach and avoidance in Gray’s, Higgins’, and Elliot’s perspectives: A theoretical comparison and integration of approach-avoidance in motivated behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 166, 110163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.202.110163
Monni, A., & Scalas, L. F. (2020a). Italian validation of the approach-avoidance temperament questionnaire. BPA-Applied Psychology Bulletin (bollettino Di Psicologia Applicata), 67(284), 20–30.
Monni, A., & Scalas, L. F. (2020b). Contributo alla validazione della versione italiana del regulatory focus questionnaire di higgins: A contribution to the Italian validation of the Higgins’ regulatory focus questionnaire. Ricerche di Psicologia, 2, 469–499. https://doi.org/10.3280/RIP2020-002003
Murty, V. P., LaBar, K. S., Hamilton, D. A., & Adcock, R. A. (2011). Is all motivation good for learning? Dissociable influences of approach and avoidance motivation in declarative memory. Learning and Memory, 18(11), 712–717. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.023549.111
Neumann, R., & Strack, F. (2000). Approach and avoidance: The influence of proprioceptive and exteroceptive cues on encoding of affective information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.39
Nussinson, R., Seibt, B., Häfner, M., & Strack, F. (2011). Cognitive consequences of motivational orientation: Perceived similarity between objects. Acta Psychologica, 138(1), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.05.003
Pattershall, J., Eidelman, S., & Beike, D. R. (2012). Regulatory focus and affective recall. Motivation and Emotion, 36(3), 396–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-011-9255-4
Pugnaghi, G., Cooper, A., Ettinger, U., & Corr, P. J. (2018). The psychometric properties of the German language reinforcement sensitivity theory-personality questionnaire (RST-PQ). Journal of Individual Differences, 39, 182–190. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000262
Reuter, M., Cooper, A. J., Smillie, L. D., Markett, S., & Montag, C. (2015). A new measure for the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory: Psychometric criteria and genetic validation. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 9, 38. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2015.00038
Roskes, M., Elliot, A. J., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2013a). Avoidance motivation and conservation of energy. Emotion Review, 5(3), 264–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073913477517
Roskes, M., Elliot, A. J., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2013b). Time pressure undermines performance more under avoidance than approach motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(6), 803–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213482984
Sava, F. A., & Sperneac, A. M. (2006). Sensitivity to reward and sensitivity to punishment rating scales: A validation study on the Romanian population. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(8), 1445–1456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.04.024
Scholer, A. A., & Higgins, E. T. (2008). Distinguishing levels of approach and avoidance: An analysis using regulatory focus theory. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation (pp. 489–503). Psychology Press.
Scott, M. D., Hauenstein, N. M., & Coyle, P. T. (2015). Construct validity of measures of goal orientation in the approach–avoidance network. Learning and Individual Differences, 38, 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.002
Smederevac, S., Mitrović, D., Čolović, P., & Nikolašević, Ž. (2014). Validation of the measure of revised reinforcement sensitivity theory constructs. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000121
Smits, D. J., & Boeck, P. D. (2006). From BIS/BAS to the big five. European journal of personality, 20(4), 255–270.
Spielberg, J. M., Heller, W., & Miller, G. A. (2013). Hierarchical brain networks active in approach and avoidance goal pursuit. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 284. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00284
Spielberg, J. M., Miller, G. A., Warren, S. L., Engels, A. S., Crocker, L. D., Banich, M. T., Sutton, B. P., & Heller, W. (2012). A brain network instantiating approach and avoidance motivation. Psychophysiology, 49(9), 1200–1214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01443.x
Summerville, A., & Roese, N. J. (2008). Self-report measures of individual differences in regulatory focus: A cautionary note. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.05.005
Torrubia, R., Avila, C., Moltó, J., & Caseras, X. (2001). The sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire (SPSRQ) as a measure of Gray’s anxiety and impulsivity dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(6), 837–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00183-5
Vecchione, M., & Corr, P. J. (2020). Development and validation of a short version of the reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality questionnaire (RST-PQ-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 103, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2020.1801702
Walker, B. R., & Jackson, C. J. (2017). Examining the validity of the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.035
Wang, J., Wang, L., Liu, R. D., & Dong, H. Z. (2017). How expected evaluation influences creativity: Regulatory focus as moderator. Motivation and Emotion, 41(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-016-9598-y
Wytykowska, A., Fajkowska, M., Domaradzka, E., & Jankowski, K. S. (2017). Construct validity of the polish version of the reinforcement sensitivity theory-personality questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 109, 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.054
Funding
No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
AM contributed to the conceptualization, investigation, writing—original draft, and writing—review and editing; LFS was involved in the project administration, supervision, and review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Ethical Approval
The study was approved by the Ethics Committees of La Sapienza University of Rome and University of Cagliari.
Informed Consent
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Monni, A., Scalas, L.F. Approach-Avoidance Assessment: Comparison and Validity of the Measures Related to Three Theories. Psychol Stud 69, 145–157 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-024-00786-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-024-00786-2