Schouppe, N. 1 , Ridderinkhof, K. R. 2 , De Houwer, J. 3 , Verguts, T. 1 & Notebaert, W. 1
1 Experimental Psychology. Ghent University. Ghent, Belgium
2 Developmental Psychology. University of Amsterdam. Amsterdam, The Netherlands
3 Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology. Ghent University. Ghent, Belgium
Recent cognitive control theories proposed that conflict is a learning signal driving behavioural adaptations. Its nature has remained unclear, however. Verguts and Notebaert (2009) proposed that conflict is an arousal signal; Botvinick (2007) conceptualized conflict as inherently aversive; and recent data suggest that conflict may act as a positive signal (Braem, Verguts, & Notebaert, in press). Here, we focus on the valence dimension of conflict. We used a preference judgement paradigm to investigate whether response conflict is associated with a positive or negative valence. Participants had to choose whether they preferred a trial from one of two categories (low- or high conflict category). Results showed a higher preference for the low-conflict category, indicating conflict avoidance. This was elaborated in a second study, using an approach-avoidance paradigm. Participants were instructed to move a manikin towards (approach) or away from (avoidance) Stroop stimuli based on the colour of the word. They were significantly faster on compatible trials (approach congruent stimuli; avoid incongruent stimuli) than on incompatible trials (approach incongruent stimuli; avoid congruent stimuli). Together, these findings suggest that response conflict is a negative learning signal resulting in avoidance behaviour.