» Articles » PMID: 28432567

Less Approach, More Avoidance: Response Inhibition Has Motivational Consequences for Sexual Stimuli That Reflect Changes in Affective Value Not a Lingering Global Brake on Behavior

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2017 Apr 23
PMID 28432567
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Response inhibition negatively impacts subsequent hedonic evaluations of motivationally relevant stimuli and reduces the behavioral incentive to seek and obtain such items. Here we expand the investigation of the motivational consequences of inhibition by presenting sexually appealing and nonappealing images in a go/no-go task and a subsequent image-viewing task. Each initially obscured image in the viewing task could either be made more visible or less visible by repeatedly pressing different keys. Fewer key presses were made to obtain better views of preferred-sex images when such images had previously been inhibited as no-go items than when previously encountered as noninhibited go items. This finding replicates prior results and is consistent with the possibility that motor-response suppression has lingering effects that include global reductions in all behavioral expression. However, for nonpreferred images, prior inhibition resulted in more key presses to obscure their visibility than when such images had not been inhibited. This novel finding suggests that the motivational consequences of response inhibition are not due to a global brake on action but are instead linked to negative changes in stimulus value that induce corresponding increases in avoidance and decreases in approach.

Citing Articles

No impact of story context and avatar power on performance in a stop-signal game.

Held L, Pannermayr J, Kaufmann A, Scheffer M, Flores P, Dechant M Heliyon. 2025; 11(1):e41039.

PMID: 39802016 PMC: 11719363. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41039.


The affective consequences of response inhibition determine no-go-based crosstalk effects in dual tasks.

Mahesan D, Fischer R Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2024; 77(12):2533-2550.

PMID: 38290849 PMC: 11607847. DOI: 10.1177/17470218241231681.


Memory for individual items is related to nonreinforced preference change.

Botvinik-Nezer R, Bakkour A, Salomon T, Shohamy D, Schonberg T Learn Mem. 2021; 28(10):348-360.

PMID: 34526380 PMC: 8456982. DOI: 10.1101/lm.053411.121.

References
1.
Aron A . The neural basis of inhibition in cognitive control. Neuroscientist. 2007; 13(3):214-28. DOI: 10.1177/1073858407299288. View

2.
Houben K, Havermans R, Nederkoorn C, Jansen A . Beer à no-go: learning to stop responding to alcohol cues reduces alcohol intake via reduced affective associations rather than increased response inhibition. Addiction. 2012; 107(7):1280-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03827.x. View

3.
Ferrey A, Frischen A, Fenske M . Hot or not: response inhibition reduces the hedonic value and motivational incentive of sexual stimuli. Front Psychol. 2012; 3:575. PMC: 3530044. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00575. View

4.
Chambers C, Garavan H, Bellgrove M . Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2008; 33(5):631-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.08.016. View

5.
Houben K, Nederkoorn C, Wiers R, Jansen A . Resisting temptation: decreasing alcohol-related affect and drinking behavior by training response inhibition. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011; 116(1-3):132-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.12.011. View