Levels of affect elicited by process and outcome thinking in approach and avoidance goals.

The current study sought to test the idea that conducting process and outcome simulations about one’s goals might have different, or even opposite, affective impacts depending on whether the goal in question is an approach goal or an avoidance goal. In particular, it was predicted that, in the case of approach goals, process simulations would increase negative affect whilst outcome simulations would increase positive affect, and in the case of avoidance goals, process simulations would decrease negative affect and increase positive affect. Thirty-nine participants were randomly assigned to either an Approach Goal group or an Avoidance Goal group in which they were asked to generate goals of the relevant orientation (i.e. approach or avoidance). Participants’ levels of positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) were measured before and after conducting process and outcome simulations. Results showed there to be no significant interaction between the Goal Type factor and the Simulation Type factor for NA. There was, however, a significant interaction between the Goal Type factor and the Simulation Type factor for PA. Follow up t-tests indicated a non-significant trend (p = .054) whereby outcome thinking about avoidance goals elicited an increase in PA as compared to outcome thinking about approach goals. A separate follow-up t-test also found a significant effect (p = .002) whereby outcome thinking about avoidance goals elicited a significant increase in PA as compared to process thinking about avoidance goals. These results provided some limited support for the idea that process and outcome thinking have different, or reverse, affective impacts for approach and avoidance goals, however, the direction of the emotional effects detected were not in line with those predicted.