Developing a non‐verbal, self‐report assessment tool of action tendencies: The Depicted Action Tendencies (DAT) instrument

Abstract

The objectives of this series of studies were to develop and evaluate a visual self‐report measure, the Depicted Action Tendencies (DAT), for the assessment of action tendencies, and to examine relations between action tendencies and emotions. In three independent studies, 938 participants evaluated drawings depicting individuals engaged in actions, reflecting four classes of action tendencies; the tendency to approach reward, approach threat, avoid threat, and avoid reward. The DAT instrument showed specificity in terms of associations with emotions and verbal action‐tendency items with minimal overlap between drawings (Study 1). The specificity of the drawings extended to settings in which participants recalled events from their lives (Study 2 and 3). The findings suggest that the drawings can capture different action tendencies in contexts labeled with the same emotion and provide initial support for the DAT instrument as a valid and reliable measure of action tendencies. We believe the DAT instrument offers potential value both in experimental and clinical settings. Given its pictorial format, the DAT is easy to comprehend and may represent a valuable instrument for assessing action tendencies in a quick manner at the momentary level. It may also be useful to individuals with limited linguistic skills or difficulties in verbalizing sensations and feelings.

Using bodily displays to facilitating approach action outcomes within the context of a personally relevant task

“…Participants’ action tendencies were measured with a recently validated nonverbal pictorial measure: Depicted Action Tendencies (DAT; OToole & Mikkelsen, 2021 ). The DAT items portray characters engaged in actions reflecting four different action tendencies: approach a reward (e.g., running toward something meaningful/rewarding), approach a threat (e.g., confronting someone), avoid a reward (e.g., withdrawal from meaningful activities), or avoid a threat (e.g., fleeing from something or freezing; see Table 1 ).…”

“…Studies of bodily displays have frequently compared two sets of displays: expansive displays, which have often been associated with approach and engagement, and contractive displays, commonly associated with avoidance or withdrawal (O'Toole & Mikkelsen, 2021 ). Recently, a number of reviews and meta‐analyses have been conducted on the effect of expansive and contractive displays on affective, behavioral, and hormonal outcomes (Carney et al., 2015 ; Cesario et al., 2017 ; Cuddy et al., 2018 ; Elkjær et al., 2022 ; Körner & Schütz, 2020 ; Körner et al., 2022 ; Simmons & Simonsohn, 2017 ).…”

Can action tendencies be counteracted by inducing incompatible emotions? Considering instances of anxiety and anger

“…Recently it was suggested that emotions associated with opposing action tendencies (i.e., approach vs. avoidance) may counteract each other (Lutz & Krahé, 2018). Hence, it has been proposed that negative and positive emotions are not necessarily incompatible in the sense that they can both concern approach action tendencies (e.g., running toward something in happiness, fighting someone in anger; Krieglmeyer & Deutsch, 2013;O'Toole & Mikkelsen, 2021).…”

“…This actualizes the question of whether it suffices that action tendencies are incompatible in terms of type of motivational impetus (i.e., approach vs. avoidance) for a counteractive effect to appear. To test this, it would be relevant to look at the possible counteractive effect of fear or anxiety on anger and vice versa, since these emotions, although involving opposite action tendencies (i.e., avoidance vs. approach), could be said to involve shared physiology (Prather, 2018;Siegel et al, 2018), and, at least in some instances, the same motivational context (i.e., threat;O'Toole & Mikkelsen, 2021). In this regard, Zhan et al (2015) found that fear did not counteract anger.…”

“…Recently it was suggested that emotions associated with opposing action tendencies (i.e., approach vs. avoidance) may counteract each other (Lutz & Krahé, 2018 ). Hence, it has been proposed that negative and positive emotions are not necessarily incompatible in the sense that they can both concern approach action tendencies (e.g., running toward something in happiness, fighting someone in anger; Krieglmeyer & Deutsch, 2013 ; O'Toole & Mikkelsen, 2021 ). Studies have shown that the induction of sadness (i.e., associated with avoidance tendencies) following an anger induction can counteract the initial anger response (i.e., associated with approach tendencies) (Lutz & Krahé, 2018 ; Zhan et al., 2015 ).…”