Online Visual Approach/Avoidance by the Self Task

A minimal online adaptation of the approach/avoidance task family (VAAST; Rougier et al., 2018). Words with positive and negative valence appear one at a time, and you respond to each with an approach or an avoid key. The session has two blocks of 20 trials: in the compatible block, positive words share the approach key and negative words the avoid key; in the incompatible block the mapping is reversed. Approach responses make the word grow toward you, avoid responses make it shrink away. What is measured is the reaction-time difference between the two blocks within this session — valence–action compatibility — not a stable trait or tendency.

Show Details

Frequently Asked Questions

Have another question? Let us know.

What is the VAAST?

The Visual Approach/Avoidance by the Self Task (VAAST) was introduced by Rougier et al. (2018), with a short online version by Aubé et al. (2019). This page is a minimal adaptation of the approach/avoidance logic: it compares response times when word valence and action are compatible versus incompatible, within a single session.

How does a trial work?

A fixation cross appears for 500 ms, then a word appears. You have about two seconds to press the approach or the avoid key. Approach responses play a growing animation, avoid responses a shrinking one. The session consists of two blocks of 20 trials, and the key mapping reverses between blocks.

What do we record?

Per trial: the word, its valence, your response, the reaction time, and whether it was correct — all exportable as JSON or CSV. The summary measure is the congruence effect: mean reaction time in the incompatible block minus the compatible block, computed only from correct responses with a reaction time of at least 200 ms, alongside overall accuracy.

What does the congruence effect mean?

A positive value means you were, on average, faster when valence and action matched during this session. Approach–avoidance effects measured online are small, and the replicability of individual-differences findings in this literature is contested. This demo illustrates the paradigm; it does not measure stable tendencies.

References

  • Dijksterhuis, A., & van Knippenberg, A. (1998). The relation between perception and behavior, or how to win a game of Trivial Pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 865-877. 10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.865
  • Pashler, H., Coburn, N., & Harris, C. R. (2012). Priming of social distance? Failure to replicate effects on social and food judgments. PLoS ONE, 7(8), e42510. 10.1371/journal.pone.0042510
  • Rougier, M., Muller, D., Ric, F., Alexopoulos, T., Batailler, C., Smeding, A., & Aubé, B. (2018). A new look at sensorimotor aspects in approach/avoidance tendencies: The role of visual whole-body movement information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 42-53. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.12.004

About This Experiment

This experiment is an educational adaptation for demonstration purposes. It is not a clinical diagnostic tool. Results reflect your performance in this specific session and should not be interpreted as an assessment of your cognitive abilities.

Data Privacy

Your experiment data is processed and stored locally in your browser. No data is uploaded to any server unless you explicitly export it.

Buy me a coffee