Journal of

Experimental Psychology
VOL. 70, No. 1 JULY 1965

STEEPNESS OF APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS

IN HUMANS AS A FUNCTION OF EXPERIENCE:
THEORY AND EXPERIMENT *
SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ 2
University of Massachusetts

33 experienced and 33 novice parachutists rated their approach and

avoidance feelings at different points in time preceding and following a
parachute jump. For the novice parachutists, self-rated avoidance
increased up to a point shortly before the jump, and then decreased.
For the experienced parachutists, self-rated avoidance increased up to
the morning of the jump, decreased to the jump, and increased after the
jump. It was concluded that with experience the point of greatest
anxiety is displaced backward in time. To account for this phenomenon,
a miniature theory was presented which assumed that with continuous
exposure to threat, 2 developments take place, a heightening of the
gradient of anxiety and the development of a gradient of inhibition of
anxiety, the latter having the steeper slope.

Sport parachuting provides an un- ers, who appear to become increas-

usual opportunity for investigating
approach-avoidance conflict in hu-
mans under intensely ego-involving
circumstances. Observation of in-
experienced parachutists suggests that
for them the gradient of avoidance is
steeper than the gradient of approach.
The enthusiasm exhibited some time
before the jump is seen to gradually
wane and is replaced on the day of the
jump with fear and uncertainty. Such
is not the case with experienced jump-
1
This paper was presented, in part, at the
American Psychological Association Conven-
tion in 1963. The study was supported by
Grant MH-01293 from the National Institute
of Mental Health, United States Public
Health Service.
2
Now at the University of Waterloo.
ingly eager to jump as the time of the
anticipated jump approaches. This
would suggest that for experienced
jumpers the gradient of approach is
steeper than that of avoidance. The
present study attempts to verify the
above observations by obtaining rat-
ings of fear of, and desire to jump as
a function of the sequence of events
leading up to, and following, a jump.
METHOD
The 5s consisted of 33 inexperienced and 33
experienced sport parachutists. The former
had made between 1 and S jumps, and the
latter over 100 jumps. Shortly after a jump,
5s were asked to rate the strength of their
approach and avoidance feelings at each of
the following points in time: (1) last week,
 SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ

(2) last night, (3) this morning, (4) upon
reaching the airfield, (5) waiting to board the
aircraft, (6) getting strapped, (7) boarding
the aircraft, (8) during ascent in the plane,
(9) at the "ready" signal, (10) stepping out-
side onto the step above the wheel of the
plane, (11) waiting for the signal to jump,
(12) freefalling, (13) after the chute has
opened, (14) immediately after landing. Ap-
proach was defined as "looking forward to the
jump, wanting to go ahead, being thrilled
at the prospect of jumping"; avoidance as
"wanting to turn back and call the jump off,
questioning why you ever let yourself get into
jumping, fear."
The 5s were told to try to keep their rat-
ings of approach and avoidance as independ-
ent from each other as possible. To this end
it was pointed out that they could feel both
frightened and intrigued with jumping at the
same time, and that it was important in
rating approach to consider only the attri-
butes of approach, and to do the same for
avoidance.
Following this, 5s were instructed to select
the point of strongest approach and assign it
a value of 10, and then to select the point of
weakest approach and assign it a value of 1.
Having defined the range of their responses,
they were told to rate each of the other points
in a relative manner. They were instructed
to use the same number more than once to
designate points of equal intensity. Following
ratings of approach, ratings of avoidance were
made in a corresponding manner. It should
be noted that the procedure for rating that
was employed provides information only on
the relative strength of approach or avoidance
at the different points in time, and provides
no basis for inferring absolute magnitude.
RESULTS
Novice Parachutists
In Fig. 1 it can be seen that self-
ratings of approach and avoidance are,
to a large extent, inverted replicas of
each other. Apparently, it was not
possible for 5s to keep the two ratings
independent. Self-ratings of approach
are relatively high at Point 1, 1 wk.

INEXPERIENCED PARACHUTISTS

MAXIMAL
AVOIDANCE
GOAL ..
ACT

JUMP SEQUENCE
FIG. 1. Mean self-ratings of approach and avoidance for inexperienced parachutists
as a function of a sequence of events leading to and following a jump.
 HUMAN APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS
before the jump, and fall off until
shortly before the jump, after which
they again rise. The converse holds
for self-rated avoidance.3 It is par-
ticularly noteworthy that the point
of maximum avoidance corresponds to
the ready signal at Point 9 and not to
the goal act at Point 12, which is the
moment of greatest danger, immedi-
ately preceding the opening of the
chute.
An analysis of variance of the data
represented in Fig. 1 would result in a
spuriously high interaction between
the time dimension and the approach
and avoidance ratings, because the
curves are largely equivalent but
opposite forms of each other. An
analysis of variance of each curve
separately, on the other hand, would
reduce reliability by eliminating half
the data. A solution is provided by
reversing one of the scales. Not only
does this permit both sets of ratings to
be pooled, but it allows for a determi-
nation of whether there is an inter-
action between the two scales and the
time dimension. If such is the case,
it establishes a degree of independence
between the two kinds of ratings.4
3
The observation that self-ratings of
avoidance are greater than of approach at the
time of the jump may appear to present a
problem, as the parachutist, after all, does
jump. The problem is more apparent than
real. It will be recalled that the scales of
approach and avoidance yielded relative
ratings on a 10-point scale within each
dimension, thereby requiring as many ratings
of approach to be higher than avoidance as
the reverse. Furthermore, as has been
pointed out, the two kinds of ratings repre-
sent, for the most part, two ways of stating
the same information. Accordingly, absolute
differences between the two sets of ratings
cannot be taken at face value.
4
If some degree of independence is found,
it does not, of course, invalidate the assump-
tion that self-ratings of approach and avoid-
ance represent, to a predominant degree, a
single feeling state. Inspection of Fig. 1 and 2
makes it apparent that the two dimensions,
Figure 2 presents curves for self-
rated avoidance and for self-rated
approach, the latter with the scale
reversed, and referred to as "inverse
approach." An F value of 41.39,
significant at the .001 level, is obtained
for the differences among the means
of the pooled ratings of avoidance and
inverse approach as a function of the
time dimension (see Table 1). The
failure of the 5s X T interaction to
reach significance indicates that the
curve form is consistent among indi-
viduals except for deviations within
chance expectancy. Of the 33 novice
jumpers who took part in the experi-
ment, 30 rate approach as greater a
week before the jump than during the
free fall, and corresponding results are
obtained for self-ratings of avoidance.
Examination of the curves of avoid-
ance and inverse approach in Fig. 2
reveals that they differ from each
other in a systematic manner. From
pooled across 5s, are almost perfectly in-
versely related.
It is important to keep in mind when
evaluating the results of the analyses of
variance that it is the pooled gradients of
avoidance and inverse approach rather than
the difference between them, i.e., the inter-
action, that is of primary interest. This
is because self-ratings of approach and
avoidance do not yield independent gradients
of approach and avoidance, but are, by and
large, two ways of reporting the same feeling,
which, as will be seen later, can be viewed as
a single net effect derived from independent
hypothetical gradients of approach and
avoidance. The major conclusions of the
study would not be altered if only one of the
sets of self-ratings were retained. This is not
to say that differences between the curves of
self-rated avoidance and inverse approach are
of no importance, but to caution the reader
against assuming that they are the major
source of inference about the relative steep-
ness of the hypothetical gradients. Such an
error would be an easy one to make, as the
forms of the curves of avoidance and inverse
approach in Fig. 2 are similar in appearance
to goal gradients of approach and avoidance
as represented by Miller (1959).
 SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ

INEXPERIENCED PARACHUTISTS

MAXIMAL
AVOIDANCE

INVERSE APPROACH

5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14

JUMP SEQUENCE
FIG. 2. Mean self-ratings of avoidance and inverse approach for inexperienced parachutists
as a function of a sequence of events leading to and following a jump.

1 wk. before the jump (Point 1) to approach. From the ready signal on,
the ready signal (Point 9), the the decrease in self-rated avoidance is
increase in self-rated avoidance is greater than the decrease in inverse
greater than the increase in inverse approach. The avoidance ratings,
thus, tend to vary more sharply as a
TABLE 1 function of the time dimension than
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR INEXPERIENCED the approach ratings. This con-
PARACHUTISTS ON SELF-RATINGS OF clusion is supported by a significant
AVOIDANCE AND INVERSE
APPROACH A X T interaction in Table 1.
Separate analyses of variance for
Source df MS F the ascending and descending por-
tions of the curve in Fig. 2 indicate
Between 5s 32 14.56 3.40***
Total within 5s 891 that in both cases the pooled gradients
Avoidance vs. inverse of avoidance and inverse approach are
approach (A) 1 23.71 1.85 significantly related to the time di-
5s X A 32 12.84" 3.13***
Time sequence (T) 13 252.04 41.39*** mension at the .01 level. While
5s XT 416 6.09> 1.49 inspection reveals that avoidance
AXT 13 7.23 1.77*
5s X A X T 416 4.07 tends to be steeper than approach for
both portions of the curve, the inter-
Error term for MSs above it up to the next error
term. The J?s X A X T Interaction was used to
action between kind of rating and
evaluate all other error terms.
*p <.OS.
time dimension is significant only for
***p <.001. the ascending portion.
 HUMAN APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS
Experienced Parachutists
Figure 3, like Fig. 1, is divided at
two points, one corresponding to the
point of greatest avoidance, and the
other to the goal act and point of
greatest objective danger. There is an
increase in self-rated avoidance (or
conversely, a decrease in self-rated
approach) up to the morning of the
jump, followed by a more protracted
decrease in self-rated avoidance (and
a corresponding increase in self-rated
approach) up to the goal act, and
finally an increase in self-rated avoid-
ance (or decrease in self-rated ap-
proach) after the goal act. Opposite
to the findings for novice parachutists,
self-rated approach is higher (and
self-rated avoidance correspondingly
lower) at the time of the jump than
EXPERIENCED
MAXIMAL
AVOIDANCE
CO
rr
I
u_
-I
UJ
CO
5 6
JUMP
FIG. 3. Mean self-ratings of approach and avoidance for experienced parachutists
as a function of a sequence of events leading to and following a jump.
early in the sequence. This phenom-
enon is associated with a shift in the
peak of self-rated avoidance for the
experienced jumpers to an earlier
point on the time dimension than for
the inexperienced jumpers. It is note-
worthy that after the goal act, the
experienced jumpers report an in-
crease in avoidance.
Figure 4 presents the curves of self-
ratings of avoidance and inverse
approach for experienced parachutists.
An F value of 65.58, significant at the
.0001 level (see Table 2), is obtained
for the combined ratings as a function
of the time dimension. Twenty-nine
out of 33 experienced jumpers report
that approach is greater during the
free fall than on the morning of the
jump, and corresponding results are
PARACHUTISTS
GOAL ACT
7 8 9 10 12 13 14
SEQUENCE
 SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ

EXPERIENCED PARACHUTISTS

MAXIMAL GOAL
AVOIDANCE ACT

7 8 9 10 13 14

SEQUENCE
FIG. 4. Mean self-ratings of avoidance and inverse approach for experienced parachutists
as a function of a sequence of events leading to and following a jump.

obtained for self-ratings of avoidance. 5s X T interaction. The interaction

Individual differences in curve form between the time dimension and the
do not approach significance, as two kinds of ratings is significant at
indicated by an F value of 0.93 for the the .01 level, indicating a degree of
independence between approach and
TABLE 2 avoidance ratings.
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR EXPERIENCED Inspection of Fig. 4 indicates that
PARACHUTISTS ON SELF-RATINGS OF in all three periods, the self-ratings of
AVOIDANCE AND INVERSE avoidance produce steeper gradients
APPROACH
than inverse approach. An analysis
Source df MS F of variance confined to the data pre-
ceding the peak of self-rated avoid-
Between 5s 32 12.03 27.12*** ance indicates that the pooled ratings
Total within 5s 891
Avoidance vs. inverse of avoidance and inverse approach
approach (A) 1 24.03 1.65 vary reliably over the time dimension,
5s X A 32 14.54" 3.29***
Time sequence (T) 13 265.14a 63.58*** and that the slope of the gradient of
5s X T 416 4.17 .93 avoidance is reliably steeper than the
AXT 13 13.92 a 3.14***
5s X A X T 416 4.43 slope of the gradient of inverse ap-
proach. An analysis of the period
Error term for MSs above it up to the next error from the peak of self-rated avoidance
term. The 5s X A X T interaction was used to
evaluate all other error terms. to the goal act produces corresponding
* t < .05.
***? <,001, results, although here both gradients
 HUMAN APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS

are falling. Analysis of the postaction source of variance 5s X T/G) do not

period indicates that while the rise approach significance, attesting to a
in the pooled ratings of avoidance and high degree of uniformity in the form
inverse approach as a function of the of the curve when experience is held
time dimension is highly reliable, the constant.
two curves are not reliably different
from each other. Nevertheless, as was DISCUSSION
the case for inexperienced jumpers, It was found that self-ratings of ap-
there is a tendency for avoidance ra- proach and avoidance, rather than rep-
tings in all periods to vary more sharply resenting independent processes, were
as a function of time than inverse ap- largely inverted replicas of each other.
proach ratings, and, therefore, than As it is necessary to assume separate and
approach ratings. opposed processes for conflict to exist,
and as there is no question but that
Table 3 summarizes the results of an parachuting provides an acute conflict
analysis of variance in which inex- for the novice parachutist, it is necessary
perienced and experienced parachut- to infer hypothetical gradients of ap-
ists are both included. The main proach and avoidance of which the self-
effect for groups is not significant, ratings are a net effect. According to
indicating that they do not differ in Lewin's (1946) and Miller's (1959)
rating style. The interaction between models of conflict, independent gradients
groups and the time dimension yields of approach and avoidance should both
an F value of 87.06, which indicates rise as a function of decreasing time to
the goal, with the avoidance gradient
that the difference in the curve form rising more steeply than the approach
for the two groups is highly reliable. gradient. The obtained results for the
At the same time, individual differ- novice parachutists, with self-rated ap-
ences within groups in curve form (see proach (or self-rated avoidance) treated
as a net effect, are in accord with such an
TABLE 3 assumption, as in order for net approach
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR INEXPERIENCED
to be high at a time remote from the
AND EXPERIENCED PARACHUTISTS ON jump and low at a time close to the
SELF-RATINGS OF AVOIDANCE jump, the hypothetical gradient of
AND INVERSE APPROACH avoidance would have to be steeper than
the hypothetical gradient of approach.6
Source if MS F The hypothetical gradients as presented
in Fig. 5 do not intersect, as the para-
Total between 5s 65 chutist does jump, and it is necessary
Groups (G) 1 161.91 12.17***
Ss/G 64 13.30" 3.13*** to represent approach as greater than
Total within 5s 1782 avoidance at the goal. Figure 6 presents
Avoidance vs. in- the net differences as derived to scale
verse approach
(A) 1 47.73 3.48 from Fig. 5. It is apparent that with
GXA 1 .001 6
5s X A/G 64 13.69" 3.22*** The reasoning here is no different from
Time sequence (T) 13 70.58 13.76*** that used to infer a steeper gradient of
GXT 13 446.60 87.06*** avoidance than approach when it is noted in
AXT 13 10.87 2.56* a conflict situation that a child (Lewin, 1946)
5s X T/G 832 5.13" 1.21
GX AXT 13 10.28 2.42* or rat (Miller, 1959) makes stronger approach
5s X A X T/G 832 4.25" responses at a distance than when close to a
goal. If we may take the liberty of anthropo-
Error term for mean squares above It up to the morphizing for a moment, Miller's rats, could
next error term. The 5s X A X T/G interaction was they report their feelings in a manner con-
used to evaluate all other error terms. sistent with their behavior, would reproduce
* p < .05.
*** p < .001. the data of our parachutists.
 SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ
a:
o
u_
o advantages, as anxiety would auto-
z advance of the potentially dangerous
111
cc
NEARNESS TO GOAL
FIG. 5. Hypothetical gradients of ap-
proach and avoidance as a function of time
to the goal in a conflict situation where the
goal is reached in the absence of external
restraint.6
increasing nearness to the goal, net
strength of approach steadily diminishes.
While the theoretical formulation rep-
resented by Fig. 5 and 6 adequately
accounts for the general finding of a
decrease in self-ratings of approach as
the goal act is approached, it fails to
account for the decrease in the avoidance
ratings shortly before rather than im-
mediately after the goal point. This
phenomenon requires additional as-
sumptions, which can best be presented
in the discussion of the experienced
parachutists.
For the experienced parachutists, self-
ratings of approach are greater (or
conversely, self-ratings of avoidance
weaker) at the goal point than at a more
6
It will be noted that the ordinate is
labeled as drive, rather than as strength of
response or response disposition, as Miller
labels it. Drive is defined as a directed force,
with separate measurable components of
direction and activation, the latter measurable
by physiological indexes of arousal, such as
the GSR. Drive, as so denned, is more closely
related to Hull's (1943) excitatory potential
than to his concept of drive, and is similar to
Lewin's (1946) concept of vector. To derive
total activation from hypothetical gradients
of approach and avoidance, the two gradients
are added disregarding algebraic sign. To
derive net approach strength the gradients
are added considering algebraic sign. (For
a more detailed presentation of the theoretical
approach, see Epstein, 1962.)
remote time from the jump. Thus, for
them, the data might appear to suggest
that the hypothetical gradient of ap-
proach is steeper than the hypothetical
gradient of avoidance. Such a state of
affairs would have obvious adaptive
matically alert the parachutist well in
event, arid be relatively low at the time
of the jump. However, there are several
reasons for favoring an alternate inter-
pretation which assumes that the hy-
pothetical gradient of avoidance is
steeper than that of approach, and adds
further assumptions. One difficulty with
the first explanation is that it cannot
account for the highly reliable early rise
in self-rated avoidance (or corresponding
drop in self-rated approach) for the ex-
perienced parachutists before the more
protracted decline (see Fig. 3 and 4) to
the goal point. Secondly, the assump-
tion that the hypothetical gradient of
approach is steeper than that of avoid-
ance is inconsistent with the findings
on self-rated avoidance and inverse ap-
proach. In three out of five comparisons
self-ratings of avoidance were reliably
steeper than of inverse approach, and in
the other two cases the results were in the
same direction. Thus, while it was con-
cluded that the two ratings measure
predominantly one feeling, to the small
extent that an independent component
is involved it supports the conclusion
APPROACH!
AVOIDANCE^
I
a:
a.
o.
-*-
NEARNESS TO GOAL
FIG. 6. Net approach strength as derived
from hypothetical gradients of approach and
avoidance in Fig. 5. (Units are arbitrary.)
 HUMAN APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS
that the hypothetical gradient of avoid-
ance is steeper than that of approach.
Thirdly, the first explanation is of no use
in accounting for the finding that the
peak of self-ratings of avoidance for
inexperienced jumpers precedes rather
than coincides with the goal point, while
the alternate theory is able to do so,
using the same set of assumptions that
account for the yet earlier peaking of the
self-ratings of avoidance for experienced
jumpers. Finally, the second theory has
greater integrating power than the first
in accounting for findings reported by
others.
The considerably earlier peak of self-
rated avoidance for the experienced than
the inexperienced parachutists is con-
sistent with findings in an earlier study
of parachutists (Epstein, 1962; Epstein
& Fenz, 1962) which used superficially
different techniques, but of conceptual
relevance to those in the present
study. In the earlier work, GSR and
reaction time were investigated as a
function of a cue dimension of words
related to parachuting embedded in a
word-association test. On a control day,
2 wk. before a jump, experienced and
novice parachutists could not be dis-
tinguished from each other, both produc-
ing monotonic gradients of similar slope
on both dependent variables. On the day
of a jump, however, experienced para-
chutists produced inverted v-shaped
curves, while novices simply produced
steeper monotonic gradients. With in-
creasing experience, the peak of the
inverted v was found to advance toward
the remote end of the dimension. Tested
repeatedly after different amounts of
experience, all individuals demonstrated
the same developmental pattern, al-
though they differed in their rate of
peaking back. As an example of an
individual developmental pattern, Fig. 7
is presented. A theoretical explanation
was offered which assumed that the
down-turn on the inverted v is the
consequence of an inhibitory process that
serves to keep anxiety within nondisrup-
tive limits. The progressive peaking
back was accounted for by assuming that
with repeated exposure to threat, two
gradients develop, one based upon the
generalization of conditioned anxiety,
and the other upon learned inhibition of
anxiety, the latter with steeper slope (see
Epstein, 1962, for a more detailed pres-
entation of the theory). In order to
apply the theory to the present data, it
is only necessary to substitute a time
dimension for a cue dimension and rat-
ings of fear and avoidance for a physio-
logical measure. The finding that the
peak of self-rated avoidance for novice
parachutists precedes the goal act by
a small amount can be explained by
considering that the novices have had
some experience, in training, in identify-
ing with other jumpers, and in having
made one to five jumps. Thus, the same
process which produces a marked effect
in the experienced jumpers, is presumed
to produce a limited effect in the novices.
It should be noted that the theoretical
formulation as presented above does not
follow Hull's (1943) or Miller's (1959)
views on conflict. One of the major
differences is that we are postulating two
levels of inhibition, one consisting of a
hypothetical avoidance gradient which
inhibits a hypothetical approach gra-
dient, and the other of an inhibitory
gradient which inhibits the hypothetical
avoidance gradient. Thus, a concept of
a hierarchy of inhibition is introduced
in place of the single-factor inhibition
theory of Hull and Miller. Such a con-
ceptualization is necessary to account
for the appearance of inverted V-shaped
curves of avoidance in place of monotonic
gradients. It is assumed that inhibitory
gradients, as higher-order responses, are
steeper than the gradients they inhibit,
and that this relationship serves to free
higher-order thought processes from pri-
mary stimulus generalization. This for-
mulation differs from Miller's in that
Miller assumes a dichotomy between
higher- and lower-order processes, while
the present position assumes a continuum
based upon a chaining of inhibitory
gradients of increasing slope.
It may be questioned as to whether
it is indeed possible to inhibit anxiety.
While the mechanism is not evident and
deserves investigation in its own right,
 4Or 80

CO
o " s v jt2 nd Jump ^
X -5 th Jump g
3O -
s ft)
o
o: w
o -19th Jump a
20

z;
QL. a
8 I.O -

5O

Neutral Low Medium High Neutral Low Medium High

w
STIMULUS DIMENSION - STIMULUS DIMENSION 2,
N
FIG. 7. GSR curves for a single 5 obtained at three levels of experience. ("Deviation score" refers to a transformation which controls
for individual lability and mean reactivity as evaluated by responses to control stimuli Prom Epstein, 1962].)
 HUMAN APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE GRADIENTS
it is assumed that the inhibition of
anxiety is similar to the inhibition of
other autonomic responses which can
often be delayed until an appropriate
time and place for their expression are
available. Such responses include vomit-
ing, voiding, crying, and fainting from
physical exhaustion. Very likely what is
involved is the production of responses
incompatible with the inhibited response,
i.e., distracting responses, or the in-
hibition of goal-oriented responses, in-
cluding those involved in perception,
thought, and imagination. Whatever
the mechanism, there is considerable evi-
dence that anxiety can be inhibited.
Thus, in the present study, the increase
in self-rated avoidance following the goal
act for the experienced, but not the
novice, parachutists is consistent with
the assumption that inhibited anxiety
was released when inhibition no longer
served a purpose. In this respect it will
be recalled that the early peak of self-
rated avoidance for the experienced
jumpers was interpreted as resulting from
a protracted period of inhibition before
the goal act. A similar release of in-
hibited anxiety was noted in a study by
Basowitz, Persky, Korchin, and Grinker
(1955), where it was found that army
paratroopers produced an unanticipated
rise in anxiety some time after a stressful
training period. In a study in progress
on dreams we are finding that parachut-
ists almost never report an anxiety dream
immediately before a jump, but do so
some time after the jump. In investiga-
tions of parachutists' reactions to word-
association (Epstein & Fenz, 1962) and
TAT-like tests (Fenz & Epstein, 1962)
containing built-in stimulus dimensions,
it was found that novice parachutists
on the day of a jump failed to perceive
anxiety-related words and explicitly
denied fear of parachuting in stories to
pictures of parachuting. At the same
time, they showed an increase in anxiety
responses to pictures unrelated to para-
chuting, suggesting displacement of in-
hibited anxiety.
There is reason to believe that the
backward shift in the peak of avoidance
with experience represents a fundamental
11
adaptive mechanism in nonhuman as
well as human animals. The phenom-
enon is remarkably similar to Pavlov's
(Pavlov, 1927, 1928, 1941) "paradoxical
phase." Pavlov noted that when his
dogs were subjected to extreme states of
stress over a prolonged period, a highly
orderly sequence of changes took place
in their conditioned response hierarchies.
Following a period of total inhibition,
a reverse gradient appeared, with the
animal responding most strongly to stim-
uli that it had originally responded to
least strongly, and least strongly to stim-
uli that it had originally responded to
most strongly. Pavlov referred to this
complete reversal as the "ultraparadox-
ical phase." Following this, there oc-
curred a gradual shift along the stimulus
dimension of the point of strongest
response until the original gradient was
restored. With repeated exposure to the
same source of stress, the sequence un-
folded itself more and more rapidly
and finally disappeared. The Pavlovian
phenomenon, as described above, is
opposite in developmental direction to
that observed in our parachutists. How-
ever, this is theoretically to be expected,
as Pavlov attributed the above sequence
of responses to the gradual dissipation
of an inhibitory state, whereas in the
theoretical formulation presented for the
parachutists, the peaking back was
assumed to be associated with increas-
ing inhibition. Under conditions experi-
mentally designed to increase inhibition,
e.g., drowsiness and certain drug states,
Pavlov was able to demonstrate a peak-
ing back of the generalization gradient
in the same direction as that found for
our parachutists.
The shift in the peak of anxiety toward
the remote end of the dimension, whether
a cue dimension or a time dimension, has
important implications for both adaptive
and maladaptive behavior. On the
adaptive side, it can serve to alert the
person or animal in sufficient time for
defensive reactions to be brought effec-
tively into play. Secondly, the inhibi-
tory reaction responsible for the inverted
v serves to keep anxiety within relatively
low and nondisruptive overall levels. It
12 SEYMOUR EPSTEIN AND WALTER D. FENZ
is presumably by this mechanism that
the experienced parachutist is able to
keep from experiencing the intense anxi-
ety that the inexperienced parachutist
must cope with. An interesting negative
derivation related to this last advantage
is that individuals who have successfully
coped with stress over a prolonged period,
if their controls ever were to break down,
should be susceptible to greater panic and
disorganization than inexperienced in-
dividuals. Such a derivation is actually
supported by observations of wartime
pilots (Bond, 1952). A further implica-
tion of the displacement of the peak of
the inverted v is that while it should
normally be adaptive in alerting the indi-
vidual to an area of potential danger,
should the conflict become unconscious,
the displacement of the anxiety from its
point of origin would result in what
would appear to be meaningless anxiety,
and the greater the time since the
conflict, the more remote would the
relationship become between the original
conflict and the cues that elicit the
anxiety. Space does not permit a full
development of the implications of the
inverted v-shaped curve, which will have
to be reserved for a future theoretical
paper.
REFERENCES
BASOWITZ, H., PERSKY, H., KORCHIN, S. J.,
& GRINKER, R. R. Anxiety and stress.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1955.
BOND, D. D. The love and fear of flying.
New York: International Univer. Press,
1952.
EPSTEIN, S. The measurement of drive and
conflict in humans: Theory and experiment.
In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium
on motivation: 1962. Lincoln: Univer.
Nebraska Press, 1962. Pp. 281-321.
EPSTEIN, S., & FENZ, W. D. Theory and
experiment on the measurement of ap-
proach-avoidance conflict. J. abnorm. soc.
Psychol., 1962, 64, 97-112.
FENZ, W. D., & EPSTEIN, S. Measurement of
approach-avoidance conflict along a stim-
ulus-dimension by a thematic apperception
test. /. Pers., 1962, 30, 613-632.
HULL, C. L. Principles of behavior. New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1943.
LEWIN, K. Behavior and development as a
function of the total situation. In L.
Carmichael (Ed.), Manual of child psy-
chology. New York: Wiley, 1946.
MILLER, N. E. Liberalization of basic S-R
concepts: Extensions to conflict behavior,
motivation, and social learning. In S. Koch
(Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science.
Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959.
PAVLOV, I. P. Conditioned reflexes. (Trans,
by G. V. Anrep) London: Oxford Univer.
Press, 1927.
PAVLOV, I. P. Lectures on conditioned reflexes.
(Trans, by W. H. Gantt) New York:
International, 1928.
PAVLOV, I. P. Conditioned reflexes and
psychiatry. (Trans, by W. H. Gantt) New
York: International, 1941.
(Received April 17, 1964)