The right side? Under time pressure, approach motivation leads to right-oriented bias

Goal Side Selection of Penalty Shots in Soccer: A Laboratory Study and Analyses of Men's World Cup Shoot-Outs

Penalty kicks in soccer provide a unique scenario in which to examine human choice behavior under competitive conditions. Here, we report two studies examining the tendency for soccer kickers to select the goal side with the largest area to the left or right of the goalkeeper's veridical midline, when the goalkeeper stands marginally off-center. In Study I participants viewed realistic images of a soccer goal and goalkeeper with instructions to choose the left or right side of the goalmouth to best score a goal. We systematically displaced the goalkeeper's position along the goal line; and, to simulate changes in the kicker's viewing position, we systematically displaced the lateral position of the goalmouth in each image. While, overall, participants tended to choose the left over the right goal side, this preference was modulated by the goalkeeper's position relative to the center of the goal and jointly on the lateral position of the goalmouth relative to the participants' body midline. In Study II we analyzed 100 penalty shots from men's world cup shoot-outs between the years 1982 to 2018. Again, we found a small tendency for kickers to aim the ball to the left goal side, but with barely any modulating effect of changes in the goalkeeper's position and no effect of changes in the kicker's position. In contrast to earlier claims that a goalkeeper may benefit by standing marginally to the left or right of the center of the goal to influence the direction of the kicker's shot, our findings suggest that this is probably not a good strategy in elite football competitions.

Fear-specific leftward bias in gaze direction judgment

Previous studies have shown that humans have a left spatial attention bias in cognition and behaviour. However, whether there exists a leftward perception bias of gaze direction has not been investigated. To address this gap, we conducted three behavioural experiments using a forced-choice gaze direction judgment task. The point of subjective equality (PSE) was employed to measure whether there was a leftward perception bias of gaze direction, and if there was, whether this bias was modulated by face emotion. The results of experiment 1 showed that the PSE of fearful faces was significantly positive as compared to zero and this effect was not found in angry, happy, and neutral faces, indicating that participants were more likely to judge the gaze direction of fearful faces as directed to their left-side space, namely a leftward perception bias. With the response keys counterbalanced between participants, experiment 2a replicated the findings in experiment 1. To further investigate whether the gaze direction perception variation was contributed by emotional or low-level features of faces, experiment 2b and 3 used inverted faces and inverted eyes, respectively. The results revealed similar leftward perception biases of gaze direction in all types of faces, indicating that gaze direction perception was biased by emotional information in faces rather than low-level facial features. Overall, our study demonstrates that there a fear-specific leftward perception bias in processing gaze direction. These findings shed new light on the cerebral lateralization in humans.

The Other End of the Line

Abstract. The two hemispheres of the human brain are asymmetrically involved in representing a person’s motivational orientation: Approach motivation is reflected in greater activation of the left hemisphere, whereas avoidance motivation more strongly activates the right hemisphere. Visuospatial bias, as assessed in the line-bisection task, is often used as a simple behavioral measure of relative hemispheric activation. In three experiments, we investigated whether affect-induced approach and avoidance motivation are associated with spatial biases in line-bisection performance. Happy or terrifying pictures (Experiment 1, N = 70), happy or sad music (Experiment 2, N = 50), and joyful or frightening videos (Experiment 3, N = 90) were used to induce negative and positive affect. Mood-induction procedures successfully changed emotional states in the intended direction. However, our analyses revealed no effect of mood on visuospatial biases in the line-bisection task. Additional Bayesian analyses also provided more evidence against the hypothesized effect than in favor of it. Thus, visuospatial bias in line bisection does not seem to be a sensitive measure of approach and avoidance motivation induced by positive and negative affect.

Goal center width, how to count sequences, and the gambler’s fallacy in soccer penalty shootouts

Previous research has reported that the gambler’s fallacy could be detected in goalkeepers’ behavior during penalty shootouts. Following repeated kicks in the same direction, goalkeepers were more likely to dive in the opposite direction on the next kick. We employ here a unique data collection approach and accurately measure the exact location of each ball when crossing the goal plane. This allows us to analyze how different definitions of the goal center width affect the results, and we show that this width indeed affects whether a gambler’s fallacy in goalkeepers’ diving behavior exists. We further augment the data with additional kicks from top international competitions and analyze the extended dataset. We also question whether previous treatments of kicking sequences adequately represent what goalkeepers consider as a run of consecutive kicks to the same side. A different representation of kicking sequences is provided and applied to the data. Overall, we find some evidence for the gambler’s fallacy after sequences of two or three kicks to the same side.

Heading Right and Judging Harsher

Abstract. The term right may imply different meanings, for example, right can be the direction opposite to left, but right can also mean the opposite of wrong. In three experiments, we investigated whether orientation toward the right versus left direction can influence how individuals judge situational moral transgressions. Mental spatial orientation was manipulated by placing the text of moral transgressions on the left versus right side of the screen (Experiment 1) or by presenting different landscape pictures depicting paths that either lead to the left versus to the right (Experiments 2 and 3). In Experiment 3, we also manipulated participants’ physical spatial orientation. Results confirmed our main prediction that a mental rightward (vs. leftward) orientation can trigger relatively harsher moral judgments.

Modulating prefrontal control in humans reveals distinct pathways to competitive success and collective waste

Competitive decision making may require controlling and calculative mind-sets. We examined this possibility in repeated predator-prey contests by up- or down-regulating the individual's right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG), a brain region involved in impulse inhibition and mentalizing. Following brain stimulation, subjects invested as predator or prey against a non-treated antagonist. Relative to sham-treatment (i) prey-defense was relatively frequent, strong and unaffected by stimulation, (ii) down-regulating predator rIFG produced a high-firing strategy-predators earned more because they attacked more frequently, while (iii) up-regulating predator rIFG produced a track-and-attack strategy-predators earned more because they attacked especially when their (non-stimulated) antagonist lowered its prey-defense. Results suggest that calculative mindsets are not needed to compete effectively, especially not when the goal is to survive. Enhanced prefrontal control enables individuals to appear less aggressive without sacrificing competitive effectiveness-it provides human predators with an iron fist in a velvet glove.

Walking blindfolded unveils unique contributions of behavioural approach and inhibition to lateral spatial bias

Healthy individuals display a tendency to allocate attention unequally across space, and this bias has implications for how individuals interact with their environments. However, the origins of this phenomenon remain relatively poorly understood. The present research examined the joint and independent contributions of two fundamental motivational systems - behavioural approach and inhibition systems (BAS and BIS) - to lateral spatial bias in a locomotion task. Participants completed self-report measures of trait BAS and BIS, then repeatedly traversed a room, blindfolded, aiming for a straight line. We obtained locomotion data from motion tracking to capture variations in the walking trajectories. Overall, walking trajectories deviated to the left, and this tendency was more pronounced with increasing BIS scores. Meanwhile, BAS was associated with relative rightward tendencies when BIS was low, but not when BIS was high. These results demonstrate for the first time an association between BIS and lateral spatial bias independently of variations in BAS. The findings also contribute to clarify the circumstances in which BAS is associated with a rightward bias. We discuss the implications of these findings for the neurobiological underpinnings of BIS and for the literature on spatial bias.

End of the line: Line bisection, an unreliable measure of approach and avoidance motivation

Approach motivation leads to greater left hemisphere activation, whereas an avoidant motivational state activates the right hemisphere. Recent research, which served as the basis for the current experiment, suggests line bisection provides a simple measure of approach/avoidance lateralisation. Findings from Experiment 1 indicated that the landmark task was sensitive enough to identify lateral asymmetries evoked by happy and angry faces; however, follow-up experiments failed to replicate this finding. When task instructions were slightly modified or when a mixed design was used, motivation did not influence landmark task performance. The use of images in lieu of faces also failed to produce a significant effect. Importantly, a straight replication of Experiment 1 produced a null result. Line bisection does not appear to be a suitable measure of lateralised approach/avoidance biases, possibly due to the high individual variability inherent in visuospatial biases. Implications for null hypothesis significance testing are also discussed.

Arbitrary numbers counter fair decisions: trails of markedness in card distribution

Converging evidence from controlled experiments suggests that the mere processing of a number and its attributes such as value or parity might affect free choice decisions between different actions. For example the spatial numerical associations of response codes (SNARC) effect indicates the magnitude of a digit to be associated with a spatial representation and might therefore affect spatial response choices (i.e., decisions between a "left" and a "right" option). At the same time, other (linguistic) features of a number such as parity are embedded into space and might likewise prime left or right responses through feature words [odd or even, respectively; markedness association of response codes (MARC) effect]. In this experiment we aimed at documenting such influences in a natural setting. We therefore assessed number-space and parity-space association effects by exposing participants to a fair distribution task in a card playing scenario. Participants drew cards, read out loud their number values, and announced their response choice, i.e., dealing it to a left vs. right player, indicated by Playmobil characters. Not only did participants prefer to deal more cards to the right player, the card's digits also affected response choices and led to a slightly but systematically unfair distribution, supported by a regular SNARC effect and counteracted by a reversed MARC effect. The experiment demonstrates the impact of SNARC- and MARC-like biases in free choice behavior through verbal and visual numerical information processing even in a setting with high external validity.

Avoidance Motivation and Conservation of Energy

Compared to approach motivation, avoidance motivation evokes vigilance, attention to detail, systematic information processing, and the recruitment of cognitive resources. From a conservation of energy perspective it follows that people would be reluctant to engage in the kind of effortful cognitive processing evoked by avoidance motivation, unless the benefits of expending this energy outweigh the costs. We put forward three empirically testable propositions concerning approach and avoidance motivation, investment of energy, and the consequences of such investments. Specifically, we propose that compared to approach-motivated people, avoidance-motivated people (a) carefully select situations in which they exert such cognitive effort, (b) only perform well in the absence of distracters that occupy cognitive resources, and (c) become depleted after exerting such cognitive effort.

Honesty Requires Time (and Lack of Justifications)

Recent research suggests that refraining from cheating in tempting situations requires self-control, which indicates that serving self-interest is an automatic tendency. However, evidence also suggests that people cheat to the extent that they can justify their unethical behavior to themselves. To merge these different lines of research, we adopted a dual-system approach that distinguished between the intuitive and deliberative cognitive systems. We suggest that for people to restrict their dishonest behavior, they need to have enough time and no justifications for self-serving unethical behavior. We employed an anonymous die-under-cup task in which participants privately rolled a die and reported the outcome to determine their pay. We manipulated the time available for participants to report their outcome (short vs. ample). The results of two experiments support our prediction, revealing that the dark side of people’s automatic self-serving tendency may be overcome when time to decide is ample and private justifications for dishonesty are not available.