Approach-approach and avoidance-avoidance choice conflicts arise from an independent evaluation of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the features of the choice alternatives. The conflicts can also be determined by the manner in which the features are evaluated and highlighted by the comparison of the choice alternatives. Two such comparison-for-choice effects are addressed. The first is the identification of shared and unique features of the alternatives by means of a feature-matching comparison process. The second involves political choice. Acting in synergy, negative and positive political advertising campaigns can focus the choice on either the bad features or the good features of competing candidates.
Choice conflict refers to the internal conflict that an individual experiences when making a choice between competing alternatives, as in buying a house or choosing among job offers. The nature of such a conflict has typically been viewed as arising out of an individual's evalution of the features of the choice alternatives themselves. That is, if the evaluation of the features is primarily positive, thereby creating a conflict between two desirable goals, then there is an appr~ffch-~pproach conflict. If the evaluation of the features is primarily negative, thereby creating a conflict between two undesirable goals, then there is an avoidance-avoidance conflict (Lewin, 1933(Lewin, , 1951;; Miller, 1944).
Approach-approach choices are characterized by an attraction to the focal item, finding its good features appealing and choosing it for its merits. Accordingly, making a choice between two items in which the positive features are prominent is relatively easy and psychologically pleasant. In contrast, avoidance-avoidance choices are psychologically quite different. When a choice is experienced as an avoidance-avoidance choice, then the choice is characterized by eliminating one item on the basis of its detriments, and choosing the remaining alternative by default. Such a choice process is difficult and feels psychologically unpleasant (Houston, Sherman and Baker, 1991).
This paper examines how the nature of the choice conflict can emerge from the process of comparing the choice alternatives, rather than from an independent evaluation of the benefits and detriments of the features of the choice alternatives. A functionally equivalent (or even identical) pair of choice alternatives will sometimes