494 v. AFFECTI vE PROCESSES
he held that the BAS was responsible for gen -
erating all positively valenced affects, such 
as hope, excitement, and elation, in support 
of goal pursuit and attainment, and only 
positively valenced affects. Consistent with 
this notion, BAS scores have been shown to 
predict situational positive affect in response 
to cues that a reward is available (Carver 
& White, 1994; Heponíemi, Keltikangas- 
Järvinen, Puttonen, & Ravaja, 2003), as 
well as positive emotional responses imme -
diately after receiving rewards (De Pascalis, 
Varriale, & D’Antuono, 2010; Germans & 
Kring, 2000).
There are conceptual complications, how -
ever, with respect to certain other affects. 
Gray (1990, 1994) consistently held that 
frustrative nonreward engages the BIS rath -
er than the BAS, consistent with the view 
that negative valence always is attributable 
to BIS activity. This view is not held univer -
sally. Carver and Scheier (1998) have argued 
that the affective outputs of the behavioral 
approach and threat systems are instead 
products of self-  regulatory feedback loops 
that monitor the rate of progress (or the lack 
thereof) toward one’s goals and away from 
threats. In this view, feelings facilitate effort 
regulation by signaling whether one is pro -
gressing toward one’s goal at a sufficiently 
rapid pace. Accordingly, when the perceived 
rate of goal-  related progress falls below a 
criterion value that defines acceptable or an -
ticipated progress, negative affect arises that 
signals a need to increase one’s efforts. Posi -
tive affect arises when perceived progress ex -
ceeds the criterion value, signaling that one’s 
efforts can potentially be relaxed (Carver, 
2003).
This model holds that the specific emo -
tional outputs (rather than valence per se) 
differ between the approach and the threat 
systems (Carver & Scheier, 1998). Thus, 
the positive affect generated by better-  than- 
expected goal-  related progress takes the 
form of eagerness and joy when doing well 
at approaching goals, but it takes the form 
of relief and contentment when doing well at 
avoiding threats (Carver, 2003).
Responses to lack of expected progress to -
ward approach goals are negative in valence, 
taking one of two forms. The form depends 
on the degree to which a goal appears ul -
timately attainable versus lost (see Carver, 
2004). Progress somewhat below the crite -rion yields frustration and anger. If the ap -
proach goal seems unattainable, the affec -
tive response is more likely to be sadness, 
dejection, and despondency (see Carver & 
Harmon-  Jones, 2009).
Research findings are consistent with the 
idea that high BAS sensitivity can result in 
negative emotions when goal pursuit goes 
poorly. In one such study involving frustra -
tive nonreward, participants were led to be -
lieve that they could earn extra credit if they 
performed sufficiently well at a task, but 
they were subsequently given feedback indi -
cating that they had failed to do so (Carver, 
2004). Individual differences in BAS sensi -
tivity (specifically the Fun Seeking subscale), 
but not BIS sensitivity, were significantly 
associated with participants’ ratings of sad -
ness and frustration after failing to earn the 
reward. Conceptually similar results have 
also been reported by Van den Berg, Fran -
ken, and Muris (2011).
In addition to predicting situational nega -
tive affect, BAS sensitivity has also been 
shown to positively relate to trait anger 
(Harmon-  Jones, 2003) and proneness to 
guilt (Sheikh & Janoff-  Bulman, 2010), 
both of which have been conceptualized as 
approach-  oriented emotions (see Amodio, 
Devine, & Harmon-  Jones, 2007; Carver & 
Harmon-  Jones, 2009). Collectively, these 
findings support the idea that individual dif -
ferences in BAS produce different affective 
states as a function of progress or lack of 
progress toward goals.
This means that the picture of a person 
with a highly sensitive BAS is considerably 
more complex than simply positive affect 
and effort engagement. The picture also de -
pends on the context in which the person is 
presently operating. A person with a sensi -
tive BAS who is presently facing obstacles 
and difficulty may be vulnerable to frustra -
tion and anger, or even sadness and dejec -
tion (though not fear), depending on the de -
gree of difficulty, which must be figured into 
the prediction of his or her behavior.
Close  Relationships
Researchers have suggested that close re -
lationships can be construed in terms 
of motivational tendencies to approach 
relationship-  related rewards (e.g., intimacy) 
and avoid relationship-  related punishments 