The power of goal-directed processes in the causation of emotional and other actions

People often engage in behavior that is not in their best interest. For instance, they engage in unhealthy behaviors such as smoking, commit action slips such as taking a wrong habitual route, or they become aggressive even when they risk a high cost (e.g., retaliation or ruining a relationship). To make sense of these so-called suboptimal actions, theorists have come up with dual process models that distinguish between (a) a stimulus-driven process, in which a stimulus activates a response based on the person’s prior learning history or innate wiring and (a) a goal-directed process, which compares the values and likelihoods of the outcomes of different action options. Whereas traditional dual process models take suboptimal behavior to be caused by stimulus-driven processes, we propose an alternative model that attributes a more important role to goal-directed processes instead. We identify several reasons for why classic dual process models tend to over- vs. underestimate the role of stimulus-driven vs. goal-directed processes. In the current research proposal, we put forward a series of experiments that challenge traditional dual process models by testing whether seemingly stimulus-driven phenomena might be due to goal-driven processes after all. We do so by using state-of-the-art behavioral (reaction time) and neurological (TMS/MEP) techniques. Support for our alternative model has important implications for behavior change in clinical practice and society.