An avoidance-avoidance conflict is a motivational conflict in which you must choose between two (or more) undesirable options, like doing a dreaded chore or getting punished for skipping it. In AP Psychology, it's one of the conflict types that act as stressors in Topic 7.4 (Stress and Coping).
An avoidance-avoidance conflict happens when every option on the table is something you want to avoid. You're stuck picking the lesser of two evils. Classic example: you can either study all weekend for a test you dread, or skip studying and fail. Neither sounds good, but you have to pick one. Because there's no appealing outcome, these conflicts tend to produce procrastination, indecision, and a strong urge to escape the situation entirely.
In the AP Psych CED, this term lives in Topic 7.4 (Stress and Coping) as one of three classic motivational conflicts that function as stressors. The other two are approach-approach (two good options) and approach-avoidance (one option with both good and bad sides). Avoidance-avoidance conflicts are generally the most stressful of the three, because no matter what you choose, you end up with something negative. That guaranteed bad outcome is exactly what makes them a textbook stressor.
This term sits in Topic 7.4 (Stress and Coping) in Unit 7, where the CED treats motivational conflicts as a category of stressor. The big idea is that stress doesn't only come from catastrophes or major life changes. Everyday decisions where both choices hurt can ramp up stress too. Knowing all three conflict types (approach-approach, approach-avoidance, avoidance-avoidance) lets you classify a scenario quickly, which is exactly the skill multiple-choice questions test. It also connects forward to coping. How stressful an avoidance-avoidance conflict feels depends on your cognitive appraisal of it, and how you handle it depends on the coping mechanisms you use.
Keep studying AP Psychology Unit 7
Approach-avoidance conflict (Unit 7)
This is the term's closest sibling and the one the exam loves to swap in. Approach-avoidance is one option with both a pull and a push (a dream college that's wildly expensive). Avoidance-avoidance is two separate options that both push you away. Count the options and check their valence, and you can't mix them up.
Cognitive Appraisal (Unit 7)
Whether an avoidance-avoidance conflict feels mildly annoying or crushing depends on how you appraise it. If you see one bad option as a manageable challenge rather than a threat, the conflict produces less stress. Appraisal is the bridge between the conflict itself and your stress response.
Coping Mechanisms (Unit 7)
Avoidance-avoidance conflicts trigger a lot of escape behavior, like procrastinating or pretending the decision doesn't exist. Problem-focused coping (just picking the lesser evil and acting) usually resolves the conflict, while emotion-focused coping manages how bad it feels in the meantime.
Learned Helplessness (Unit 7)
Repeatedly facing situations where every outcome is bad can teach an organism that its choices don't matter. That's the recipe for learned helplessness, where people stop trying to escape negative outcomes even when escape becomes possible. It's the long-term cousin of being stuck between two evils.
This term shows up almost exclusively in multiple-choice scenario questions. You'll get a short vignette ('Maria must either get a painful root canal or live with a toothache') and have to label the conflict type. The skill being tested is application, not definition recall, so practice sorting scenarios into the three conflict types fast. The trick is to count the options and ask whether each one attracts or repels. No released FRQ has hinged on this term by itself, but it can appear inside an Article Analysis or Evidence-Based Question about stressors, where correctly naming the conflict type earns you the 'apply the concept' point.
Avoidance-avoidance means TWO separate options, both bad (study all weekend OR fail the test). Approach-avoidance means ONE option that has both an upside and a downside (marrying someone you love who lives far from your family). If the scenario describes pros and cons of a single choice, it's approach-avoidance. If it describes two choices you'd both rather skip, it's avoidance-avoidance.
An avoidance-avoidance conflict forces a choice between two or more options that are all undesirable, so you're picking the lesser of two evils.
It's one of three motivational conflict types in Topic 7.4, alongside approach-approach (two good options) and approach-avoidance (one option with both good and bad sides).
Avoidance-avoidance conflicts are usually the most stressful conflict type because every possible outcome is negative.
These conflicts commonly produce procrastination, indecision, and escape behavior, since avoiding the decision feels easier than choosing a bad outcome.
On the exam, identify the conflict type by counting the options and checking whether each one attracts you or repels you.
It's a motivational conflict where you must choose between two or more options that are all unpleasant, like getting a painful shot or staying sick. It appears in Topic 7.4 (Stress and Coping) as a type of stressor.
Avoidance-avoidance involves two separate bad options, while approach-avoidance involves a single option that has both appealing and unappealing features. Count the choices in the scenario: two evils means avoidance-avoidance, one mixed option means approach-avoidance.
Generally, yes. Because every available outcome is negative, there's no satisfying resolution, which is why these conflicts produce more stress, procrastination, and escape behavior than approach-approach or approach-avoidance conflicts.
Choosing between writing a long essay you dread or taking a zero on the assignment. Both outcomes are negative, so you have to pick whichever one hurts less.
Yes, it's part of Topic 7.4 (Stress and Coping). It's most often tested in multiple-choice questions that give you a short scenario and ask you to identify which of the three conflict types it describes.