Travis was stopped by a police officer for speeding on his way to work one day. Although he had never received a ticket during 35 years of driving, he received one costing $150 and adding two points to his license. He decided to contest the ticket in court, citing his previously impeccable driving record. The judge presented an alternative: either pay the fine and accept the points or complete 250 hours of community service. Given that Travis works 50-60 hours a week, he faced a dilemma: A) approach-avoidance, B) approach-approach, C) avoidance-approach, D) avoidance-avoidance.

 D) avoidance-avoidance

Travis is faced with an avoidance-avoidance conflict. This type of conflict occurs when a person must choose between two undesirable options. In this case, both options have negative consequences for Travis. The first option—paying the $150 fine and receiving two points on his license—is financially costly and could potentially affect his driving record and insurance rates. The second option—completing 250 hours of community service—while not financially costly, is a significant demand on his time, which is already limited given his long work hours.

Neither option is appealing to Travis. An avoidance-avoidance conflict can be difficult to resolve because choosing either outcome involves confronting a negative aspect. The choice comes down to which option Travis dislikes the least or which negative outcome he is better able to tolerate or mitigate.