A study from the University of Portsmouth in England has mapped how anxiety unfolds in the brain when people face a no‑win dilemma.
Picture being trapped between two unpleasant choices—such as giving a dreaded presentation or failing a class. That uncomfortable sensation of being caught in a scenario where both options are undesirable is known as an “avoid‑avoid conflict,” and it is closely linked to anxiety. When this occurs, the brain shows measurable changes that researchers can now examine.
Benjamin Stocker, a Ph.D. candidate in the university’s School of Psychology, Sport and Health Sciences, designed a game‑like task he coded himself. Forty young adults (aged 18–24) used a joystick to steer clear of threatening objects on a screen. The task alternated between simple sessions (low conflict) and frustrating ones where participants had to choose between two negative outcomes (high conflict).
While players completed the task, researchers recorded brain activity with electroencephalography (EEG), a method that places sensors on the scalp to capture electrical signals from the brain.
During challenging “no‑win” situations, participants’ brains exhibited a distinctive activity pattern. The right frontal cortex produced increased theta waves, and distinct brain regions became active depending on whether the situation felt stressful or manageable.
Published in the International Journal of Psychophysiology, the findings suggest that these neural signatures could serve as an indicator of anxiety‑related conflict.
International Journal of Psychophysiology“Think of it as having a way to literally see anxiety in the brain instead of relying solely on self‑report,” Stocker explained, citing his experience in general practice, where he saw a gap in mental health support. “There is no quick test to diagnose mental health conditions. While a simple illness can be treated immediately, a mental disorder often requires a lengthy trial‑and‑error period before a correct diagnosis and treatment are found.”
This research helps clarify the biology of anxiety, which could eventually lead to more accurate diagnoses, treatments that target specific brain patterns, and a better understanding of why some people struggle more with difficult decisions.
Stocker’s work began during his undergraduate study in psychology, continued through a Master’s in neuroscience, and now comprises his Ph.D. at Portsmouth.
Traditional anxiety studies focus on “approach‑avoid” conflicts—balancing something good against something bad. This study is the first to combine EEG with an “avoid‑avoid” scenario where no choice is beneficial, more closely mirroring real‑world anxiety.
The results showed large, statistically significant differences in brain activity between high‑ and low‑conflict conditions, indicating clear and substantial neural differences rather than trivial noise.
It represents a major step toward evidence‑based, personalized mental health care that could transform anxiety diagnosis and management across the UK.
“One in four people experience anxiety,” Stocker added. “There are huge gaps in the literature that remain unfilled. One day you could hand someone a small EEG device and determine if they have an anxiety condition.”
Stocker’s study was conducted under the guidance of Dr. Roger Moore and Dr. Tom Lockhart.
Dr. Moore noted, “Ben’s research brings us closer to a reliable, individual‑level biomarker that could help diagnose clinical anxiety and guide new non‑drug treatments.”
The team is now planning follow‑up studies to examine how anxiety medications affect the newly identified brain patterns, and to include participants with diagnosed anxiety disorders. This next phase will be key to translating the findings into practical diagnostic tools.