We can be very afraid of an upcoming conversation — and still begin it. We can feel anxious before a trip but not cancel it. Yet sometimes even moderate fear makes us postpone a meeting, change our route, or make efforts to avoid ever encountering what frightens us.
It may seem that the intensity of fear directly determines our behavior: the more frightened we are, the farther away we stay. But the relationship between experience and action is not that simple. Two people may rate their fear equally, yet one may quickly approach its source while the other freezes, takes a few steps, backs away, or stops at the very end.
A study by Sergio Frumento and colleagues, published on September 11, 2026, in Communications Psychology, showed that avoidance consists of different elements. To understand it, it is not enough simply to ask how afraid we are or to measure the distance at which we stop. We need to see the whole path — from the first hesitation to the final step.
How to Measure Avoidance
To study phobias researchers often use a behavioral approach task. Participants are asked to move as close as they can to a frightening object, and researchers record the distance at which they stop.
This method seems logical: if we are afraid of a spider, we will probably try to stay away from it. But a single final measure tells us nothing about how we moved. We may move slowly yet continue all the way. We may approach quickly and then freeze. We may stop several times or keep close to the wall, even if we eventually end up nearby.
Researchers from the University of Pisa created a standardized version of this task in virtual reality. The sample included 75 volunteers with different levels of fear of spiders. Participants completed a special questionnaire and then had to approach first a live spider in a closed cage and, in another session, a virtual spider. The order of the tasks was randomized.
In both cases, participants were allowed to stop the experiment at any time if the fear became unbearable. The researchers measured how close they came, how long it took, and their average movement speed. In the virtual environment, the entire movement trajectory could also be recorded. A detailed analysis of these trajectories was conducted using data from 52 participants who completed the virtual task.
The main measures from the virtual test were associated both with behavior in front of the real spider and with questionnaire responses. This confirmed that the virtual task did reflect fear and avoidance. But the most interesting findings emerged when the researchers stopped looking only at the final point and examined the entire approach process.
Five Ways of Holding Back
Five relatively independent features of avoidance emerged from participants’ movements.
The first is freezing at the very beginning. We already know that we need to take a step, but for a while we remain in place. This is not a final refusal: movement may still begin, but first we have to overcome internal resistance.
The second is action delay. It resembles initial freezing but describes a broader difficulty in moving from intention to action.
The third feature is hesitant approach. We move, but not smoothly: we slow down, stop, or advance in short segments. From the outside it may look as though the task is being completed, yet every next step requires another decision.
The fourth is maintaining spatial distance. Even while continuing to approach, we choose a path that allows us to remain farther from the source of fear.
Finally, the fifth feature is freezing just before direct contact. Most of the path has already been covered, but the final step proves especially difficult. We come almost all the way and stop exactly where the action is about to become final.
These are not five types of phobia or ready-made psychological types into which any of us can be classified. The researchers identified behavioral dimensions — different parts of one process that can occur in combination. One participant might take a long time to begin moving but then complete the task quickly. Another might approach immediately but stop before the final step.
Why Talking About Fear Does Not Tell the Whole Story
When the researchers grouped participants according to movement characteristics, two behavioral clusters emerged. But these only partially overlapped with the groups formed from questionnaire responses. Participants who reported little fear usually also showed little avoidance. With moderate and strong fear, the correspondence became less clear: people with similar questionnaire scores could behave differently in front of the spider and end up in different behavioral groups.
This does not mean that anyone described their feelings incorrectly. Subjective fear and avoidance are genuinely related, but they reflect different aspects of our experience.
A questionnaire helps reveal what we think and feel: how strong we consider our fear to be, which situations we imagine as dangerous, and what we expect from encountering a frightening object. A behavioral task shows something different: what happens when the encounter has already begun and a decision has to be made right now.
We may experience intense anxiety yet have experience, motivation, or a way of coping with it that allows us to keep moving. Conversely, comparatively moderate fear may coexist with a persistent habit of keeping our distance. That is why fear and avoidance are not simply two versions of the same trait.
Avoidance Is a Process, Not a Single Choice
In everyday life, avoidance rarely looks like an outright refusal. More often it consists of small actions: we hesitate, postpone, choose a detour, shorten unpleasant contact, or leave ourselves a way to exit quickly. Such behavior immediately reduces tension. If we cancel a frightening meeting, the anxiety really does subside. The brain receives a convincing lesson: distance brought relief. As a result, the urge to avoid the situation may arise even earlier next time.
But sequence matters here too. Sometimes the hardest part is getting started. Sometimes we manage the first steps calmly but stop before the climax: we do not press Send, do not enter the office, or do not ask the important question. And sometimes we technically remain in the situation while maintaining psychological or physical distance.
That is why the question — “Do you avoid this?” — may be too crude. More informative questions are: at what point do we stop, what happens immediately beforehand, how does our pace change, and what distance are we trying to maintain?
The study does not provide a ready-made way to overcome fear, but it offers a more precise understanding of behavior itself. A difficulty at the beginning of the path is different from a difficulty with the final step. And hesitant progress is not the same as a complete refusal to approach.
What Virtual Reality Could Change
Conventional behavioral tests are difficult to standardize. Different laboratories use different rooms, distances, and frightening objects. A virtual environment makes it possible to create identical conditions and record every movement precisely.
It can also be changed gradually. In theory, this opens the possibility of studying not only spiders but also other fear-provoking objects or situations, and of observing more precisely how behavior changes over time. In the future, such measurements could complement evaluation of exposure therapy, in which we safely and gradually encounter frightening stimuli.
For now, however, this is only a possibility. The authors presented and tested a research tool, not a new treatment method. The study does not show that the virtual task can already select individualized therapy or predict its outcome.
What the Study Does Not Yet Prove
The sample was small and consisted mainly of young volunteers recruited in a university setting. Participants were selected to represent different levels of fear of spiders, but this was not a large clinical sample of people with an established diagnosis.
The five dimensions and two behavioral clusters were derived statistically from data from a single group. They need to be replicated in independent samples. For now, we cannot conclude that avoidance has exactly two stable subtypes or that the same structure will appear with fear of heights, social situations, medical procedures, or open spaces.
The study also found associations between self-reported fear and behavior, but it does not establish causation. It cannot determine whether a particular experience causes a specific movement trajectory, whether years of avoidance create stronger fear, or whether both processes are influenced by other features of our experience.
Finally, a virtual spider remains virtual. Despite the similarity of the main measures in the two tasks, participants knew they were in an artificial environment. In real life, fear is accompanied by unpredictability, the consequences of decisions, and the personal meaning of the situation.
Seeing More Than What We Fear
The main value of the study lies not in the unusual experiment with a virtual spider, but in a more precise view of avoidance. Our fear cannot be fully understood simply by how far we retreat. Sometimes the most important thing happens before the first step. Sometimes it happens in hesitation along the way. Sometimes we cover almost the entire distance and stop at the final boundary.
So the same words about fear can conceal different behaviors, while similar behaviors can conceal different inner experiences. It is not enough to know how strongly we are afraid. It is important to notice what exactly we do with our fear.
Avoidance is not a fixed trait and not a simple choice between “approach” and “leave.” It is a way of coping with threat that unfolds over time. And the more closely we observe its individual moments, the less mysterious it seems — not some force that completely controls us.