Right Effort: Approach Versus Avoidance Is there a difference in practice between approaching positive states and abandoning negative states? 

I have tried for a long time to abandon the negative, which in my case is not  too severe (e.g. not drugs, nor physical violence, etc.), but seemingly the focus on abandoning seems less efficient than actually approaching constructive states, such as doing meditation or exercising. If one's problems are not too severe, should one prioritize doing virtuous behaviours (e.g. meditation) above trying to limit the negative?

I had read in psychological texts that an attitude based on approach can be superior to one based on avoidance. Is such a distinction made in Buddhism in any way?
They shouldn't be done in isolation. It should be a comprehensive approach which is exactly why the Buddha taught the Four Right Exertions:


  There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds &amp; exerts his intent:
  1. for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen...
  2. for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen...
  3. for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and)
  4. for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, &amp; culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. ~~ MN 78 ~~