An Experimental Investigation of Co-rumination, Problem Solving, and Distraction

Zelic, Kate J.; Ciesla, Jeffrey A.; Dickson, Kelsey S.; Hruska, Laura; Ciesla, Shannon N.

doi:10.1016/j.beth.2016.11.013

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with these postulates, co-brooding and co-reflection -two facets of co-rumination -correlated respectively with more and less depression symptoms among girls [31]. Similarly, compared to co-distracting and co-problem solving, co-ruminating has been demonstrated as the least effective strategy for regulating negative affect [34 ] and the most related to depressive symptoms [32].…”

Section: Co-rumination a Deleterious Form Of Sharing Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 59%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and social outcomes of the social sharing of emotion

Rimé

Bouchat

Paquot

et al. 2020

Current Opinion in Psychology

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotional experiences trigger the social sharing of emotion. This disclosure of emotional facts and feelings to the social surrounding was generally considered as a simple process of emotional release. The empirical data reviewed in this article invalidate this simplistic view. They show that the social sharing of emotions is a complex process that results not only in intrapersonal effects for the source person, but also in important interpersonal and social outcomes. The intrapersonal effects of the social sharing of emotions are varied, they do not necessarily go together, and they respond to specific conditions. At the interpersonal level, both the sharing of positive and negative emotional episodes affects relationships with the audience. Finally, the research highlights broader social effects relating to social structure, social norms, group action, beliefs, collective resilience, and intergroup relations.

show abstract

Section: Co-rumination a Deleterious Form Of Sharing Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Refs. 28,[30][31][32]. As partners are particularly supportive and engaged within these interactions [e.g.…”

Section: Co-rumination a Deleterious Form Of Sharing Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and social outcomes of the social sharing of emotion

Rimé

Bouchat

Paquot

et al. 2020

Current Opinion in Psychology

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We propose that co-rumination may also foster risk by serving as an ineffective emotion regulation strategy that generates or maintains distress. To date, only one study has examined the short-term impact of social strategies on emotion regulation (Zelic et al 2016). Healthy undergraduates assigned to co-ruminate with the experimenter reported an increase in NA, whereas those who co-problem-solved or co-distracted did not.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Help me Feel Better! Ecological Momentary Assessment of Anxious Youths’ Emotion Regulation with Parents and Peers

Stone

Mennies

Waller

et al. 2018

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anxious youth often have trouble regulating negative affect (NA) and tend to over-rely on parents when faced with challenges. It is unclear how social interactions with parents or peers actually helps or hinders anxious youths' success in regulating NA. The aim of this study was to examine whether the success of anxious youths' emotion regulation strategies differed according to social context. We compared the effectiveness of co-ruminating, co-problem solving and co-distracting with parents/peers for regulating anxious youth's NA in response to stress in their daily lives. We also examined the benefit of attempting each strategy socially vs. non-socially (e.g., co-ruminating vs. ruminating). One-hundred-seventeen youth (9-14) with a current diagnosis of Separation Anxiety Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and/or Social Phobia completed an ecological momentary assessment (14 calls over 5 days), reporting on recent stressors, their affective state, presence of others, and emotion regulation strategies within the prior hour. Mixed linear models revealed that co-distracting was the most effective social strategy for reducing NA, but only for boys. Co-rumination was the least effective social strategy for regulating NA. Regarding social context, only co-distracting was more effective for regulating NA over distracting alone, but only among anxious boys. Results suggest that co-rumination is an ineffective use of social support for regulating NA. Anxious boys may benefit from social support by co-distracting with parents/peers, but improper use may reflect avoidance and contribute to long-term anxiety maintenance. Results extend research on gender differences in interpersonal relationships and emotion regulation.

show abstract

“…Response style informed interventions focus on fostering a Moriarity et al 3 more "adaptive" response style profile (i.e., less rumination, more distraction and/or problemsolving). Experimental and longitudinal designs have shown that distraction and problem-solving can protect against negative affect and internalizing symptoms (Abela et al, 2004(Abela et al, , 2007Hilt et al, 2010;Roelofs et al, 2009;Zelic et al, 2017). However, distraction and problem-solving sometimes predict worse symptoms (Nolen-Hoeksema et al, 2008).…”

Section: Response Styles Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Response Styles Theory and Internalizing Symptoms in Adolescence: A Network Approach

Moriarity¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Response styles theory is a well-supported etiological theory of internalizing psychopathology. However, evidence indicates that the three response styles (rumination, problem-solving, and distraction) are not orthogonal, highlighting the importance of multivariate tests of this theory. Further, different types of symptoms within a disorder can have different risk factors, suggesting that refinement of theory and response style-focused interventions is possible with the help of analyses that go beyond symptom total scores or diagnoses. Methods: A sample of 567 participants (Mage=12.6 years, 54.1% female) completed measures of response styles, depression symptoms, and anxiety symptoms. A subset of 360 completed these measures a second time (mean/median months apart=18.2/12.4). Internalizing symptoms and response styles were modeled in cross-sectional and cross-lagged panel network models. Results: Rumination was the response style most comorbid with concurrent internalizing symptoms. Social anxiety, negative self-concept, and dysphoria were the symptom domains most comorbid with a classically-defined maladaptive response profile. Distraction was the response style most strongly predictive of future symptoms, whereas negative self-concept, somatic depression, and somatic anxiety were the strongest predictors of future response styles. Conversely, rumination was the response style most strongly predicted by past internalizing symptoms and dysphoria was the symptom subtype most strongly predicted by past response styles. Conclusions: Differential prospective relationships between response styles and symptom subtypes suggest that response style theory, and treatments informed by it, should be conceptualized transdiagnostically and at a more fine-grained level than diagnostic categories.

show abstract

An Experimental Investigation of Co-rumination, Problem Solving, and Distraction

Cited by 13 publications

References 21 publications

Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and social outcomes of the social sharing of emotion

Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and social outcomes of the social sharing of emotion

Help me Feel Better! Ecological Momentary Assessment of Anxious Youths’ Emotion Regulation with Parents and Peers

Response Styles Theory and Internalizing Symptoms in Adolescence: A Network Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About