Emotion regulation strategy use and forecasting in response to dynamic, multimodal stimuli

Abstract

Successful emotion regulation requires effective strategy selection. Prior research suggests that low-effort relative to high-effort strategies are more likely to be selected as emotional experiences intensify. However, the extent to which strategy choice reflects strategy usage as circumstances more closely reflect the complications of a complex, multimodal world is not yet well understood. The present research uses a quasi-naturalistic approach to examine the association between affective intensity and strategy usage using untrained participants who were given minimal direction while navigating a haunted house and subsequently reporting emotional states, intensities, and regulation attempts. Studies 1 (n = 47) and 2 (n = 118) found no relationship between emotional intensity and use of high- vs. low effort strategies, which may have been due to the relative underperformance of distraction as an emotion regulation strategy. Study 3 participants (n = 152) predicted regulation strategy usage based on the experiences reported by Study 1 participants, and their forecasts matched the regulatory choice associations reported in prior literature. Though such a quasi-naturalistic approach cannot isolate variable associations like the strategy choice paradigms that laid the groundwork for the field, the pattern of results may highlight differences between emotion regulation choice and usage as research paradigms shift to encompass more naturalistic features within their designs and literature which may explain the observed differences is discussed.