Individual differences in emotion regulation: Personal tendency in strategy selection is related to implementation capacity and well-being.

Abstract

Individual differences in emotion regulation (ER) are assumed to play an important role in resilience and mental health. In a standardized laboratory setting, we investigated how the individual tendency to select specific ER strategies (reappraisal vs. distraction) and the capacity to implement these strategies are related (a) to each other and (b) to trait markers of mental health in a nonclinical sample. For 159 participants, individual regulatory tendency and capacity were assessed with established experimental tasks focusing on ER selection and implementation, respectively. Trait markers of mental health were assessed with questionnaires on ER habits, trait resilience, and well-being. We observed that ER tendency and capacity were positively correlated specifically for the condition in which participants were facing negative stimuli of high intensity. Furthermore, while ER capacity was not consistently associated with trait markers of mental health, a higher tendency to choose reappraisal (as opposed to distraction) was associated with higher trait resilience and better well-being. This study is the first to provide experimental evidence that a person’s tendency to select a particular ER strategy is associated with the person’s capacity to implement it successfully. Moreover, based on experimental data, we confirm an association between reappraisal tendency and mental health that has previously been suggested by questionnaire studies. This points to regulatory selection as a potential target for interventions fostering resilience and mental health. In the next step, intervention studies should clarify whether the association reflects a causal influence of regulation tendency on resilience.

Resting‐state effective connectivity is systematically linked to reappraisal success of high‐ and low‐intensity negative emotions

“…From a behavioral perspective, one would expect that emotional state ratings and stimulus intensity are directly negatively related (Rammensee et al, 2023 ), that is, experiencing more negative emotions is associated with increased stimulus intensity. This was confirmed by our correlation analysis.…”

“…In our ever‐changing and emotionally demanding environments, the control of our emotional responses is critical for moderating our behaviors (Debrot, 2012 ; Kobylińska & Kusev, 2019 ; Levy‐Gigi & Shamay‐Tsoory, 2017 ; Niven et al, 2015 ; Sahi et al, 2020 ), successfully navigating social interactions (Cameron & Overall, 2018 ; Grommisch et al, 2020 ; Sahi et al, 2020 ; Williams et al, 2018 ), and maintaining our mental well‐being (Newman & Nezlek, 2022 ; Quoidbach et al, 2010 ; Rammensee et al, 2023 ). Different situations are often suited for the use of specific regulation strategies (Matthews et al, 2021 ; Sheppes, 2020 ), but aspects of the stimuli that trigger the emotional response, such as their intensity, will also determine how successful emotion regulation will be in a given situation (Aldao, 2013 ; Aldao & Tull, 2015 ; Dore et al, 2016 ).…”

“…The second unexplored factor in this context is whether neural network dynamics might differ in relation to the intensity of the stimulus that triggers the negative emotion to be regulated. Evidence for the importance of stimulus intensity comes from studies showing that participants prefer to choose different regulation strategies when confronted with high‐ or low‐intensity stimuli (Rammensee et al, 2023 ; Sheppes, 2020 ). Other studies reported that stimulus intensity modulated components of the event‐related potential (ERP) when participants used reappraisal as an emotion regulation strategy.…”

Self-report assessment of Positive Appraisal Style (PAS): Development of a process-focused and a content-focused questionnaire for use in mental health and resilience research

“…Importantly, PASS-process is intended to measure process use (frequency or tendency) [66], not process effectiveness (ability or capacity). Experimental studies on emotion regulation suggest an association between the individual capacity to use reappraisal and the tendency to choose this strategy for emotion regulation [67]. Hence, PASS-process may be found to correlate with positive (re)appraisal effectiveness or capacity measures, such as employed in laboratory tasks [12].…”