Integrative emotion regulation: Process and development from a self-determination theory perspective

Abstract

Grounded in self-determination theory's (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2017) organismic perspective, we present a process view of integrative emotion regulation. SDT describes three general types of emotion regulation: integrative emotion regulation, which focuses on emotions as carrying information that is brought to awareness; controlled emotion regulation, which is focused on diminishing emotions through avoidance, suppression, or enforced expression or reappraisal; and amotivated emotion regulation, in which emotions are uncontrolled or dysregulated. We review survey and experimental research contrasting these emotion regulation styles, providing evidence for the benefits of integrative emotion regulation for volitional functioning, personal well-being, and high-quality relationships, and for the costs of controlled emotion regulation and dysregulation. The development of emotion regulation styles is discussed, especially the role of autonomy-supportive parenting in fostering more integrative emotion regulation, and the role of controlling parenting in contributing to controlled or dysregulated emotion processing. Overall, integrative emotion regulation represents a beneficial style of processing emotions, which develops most effectively in a nonjudgmental and autonomy-supportive environment, an issue relevant to both development and psychotherapy.

Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions

“…Directional A basic need directs and shapes individuals' thinking, acting, and feeling, thereby spurring the pro-active search for needconducive circumstances, partners, and activities under supportive conditions, while eliciting corrective behavior under need thwarting circumstances 4. Explanatory A basic need helps to account for or explain the relation between variations in social contexts, both growth-promoting and toxic, and wellness-related outcomes consolidation (Luyckx et al 2009;Skhirtladze et al 2019), emotion regulation (Roth et al 2018(Roth et al , 2019 and political engagement (Wüttke 2020). That is, BPNT specified that these varied positive developmental outcomes would be facilated by need supports and satisfactions.…”

“…the essential criterion), but they also play a directional role, pulling individuals into action (see also Sheldon 2011). Similarly, need frustration should also play an important signaling function, potentially mobilizing corrective behavior and (adaptive) coping responses (Roth et al 2019).…”

Consistency and moral integrity: A self-determination theory perspective

“…Such flexibility is offered by the capacity to manage volitionally one's emotions, a capacity called emotional integration (Ryan, Deci, Grolnick, & La Guardia, 2006). It involves being open even to negative emotions, which, if mindfully processed, can result in subsequent lower arousal and better cognitive functioning, when compared to emotional distancing (Roth et al, 2018;Roth, Vansteenkiste, & Ryan, 2019). Through integrative emotion regulation, it is likely that emotional conflict will be approached with high flexibility, leading in turn to an alignment of moral rules and emotions, i.e.…”

Freedom to feel: A self‐determination theory account of emotion regulation

“…SDT relies on an organismic metatheory (Ryan & Deci, 2001, 2017), whereby wellness and mental health are represented by integrated and harmonious functioning, and positive and negative experiences are merged to support people's innate growth tendencies. As such, the theory offers a unique view of emotion regulation, whereby all emotions foster psychological growth (Roth, Vansteenkiste, & Ryan, 2019; Ryan, Deci, & Grolnick, 1995; Ryan, Deci, Grolnick, & La Guardia, 2006).…”