The effects of verbal labelling on psychophysiology: Objective but not subjective emotion labelling reduces skin-conductance responses to briefly presented pictures

McRae, Kateri; Taitano, E. Keolani; Lane, Richard D.

doi:10.1080/02699930902797141

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, we were not able to generate independent indices of amygdala reductions for labeling and reappraisal because both would be contrasted with the same amygdala activity during observe, and therefore correlations would be inflated and biased. Fourth, while personally-relevant affect labeling in this study yielded a similar pattern of neural activity as affect labeling of external stimuli in previous studies, there are likely to be some subtle differences (e.g., McRae et al, 2010). Future studies can address this issue by including both conditions in the same neuroimaging study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

The common and distinct neural bases of affect labeling and reappraisal in healthy adults

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotion regulation is commonly characterized as involving conscious and intentional attempts to change felt emotions, such as, for example, through reappraisal whereby one intentionally decreases the intensity of one's emotional response to a particular stimulus or situation by reinterpreting it in a less threatening way. However, there is growing evidence and appreciation that some types of emotion regulation are unintentional or incidental, meaning that affective modulation is a consequence but not an explicit goal. For example, affect labeling involves simply verbally labeling the emotional content of an external stimulus or one's own affective responses without an intentional goal of altering emotional responses, yet has been associated with reduced affective responses at the neural and experiential levels. Although both intentional and incidental emotional regulation strategies have been associated with diminished limbic responses and self-reported distress, little previous research has directly compared their underlying neural mechanisms. In this study, we examined the extent to which incidental and intentional emotion regulation, namely, affect labeling and reappraisal, produced common and divergent neural and self-report responses to aversive images relative to an observe-only control condition in a sample of healthy older adults (N = 39). Affect labeling and reappraisal produced common activations in several prefrontal regulatory regions, with affect labeling producing stronger responses in direct comparisons. Affect labeling and reappraisal were also associated with similar decreases in amygdala activity. Finally, affect labeling and reappraisal were associated with correlated reductions in self-reported distress. Together these results point to common neurocognitive mechanisms involved in affect labeling and reappraisal, supporting the idea that intentional and incidental emotion regulation may utilize overlapping neural processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

The common and distinct neural bases of affect labeling and reappraisal in healthy adults

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, there has been almost no research aimed at disentangling these different kinds of affect labeling (cf. McRae, Taitano, & Lane, 2010). However, regardless of the specific form affect labeling takes, research on affect labeling has demonstrated a modulation of emotional output effects in the same experiential, autonomic, neural, and behavioral domains as found in other forms of emotion regulation.…”

Section: Emotion Regulatory Effects Of Affect Labelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting Feelings Into Words: Affect Labeling as Implicit Emotion Regulation

Torre

Lieberman²

2018

Emotion Review

280

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Putting feelings into words, or "affect labeling," can attenuate our emotional experiences. However, unlike explicit emotion regulation techniques, affect labeling may not even feel like a regulatory process as it occurs. Nevertheless, research investigating affect labeling has found it produces a pattern of effects like those seen during explicit emotion regulation, suggesting affect labeling is a form of implicit emotion regulation. In this review, we will outline research on affect labeling, comparing it to reappraisal, a form of explicit emotion regulation, along four major domains of effects-experiential, autonomic, neural, and behavioral-that establish it as a form of implicit emotion regulation. This review will then speculate on possible mechanisms driving affect labeling effects and other remaining unanswered questions.

show abstract

“…This is typically measured as decreased emotional interference as evidenced by reaction time, decreased activation in emotionally responsive regions, and increased activation in control regions of the brain (Gyurak et al, 2011). Finally, experimental studies have used explicit instructions, such as verbal labeling, that do not mention an ER goal but have a measurable impact on emotional responding (Hariri, Bookheimer, & Mazziotta, 2000;Lieberman et al, 2007;McRae, Taitano, & Lane, 2010;Tabibnia, Lieberman, & Craske, 2008). These studies have demonstrated changes in emotional responding, but it is unclear whether they influence ER frequency or ER success, over only the short or also the long term.…”

Section: Implicit Emotion Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotion Regulation Frequency and Success: Separating Constructs from Methods and Time Scale

McRae

2013

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on emotion regulation (ER) has largely focused upon two related lines of inquiry: ER frequency and ER success. First, research on ER frequency has focused upon the relationship between how often individuals attempt to use ER strategies in everyday life which is typically measured by subjective reports on questionnaires and interpreted as trait ER. Second, research on ER success has focused on the degree to which experimentally instructed use of different strategies results in change of one or more measures of affect as measured by relatively objective measures. Therefore, distinctions between ER frequency and success are very often confounded by time scale (ER frequency measured in the long-term, ER success measured in the short-term) and methods (ER frequency measured with subjective questionnaires, ER success measured with more objective affective variables). I offer examples from the literature on ER and offer suggestions for ways to uncouple ER frequency and success from the methods that are currently being used to measure them. Clarity on the distinction between these constructs should lead to the most appropriate interpretation of results from current studies and more precisely inform clinical interventions that target one or more ER process.Although research in human emotions has been popular for several decades, research on how we are able to control our emotions, or emotion regulation (ER), has received a steep increase in attention over the past 15 years (Gross, in press). Research on ER refers to the fact that we are not merely passive conduits of emotional responses and specifically outlines processes by which we influence the onset, offset, magnitude, duration, intensity, or quality of an emotional experience (Gross & Thompson, 2007). The widespread interest in ER may be due to the fact that ER seems to be of interest to many subfields of psychology. More specifically, ER can be described as poised between two psychological research traditionsthose that describe stable traits and those that characterize the effects of dynamic processes. On one hand, researchers interested in ER as a stable trait have focused upon measuring individual differences in the use of different ER strategies and describing how these individual differences are associated with important outcomes. Other researchers have made it a priority to describe the effects of ER processes in terms of measurable affective changes when ER processes are used, and the set of circumstances under which those processes are optimized. Although these two traditions have had a few points of contact, much research on ER has largely addressed either ER as a long-term trait variable or ER as a relatively brief cognitive process. 1

show abstract

The effects of verbal labelling on psychophysiology: Objective but not subjective emotion labelling reduces skin-conductance responses to briefly presented pictures

Cited by 27 publications

References 19 publications

The common and distinct neural bases of affect labeling and reappraisal in healthy adults

The common and distinct neural bases of affect labeling and reappraisal in healthy adults

Putting Feelings Into Words: Affect Labeling as Implicit Emotion Regulation

Emotion Regulation Frequency and Success: Separating Constructs from Methods and Time Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About