When and How to Regulate: Everyday Emotion-Regulation Strategy Use and Stressor Intensity

Abstract

Contextual factors shape emotion regulation (ER). The intensity of emotional stimuli may be such a contextual factor that influences the selection and moderates the effectiveness of ER strategies in reducing negative affect (NA). Prior research has shown that, on average, when emotional stimuli were more intense, distraction was selected over reappraisal (and vice versa). This pattern was previously shown to be adaptive as the preferred strategies were more efficient in the respective contexts. Here, we investigated whether stressor intensity predicted strategy use and effectiveness in similar ways in daily life. We examined five ER strategies (reappraisal, reflection, acceptance, distraction, and rumination) in relation to the intensity of everyday stressors, using two waves of experience-sampling data (N = 156). In accordance with our hypotheses, reappraisal, reflection, and acceptance were used less, and rumination was used more, when stressors were more intense. Moreover, results suggested that distraction was more effective, and rumination more detrimental the higher the stressor intensity. Against our hypotheses, distraction did not covary with stressor intensity, and there was no evidence that reappraisal, reflection, and acceptance were more effective at lower levels of stressor intensity. Instead, when examined individually, reflection and reappraisal (like distraction) were more effective at higher levels of stressor intensity. In sum, stressor intensity predicted ER selection and moderated strategy effectiveness, but the results also point to a more complex ER strategy use in daily life than in the laboratory.

A domain-differentiated approach to everyday emotion regulation from adolescence to older age.

“…In addition, regulation can be an effortful process (Aldao et al, 2015), and keeping regulation efforts to a minimum for less complex hassles can help to conserve resources for future regulation efforts (Hobfoll, 1989). This finding is in line with past research indicating a greater use of regulation on occasions with greater emotional intensity (Blanke et al, 2021; Brans et al, 2013; Dixon-Gordon et al, 2015).…”

Everyday Emotional Functioning in COVID-19 Lockdowns

“…We also found that people accepted their emotions less during lockdown, which is consistent with recent research showing that in daily life, people use acceptance less in emotionally intense situations (Blanke et al, 2022). Promisingly, people did not use strategies linked to poor well-being outcomes, like rumination, to a greater extent in lockdown.…”

Studying Emotion Regulation with Daily Diaries and Ecological Momentary Assessment

“…For example, in the lab, participants show a consistent preference for regulating with distraction in response to more intense emotional stimuli, but reappraisal in the context of less emotionally intense stimuli (Sheppes et al, 2014). However, support for these findings is mixed in daily life: consistent with the lab, some daily life studies have reported decreases in reappraisal in the context of more intense emotions/stressors (e.g., Blanke et al, 2022), whereas others have reported the opposite (Hiekkaranta et al, 2022). Hiekkaranta et al…”

“…(2022) also found that distraction increased in the context of more intense negative events in daily life, replicating the lab, whereas other studies have reported no association between intensity and distraction (e.g., Blanke et al, 2022). These mixed findings highlight the importance of testing the generalizability of lab research to everyday contexts, where the antecedents of emotion regulation may be more complex.…”