scholarly journals Age differences in emotion regulation strategy use, variability, and flexibility: An experience sampling approach.

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (9) ◽  
pp. 1951-1964 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lizbeth Benson ◽  
Tammy English ◽  
David E. Conroy ◽  
Aaron L. Pincus ◽  
Denis Gerstorf ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth S. Blanke ◽  
Jennifer A. Bellingtier ◽  
Michaela Riediger ◽  
Annette Brose

AbstractContextual 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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 844-855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander R. Daros ◽  
Katharine E. Daniel ◽  
M. Joseph Meyer ◽  
Philip I. Chow ◽  
Laura E. Barnes ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document