Between‐Individual Differences in Baseline Well‐Being and Emotion Regulation Strategy Use Moderate the Effect of a Self‐Help Cognitive‐Behavioral Intervention for Typical Adults

Emotion regulation has been proposed to be a transdiagnostic factor in the development and maintenance of psychopathology in the general population, yet the nature of the relationships between emotion regulation strategy use and psychological well-being has not been comprehensively explored in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The aim of this study was to assess how the individual differences in self-reported emotion regulation strategy use relate to levels of both positive and negative psychological well-being. In total, 56 individuals with ASD aged 14–24 years (Mage = 18.15; SDage = 2.30) completed Emotion Regulation Questionnaire, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 Generalized Anxiety Disorder Dimensional Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale and Autism-Spectrum Quotient – Short. Individuals were grouped into four clusters based on their Emotion Regulation Questionnaire subscale scores. Individuals in the high suppression and low reappraisal group expressed higher depressive symptoms and lower positive well-being when compared with the low suppression and high reappraisal group. Interestingly, individuals who self-reported using both high suppression and reappraisal expressed relatively high positive well-being and low depression symptoms. We suggest that the maladaptive effect of habitual suppression usage may be buffered by the habitual use of reappraisal, and this interaction between adaptive and maladaptive emotion regulation strategy use has clinical implications.

Download Full-text

Direct and indirect effects of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and emotion regulation strategy use on mental health during Covid-19

10.31234/osf.io/bmgt9 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Plamina Dimanova ◽

Réka Borbás ◽

Cilly Bernardette Schnider ◽

Lynn V. Fehlbaum ◽

Nora Maria Raschle

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Emotion Regulation ◽

Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex ◽

Well Being ◽

Strategy Use ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cognitive Emotion Regulation ◽

Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽

Emotion Regulation Strategy ◽

Regulation Strategies

Background. Covid-19 and associated restrictions have been linked to negative mental health outcomes across the globe. Cognitive emotion regulation strategies constitute means to mitigating negative affect and are associated with prefrontal and limbic brain regions. Methods. Variations in cognitive emotion regulation strategy use, anxiety and depression in 43 adults (31♀, average age=35.14±9.20y) and emotional and behavioral problems in 26 children (10♀, average age=10.69±2.52y) were tested seven times following Covid-19 onset (March-December 2020). Relationships between pre-pandemic brain structure, use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies and mental well-being were tested using multiple regression and mediation models. Results. Covid-19 and associated restrictions were linked to heightened, but varying levels of anxiety and depression across 2020. While adaptive strategies were most employed, maladaptive strategies explained the highest variation in negative mental health outcomes (i.e., anxiety and depression). Adaptive strategies had a positive, maladaptive strategies a negative effect, however, this direction varied for some strategies when considering long-term effects. Emotion regulation strategy use mediated the association between pre-pandemic brain structure (i.e., cortical thickness) in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and well-being, with prefrontal-amygdala coupling as a possible driving factor. Additionally, early well-being measures were crucial for later well-being. Conclusion. Our findings support the use of early intervention strategies for mental health consequences due to the pandemic. Due to substantial personal and societal costs associated with mental health disorders, such as anxiety and depression, an early identification of risk factors for the development and treatment response are of utmost importance.

Download Full-text