Intra- versus interpersonal emotion regulation: Associations with affect, relationship quality and closeness, and biological markers of stress.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Ashley M Battaglini,Bita Zareian,Joelle LeMoult
{"title":"Intra- versus interpersonal emotion regulation: Associations with affect, relationship quality and closeness, and biological markers of stress.","authors":"Ashley M Battaglini,Bita Zareian,Joelle LeMoult","doi":"10.1037/xge0001757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Past research has focused on emotion regulation (ER) as an intrapersonal endeavor (managing one's own emotions), leaving many questions unanswered about interpersonal emotion regulation (IER; receiving support from another person to regulate one's emotions). This study sought to understand the effects of two common IER strategies (corumination, codistraction) by comparing them with each other and their intrapersonal counterparts (rumination, distraction) on negative and positive affect, relationship quality and closeness, and biological stress responses (i.e., cortisol and salivary alpha-amylase [sAA]). Participants completed the Fast Friends paradigm and then privately recalled a stressful event. Participants were then randomized into one of four ER groups: rumination, distraction, corumination, or codistraction. Affect, relationship quality, closeness, cortisol, and sAA were measured throughout the study session and during a 40-min post-ER recovery period. Interestingly, the ER groups differed in affect and biological recovery from stress, but not in relationship quality or closeness. Specifically, distraction facilitated the greatest decline in negative affect during the ER induction, but negative affect decline was greater in rumination and corumination than in distraction during the recovery period. Additionally, both IER groups showed increased sAA levels during the ER induction, but sAA levels showed a greater decline in the IER than in intrapersonal ER groups during the recovery period. This study highlights the nuanced effects of intrapersonal versus IER strategies and thus informs approaches to modulate negative affect and biological markers of stress when facing stressful events. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001757","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Past research has focused on emotion regulation (ER) as an intrapersonal endeavor (managing one's own emotions), leaving many questions unanswered about interpersonal emotion regulation (IER; receiving support from another person to regulate one's emotions). This study sought to understand the effects of two common IER strategies (corumination, codistraction) by comparing them with each other and their intrapersonal counterparts (rumination, distraction) on negative and positive affect, relationship quality and closeness, and biological stress responses (i.e., cortisol and salivary alpha-amylase [sAA]). Participants completed the Fast Friends paradigm and then privately recalled a stressful event. Participants were then randomized into one of four ER groups: rumination, distraction, corumination, or codistraction. Affect, relationship quality, closeness, cortisol, and sAA were measured throughout the study session and during a 40-min post-ER recovery period. Interestingly, the ER groups differed in affect and biological recovery from stress, but not in relationship quality or closeness. Specifically, distraction facilitated the greatest decline in negative affect during the ER induction, but negative affect decline was greater in rumination and corumination than in distraction during the recovery period. Additionally, both IER groups showed increased sAA levels during the ER induction, but sAA levels showed a greater decline in the IER than in intrapersonal ER groups during the recovery period. This study highlights the nuanced effects of intrapersonal versus IER strategies and thus informs approaches to modulate negative affect and biological markers of stress when facing stressful events. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
内部情绪调节与人际情绪调节:与情感、关系质量和亲密程度的关联,以及压力的生物学标记。
过去的研究将情绪调节(ER)作为一种个人的努力(管理自己的情绪),留下了许多关于人际情绪调节(IER;从另一个人那里得到支持来调节自己的情绪)。本研究试图通过比较两种常见的IER策略(沉思、分散注意力)及其对应的人际关系策略(反刍、分散注意力)对消极和积极情绪、关系质量和亲密程度以及生物应激反应(即皮质醇和唾液α -淀粉酶[sAA])的影响,了解两种常见的IER策略(沉思、分散注意力)。参与者完成了“快朋友”模式,然后私下回忆一件压力事件。然后,参与者被随机分为四组:反刍、分心、沉思或共同分心。在整个研究过程中以及在er后40分钟的恢复期,测量了情感、关系质量、亲密度、皮质醇和sAA。有趣的是,内啡肽组在情感和压力后的生理恢复方面存在差异,但在关系质量或亲密度方面却没有差异。其中,在内质网诱导期,分心对负性情绪下降的促进作用最大,但恢复期反刍和沉思的负性情绪下降幅度大于分心。此外,两组在ER诱导期间sAA水平均升高,但在恢复期,sAA水平在IER中下降幅度大于内向型ER组。本研究强调了内省策略与内在情感策略的微妙影响,从而为面对压力事件时调节负面影响和压力的生物标记提供了方法。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信